Kendrick Meek

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you. We pray and hope that they join us. And I just want to thank Mr. Altmire and, you, Mr. Ryan, and Mr. Murphy and Ms. Wasserman Schultz for being here with us. We will vote tomorrow. We will be on the floor continuing in the debate. Mr. Altmire, I want to thank you for being very factual on the bill and sharing with the Members what is actually in the bill. A lot of folks don't take the time to find out what's actually in the bill; so I am glad you brought that perspective to the floor tonight. With that, Mr. Speaker, it was an honor addressing the House.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I would like you to just yield for a minute because, as you know, in the 30-something Working Group we always enjoy seeing our friends come by, and the majority whip came to the floor, heard we were talking about children's health care, and thought he would just stop by and share something with the Members, and I yield to him.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you for joining us.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. And the good thing about the 30-Something, we really get into a conversation about this. And behind you, you can see, I will let you explain that chart there. But I want Ms. Wasserman Schultz and I just to share a little bit. You say that everyone is saying that it is socialized medicine. That is not the case. Do you know who is saying that? The Bush administration. Do you know who else is saying that? Our friends on the Republican side that are not even thinking about health care. They are thinking about how I need to protect the GOP philosophy on Capitol Hill. Not in America. Let me just read this here. CBS News poll that was taken says, and here the headline goes and you can go on, it says CBSnews.com. Don't believe me. You can go on there if you don't believe what I am telling you. This came right off of this sheet here: Do you favor or oppose expanding the children's health care plan? Eighty-one percent said I am in favor of it. I am in favor of the Democratic plan. And the headline goes: Most backed Democrats and kids health care fight. It says, those that oppose, 15 percent. So, Mr. Ryan, when we look at that, we have to look at it for what it is worth. And I know Ms. Wasserman Schultz has something from the USA Today. And I will yield back, but I want to share that with you, Mr. Ryan.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Altmire, I mean, factually, you said factually accurate? This whole administration is about misperception. It is about look right, we are going left. I mean, it is not about that. The good thing about it, Mr. Altmire, is that you were elected and your colleagues were elected in this last Congress that brought about that paradigm shift. And that wasn't because it was something great that an individual did; that was the fact that the American people wanted to move in a new direction. Now we are moving in that new direction. We have the same game, but the Congress is changing, and we are not going to allow that to happen. And I am glad that the Speaker is saying, listen, we are going to insure 10 million children, period, dot, and we are going to stand there.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Ryan wants to say something, but I want Mr. Murphy to say something because he stood up and he likely had something he wanted to share. Ms. Wasserman Schultz and I are always willing to share, because we have a whole notebook full of stuff that we are just ready to take off on.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Ryan, it is good that all of us agree here that is on the floor here tonight, along with hundreds of other Members of Congress. But it only takes a very small percentage of numbers to say ``no.'' And what is interesting, Mr. Ryan, when we start talking about fact versus fiction; be accurate if you are going to share something. Accuracy is not necessarily a value here in Washington, D.C. We pride ourselves, Mr. Speaker, here on the 30-Something Working Group, we go through a lot of pain and suffering and research and all of that to make sure that what we are sharing with the American people is actually fact and not fiction. If we had more fact, we would have better policymaking here in Washington, D.C. The fact that the President would say, oh, well, you know, the Democratic Congress needs to go to work, when we broke records in the history of the Republic of 980 rollcall votes. And that is not just post offices. That is major policy that has passed off this floor. Still saying that, what Mr. Ryan is saying, the bottom line is as we go into the last closing minutes of our time here on the floor, the bottom line is we are going to see a separation from those that are willing to lead and those that are willing to follow tomorrow. There's going to be a supermajority vote to vote for children's health care to override the President of the United States. The only time he ever vetoed a piece of legislation last Congress was dealing with the stem cell research bill, and he did that. Okay. But now, every week he's threatening a veto. He's threatening a veto. Mr. Ryan, over there, has a chart that shows how record oil prices under the Bush administration are continuing to climb to today's oil prices rate that is at the top, that's recordbreaking at the top. Meanwhile, we're around here trying to provide health care for children. We have a war that's going on that the President is willing, you know, to say, oh, well, it's okay for us to borrow from foreign nations to continue a war in Iraq, but we're not willing to provide health care for our own children. And the sad part, and Ms. Wasserman Schultz said funny and then we agreed on sad, the sad part is the fact that these are American children. I mean, I've been to Iraq. Mr. Altmire and I have been to Iraq recently, and some of the Members here, we've been. And the real issue is this, is the fact that we went into a health care facility. Iraqi children there are getting health care. I mean, you have U.S. troops that are in neighborhoods that are giving shots and evaluations. I don't have anyone in my neighborhood giving shots and evaluations to all the children and not asking for any documentation if you have health care or not. It's almost universal. And so we're sitting here, and the President's going to stand on a small ant hill saying, well, you know, I think it's just too much that we're investing, and using some sort of, you know, hocus pocus talking about social medicine. Meanwhile, children are going to the CVS, Rite-Aid or whatever the case may be, families trying to cure themselves. So I just want to make sure, I want to put the pressure on my colleagues to make sure that they override. And in closing, I'm going to send it over to Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Y'all know this chart. This is the first action, one of the first actions that we took as relates to the Iraq war. It had all of the requirements in there to bring our men and women home, put the pressure on the Iraqis to stand up. And the Republicans went down there and stood with the President and said we stand with the President so that the Congress will never override the President. And they may not have one of these because if they do I'm going to have my staff down there with a camera to take a picture to make sure that we have the second picture. But those that stand with the President tomorrow in not allowing us to override when we have a bipartisan vote out of this House, and we have Senators that are standing up here like Orrin Hatch, Grassley, a number of other Republicans that are saying, hey, you know, Mr. President, you're wrong. But we have some House Members here that are saying, well, we're with the President. You continue to stand with the President. I would appreciate some sort of public kind of standing out with the President because the bottom line is, I believe those Members, Mr. Speaker, all due respect, they will be at home reading this process in the paper and paying attention to C-SPAN and seeing what's going on because their constituents will not allow a Member to vote against their own children and then say, I want to go back to Congress and represent you. Ms. Wasserman Schultz, I'm sorry I went past 30 seconds when you asked me to yield.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. And also, Mr. Ryan, you shared that with us last week; you shared that with us the day before that. We're happy that the welterweight and middleweight champion is from Ohio.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Ryan, we were very mild. Those of us from Florida were very mild when the University of Florida, and I'll take this from Ms. Wasserman Schultz because if she says it she may not be as mild as I am when a certain team in Ohio, not only in football, but basketball, found themselves, no I will not yield. So what I'm saying, this whole dancing in the end zone experience that you're having now about going on and on and on, Florida, I mean, the Marlins are nowhere in this thing, and we had nothing, we're just sitting here quiet, doing an hour with you and we're not, we're not talking sports, we're all friends. We're talking about children's health care. But we understand that those victories, the people of Youngstown, Ohio, being in Niles, Ohio, and other cities around it are very represented here under your leadership, sir, and I respect that. And I'm saying there is a limit.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Ryan, we just could not sit here and not give the representation that we were sent up here to carry out. But, Mr. Ryan, you know, in all seriousness to all the Members, I mean, the good thing about the 30-something Working Group, we work so hard we have to add some humor in every now and then, especially when we work a full day and it's a quarter to 10 and we're still here on the floor. The bottom line is one of the real historic votes of the 110th Congress will take place tomorrow. And I'm asking the Members, those that are not willing to override the President's veto of children's health care in the United States of America, and we don't have to worry about any Democrats, but need it be Republicans, I implore you to please reconsider on behalf of the children of the United States of America. This is not about our children. My kids, they have health care. I am a Member of Congress, but I wasn't elected for my children to have health care. I didn't go out and give the speech, Mr. Speaker, and say ``I want you to vote for me because my children need health care and I need health care. Send me to Washington. And I am not going to vote for you to have health care, but I want my kids to have health care.''

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Absolutely. Absolutely. But the real issue is this: At least I have a plan that I can afford, and the average American doesn't have that. And especially for these poor families, they need it. So I don't think that anyone who votes against this went to their constituents and gave the brimstone speech or whatever you want to call it saying, ``I'm going to Washington, and when we have an opportunity to insure 10 million American children that need health care, I am going to vote against it. Vote for me on Tuesday'' and walk away. That did not happen. I guarantee you it did not happen. And I want those Members to pay very close attention to when they put their card in the voting machine tomorrow and they vote that they look at that red light, if they press red, and correct their vote immediately on behalf of the children who don't have health care. We are given this card here. This card is to help children, to be able to help Americans have a better life, and if you vote against it, it is really going to be a sad situation for our poorer families that are here in the United States of America and those families that are financially challenged.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation that will stop the selling of our U.S. servicemembers' safety. Between August and October of 2006, 4,800 used combat uniforms bearing ``glo-tape'' patches were inadvertently sold despite a determination by a Defense Department office in July of that year that the patches had to be removed and destroyed before such uniforms could be put on sale. A year later less than 350 of the uniforms and patches have been returned. The availability of these items on the black market has the potential to cost U.S. military lives. Glo-tape patches and other military items designated as ``Identification Friend or Foe (IFF)'' are specifically designed to allow members of our armed services to easily identify each other in poor lighting and certain other inclement conditions. In the hands of the enemy, these patches could allow for infiltration into our ranks, as happened in January of this year when insurgents dressed in U.S. military uniforms in Karbala entered a secure compound killing one serviceman and abducting four others. IFF items are listed by the military as items that are required to be completely demilitarized, and are not to be sold to the public. Yet, there is currently no enforcement procedure to ensure that persons illegally in possession of these items return them to the Department of Defense. An investigation in July of 2007 by Newsweek magazine determined that IFF items were easily obtained at retailers in several areas of the United States without consequence (See article following). I have introduced legislation that will protect our men and women from those whose reckless acts would cause them harm. First, the bill codifies into law that it is illegal to possess, purchase, or sell Identification Friend or Foe items. The bill further requires the Department to provide notice anywhere that the Department authorizes the private sale of surplus or used military items that the possession, purchase, or sale of IFF items, original or counterfeit, is punishable by law. Secondly, the bill makes it a Class B Misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail per incident, to possess these items or transact business related to the items. It would also be a crime to counterfeit these items for personal or retail use. We can and should do everything in power to protect our men and women in uniform by removing any advantage the enemy might seek to gain. Please join me in making the selling of our servicemembers' safety a crime. [From Newsweek, July 16, 2007] The Military: A Dangerous Patch The Pentagon prides itself on the ability of U.S. combat units to operate under cover of darkness. But that advantage could be eroded if a key item--infrared patches that troops use to ID each other at night--were to fall into the wrong hands. According to a Defense Department spokesman, 4,800 used combat uniforms bearing ``glo-tape'' patches were inadvertently sold to U.S. and Canadian clients of an Arizona-based company between August and October 2006-- despite a Defense Department determination in July of that year that the patches had to be removed and destroyed before such uniforms could be put on sale. When the oversight was discovered, the Pentagon ordered the company, Government Liquidation, to return 1,200 garments containing the infrared patches that were still in its possession. (A company spokeswoman says the Pentagon did not notify Government Liquidation of any restrictions on the sale of the glo-tape items prior to October of last year, and a senior Defense Department official said the company did not violate any existing clause of its contract with the Pentagon when it was selling the glo-tape uniforms.) The Pentagon imposed a blanket ban on the sale of combat fatigues this past February after Iraqi insurgents in U.S. combat uniforms entered a government security compound and killed five soldiers. But individual patches can still be easily obtained--as Newsweek reporters learned last month when they purchased several patches at military supply stores in Jacksonville, N.C., and Oceanside, Calif., without being asked to produce military ID. More than 4,000 of the patchbearing used uniforms are still at large, according to senior Pentagon official Paul Peters. The U.S. Army began issuing combat fatigues bearing the glo-tape patches after a friendly-fire incident in the first week of the Iraq invasion that may have contributed to the deaths of 10 Marines. Known as IFF (Identification Friend or Foe), they come in various shapes and sizes that include U.S. flags; they can be detected at night by ground troops and airborne combat pilots equipped with night-vision goggles. No law forbids civilian surplus stores in the United States from selling the items, a fact that one Marine corporal finds alarming. ``If you're moving around in the dark and you see someone with infrared patches, you won't be as on guard as you would be with somebody without those patches;' says Jeremy Terhune, 26, an infantry rifleman from Saugus, Calif., who has served three tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. No evidence has yet surfaced that insurgents in Iraq or Afghanistan have acquired the patches.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, it is with great sadness that I rise today to pay tribute to the late Mary Lee Slater, a mother of four, and grandmother to an only grandson. She died on Tuesday, October 9, 2007 and will be buried this Friday October 19, 2007 at Bethany Seventh Day Adventist Church in Miami, Florida where she was a member for many years. Born on March 1, 1935 to the late Murdic and Illinois Jordan in Soperton, Georgia, she was the oldest of four siblings: James, Elvin, Floyd and Randolph. She moved to Miami, Florida with her family where she attended public schools, graduating from Booker T. Washington High School in 1953. She attended Hampton University in Hampton, Virginia. Mary worked in the insurance industry for more than 30 years as an agent for such companies as Atlanta Life and American General. Because of her outstanding professionalism, work ethic and dedication to her career, she received numerous honors and awards including National Sales Achievement Award and Outstanding Sales Achievement Recognition. Effectively balancing work and family, Mary was the dedicated mother of four loving children, Michael, Ronald, Surette and Illka. She was also the proud grandmother of one grandson, David ``Boom Boom'' Jonathan whom she loved and adored. Always demonstrating love for her community, Mary was President of the High Ridge Neighborhood Improvement Association. With a reputation for helping others, solving problems and improving her community, she was a source of inspiration and wisdom. One of Mary's favorite programs was the Association's annual Thanksgiving Dinner, which provided an opportunity for residents, families and friends to gather in fellowship to give thanks to God for His many blessings. Mary received numerous awards and honors for her dedication and commitment to the community, including Making a Difference Award from Team Metro and Inner City Education Foundation Parent Club. She also served on the Model City/ Brownsville Charrette Steering Committee. A committed servant of God, whatever church Mary was a member of, she stood out as a beacon of light, who demonstrated the love of God to whomever she met. An active member in her church, Mary served on several ministries. She was a Deaconess, Sabbath School Teacher and dedicated servant. Her walk with God was evident. At Bethany Seventh Day Adventist Church, she was honored by the Sabbath School Department for Outstanding and Dedicated Service. Mary loved her church family. Last Tuesday, Mary heard and answered her Lord's call to rest. She leaves to cherish and celebrate her life four loving children, Michael, Ronald, Surette Sands (Christopher), and Illka; one grandson, David ``Boom Boom'' Jonathan; three brothers James Jordan (Loretta) of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, Elvin Floyd Jordan (Sandra) of Oakland, California and Randolph of Miami, Florida; and a host of relatives and friends. May God bless her soul and grant her eternal rest.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you so very much, Madam Speaker. It is an honor to be here before the House once again. As you know, the 30- Something Working Group, we come to the floor weekly, if not once, twice, if not twice, three times, to share with the Members the forward progress we are making with a number of pieces of legislation. In some areas we not only need Member help, but we need the American people to stay involved and get involved in certain issues. As you know, last week we talked quite a bit about the children's health care bill that passed in a bipartisan vote here in Congress. We know that we have given Web sites out to the Members so that they can be able to educate themselves even more and also to the American people. I think it is important, Madam Speaker, that we continue in that light. There will be a vote, I believe not this Thursday, but next Thursday, to override the President on behalf of children's health care. There are a lot of editorials that have been written, a lot of pressure that has been applied to the President and also mainly to Members on the Republican side of the aisle that we would need to vote in the affirmative to be able to allow us to do that. I have faith, because I have watched legislation pass. I have watched the President and I have watched Republicans on the other side say that we're not going to increase the minimum wage; we're not going to take part in increasing the minimum wage. And when the American people voted for a new direction, that legislation was one of the first pieces of legislation that came before this House. We voted an overwhelming affirmative, the whole Congress. The President was kind of stutter-stepping on it, and, all of a sudden, he signed it, even though he said he wouldn't sign it. That is not because of an act of the Members of Congress. That is because the American people were involved in that process and thought it was very, very important. A supermajority of the American people called their Members of Congress and said this is important, we must do this, and it is important for our economy. The same thing as relates to the student loan interest rate. We cut it in half. The President said he would not sign that bill. It was not just because of the act of the Democratic majority moving in a new direction, it was because the American people got involved in that process and President Bush changed his mind. I think it is very, very important for us, and I just want to say this to the Members and also to staff, maybe it is important for us to get the time that the President signs these bills late Friday at like 7:30 in the afternoon before he goes to Camp David. If the President signs it in broad daylight or at night, as long as he signs the bill and allows the American people to get what they deserve, a piece of the pie. I am going to yield right now, because I know that I have a couple of colleagues that are here that want to shed some light on action. We have finished votes. I just want to say also, Madam Speaker, our colleague, Congresswoman Davis, our hearts go out to her family and also to her constituents and also everyone that she has touched in her lifetime. We served together, I believe on Armed Services, and even though she was on the Republican side of the aisle, we were colleagues here in Congress. She served to the very end, and I am forever grateful to her family for allowing her to serve and be a part of this body, to serve the American people. I know that over the coming days, tomorrow, I believe, will be her home-going service, that there will be further reflections on her life. With that, I would like to yield to Mr. Murphy.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Ms. Wasserman Schultz and Mr. Murphy, I can't help but think of the action that we are taking here in Congress, and we know that we have some of our friends on the other side of the aisle that don't necessarily see it our way. But because the American people are involved in what we are doing, because we are moving in a new direction, we are giving the American people what they asked for. That is what is supposed to happen. You run for office and say what you stand for. The people send you to Washington. Some races are closer than others. Or you are reelected to Congress and you come here to represent the people. I see a pattern. You showed a picture of some of our friends on the other side of the aisle running down to the White House saying we are going to stand with you, Mr. President, not to allow the Congress to override, article I, section 1, of the U.S. Constitution. I want you to talk about that a little later. There's something blowing through the air conditioning ducts, I guess, here in Congress and in the White House. One would be in disbelief of the fact that we actually have a say in what happens in this government because we appropriate the necessary dollars. We put forth the policy to be able to get the revenue to run the country. I just want to say that some things that we have done here we can claim victory on, and I think we need to talk about a few of those things. We can claim victory on passing a children's health care bill with a bipartisan vote. This was not just powerful Democrats that voted. There are a number of Republicans that voted in both chambers. We have quotes on the Speaker's Web site. I believe it's, what is it, 45 Republicans over here and 18 Republicans in the Senate. And on www.speaker.gov you can go on the Web site and get the quotes of our Republican colleagues that spoke so very highly about this bipartisan piece of legislation. You know something, we're putting in the work. We're putting in the work. I mean, the House last week held its 943rd rollcall vote of the year, and I mean of this year, breaking a previous record of 942 votes. That mark was set in 1978, and we're well on our way to taking care of the country's business of heading into a higher number of at least 1,000 votes by the end of this year. People wanted us to go to work. We're working now. We're working now. If it wasn't for the loss we had here in Congress, we would be working tomorrow. But the bottom line is this, Madam Speaker, is that we have to continue to move down the track of responsibility, and that's the reason why we come to the floor because we want the Members to feel the pressure. You might have seen me moving around here on the floor because, as Ms. Wasserman Schultz can tell you, my good friend from Florida, and Mr. Murphy can tell you, that we pride ourselves, Madam Speaker, on making sure that we share accurate information with the Members and the American people. That's just where it is. We don't talk about fiction. We just talk about facts. Now, earlier today we had H.R. 3056. What does that mean? There's a lot of House bills that are around, but this bill was actually a very, very important bill to the U.S. taxpayer. It dealt with the Tax Collection Responsibility Act. We had tax collectors that the Republican majority put it in power to have the phone numbers of every American taxpayer, and they were so- called to ring in dollars of individuals that are not paying taxes.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Private. I mean, these are private tax collectors that we ended up spending more money paying them than what they collected, and then they turned around and there's an instance of when an elderly couple received 150 calls in the course of 27 days. Now, anyone that knows anything about people calling your home that you don't want calling your home, and they're calling for someone else, they're calling the Murphy household and they're asking for the Johnson family, and you keep telling them that, no, the Johnson family doesn't live here, what we did today was to do the right thing on behalf of the American taxpayer by passing that piece of legislation that repealed the IRS authority to enter into private debt collector contracts. I think that's very, very important. Also, when you look at it from a fiscal responsibility piece, Madam Speaker, and we're talking about being responsible, you have to look at this whole issue of the study that shows that the IRS employees that are employed by the IRS is 13-1 on what they can collect from what the private collectors are actually able to collect. Also in that great piece of legislation was something that we all feel very strong about, the 1-year suspension on the 3 percent, 3 percent that is collected from small businesses up front when they contract with local governments, and a number of other issues that were in that bill. I'm saying all of this to make this point: 210 Democrats voted for it; 22 Republicans voted for it. Now, one can say that's a bipartisan vote, but when you look at 164 Republicans voting against something that, on its surface, you don't have to dig far, the numbers, when we had hearing in Ways and Means on it, the numbers represent the true meaning of what has not happened and contracting with a private company to call the taxpayers of this great country of ours and not doing the job that they set out to do, that they ended up getting a real paycheck at the end of the day, which they didn't even do the work, and then better yet, they're calling individuals' homes that already paid their taxes, because the accountability was not there. I think it is very, very important. I just want to make sure that it is very important that we highlight these issues and we talk about the success that we're having here in Congress where we need our Republican colleagues to join us, but we're still pushing forward because the good thing about it is the fact that the American people are with the new direction agenda, and it's their agenda. We're just a vehicle to allow it to happen, need it be children's health care, need it be cutting student loan interest rates in half, need it be increasing the minimum wage, need it be what we're doing and what's at the President's desk on the issue of energy. I mean, we have all these issues. Some were the 6 in '06 that we talked about. Some were ideas we picked up along the way that we thought was very, very important. As we continue to move down this track, I just want to share with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that it is not necessarily or if it is something of a Democratic idea, because when you see votes like this, I can't help but think as a legislator going into my 14th year of public service, you have me by 2 years, to see a vote like this vote, that was obviously a good vote to take on behalf of the American people and to go the opposite way, if it was just merely politics, then I would say, well, you know, let's just go back and sit in our office and allow them to continue to take these votes. But when we start looking at how we are going to deal with the war in Iraq, you called those numbers out of how many children I mean by day, by week, by month, by days that can receive health care, and just like this, $3,316 I think are spent every second in Iraq when children can receive health care. And so when you look at it, I mean, when we start talking about why and it should work itself out or it's the right thing to do, it's something that's happening around here that we haven't quite uncovered yet. But I don't have a lot of time, Madam Speaker, to try to uncover the problem on the other side of the aisle. I don't. I'm with the Speaker and I'm with the majority leader and I'm with the majority whip and I'm with the Chair of the caucus and the Vice Chair of the caucus and all of the leadership folks that are running around here in the different caucuses and saying that the American people sent us here to go to work. We've gone to work. We've already broken records. We're on our way to break another record as it relates to what we're doing on behalf of the American people. But that's something that Members are going to have to explain back home if they're taking these unpopular votes, when one may say the blind leading the blind and two shall fall down in the ditch, that should happen. That's what we used to stay when I was on the football field at Florida A&M. The real issue here is we should feel good about what we have accomplished. We should feel good that the American people are on board. We're on board with the American people. We're carrying out their agenda, and that's Democrat and Republican, too. I don't want an American that opens their wallet and, you know, look at their voter registration card and say, well, I'm a Republican, Congressman Meek is not talking to me. I'm talking to you because when you look at fiscal responsibility, when you look at this issue, this is your wallet, too. When we cut interest rates in half, the President didn't want to do it. You wanted it to happen, Republican, independent, nonvoter, Democrat, you wanted it to happen. That was a bill for you, not for the three of us, for you to cut your interest rates in half. So when we look at these issues, we have to look at a functional government, that we have responsibility, and then we have to put the partisanship aside. One thing I can say, that we have passed major pieces of legislation in a bipartisan way and have allowed Republican input that has not been the case, I know and I can attest, for the 108th and 109th Congress. I say all of that to say that I think it's important that we continue to paint the picture, especially for our colleagues that are not voting when it's abundantly clear of why you should vote for something. I mean, someone had to say don't vote for it, and then they say, okay, I'm not going to vote for it. There has to be a reason why, when you empower private debt collectors to have private information, you know what I'm talking about because I know you wear that privacy hat, privacy information of your personal information, okay, and they abuse and they fail in the mission of collecting the dollars that they're supposed to collect from individuals that are not paying their taxes. And then to turn around and see numbers of cases of abuse where individuals have been called over 150 times that have been documented over a period of 27 days to an elderly couple and still you come to the floor and vote no? I mean, I just don't understand it.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I know we have it for the record, but I just want, when folks open the Congressional Record, that they can see that number twice, because that's the point even driven further down the street as it relates to why would you vote against something like this.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I want to thank the Members for what they have done this far, the majority of the Members in this House, and that is including some of our Republican friends that have voted for a number of these measures that the American people want, Republicans, Democrats, you name it, those that are involved in other parties and those that are thinking about voting. We have to show that we are a functional House and that we can be able to provide the leadership, when necessary, to be able to run the country in a way that it should be operated, especially on appropriations and on the finance and tax hand. I want to thank the Democratic leadership for allowing us to have the hour.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Let's just engage in a conversation here. I mean, the real issue is this: It's not an isolated incident, and that's the reason why many of our Republican colleagues that were here in the 109th Congress is now reading about what Congress is doing in their hometown paper in an involuntary retirement. It's not like they said, oh, I just don't want to be your Congressman here anymore. No, they took votes that were unpopular, and when I say unpopular, one person may say, well, leadership, you're supposed to lead, but when you have a bill like the bill that is in question here, H.R. 3056, and I encourage the Members, staff and what have you because maybe there may be another opportunity.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. We are going to start closing out here, and this is something we don't ordinarily do. We are going to end up leaving 10 minutes left open. I mean, there is just so much information we want to share, but we know that the House has to continue, but I want to recognize Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Allison and Jerry Sokol for their devotion and dedication to the south Florida Jewish community, Hadassah, and Israel. They are being honored by the Galim Chapter of Hadassah at their First Annual Benefit Dinner on Thursday, October 11, 2007. Mr. Jerry Sokol has been extremely active in numerous charitable and community endeavors for many years. Mr. Sokol co-founded the Future Generation Division of the International Israel Bonds Organization and has been bestowed volunteer leadership positions in the Greater Miami Jewish Federation, the Israel Bonds Organization, the Alexander Muss High School in Israel (AMHSI) program, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, and the Miami Beach Jewish Community Center. Mr. Sokol is currently spearheading the efforts to raise the funds to build a brand new state of the art facility for the Miami Beach Jewish Community. In addition to his work for the Jewish Community, Mr. Sokol contributes substantial time to a number of community causes. He is currently a Member of the City of Miami Beach Parks and Recreation Board and dedicates a considerable amount of time to coaching youth football and basketball. Professionally, Mr. Sokol is a Partner with the International law firm of McDermott, Will & Emery and is currently a Board Certified Healthcare Lawyer as well as a licensed CPA. Mrs. Allison Sokol has been very active in a number of Jewish organizations most of her adult life. Mrs. Sokol's charitable involvement began right out of college, where she co-founded the Future Generation Division of Israel Bonds which spread nation wide. She was also part of the inception of Survivor Alone, an organization dedicated to helping Holocaust Survivors who currently live below poverty level. Mrs. Sokol currently contributes and volunteers with the Miami Beach Jewish Community Center, the Greater Miami Jewish Federation, the Beth David Gordon Day School Board, as well as the Miami Beach Fine Arts Board. Over the past several years, Mrs. Sokol has been a member of Ort America, Mount Sinai's Young President's Board, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee and the New World Symphony. Mrs. Sokol is also a Lifetime member of Hadassah and a founding member of the South Miami chapter of Hadassah. After being a partner in two very successful business ventures, Manamana, a successful children's clothing manufacturer and Magic Box, one of the largest network integration companies in the Southeastern United States, Allison and Jerry Sokol started a family and are the proud parents of four children: Jake, Sophie, Caroline and Isaac. It is a privilege to rise in honor of their tremendous philanthropic efforts and commitment to our community that has made such a positive impact on the 17th Congressional District.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in general support for H.R. 3056, which as a primary mission puts a stop to the harassing nature of private tax collection on a targeted group of American citizens, those least responsible for the ever-growing tax gap problem. However, I rise to speak in particular about section 3 of the Chairman's mark which delays implementation of the 3 percent withholding requirement made by section of 511 of last year's Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, also known as TIPRA. Section 511 requires all levels of government with at least $100 million in annual procurements to withhold 3 percent of payment on most procurement contracts. The Conference Report for the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 states that section 511 would impose an intergovernmental mandate not previously considered by either the House or the Senate. The costs of this mandate on government would likely exceed the $64 million threshold established in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act for public-sector mandates. The costs of this mandate would also likely exceed the annual $128 million threshold established in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act for private-sector mandates. I am concerned this provision will seriously impact small businesses that routinely provide goods and services to the Federal, State and local governments, and those governments themselves. For example, withholding 3 percent of payments to a primary contractor could hamper cash flows needed to meet operating expenses, pay suppliers or subcontractors, or meet payroll. Any loss of small business involvement in government contracting is likely to have a negative effect on government costs associated with procurement contracts. The withholding requirement would also create a new financial burden on the local governments responsible for administering withholding and forwarding these types of payments to the IRS, both in the increased need for new software and manpower, and in the likely increase in contract values as businesses seek to pass the 3 percent on to their government clients. The 3 percent withholding was originally approved in an effort to narrow the ``tax gap.'' Like most, I believe that Congress should ferret out non-compliance to the best of our ability. Still, efforts to bridge the ``tax gap'' should be weighed first against the potential for ``collateral damage to honest taxpayers and local governments.'' Annual procurements by Federal, State, and local governments add up to hundreds of billions of dollars, yet a one year delay, as mandated in the legislation before us, costs only $44 million, hardly the amount that would be expected if there was rampant noncompliance among contractors. The language also requires the Department of the Treasury to study the negative affects that section 511 would have and report those to Congress. There are too many questions left unanswered to go forward with the implementation of section 511, questions that we have a pretty good idea of the answers to. I applaud and thank my Chairman, Congressman Rangel, for giving this issue a spotlight on a bill that is of high priority to him. We know that this is a starting point to full repeal of section 511 and with the continued grassroots support from the Government Withholding Coalition of private industry and the many public sector groups like the National Association of Counties, I feel confident that we will find the Ways and the Means to do away with this onerous requirement.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be a co-sponsor to this bill that will provide relief to those people in my district, the entire State of Florida, and the country as a whole who are losing their homes. Foreclosures in south Florida are escalating way too quickly. They have tripled in Miami-Dade County and more than doubled in Broward County from this time last year. In fact, Florida as a whole is second only to Nevada in new foreclosures from January through March of this year. Why this fast increase in foreclosures? Mostly because lenders gave high-priced loans to borrowers during the housing boom, particularly borrowers in low-income, largely minority neighborhoods. Starting in 2000, because property values were rising quickly, financial institutions made risky loans that put them and the borrowers in jeopardy. About $1.3 trillion in subprime loans was lent to these borrowers. Specifically to south Florida, in Miami-Dade, about 23 percent of these loans are subprime--in Broward about 18 percent are subprime--in Miami Gardens about 66 percent are subprime. Florida homeowners are now bearing about one tenth of that 1.3 trillion dollar debt. This is more than any other state except California. Now the value of these homes is declining but these homeowners have this huge outstanding mortgage debt. It's bad enough that these homeowners are losing their homes, but under current law they would also have to include their discharged mortgage debt in their income and pay tax on it. This bill will give some relief to those homeowners by eliminating that tax. Equally important, the bill will help those homeowners who are doing their best to avoid foreclosures--those that are having a portion of their mortgage discharged as part of a restructuring of their debt. It is time for those homeowners in Florida and elsewhere to get this badly needed tax relief.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It's an honor to address the House one more time. As you know, the 30-something Working Group, we come to share with the Members fact, not fiction. I'm so glad my good friend from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), we came into the Congress together, Dr. Gingrey, good friend, I want to borrow that chart from him because it shows how earmarks were cut in half when the Democrats took over. But that's another story. But I'm glad that he has the accurate numbers there, and I'm glad that we're going to have an opportunity to talk about that a little bit more in the future. Mr. Speaker, we came to the floor yesterday, or last night, and talked about the issue of the President's veto of the SCHIP bill. We, the 30-something Working Group, received a lot of e-mails on that, and we received a lot of phone calls. There were a number of Members that even had questions like, ``Is it true that 41 days of what we spend in Iraq could pay for a full year of health care for children? Is it true, 3\1/2\ months of what we spend in Iraq, which will come out to almost $35 billion, will pay for children's health care for 5 years?'' On both of those questions I would say, ``Yes. Absolutely. The numbers are there.'' I am going to have my charts here that I had last night hopefully join me here on the floor pretty soon. It is very unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that there are people that are focusing on the President. As far as I am concerned, the President said he was going to veto the SCHIP bill, the children's health care bill, and he did. Now it is up to Members of Congress. Yesterday we voted to set the date for the time that we are going to take up the SCHIP bill again to override the President's veto. I think between now and then, Members are going to have to reflect on if they are on the side of the President, of a bad decision that was a bipartisan bill, Mr. Speaker, that Democrats and Republicans voted in a bipartisan way to send that bill to the President, or are they with the uninsured children of this country. Like I said last night, there are a number of provisions in the bill that some Members may not agree with. I have been in elected service now going on 14 years, Mr. Speaker. There has always been a provision in a bill that I didn't agree with. But for the greater good, especially when you are talking about health care for children, I saw past that one line or that one provision or that one piece that was not in there. I just want to say that this health care, and let me just share this because I want to make sure that the Members understand, that 10 million low-income children would have had health care in this country. Now, that is in every State. That is in my State of Florida. That is in Ohio. That is in California. That is in New York. That is in Texas. That is in Wyoming. All over. I think it is important that we shed light on that and we continue to talk about that in the face of wasteful spending in the past. Another thing about this children's health care bill that wouldn't have been a reality in the 109th Congress, the Congress before this Congress, is the fact that it is paid for. Now, I am going to illustrate in a few minutes how things used to operate here on this House floor. The American people want to move in a new direction. At my house, if we are going to do something, we have to figure out how we are going to pay for it. We are not going to say, We will put it on a credit card and get it on some unforeseen date somewhere down in the future that is not necessarily lined out or identified yet, but we will figure it out somehow. We are going to end up in foreclosure or we are going to end up in a financial situation we can't get ourselves out of. That is the position we find ourselves in now, Mr. Speaker. That is the reason why, in the majority, this House and the Senate agreed in the pay-as-you-go principles to make sure that if we say we are going to spend something, we are going to pay for it. So that is very, very important. When we look at some of the issues that the other side may bring up as it relates to fiscal responsibility, you have to look at, you just have to look at the irresponsibility, or the lack of responsibility, that the Republican side had when they were in control of this House. When you look at $70 billion for the war in Iraq, $50 billion in subsidies to oil companies, $8 billion, these are billions, these are not millions, in loss, waste, fraud and abuse of no-bid contracts and billions for schools and roads and clinics in Iraq, but we cannot do the same for our children. I am speaking in a very simple way here today, Mr. Speaker, because I want to make sure that Members totally understand what I am saying. I don't want to lose anyone with a whole bunch of acronyms in talking about things that are way out, pie in the sky, and some folks may not understand what is going on. The bottom line is, 10 million kids need health care for 5 years. The other bottom line is the fact that we showed how we would pay for it, not building into an everlasting debt. Now, I am glad that this chart has made it to the floor. I think it is important. I pulled it out last night, and I have been using this chart almost for the last 3 years. We have been updating it, but I think it is important. We talk about foreign debt and we talk about the Bush administration and Republicans here in Congress what they were able to do, $1.19 trillion in get debt over the last 6 years, and that is between 2001 and 2006. These numbers are from the Treasury Department. These are not Kendrick Meek numbers. Forty-two Presidents, 224 years, $1.01 trillion. I say that to say that the days of just stacking on top of the $1.9 trillion are over. Now, when we start going down the line of what is important here, and what is important is making sure that domestically we look at the needs of our children and also of our country. This is just an example, just to show you the per month. Now this is talking about college costs, but when you look at the per-year costs, that is $120 billion. I said, four and, 3\1/2\ months. I pulled this chart just to prove a point. 3\1/2\ months, $10 billion a month pays for the children's health care program. That is every State block grant, and the States get to apply it the way they want to. Many of them use private health insurance companies to provide that level of insurance that those kids need. So when the President and some other folk in this Chamber in the minority, our Republican friends, they start to talk about socialized medicine, I don't know where they are getting these numbers from. I don't know where they are getting the logic from. But I can tell you what will be historic is making sure that we are able to enforce this piece of legislation. I think it is important for Americans to weigh the kind of enthusiasm that the President has and our Republican colleagues may have or they do have on behalf of the Iraqi children. I'm sorry. I am a United States Congressman federalized by the people of the 17th Congressional District to come up and give representation to them and all Americans. I care about other kids in other parts of the world. I have been to Iraq. I have held Iraqi children in my arms. But guess what? I have held American children in my arms. It is not about my kids. I have two kids. We have health care. I thank God we have health care here in Congress. The people elected me to come up here and represent them not for me to have coverage and not for my kids to have coverage that they are not allowed to have, especially those that are financially challenged. So I want the Members who are not thinking about overriding or who are thinking about joining in with the President and not allowing the Congress, this great democracy, the House and Senate, to override the President on this very bad decision. I also think it is important to highlight the fact that we have had a number, a number of editorials throughout the country, of papers, either it be rural America or urban America, either it be the East Coast or the West Coast or the Midwest or the Deep South or the North by the Canadian border, all throughout the country, they have called the decision that the President made a very, not only unpopular, but wrong decision. The President is not running for reelection, but we Members of Congress have to run for election every 2 years. The reason why we have elections is to bring about accountability and to make sure that people back home in their given districts have the right people up here. I think it is important for people to pay very close attention. Mr. Speaker, if this were about politics, I wouldn't spend the time to come down to the floor. I could be doing something else on this Thursday evening after we took our last votes of the week. I could be somewhere on the telephone talking to constituents, or I could be in my house here in Washington enjoying some time with the kids and the family. But I decided to be here because representation is very, very important in this 2-week span. One day has already passed. We have 9 days left. I want to make sure that American people and every Member of Congress know that in another 9 days, there will be an action to override the President. What side are they going to be on? Are they going to be on the side of the children and on behalf of the people of the United States? Or are they going to be on the side of the President and the bad decision? I am not saying the President is not for the folks, for the good people of the United States of America. All I'm saying is that 10 million children that are poor and families would have had a guaranteed health care opportunity in their State, at least 10 million of them. That is a big number. So when I hear the President talk about our obligations to Iraq, I can't help but think about our obligations here to the kids here in the United States and families here in the United States. I am just as passionate as anyone else may be about it. I share that today because I want my Republican colleagues who did not vote, those that voted for the SCHIP bill, congratulations. Thank you on behalf of all Americans and the 10 million children that are seeking health care. But for those who did not vote for the SCHIP bill, for the children's health care bill, I am asking you to rethink your decision for two reasons; one, you have another chance to do the right thing if you missed the opportunity to do the right thing when we pass the children's health care bill here on this floor. You have an opportunity to do the right thing. The second thing, I think more Americans are focused, 72 percent of Americans in a bipartisan poll said that they agree with the version of the children's health care bill that we passed throughout this floor. So that means they could be on the right side of the issue, and they can provide health care for 10 million children that many of them reside in their own congressional districts. I said I would give you two. I gave you three. And I can go on and on and on. I think it is also important for the staff here in Congress. I have a chart that my former chief of staff left with me. It is actually a picture, Mr. Speaker. It is an iceberg. It has a little tip of the iceberg up there, a little triangle just kind of showing the top, then underwater you can see a majority of the iceberg which is almost 80 or 90 percent of the iceberg. At the top it says, Member of Congress. Right under the iceberg it says, Staff, Congressional staff. I think it is important for those members of the staff that are paying attention to this debate and paying attention to what is happening right now in the country to talk to your Member or to talk to your ranking member and say that maybe you need to reconsider your vote. Now, I am talking inside politics here under the dome. Because I don't think that this is an us-against-them kind of philosophy because we have to all be on the side of children. Like some folks say out in the neighborhood, it is what it is. And the bottom line is, 10 million children need health care and we need every person on the ground making that happen. Also, I think that it is important, Mr. Speaker, and I just want to point out what happened recently. This is a picture of one of the first actions that we took here in this House. You remember. We all voted on it, to put benchmarks in and also timelines as relates to giving responsibility or mandating responsibility of the Iraqi Government to rise to the occasion to patrol the streets of Baghdad so we don't have to continue to watch our troops having to do door-to-door neighborhood- to-neighborhood checks. Put the Iraqi folks up front and allow them to do it, or make them do it, so that we don't have to continue to click off $10 billion a month, some $3,316 a second in Iraq, because every time we stay there another day, another month in a combat mode, we continue to lose out. After that, the vote was so overwhelming to do that, or, as the majority, until that, the Speaker and Leader Reid decided, let's override the President because the people wanted a new direction here in the United States. Not just Democrats, not just Republicans, but the people of the United States want it. Well, here are some of my good friends that are here with the President, my Republican colleagues, not one Democrat in this crowd, outside of the White House standing with the President. Mr. President, we are going to be with you and we are not going to allow the Congress to override your veto. Now, what happened after this event? Well, the approval rating of Congress overall went straight down. The American people wanted action, and they got more of the same. I don't want another picture like this, Mr. Speaker, because in nine days, if we find that our Republican colleagues run back down to the White House and stand on the steps with the President and say we stand with the President and we will not allow the Congress to override his veto, I think it will be a very sad day in the United States of America when we provide health care for children abroad, and we are spending $120 billion a year, and counting, in Iraq, and we have Members of Congress and we have a President who doesn't want to provide health care for 10 million children here in the United States. I feel we are up here to represent especially those that are most vulnerable. I guess because the kids that will be eligible for the SCHIP program, they can't vote, they are under 18, maybe that is the reason. But I ask, Mr. Speaker, that those of us that are adults, if you are a grandparent or granddad or you are a senior, or you are a mother or father or an aunt or an uncle, or if your kids have health care, and we talked about that last night, because my kids go to school with other kids, and if someone is in that classroom that has not received health care insurance and they have a cold or they have some sort of ailment, my kids are going to end up falling victim to that. With that, Mr. Speaker, I have two of my good colleagues from Ohio, they are about an hour-and-a-half away from each other I guess by car, the Chair of the Ethics Committee and a member of the Ways and Means Committee, who I am happy to serve with on that committee, Mrs. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, and also Mr. Tim Ryan from the great town of Youngstown, Ohio. With that, I would like to yield to Mrs. Stephanie Tubbs Jones.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Before I say something here as it relates what you just said, Mr. Ryan, I think it is important for us to at least look at the argument that the President has not been able to make. He hasn't been able to make that Democrats on Capitol Hill are trying to do something that the American people should not do. We can't say that because 18 Republicans in the Senate supported the bill along with the Democrats. It is bipartisan. And 43 Governors, including 16 Republicans, are in support of the SCHIP bill and children's health care, and 270 organizations representing millions of Americans are in support. And a strong majority of the American people are in support. I have the quotes here, and I hope to put it on the 30-something Web site about what Republicans have said about the veto and even prior to the veto. I think it is also important to point out, Mr. Ryan and Mrs. Tubbs Jones, I think it is important for us not just to focus on the action of the President. We do have the opportunity to override. The President, like I said last night, he can't run for reelection again because he is term limited out. So the only way the American people can stand in judgment of him is when someone calls their home and asks how they feel about how the President is running the country, and those numbers are very, very low as to whether the President is doing a good job. But when you look at this issue of health care, I think there this is a gut check for many Members of Congress. There are some numbers, and I heard Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones asking Members on the floor today that voted in the affirmative for the bill: Are you going to vote with us to override the President? Out of two conversations I heard, it was ``yes.'' But I think it is important that each Member of Congress start to use their relationships with other Members of Congress, especially with the other side of the aisle. My conversation with some of my colleagues today have been, Please, I kind of like you. I think you are a nice guy. I don't know if you want to make a career decision to be with the President because that is what is going to happen. The President is talking about negotiating on children's health care when, and I am looking at a quote here, and quotes and past statements by the President, I don't think they hold any great value as to what he is going to do if it has nothing to do with Iraq. He said at the Republican National Convention in 2004: ``In a new term, we will lead in an aggressive effort to enroll millions of children who are eligible but not yet signed up for government health care insurance programs. We will not allow the lack of attention or information to stand between these children and health care that they need.'' Well, I can tell you, based on his veto, he is standing in the schoolhouse door as it relates to children receiving health care. I have been talking to my colleagues in the halls and saying, Listen you need to be on the side of the children. Not with the Democrats, not with some group, either liberal or conservative, moderate, you have to be on the side of the children.