Bill Pascrell

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007. This is critical legislation designed to focus on a long-time vulnerability that exists within our Nation. This bill is a real product of bipartisan cooperation. So I want to commend our leader, Chairman Bennie Thompson, as well as Ranking Member Peter King, both of whom I enjoyed working with and continue to work with, even though I am not officially on the committee. You have performed a tremendous service to this country, and we are indebted to you. Your sagacity is seconded by no one. We know that rail and public transportation represent a very tempting target for those who wish to do us harm. London and Madrid are just two recent examples of the mass transit systems that are plagued by terrorism. Last year, in fact, the committee went to Madrid, to Rome, and to London, and we saw the evil deeds of terrorists, and we learned much, and they learned much from us. Thankfully, H.R. 1401 will make needed and long-overdue investments in America's public transportation to ensure that we are safer and more secure. The bill provides for comprehensive, mandatory training for front- line workers. That is so critical for us to understand. These are folks that are on the job every day. Transit employees must know how to identify risks and respond in case of a threat or attack. And you know, Mr. Chairman, I felt very strongly about this, discussed it with both of you, that we need to get more retired law enforcement into these positions of security. They know how to detect the threats that are on the line. The bill also enhances whistleblower protections so that workers can be free to report security concerns. This is critical, Mr. Chairman. This has been so critical in exposing the security gaps at airports throughout the United States of America. If people are not free to tell us what they see day to day and are fearful that there will be reaction against them, that is not good. Most importantly, this bill provides $7.3 billion to public transit agencies, Amtrak, bus operators, and other providers of rail and public transportation. We want people to feel as safe on the trains as they are in the air. We know full well that rail and mass transit have been negligently underfunded in terms of security since 9/11, and it is long past time that we do this. Today we do that. I applaud the chairman and I applaud the entire committee for their hard work.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule for H.R. 1591. In fact, Madam Chair, you have set the rule, and we need rules of the road. That is why we need to pass H.R. 1591. This is not the average spending bill taken up by the Congress. This legislation represents a very personal decision that needs to be made by each and every Member of this body about the future of our Nation. The fact is, and I address, if I may through the Chair, my respected brothers and sisters in the opposition. The fact is that this bill was not necessitated by the acts of Congress. No, no. This supplemental is necessary because our Nation faces an emergency due to the multitude of failures from this administration. Why are you carrying their water? Funding will be provided to make certain that the disgrace of Walter Reed will not be repeated. This supplemental makes certain that our troops are not redeployed in and out of Iraq without proper rest, without proper preparation. We all support that, don't we? And our support in Iraq will be brought to an end responsibly. We recently observed the 4-year anniversary of the war in Iraq. And yet during those 4 years, Congress stood on the sidelines providing endless funding without questioning. No more; no more. Today, Congress finally fulfills its constitutionally mandated responsibility, provides real oversight for the funding of this war, and holds this administration accountable for its actions. That is what this rule, that is what this legislation is all about. We have the opportunity here, all of us, to undo some of the severe damage caused by the unnecessary war. I ask Members to vote for the rule and for the bill.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of the Water Quality Financing Act, H.R. 720, and I commend Chairman Oberstar for working so hard to bring it to the floor today. This bill reauthorizes the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, a necessary program providing low-interest loans to communities for construction of wastewater treatment facilities and other water projects. H.R. 720 authorizes $14 billion over the next 4 years for the fund, which will go a long way toward helping America's cities and towns fix their wastewater infrastructure. This is a critical program. Since it was created in 1987, the fund has partnered with local and State governments to drastically improve America's water quality. As a result of dramatic improvements in wastewater infrastructure due in part to this fund, discharges of waste into the environment have decreased by one-half since the early 1970's. In my home State of New Jersey, the fund has been enormously helpful. New Jersey was granted almost $2 billion during fiscal years 1987 through 2005, almost all of which was used for wastewater treatment projects. This much-needed funding has been instrumental in helping my State keep its water clean and its citizens safe and healthy. The fact is: This bill is long overdue. We know all too well that progress cannot be achieved on the cheap. If we want clean water for ourselves and future generations, we must invest in it. The longer we wait, the more degraded our systems get. I urge my colleagues to vote. ``yes'' on this bill today.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent for 2 additional minutes.

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price), respectfully, to withdraw this amendment. And if I may just take a few moments. The pay-as-you-go rule, which was adopted by the House of Representatives, presents consideration of bills that affect direct or mandatory spending as we know it, or revenues, unless the measures also contain offsets, as I am sure my friend from Georgia knows. Direct spending includes funds for entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Federal Employee Retirement and Unemployment Compensation and other programs that you and I, I think, would consider mandatory. All other spending in the budget is referred to as the discretionary spending, which is provided in and controlled by the annual appropriations process and is not subject to PAYGO. That is why the Congressional Budget Office has stated that this legislation does not trigger the PAYGO rule. CBO says, this is not direct spending, so it is not applicable in this legislation. Now, I think your point is that maybe we ought to put everything under the same umbrella, but then you are going to have to change every authorizing program in the Congress. This is a reauthorization. We are authorizing a program that already exists. The original authorization was signed into law in fiscal year 2001 in the omnibus appropriations bill. We are going to offset each and every reauthorization we consider in the House? I don't know if that is the direction you want to go in. This majority, the Democratic majority, and we are talking about a bipartisan bill here, voted out unanimously in conference, this majority has instituted strong PAYGO rules, pay as you go. We are taking fiscal responsibility very seriously. Nonetheless, neither this bill nor any other reauthorization bill falls under House PAYGO rules; and I wanted to make that clear. The fact is that this is too critical a program, and I don't sense the sense of urgency here. This is too sensitive an issue, too urgent an issue to jeopardize with attempts to score a political point, as the gentleman from Georgia is attempting to do, I believe, if he considers to move forward. Failing to prevent sewer overflows will result in more sewage, more toxins, more debris making the way into our waterways and drinking water. We have worked on both sides of the aisle for so many years to clean this mess up. What legacy do we leave to our children if we don't do this? It is our duty to prevent beach closures, shellfish bed closures, contamination of drinking water and other environmental and public health concerns that result from sewer overflows before it is too late. I would ask my friend from Georgia if he would consider not asking for a vote on this amendment.

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from California and the gentleman from Louisiana, and I want to commend Congressman Camp from Michigan for being a stalwart in this area. It has taken us a long time, a few years. We have had bipartisan support in the past, Mr. Chairman, but we aim to put closure on this at this time. Mr. Chairman, the EPA estimates that the Nation's wastewater infrastructure will face a funding shortfall of between 300 and $400 billion over the next 20 years. That should give us pause because of all the work and help from both sides of the aisle in protecting our waterways. I am very proud to rise today in strong support of this bill, the Water Quality Investment Act, H.R. 569. I want to thank Mr. Oberstar, chairman of the Transportation Committee, and, of course, Ranking Member Mica and Chairwoman Johnson and Ranking Member Baker for helping to get this bill on the floor. Congressman Camp and I have pursued this issue for many years, as I have said, in order to authorize the wastewater infrastructure funding that our cities and towns so badly need; and, Mr. Chairman, I might add, there are 30 mayors in the House. We need a little bit of that mayor persuasion and touch to deal with a lot of problems that we face on this floor, both domestically and internationally. The mayors know every day what they face on 24/7 and in the community, every community, be it large or small. Because you cannot see something, people forget about how significant it is. I also want to thank Congressman Capuano and others in this worthy endeavor. H.R. 569 has garnered co-sponsorship from both sides and was unanimously voted out of committee and was even reported out of committee during the past two Congresses for the simple reason that combined sewer overflows and sanitary soil overflows affect millions of people in each and every State in the Union. We are talking about affecting the lives of over 40 million people here in what we are doing to today. The United States' antiquated wastewater infrastructure is deteriorating. State and local governments are often unable to stop sewage and untreated waste from flowing into the streets, into basements, into rivers and into lakes. So all the work that we have done on making our water clean is being undone if we do not attack these two major problems. Combined sewer systems found mainly in older cities are one source of these overflows. A total of 772 municipalities throughout America would serve these 40 million which I just spoke of. My home State of New Jersey has 31 combined sewer systems, water, sanitation coming together at over 200 discharge points throughout the State. Many of those discharges, including several in my own town of Paterson, New Jersey, flow into the Passaic River, a heavily polluted waterway in the heart of my district. Sanitary sewer systems often overflow as well, releasing untreated waste into our environment, closing our beaches, we have been famous for that, too, New Jersey, and contaminating highways, waterways and drinking water supplies. In 2003, New Jersey closed over 30,000 acres of classified shellfish growing areas due to a large sanitary sewer overflow. Upgrading these sewer systems is extremely expensive. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the total cost of repairing the combined sewer systems in America will be about $51 billion. The price tag for fixing the U.S. sanitary sewer systems hovers around $89 billion. We are talking about $140 billion. As a former mayor, I know that wet weather issues are one of the most pressing issues facing urban America. Cities are doing their best to increase capacity and upgrade facilities with the resources they have, but they need our help. Most communities with combined sewer overflow problems have fewer than 10,000 people. They cannot afford to impose more fees and taxes upon struggling residents who have borne the vast majority of costs associated with sewer overflows. If we impose a Federal mandate demanding clean water, we must follow up with the Federal ability to pay. As the spring rains loom on the horizon, we cannot let small communities throughout this country shoulder this tremendous burden alone. This bill authorizes $1.8 billion for Federal grants from the EPA over a 5-year period. Although it is only a drop in the bucket compared to what we really need, it should provide some relief to our municipalities; and it sends a signal that we really mean business this year and that we are doing that business on a bipartisan basis and that that is the only business we should be about on the important problems facing Americans. I want to wholeheartedly thank the Speaker and the majority leader and the rest of the House leadership for addressing legislation this week that will provide immeasurable benefit to communities throughout this country to help have clean, safe water for their residents. I applaud Chairman Oberstar for his leadership and wish to express my constituents' sincere gratitude for his action on this important issue. This truly has been bipartisan legislation. This is what we talk about and so infrequently implement. So I thank the minority side, the majority side, wherever that line is, who knows, and I say this is a good piece of legislation.

Mr. PASCRELL. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. It is not surprising to learn that during the Scooter Libby trial, Vice President Cheney's former communications aide, Catherine Martin, said that delivering a message on Meet the Press was a tactic we often use. By the way, within the last 10 minutes, Mr. Libby has been found guilty on four of five counts. The truth shall lead America. The truth is that the 9/11 Commission found no credible evidence of a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda and the attacks upon the United States. The epicenter of our war against terror is not Iraq but on the border of Pakistan and on the border of Afghanistan. The American people deserve the truth instead of deceptive tactics. And if this administration won't give the people the truth about this war, then this Congress will. He stated, Mr. Cheney, five separate occasions that Saddam Hussein was joined at the hip with bin Laden. He told the American people five times a lie and repeated it year after year on the same TV station. The epicenter of our war on terror is on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Chairman, the legislation we have before us today is not a debate between the interests of big business versus the interests of unions; this legislation is instead intended to serve the interests of the American worker. The Employee Free Choice Act is a bipartisan agreement that America's workers are not being served by our current system. We already know that workers who are able to unionize enjoy a higher standard of living than their nonunion counterparts and that those higher standards contribute to a stronger middle class. In fact, union workers' median weekly earnings are 30 percent higher than nonunion workers' and a full 80 percent of union workers have employer- provided health insurance while only 49 percent of nonunion workers do. Those facts are clear and so is the fact that the current NLRB election process is broken. The current system does not allow workers the ability to fairly judge for themselves if they want to join a union, instead it allows their employers to unfairly place pressure upon them to reject unionization. This is demonstrated by the fact that 75 percent of employers hire unionbusting consultants to help fight union organizing drives. It's not surprising then to learn that 25 percent of employers in organizing drives fire at least one worker for union activity and a striking 51 percent of employers threaten to close the business if the union wins the election. Under the current broken system these employers are allowed to threaten, harass and fire employees without any real consequence. The Employee Free Choice Act fixes this broken system and puts the onus back on employers to provide the American workers the rights they have so truly earned.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a very accomplished young man. Andre Dabney, a record-breaking member of Bloomfield College's basketball team, deserves our recognition for his accomplishments both on and off the court. He is certainly an inspiration to young people everywhere. A native of Plainfield, New Jersey, Andre has truly excelled at Bloomfield College. He has been named three times to the All-Central Athletic Collegiate Conference (CACC) First Team in basketball and was named CACC Player of the Year during the 2004-2005 school year. He has been recognized twice as CACC All Tournament Most Valuable Player and was the first member of the Bloomfield College basketball team to exceed 2,000 career points. Andre Dabney received honorable mentions for All American in the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 school years, and was awarded with a spot on the Pre-Season Second Team All American in the 2006-2007 school year. When not playing basketball, Andre is a strong student who has been on the Dean's List for seven of the last nine semesters. He is also an active member of the Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity. Madam Speaker, Andre Dabney is a model of achievement. He truly shows how far young people can go when they are given the opportunity to succeed. I wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors, and I know we can expect great things from him in the years to come.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 644. As a former mayor of the third largest city in New Jersey, Paterson, the first planned industrial city in the Nation and home to some of the country's oldest brownfield sites, I know this bill will be beneficial to our Nation's communities. H.R. 644 authorizes HUD to offer much-needed grants for the environmental cleanup and economic development of brownfield sites, places we drive by every day of our lives. We want to rehabilitate those sites, including inactive factories, gas stations, salvage yards, abandoned warehouses. This bill also makes brownfield-related environmental cleanup and economic development activities eligible for Community Development Block Grants assistance. These sites drive down property values, provide little or no tax revenue, and contribute to community blight. Since the inception of brownfield programs, Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government has allocated over $800 million in brownfield assessment and cleanup funds. In addition, this investment has leveraged over $8 billion in cleanup and redevelopment dollars, a better than 10 to 1 return on investment. It has resulted in the assessment of more than 8,000 properties and helped create over 37,000 jobs. It is a winner. This is because the EPA and HUD grants work in conjunction with funds that come from both the State and local governments, and of course private sources, to address cleanup of brownfield sites. If we don't do this, those sites will remain abandoned and barren for years ahead of us. This is an exciting time in the brownfields marketplace. Federal brownfields programs have provided the foundation on which State initiatives have flourished. Throughout the country, there are thousands of abandoned structures that were once thriving businesses, often part of large industrial centers. Economic development matched with environmental cleanup has resulted in the rebirth of many industrial and commercial properties and surrounding neighborhoods. Anyone who cares about our Nation's cities celebrates these successes. HUD's particular expertise in incorporating brownfields remediation into a larger strategy for economic development and community revitalization is essential to the success we have had and will continue to have in the future. This is a stimulant to the economy, a real stimulant. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this very worthwhile legislation.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. I thank the chairman and ranking member. I really commend the work that you have done, both Mr. Thompson and Mr. King, in this area of reaching across the aisle and not just speaking about it, but doing something about it. This is a very important piece of legislation, H.R. 884. It has been a product of bipartisan effort and collegial dedication by a lot of people on both sides of the aisle, the staffs of both sides of the aisle, and I am heartened at the process by which the bill has moved forward. The commitment of Mr. Thompson and Mr. King to this vitally important legislation has been unwavering, and the collaboration offered epitomizes the very best of what the homeland security can and should be. I was honored to serve on that committee for 4 years, and this is a tremendous achievement to see this proposal move forward. This legislation will help to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security works with our allies in the war on terror to develop and share the best homeland security technologies possible, and we will all be better off because of it. In fact, it was not that long ago that several of us went to Europe, to various capitals of Europe, to see what they were doing in terms of homeland security. That proved to be a very productive trip, and we learned from the Brits and from the Spanish and from the Italians, and they learned from us. This is a true collaboration here. Specifically, H.R. 884 will establish what we call the Science and Technology Homeland Security International Cooperative Programs Office. Its objective will be to facilitate international cooperative activities throughout the Directorate of Science and Technology within the Department of Homeland Security. These international cooperative activities will be supported through grants and cooperative agreements, contracts with the U.S. governmental organizations, businesses, federally-funded research and developmental centers, institutions of higher education, and foreign public and private entities. This bill seeks to strengthen ongoing partnerships, as well as encourage new ones. As has been mentioned by both the chairman and the ranking member, the global war on terrorism is one we have joined with with Israel and the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and Singapore and many other countries. To be sure, the United States could greatly benefit from joint international homeland security development programs between the U.S. and our allies in this war on terror. The fact is this: Many of our allies have substantial experience dealing with terror, and by necessity, they have become op-eds for counterterrorism research. The bill would authorize $25 million for international cooperative activities for each of the fiscal years of 2008 to 2011. Now, that is not a lot of money when we consider the vast array of benefits that such cooperative agreements can produce. Forming these partnerships, Mr. Speaker, and working together in a way that will ultimately help secure America is the main objective of the bill, and it should always be the main objective of this whole body. Passage of this legislation today shows that the House takes this austere responsibility seriously. A final point, Mr. Speaker, if I may, the point of global strategy was at the center of the 9/11 Commission Report, Chapter 12. The Commission made recommendations about global strategy. The kind of partnership and cooperation at the heart of our port security, for instance, is determined by how well the other country where goods and services are coming from will cooperate with us. We can't check every ship that comes into our ports, but we certainly could get the cooperation of other countries with state-of-the-art science and technology to do that. Once again, I commend, and I do not speak empty or hollow of the work that both Mr. Thompson and Mr. King did.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, the Wall Street Journal accused us of trying to micromanage this war. Well, this President has not listened to the generals. He hasn't listened to the American people. And he hasn't listened to the Iraqi people. He has micromanaged this failure. Four and a half years ago, Madam Speaker, on this floor I stood in this Chamber, along with 295 of my colleagues, to support the resolution authorizing the President to attack Iraq. I regret that vote deeply. And I told my constituents in my district 1\1/2\ years ago that I made a mistake. Down the street they make no mistakes. They are infallible. I did so because the premise on which we authorized this war was false, the military plan for victory has been weak, and more than 5 years later, this war has made our Nation less safe. We stand ready to vote on a different resolution that could take a significant step towards remedying the historic mistake we made in October of 2002. The troop escalation advocated by President Bush will only widen our involvement in this conflict and put more brave American troops in the middle of a vicious civil war. Voting in favor of the President's escalation plan is an historic error, and I stress the historic nature of this debate because I am a firm believer that history is telling of the future. The history of this war shows that this President cannot form the right policy for victory. He should have sent additional troops in 2003 when the generals asked him to do that, when it was possible to restore order in Baghdad, instead of now in 2007 when violence reigns supreme. The history of Iraq shows it has been wracked by sectarian and ethnic division long before it was even a state, a fact conveniently ignored by this President and his supporters on their march to Baghdad. Remember, Iran and Syria and others are possibly fighting a proxy war by supplying insurgents against an unpopular foreign occupier, the same role that we played in helping the Afghans to fight the Soviets 20 years ago; and we know how that conflict turned out. In history I see the lessons, Madam Speaker. As I speak today, in 280 B.C. when King Pyrrhus of Greece defeated the Romans during the Pyrrhic War, his army suffered irreplaceable casualties in battle. And when he was congratulated on his victory, he replied: ``Another such victory like that over the Romans and we are undone.'' We have heard the word ``success'' and we have heard the word ``victory'' so many times that they are now as pyrrhic, empty, fleeting, hollow. The lesson is clear. The President's escalation plan offers an illusion, when only the real hope is that it offers a Pyrrhic victory at best. Our Armed Forces have been used, abused, refused and accused. They have been overstretched. They were ill-equipped from the very beginning. Don't tell us we don't support the troops, when you did not give what they deserved in the field of battle. Our military readiness to fight the ongoing war on terror is now in serious doubt because of this war. Don't question our patriotism. Don't question our support or the American people's. Listen. By the way, Madam Speaker, have we asked the Iraqis what they feel? Well, 80 percent of them want us out. Don't they count? Can't we ask and listen to at least the very people whose country we occupy, this sovereign nation? This is unbelievable. It is illusionary at best. And what will we say to these Iraqi people? I want to hear the answer from the other side. What is your answer for them when they say, Don't stay here, and certainly don't escalate. I ask the loyal opposition to our resolution to tell the American people how much do the intentions of the Iraqi people really matter to you? The epicenter of our fight against terror is on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Many of us have been there. Many of us have gone there. You have forgotten that part of the world, which many did not even know on September 11, 2001, where Afghanistan was in the first place. The clear message we send to the Iraqi people and the American people is that we will bring freedom to Iraq, even if it takes the blood of every Iraqi and the lives of more American soldiers. That is not good enough. That is not acceptable. You have heard the statistics from speaker after speaker. Previous escalations in this war have not worked. Why will this one work? Our ill-fated presence in Iraq is being used as a propaganda tool for the enemy, al Quaeda, and other terrorists worldwide.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, February 19, we will mark the 65th anniversary of the signing of Executive Order 9066 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. This resolution authorized the internment of over one hundred thousand American citizens and legal resident aliens of Japanese, German, and Italian ancestry. At the hands of our government, Japanese, German, and Italian citizens suffered grievous violations of their civil liberties. These war-time measures were far- reaching, uprooting entire communities and targeting citizens as well as resident aliens. Although the greatest numbers of those impacted by Executive Order 9066 were Japanese-Americans, little is known about the impact of the measure on Italian and German- Americans. Like Japanese-Americans, Italian and German-Americans were branded ``enemy aliens'' and were required to carry identification cards, saddled with travel restrictions, had their personal property seized, and placed in internment. For example, 3,200 resident aliens of Italian background were arrested and more than 300 of them were interned. About 11,000 German residents--including some naturalized citizens--were arrested and more than 5,000 were interned. Executive Order 9066 was finally rescinded by Gerald Ford on April 19, 1976 and in 1983, the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians (CWRIC) concluded that the incarceration of Japanese-Americans had not been justified by military necessity. Rather, the report determined that the decision to incarcerate was based on ``race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.'' The Civil Liberties Act of 1988, based on the CWRIC recommendations, was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan and an appropriations bill authorizing reparations to be paid between 1990 and 1998 was signed by George H.W. Bush in 1989. Finally, in 1990, surviving internees began to receive individual redress payments and a letter of apology. Through these acts, our government has attempted to make amends, yet the initial effects of Executive Order 9066 remain in the hearts and minds of many Americans. Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the Congressional Italian-American Delegation, I fully support H. Res. 122, which would effectively recognize the significance of the 65th anniversary of Executive Order 9066 and support the goals of the Japanese-American, German-American, and Italian-American communities in recognizing a National Day of Remembrance. This bill will go a long way in helping to increase public awareness of the events surrounding the restriction, exclusion, and internment of individuals and families during World War II, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I am very, very concerned. President Bush initially wanted the authority in the October 16, 2002 Act of War to use force to restore peace and security in the region, not just Iraq. We rejected that. The Congress of the United States, Mr. Speaker, rejected that and said no. The exercise of the authority granted in the resolution, read the resolution, is conditioned on the President certifying that war in Iraq would not harm the war on terrorism. We will make a point of that over the next 3 days. Iran has an oppressive economy. We must understand Iranian culture in order not to make the same mistakes we made in Iraq. Ethnically, Iranians are of Indo-European descent and have no kinship to their neighbors in the Middle East. Their language is Indo-European, with grammar and structure similar to classical Latin. They do not identify with Arabs. We do not understand the Middle East. We made that mistake once, we should not make that mistake again.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. President Bush says that he is going forward with his plan for a troop surge in Iraq regardless of what the Congress does and what the American people want. But Senator Specter was right when he said yesterday that the President is not the sole decider, that the future of this war is a joint and shared responsibility with this Congress. It is time the President realizes that Congress will no longer be asleep at the wheel while this war rages on. You need only to read the Constitution to know that Congress has the power to decide the direction of this war. The Constitution gives Congress an array of war powers, including the power to declare war, to raise and support armies and make rules concerning captures on land and water. The Framers knew what they were doing in checks and balances. They intended that, by giving Congress the power to declare war, they had the authority to make decisions about the war's scope and duration. Now is not the time for a troop surge. Now is the time for a real plan in Iraq. The Murtha Plan, which I support, stipulates a diplomatic surge instead of a troop surge. It is time for President Bush to realize that we all support our brave troops, but America does not support the war.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, I would like to call to your attention to a man I am proud to recognize, His Excellency Lazar Elenovski, Minister of Defense of the Republic of Macedonia, on the occasion of his visit to the United States. It is only fitting that he be honored in this, the permanent record of the greatest freely elected body on earth, for he has a long history of dedication and commitment to international relations. Minister Elenovski was born in 1971 in Skopje, Macedonia, and went on to graduate from the Faculty of Economy at Ss. Cyril and Methodius University. A member of the New Social Democratic Party of Macedonia, a part of the coalition government, he was appointed Minister of Defense in August 2006. Minister Elenovski has long been a great advocate for Atlanticism in Macedonia. He worked to promote and implement the Euro-Atlantic idea and values in Macedonian society in the early 1990s. This effort culminated in his founding of Young Europeans for Security (YES) in 1995. He was also one of the founders of the Social Democratic Youth of Macedenia (SDYM), and served as its Secretary General from 1996-1999, and then as its president until 2001. He was a member of the Presidency of the Social Demecratic Union of Macedenia from 1997 until 2003. He is a signer of the Protocol for Cooperation between the SDYM and PASOK Youth in Athens in 2001. Between 2001 and 2005, Minister Elenovski served as Secretary General of the Euro-Atlantic Club of Macedonia, and in late 2005, was elected President of the Euro-Atlantic Council of Macedonia, a member of the Atlantic Treaty Association. During this time he was also Deputy LEO of Public Transport in Skopje. He has implemented many initiatives for the support of NATO and EU integration projects in his nation, for the civilization values of Atlanticism, and notably for the democratic development of Macedenia. In May of 2004, he initiated and served as a signatory of the Declaration for Euro-Atlantic Partnership and Cooperation between the Atlantic Associations of Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia. He is also a founder of the Central and South Eastern European Security Forum-Balkan Mosaic. Minister Elenovski is known as an advocate for regional cooperation and integration. Along with civil and local authorities, he has worked on many regional and international projects which strengthened regional cooperation, and improved the security and stability of the nation and region. Madam Speaker, I ask that you join our colleagues, Minister Elenovski's friends, and me in recognizing the outstanding achievements of a true leader, the Minister of Defense of the Republic of Macedonia, Lazar Elenovski.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, 7 years ago this month, Seton Hall University in South Orange, NJ, suffered a horrible tragedy, as a fire ripped through one of its residence halls. That fire killed 3 young freshmen and wounded 58 other students. Unfortunately, campus fires have become all too common. Each year, thousands of fires rage through the campuses and off-campus housing of our colleges and universities. Since January 2000, almost 100 people have died in campus-related fires across the country. In 2006 alone, 12 people were killed. Last week, I was proud to reintroduce the Campus Fire Safety Right to Know Act of 2007, H.R. 592, in response to this problem. This bill is widely supported, and has garnered 28 bipartisan cosponsors to date. Senator Frank Lautenberg has also introduced companion legislation in the Senate, S. 354. This landmark legislation calls for colleges and universities to report vital fire safety information to the U.S. Department of Education. This will allow prospective students and their parents to make informed decisions regarding a fire-safe school based on criteria such as the installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems, automatic fire alarm systems, fire prevention training and other related factors. The Campus Fire Safety Right to Know Act does not mandate upgrades; it simply requires schools to collect and report data crucial to the safety and well-being of students and other residents. The fact that this legislation was passed by the House of Representatives in the 109th Congress was due, in no small part, to the tremendous support provided by leading fire safety organizations. These and other organizations have joined with me once again to support this vital legislation in order to protect our students on campuses across the Nation. They are working tirelessly every day to improve fire safety for our citizens, and I want to recognize and commend them for their support and their leadership. These fourteen organizations include Campus Firewatch, The Center for Campus Fire Safety, the Congressional Fire Services Institute, the International Fire Chiefs Association, the International Association of Fire Fighters, the International Code Council, the International Fire Marshals Association, the National Association of State Fire Marshals, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, the National Fire Protection Association, the National Fire Sprinkler Association, the National Volunteer Fire Council, the Society of Fire Protection Engineers, and Underwriters Laboratories. Madam Speaker, I urge Congress to act now on this important legislation so that we may ensure a safe school environment for all college and university students. When we entrust our children to any institution, we expect that they will be in a safe environment. And we have the right to expect that much.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, last week I was proud to introduce the Water Quality Investment Act of 2007, along with original cosponsors Congressmen Dave Camp and Mike Capuano. This bipartisan legislation authorizes a $3 billion grant program over 6 years to control combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows. A combined sewer is a type of sewer system which provides partially separated channels for sanitary sewage and stormwater runoff. This allows the sanitary sewer system to provide backup capacity for the runoff sewer when runoff volumes are unusually high, but it is an antiquated system that is vulnerable to overflow during peak rainfall events. These overflows, called combined sewer overflows, CSOs, contain stormwater and untreated human and industrial waste, toxic materials, and debris that are very harmful to human health. Combined sewer systems serve roughly 772 American communities containing about 40 million people. My home state of New Jersey has 31 combined sewer systems, with over 200 discharge points throughout the state. The EPA estimates that about 850 billion gallons of untreated wastewater and storm water are released as CSOs each year in the United States. Because CSOs contain raw sewage along with large volumes of storm water and contribute pathogens, solids, debris, and toxic pollutants to receiving waters, CSOs can create significant public health and water quality concerns. CSOs have contributed to beach closures, shellfish bed closures, contamination of drinking water supplies, and other environmental and public health concerns. A sanitary sewer overflow, SSO, occurs when raw sewage from municipal sanitary sewers unintentionally discharges, polluting our waters and backing up into basements. SSOs can be attributed to severe weather, vandalism, and a variety of other causes. The EPA estimates that there are at least 40,000 SSOs every year. In 2003, New Jersey closed over 30,000 acres of classified shellfish growing areas in the Raritan Bay area due to a large SSO. Upgrading these systems is extremely expensive. The EPA estimates that the total cost of repairing the country's combined sewer systems is nearly $51 billion; the price tag for fixing U.S. sanitary sewer systems hovers around $89 billion. As the former mayor of Paterson, New Jersey, I fully understand the fiscal challenge that many municipalities face in meeting state and federal environmental standards. Many states find building or improving sewer infrastructure financially impossible without aid from the federal government. The Water Quality Investment Act of 2007 will help to alleviate this financial burden, so that municipalities are able to mitigate the harmful effects of CSOs and SSOs. Madam Speaker, I urge Congress to enact this important legislation, so that we may help our communities provide a cleaner, safer environment for their citizens.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, this legislation, H.R. 6, begins the process of weaning off of corporate welfare. This is the beginning of it, so you had better get used to it. I am very shocked to hear what the opponents are saying to this legislation. Ensuring that oil companies actually pay their fair share in royalties is reasonable and prudent. Why isn't this welfare looked at as our tax money that we provide for these corporations? They don't need it. You know it, and I know it. This bill will ultimately repeal approximately $14 billion in oil subsidies given to big oil companies and, most importantly, invest those funds, because the question has been asked on the other side, will this wind up in a slush fund. They cavalierly talk about that. Specifically, if you read the bill, these funds will go to clean renewable energy and energy-efficient programs. This is critical. The bill creates the Strategic Energy Efficiency and Renewables Reserve, which will help accelerate the use of clean, domestic renewable energy resources, thereby reducing our dependence on foreign oil. And the case has been made over and over and over again this afternoon. This is the beginning of real security for our country, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for gathering support from both sides of the aisle. To those who have said this is a Pyrrhic victory, I ask them to look at the record here. This is a victory for undergraduates and future undergraduates. What I also hear on the other side is that, perhaps, why are we waiting till students get out of school, why don't we do something about the tuition in school? We believe, most of us, on both sides of the aisle, in the free market. You certainly aren't suggesting that we inject ourselves in what colleges charge as tuition. I don't think that is what you mean. But I don't know what you mean. What I do know is what I have heard on the other side of the aisle from too many that defend the lenders and not college students. I am the first member of my family to have the opportunity to go to college. I am a strong believer in the importance of higher education, like many in this room today. Our success in educating today's generation of students will have a striking and lasting impact on the Nation's success. According to the Department of Education, financial concerns will prevent 4.4 million high school graduates from attending a 4-year college. That is not acceptable to anybody here. It will prevent another 2 million high school graduates from attending college at all at any time. That is not acceptable either. As tuition and fees at 4-year public colleges and universities have risen 41 percent, after inflation, since 2001, the typical student now graduates with an enormous $17,500 in total Federal debt. Besides what we are doing on interest rates, we will be working in the future, down the road, consolidating these debts, providing some loan flexibility within this program and loan forgiveness for many public service employees who give their lives and put their lives on the line today. In my home State of New Jersey, the College Student Relief Act will save students an average of $2,370 on interest payments over the life of their loan if the student starts school this September. And if the student starts school in 2011, he or she will save $4,600 over the life of the loan. This is not theory, this is not empty. This is substantial.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I am astonished today. It is only government interference when the little guy gets some help from the government. It is not government interference when corporations get subsidies and royalties from taxpayers. That is a different story. Well, it is a different story after November 7. This legislation will require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate lower drug prices on behalf of those who enroll in the Medicare prescription drug plans. The current Medicare prescription drug law explicitly prohibits the Secretary from using the market power. The former Secretary wished he had it, under the Bush administration, this power for the 43 million beneficiaries. This power is splintered now among numerous private plans, and we have headed down the slippery slope of privatization of what were guaranteed benefits at one time. The prices charged by Medicare plans are rising more than twice the rate of overall inflation, and many beneficiaries are seeing substantial premium increases, some as much as six-fold. During the first 6 months of the program, the price for brand-name drugs rose 6.3 percent. For an average senior who relies on four drugs a day, this translates into an increase of 30 percent in prescription drug therapy for 1 year. The simple fact is that part D is doing nothing to truly control the high cost of prescription drugs. In the past year, the average price of 20 top-selling prescription drugs rose 3.8 percent. Following suit, the average private plan price increased 3.7 percent. That means even with part D, Medicare beneficiaries still foot the entire bill for escalating drug prices.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support all the efforts to encourage responsible research in this area. Indeed, I think it is a moral imperative for the Congress to pursue all prudent policies for the benefit of our people. I want to commend both the manager and all of the other managers on both sides of the aisle, because they have not shrunk from addressing the moral issues here, which are very, very important to the whole issue. I am not afraid of those issues, I want you to know, Mr. Speaker, at all. Even as a Christian, I say this: The principle of double effect is in play here. More good will come out of this, the saving of many lives. I think this is critical. If we are afraid to face the moral issues, then we should not have presented this bill in the first place. That is why I want to commend the sponsors. This is not inherently wrong. It is not intended to be wrong. The good effort and result may not be a direct casual result. Finally, the good result must be proportionate to the bad result. Prudence and reflection are critical here, and I want to address this, and the debate should be on a moral plane. There is nothing wrong with that, that we debate this issue. But the moral correctness of this thing isn't all on one side, I want everybody to understand that. Thomas Aquinas laid out the principles of double effect. It is absolutely inherent in this particular issue. I say support H.R. 3, and, again, I commend the moral fortitude of all the sponsors of this legislation.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman. He has put together legislation that should be commended. It is the right thing, the fair thing to do to vote for this legislation today. The Congress will finally take care of our working class brothers and sisters. I must say, though, that the gentlewoman from Tennessee and the gentleman from Idaho had better get their economics straight. In their logic, we should reduce the minimum wage so we will produce more jobs. If that makes any sense, you are really off the reservation. My friends, this is an opportunity for us to put aside politics and get to the heart of the issue. At $5.15 an hour, a full-time minimum wage worker brings home $10,712. How could anyone live on that sum in this day and age? We all know that, since 2000, the costs of health insurance and gasoline and home heating and attending college have skyrocketed to the tune of almost $5,000 annually. Clearly an untenable situation for American workers. And just this week Northeastern University put out this report, an increase of productivity for the American worker of 17 percent and an increase in wages of 1 percent. The little guy is going to get help from this Congress, and you had better get that straight, to all of the folks on both sides of the aisle. The little guy is not going to be forgotten any longer. This is an important piece of legislation. Raising the minimum wage today will provide an additional $4,400 a year for a family of three, equaling 15 months of groceries. That is good enough for me.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure today to introduce the Paterson Great Falls National Park Act of 2007. This bipartisan legislation is cosponsored by every Member of the New Jersey Congressional delegation, and would designate a National Park at the majestic Great Falls in Paterson, New Jersey. I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation as soon as possible. Fifteen miles west of New York City, the Great Falls was the second largest waterfall in colonial America. No other natural wonder in America has played such an important role in our Nation's historic quest for freedom and prosperity. At the Great Falls, Alexander Hamilton conceived and implemented a plan to harness the force of water to power the new industries that would secure our economic independence. Hamilton told Congress and the American people that at the Great Falls he would begin implementation of his ambitious strategy to transform a rural agrarian society dependent upon slavery into a modem economy based on freedom. True to Hamilton's vision, Paterson became a great manufacturing city, producing the Colt revolver, the first submarine, the aircraft engine for the first trans-Atlantic flight, more locomotives than any city in the Nation, and more silk than any city in the world. New Jersey's Great Falls is the only National Historic District that includes both a National Natural Resource and a National Historic Landmark. In a special Bicentennial speech in Paterson with the spectacular natural beauty of the Great Falls in the background, the late President Gerald R. Ford said, ``We can see the Great Falls as a symbol of the industrial might which helps to make America the most powerful nation in the world.'' Preeminent Hamilton biographers; an esteemed former Smithsonian Institution curator, the former chief of the National Park Service Historic American Engineering Record, and distinguished professors at Yale, Princeton, Harvard, NYU, Brown and other universities have filed letters with the National Park Service strongly recommending a National Historical Park for the Great Falls Historic District. Editorial boards, federal, state, and local officials and community groups have also endorsed the campaign to award a National Park Service designation to the Falls. Scholars have concluded that Pierre L'Enfant's innovative water power system in Paterson, and many factories built later, constitute the finest remaining collection of engineering and architectural structures representing each stage of America's progress from a weak agrarian society to a leader in the global economy. It is a little known fact that L'Enfant was hired by Hamilton to create Paterson as the sister city to Washington, DC, having completed his plan of Washington only months before arriving in Paterson. This proposed National Park would also encompass historic Hinchliffe Stadium, which was added to the National Register of Historic Places by the National Park Service in 2004. This stadium, built in 1932, is adjacent to the Great Falls and was home to the New York Black Yankees. Baseball legend Larry Doby played in Hinchliffe Stadium both as a star high school athlete and again as a Negro League player, shortly before becoming the first African-American to play in the American League. Madam Speaker, Congress must act now to pass this vital piece of legislation, so that we may fully recognize these cultural and historic landmarks that have played such a seminal role in America's history.