Nancy Pelosi

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and I thank her for her leadership on this very important matter. I want to join Congresswoman Millender-McDonald in applauding the Speaker for making this accommodation so the legislation could move quickly and be enacted into law and that the statue hopefully soon will be standing in Statuary Hall and so that this law can be passed in time for the 50th anniversary of Rosa Parks' courageous action which occurs in December. I want to join Congresswoman Millender-McDonald in commending the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) as well and our distinguished colleague, Mr. Jesse Jackson, Jr., who was the author of this legislation. By the time we all got to Rosa Parks funeral, we already had over 100 cosponsors of the bill and this action tonight will deliver on the promise that many of us made at that funeral. I considered it a great privilege to speak there. On behalf of the Democrats and the Republicans in the Congress, I said that we would soon have a promised statue in the Capitol. Congressman John Conyers of Detroit has been a godfather to all of this effort and he deserves a great deal of recognition and credit for this. I said at the time that Rosa Parks loved young people. That was her focus. While we were all praising her for her past actions, she was always concerned about the impact on the future for America's children. She was the mother of the modern civil rights movement. She was the mother of modern society because she made such a change in America with her courage. She came to the Capitol to receive the Congressional Gold Medal. It was a proud day for all of us. She brought luster to that award by accepting it. She came here, as was mentioned, to lie in state, the first woman to lie in state in the Rotunda of the Capitol and she will return to the Capitol in a statue to be an ongoing inspiration. We in Congress think we have a special relationship with Rosa Parks. She will live here with us as a constant inspiration of her courage and inspiration to future generations. When they visit the Capitol they will be sure to see, observe and be inspired by the life, the courage and the incredible contribution of Rosa Parks. I commend all of my colleagues, Congresswoman Millender-McDonald, Congressman Conyers, and Congressman Jackson for their role in making this possible. It is an honor to be part of this effort. I look forward to the day when all of us can converge on this Capitol for the unveiling of this magnificent statue.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to join my colleagues in paying tribute to our former colleague and friend, Congressman Ed Roybal. Many people who are in Congress now did not have the privilege of serving with him. They serve with his very distinguished daughter, Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard, but the legacy lives on. I wish everyone in this Congress could have seen the outpouring of love and support and devotion to Ed Roybal at his magnificent funeral at the Catholic Cathedral in Los Angeles. We know how respected Ed Roybal is in this body. It was wonderful to see the love of the people he was closest to in California. Many of us went there, and we told his many friends and his family and those close to him of the respect in which he was held here. Mr. Speaker, I knew Ed Roybal very well for many years. I was a big fan of his when he was doing work with the farm workers organizing in California. He was a legend in our State. And then he continued his leadership for our country in the Congress of the United States. When I was first named to the Appropriations Committee, Ed Roybal was my chairman. We were in the majority at the time. He was my chairman on the Treasury Postal Subcommittee. So, on a daily basis, I saw firsthand his command of the policy, of the issues, the power of his advocacy and his determination to help all Americans. Ed Roybal had no time for government of the few. He was about the many. When others in Washington turned their backs on seniors, the disadvantaged, and the poor, Ed Roybal was there. He was the first Member of Congress to appropriate funds for HIV/AIDS, and that sounds very remarkable and commendable now. It was very courageous at the time. He then was a leader. He fought the good fight with courage. He had a special grace about him and a dignity and a twinkle in his eye. In recognition of his leadership on public health, the Campus of the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta was named in his honor. Ed Roybal probably has more buildings in California named for him than any other politician ever in California. But at the CDC, at the Centers for Disease Control, they named an entire campus for him, if that gives Members any idea of the respect and the gratitude that they felt for Ed Roybal. Fiercely proud of his Hispanic roots and deeply patriotic, the two went hand in hand. Ed Roybal loved America. He helped found the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Caucus's Institute and embarked on a mission to provide scholarships to needy Latino children and expand opportunities for all Americans. Through his work as founder emeritus of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, he contributed to the advancement of Latino political power first in Southern California and then in the Nation. Hundreds of Latino elected officials have since followed in his footsteps, all knowing that they stand on his shoulders. By his courage and his determination to open the doors to minorities, Latinos have become much more active in politics and all facets of American society. Indeed, in our State of California, we are now a minority majority State, so we see regularly and firsthand the magnificent contribution of the Latino community to our great country, and Ed Roybal was very much a part of facilitating all of that. As I said, Mr. Speaker, Eddie Roybal loved his country and he loved his family, speaking with pride of them every day that he served here. Tonight we bring the deepest sympathy of this Congress in which he led and served and indeed the sympathy of our entire country to the family he loved, he adored. I hope it is a comfort to Ms. Roybal-Allard's beautiful mother, Lucille, her name is Lucille as well, and his three children, our colleague Lucille, her sister Lillian and Ed, Jr., that so many people mourn their loss and are praying for them at this sad time. With the life and leadership of Ed Roybal, God truly blessed America.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the many years of service of House parliamentarian, Muftiah McCartin, who completes her excellent work in this body later this week. Ms. McCartin joined the Parliamentarian's office in 1976, and has served during the tenure of six Speakers of the House, and six Presidents. In 1991, she became the first woman to be appointed a Parliamentarian. As someone who understands the importance of breaking glass ceilings, I am particularly honored to acknowledge her outstanding work. Muftiah has always had a wonderful smile and a warm demeanor on the House floor. As we know, it can get pretty heated in debate and very partisan. But Muftiah has always been a calm and rationale presence to Members of both sides of the aisle and their staff who seek parliamentary advice. She has brought a keen mind, and a clear understanding of House rules that has served this institution very well. In addition to the long, grueling hours that she has spent on the House floor, Muftiah McCartin has managed to raise four wonderful children: Marissa, Elaine, Sandra, and Luke. I'm sure she will welcome spending the extra time with her family and her husband, Terry. Muftiah, today we thank you for your service to this great institution and wish you the very best. You have been a tremendous asset to the work that we do every day. And we will miss you. Thank you again for your many years of commitment toward making this House of Representatives a better place.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for her leadership on this bill which is so important to the City of San Francisco but, more importantly, to our country because it is part of our country's history. I want to extend my gratitude as well to my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle who have made this a very bipartisan effort. As was indicated by the gentlewoman from New York, we have 291 co-sponsors. That is why we were able to come to the floor. I thank Members so much for their help. I am proud to rise in support of the San Francisco Old Mint Commemorative Coin Act, my bill to authorize the issuance of commemorative coins in 2006 honoring San Francisco's Old Mint. As you know, Mr. Speaker, that was the year of the great earthquake in California, so the history is very meaningful to our area. H.R. 1953 will help ensure that this building exists for many generations to come. Congress established the San Francisco Old Mint, as others have referenced, in 1852. This was immediately following the Gold Rush in 1849, and it was affectionately known as the Granite Lady. The Mint is the oldest stone structure in San Francisco. Its architect, A.B. Mullet, also designed the United States Treasury Building, and we all know how beautiful that is, and the Old Executive Office Building here in Washington, D.C. In 1906, disaster struck the City of San Francisco in the great earthquake of that year; and next year will be the 100th anniversary of the earthquake that leveled much of San Francisco. With infrastructure destroyed and lines of communication severed, the city was unable to respond when a subsequent fire spread to anything that would burn. The blaze raged for more than 3 days and destroyed more than 28,000 buildings. More than 3,000 people died and more than 225,000 lost their homes. This was a huge number considering the population of San Francisco at the time. Yet, as much of the city crumbled in one of the worst natural disasters in our Nation's history, the Granite Lady stood strong. Mullet's architecture let the Mint float on its foundation, allowing it to survive the earthquake and the fire. Treasury Department employees worked with the United States Army with only one hose connected to two wells on the property to save this building and the $200 million in gold that was stored in its vaults. It was the only functional financial institution after the quake in San Francisco and was used as a relief fund treasury. The coin's 2006 issuance, 100 years later, will honor the Mint and its role in San Francisco's recovery. The Old Mint operated until 1937. It played a pivotal role in the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad and the economic development of the western United States. At one time, the Granite Lady produced more than half of the United States coinage; and by 1934 it held a third of the Nation's gold supply. The Mint produced many rare coins, some worth more than $1 million, Mr. Speaker. Coins minted in San Francisco bear the S mint mark, which is very significant. In 1961, the Mint was designated a National Historic Landmark but slowly fell into disrepair, to be closed in 1994 due to structural concerns. Since that time, I have worked with our two senators, Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer, to give the recognition to the Old Mint, the Granite Lady, that she deserved. The National Trust For Historic Preservation lists the Mint as one of the most endangered American structures. Today, with this bill, we can help declare the Old Mint endangered no longer. The American Numismatic Association has partnered with the City of San Francisco and the City of San Francisco Museum and Historical Society to establish a special coin museum. When completed, the Mint will be one of the Nation's largest museums devoted to telling the story of our country's coinage from colonial times up to the present. Along with our rich history comes a responsibility to preserve and protect it for future generations. I am very, very proud of the history that the Old Mint, the Old Granite Lady, represents. It is about the founding of our city in San Francisco in Gold Rush times. The Mint almost corresponds to that date, and it has been part of our history and that of our country ever since. I urge my colleagues to join us in commemorating the 100th anniversary of the 1906 earthquake and fire and to honor the landmark of national significance with a vote for H.R. 1953. Again, I thank our colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, for their cooperation on this bill which is very important to our country's history.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, because the Republican-led Congress has not conducted any investigations of abuses by the Republican administration's decision to go to war in Iraq, and because the over 2,000 American soldiers have lost their lives and more than 15,000 have been wounded, therefore, pursuant to rule IX, I rise in regard to a question of privileges of the House, and I offer a privileged resolution.

Ms. PELOSI. Yes, I do, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I do not hear an objection to my motion.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate some of what I said in the motion to instruct. For the past 2\1/2\ years since our country has gone to war, we have paid a big price for a bad policy based on faulty intelligence which was wrong, based on a false premise without proper planning and putting our young people at risk. In that period of time, that 2\1/2\ years, over 2,000 Americans have lost their lives. Every single one of them is precious to us, but, as the toll mounts, the grief does as well. Over 15,000 of our young people have lost their limbs, 15,000 have been injured, many of them permanently, many with loss of limb and sight, at a cost of over $250 billion, a quarter of a trillion dollars, to the taxpayer and just endless cost to our reputation in the world. I think it begs the question, are we safer in America because of this war? What is this war doing to the preparedness of our troops? I think that the answer to both of those is negative, and I think it calls for an examination of what the intelligence was to get us there in the first place. Was it manipulated? Why was there no plan for us to go into Iraq, a post-war plan for after the fall of Iraq, as well as an exit strategy? The American people love freedom for ourselves and for people throughout the world, but we have to examine what the cost of this war is and why even the Republican Department of Defense has said----

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thought there was no objection and that we were just speaking on the resolution. Is that a mistake? My impression from what you said when you yielded to me was that there was no objection, and did I wish to speak on the motion.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, then I will just conclude by saying, can the Chair please explain why it is not in order to discuss on the floor of this House, of this great democratic institution, a situation where our young people are in harm's way, the death toll mounts, the injuries mount, the cost to the taxpayer mounts, the cost to our reputation mounts, and we have a cover-up Congress that will not investigate, will not ask any questions about the intelligence which was wrong, which got us into war in the first place and the lack of a plan providing for our troops, what they need to serve and to come home safely and soon? Why is that not in order on the floor of the House?

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I think it brings shame to the House for this Congress to be engaged in a cover-up when it comes to reviewing what is happening in Iraq, and I appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, is it not appropriate for a Member to speak on a point of order? Is it not appropriate for the gentleman from Wisconsin to be able to speak on a point of order that was lodged by the other side?

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding and for his leadership on this issue. I am pleased to join the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) in saluting our troops. Wherever they are serving, at home or abroad, we owe them a deep debt of gratitude for their courage, for their patriotism, for the sacrifices they are willing to make for our country. We are very, very proud of them, and when they come home, we want to honor their service by giving them what they need as veterans, and those needs will be large. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the motion to instruct offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey). We must provide those we send in to fight in Iraq with everything they need to serve, to keep them safe and so that they can return as safe as possible. It is tragic that more than 2\1/2\ years after the invasion of Iraq, that long a time, we are still encountering such appalling needs in the area of force protection. History will not treat kindly those who embarked on a war of choice without making sure that our troops were properly equipped. Not enough body armor, not enough jammers for protection against explosive devices, not enough armored vehicles, not enough overhead cover systems, the list goes on and on. Once again, Congress must deal with the consequences of the Bush administration's bad planning. We have had to do it before in the appropriations bills, and we are doing it here today with the gentleman from Wisconsin's motion to instruct. Congress has a responsibility to find out why so many things about Iraq have gone so terribly wrong. This Republican cover-up Congress has never lived up to the oversight responsibility to ask the questions. One of the essential elements of the force protection, for example, is good intelligence. Our Nation spends billions of dollars each year on intelligence programs and activities, and when they do not produce timely and reliable intelligence, we make the American people less safe, and Congress has a duty to find out why. The intelligence used as the justification for the administration's decision to go into war in Iraq was wrong. That Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, that was wrong. I said at the time that the intelligence did not support the threat that the administration was describing, but, nonetheless, the intelligence that they were using was wrong. Given the enormous consequences of that decision, more than 2,000 American soldiers have been killed; more than 15,000 wounded, many of them permanently; more than a quarter of a trillion dollars spent; and enormous damage done to the reputation of the United States in the eyes of the world. The cost of lives and limbs and taxpayer dollars and reputation is enormous. Congress has an obligation to identify and correct the problems that led to the production of false intelligence. Our troops are at risk until that is done; and yet, as we address other force protection issues, there is no sense of urgency to undertake a thorough review of what went wrong with the intelligence. Neither the issue of the quality of the intelligence nor the equally important issue of whether intelligence was politicized have been investigated by this Congress. That is why shortly I will offer the House a chance to do more for force protection than provide the $50 million in this motion to instruct, as important as that money is. Democrats have continually asked for investigation of pre-war intelligence, and those requests have been repeatedly denied. The same is true for requests to investigate the other matters related to the war in Iraq: The prison abuse scandals, the no-bid Halliburton reconstruction contracts, the misuse of classified information to discredit administration critics. Each of these matters has national security implications that need to be examined, particularly on the issue of going to war and the conduct of war. Congress has an obligation to make sure that decisions were made properly and that these decisions are based on truth and trust. Until the Congress examines fully issues like whether intelligence was politicized, we have failed in a fundamental way to protect our troops and maintain a level of trust with the American people. I urge the House to support both the Obey motion to instruct and my subsequent resolution on Iraq.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize the legacy of John H. Adams, co-founder and president of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). In 1970, with a small group of lawyers, he created the non-profit NRDC to protect the planet's wildlife and wild places, and ensure a safe and healthy environment for all living things. As NRDC celebrates its 35th anniversary, Mr. Adams prepares to step down as its president and continue as a senior advisor, pursuing special projects on those issues about which he cares most passionately. Mr. Adams brought together lawyers, scientists, and policy experts to help build, enforce and reinforce the solid foundation of federal statutes that have provided a legal basis for protecting the environment. Mr. Adams' tenure with the organization encompasses the creation of pioneering laws like the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, as well as more recent battles over global warming and energy security. Nationally and internationally, NRDC became a leader in the fight against acid rain, water pollution, and urban smog. The organization has fostered stronger protections for our oceans, coasts, natural landscapes, forests, and wildlife. Under Mr. Adams' guidance, the New York-based NRDC has become one of the world's most effective advocacy organizations, with more than 1 million members and activists and a staff of nearly 300. Along with his efforts as president of NRDC for 35 years, Mr. Adams taught for 26 years as an adjunct faculty member at New York University Law School, where he created the NYC/NRDC Environmental Law Clinic. He is chairman of the board of the Open Space Institute, created for the protection of land in New York State. He also serves on boards of the Woods Hole Research center, League of Conservation Voters, Centers for American Progress, American Conservation Association, and the Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. In addition to his great professional success and public service, Mr. Adams is fortunate to share his life with his wife Patricia, to whom he has been married 40 years. Together, they have three grown children. I commend John H. Adams for his 35 years of protecting the environment, safeguarding our natural resources and protecting our public health. He has created an environmental legacy that will serve to benefit the citizens of the United States for generations to come.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to allow the American people to pay their last respects to Rosa Parks in the United States Capitol. This unique honor befits and does justice to the life led by Rosa Parks. In honoring her legacy in this way, we are reminded that the power of one person, acting with a singularity of purpose, driven by the ideals of justice, is infinite. And as we grieve the loss of Rosa Parks, we recommit ourselves to her lifelong struggle to create an America that reflects the hopes and aspirations of all of its citizens. The Capitol Rotunda has been used for this honor only 28 times since 1852, and Rosa Parks will be the first woman ever accorded this honor. She joins the esteemed company of Presidents Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower and Lyndon B. Johnson, General Douglas MacArthur and the remains of several unknown soldiers. It is, without question, a fitting mark of respect. Rosa Parks changed history through the quiet rebellion of refusing to be refused. In honor of this remarkable woman and her indomitable spirit, we must recommit to rooting out injustice wherever it takes harbor, even if doing so comes at great personal cost. As House Democratic Leader, it is a privilege to join all my colleagues in tribute to Rosa Parks, and to offer the American people an opportunity to pay their respects to her extraordinary life.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Democratic motion to support the Senate funding level of $3 billion for our global AIDS initiatives. The funding level includes $500 million for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. Appropriations Foreign Operations Subcommittee Ranking Member Nita Lowey and Chairman Jim Kolbe are to be commended for their leadership in the fight against the global AIDS pandemic. They are a model of bipartisan effectiveness and are leading the way in providing needed funding under tight budget constraints. In 2003, President Bush and Congress took a bold step in authorizing $15 billion over five years toward AIDS prevention and treatment. The Senate funding levels in the Foreign Operations and Labor-HHS Appropriations bills would put the U.S. on track to meet this commitment in future years. At this critical juncture in history, the U.S. has the opportunity and the responsibility to fully fund an ambitious global effort to combat AIDS. The statistics are staggering. Of the 40 million people currently living with HIV, 95 percent live in the developing world. This week, UNICEF released a report showing that 18 million children in Africa could be orphaned by AIDS by the end of 2010. We know how to treat this devastating disease. Success stories can be found in every part of the world. In Uganda and Senegal, HIV rates have been brought down through effective prevention campaigns. In the past year alone, an estimated 350,000 African AIDS patients have received access to anti-retroviral drugs that will keep them alive to work and care for their families. Unfortunately, only 500,000 of the 4.7 million people in need of anti-retroviral drugs have them. If we support what works, we can prevent nearly two-thirds of the 45 million new HIV infections projected by 2020. When we invest more resources, more people have access to life-saving drugs, more people learn how to protect themselves and their partners, more people have access to voluntary testing and counseling, and more pregnant women have services to prevent mother-to-child transmission. The longer we go without fully investing in stopping the AIDS pandemic, the further it will spread worldwide and the more expensive the bottom line will be. The moral case is reason alone to fully fund our global AIDS initiatives, but it is also in our national security interest. As we have seen in the case of Afghanistan and Sudan, impoverished states can become incubators for terrorism and conflict. We must address the root causes of instability so that the ``fury of despair'' does not provoke more violence. It is in this global context that I support the Senate funding levels for global AIDS. Let us all come together today to fully support our commitments to fight the global AIDS pandemic.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and I congratulate him and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) for their leadership in proposing this good Democratic substitute. Mr. Chairman, here we go again. The madness continues. Once again, the Republicans must prove that they are the handmaidens of the special interests by putting this bill on the floor today. Just when we should be talking about creating good jobs for the American people, expanding access to quality health care, broadening opportunity in education, having a strong national defense and doing it all in a fiscally sound way, the Republicans are wasting the time of this Congress and testing the patience of the American people with legislation that is frivolous. It is something that is, again, another reflection of the culture of cronyism that exists under the Republican leadership in Washington, DC. This legislation before us again seeks to protect their friends. The outrageous venue provisions in the Republican bill give defendant corporations special advantages by overriding State minimum-contact provisions and limiting the locations in which a suit can be brought and could render foreign corporations out of reach of the American justice system. Today, we will take the opportunity to address the Republican culture of cronyism. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow) will be offering a motion to recommit to make sure that politically connected cronies and no-bid contractors that defraud and cheat the government in providing goods and service after a natural disaster will never again be able to use these special bids. They should never be used by government contractors that specifically intend to profit excessively from the disaster. Mr. Chairman, I really want to congratulate the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) for putting together a really excellent substitute to get rid of loopholes in the Republican bill that favors big corporate interests and foreign corporations and to protect civil rights claims. We all agree that if there are frivolous lawsuits, those who bring them should pay a price. That we will have three-strikes-you-are-out for doing that is a very important provision in the substitute. The substitute seeks to stop the madness that exists on the floor of this House when it is used as a venue to promote the special interests in our country. We must stand up for the American people, not for the politically connected cronies who are getting a no-bid contract. Let us take a stand to end this culture of cronyism and corruption. Let us get back to the real issues that are affecting the American people. We must vote for this substitute and send this bill back to ensure that no one who defrauds the American people during natural disasters is ever permitted to take undue advantage of our legal system. We must, again, stop the madness by voting for the substitute that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) have proposed. It has very excellent provisions and is worthy of the support of our colleagues.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlemen from the Financial Services Committee, Mr. Frank and Mr. Oxley for working in a bipartisan way to build broad support for the GSE reform bill they bring to the Floor today. This bill was reported from the Committee by a vote of 65- 5. But today that spirit of working together for common sense reforms and for the good of the people seems to have vanished. The first order of business will be to consider a manager's amendment that will eviscerate a provision of the bill that is central to the broad support it enjoys--the Affordable Housing program funded through a small percentage of the profits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. If enacted, it will be the first affordable housing resource created without using Federal dollars since Congress established the Federal Home Loan Banks Affordable Housing Program in 1989. Mr. Chairman, for too long many of America's low-income families have struggled to find affordable, safe, decent housing. Budget cuts and rising development costs mean that fewer units are built under existing programs each year. We are losing more affordable housing than we are building. Therefore it is vital that a new dedicated funding stream for affordable housing be created. Unfortunately, my Republican conservative colleagues hijacked this bill in an effort to strip away the bipartisan housing fund. When they were not able to completely get rid of it, they limited its use by blocking nonprofit organizations and faith-based groups, who engage in vote registration with their own funds, from even applying for grants to build affordable housing. There are no similar restrictions on ``for-profit'' organizations. This is not fair. As Catholic Charities has pointed out, ``Encouraging citizens to exercise their right to vote is an integral part of the Catholic Church's religious and moral mission and reinforces individual responsibility for the common good . . . Catholic Charities agencies should not be forced to choose between affordable housing funds and fulfillment of their religious mission.'' It is unacceptable to force a poisoned choice on these entities: to help fill critical housing needs or to exercise their basic civic responsibilities. Most importantly, it is an unacceptable barrier to Americans' right to vote. Our democracy depends on protecting the right of every American citizen to vote--and to register to vote--in every election. As the Supreme Court noted: ``No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the law, under which, as good citizens, we must live.'' We dare not, we must not create barriers on the right to vote and undermine 40 years of progress. It is a chilling precedent and a path we should refuse to walk. No church, no religious order, no faith-based group or non-profit organization should face the prospect of being deemed ineligible for money to help low-income, elderly, or disabled individuals find affordable homes simply because they offer a full range of services, including counseling, clothing, mentoring, and-- yes--helping people fulfill their right to participate in their government. Mr. Chairman, today we honor the life of Rosa Parks. We must use the opportunity in this bill to recommit ourselves to the ideals of equality and opportunity that are both our hope and our future. We must defeat this cynical, political strategy to divide us once again. I urge my colleagues to support our effort to strip these mean-spirited restrictions from the bill.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Michigan for yielding. I commend the gentleman from Michigan for his great leadership, and I thank him for his great leadership on behalf of the American consumer and the American taxpayer. The gentleman from Michigan and the gentleman from Virginia with their very wise substitute give a chance to help the consumer and declare energy independence. I also want to commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the distinguished ranking member of the full committee, for his extraordinary leadership on this and so many issues. Also, I salute the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), chair of the Science Committee, for his recognition that this Democratic substitute is a better way to go. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Republican energy bill. It is anti-taxpayer. It is anti-consumer. And it is anti- environment. I encourage my colleagues to support the Stupak-Boucher substitute. This bill should be called, The Republican Gifts to Special Interests Bill. It is a perfect example of the Republican culture of cronyism and corruption. Using Hurricane Katrina as their excuse, the Republicans are once again pushing their special interest agenda at the expense of the American people. Americans do not need legislation passed here today to enrich the oil industry. Americans need relief from high Georgia prices. This week, the average price at the pump was $2.92 a gallon. That is 99 cents more than a year ago and 30 cents higher than just pre-Katrina. It is also twice the cost per gallon than the first year when President Bush took office. Winter is around the corner, and so are skyrocketing increases in home heating costs. Families who heat with natural gas could see their fuel costs increase more than 70 percent in some parts of the country. It is astounding. Families are expected to spend nearly three times as much for home heating oil again than they did 4 years ago, the first year President Bush took office. Let us get this straight. Price at the pump for the consumer, per gallon of gas, is twice as high as 4 years ago, the first year President Bush took office. For home heating oil, you are expected to pay three times as much as you did 4 years ago, the first year President Bush took office. Yet for the second time in 1 month, the Republicans have brought a bill to the floor that fails to address price gouging, fails to bring down prices and fails to put us on the road to energy independence. As with the energy bill passed this summer, this bill ignores the real need of the American people and rewards the greed of special interests. Need or greed, take your choice. The Republicans in this culture of corruption and cronyism came down on the side of greed. This bill includes all the special favors to the energy industry that were too extreme to be included in the energy bill passed by Congress less than 3 months ago. Refinery companies have deliberately closed and consolidated their facilities to drive up profit margins. They are making enormous profits. Do the American people really believe the right response is to waive environmental laws, brush aside State and local authorities and open up Federal lands to new refineries? Of course not. But that is the Republican approach: Greed over need. Republicans blame the Clean Air Act for our record energy costs. Even after removing its most extreme provisions, this bill still includes the so-called bump-up provision, which would expose millions of Americans to unhealthy levels of smog for years to come. Once again, greed over need. Our Democratic substitute to this bill, introduced again by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher) creates a strategic refinery initiative which would be able to produce 5 percent of the daily demand for gasoline when needed, real solutions to America's energy crisis. That is what this substitute contains. If you are able to produce 5 percent, bump that up to the daily demand, you can reduce the price of gasoline at the pump drastically. For weeks, Democrats have demanded a new Federal law to crack down on price gouging by the energy industry. In fact, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) has that very bill. Consumers are being cheated every time they fill up their cars or turn up their thermostat by an industry making record profits. But this bill does not come close to addressing the severe gouging of consumers. Our Democratic substitute provides real protection from price gouging for the first time. We have been asking for it over and over. Here we have a bill on the floor that will do just that. The Stupak-Boucher bill gives the Federal Trade Commission broad authority to crack down on price gouging for a wide range of fuels, for businesses all along the supply chain. Our substitute provides for tough civil penalties and allows attorneys general to enforce the Federal law without interfering with State price gouging laws. Mr. Speaker, it is time for our Nation to make a declaration of energy independence. This is an urgent issue of national security. Together, America can do better. We have the resources. We have the technology. We have the innovative ideas, and more of them are springing forth all the time. We can do it right and create millions of new jobs at the same time. We have an enormous untapped potential in the area of energy efficiency and renewable energy. By implementing existing technologies and developing new ones in every sector of the economy and American life, we can take a giant step toward energy independence. This is not just about turning down the thermostat or driving less. Many Americans have had to do that for a long time now, they have already taken those steps; as much as this is about using our ingenuity to make our lives better and more comfortable. Let us make progress. Let us set aside this back-to-the-future energy bill and turn our faces into the 21st Century, toward our Nation's true needs. I urge my colleagues to again reject this special interest Republican giveaway act and support the Democratic substitute. Together, Americans can do better.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, my parliamentary inquiry is: Is it not bringing dishonor to the House of Representatives for this body to act in the shameful way that it is? Is it not part of the culture of corruption of the Republican Party to dishonor the wishes of the American people?

Ms. PELOSI. I have a parliamentary inquiry. Parliamentary Inquiry Mr. THOMAS (during the vote). Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. Based upon the statement of the gentleman from Maryland that everyone had voted and that therefore the vote should have been closed----

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of a bipartisan resolution urging the United States Postal Service to act on a pending petition for an Alzheimer's Semi-Postal Stamp. I am proud to have partnered with my colleagues, Representatives Ed Markey, Chris Smith, and John Boozman in introducing this legislation that encourages a long-overdue opportunity for the public to make an investment in the research that could find a cure to Alzheimer's disease. Nancy Reagan described the slow decline of her husband, President Reagan, to Alzheimer's disease as ``the long goodbye.'' Far too many Americans are enduring that same long goodbye today. More than 4 million Americans have Alzheimer's disease, a number that is expected to triple within the next 50 years. Nineteen million Americans are caring for someone with Alzheimer's. That is why I have fought so hard to increase federal funding for Alzheimer's disease research. Scientists around the world, including some of our best minds at the National Institutes of Health, believe we are on the verge of breakthroughs in Alzheimer's detection, diagnosis, and prevention. With an annual cost of more than $100 billion to care for people with Alzheimer's, and an immeasurable amount of heartache, America must invest in hastening the day when Alzheimer's disease is no longer--we cannot afford not to. That is why we are encouraging the Postal Service to act now on an Alzheimer's stamp. Semi-postal stamps are authorized by Congress as a tool for the Postal Service to raise funds and awareness of worthy causes. Tens of thousands of Americans, from across the country, have signed a petition of support for this stamp, yet its issue is still pending with the Postal Service after four years. There is no more worthy cause today than a fight against Alzheimer's disease, and time is of the essence. By allowing the public to directly contribute to research funds through a postal stamp, we could be one step closer to a treatment, or even a cure. I hope that my colleagues will join me to encourage the Postal Service to allow Americans to invest in the fight against Alzheimer's disease through a semi-postal stamp.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to announce the reopening and dedication of the de Young Museum in San Francisco on October 15, 2005. I join with the Mayor and the people of San Francisco in celebrating the new de Young in our vibrant arts community. Founded in 1895, the de Young Museum has been an integral part of San Francisco's Golden Gate Park for over 100 years. We have the de Young family to thank for establishing this vital center for the arts. M.H. de Young was the driving force behind establishing a permanent home for exhibits featured in the California Midwinter International Exposition of 1894. He set about establishing a diverse and fascinating permanent collection accessible to all San Franciscans that he hoped one day would become ``the pride of the Golden State.'' After sustaining extensive damage in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, the de Young building was closed in 2000 to make way for a new and seismically stable home for the city's treasured art collections. Designed to complement its natural surroundings, the new de Young will allow museum guests and park visitors alike to travel effortlessly from the park's pathways to the museum's entryways and the sculpture and children's gardens surrounding the museum. The new de Young offers twice the exhibition space of the old building, doubles its arts education space and programming in the new Hamon Education Tower and allows access to a third of the museum free of charge. In addition to showcasing the permanent collection, the new building will mean that the de Young is once again the Bay Area's premier venue for special exhibitions. The de Young will inaugurate its new special exhibition galleries with an ambitious exhibition showcasing objects from Egypt's Golden Age, Hatshepsut: From Queen to Pharaoh. Over one hundred objects from this period will be on view, including treasures from these conquered territories, ornate royal possessions, and monumental sculptures and reliefs. Its groundbreaking design will provide a spectacular art habitat for the extensive and diverse collections of the de Young, which will encompass American painting and decorative arts, and arts of the Americas, the Pacific Island, and Africa. The new de Young will present visitors with an exceptional view of the distinctions and connections among the art of different cultures and eras of creativity. I would also like to recognize the work of Dede Wilsey, President of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco's Board of Trustees. Mrs. Wilsey has served as Chairman of the de Young's capital campaign since 1995 and President of the Board of Trustees since 1998. As Chairman of the capital campaign, she has successfully led the museum in securing over $190 million in funding from nearly 7,000 private donors, making the new de Young the largest privately funded cultural gift ever amassed for the City of San Francisco. Mrs. Wilsey mobilized a broad spectrum of support from trustees, museum members, community leaders and elected officials to support and contribute to the new de Young. Harry S. Parker III, Director for the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, has spearheaded the design and collections to be housed in the new de Young. His critical eye, his unwavering commitment, and his distinct understanding of art have brought the de Young to its stature in the world. The de Young and its sister museum, the Legion of Honor, make up the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco--the largest public arts institution in the City of San Francisco and one of the largest and most celebrated arts museums in the United States. The Museums remain committed to presenting stellar art collections for San Franciscans and visitors to San Francisco. Today we have a world-class museum, and a national treasure, in our community to share with the world.