Christopher Murphy

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Let me point out this chart. We are talking about the fact that facts don't lie. Here it is. This isn't fuzzy numbers. This chart isn't rigged. This is just telling it like it is. You're looking in this chart at the last year of the Bush administration and the first year of the Obama administration. The trend is unmistakable. As the Bush administration ground to a halt, the economy went into the tank, cratering to the point where in January of 2009, the last month of the Bush administration and first month of the Obama administration, this economy lost nearly 800,000 jobs, as Mr. Welch and I were sworn in for our second term, Mr. Boccieri for his first term. But the trend coming out of January is just as unmistakable. Every month, almost without exception, less and less jobs being lost, to the point where in the last 3 months we have added jobs. We've added 700,000 jobs just in the last 2 months. Now, that still leaves way, way too many people out of work. We still have miles to go. But you want to talk about what policies didn't work and what policies have worked? The numbers don't lie. I want to add just one more thing to the table here. We can talk about the jobs that have been created through the stimulus bill, the jobs that have been saved through the policies of this administration, but there are other maybe not as well covered but just as important successes that are happening right underneath our feet. Last week on page 4 or 5 or 6 of a lot of your local papers you might have noticed a story that the Chinese Government has announced that it is going to dramatically change the way that it runs its currency, that it is going to start allowing its currency to float in a way that it has never before. That is something the Democrats in this Congress, led by Mr. Ryan, frankly, have been working on for a very, very long time. The Chinese have been essentially manipulating their currency so that they, on day one, can underprice American manufacturers sometimes by 30, 40, 50 percent just on the basis of how they manipulate the value of their currency. We have lost millions of manufacturing jobs in this country, and much of it has gone to China. Much of that is because of the funny business going on with their currency. Now, they could get away with that under the Bush administration because that administration asked no questions when it came to trade policy. They rushed into trade agreement after trade agreement, asking little, if any, questions about what we could do when we sat across the table with our trade partners to try to force them to change their policies so that they couldn't immediately unfairly underbid American labor and American factories and American manufacturers. Well, the Chinese can't get away with that under the Obama administration any longer. The Chinese can't get away with that with a Democratic Congress. We're not going to give a free pass to China and other Asian nations, to India and our European partners to allow them to either subsidize their industries with government dollars, to manipulate their currencies, or to run roughshod over labor and environmental policies so as to underprice and outbid American manufacturers. The Chinese saw the writing on the wall. Now, they've got a long way to go to get this thing right, but the fact that they've finally figured out that they can no longer manipulate their currency so as to unfairly compete with American manufacturers shows that a new sheriff is in town. As Mr. Boccieri would say, there is a new referee here. And the whole world understands that, that when the referee is finally holding domestic corporations accountable for their actions, that's a good thing. But when the referee is also on the international playing field ready to hold our trading partners accountable for their unfair trading practices, that's transformative as well. So the story about how we get from a point in January of 2009 when we were at an absolute disastrous point in our economy to where today we are headed unmistakably in the right direction has a lot of stories to it, Mr. Welch. It's about job creation in the stimulus bill, but it's also about starting to stick up for American manufacturing, which we are finally doing in this Congress.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. When it comes down to it, of all the things that drive the recovery in this economy, it's people spending again. And the fact is we'll go back to where we started. At the heart of our economic recovery legislation is putting power in the hands of average, everyday working-class families. That's what drives this economic recovery, and that's what the Democrats have invested in.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Thanks to my friend from Ohio for setting the playing field for us this evening. I think back to when I was making up my mind about running for Congress some 4, 5 years ago, and I was in Connecticut--Cheshire, where I live today--sitting and watching a Federal Government that seemed intent on using the power that it has accumulated here in Congress and in the administration to essentially turn over government to their friends. Now, whether their friends were in the oil industry or their friends were in the health insurance industry or the pharmaceutical industry or the defense contracting industry, whatever it was, it seemed as if the reason that some people had run for office, the reason that some people had sought positions in the Bush administration was to hand over the reins of government to corporate interests; to people that, frankly, didn't have the public interest at heart. And I think back to the reasons that I decided to run for Congress, and at the foundation of it was a real belief that we had essentially begun to privatize all sectors of the United States economy and the United States Government and that taxpayer dollars were more often being used not to accrue to the public benefit but to accrue to the benefit of a small group of people who happened to hold and wield influence here in Washington. And so I think about what would have happened back in January and February of last year as we were setting the economic strategy toward recovery. I think about what would have happened if the folks who had been running Congress and running the administration in prior years were in charge of this economic recovery. I think about the bill we passed. I think about the fact that one-third of the stimulus bill passed in the winter of last year went to tax cuts--went to tax cuts not for the top 1, 2, 3 percent of income earners in this Nation; not tax cuts for the Fortune 100, 200, 300, but tax cuts for individuals, for middle-income folks out there, the people that I represent in Connecticut. Now, they're not enormous tax breaks. Folks weren't getting thousands of dollars back, but they were getting a couple hundred--$300, $400, $500--back in taxes. Small business tax breaks in that stimulus bill to allow for more incentives for small businesses to expand and invest in capital to maybe allow them to take some of their losses a little bit earlier than they might have otherwise been able to do in order to make the books balance for that one or two really tough years that they needed to survive. I think about what would have happened if the Republicans had written that stimulus bill and where those tax breaks would have gone. Because I know the statistics from the Bush tax breaks. Not to say there weren't some deserving people who benefited from that tax break, but I know that the average millionaire in my district from the last round of Bush tax cuts got $43,000 back. I know that the average-income family in New Britain, Connecticut got $19 back from that tax break. Now things cost a little bit more in Connecticut, but that's just about enough money to buy a pepperoni pizza in New Britain. That's nothing. I know that if the Republicans had been writing that stimulus bill that we would have likely seen more of the same, that we have would have likely seen the economic recovery and the economic stimulus bill that they would have written as an excuse to hand out more tax breaks and more favors to folks that didn't need any more. And so the reason, Mr. Ryan, that you talk about this recovery as it is in action, the reason that we see retail sales picking up, the reason that we see 10 percent growth in our economy in the last 6 months is in part because we invested our recovery strategy in the right people; we invested our recovery strategy in low-income and middle-income families who needed a little bit extra money back on their taxes so that they can pay their bills, that they could stop from going into bankruptcy themselves, and that maybe they could put a little bit of their money back into the economy. We invest it in small businesses because we know that 90 percent of the jobs in this or any other recovery are going to come from small businesses. And we invest in future businesses as well. We've got a company in my district called Apollo Solar. I've got to tell you, this is going to be the next big thing. They are making some really important technology that will allow individual homeowners to put solar panels on their roof, generate a whole bunch of power, and then sell it back to the grid for a profit. This is going to be in every home in the Nation, we hope, in a matter of to 10 to 15 years. And the stimulus bill decided to put money into Apollo Solar so that they can not only add jobs, but point the way forward for the future of the American economy. Money in the pockets of middle-class families. Money in the bank accounts of small businesses. An opportunity to point this economy forward to the next wave of jobs that we're going to enjoy in this country in the form of renewable-energy jobs. Mr. Ryan, you're exactly right. I still have unacceptably high levels of unemployment in the places that I represent. I've still got way too many people that are laid off. And it's no small consolation--no consolation at all to them when I, or anybody else, tries to explain that jobs are always a lagging indicator and listen, we've got to have big jumps in the production in this country and jumps in retail sales and jumps in orders for factories before all of those employers start adding jobs. But I think people are coming to understand that the recovery is on its way. They hear the stories. They hear the stories from Main Street, as I did in New Milford, Connecticut, a few weeks ago where almost every retail establishment on Main Street in New Milford reported that May and June have been among their best retail months in 2 to 3 years. Factory after factory that I go to are reporting that for the first time they've seen orders make significant upward increases in the past several months. They feel that good news. Now they know that those retail establishments and those factories need to get a couple more months of good news before they start actually adding jobs back. And they know that the first thing they're going to do is take the workers that they had furloughed for a day or two every week and put them back full time. But the trend is going in the right direction, and I think it's going in the right direction because the stimulus, written by the Democrats, championed by President Obama, was put in the right place. It gave to Main Street. It gave to middle-class families. It gave to small businesses which--we're only guessing here. I'm only guessing--but I think that if President Bush was still here or the Republicans were still in charge of Congress, that that stimulus and the people and the corporations and the institutions that it invested in would have been a very different set of people and businesses than we see today having been invested in. Mr. Welch, I would be happy to turn it over to you. I'm glad to see you and Mr. Boccieri joining us on the floor this evening.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. You mentioned that we need Republicans here and you mentioned that there's support for the Democratic policies and Obama's policies across the board. Let me just add two quotes to that that you mentioned. First, from Phil Swagel, who was assistant Treasury Secretary for Economic Policy under George Bush. This is one of Bush's top economic strategists who said, their economic policies--I think referring to the Democrats and Obama--their economic policies including the stimulus have helped move the economy in the right direction. Mark Zandi, who is the chief economist at Moody's, a former adviser to a number of Republican candidates, says, It feels like the light switch went on in many businesses this spring. When you take it all together the response to the recession was massive, it was unprecedented, and it was ultimately successful. You've got a broad spectrum of agreement, as you mentioned, from conservative economists to progressive economists, who say that the policies that the President and Congress have put into place have put us on the right track. Mr. Altmire.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4451) to reinstate and transfer certain hydroelectric licenses and extend the deadline for commencement of construction of certain hydroelectric projects, as amended.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his support of the bill and for working with us in providing the amendments that he referenced. I think it is important to underscore his point, that this is not a requirement that FERC reissue these licenses to the town of Canton, it is permissive language allowing them to do that given proper environmental review and proper availability of comment from other interested parties. This really is an example of how local power production can be done right. This is a nonpartisan local issue, Democrats and Republicans at the local and State level, along with the administration in the State of Connecticut coming together, to try to promote a project to bring two long-dormant dams online. I would note also that the reconstruction of the dams will allow for potential fish passage along a stream that has not allowed for that passage for a long time. There are multiple benefits to the community and to ratepayers. I thank the gentleman for his support of the bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The legislation before the House today is pretty simple. It will permit several communities in my district, the Fifth Congressional District of Connecticut, to operate two now-defunct hydroelectric dams as municipal power sources. The dams, the Upper and Lower Collinsville dams, have lain dormant in Connecticut's Farmington River since the 1960s. The licenses previously issued by FERC to operate both these dams are currently inactive, and this legislation would allow FERC to reinstate them and transfer them to the town of Canton, Connecticut, for operation. The State legislature has already passed legislation to operate these two State-owned dams, but Federal legislation is also needed to restore their operation. These small dams are already a beloved and longstanding symbol of the Farmington Valley's rich history. They used to power a very well-known and thriving axe factory on the site. This legislation would allow for additional comments and for environmental data to be considered by FERC prior to taking any action, ensuring that the river's health and the region's health is well protected. This legislation has been drafted over the course of many months with the close cooperation of FERC, who's unopposed to the legislation, and we put together a bipartisan coalition of stakeholders, including all of the affected communities, the Governor of the State of Connecticut, and regional and national river protection organizations. Simply put, there is broad and deep consensus and agreement that these dams represent a valuable source of renewable energy right in the heart of suburban Connecticut. And while we work here in the House and the Senate to enact much broader and sweeping policies to try to promote renewable energy development around this country, we need to also recognize that in some parts of this Nation there are some very locally produced, locally driven projects like this one in Canton and Avon, Connecticut, that can produce some pretty immediate effects for local rate payers, providing them with clean, renewable, locally produced and locally run energy. I would like to thank Chairman Waxman and Chairman Markey and Ranking Members Barton and Upton for their help in bringing this legislation to the floor. And I urge passage today of H.R. 4451. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I ran for Congress 4 years ago because I had watched the Republicans use the power that they had accrued here to turn our government over to their friends in the oil industry and the insurance industry, the drug industry and the banking industry, and so I wonder what kind of stimulus bill they would have written last year were they still in charge. It would have been very different than the one that's on the ground today in Connecticut, one that has put funds in a small solar company in Bethel, Connecticut, Apollo Solar, creating jobs in renewable energy; a stimulus bill that just opened up a new early Head Start program in Danbury, Connecticut, employing 20 people immediately and creating a lot of job opportunities for the parents who now have child care. It would have been very different than the bill that gave millions and millions in tax credits to middle- and lower-income individuals in Connecticut that have allowed them to go out and start to create a retail resurgence. The stimulus bill would have been done very differently under the Republicans. Democrats in charge, the money went to the right people.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, more than 52,000 miles in 4 weeks. That is what 10,000 steps, or 5 miles, every single day is. That's what the kids at Sarah Noble School in New Milford, Connecticut, accomplished in May. In their fourth annual school walking project for fifth graders, students lived by the ``Triple E'' mantra: exercise, eating healthy, and protecting the environment. These students are putting themselves on a path to a healthier life by investing in walking. Healthy habits that can start now can pay off as they grow older because, as we know, obese youth are becoming an epidemic. They are more likely to have high-risk factors for cardiovascular disease such as high cholesterol and high blood pressure, as well as Type II diabetes and several types of cancer. We've got to break this cycle, and it starts with a single step, some healthy snacks, and keeping the air we breathe clean. At Sarah Noble School, fifth graders are already doing their part, and they have given me this pedometer to help me do the same. Together, we can all strive to be healthy, one step at a time.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Chew on this fact. In 2007, there were 14,000 waivers granted to the Buy American law by DOD. One year later, in 2008, that number jumped to 65,000. That's a 1- year 450 percent increase in Buy American waivers that likely cost tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of U.S. manufactured jobs. That's why the amendments being offered in this block by myself, by Representative Edwards, and by Representative Lipinski are so important, because we need to start shining a light on this outrageous flow of U.S. defense jobs overseas. My amendment would specifically require DOD to explain large increases in waiver approvals from one year to the next, and it would require the DOD to explain if they even looked for American-made products before they granted these waivers. We want to grow American manufacturing. We need to start with the billions and billions of American taxpayer dollars spent at the Department of Defense.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, in the last year of the Bush administration, the Department of Defense, under President Bush, authorized a 450 percent increase in the number of waivers we grant to this Nation's Buy America law, allowing in just 1 year thousands of American jobs to be sent overseas using U.S. taxpayer dollars. We have the defense reauthorization bill on the floor this week, and we have a chance to say no more, that one of the best ways to grow our domestic economy is to make sure that our own U.S. taxpayer dollars, 70 percent of which are used with respect to U.S. procurement on defense items, stay right here in this country. The stimulus bill is working. It's creating American jobs. But without spending one dime more of American money, we can stop this trend of more and more waivers being granted to the Buy America laws and apply U.S. taxpayer dollars to create U.S. jobs.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, in 2007 President Bush allowed for 14,000 waivers to our Buy America laws. In 2008, on his way out the door, that number became 65,000. Let me say that again: in the last year of the Bush administration, he quadrupled the number of permits to allow for government contractors to outsource jobs overseas. You want to know why we lost millions of manufacturing jobs over the last decade? There's your answer. We have allowed for American dollars to go overseas to be able to grow international workforces at the expense of our domestic workforce. You want to know why this year we have already created more jobs than President Bush did in his 8 years? Well, right at the root of it is President Bush's and the Republicans' drive to take our tax dollars, send them to multinational companies, and allow them to kill American manufacturing jobs. That has to stop, and the Democrats are leading the way.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, over the last several months, I have visited factory floors in Burlington, Meriden, and Waterbury, Connecticut, and the news is good. Orders are returning; revenue is up; access to capital is coming back. And we have seen it in the national numbers. Last week, the Department of Labor reported that 290,000 jobs were added in April, a larger-than-expected increase. And last year, thanks to the tax cuts that this House passed, consumer spending has started to increase, jumping up by 3.5 percent in the last report. But we have to do more in Connecticut. Our economic recovery won't be complete until manufacturing completely rebounds, and that won't happen until this Congress decides to start spending U.S. taxpayer dollars here on U.S. jobs. Our economy is coming back, but its recovery will not be full until we make a commitment to buy American.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the life of a great man and constituent, Mr. Edward Bowman, Sr. Mr. Bowman, of Cheshire, Connecticut, passed away on April 17, 2010 after a vigorous battle with cancer. He is survived by his eight children and twenty-five grandchildren. If you know Cheshire, Connecticut, traffic jams aren't something we have to worry about every day. But on the day of his burial procession, Ed Bowman caused one heck of a traffic jam that virtually shut down Route 10. That is how beloved the man was to his family, his friends and his community. While not everyone at Mr. Bowman's funeral knew the man well, they certainly knew what he meant to their community and what a great loss his passing represented. Ed Bowman was simply a giant in town, both in business and in charity. A devout Catholic, he lived his life in the true spirit of the Ignatian value of acting as a ``man for others.'' Mr. Bowman came up from the bottom to eventually purchase and operate a successful business in Cheshire--White Bowman, Inc. While he was a good businessman, he was an even better volunteer and community cheerleader. If you volunteered at a St. Bridget food drive, Ed Bowman was probably packing grocery bags right next to you; if you thought kids in Cheshire needed more opportunities to participate in sports, Ed Bowman was probably chalking the ball field with you; and if you thought that more scholarships were needed to get more kids to college, Ed Bowman was right there next to you selling raffle tickets and hustling for donations. And he did it all without asking for anything. One of his friends at the local Rotary remarked that Mr. Bowman wasn't a member of the Rotary because he wanted to attain any leadership position but because he simply believed in the organization and its mission of community service. Edward Bowman is a rarity among us. His service to his family and community wasn't based on the need for appreciation and acclamation, but instead he served for the most noble of reasons--it was the right thing to do, because he was a man for others. There is no other way to put it--Ed Bowman WAS Cheshire, and the Bowman family that he built IS Cheshire. In honor of Edward Bowman, Sr. and his lifetime of service to his family and community I ask that all Members of the House of Representatives join me in a moment of silence for one outstanding American.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the life of a great man and constituent, Mr. Edward Bowman, Sr. of Cheshire. In my hometown of Cheshire, Connecticut, there aren't many traffic jams, but on the day of his burial procession, Ed Bowman caused one heck of a mess that virtually closed down Route 10. Hundreds turned out to pay respects to Cheshire's hero, a giant in business and in charity. One of Cheshire's leading businessmen, the owner of White-Bowman, Ed was an even better volunteer and community cheerleader. If you volunteered at the St. Bridget food drive, Ed Bowman was there packing grocery bags next to you; if you cared about youth sports, Ed Bowman was chalking the ball field with you; and if you were interested in helping kids go to college, Ed Bowman was right there with you hustling for scholarships. He was a rarity among us. He served not because he wanted any acclamation but because his Catholic faith told him it was the right thing to do. He leaves behind eight children and 25 grandchildren--a family that has simply picked up where its patriarch left off. Ed Bowman was Cheshire, and the Bowman family is Cheshire.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made in order under the rule.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Again, thank you, Mr. Andrews, for working with us on this. Mr. Chair, all of us who represent small manufacturers have heard the stories as they seek to compete with companies that are underpricing them from China, Asia, and across the globe. The defense dollars that we spend here on acquisition better targeted to help those small firms is part of their future salvation. Overall, I think this bill represents a tremendous opportunity for the U.S. taxpayers and for U.S. manufacturers alike. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, first, let me express my thanks to Mr. Andrews, to the committee, and to the ranking members for all of their work by bringing this bipartisan bill to the floor today. My amendment is similar, but I think it adds a very important clarification to the bill. There is a really important program in title IV of this legislation which seeks to have the Department of Defense do outreach to nontraditional suppliers, to nontraditional manufacturers, throughout the country. With a little bit of outreach and with a little bit of contracting help, those small manufacturers, by and large, which may have very small numbers of contracts with the Department of Defense or which may have no contracts at all, can be future suppliers and future members of our industrial military base in this country. This amendment simply seeks to make sure that that program is operational for firms here in the United States of America, specifically targeting the help to the national technology and industrial base, which is defined as those companies in the United States and Canada. We know why it is so important to spend our military acquisition dollars here at home. First, we need to be using taxpayer dollars to grow jobs right here in our backyard. By better targeting U.S. taxpayer dollars, 70 percent of which are used to purchase goods through the military budget here in the United States, we are growing the American workforce. We also have national security reasons we should be purchasing here at home. By making sure that we have American manufacturers building for our military and that we are securing a long-term industrial manufacturing base for our military equipment, we further protect the security of this Nation. This is a great program, and I am so thankful to both parties here for bringing it before us for a vote today. I think that you will find a myriad of companies throughout the country which, with a little bit of help and with a little bit of outreach, can be part of this industrial base. I can think of one company in Meriden, Connecticut, DI-EL Tool, which is a small manufacturing firm with only about six or seven employees. They've got a small number of military contracts as a subcontractor today. They came to me, and they said, Listen, Representative Murphy. We could do more, but we just don't have the capacity to compete with some of these traditional, large manufacturers. This is the type of program that can help DI-EL Tool, and it could probably help thousands of others across this country. This amendment simply seeks to clarify that this program will be operational here at home. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, we need to pass financial reform, and it's time for Republicans to stop standing in the way. When I'm home in Connecticut and talk to my neighbors and constituents, I never hear anybody disagree with me about the need to reform Wall Street. Their retirement account statements are all the proof that they need that Wall Street played a hand that was too dangerous for their own good. We need to make sure that our financial system does what it does best: help get money from investors to businesses so that they can innovate and expand. When Wall Street sticks to this mission, we all win. But over the last decade, much of Wall Street became a Las Vegas casino, with our money--our mortgages, our investments, and pensions-- being used as casino chips in trading schemes that added no value to our economy. Wall Street needs to get back to what it's good at, and it's time for Republicans to stop standing in the way and join us so that we can lock the door together.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, in New Britain, Connecticut, on Sunday, over 1,000 people came together at Sacred Heart Catholic Church to mourn the 96 public servants, diplomats and military leaders who died in the tragic plane crash in Poland. This tragedy has shocked the entire world, but it's hit my district particularly hard. The Polish American community in Connecticut has deep roots and remains strongly connected to their homeland. Our Polish inheritance is visible throughout the community of New Britain, Connecticut, and the surrounding suburbs. Broad Street in that town has been named ``Little Poland'' by the city council. There are people grieving today at Casimir Pulaski School in Meriden, at Pulaski Middle School in New Britain, and certainly this summer during the annual Dozynki harvest festival, a tradition which Polish immigrants brought to New Britain, Connecticut, during their immigration to the United States. As Americans, and as a people with deep and lasting Polish roots, we together mourn this terrible tragedy and send our sincere condolences to the people of Poland.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. There is one group of people we don't talk about enough with respect to the health insurance debate. That is young people. They're the most likely group of people in this country to go uninsured, but they get sick, and when they get sick, they often become saddled with debts that stay with them and their families for the rest of their lives. With the health insurance reform bill this House will pass that all changes. We have included affordability credits that will help young adults who are at the beginning of their career and earning less income to get insurance. We aim to give people stability by guaranteeing affordable insurance marketplaces for those who switch their jobs, start their own businesses, or seek more education, as younger people are more likely to do. And maybe most importantly, immediately on passage of the bill, we allow young people up to the age of 26 to stay on their parents' health insurance. There is nothing more valuable in life than your health, but for far too many young people, protecting their health is simply too expensive. Let's move forward on health insurance reform for them.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, the people I represent in Connecticut, those who buy their health insurance on the individual market, are bearing the burden of a 20 percent rate hike in a recession. Who's getting this 20 percent? It's not the patients, it's not my doctors, it's not my hospitals. This fact screams for the need for national health insurance reform, reform that drives down health care costs for everyone, and asking those who make the biggest bucks off the system to take a little bit less. Today President Obama is going to convene Members of both parties in a televised forum to sit down and try to fix our health insurance mess. And I'm hopeful that our Republican friends will finally bring some ideas that will change this status quo for individuals in my district, seniors and small businesses across the Nation. Instead of empowering these insurance industry rate increases, they should work with us to stop them. I'm not naive. This may not happen today. But I'll tell you this: people in Connecticut will be watching.

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut

Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. First of all, let me extend my sincerest thanks to the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Scott, for bringing this bill to the floor with such speed, and then let me extend additional thanks to the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Conyers, and Ranking Members Gohmert and Smith for their assistance in bringing this bill to the floor today. Madam Speaker, when I was home over the break, I told a lot of people that I saw that for all of the attention on the news about the things that Republicans and Democrats disagree with, this legislation, Billy's Law, is an example of the vast legislative underbrush that happens here that changes lives but don't necessarily get the big headlines, places where both parties work together to make this government work better and to make it more compassionate. I'd like to thank Representative Poe for sponsoring this bill with me. This House has no stronger advocate for the rights of victims and their families, and it has been my pleasure to work with him to move this legislation forward. But above all, I'd like to extend my personal thanks to Jan Smolinski and her husband Bill, the parents of Billy Smolinski, for whom this legislation is named. Their story is tragic, but Jan's pursuit of justice, her desire to do something with her situation, to change it for all of the other families who have gone through the same thing, that is nothing less than heroic. Madam Speaker, Billy Smolinski of Waterbury, Connecticut, went missing on August 24, 2004, at the age of 31. In their search for their son, Jan and her husband Bill encountered a national missing persons system that is simply broken. They were met with law enforcement that didn't understand how to handle an adult missing persons case, and then they ran into a national system of disconnected and inaccessible databases that didn't allow them to be true partners in the search for justice. To this day, they haven't found Billy. Sadly, their story is not a unique one. Every year, thousands of Americans go missing, often never to be seen by their loved ones again. In fact, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, there are over 100,000 missing persons cases open at any time and approximately 4,400 unidentified human remains are found every single year. Now, those numbers are too high, but just as intolerable are the roadblocks that family members face when they're trying to help law enforcement find a missing loved one. That is why I am here to urge my friends to join us in supporting Billy's Law, legislation that will begin correcting these problems that plague our Nation's missing persons system. My colleagues have really gone over the basics of the law so I won't belabor the point. But this legislation for the first time provides statutory authorization for NamUs, which is the Web-based database created in 2007 by the Department of Justice. It's the only federally funded database of missing persons and unidentified remains information that is open and accessible to the public. But currently it's not a congressionally authorized program. Second, the bill connects NamUs with the other major Federal database housed at the FBI, which is now only accessible to law enforcement. We protect information that needs to stay private, but this new connected database, which will also work with protocols that build in other information from State and local nonprofit databases, creates a complete and powerful national powerful database that families can use along with law enforcement. And third, as has been stated, it sets up a competitive grants program to make sure that all the information that a coroner may have in California is posted onto a national database so a family searching for their missing loved one in Connecticut has that information in real time. On January 21, Madam Speaker, Jan Smolinski testified at a hearing on the bill that Subcommittee Chairman Scott so graciously held. During her testimony, she poignantly remarked, ``Uncertainty is a cancer that crushes the spirit of loved ones left behind, destroys marriages, and tears at the tissue of family bonds.'' By creating a robust, user-friendly national missing persons and unidentified remains database, Billy's law will help heal these wounds by finally giving parents and family members like the Smolinskis the ability to be true partners with law enforcement in the search for their loved ones. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill. We owe it to the Smolinskis and to thousands of families like them across the country to make sure their personal nightmares are not repeated.