Carolyn Maloney

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, 4 years that have been difficult for our country, we have had to watch the administration bungle the war in Iraq in just about every way imaginable. As war became civil war in Iraq, we watched our colleagues on the other side of the aisle act as a rubber stamp for this misguided war while refusing to ask the pertinent questions, the questions we were asking, the questions the American people were asking. And we watched as 3,200 of our brave troops lost their lives in another country's civil war, while 24,000 came home with permanent injuries and billions upon billions of our taxpayers' dollars have been sunk into the quicksand Iraq has become. This will be the case no more. With the scores of oversight hearings our leadership has already conducted this year and now with this legislation, we are, for the first time, bringing accountability, timelines and end to the mismanaged war in Iraq. Congress is no longer a rubber stamp. The President has asked us time and again for money for this war without any strings. This, despite the fact that they let many of our troops go to battle without the proper equipment, and that they can't even account for $12 billion of taxpayer money for reconstruction. With this bill, we will bring accountability as well as money for our injured soldiers who have been neglected. We are adding a total of $3.4 billion for the military health care system, including money to address the problems at Walter Reed and money for head injuries and post- traumatic stress disorder. For 4 years, the administration's war policies have been risking lives and spending this country's treasure without any accountability. This legislation will end the free ride and it will end the war. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, the most recent employment report showing modest job gains in February provided further signs of a slowing economy. Private sector employment rose by just 58,000 jobs, the smallest monthly gain in nearly 2\1/2\ years. The unemployment rate edged down last month only because the labor force shrank, and many people are discouraged by their job prospects. This is hardly the picture of a robust labor market, which is not good news for workers. President Bush is now tied with his father for the dubious honor of having the worst job-creation record of any President since President Hoover. American families are understandably worried about the future because the economy is weakening even before many have shared in the gains from the economic growth so far.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support for voting rights for residents of the District of Columbia. I would note, Madam Speaker, that this month is Women's History Month, and it took women many, many long years to gain the right to vote. It took a constitutional amendment in 1920 to give women the right to vote. But today we can vote to give the vote to the residents of the District of Columbia. I would note that it was not until 1965 that the landmark Voting Rights Act was signed into law to outlaw discriminatory practices like literacy tests and to ensure that all Americans, regardless of race, had access to the ballot. Today we have the opportunity to take another historic step in the right direction by ending the disenfranchisement of hundreds of thousands of tax-paying Americans. The people of the District of Columbia contribute to our national economy, they fight in our wars, and it is simply wrong that they not have representation. I rise in strong support of voting rights for these residents. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1433, the ``District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act,'' introduced by my good friend and colleague, Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton. She has been a steadfast champion for her constituents on many issues, and has worked tirelessly to bring this legislation to the floor today. I want to commend her for her commitment to the residents of the District of Columbia, who for too long have been denied a voice in the House of Representatives. We have seen through our own history the great struggles that have been endured to win the right to vote. For women, it took a constitutional amendment in 1920 to give us the right the vote. It was not until 1965 that the landmark ``Voting Rights Act'' was signed into law to outlaw discriminatory practices like literacy tests and to ensure that all Americans, regardless of race, had access to the ballot box. Today, we are taking another step in the right direction by ending the disenfranchisement of hundreds of thousands of tax-paying Americans. It is undemocratic that we can determine the taxes that District residents pay to the Federal Government, but they have not been able to elect a representative who has a say in what those taxes will be. The people of the District of Columbia contribute to our national economy and they fight in wars. It is simply wrong that their representative in the House does not have full voting rights. The House of Representatives is known as ``the people's house'' yet for the people living in the District of Columbia, their voices have been silenced for far too long. It is sadly ironic that the citizens living in the Nation's Capital do not have full representation in the House. With this legislation, we will change history. I urge my colleagues to support his legislation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his important leadership on this bill. I rise in strong support of the Gulf Coast Hurricane Housing Recovery Act. This bill was marked up earlier this month in the Financial Services Committee and was passed by a strong bipartisan vote. I not only thank the chairman and Ranking Member Bachus, but Chairwoman Waters and Ranking Member Biggert. Chairwoman Waters led many hearings and meetings and conferences on this, going to New Orleans and Mississippi, meeting with the families, with the authorities, and working with really great devotion and determination to move this bill to the floor to help the people in the gulf region. This bill is a victory for those people who have suffered so greatly not only through Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, but an awe-inspiring amount of bureaucratic red tape, trying to get the help and the assistance that they need. This bill will finally provide comprehensive housing relief for the hurricane-impacted areas of the gulf coast, and it will expedite and move forward and cut through the red tape so that the money and the services get to the people they were intended for. It provides increased flexibility and oversight, while preserving Federal housing assistance and providing assistance to landowners and communities who helped evacuees. It provides flexibility by freeing up $1.2 billion in funds for Louisiana's Road Home program for which FEMA is currently withholding use by transferring the funds to the Community Development Block Grant account, and it eliminates an unnecessary restriction imposed by the prior Congress against CDBG funds being used to meet matching requirements under other Federal programs. It increases oversight by requiring the Louisiana Recovery Authority, the entity that administers the Road Home program, to report on their progress every 30 days on exactly what they are doing to help the people. It preserves Federal housing assistance by including a number of provisions to rebuild the stock of affordable housing and to ensure that the administration will not shrink the level of housing assistance that supports that housing stock. It provides assistance to communities that assisted evacuees by authorizing reimbursement for communities that used their own CDBG funds to provide rental assistance to evacuees after the storms hit, and it also provides such reimbursement to landowners who assisted the people. This is a good bill. It cuts through the red tape. It provides assistance to the people, and I congratulate all who worked on it, particularly the Chair of the subcommittee, Ms. Waters.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Chairman, I thank very much the gentleman's yielding and for his extraordinary leadership on protecting taxpayers' money by better oversight of our contracting policies. And I congratulate former Chairman Davis and Chairman Waxman on the Accountability in Contracting Act that we are passing today. I feel so strongly about it because if we really manage our dollars better, then we will have more dollars for the services that we need for our people. And I urge all of my colleagues and all of my constituents and really the listening public to read this excellent report that has come out from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee on ``Dollars, not Sense: Government Contracting Under the Bush Administration.'' And it shows that sole source contracts have absolutely ballooned. They have grown dramatically from $67 billion in 2000 to over $145 billion in 2005. These are contracts that only one person gets. It is as if I handed you a lollipop. It is giving someone billions and billions of dollars, and I believe there are many talented businesses, many talented individuals in this country that should deserve the right to compete for these contracts. This bill makes it easier for them to compete and, I believe, will save taxpayers dollars by the billions. It says if we give Halliburton or some other company a sole source no-bid contract worth billions and billions of dollars, then they have to tell us why we should give it to them. They have to file a document called the Justification and Approval Document. That is the least that we can do for the American taxpayer, to build in some transparency and some accountability. It also has many other important reforms in it. But I must say of all the areas of mismanagement, contracting may look dull, but it is billions of dollars that if we were better stewards, we would have those dollars for education and health care. I commend the chairman for his leadership on cracking down on this waste, fraud, and abuse and really shoddy mismanagement that has ballooned into billions of sole source contracts. If you read this report, it is really chilling.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the work done by the New York Blood Center (NYBC) and its efforts to recruit volunteer blood donors to help assure a safe and ample blood supply in the New York Metropolitan area. As one of the nation's largest non- profit, community based blood centers, The New York Blood Center has provided critical blood, transfusion products and services to patients in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut hospitals for over 40 years. Established in 1964 in order to better serve the transfusion needs of the New York City community, New York Blood Center was founded in order to carry out a critical mission to provide community members with the highest quality transfusion products and services, as well as leading- edge research and technological and medical care innovation. The New York metropolitan area is currently experiencing a blood shortage that has reached an emergency level. The New York Blood Center reports a shortage of all types of blood, but most pressingly a need for ``O'' type blood, the universal donor to patients of all blood types. Hospitals in New York need an average of 2,000 volunteer donors every day to meet critical patient needs. NYBC collects an average of 1500-1700 units/day to help meet these needs in combination with other providers. When the number of donations falls below the necessary number, NYBC must import the balance of necessary units from other areas of the United States. Without these vital donations, blood must be rationed to local area hospitals and elective surgeries postponed until blood supply levels improve. While the current shortage has not yet caused rationing to occur, it has become an area-wide crisis that endangers the lives and well-being of New Yorkers and demands the community's immediate attention. To date, NYBC has avoided this critical problem through continuous partnership with local and national government officials to perform constituent outreach. NYBC also collaborates with businesses and organizations that sponsor blood drives, as well as with individuals who donate on a consistent basis. In recent years, while the number of donations in the New York metropolitan area have remained steady, there has been a downward trend in the number of donations in Manhattan, contributing to the causes of the current shortage.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, in the last 2 weeks, we have seen a tsunami of foreclosures and turmoil in the subprime markets. The Federal regulators' recent joint guidance to stop issuance of loans that borrowers can't repay in full is a good first step, but lenders won't make bad loans if no one will buy them. The secondary market must stop buying the loans causing this crisis. Freddie Mac did this voluntarily, and I am introducing legislation to require all the housing GSEs to do the same. In the interim, I call on Fannie Mae and the Federal Home Loan Banks to follow Freddie Mac and stop buying these risky loans. Both Congress and the GSEs must act to protect homeowners and stabilize the system.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership, along with Mr. Waxman, on working on so many sunshine bills to make government more open and accountable to the citizens, to our taxpayers, to the American public. And an important part of sunshine is the Freedom of Information Act Amendments, it is a tremendously important bill, H.R. 1309, of 2007. Since coming to Congress, I have been working on this committee, and improved FOIA processes which are critical to an open government and making our government more transparent is very fundamental to our democracy. We have made improvement over the years, and I am pleased to have been one of the authors of the Electronic Freedom of Information Act of 1996. This important law was intended to make FOIA more efficient by providing public access to information, including in an electronic format. The Oversight and Government Reform Committee, of which I am a member, has held many hearings on FOIA over the past few years, and we have learned that it has not progressed as well as we had hoped. Some agencies and Departments are doing a better job of fulfilling freedom of information requests, while some continue to have terrible records and lag far, far behind. Requesters often wait months or years to find out the status of their requests or to obtain the information. And I am pleased that we have report language that clarifies that they have to get back quickly on requests and at least let them know where they are. As a result, the backlogs at agencies and Departments continue to grow, and frequently the only recourse for the denial of requested information is to file lawsuits. But many people, many Americans cannot afford the high costs associated with court costs. So by not moving in a timely manner, you are depriving them of this information. H.R. 1309 includes many important provisions that my colleagues have spoken about and that I hope will improve the process and eliminate the problems that exist in today's system, including an amendment that I offered in committee that would provide for greater disclosure to the FOIA requester about the exemption under which a deletion has been made from requested material. I often hear from constituents, they come to my office with piles of FOIA requests and like the whole thing is redacted and there is absolutely no explanation why. This is really not fair, and we hope that this amendment will improve the process. I am pleased that it was accepted in a bipartisan way by Ranking Member Davis and Ranking Member Turner. I really feel this legislation is long overdue, and I commend Chairman Waxman and Ranking Member Davis and Chairman Clay and Ranking Member Turner for bringing this bipartisan legislation to the floor with the many other very important sunshine bills to make our government more open and accountable to the American public.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I rise, Mr. Speaker, in strong support of the rule, H. Res. 239, and the underlying bill, H.R. 985, the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act. And I want to commend, not only the Rules Committee for coming forward with a fair rule, but also Chairman Waxman and Ranking Member Davis for moving this important bill out of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee on which I serve. The Whistleblower Protection Act has been weakened by court cases in recent years, and even the weak protections offered under the Whistleblower Protection Act do not apply to national security whistleblowers or contractors at those agencies. The Oversight Committee repeatedly has heard from people who have had their security clearances revoked after blowing the whistle. In some cases they have been fired for pointing out lapses in security, for pointing out waste, fraud and abuse. We have been told that wrongdoers have been allowed to continue their actions, while the whistleblowers have been the ones that have been made to suffer. This is absolutely wrong. In the 109th Congress I was joined by my colleague, Diane Watson, in offering an amendment during the committee's consideration of the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act, that would have extended whistleblower protections to employees in national security and in the intelligence community. I would argue, and I believe many of my colleagues would agree, that revealing lapses in the security of our Nation is a national security priority above all. Whistleblowers in these categories should be protected. And I am thrilled that, under Democratic leadership, this has been included in the bill, that these protections have been extended to employees of intelligence agencies, and to Federal contractors in intelligence agencies. This is an important step forward for the American public. This is an important step forward, I would argue, for the national security of our country. Whistleblowers are heroes and heroines. They should not be turned into villains and be harassed out of their jobs, denied their security clearance because they see a breach in security or a breach in accountability in our government. So I am thrilled with this Democratic bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote for the rule and also for the underlying bill. I urge all of my colleagues to support it. It had bipartisan support coming out of our committee.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, as a cosponsor of this legislation, I rise in strong support of H.R. 985, the Whistleblower Protection Act. I think one thing we can all agree on is that the current system is broken and whistleblowers are simply not being protected. Too often our system retaliates against whistleblowers rather than thanking them for standing up for what is right. The Oversight and Government Reform Committee has heard from many of them, including Sibel Edmonds, the former FBI Translator who was fired for raising concerns about the way the FBI was translating important information about our security. Her reward for blowing the whistle included having her security clearance stripped, being fired from her job and being forced to endure a years-long court battle that prevented her from any sort of normal life. Things were so bad with her case that when she testified before the committee she literally could not tell us anything about her life-- where she was born or which languages she speaks. Sadly, she is not alone. The Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) has been weakened by court cases in recent years and even the weak protections offered under the WPA do not apply to national security whistleblowers or contractors at those agencies. The Oversight Committee repeatedly has heard from people who have had their security clearances revoked after blowing the whistle. We have been told that wrongdoers have been allowed to continue their actions while the whistleblower has been the one made to suffer. In the 109th Congress I was joined by my colleague Representative Diane Watson in offering an amendment during the Committee's consideration of the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act that would have extended whistleblower protections to employees in national security and the intelligence community. I am thrilled that this legislation will extend these important protections to employees of intelligence agencies and to federal contractors. Passage of this bill is long overdue. I urge my colleagues to vote for this legislation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, as an original cosponsor of this legislation, H. Res. 228, and cochair and cofounder of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues, I rise today to celebrate the 186th anniversary of Greece's independence from the Ottoman Empire. Against incredibly difficult odds, the Greeks defeated one of the most powerful empires in history to gain their independence. Following 400 years of Ottoman rule, in March 1821, Bishop Germanos of Patras raised the traditional Greek flag at the monastery of Agia Lavras, inciting his countrymen to rise up against the Ottoman Empire. The bishop timed this act of revolution to coincide with the Greek Orthodox holiday celebrating the archangel Gabriel's announcement that the Virgin Mary was pregnant with the divine child. Bishop Germanos' message to his people was clear, a new spirit was about to be born in Greece. The following year, the Treaty of Constantinople established full independence of Greece. As we celebrate Greek Independence Day, we should reflect upon the strong ties between Greece and the United States and the strong commitment to democracy shared by our two countries. The Greeks of 1821 fought for independence from the Ottoman Empire while drawing inspiration from the ideals and institutions of the United States. During their war of independence, the Greeks also received support from many Americans, including Presidents James Madison and James Monroe and Representatives Daniel Webster and Henry Clay, each of whom gave speeches and made resolutions and other statements in Congress in support of the Greek revolutionaries. Just as our defeat of the British Army was remarkable, so too was the Greek triumph over the Ottoman Army, a momentous achievement in world history. New York City is home to the largest Hellenic population outside of Greece and Cyprus. Western Queens, which I have the honor of representing, is often called Little Athens because of the large Hellenic population in its neighborhoods. New Yorkers celebrate Greek Independence Day with a parade on Fifth Avenue, along with many cultural events, private meetings and celebrations. These events, hosted by the Federation of Hellenic Societies and other Hellenic and Philhellenic organizations and friends, remind us of the Hellenic American community's many, many contributions to our Nation's history and culture. Relations between the United States and Greece remain strong with a shared commitment to ensuring stability in southeastern Europe. I hope permanent solutions can be found for ending the division of Cyprus and finding a mutually agreed upon name for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Additionally, I strongly support the inclusion of Greece in the Visa Waiver Program. Last month, along with Representatives Space and Bilirakis and 18 of our House colleagues, we sent letters to Secretary Rice and Secretary Chertoff urging them to extend the Visa Waiver Program to Greece. Greece is the only member of the original 15 European Union nations not to belong to the Visa Waiver Program. Greece has met the criteria for the program, including a less than 3 percent refusal rate of U.S. nonimmigrant visa applicants and biometric passports. I hope that they will soon be included in the program, and I ask my colleagues and the Nation to join me in celebrating Greek's independence today. Additionally, it is my sincere pleasure to pay tribute to the New York Hellenic American community for its many, many contributions to our city and Nation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for H. Res. 89. New York City was first founded by the Dutch, and they made a tremendous contribution to the city I am honored to represent and to our country. Two of the Dutch Presidents, Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, both came from New York. If you go to the City Museum of New York, there is really a beautiful exhibit that pays tribute to the many contributions in our early days by the Dutch. I rise in strong support of this resolution and to the preceding resolution, which honors the 95th anniversary of the Girl Scouts. I really rise today to honor the 95 years of educating, nurturing, and empowering our Nation's girls through the Girl Scout programs. Its 3.6 million members learn skills and develop character that help them succeed in the real world. The Girl Scouts' Web site highlights the organization's focus on the leadership, strong values, social conscience and conviction about their own potential and self-worth of its members. These are vital attributes that help girls grow into the women who will lead our country and inspire the next generation of scouts. I know personally about the power of being a Girl Scout, because I was one. The basic character and skills I learned then have served me my entire life, and they even serve me now in Congress. For that I owe the Girl Scouts and the great Juliette Gordon, who founded the organization in 1912, a great debt of gratitude. I am proud that my hometown, New York City, is home to the Girl Scouts' national headquarters. I applaud the scouts for 95 years of empowerment and excellence, and I wish them many more years of helping nurture America's girls. I rise in support of these two resolutions and applaud the leadership of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for bringing them before this body today, and I urge unanimous support for them.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, today, I, along with Representative Petri (R-WI), reintroduce legislation to subject operators of push polls or phone banks to the same disclosure requirements as other types of political communication. It will not ban push polls or phone banking--it will simply create a level playing field for all types of political communication. Under this bill, any person conducting these types of calls would be required to disclose to each recipient of a call the identity of the organization paying for the call. In addition, the bill would require that campaigns and other organizations that conduct advocacy phone calls report to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) the number of households they have contacted and the script they used in making the calls. The bill would not interfere with legitimate polling, conducted either by candidates or independent organizations, as it would only apply to phone banks in which more than 1,500 households are contacted within the 25 days preceding a federal election.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, On March 8, men and women around the world celebrated International Women's Day. Women have certainly made enormous strides but as we celebrate the recent successes of women in leadership here in the United States and abroad, we must not forget the many women and girls who are struggling to assert their human rights. The reality is that women and girls continue to suffer from discrimination and violence and face enormous obstacles in their ability to succeed in any arena. The reality is that women are still not equal to men. Women work two-thirds of the world's working hours and produce half of the world's food, yet earn only 1 percent of the world's income, and own less than 1 percent of the world's property. Harmful traditional practices in many nations, such as dowry murder, honor killings and female genital mutilation continue without signs of abatement. An estimated five thousand women are murdered by family members each year and 2 million girls and women a year are at risk of female genital mutilation. Trafficking has become a worldwide crisis which involves between 1 and 2 million women and children each year. While many young women are taking advantage of increased opportunities and graduating from higher education in record numbers, there are many girls around the world whose choices are severely restricted because of their gender. Girls in various countries face severe violence, forced early marriage, and dangerous childbirth. Early marriage almost always ends formal educational opportunities for girls and it is estimated that in the next decade, 100 million girls will be married before the age of 18. In Africa, more than half of girls do not complete primary school education. Due to early childbirth and poor maternal healthcare, there are approximately 100,000 new cases of obstetric fistula among young women every year. Women around the world look to the United States for leadership and assistance in advancing women's rights in their communities. We should be doing more to help them. In recognition of this need, I plan to reintroduce the International Women's Freedom Act, which is modeled after the successful International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRFA). IRFA established the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, which over the past 7 years, has drawn attention to the importance of protecting religious freedom around the world. The Commission's annual report and recommendations has had an impact on the protection of human rights around the world, with many of the Commission's recommendations being taken up by the President, the Congress, and the State Department. The International Women's Freedom Act will, like IRFA, establish an office in the State Department and a U.S. Commission, which will focus on International Women's Rights. The Commission will draft an annual report on violations of women's human rights abroad and the legislation will force the U.S. to consider these violations when determining foreign policy. There are many women who we salute on International Women's Day for breaking barriers. But let us also acknowledge the women who face hurdles which seem insurmountable. Those women who live in desperate poverty, who don't have basic health care, and who fear violence from their own family members are the women we need to think about today. As a superpower, as a country of compassionate concerned citizens, as human beings; let's commit ourselves to doing something about the state of the world's most vulnerable women as we celebrate International Women's Day.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Chairman, I regret that I was unable to vote on H.R. 800, the Employee Free Choice Act, because of previously scheduled family matters. Had I been present, I would have enthusiastically cast my vote in support of this very important bill. In addition, I would have voted against each of the three anti-worker amendments and the Republican motion to recommit. As a strong supporter of the rights of workers to organize and bargain collectively, I have been an original cosponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act in each session of Congress that it has been introduced. I believe it is critical that workers be able to make their own decision--freely and fairly--about whether or not to form a union. Although we have had several years of economic growth and high corporate profits, middle-class families in America continue to feel the squeeze of stagnating incomes coupled with rising health care, education, and housing costs. By passing the H.R. 800 today, we can take an important step towards easing the middle class squeeze by giving workers a free choice to join together to bargain for better wages, benefits and working conditions. Some have said that this bill would abolish the secret ballot election. It would not. It simply gives employees a choice. Employees can still petition for an election, but if a majority of workers sign cards saying they want a union now, they get a union, and the employer must respect that choice. This is about fixing the current system for forming unions and bargaining, which is badly broken. But above all, it is about respect and fairness for middle-class America, ensuring that workers have a choice--and a voice--at work.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership. I want to thank in particular Chairman Frank for making this bill, the National Security FIRST Act, a priority of this Congress. Democrats and Republicans have supported this bill, demonstrating a desire to enhance national security while avoiding a freeze of beneficial and safe economic investment in our country. I would like to thank in addition my other Democratic colleagues, Luis Gutierrez and Joe Crowley, and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, Deborah Pryce, Roy Blunt and Ranking Member Bachus, for their continued support and leadership on this important legislation. A year ago, Mr. Speaker, Americans woke up to find out that six of the largest ports in our Nation would be controlled by a foreign government, the United Arab Emirates, under the Dubai Ports World. Even worse, this deal had been approved by our government through a secretive process no one had ever heard of. In fact, Congress and senior administration officials learned about this deal by reading about it in the newspapers. Even before the Dubai Ports World fiasco, the General Accountability Office had criticized the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, or CFIUS, for being overly focused on bureaucratic goals, basically getting deals done with little oversight, without causing a fuss. Well, the Dubai Ports World deal showed the world the weaknesses in the CFIUS process. The decision was made, and when they did make that decision, they did not involve any high-level government officials. They did not report to Congress. They used a very out-of-date definition of national security. Surely anyone in a post-9/11 world would consider our largest ports a national security concern. The 9/11 Commission called it one of the areas that we have the most problems and one that needs the most attention. As a Representative from New York, which is both target number one for terrorism and the financial capital in our Nation, I felt very strongly that we needed to get something done. At the time, along with Deborah Pryce, I was the ranking member on the subcommittee which we both served on with jurisdiction over CFIUS, and so we had a front-line responsibility for the issue, and we worked together to put forward this legislation. Our legislation passed the last Congress 421-0. We hope we get the same result today, and we resubmitted the bill again earlier this year. It is past time to get this done. If you had told the American people that a year after Dubai Ports World and the scandal involved with it we would still be debating CFIUS reform and had not strengthened the system already, I think they would be very surprised. The need for reform remains even after DPW. The CFIUS process is not catching all the deals that it should. Last year I personally called to the attention of CFIUS the fact that a company with ties to the Venezuelan Government had purchased a major voting machine manufacturer in our country. CFIUS did initiate a review, and after some time in the process, the company announced that it would withdraw from the U.S. market. Surely we would consider a foreign government owning our voting machines a national security concern. In the end the process did work, but it worked only after prodding, and it should work better. That is what this bill would accomplish. It puts national security first, addressing the weaknesses in the Dubai Ports World. The bill requires high-level attention and sign-off on every transaction, and particular attention to transactions involving foreign-government-owned entities. The bill also creates a formal role for the intelligence community and sets up an independent intelligence assessment. It requires a broad and flexible definition of national security that includes the concerns of 12 different agencies, and it sets up a system for monitoring deals that are withdrawn from the process. The bill contains very tough provisions to protect national security, including the ability of CFIUS to reopen reviews when companies do not comply with mitigation agreements designed to reduce security risks. This is such a severe remedy that we have hedged it with many procedural protections, and we expect CFIUS to use it only in exceptional cases. This bill also puts Congress in the picture, making sure that we learn about these deals from CFIUS, not from the newspapers but after the decisions have been made. And by providing greater certainty and predictability in the process, we can encourage foreign investors. I am glad he yielded me this time, because a very important part of CFIUS is we build in predictability and clarity for foreign investment, so that it is not gray, but black and white of where they can go to get a swift approval for safe foreign investment. This is critical to our economy. Over 5.1 million jobs came into our economy from foreign investment in 2004, and there were 50,000 jobs recently created in New York City after 9/11 from foreign investment. It is very important to economic growth in our country. We want to encourage it, but at the same time, we want to protect our citizens, our number one responsibility. Mr. Chairman, may I say to Ms. Pelosi, I appreciate your making this a priority and moving it to the floor so quickly. We will be able to work with our colleagues in the Senate to get a strong bill and pass it and sign it into law. I appreciate the support from the business community, the intelligence community, and from the executive office. I request unanimous consent to place in the Record the statement from the Executive. What can I say, it is a win-win situation. It is a bipartisan bill. Let's move forward and pass it and enact it into law. Statement of Administration Policy h.R. 556--national security foreign investment reform and strengthened transparency (rep. maloney (d) ny and 58 cosponsors) The Administration supports House passage of H.R. 556 and appreciates the efforts of the House Financial Services Committee to strengthen the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The Administration regards the Nation's security as its top priority. In addition, the Administration views investment, including investment from overseas, as vital to continued economic growth, job creation, and building an ever-stronger America. Therefore, the Administration seeks to improve the CFIUS process in a manner that protects national security and ensures a strong U.S. economy and an open investment environment that will serve as an example and thereby support U.S. investment abroad. In light of the President's responsibility to ensure the Nation's security, and in the context of comity between the executive and legislative branches, we believe the President should retain substantial flexibility to determine CFIUS's membership and administrative procedures and to make adjustments when national security so requires. Accordingly, the Administration has concerns with some of the provisions of H.R. 556 and looks forward to working with Congress to address these concerns, to strengthen CFIUS, and to ensure the protection of America's homeland and the strength of our economy. Establishment and membership of CFIUS The President should retain the flexibility to determine and adjust the appropriate Executive Branch membership of CFIUS and their roles. H.R. 556 should not mandate that CFIUS have Vice Chairs, nor that CFIUS include members of the Executive Office of the President. Further, the President should retain the flexibility to determine roles and responsibilities of CFIUS and its members. For example, the Administration opposes any language in Section 6 that would call for the designation of a lead agency or agencies to represent other agencies or the Committee in negotiating, entering into, imposing, modifying, monitoring, or enforcing mitigation agreements. Deliberations and decision-making of the committee The Administration is concerned that the legislation imposes procedural requirements, such as roll call voting and motions, which are ill-suited for executive bodies such as CFIUS and are inconsistent with the vesting of the executive power in the President. Given the bill's reporting requirements, such procedures will deter the full and open interagency discussion that is required to consider CFIUS cases properly. The Administration fully shares Congress' goal of ensuring senior-level accountability for CFIUS decisions. The Administration supports requiring the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, or an Under Secretary of the Treasury to sign CFIUS decisions at the conclusion of a second-stage (45-day) investigation, as H.R. 556 provides. With respect to cases for which CFIUS concludes its action at the end of the first- stage (30-day) investigation, the Administration supports the House Financial Services Committee's decision to authorize delegation of this authority. However, in view of the volume and variety of cases and to ensure that our most senior officials are able to focus on those cases that do raise national security concerns, this authority should be further delegable to other officials appointed by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. The Administration believes that the current 30-day and 45- day time frames for first-stage and second-stage investigations provide CFIUS with sufficient time to examine transactions. The possibility of extensions may discourage foreign investment by generating uncertainty and delay for the parties to proposed transactions. The Administration therefore opposes allowing CFIUS to extend the second stage (45-day) investigation period. The Administration notes that the current CFIUS practice of encouraging parties to transactions to consult with CFIUS prior to filing provides CFIUS with additional time and flexibility to examine complex transactions. The Administration supports the role of the intelligence community as an independent advisor to CFIUS and appreciates the bill's inclusion of a provision that ensures that the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) is provided adequate time to complete the DNI's analysis of any threat to the national security of a covered transaction. However, language in H.R. 556 also appears to provide the DNI with the ability to force a second-stage (45-day) investigation if the DNI has identified particularly complex intelligence concerns and CFIUS was not able to satisfactorily mitigate the threat. Such a policy role would be inconsistent with the independent advisory role of the DNI envisioned in the legislation and supported by the Administration. Notification and reports to Congress The Administration supports enhanced communication with Congress on CFIUS matters to better facilitate Congress' performance of its functions. CFIUS should be required to notify Congress of transactions only after all deliberative action is concluded, as H.R. 556 provides. As discussed above, roll call voting, particularly if reported outside the Executive Branch, would deter the full and open interagency discussion that is required to consider CFIUS cases, and reporting on internal Executive Branch deliberations, including the positions of individual CFIUS members, should not be required. Authorities of CFIUS The Administration believes current law and regulations give the President and CFIUS adequate authority to gather all information needed to conduct CFIUS investigations. The Administration is concerned that provisions of the bill that provide CFIUS with additional statutory authority to collect evidence and require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of documents would make the CFIUS process more adversarial and less effective. The Administration believes its ability to protect national security would be enhanced by a statutory grant of authority to impose civil penalties for a breach of a mitigation agreement. This authority to seek civil penalties, which could be calibrated to the seriousness of the non-compliance, would be a useful and effective tool for enforcing those agreements. Presidential review and decision The Administration supports requiring the President to make the final decision on a case only when CFIUS recommends that a transaction be blocked or when CFIUS fails to reach a consensus after a second-stage investigation. Requiring Presidential action in a broader set of cases would undermine the President's ability to determine how best to exercise Executive Branch decision-making authority. The Administration looks forward to working with Congress on these important issues.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I join Chairman Frank and my colleague from New York in stressing that the CFIUS process is first and foremost for national security, and to give clear guidelines and predictability to foreign businesses to invest in America. The CFIUS process is supported, if the gentleman is concerned about jobs and the private sector, this is supported almost unanimously by the business sector of our country. They have come out, a whole list of groups, supporting this well-balanced legislation and have called upon it not to be dressed up like a Christmas tree. My other colleague said this did not dress it up like a Christmas tree, yet it is adding unrelated items to the bill. We have bills on commerce, we have bills on education, we have bills in other areas, and that is where this should be discussed. Foreign investment is very important to our country. It provides 5.1 million American jobs, $1.9 trillion in equity investment; and some 50,000 jobs in New York City are created at this point by foreign investment. But not one of these jobs or dollars is worth risking our national security. That is why we have CFIUS. We do not want to risk our national security for any job, and we have a template, we have a procedure placed in the CFIUS process for direct, safe foreign investment. I join my colleague in opposing this amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Reclaiming my time, I will yield to the gentleman on his own time. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. The CFIUS process already requires comprehensive reporting to Congress on just about every factor conceivable that is relevant to the subject of national security and foreign direct investment. That is the purpose of this bill. This is not the place to evaluate whether our tax or our regulatory system, our jobs should be changed to encourage foreign investment. That is not the purpose of this bill, and we cannot dress it up like a Christmas tree with all these other items. I would suggest the gentleman put forward a stand-alone bill or address it in an economic development package, but that is not the purpose of this legislation. The CFIUS process is put in place and should focus on national security. And while we value foreign investment, we certainly do not want CFIUS to be weighing the value of foreign investment, as per regulation or tax burden or jobs, against any national security risk. The primary purpose is national security. And if there are national security risks that cannot be fixed with an agreement, these transactions should not go forward, period. I would like to add that the process that we have, the CFIUS process, requires annual reporting to a board setup of a committee on, among other things, all filings with CFIUS, details on the trends in filings, investigations, withdrawals, and Presidential decisions. It requires reporting on mitigation agreements and enforcement, the impact of foreign investment on critical infrastructure, critical technologies, and whether there is a coordinated strategy by one or more countries to acquire critical technologies in the United States. But to force CFIUS to opine on policy matters outside of its mandate and expertise, CFIUS is not the right body to report on regulation matters or tax matters that the gentleman has put forward in his amendment, and this requirement will also distract CFIUS from focusing on its prime focus, which is protecting our American citizens, our national security first. These are legitimate issues to raise, and I compliment the gentleman on his thoughtful research and concern, but this is not the area where it should be legislated. So I join the chairman in strongly urging a ``no'' vote on the gentleman's amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I yield to the chairman.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise today to commend my friend, former Representative Michael Bilirakis, for his dedication and service to the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues during his tenure in Congress. Because we represented large Hellenic communities, together we cofounded the Hellenic Caucus in 1996. The caucus now includes more than 120 bipartisan Members of Congress. Together, Representative Bilirakis and I sought justice for Cyprus and fought for the protection of the Hellenic Islands. The caucus has served to bring a renewed congressional focus on diplomatic, military, and human rights issues in a critical part of the world. Representative Bilirakis represented Clearwater, Tarpon Springs, and Newport Richie in Florida, where he has contributed to the preservation of the Hellenic community. He is a member and supporter of the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association, AHEPA, which works on an international level to promote Hellenism, education, philanthropy, civic responsibility, and family and individual excellence. Representative Bilirakis was a valued Member of Congress, and it was a privilege working with him these past several years. I will miss his friendship, guidance and support. I am thrilled that his son, Gus Bilirakis, was elected to Congress and has taken his father's place as the new Republican cochair of the caucus in the 110th Congress. I am looking forward to working with Representative Gus Bilirakis in continuing the important work of the Hellenic Caucus.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him so much for his leadership on this bill and so many other important issues to our State and country. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for National Security FIRST, the underlying bill, and in strong support for the open rule that is before us. Democrats have pledged a return to democracy on the floor of the House of Representatives with an open rule process, and I am very happy to support that pledge with a debate on my bill, H.R. 556. As Congressman Dreier said last night in the Rules Committee, he said that this doubles the amount of times the Republicans allowed for an open rule on a legislative bill in the last Congress; of course this is legislative bills, not appropriations bills. And even though this bill has strong bipartisan support, we did get several amendments last night. I appreciate deeply that Chairman Frank supported and called for an open rule, and that in addition he asked for and obtained a preprinting requirement, since the bill is complicated, and Members on both sides of the aisle need to have time to read the amendments and put them in context. This is the second time this bill has come to the floor. It passed overwhelmingly last year, 421-0, and it is a sound bill that strengthens national security, while encouraging safe foreign investment that helps create American jobs. I hope and expect that the bipartisan effort that got this bill passed in the last Congress will be here today, and I believe that this open rule reflects the spirit of our bipartisan work. I would just like to point out that a year has passed since the Dubai World's fiasco, the scandal, and if you had told me that it would take a year to pass this bill, I would not have believed it. And I think my colleagues on both sides of the aisle share this sense of urgency to get this bill done. I am deeply grateful for their support. This is not a political issue; it deserves strong bipartisan support. Nothing is more important than our national security, our homeland security and promoting American jobs. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker and Chairman Frank, on behalf of New York City, which I represent, I am pleased that the House is considering the Brownfields Redevelopment Enhancement Act. I am proud to have been an original cosponsor of this legislation in every session since it was first introduced in the 107th Congress. As you know, the primary purpose of the bill is to increase the flexibility of the Housing and Urban Development Department's Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) and to make the program available to more local Governments. The legislation eliminates the requirement that communities applying for BEDI grants must pledge their Community Block Development Grant (CBDG) funding as security for the loan--a rule that puts local Governments between a rock and a hard place. Since its inception, the larger brownfields program has proven an effective Government response to a serious environmental problem, and it is important that we maximize its use. Brownfields are abandoned, or under-used industrial and commercial facilities where further redevelopment is impeded by environmental contamination. They spot our country from coast to coast, especially in areas with high or formerly high levels of industrial activity, such as older urban areas. New York City, including my district, is full of them. These locations have potential for economic development but are held back by the environmental problems created by former or current users. The program has successfully used a variety of financial and technical assistance to restore these sites which would otherwise be doomed to further decay. I am very pleased to support this legislation and thank Representative Gary Miller for introducing it again this year and Chairman Barney Frank and Ranking Member Bachus for their leadership on this bipartisan issue.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, today, along with Representatives Barbara Lee, Elijah Cummings, Zoe Lofgren, Lynn Woolsey, and George Miller, I am reintroducing the ``Hate Crimes Statistics Improvement Act'' which will ensure that hate crimes motivated by gender are accounted for by the FBI and local law enforcement agencies. With accurate data, local communities can identify gender-based hate crimes in their areas and chart their progress toward eliminating them. Moreover, the inclusion of gender will send a strong message that gender-based hate crimes will not be tolerated. In States with gender-based hate crimes laws, prosecutors typically must present concrete evidence that the criminal act was committed due to gender bias. Obviously, not all crimes against women are gender- based crimes, and prosecutors should have discretion in identifying what constitutes a gender-based hate crime. The process of discussing these differences will improve the understanding of all hate crimes by law enforcement personnel and will improve reporting of these tragic crimes. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, today I introduce the Women's Health Office Act with my Republican colleague, Deborah Pryce from Ohio. This Act establishes permanent authorization for the offices or officers of women's health in five federal agencies: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Health Resources and Services Administration, and the Food and Drug Administration. Women's health research has been historically underfunded in the United States and for years women have been banned from clinical trials. For example, in 1977, the FDA barred all women of child bearing potential from participating in most early phase clinical research, and this continued for 16 years. Unfortunately, sex differences continue to be ignored in medical research today and we have not made up for the dearth of information on women's health. The offices of women's health in these federal agencies were intended to provide a much needed focus on women's health including research, service delivery, policy, education, and outreach. However, these offices are currently unable to perform their responsibilities due to a lack of support from our federal government. They are severely underfunded and understaffed, and vulnerable to elimination in the future. The work of these offices is essential to improving the health of women in the United States. Creating a permanent authorization would ensure that these offices retain their allocated funding, are sufficiently staffed, and can accomplish the important work for which they were established.