Kendrick Meek

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce H.R. __ which includes ``new construction'' as qualified restaurant property to take advantage of the reduction from 39\1/2\ years to 15 years for depreciation. H.R. __ also makes permanent the already existing 15-year depreciation for improvements to restaurant property. Madam Speaker, depreciation schedules for commercial real estate have not been significantly revised since they were established. Currently, commercial real estate generally has a 39\1/2\-year depreciable life for the original building and for any subsequent renovations or improvements to the building. Changes have been made in recent years to allow certain industries that directly compete with restaurants to benefit from shorter schedules. These schedules range from seven years for food outlets located in amusement parks to 15 years for those in gas stations and convenience stores. This favorable depreciation schedule has allowed convenience stores to expand and improve their foodservice options. The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 established that restaurants could depreciate qualified restaurant building improvement costs over 15 years for property in place by the end of 2005. Just as it had intended, this provision spurred a tremendous amount of economic activity in both the restaurant industry and the overall economy. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the restaurant industry spent more than $7.4 billion on new structures and building improvements in 2005--a 42 percent increase over the $5.2 billion spent in 2004. The additional spending--fueled by a shorter depreciation schedule--created thousands of jobs in construction- related industries across the country. However, while enhanced depreciation for new restaurant construction was originally included in this legislation, it was subsequently removed for reasons that remain uncertain; thus only leasehold and restaurant improvements were included in the final package. The Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 extended the existing combined qualified leasehold and restaurant improvement provision for costs incurred through the end of 2007. These provisions do not cover new restaurant construction in stand-alone buildings but only apply to restaurants leasing space within larger commercial buildings, and to improvements to existing restaurant structures. Because the depreciation changes that have been made in the past do not apply to stand-alone/owner occupied buildings, a significant sector of retail businesses is at a distinct economic disadvantage, as they must continue to depreciate their buildings, and any improvements made to them, over a 39\1/2\-year schedule. This recovery period is particularly onerous for the restaurant industry because most restaurants remodel and update their building structures every 6 to 8 years--a much shorter timeframe than is reflected in the current depreciation schedule. Each periodic improvement must in turn be depreciated over its own 39\1/2\-year schedule, resulting in concurrent depreciable lives. This ``layering'' in turn yields an actual net tax value in excess of the restaurant's fair market value. Restaurants must constantly make changes to keep up with the daily structural and cosmetic wear and tear caused by customers and employees. On any given day, nearly half of all American adults are patrons of the restaurant industry. Restaurants get more customer traffic and are open longer than other commercial businesses. This heavy use accelerates deterioration of a restaurant building's entrance, lobbies, flooring, restrooms, and interior walls. Restaurant built structures therefore experience more wear and tear unlike that borne by any other types of buildings in the retail industry. These renovations and structural improvements made to restaurants every 6 to 8 years come at an average cost of $250,000 to $400,000. This year alone the restaurant industry is expected to spend in excess of $5.5 billion on capital expenditures for building construction and renovations. The restaurant industry is projected to spend over $70 billion over the next 10 years for building construction and renovations. These expenditures in turn have a significant economic impact on the construction industry, with whose members restaurants contract to perform the new construction and renovations. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, every dollar spent in the construction industry generates an additional $2.39 in spending in the rest of the economy, while every $1 million spent in the construction industry creates more than 28 jobs in the overall economy. Madam Speaker, it is time to equalize the depreciation schedules for new construction with those for combined qualified leasehold and restaurant improvements to make tax policy in this area more uniform, consistent, and fair. H.R._ will accomplish this, and put new restaurant construction on a par with leasehold and improvements with regard to depreciation. H.R._ helps a service industry--one that will provide work for approximately 12.8 million people in the United States in 2007.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise to offer my congratulations to Dr. Nelson Adams. On August 7, 2007, Dr. Nelson Adams will be installed as the 108th president of the 112-year-old National Medical Association during their annual convention and scientific assembly in Honolulu, Hawaii. The National Medical Association (NMA) promotes the collective interests of physicians and patients of African descent by serving as the collective voice of physicians of African descent and as a leading force for parity in medicine, elimination of health disparities, and promotion of optimal health. Dr. Adams is the recipient of numerous awards and honors, including the Honorary Doctor of Laws, but to me his most important accomplishment is that he was the doctor who delivered my son Kendrick Meek, Jr. Dr. Adams, a native of Miami, Florida and a product of its public school system, is a medical leader passionately committed to eliminating racial and ethnic inequality in health. He is regarded as an exceptional achiever, earning high recognition both scholastically and among medical peers. An esteemed alumnus of Howard University, Dr. Adams has been recognized in Who's Who in American Colleges and Universities. He earned his medical degree at Meharry Medical College, where he was named Student of the Year in his freshman class and served as President of the Meharry Chapter of the Student NMA. Dr. Adams completed his four-year residency in Obstetrics and Gynecology at Emory University in 1982. Prior to returning home to Miami, Dr. Adams practiced in Mobile, Alabama for three years, where he was a founding member of the Bay Area Medical Association, an affiliate society of the NMA. A board certified obstetrician-gynecologist, Dr. Adams has a vibrant and challenging practice in North Miami-Dade County. He was the first African-American Chairman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the first African-American Chief of Staff of North Shore Medical Center. In 1992, he founded the Maternal Child Health Initiative (MCHI), an award-winning model for providing care to at- risk, low-income, pregnant women. Today, Dr. Adams is the Chairman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Jackson North Medical Center and President of N.L. Adams, M.D. and Associates. He is also President and Chairman of Access Health Solutions (AHS), a managed care company providing services in 26 counties in Florida. Under Dr. Adams' leadership and through his keen focus on both access and quality, AHS has grown from humble beginnings to serving more than 94,000 beneficiaries with 525 healthcare providers. Throughout his fruitful career, Dr. Adams' leadership and community service has reached across academic, religious, fraternal, and charity institutions. He is the past Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Greater Miami Region of the National Conference of Christian and Jews, a member of the prestigious Orange Bowl Committee, a member of the Board of Trustees of the Florida International University Foundation, Meharry Medical College, Barry University, The Children's Trust and until recently, the Miami Art Museum. I am also proud to report that Dr. Adams and I are Members of the same fraternity, which we both consider the best fraternity in the country--Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc. Additionally, he is a beloved and active member of the historic St. John Baptist Church where he serves as a Deacon and Chairman of the Board of the church's Community Development Corporation. Dr. Adams has held many positions of leadership in organized medicine at the local, state and national levels. He is the past President of the local and state NMA societies in Florida and has served as Vice President, Secretary of the House of Delegates, and member of the Board of Trustees of the NMA. Dr. Adams has served on the board of directors of the DCMA for nearly 10 years, and is the past Treasurer, Secretary, Vice-President, and President-elect of this august body. In June 2007 he was installed as the 97th President of the Dade County Medical Association. Dr. Adams is the son of Naomi A. Adams and the late Nelson L. Adams, both of whom were educators in the Dade County School system. Dr. Adams is married to Effie Jones Adams and they are the proud parents of Victoria and Nelson. Sustained by family ties and guided by spiritual values, Dr. Adams abides by the motto: ``To whom much is given, much is required.''

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the late Kenneth Myers, a fellow Florida Legislator and outstanding attorney in the Miami community. During Mr. Myers distinguished career in the Florida House of Representatives and Florida Senate, he displayed a dedication and commitment to strengthening the state of Florida. Serving 4 years in the House of Representatives and 12 years in the State Senate, Mr. Myers sponsored more than 200 bills that strengthened Florida and our sense of social justice. He personified the essential qualities of a great community leader and earned his place among the pillars of our community. Mr. Myers was a brilliant attorney and proudly practiced law with his father for over thirty years. When his father retired, he joined another distinguished law firm and continued with compassion his path for justice in our South Florida community. Mr. Myers' sincere involvement instilled a profound impact on the community, resulting in many awards, accolades and honors including a Coconut Grove park named in his honor. Mr. Myers lived a stunning life, graduating from Miami High School in 1950 then pursuing higher education at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He proceeded to the University of Florida, School of Law. Mr. Myers' devotion to education led him to serve as a member of the prestigious University of Miami Board of Trustees for 25 years. Mr. Myers' is survived by his sister and my esteemed friend, the Jewish Community Relations Council Director Judy Gilbert-Gould and her husband, Gerald Gould. He is also survived by his nieces Nancy Gilbert, Carolyn Gilbert Epstein and Belinda Gilbert; his nephew Robert C. Gilbert, an officer of the Greater Miami Jewish Federation Board; Mark Gilbert, and eight grandnephews and grandnieces. Mr. Myers was the son of the Federation's Founding President, Stanley C. Myers. His Family and friends will memorialize him during a special service at Temple Beth Am on Tuesday July, 31 2007. Kenneth Myers was a dedicated public servant and his leadership in the community was genuinely admirable. We would all be well served to emulate the legacy of achievement that Mr. Myers practiced throughout his lifetime. May his memory be blessed.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor and congratulate Ada Manuel who will be celebrating her 90th birthday at the J. Charles Griswell Senior Citizens Center in Georgia. She was born on August 10, 1917 to Frank and Hettie Drake Spence. Ada was married to the late Booker T. Manuel with whom she had two daughters Juanita Manuel Rhodes Mond and Elaine Manuel Symonette. She is the grandmother of Reginald E. Symonette, Dr. Yulanda Rhodes, Edward R. Rhodes and Wanda D. Rhodes Price; and the great grandmother of Chandler Price, Chad Price, Chelsea Price, Chania Price, Aaron Rhodes and Xenia Rhodes who sadly preceded her great grandmother in death. After graduating from Mitchell County Elementary High School, she felt the need for spiritual growth so she became a member of Friendship Missionary Baptist Church under the leadership of the late Reverend J. I. Ross. Eager to serve, she became a doorkeeper at the Church. She also served as an assistant chief to the usher board. She later formed the now Jordan Grove Missionary Baptist Church under the leadership of the late Reverend Charlie E. Smith. Ada also enjoys singing and praying; especially praying because she will pray for anyone. During her forty years at Jordan Grove Missionary Baptist Church, she was a member of the Willing Workers where she served as president for one term and then vice-president. As also a member of the Prayer Band, she worked one several committees including Women's Days. Currently she is a member of the First Baptist Church of Brownsville. She is an exemplary figure for both the young and the old of her parish. Madam Speaker, and colleagues, I ask that you join me in honoring Ada Manuel today. I hope we all have the good fortune to live such a full life as she has; she is truly a great lady. Her family and friends must be very proud, and I thank her for continuing to serve the community.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to come before the House once again. I think it's very important to know that we have half a week and next week to complete the people's business. We have a lot that we are working on right now in the United States, also; legislation to redeploy our troops in Iraq, passing a farm bill that would help America move forward, to continue to have legislation that has already passed this House in the Six in '06 plan that we put forth in the first 100 hours of this Congress, getting it through the process. We celebrate this week, just yesterday, I believe, the increase that started with the minimum wage across the country. Americans have a lot to be proud of with this new direction of Congress. As you know, in any democracy, it has to be a bipartisan spirit to get the job done on behalf of the American people. We are trying to do that in the best way possible. Our friends on the other side of the aisle, on the Republican side of the aisle, in many cases are stutter-stepping and slowing down the process, but it's very, very important that their voice is heard in this Chamber. I think the days upon days and the hundreds of amendments that have been offered here on the floor and that have been voted on is evident of how this Democratically controlled House has allowed the minority party to be able to have access that only they could celebrate in the 110th Congress, which we weren't able to celebrate under the 109th Congress. I also want to point out the fact that we have passed over 40- something major legislation where we have had bipartisan support, and I think that's important. One issue I want to talk about tonight, since our time is limited, of the amount of dollars that we are spending in Iraq as we continue to try to redeploy our troops. We know the September 15 date is coming up, the second report of progress, or a lack thereof, in Iraq will be due. Members of the House are going to have to vote on the defense appropriations bill shortly thereafter that will set the tone for the remainder of the fiscal year. As you know, we passed off this floor on a bipartisan vote continuing an emergency supplemental that would allow 3\1/2\ months of funding for the war in Iraq with MRAP tanks and other equipment that the troops needed. I think Members had voted in the affirmative, Members had voted against it, both were courageous votes. I think it's time to move in a direction of policy. No permanent bases, I understand, will be coming up on the floor. We also have other legislation calling for the withdrawal of U.S. troops by a certain date. I think that's also important and very courageous. I think the debate that is going on in the Senate and the House, led by Democrats, are going to help us as we move towards the September 15 date. As you know, and the Members know, I speak quite often on leaving politics behind and putting good policy forward, making sure that we don't act as Democrats and Republicans politically, I will say that again, rather than representing the American people. The American people are way ahead of us on this issue of Iraq. I think it's important as we continue to share the information as we get in. This came from the Congressional Research Service. The cost of the war in Iraq is rising per year. You see the number in the billions, $120 billion per year, per month; $10 billion per week. We are looking at looking at $2.3 billion a day. We are looking at $329,000, we are looking at, per hour, as you see it relates per hour; the $13 million. I think it's important to look at per minute, $228,938 that's there in the thousands, and then we have $3,816 per second. I think it's important. I think it's also important we look at those numbers, the cost per year, we look at the billions. We are looking at $120 billion per year. That can actually pay for 4.7 million EMTs and paramedics. When you look at it for a monthly cost at $10 billion, which we are spending in Iraq, you can actually provide EMTs or paramedics for your local community or for the Nation, 395,000. When you look at the per-week cost, $2.3 billion, 91,000 EMTs and paramedics could be provided for local cities and counties and parishes; per day, at $329 million, 13,000; and per hour, $13.7 million that's spent that could actually fund 543 new EMTs. I think it's important, especially for those cities that are struggling and those counties that are struggling and States that are struggling on this very issue of how they are going to provide emergency service in their local community. If you look at the cost of the war, could enroll more kids in Head Start. I think it's important for us to look at the $120 billion, 16.7 million kids can go into Head Start; per month at $10 billion, 1.7 million kids could go into Head Start; per week, $2.3 billion that's being spent in Iraq, 320,000 kids could actually be enrolled in Head Start where we have a shortage of funding and every kid can't receive Head Start opportunities where kids can start early and be healthy, and parents can have kids that will be prosperous educationally. Per day, look at $329 million; 46,000 kids could benefit. And the per-hour cost that we are spending in Iraq at 13.7, 2,000 kids could be enrolled in the Head Start program. As we start talking about health care insurance for children, I am just looking at these numbers as a member of the Ways and Means Committee and I am just thinking of how many kids we can actually do good things for and Americans. We just pulled a few of these things. The cost of Iraq could send more Americans to college. You know the numbers by now. As you know, this is the year number at $120 billion, and the per-month is $10 billion, the per-week is $2.3 billion, per-day is $329 million, and per-hour at $13.7 million. But look at this side, on the far side here, Mr. Speaker and Members, the numbers of students that could be helped: 21 million students in the one year that we spend there. So this means 21 million young people would have an opportunity to go to college, that is amazing, for what we are spending in Iraq right now; 1.7 million students per month can receive an education in the United States and make us competitive, not States competitive with other States, but this country competitive with other countries. I think it is also important if we can tie this chart in with that. I think it is also important that 395,000 students can be funded within a week of what we spend. I just know that financial aid officers at universities and at community colleges and at technical centers throughout the country are saying, wow, look at that number; 56,000 students could be funded per day. 56,000. Think about the kids that are paying student loans back that are having to go out and scratch and beg, and people that are punched in right now and grandparents and parents that have picked up an extra job to put their kids through school looking at these numbers as relates to this endless war, as the President sees it, in Iraq, we could actually help. And this is almost sad when it comes down to per hour. With the $13.7 million that is being spent in Iraq per hour, 2,000 students could actually receive an education. I am going to break out from the charts and the numbers. But if you look at the foreign-owned debt and you start looking at countries like Japan that are holding a great number of our debt at the 644-plus million dollars, I think it is important. We owe Japan this money, we owe China money, we owe the U.K. money, we owe OPEC countries money because of the mismanagement of the Bush administration and the former rubber-stamp Republican Congress. Our kids, our young people, our country have to compete economically, have to compete as it relates to the level of education so that we can have a workforce that is better than the countries that we have borrowed money from, and I am not proud of that at all. Just to tie in that chart, and I will get back to that Iraq issue, this is what is happening here. You have seen this chart before. We have updated this chart. Since President Bush has been in office, it has doubled the foreign-held debt. It took 42 Presidents 224 years to build up $1 trillion in foreign- held debt. If you look, you have the pictures of the Presidents here, we are talking World War I, World War II, the Great Depression, you name it, a number of other wars that took place, the Civil War, and all of the conflicts that took place, and the hard financial times that the United States has gone through, these 42 Presidents combined, $1.01 trillion. President Bush was elected, had a rubber-stamp Republican Congress, and they borrowed within 6 years, we are saying 6 years, more than 224 years of history and other financial challenges of the country, $1.19 trillion. We are moving, Mr. Speaker, into a pay-as-you- go effort to be able to knock that down, and we are passing budgets that will get us back into. Back to the cost of Iraq. And me being a former State trooper, Mr. Speaker and Members, I think this is important. Look, we know by now and we can see because I have said it about five times, the per-year, the per-month, the per-day, and the per-hour costs of the war in Iraq. The per year at $120 billion, we can actually hire in this country 2.6 million police officers that could be community police officers to prevent crime, that could be officers that can enforce the law in high- crime areas, officers that can go out and do the things that they need to do to make this country safer. In one month that it costs us in Iraq, 221,000 officers could be hired. In one week in Iraq, 51,000 officers. I am talking about folks that are in local communities that are literally under lockdown in urban and rural areas in the United States that are trying to protect their families and maybe have one or two State troopers in an entire county or State police officer in a parish or in an urban area. I represent down in Miami where you can go for a little while before you see a law enforcement officer. And to learn in one day that you can hire 7,000 police officers that it costs in Iraq, for the lack of the COPS bill that has been destroyed under the Bush administration and the past Republican Congress, that we are pushing in our past appropriations bills that we have passed thus far to rekindle that program so that we can have community policing, something that sheriffs, something that city police chiefs, something that local communities enjoy, because they prevent crime before it happens. And the per-hour cost, $3.7 million in Iraq per hour, could fund 304 police officers. Now, Mr. Speaker, it takes a lot of courage, it takes a lot of backbone to come to this floor to make sure that we do what the American people have asked us to do in making sure that we provide opportunities for local communities to fund the necessary needs that they have. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished Member from Florida (Mr. Hastings).

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Congressman Hastings, I am so glad that you did come down and that you did share your sentiments. And you are right, the point that we are trying to make here is that we are going to have to bring an end to this war as we see it now. Mr. Speaker, I think it is also important for all of the Members on both sides of the aisle to realize that, especially under the pay-as- you-go philosophy that we have adopted as the House in the majority and the Senate has adopted, that things are going to be hard back home as it relates to getting Federal appropriations back to our districts. There is really no need for us to be here if we can't bring resources back, if we can't represent the people that woke up early one Tuesday morning for representation to provide not only voice here in Congress but also action. And without money, it is hard to bring about that kind of action. I think it is also, Mr. Speaker, very important that Members do note that many of the U.S. Governors, and I am not just talking about Democratic Governors, mainly Republican Governors, that have raised the issue with the Federal commitment to the States, the devolution of taxation that has been taking place over the last 6 years, especially under the Bush administration. I just want to break that down a little further where taxes, quote/ unquote, have been cut here for the very wealthy here in Washington prior to the Democratic Congress getting here, and that responsibility with the lack of funding, Leave No Child Left Behind. I am not cutting the student loan rates in half, which we have already passed in our Six in '06 budget. But in the Republican Congress, those States had the balance. Here, under the 109th, under the Republican Congress, they could continue to raise that foreign-held debt that I talked about. They could just say, well, let's just put it on a credit card and leave it for the next generation and this generation to pay for it. But we decided here, in the Democratic leadership and society, that we are going to move in a responsible way and not leaning on the backs of our children and our families that exist now as we compete against other countries, not only in the area of technology, but also in the area of financial strength. And I think that the posture that we are in now, Mr. Speaker, of what I showed on that chart on foreign-held debt, this chart illustrates the posture that we are in right now: $1.19 trillion. And these are not my numbers; these are the numbers from the U.S. Treasury. So this is not something that I sat down my staff and said, Let's see what looks good or sounds good, because we know as the 30-something Working Group that I would like to add my colleague here Mr. Hastings that I am a part of the ``something'' of the 30-something. But I think it is important for us to point at that and take note to it. Now, if you are a conservative Democrat, Republican, Independent, you have to have issue with fiscal irresponsibility. If you are someone that feels very strongly as it relates to the supporting of the troops, I think it is important that you pay very close attention to the amount of money that is being spent in Iraq with the lack of accountability, only now that the Congress started holding hearings under the Democratic-controlled House, holding hearings to check the issues and the questions of the no-bid contracts, the lack of oversight over the years. There are a number of things that are coming to light now, Mr. Speaker, because the committees are having committee hearings, subcommittees are having hearings asking the tough questions, let's just say questions in general about the war in Iraq. I don't want to be in a position, Mr. Speaker, to say, I told you so. I want to be in the position to say that we were able to prevent the taxpayer dollar from being spent in an irresponsible way. There are a number of things that have taken place. I am looking forward, Mr. Speaker and Members, going to Iraq in the next 6 weeks prior to the September 15 report to bring about my own assessment of what is going on there on the ground. Mr. Speaker, I went in my district to the Federal Reserve Unit of the Combat Engineer Unit 841 that is actually being deployed into Iraq and will be there at the time that I visit Iraq. My talk with them, Mr. Speaker, was that I hope that this would be their last deployment to Iraq, and something that we need to hold close to us. And now, Mr. Speaker, I want to point this out because when I talk about a bipartisan approach, I want to make sure that we talk fact not fiction here on the floor, and I don't want in any way to paint some sort of butterscotch cloud world. But I think it's important that we take issue with the fact that this House and the Senate passed legislation that had benchmarks in it, legislation that had redeployment dates in it, legislation that had an end date for combat troops to patrol the streets of Iraq and other areas, and leaving that responsibility up to the Iraqi Government. I'm mentioning combat troops because I think it's important that we pay very close attention to it. Right now, as we speak, Mr. Speaker, there are troops right now, marines, soldiers, other branches of the armed services that are going through door-to-door checks, not only in Baghdad but throughout Iraq on behalf of the safety of the people of those towns or province or what have you. And every door we kick in, Mr. Speaker, because, as you hear, the President doesn't speak of coalition anymore because the coalition is gone. The coalition, in their own way, as small as the coalition was, found a way to start redeploying their troops out of combat into the periphery that we speak of so much to provide support where their troops will not be in harm's way, where their money commitment will not be at the level of our money commitment of the numbers that I called off a little earlier. And I think that is very, very important for us to pay very close attention to that. Mr. Speaker, I think it's important to note that when this House acted, and we passed legislation, and the Senate acted and they passed legislation in a bipartisan way, before that bill could even get bound to take to the White House, the President called some of our Republican colleagues down to the White House. They had a lunch and they came out of the White House. And it's not one Democrat in this picture here, and said that we're going to make sure that the President is able to withstand an override of his veto by the Congress. Now, I'm not judging Members for going down to the White House and saying that. But I just want to make sure, because I believe that a number of Members have gone back to their districts and, you know, I'm not trying to call any names or party affiliation, but I'm just telling you, not one Democrat went down to the White House to stand with the President on his troop escalation plan. But I think the November election was all about a new direction. And there's a difference between making sure that the men and women have what they need while they're in harm's way. There's a difference when it comes down to the fact that we here in the Congress have to put forth policy and parameters on the taxpayer dollars to make sure that it's being spent appropriately. You heard Mr. Hastings, who's a member of the Intelligence Committee, also is involved in many of the European talks and is a leader in one of the largest parliamentary councils in Europe that were a part of the coalition that made his statements about what we know and why we're not bringing about the accountability that's needed. I hold this picture up because I want to discourage Members from going to the White House on behalf of party. And I think it's important that we look at it from that standpoint. As I come in for a closing, Mr. Speaker, as we proceed over the next week and a half, we're going to spend many hours here on this floor. We're going to have a number of amendments. Tomorrow, as we mark up and start to put together the Children's Health Insurance Plan in the Ways and Means Committee, there will be a number of amendments, as we start looking at the Medicaid and Medicare benefits, who's going to get what when and how it's going to happen, there are going to be a number of amendments. And it's nothing wrong with amendments and dialogue and discourse. But I believe that the issues that we have to tackle as a Congress, we're going to need that Republican bipartisan support, along with this Democratic leadership. Minimum wage never would have been increased if it wasn't for the leadership of the Speaker and a number of the Democratic Members that held to their guns to make sure that everyday people that punch in and out, Mr. Speaker, while we're here on the floor, those individuals that are bussing tables, those individuals that are cleaning offices, those individuals that are working shift work, as a security officer or as an individual that's trying to provide for their families. And even for salaried workers, Mr. Speaker, I think it's important when you look at the increase in minimum wage, it helps salaried workers because they'll make more money and they will be able to pay more for health insurance, additional insurance if they're insurance at their job doesn't provide what they need; and it also takes a number of families over the poverty line. But as we look at this, I think it's important, there's only so many times that Republican Members can go down to the White House and say, Mr. President, I stand with you, versus standing with those individuals that have said that they want something overwhelmingly, like the minimum wage and other areas. We still had Members that voted against the increase in minimum wage, which I can't understand, still today. So with that, Mr. Speaker, I look forward to continuing to share with the Members, not only the costs in Iraq, but also our responsibility here in Congress. I'm glad that, from the Speaker on down to the newest Member of Congress, that we have a philosophy that we have to push forward, that we have to make sure the American people not only have voice but action in this House. I encourage my Republican colleagues to be along with us in that spirit and have the kind of paradigm shift that we need to put this country on the right track and to make sure that our men and women have what they need. And I can tell you, from the families that I saw at the 841 who were moving on into Iraq, from what I picked up, if you want to help the troops, let's bring them home. And that's what it's all about.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my good friend from the Garden State. It is interesting, Mr. Speaker, and I will point to this L.A. Times editorial since now the L.A. Times is an authority on this issue. The newspaper said it reluctantly endorsed the U.S. troop surge when it began. But at the bottom it says: ``We feel that the time has come now for us to leave Iraq.'' That is the L.A. Times. I also want to point out another thing as we talk about this redeployment, a responsible redeployment, the act that is up before the House right now that we are considering. I just want to make sure the Members of the House know exactly what they are doing, because when they get back home in their districts and they start talking to the heroes and sheroes that have been deployed two to three times and talk to Americans about why they can't meet the needs that they have to meet here domestically, I want them to reflect on this: I want them to look at the fact that you have $120 billion a year that we are spending in Iraq; per month, $10 billion; per week, $2.3 billion; per day, $329 million; per hour, $13 million since we have been here on the floor, Mr. Speaker; per minute, which I only have two, $228,000. And you have to look at per second, as I take a breath, $3,816. Also, I want to point out to the Members here, Mr. Speaker, the last time we passed a measure on behalf of the men and women in harm's way and to send the message to the Iraqi Government, they can go on vacation and they don't meet and they don't do the things that we have put forth as benchmarks that they have to meet in a bipartisan way, then why should we reward bad behavior? And I have this picture here, Mr. Speaker, of when the President called a lot of the Members of the minority here in this House down to the White House and they had a meeting and the President came out, mikes and everything, not one Democrat here, saying that we stand with the President, this is what the minority president said: ``We stand with the President in not overriding his veto.'' I want to know, Mr. Speaker, how many times the Members of the minority party are going to go down to the White House and stand on the schoolhouse door of allowing us to move in a new direction. The American people are way ahead of us on this issue. I am so happy that Chairman Skelton has brought this to the House floor. I am hoping that we have a bipartisan vote on it. I am encouraging every Member of the House, and I do mean every Member of the House, even my good friends on the other side of the aisle, to vote for a commonsense new direction. And I think that is very, very important as we look at this responsible redeployment act. Once again, it takes courage to be a Member of the House. It takes also leadership to be a Member of the House. And some of us have to go see the wizard and pick up both of those values that we all hold and that we should hold. So I encourage you to cast an affirmative vote on the Responsible Redeployment from Iraq Act.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, if you would yield for a second. You know, I was sitting here. And the great thing about being a Member of Congress, and I thank the people from the 17th Congressional District in Florida for sending me here, it's almost like, coach, get me the ball. I wanted to say, will the gentleman yield? Because it's interesting that Georgia was on their knees with hands clasped saying, please help us. Children are about to run out of health care insurance, and we're about to have a crisis. And it was the leadership of this Congress, the Democratic Congress, that brought about that kind of change. That's why people wake up at 7 a.m. in the morning to go vote for representation. So now we're down to politics, Mr. Speaker. And it's very unfortunate, politics is playing a role in the lives of our children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews that need health care. And this is for working folks. These are for folks who punch in and punch out every day, individuals that are struggling every day that are hoping that the government will stand for them. So, Mr. Chairman, continue. I yield back. But I'm just saying if Florida was in the situation, I couldn't come down here to the floor and start knocking something that this Congress ran to the savior. And what we had to do, Mr. Chairman, was to couple it with a number of other things to get it to pass for the President not to veto it. And we're going to talk about that a little later, but I think that's very, very important. I yield back, sir.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Chairman, you said $5 billion over the next 5 years?

Mr. MEEK of Florida. That's $50 billion.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Over the next 5 years.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, let me tell you, per year in Iraq we spend $120 billion.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I know that we're running out of time, and I think Mr. Ryan is going to move us to a few more minutes here.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to address the House. And I hope the Members of the House had a great 4th of July break as we celebrate another birthday of this great country. And the great thing about it is you're allowed to say what you want to say and feel what you want to feel and express yourself in any way that you would like to. Mr. Speaker, as you know, the 30-Something Working Group, we come to the floor to share with not only the Members of Congress, but also with the American people, the importance of good policymaking, and also making sure that we're factual in what we say and what we do here. It was quite interesting. I was sitting here reading my notes from the information that we pulled together to come to the floor. We're going to talk about Iraq tonight, but I'm going to talk a little bit about SCHIP because we spent a lot of time and many hours on this floor fixing what the Republican Congress left for dead, really. We had to come in, the Democratic majority, with the leadership of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and save the SCHIP program in many States. A number of Republican Governors wrote that were in a crisis mode of their program being shut down in the State of Florida, health care for children. In Washington, many people talk about SCHIP. I'm so glad to have the chairman here of the subcommittee that deals with this particular issue. And it goes to show you, here on the Democratic side we have great responsibility when it comes down to fixing and cleaning up the mess that was left from the 109th Congress and the Republican- controlled Congress and special interests got what they wanted. I think it's also important to note that a supermajority of Republicans voted against the continuing resolution to be able to save the SCHIP program in many States to provide health care for children. And now we're going through the policy move that we have to take to be able to make sure that SCHIP is here for every child and to make sure that they have the kind of health care that they deserve. So I'm so glad Mr. Pallone from the Garden State is here because he is the chairman that's dealing with this very issue. I'm a member of the Ways and Means Committee that is also going to be having a discussion on this issue. And I can tell you, as we start to move forth and uncovering and unearthing some of the injustices that have taken place in the past, and we have Governors on our side, we have children advocates on our side, we have those that believe in true health care on our side in saying that this is not a last-day-at-school kind of syndrome that we see the President and others going through. And I think something is about to happen that is really great and is going to secure and make sure the children have the kind of health care they deserve. Mr. Pallone, I would be more than happy to yield to you at this time because I know without notes that you can talk about this because you and your staff have been working on this issue and members of your committee have been working on this issue.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Imagine the line. Imagine a rural county. Imagine an urban county that I represent, everyone kind of diving into one or two locations to make it all happen. Why should we inconvenience those that are counting on their government to respond, especially on behalf of our children. I'm glad you came down here tonight to have you here, the person that has the gavel in their hand, heard testimony from the States. I know you know what I'm saying. This is what you're doing and this is why we're here. And Americans voted for a new direction, and we're heading in that new direction. There are those that are Members of Congress that don't want to move in that new direction. And, Mr. Speaker, like I said, the great thing about our country is that we can disagree and you can voice your opinion and other ideas, but I think it's important also for the American people to get fact and not fiction. And that's what we're here about, and that's what it's all about. You are always welcome, Mr. Chairman, to come down. I am a part of the ``something'' part of the 30-something. So you can join, and that caucus is growing. And the good thing about what we do here on the floor from those new Members of Congress, we call them ``majority makers,'' to those that have been here as long as you have been here, to see this process go full circle, 360 degrees, to be able to come to the floor at 11-something at night, to be able to set the record straight I think is important not only for Members of Congress, but also for the Congressional Record and for those individuals that are listening to the statements that are being made here on the floor that know better.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Murphy, I just want to thank you, definitely fresh out of the State legislature, for coming to this floor. I served in the legislature myself, and I can tell you that in Florida we enjoy the Federal assistance that is there. Some folks, Mr. Speaker, speak of Medicare as socialized medicine. If you try to do away with Medicare right now and have new and great ideas that would limit access to clinics and what have you, I think you would have an uprising in this country as we look at providing better healthcare. If I can, we came to the floor tonight, and I have my Iraq notebook with me, and I want to thank not only staff but the Democratic leadership for taking a forward lean, as we have done since we have been here in the control of the House, and the American people provided us with an opportunity to lead, to move this country in a new direction, and also move this issue of Iraq in a new direction. I just want to talk a little bit about the numbers, and I want this to sink in, because I want Members to know exactly what we are doing. We have to create and we have to be about a major paradigm shift, I would say slash ``new direction,'' as it relates to Iraq. We know that the President has executive authority and he can veto. We know that the legislature, and when we say legislature, I started talking about States, I started talking about legislature, I would say the Congress, the legislative branch of government has the responsibility of policy and making sure that we pass legislation that will be helpful. During the 4th of July break, which was a wonderful thing, you have an opportunity to go back to your districts and you have an opportunity to go to places where you can learn more, I actually went to Norfolk, Virginia, to the Naval facility there and spoke to a number of sailors and some marines and others that have been deployed before. I was there on a destroyer and also a submarine and also an amphibious vessel that moved marines into a forward area and had an opportunity to talk to a number of individuals over that weekend. I left with the impression, Mr. Murphy, of them saying, if you want to help the troops, then stand up for us in the Congress and making sure we bring some sense to what we are doing. Now, some of the bloodiest weekends in Iraq took place during the 4th of July break, and a number of Iraqis have lost their lives and they have a number of civil war conflicts that are going on there. Also a number of marines, soldiers and others, even civilians, lost their lives. I think it is important as we look at this and we go through a forward lean, I just want to capture this moment from the Congressional Research Service, Mr. Speaker, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan organization within the Congress. These are individuals that are Ph.D.'s and those that count the numbers and really give the Americans an objective view of what the real picture is. Let's talk about cost here for a minute. You heard Mr. Pallone, the Chair of a subcommittee dealing with the children's health program, say over 5 years it would take $50 billion to be able to provide healthcare for children. Let's look at these numbers. Per year in Iraq, and this is the chart that I have here, $120 billion a year. I am going to even further break that down to $10 billion a month and change. These are not my numbers. This is the Congressional Research Service numbers. Per week, $2.3 billion a week in Iraq. $2.3 billion. This is just Iraq. We are not talking about Afghanistan. Per day, $329 million and change. I am not even giving you the change. Per hour, $13 million. That is every hour in Iraq, $13 million. Think about what we can do here domestically. I am talking to the mayors of our cities and our towns. I am talking to commissioners that would like to resolve some issues and want some sort of Federal assistance in doing that. I am talking to the citizen that is wondering why something is shut down in their community for a lack of funding. Per minute, $228,000. That is per minute. $228,000. That is more than many Americans make in 5 years, Mr. Murphy, a minute. That is what is happening in Iraq right now. Per second, $3,816. Some may say $4,000 a second. You look at the Forbes' richest, most wealthy Americans, they are not even doing that. You have companies that wish they could make $3,816 a second. This makes Oprah, her income, look very small. This makes some of the new people that are there, the President or the used-to-be chairman of Microsoft, look very small when you look at these numbers. But you have to look at this issue for what it is. These are the dollars that we are spending. Now, who is standing in front of us and making new policy changes here? I think it is important, and I think we are going to have a gut check here, and I want to make sure that Americans know exactly and the Members know. Because many Members, they go back home and they say, I did not quite understand that. I am sorry. It went over my head. I didn't understand what happened, when a constituent may walk up to them. This week in the House we will have an opportunity to reaffirm our support and move this Iraq debate in a new direction. Responsible redeployment of our troops. We talk about responsible redeployment. We are talking about a bill that Chairman Ike Skelton is going to bring to this floor tomorrow, or sometime this week, where Democrats and Republicans will have an opportunity on the record to vote once again as it relates to redeployment. The Responsible Redeployment Act, H.R. 2956. It requires the responsible redeployment of U.S. troops beginning within 120 days of enacting and ending by April 1st, 2008. I think it is important that everyone understands that a supermajority, 70 percent, a supermajority of Americans believe that we should be out of Iraq. It requires the President to publicly justify the post-deployment missions for the U.S. military in Iraq with a minimum number of troops necessary to carry out those missions. This is not saying that we are going to take all of the troops out of Iraq, but what it is saying is those troops that are in harm's way, doing the door-to-door, doing all of these things in the middle of a civil war that Iraqi troops should be responsible for, there are a number of people that are saying, you know, they are not quite ready. But, meanwhile, back at the ranch, I know every Sunday on CNN they have a report talking about what happened in Iraq that week. I think I have seen too many flag-draped coffins. I think I have talked to too many spouses and family members that are saying, what are you going to do and how are you going to do it and how are you going to stand up? Chairman Ike Skelton is beyond this. He is what one may say is an individual that solely has the troops in his heart and in his mind. And this will be a product of not only him, but many Members of Congress. So Members will get an opportunity to vote. Now, Mr. Murphy, before I yield to you, I think it is important that we show who is standing in the schoolhouse door here. I would ask for not only the Members, but also the American people to go to the White House website if you want some information. Members of the Republican minority, thanks to the American people, on March 29 of 2007, stood with the President after we moved the bill through this Congress that would move the policy as it relates to Iraq in a new direction. It would bring more accountability as it relates to profiteering, more accountability as it relates to how our troops are being deployed based on what the President says that he thinks is right. It is bringing democracy to it. When we passed that bill, it passed both the House and Senate, I can say that the Democratic majority voted in the affirmative with a few Republicans, and it went to the White House. And before that bill could be carried to the White House, the President said that he would veto it. I want you to take a look at this picture here, because I think it is very very important. Pictures speak 1,000 words. You have all Republicans, the minority, that are standing behind the President saying stand with the President and we will not allow the President to be overridden, for there to be an override of his veto. I think it is important for us to pay very close attention to it, because my message to those that were on the steps of the White House, who met with the President, who had some sort of discussion with the President, that have said ``we are going to make sure that the President's will is not overridden,'' well, I want to ask, how many times will the Republican minority go down and stand with the President in front of the will of the American people? That is going to happen this week, Mr. Speaker, and I am glad that Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said we are willing to take the fight on behalf of the American people to the executive branch and to those Members of Congress who believe that we should be ``staying the course'' or continuing to do the same thing expecting different results. There are a lot of things that are going on in Iraq that are not in the control of the American Congress and executive branch and those that they elected to represent them here in Washington, DC. But what we do have control over as it relates to the policy and as it relates to the will of the American people and the troops. One person said if you want to help the troops, get us out of Iraq. If you want to help the troops. Mr. Ryan and I in the 108th and 109th Congress heard all kinds of speeches here on this floor, Mr. Murphy, Members saying ``I support the troops.'' ``No, I support the troops more than you.'' ``No, let me take my shirt. Let me show you a tattoo I have on my shoulder saying I support the troops.'' That is not what it is about. It is about policy. It is about manning up and womaning up and leadering up and standing up on behalf of these men and women that are in harm's way. These are real families. We have to treat this issue as it relates to redeployment of troops in Iraq as though our children or our nephew or our cousin or our husband or wife, what have you, are in harm's way as we speak. Those that have a dot.mil address behind their e-mail address that are e-mailing us and are asking us to be leaders, I am glad that this House is moving in the direction, and the Senate is moving in the direction, and I commend those Senators that have come to the side of the American people saying enough is enough. The President can burn all kind of Federal jet fuel and fly throughout the country. He was in Cleveland talking about what we need to do. Enough is enough. The bottom line is that folks have to come to grips that this is a democracy. The White House is under some sort of impression, I want to say impression. They believe if they were to come out at a press conference, if the President were to say the rain doesn't fall from the sky, it comes up from the ground to the sky, they believe many Americans would actually look outside to see if that is true. We know what is right and what is wrong. What is wrong is the fact that we can no longer stand idly by and let this happen. The Democratic Congress has tried to make this happen. We need Republican support. We need the American people to call their Republican representative and say enough with this partisan stuff, let's move for our young men and women in harm's way. I yield to Mr. Ryan.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Ryan, the bottom line is that the President, and we have to talk about the student loan issue that he talked about earlier today, and I think it is important that we talk about that because again we had Members here talking about SCHIP and we were all once representatives in our States on the legislative end on the State level. But I think it is important for us to, and where is my red chart to talk about the debt. We just had Mr. Pallone as the chairman of the subcommittee down here, and we have a proposal talking about $50 billion over the next 5 years. Let me say real quick, per year it is $120 billion in Iraq and climbing. I say that to a mayor or to a Governor, I would like to have my hands on $120 billion that the Federal commitment has made. Mr. Ryan, it is not the President, that is all too easy. The President is in his last leg of a swim meet here. He has the last day of school kind of syndrome. All of us know what the last day or last week of school felt like. I am about to leave the institution, and I don't have to worry about what is happening. But guess what, it is not the last day of school for the American people and those that are in harm's way. We have a responsibility to stand for them. I am not going to just leave the President. I am going to say that those individuals on the Republican side of the aisle, not all of them, but a majority of them, are willing to stand with the President that ran this record debt up that we have now. A $1.19 trillion debt and climbing, done by the Republican majority in the 108th and 109th Congress and beyond, of rubber stamping what the President has done. We all live the same kind of lives. We all understand our responsibility up here. But I tell you, to be able to move in a new direction in Iraq, it is going to take more than just Democratic majority Members, especially in the Senate, to be able to bring some real sense to this new direction in Iraq. The real issue is that there is a choice to be made. Mr. Ryan, some of the Members on the Republican side used to laugh at us when we were on the floor. I see them in the hall and they are like, ``You all are funny. Do you really believe people are going to follow what you all are talking about if you are given the opportunity to lead?'' Well, guess what, how do you like us now? People believe. Democrats, Republicans, Independents. And you know something, some people who voted for the first time in their lives who had given up on the political system, and I will be doggone if their vote goes in vain. I am telling you right now, we need Republican Members of this Congress to vote on behalf of our troops. Want to help the troops? Vote for redeployment. You want to help the troops, vote for antiprofiteering legislation. You want to help the troops, when Mr. Murtha comes to this floor with an appropriations bill that is going to bring major sense as it relates to the appropriations in this war, then support that if you want to support the troops. Mr. Ryan, I am going to yield to Mr. Murphy by saying this: As of July 11, today, the deaths in Iraq as it relates to U.S. military personnel, and this is not even counting those clandestine agents that are out there, those civilian folks, 3,609. That is as of 10 a.m. this morning. Total number of wounded in action, returned to duty, 14,681. Number of wounded that did not return to duty, 12,014 and climbing. I want to say this is real. This is above and beyond Democrat- Republican politics, Independent politics, whatever the case may be. We are moving in the direction of redeployment of our troops and a new policy. The President can stand in the schoolhouse door all he wants to, but the bottom line is he is empowered by the Republican minority that are saying that we are not going to allow you to have enough votes to be able to override what the President is saying. That is where it comes down to it. I can tell you, like I shared with some of my colleagues, you continue to follow the President on the old way, and I guarantee you, just like I said in the 108th Congress and 109th Congress, and I don't have a whole lot of say in what goes on in some of these districts because people have their own heart and mind. They read and they see. They see the people that are not coming back. People are being deployed. They are not glad they are going. They are crying when people are going. Will I see my husband? Will I see my father again? What are we doing? What does this mean? We are in the middle of a civil war; what does that mean? Will my husband or wife be knocking down some door as we speak here on this floor, having Iraqis huddle in the middle of a room on a security mission that is necessary because the Iraqi government is not doing it, and those individuals will never forget that. And they are not doing it just because they feel like doing it; they are doing it because it is the mission. We support them in that mission, but the bottom line is we have to have a new attitude and new direction. There are Iraqi troops that should be doing those house checks and taking that responsibility, and an Iraqi parliament that should be coming to work every day to make sure that they do what they do. It shouldn't be our people, and people know it. So the bottom line is, when you are in a place where you don't understand exactly where you should be, fall on the side of commonsense. That is all that I am saying. Mr. Murphy.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. What happened to the coalition, Mr. Murphy?

Mr. MEEK of Florida. The thing about it and the thing about what we work on and what we meet on, and after we leave the floor I need to talk to you even further about this issue, because, Mr. Speaker, the President was on the road and saying, well, I'm going to veto the interest rate cut that the Democratic Congress passed because it doesn't help enough needy kids that are presently in college. Well, this is the same President who said we're going to be treated as liberators when we were in Iraq. This is the same President that has said that investing in big oil will be able to assist us to be energy independent when big oil made nothing but profits after the White House meeting. This is the same President that said he was going to treat anyone in the White House that outed an CIA agent in a way that they should be treated, and then later let that person off the hook through his executive power. This is the same President that has said that we need to send an escalation of troops to Iraq and we'll see a safer Iraq; that we've seen otherwise, some 500-plus men and women in uniform that have lost their lives since that surge. This is the same President that goes on and on and on talking about how he's going to increase Pell Grants when he hasn't done that. This is the same President that said that 9/11, that we are going to implement this Department of Homeland Security and said there was no need to pass all of the 9/11 recommendations. That still hasn't made it to his desk yet, that we want to get passed, that this Democratic Congress passed. This is the same President that told folks to go shopping after 9/11 when he had the opportunity to move this country in a new direction, bring us together, help our economy, and the Americans were ready to do what they needed to do. And this is the same President saying I'm going to veto a bill that's going to cut student loan rates not only for students, I will go further as a parent to say, for parents and grandparents that are helping children that are now coming out of college that are more in debt now than ever because the Federal Government is not there for them. If we're not there for them, then the State government can't be there for them because they have to cut, and guess where the first place is they go. They go to students and cut back. So I'm about full right now of the American spirit and say that I hope that our leadership here in the House, with the President, you spoke of politics saying it's a great thing to run on. I always said this whole Iraq issue, if we see more and more pictures like this, Republican leadership leading their caucus down to the White House saying we stand with the President and making sure that the Congress doesn't override his original thoughts or what he feels should be, the White House is not to be used as the Republican National Committee instrument or the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee. This is about the American people and what we do. So, the President, this is his last day of school. This is the last month of school. He's about to move on. He's about to become a private citizen. Those of us that are in Congress, if the American people that allow us to come back after 2008, will be here to govern this country, and guess what, this is not the last day of school for Americans. So, when we talk about cutting student loan rates in half and the President starts using all kinds of, I start to go back to the big oil argument. What, did the banks have a special meeting at the White House, saying we can't allow this to happen; you got to stand in the schoolhouse door; and will they be able to motivate these Members to go back to the White House and say we stand with the President? How many times? So, Mr. Speaker, I know that the bold leadership we have here in the House, if he vetoes this bill, which I don't want him to do, I hope he signs it, and we're able to provide the assistance to these individuals that are in all of our districts, Republican and Democrats. This is not for Democratic kids. This is for all kids, for all families, for all working people. If he does it, I hope that within the hour that he does it that we have something here on this floor, and we'll separate the Members from the followers here on both sides of the aisle. And when we passed this bill, I know you brought this issue up, but when we passed this bill, there was 143 Republicans that voted against it, just enough to withstand. One, one over to be able to hold off a presidential override. That's a gut check there, Mr. Speaker. I wonder how many of those 143 are going to be with the President in not allowing American families to have a cut in financial aid. I want their constituents to pay very close attention on whose side you're on. Are you on the bank's side or are you on the American people side?

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I started off the last hour talking about the fact that tomorrow or the next day that Democrats, Republicans would be able to show their true colors as it relates to the redeployment of troops, something we have already voted on and the President vetoed. I think it's important that Members point to H.R. 2956 that will be on this floor in the next 48 hours, that will say responsible redeployment of troops. Embodied in that bill will be recommendations made not only by military advisers and those that are not longer a part of this, because as you know in the Pentagon, you say something different than what the Secretary under old Secretary Rumsfeld, back in the days, when all of those things took place and you made a career decision, if you had an idea that makes sense, and said, excuse me, sir, I know you think you have all the ideas.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I am done. I just want to thank you and Mr. Murphy for coming down tonight. I look forward to the next 48 hours, what kind of leadership will be shown on the minority side of the ball. We need them to be a part of this change in the new direction that we are moving in. But as the Democrats, with the slim majority that we do have, we are going to give the American people what they want, and that is leadership.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. But it's alive and well. What we are learning more than ever now, having hearings on Iraq, people coming forth with some of the things that have us in the situation where we are now, mounting evidence of failed policy is the justification for this redeployment of troops. Also, the issue, as it relates to the surge again, the Democratic Congress passed a nonbinding resolution saying that we disagree with the escalation of troops, that we need an escalation in diplomacy. We needed to think smarter. We talked about the lack of coalition just a few minutes ago. We used to hear about the coalition. It got down to the single digits. It got outright embarrassing for the administration, so they stopped talking about it. The mounting criticism of the failed Iraq policy, not only by Members of the military, but also the American people and Members of this Congress and some Republicans in the Senate and some Republicans here in the House and definitely a number of Democrats and retired general after retired general calling for a new direction. So this is what it's going to come down to. It's going to come down to Members taking out their card that we vote with, and they are going to have to take it out. They are going to have to find one of these meters or machines here, and they are going to have to put it in there. They are going to have to vote ``yes'' or ``no.'' Do they want to vote for staying the course with the President and all of the slogans that they come up with and that they poll, or are they going to vote for a new direction and doing exactly what the American people wanted us to do? That's the question. I look forward to coming back to the floor, not only with Mr. Murphy, but also with Mr. Ryan, talking about the issues that we are facing. The good thing about being in the majority, and I can tell you from someone that has been in the minority before in this House, is that we can bring ideas to the floor and actually see them voted on that we have not had before. Mr. Ryan came up with a very important point, the fact that Republicans had a number of years to do what they said that they want to do. No one stood in their way. They could have done it. They didn't do it. They had the opportunity to do it. We have asked them to be a part of that opportunity that we are working on. I am glad we had 16 additional minutes so we would have an opportunity to get this information out.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to address the House, and it's good to be here before we go on 4th of July break to celebrate the birthday of this great country. As you know, in the 30-something Working Group, we come to the floor to discuss a number of issues that are facing the American people, and also, I think it's important to identify our focus on the issues in Iraq and Afghanistan and the issues that are facing the American people. I think, Mr. Speaker, the events over the weekend in Iraq and also in Afghanistan even give us further focus on making sure that the issues that are facing our men and women that are in harm's way are addressed here in the Congress. I think it's also very important for us to focus on what has not happened in this Congress as it relates to making sure that we meet the needs of our men and women. We have appropriation bills that have been held up in the process that are now moving through the process. It's not because of the majority side's lack of will to be able to move them, it's the fact that we have some of our friends on the other side of the aisle that see it fit to slow the process down, but that argument is for another day. As you know, I'm one of the Members, especially on this side of the aisle, that push for bipartisanship. Mr. Speaker, I spend quite a bit of time here on the floor talking about how when we work together, we're able to move the American agenda forward. And I look forward to continuing to stand up on behalf of bipartisanship here in the House to accomplish a goal to be able to make sure that our men and women in harm's way are able to receive the representation that the American people voted for. Mr. Speaker, I think also what we should touch on is the fact that we have sent a number of documents to the White House, and those documents happen to be law, or proposed law. We had a bill that passed both House and Senate emergency supplemental that had not only benchmarks in it, but also withdrawal dates that were sensible and that were timely to let the Iraqi Government know that we will not continue to reward a lack of action on their side and accomplishment on their side as it relates to securing Iraq. That was vetoed by the President. But I can say that not one Democrat went to the White House and stood behind the President and said that we will stop any override of the President's veto. I am so glad that we did send that bill there to show the American people that we are willing to do the things that we need to do. We also passed a nonbinding resolution against the surge in Iraq, the escalation, I must add, in Iraq of U.S. troops and personnel. That was a strong message that the American people wanted to send out. That was successfully passed. Now, we are going to have two reports when we get back July 15, I would say to Mr. Larson, our Vice Chair, in a report in September. I think it is going to be very, very important for the Members to remember that we are Americans first, Members of Congress. Along with that, that first chair that I mentioned, and on the second hand, that we are from two different parties, because there are men and women who are counting on us to work together. But those of us on this side of the aisle have to provide the leadership. If the leadership doesn't come from the White House, then we are here, sent by American taxpayers, American voters, to represent them from the said districts that we are from. But it is important that we provide that leadership and opportunity. I would like to yield to my good friend, Mr. John Larson, from the great State of Connecticut. He is our Vice Chair of the Democratic Caucus. I want to thank you, sir, for your leadership on this very issue of Iraq.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, I am glad Mr. Ryan from Ohio has joined us, Mr. Vice Chairman. I just want to commend you for your work with the Iraq Watch Group and the work that you have been doing here in the House, not only working with Members such as myself, but others that are trying to find a way that we, Mr. Speaker, can get our troops home more sooner than later. I think it is important that all Members focus on the fact that we come to the floor to make sure that we can work together. Again, Mr. Speaker, I would like to not only warn, but I would like to bring to the attention of the Members of the House that when that bipartisanship is blocked or Members are discouraged from voting on legislation, or voting in the affirmative, or slowing down the process, when we are trying to carry out the work that the American people sent us up here to do, then we have to rise up, the majority that the Vice Chairman speaks of so much, to do the things that we need to do on behalf of the people. I think, Mr. Larson, when you were talking, I couldn't help but reflect on what we were able to do last week as it relates to our military construction/VA spending bill, which was the largest single increase in VA in the 77-year history of the VA. It was a bipartisan vote that took place in the final analysis, and it was something that was well-needed. This is far from what you remember under Republican control, when the chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee just got so fed up and could no longer tell the veterans groups in this country that he could help them, do what he thought he was supposed to have done on behalf of those men and women coming back, those men and women waiting in line 6 months to see a specialist or what have you. He was removed as chairman. Now we are under a Democratic-controlled Congress, understanding our responsibilities, understanding we have two wars going on, understanding that the VA doesn't have all of the things that it needs to have because of the cuts that have been made, understanding there is a Secretary of the VA appointed by the President that was confirmed by the Republican Senate, understanding that he doesn't want to make career decisions like some Members have, one Member did, who used to be the Chair of the Veterans Affairs Committee. And I have that in my document that I will bring up a little later. But I think it is important that we keep the focus; that we work double time in making sure that our men and women that are taking the fight to almost an unseen aggressor in the middle of a civil war in Iraq, with no end in sight, that they know that we are here, especially the majority of us here in this House, and will do everything in our power, go to as many meetings as we need to go to and get legislation to this floor and keep it in the forefront. I say this, Mr. Larson and Mr. Ryan, because I know there are a number of military families that are there waiting on their loved ones to come home. I know there is a wife waiting for a husband, or a husband that is waiting on the wife to come back. I know there is a child that wants to celebrate what my children celebrate, me walking through the door, their mother walking through the door, on a nightly basis, being able to do the things that families do. But if you are a soldier, you are deployed 12 to 15 months, Mr. Speaker, hands down. And we know with this surge that the troop levels have reached a level that has endangered the readiness of our country here. I think it is important.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Chairman, it is interesting that you would say that, and I can definitely share with you that we have to put a face on this issue. Mr. Speaker, I know time after time again there are some Members that are concerned that we may have a single focus on Iraq, and that is not the case. We are moving the House. We have appropriation bills that are moving through the process. We have legislation. We have the 9/11 legislation coming up this week. The Senate is fast at work, doing work before we leave on Friday. It is important to put a face on this. I said before, Iraq, Iraq, and that other issue, Iraq. But look what it is doing to the country. Look where it is holding up the resources; where it is taking up so much of our time, not only of the Congress, rightfully so, because our troops are in harm's way. We have a President that is saying ``troops will be in Iraq,'' he said this in the past, ``troops will be in Iraq as long as I am President.'' ``We will be in Iraq,'' saying ``we.'' This is the first time he has not had a rubber stamp Congress since he has been President. I think it is important that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, those that have to vote with their constituents and for their constituents, make sure we can work towards measures in getting our men and women out. But to punt the ball down and say, well, let's try on the next series of downs, we have to actually try to run the ball on fourth down. Running the ball on fourth down is having not only American families that are affected by this war in Iraq, but those that are not, letting their Members of Congress know that enough is enough. Now, let me share this with you. We are going to fight the policy battle and we are going to make sure that our men and women have what they need to have that are in harm's way. That is a no-brainer. I have never run into an American or even received a letter that says ``I encourage you not to support the troops.'' Or ``I don't support the troops.'' You never hear that. You always hear people support the troops. The policy is an entirely different issue, and I think it is very important to say time after time again that to move in a new direction, that is the what the American people wanted last November, is being able to have not only the guts, but the integrity to move in that direction. It is beyond good government. It is making a commitment to those who have made a commitment to us. And they are counting on us to stand up. And when I say us, I am not talking just about good Democrats. I am not just talking about Republicans. I am talking about all Members of the House. The reason why it is very difficult, Mr. Larson, as you know, to move the kind of legislation that we would like to move through this process, is because in the Senate they need a number of votes to be able to do so, 60 votes, I think that is the number. Here in the House, the majority is not all that big, even though we are in the majority. I know that the record speaks for itself, and before we leave here tonight, I am going to read what I read a week ago into the Congressional Record about the accomplishments of this Congress and what we have done as it relates to this issue of Iraq and where we have run into a roadblock with the President on not only vetoing legislation, with the help of our Republican colleagues on the other side of the aisle that have been standing with the President. I would like, if I can, I don't know if my chart is on the floor, Mr. Larson, I had this chart with the President on it and the Republican Congress, where they borrowed so much money. I want to have a prop so I can make the point even clearer to the Members.