George Miller

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the distinguished majority whip in the House.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee). (Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Does the gentleman have additional speakers? We only have one speaker left and we have the right to close.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Chairman, I yield the remaining time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. How much time do I have remaining?

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 15 seconds to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 3685.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1429) to reauthorize the Head Start Act, to improve program quality, to expand access, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. No, I have none.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume. I want to begin by thanking Mr. Kildee, Mr. McKeon and Mr. Castle and all of the members of the Education and Labor Committee for their hard work on this legislation, for all of their input and their suggestions. Mr. Speaker, this bill has been a very long time coming. It has been coming to the floor of this House since 2003, and we have an opportunity tonight to begin the final part of that process, which is to go to conference on this legislation. This is an important piece of legislation, and this is an important program. In fact, it's this Nation's premier program with respect to the early education and the development of our children in this country, and it has been for more than 40 years. It has served more than 20 million children and their families in that time. Head Start has remained during that time, and continues to remain today, as the cornerstone of this country's efforts to close the achievement gap, to combat poverty, to provide all of its citizens with an opportunity to thrive and to get parents more involved in the education of their children and to show them ways in which they can help in the development and the educational skills necessary for their children. Head Start's design has always been a science-based program, and this reauthorization builds on the strong foundation by, again, turning to the best science to renew and improve the Head Start program. Both Head Start and Early Head Start programs prepare our country's most disadvantaged children to succeed in school and in life by addressing the needs of the whole child by providing services such as health and nutrition, in addition to the educational curriculum, because Head Start knows and discovered, and based upon fact, that the health and the nutritional well-being of these children determines the outcomes in the schools that they attend and the programs that they attend and in their participation. Recent findings from the congressionally mandated impact study found that in less than a school year, Head Start narrowed the achievement gap by 45 percent in the prereading skills and by 28 percent in prewriting skills of the children that attended the program. Head Start also works closely with parents, as I pointed out, empowering them to understand what their involvement can mean to the success of their child and to the long-term educational outcomes of that child. This reauthorization will help more children arrive in kindergarten ready to succeed by improving program quality and expanding the access to more children. We will improve teacher and classroom quality by strengthening the Head Start standards and supporting the best practices in the classroom. We will end the inappropriate testing of 4-year-olds that has been undertaken by the administration in 2003 over the objections of hundreds of experts in child development and early education and over the bipartisan objection of many Members of Congress. We will better target available funds to the underserved communities and prioritize the expansion of early Head Start so that more of our Nation's youngest children, will receive this program during the years when their brains are growing the fastest. We will strengthen program accountability at the Federal, regional, and local levels due to the changes made by the members of this committee and the operations of this program to assure that taxpayer dollars are being used wisely. In fact, in the example that was cited by Mr. McKeon, the senior Republican in the committee, is an example that was dealt with a number of years ago, hopefully by the administration but also in this legislation. Amendments that were offered in earlier iterations of this legislation are reoffered again as part of this bill as introduced by Mr. Kildee. We have, I think, been very diligent in looking after that effort. I would hope that the administration, who has full authority on the oversight of the use of these funds, I wish they had been more diligent at that time. As the GAO found, they failed in their oversight responsibility of the disbursements of this fund. But that is the past. We are assuming that the administration takes the wise use of these funds, the proper use of these funds very seriously, and that they pursue those who choose to do otherwise with these funds. Head Start dollars are very precious in the budget of this Nation. They are very precious to the families of these children, to these children and to those who dedicated their lives to the educational improvement, to the healthy child development of each and every one of these children. We are not to be frivolous with those dollars. The minority has offered a motion to instruct. We agree with that motion. We think if there are differences, those differences are very narrow. They will be discussed; they will be voted upon in the conference committee, and that is our intent. We think that is consistent with the wording of the motion to instruct. When the proper time comes, we will urge Members to support that legislation. Given the scarcity of these dollars, the importance of these dollars and the effectiveness of these dollars, we have no alternative but to be very tough on the accountability sections for this program. This is a trust not only of the children in the care of the Head Start program for the children of this Nation, it is a trust, too, for the taxpayer dollars, because this is a program that we have seen now over these 40 years has continued to receive bipartisan support, not only in the Congress but from every President of the United States. That's why this legislation is so important. Hopefully, with this conference committee, we will be able to report back to the House and to the Senate legislation that can be sent to the President's desk hopefully in the next week or 10 days. That is our goal, and I thank the gentleman for his motion to instruct. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Just quickly, I yield myself 30 seconds to say that, as I said, this bill has been a long time coming to where we think we can get it to the President's desk. I certainly want to thank the staffs on both sides of the aisle for all of their expertise, experience, and knowledge about this program. And we've been working together to get to this point in the conference committee. I would urge passage of the motion to instruct. I reserve my time.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Speaker and Members of the House, President Bush must take a strong stand on the actions of President Musharraf in Pakistan. The constitution of Pakistan must be restored, and democratic rule must be given back to the people. If we fail to do that, then democracy fails in Pakistan and we will see the exact environment in which the Taliban, terrorists, al Qaeda and others are born. Witness Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The restoration of democracy immediately must be high on the agenda of the Bush administration. Failure to do so turns Pakistan into an armed dictatorship with a nuclear weapon. We have spent tens of billions of dollars in Pakistan to encourage their fight against terrorism and the Taliban. And what have we gotten in return? We now see that the military has started businesses with that money. They have used it to pad their retirement accounts. They have used it to run their private businesses rather than to defend the country and prosecute the war against al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other terrorists that are now in northern Pakistan. The choice is this administration's. They can speak out forcefully for democracy, or they can watch it wither on the vine and we will have another failed state in exactly a region where we don't need one.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, this weekend a devastating blow was struck against the efforts to try to grow and make sustainable democracy in Pakistan when President Musharraf of Pakistan announced that he would have an emergency order which has essentially become martial law against all those in the country who disagreed with him; against all of those on the supreme court, all of those in the legal community, all of those in general society who disagree with him are now subject to arrest, are subject to beatings, are subject to imprisonment. That is wrong, and this country cannot look the other way. For too long this administration and this Congress have looked the other way as President Musharraf has worked to limit and now crush democracy in Pakistan. Too many excuses have been offered to allow him to continue this trend against free and open elections, against a growing democracy, against a growing independent press and TV stations because we said he is helping us in Pakistan against the terrorists, the Taliban, in Afghanistan. Of course, what we know is that he has played us over these many years as he has received billions of dollars in aid. He has continued to play us to suggest that he is really concentrating on the effort to rid both Afghanistan and Pakistan of terrorists, but in fact that is not what has been taking place. In fact, he has cut agreements, he has arranged for safe haven, for safe travel for the Taliban as they have moved back and forth against our troops and against people in Afghanistan who are trying to establish a democracy there. Some months ago when I visited Afghanistan, we asked the commander of our troops there what was the biggest threat to our troops in Afghanistan, and he said the border with Pakistan. And that remains true today as the Taliban move back and forth, as recruits from al Qaeda move back and forth, and at a time when President Musharraf simply gives voice to the idea that he is going to stop this from happening, that he is going to create an environment where that will not be allowed to continue. That simply has not happened, because President Musharraf has been more interested in securing his reelection as the leader of Pakistan than he has been in getting rid of the extremists and the terrorists. In fact, he has allowed the extremists to grow even in Islamabad, where their presence wasn't known only a few years ago. We must take a stand against these actions. We must speak out. The administration has spoken out now, but already questions are being raised as to whether or not we will condition aid, whether or not we will forcefully show Musharraf that we cannot have him crush democracy in Pakistan. Pakistan needs more democracy, not less. It needs democracy to strengthen that country so that it can reject ex- tremism and terrorists. It needs free elections so that the people will believe that they are represented, not by the continuing building of a dictatorship by President Musharraf who controls the military, who controls the intelligence, and now is using them against the very people that he is supposed to represent, and that is the people of Pakistan. We cannot stand by while he takes this extraordinary effort to crush democracy, to potentially postpone the elections, to seize the independent media, and to throw hundreds and hundreds so far of his citizens into jail because they simply seek to oppose him and seek a brighter future, a more democratic future for the country of Pakistan. The time has come for this country to take a very strong stand against the corruption of this government and the growing dictatorship presented by the rule of President Musharraf.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I rise in very strong support of H.R. 2262, and I congratulate its sponsor, Chairman Nick Rahall. The Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007 will finally end the give-away of our public lands and minerals. The bill secures a fair return for taxpayers on minerals taken from public lands, and it will provide for environmental standards and cleanup for hardrock mining. For 135 years, American hardrock mining policy has given away public resources, and it has left each new generation a larger legacy of unreclaimed lands and degraded streams. The 1872 mining law is long overdue for comprehensive reform. The American taxpayers deserve an updated mining policy, and so does our natural environment. Chairman Rahall and I have been striving to update this antiquated law for decades, and thanks to his leadership, we are closer today to success than we have ever been. The Natural Resources Committee's effort to reform mining law began in the early 1990s, when I chaired the committee, but we were derailed by the Republican rule. Chairman Rahall has spent 20 years introducing bills in this House to get to this point. He has persevered against indifference, opposition, and intensive lobbying. Today, he has brought a bill to the floor of the House that takes a major step towards reform after many long years of struggle. The 1872 mining law allows mining companies to take billions of dollars worth of gold, silver and other minerals from public lands for free. We no longer treat any other resource that way--not coal, oil, or gas--yet under the archaic mining law, we still give away gold with no compensation to the taxpayers who own it. And over the years, the price tag for mining cleanup has risen astronomically. Since the House last acted on reform legislation, more than 20 mines and mills have been added to the Superfund National Priority List. The EPA Inspector General has warned of nearly $24 billion in cleanup costs for mine sites, some of which will require treatment ``in perpetuity.'' The 1872 law's failings have had a serious impact on California and the West. The mining law has remained in effect while Northern California's Iron Mountain mine spewed out nearly a quarter of the copper and zinc discharged by industries to the Nation's surface waters; as historic lands of the Indian Pass area in the southern California desert faced destruction from the proposed Glamis mine; during decades of efforts to control acidic, metal-laden discharges from an old sulfur mine southeast of Tahoe; and as the city of Grass Valley spends millions to treat hazardous mine discharges and fight a giant mining corporation in court. The bill that is before us today, the Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007, will: put certain irreplaceable public lands off limits to mining, secure a fair return for taxpayers with a royalty on minerals taken from public lands, halt the sale of public lands to mining claimholders, adopt modern environmental standards for hardrock mining; and establish a program to clean up abandoned mines. I congratulate the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, Nick Rahall, and Energy Subcommittee Chairman Jim Costa, our California colleague, for their leadership on this issue. I also want to commend the staff of the Natural Resources committee for their years of hard work to get us to this point. I urge all of my colleagues to support this major legislative accomplishment, which will be celebrated by future generations of Americans.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Speaker, the typical income of American households has actually declined between 2002 and 2006 in inflation-adjusted terms. Last year, the number of Americans without health insurance actually increased by over 2 million. For years now, Americans have had to deal with stagnating incomes and rising costs for basics like health care, food, energy and housing. For many reasons, Americans are deeply concerned about the future of their economy and their place in it. One cause of their concern is the negative consequences they see from international trade. Indeed, Americans find themselves increasingly caught in the crosshairs of the global economy. They have watched neighbors, friends and loved ones lose their jobs when plants close and move overseas. Americans have become even more skeptical about trade agreements, and for good reason. They have watched jobs move to China, and in return they get lead-poisoned toys. Given these very real concerns, it is critical that we include in trade agreements strong and enforceable labor and environmental protections. And we must provide substantial assistance to workers who are negatively affected by this trade. On the first part, I want to thank the committee for what they have done in terms of the trade agreements with these labor and environmental protections and I want to thank them for this legislation today. This legislation we are considering addresses this very important point of what happens to those workers who have the negative consequences of international trade. This legislation helps ensure that displaced workers can help make ends meet while they find a new job, or in the case of older workers, until they reach retirement age. The bill requires a layoff or plant closing notification if 50 or more employees, including part-time employees, at a single job site are laid off in a 30-day period. It eliminates a loophole that has allowed employers to avoid giving notices by shifting employees around job sites. The bill increases notice to employees of a plant closing or mass layoff from 60 to 90 days, and that is very important. And it also says that TAA-eligible employees can extend their COBRA coverage for as long as they remain TAA-eligible, up to 2\1/2\ years. And TAA-eligible employees who are 55 years or older and who have worked for an employer for more than 10 years can extend their COBRA coverage until they are eligible for Medicare at age 65, or covered by another health care plan. The coverage is available to workers today, but only up to 18 months. The bill extends that provision. This is the most important provision for those workers who lose their income and lose their job, trying to hold their families together, and also see the loss of their health care. COBRA is of no cost to the government. The employee must pay the employer share, the employee share, and the 2 percent administrative cost. Over 40 million Americans have used COBRA coverage. But in any given year, only 2 to 3 million Americans are on the program, and close to 200,000 people are losing that coverage every month. This is an important benefit to these workers and certainly to people who have preexisting conditions and know they will not be able to go in and find insurance that they can afford or that is even available to them. It is important that we make certain that these older workers are able to bridge the time until they reach Medicare eligibility so they will have continuity of health care. This is good legislation. I hope my colleagues on the floor will support this legislation.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney). (Mrs. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Yes.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hare), a member of the committee.