Ed Perlmutter

Mr. PERLMUTTER

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1204 provides for consideration of the Disaster Relief and Summer Jobs Act of 2010 under a closed rule. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Appropriations Committee. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The rule provides that the bill shall be considered as read. And, finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit the bill, with or without instructions. Madam Speaker, we are quickly approaching the beginning of disaster season in the United States. While many natural disasters occur without warning, we can say with certainty that tornadoes, hurricanes, wildfires, and flooding will damage communities across our Nation in the coming 6 months. Just this week, the residents of North Dakota and Minnesota are breathing a sigh of relief as the Red River flood crested. In my own State of Colorado, throughout our history we have suffered our fair share of destruction by wildfire, tornados, hailstorms, and flooding. In the gentlewoman Ms. Foxx's district, for instance, a major disaster was declared just this year due to severe winter storms and flooding. We don't know where and we don't know when natural disasters will occur, but our Federal response and relief officials must prepare nonetheless. And when those disasters do happen, Members of Congress will tour the devastation in their district and tell their constituents hurt by the disaster, ``I will do everything I can to help you recover from this event.'' Today's bill is the most important thing they can do to help in the recovery and relief efforts. There will be emergency response professionals who worked overtime and need to be reimbursed. There are Federal search and rescue teams which will have to be mobilized. FEMA will have to rebuild public infrastructure and remove debris. FEMA will have to provide temporary shelter to families displaced by the disaster. And, under the Stafford Act, these are all responsibilities of FEMA. There is just no getting around it. Already this year there have been 18 disasters and three emergency funds in seven States, and the disaster relief fund is about to be exhausted. Given the domestic and international efforts FEMA has undertaken this year, the disaster relief fund will be exhausted within the next month. So this bill replenishes the disaster relief fund with $5 billion. This funding can only be used for disaster relief; it cannot be shifted into other accounts. And if it is not spent this year, it will be retained for the fund next year. Because relief also requires the Federal Government to assist affected small businesses to resume operations, the bill also provides for $60 million to be funded to the Small Business Administration. And, finally, the bill invests $600 million into job training and employment services. This is a vital investment to build upon the progress we have made in the past year to put America back to work. Because this investment is not an emergency, it is paid for with unobligated Recovery Act dollars. But make no mistake, this bill is about robust emergency response capabilities. Natural disasters don't care about congressional district boundaries. They can happen anywhere in our country. I hope Members see the importance of this bill and make the right vote to ensure FEMA and our Federal disaster relief and recovery officials have the resources they need to help your States save lives and rebuild. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have listened to the gentlelady, and I guess I'm very surprised by her argument that with FEMA's funding running out within the next 2 weeks, that the Republican side of the aisle would argue against any funding for future disasters that we know are going to come. For instance, in Representative Foxx's district just this past month, a disaster was declared because of flooding and severe winter weather. These are the counties that were declared a disaster: Alleghany, Ashe, Avery, Buncombe, Burke, Caldwell, Haywood, and on and on and on. I looked through the list. We have had 16 or 17 disasters declared already this year across the country. Luckily, none of them were in Colorado. I looked at last year. We had dozens and dozens all across the country, including others in North Carolina. None were in Colorado. But I can tell you, Coloradans understand that this is a national issue. This is something that we take care of as citizens, as Americans across the country, because we're in this together. It isn't just, Let's wait until the whole thing runs out and then scurry around and try to figure out what to do. We are dealing with disasters. When I'm listening to my friend from North Carolina, it's like she wants to have Katrina happen all over again, where we're not prepared, the country is not prepared to deal with a massive emergency. That's what this is all about. It is about funding FEMA so that it can respond to the emergencies that we know are going to arise. And so all of this conversation about procedural tricks and ``You aren't getting this done,'' this is about funding the emergency management of this country. I'm surprised, especially when North Carolina just enjoyed the ability to take advantage of this--well, nobody would enjoy having to draw on the disaster relief. I take that back. That was an improper statement. What they did is they had the disaster relief fund available to them to deal with the troubles they suffered during this past winter. So I can't see any merit to the argument that's being made that the issue is not before us properly. It's a five-page bill. The other side of the aisle, the Republicans, have been complaining about big bills, too hard to read, take too long. This is five pages that says we're going to fund our emergency management administration so that we can deal with the disasters that we know are going to come. With that, I would reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I yield myself such time as I may consume. A couple of things. I'm very surprised that my friend from North Carolina would hold up the response to Katrina as the model for how we respond to emergencies. There couldn't be anything farther from the truth in that respect. It was a terrible mess, a terrible response. I don't think anybody in this country would say otherwise. The country was not prepared under the Bush administration. This Congress was not prepared. This is about preparing for emergencies. Right now, even though the flood has crested in North Dakota and Minnesota, it still is a state of emergency. Those States near the river are under water. So there is an emergency occurring even as we speak. Now, my good friend from North Carolina has her posters. Of course, we have ours. Now let's take a look at what really is going on in the economy. Under the Bush administration, we had tremendous job loss beginning in 2007, but certainly in the fall of 2008.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Let me explain my poster and then you and I can debate our posters. This is private payroll. Drops like a rock until January 2009, which is the greatest loss of jobs. During that month, some 780,000 jobs-- 780,000 jobs lost in January 2009. Twenty thousand jobs lost one year into the Obama administration in January 2010. It's too many. It's not right, but it's a heck of a lot better than 780,000 jobs lost in the last month of the Bush administration. So my friend complains about the status of jobs, but this country was in free fall when it came to the economy, the financial system, and jobs. That has turned around. We have so much farther to go, and that's part of what this bill does. It provides for summer jobs and training for many of those people who have been out of work. We have got to get those people back to work. But we turned around. You see this sea of red, jobs being lost again and again, month after month. Still, it has improved dramatically in the last year. So, I would entertain my friend's question.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. The Democrats. Well, you say when the economy started going south. The economy started going south, I would say to my friend, in September of 2008, when, because of very lax regulations on Wall Street, the bottom fell out of the financial system and jobs were lost at an ever-increasing number. And so the Bush administration, by its lax regulation, cost thousands and millions of jobs across this country, and that's what we're trying to stop. We've been able to slow it down, Madam Speaker. Now it's time to start adding jobs. And part of this bill provides for job training. It provides for summer jobs, as well as dealing with the disaster relief that has to be managed for the rest of this season of tornados and fires and floods. And we're in a flood right now in North Dakota and Minnesota. We have to address that and we have to fill that emergency fund so we can address these things promptly and without any delay, as I believe occurred with Katrina down in Louisiana. With that, I would reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Well, responding after the hurricane hits isn't fast enough. This is about knowing these things are coming and dealing with them in advance. With that, I yield back to my friend.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, first I would ask how much time remains on both sides.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Having no further speakers, I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I yield myself so much time as I might consume. I'm so glad that my friend Arizona was roused from his office because of our conversation about FEMA to come down and talk about health insurance. So I appreciate his statement that higher insurance premiums are going to be the reality. That's the reality today. That was the reality yesterday. That was the reality the day before that. That was the reality in California when they wanted to take the rates up 40 percent, I would say to my friend. That was the reality last year. That was the reality the year before. If we keep doing the same thing, we're going to get the same answers. You have to change things at some point, is what I would say to my friend from Arizona. I would also say to my friend from Arizona, to argue against eliminating discrimination against preexisting conditions, which is what I thought I heard you say, touches pretty much everybody's life in America. Somebody, either a close friend, a family member, a neighbor of everybody in this Chamber today, whether on the floor or in the gallery, has somebody who they know closely has a preexisting condition, and that is something that has to be addressed.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Not yet. So I would say to my friend that I appreciate him coming up here to talk to us about health insurance premiums which are constantly on the rise. We've got to deal with folks who suffer from preexisting conditions and can't find assistance otherwise when it comes to their health insurance. Personally--and I have said many times that I think it's a violation of the 14th Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by not allowing people to have equal access to insurance. And part of what was addressed by the historic bill that was signed yesterday by the President is that those people can get insurance. Those folks who have preexisting conditions can get insurance. We can have portability, the ability to go from one job to another, not be locked into a job for fear of losing our insurance. I appreciated the comments. You'll get another chance. I'm sure the gentlewoman has a lot of time, so she'll yield to you. The other thing I wanted to say to my good friend because he brought up the economics, in the last 18 months of the Bush administration, this country lost about $17 trillion in wealth: in homes; in 401(k)s and pension plans; and in jobs. Since last year, the country, each one of us, in our little way, each one of us has gained about $5 trillion back. Our 401(k)s have improved; our pensions have improved; there has been a stabilizing of home prices; and jobs, as we talked about earlier, are starting to come back after being lost at an unbelievable rate under the Bush administration. So the stock market is up by 4,000 points in the last year. It lost 7,500 points in the last 18 months of the Bush administration. We are not anywhere near where we need to be, but I say to my friend who is complaining about the laws of economics, that those laws seem to be working in a positive sense now. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell) who will actually speak about the bill that is before us which is about FEMA funding and job training.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I yield the gentleman another 30 seconds.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I just would remind my friend from North Carolina and the other Members of her party that when you cut taxes for the wealthiest of Americans, as was done under the Bush administration and the Republican Congress, prosecute two wars without paying for them, and have absolutely no regulation of Wall Street, you get a financial disaster. We are talking about natural disasters, but they created a financial disaster that we saw caused the loss of millions of jobs beginning in 2008. We need to reverse that, and that is precisely what is happening. The job loss has gone from 780,000 jobs lost in January 2009, the last month that George Bush was in office, to 20,000 jobs lost in January 2010. Not good enough, but a lot better. The stock market lost 7,500 points; and in the last year, it has gained 4,000 points back. Not where we want to be, but a heck of a lot better. There was $17 trillion lost by each American in their home, in their pension, in their 401(k)s and in their jobs in the last 18 months of the George Bush administration. We have gained $5 trillion back. Not good enough, but a heck of a lot better. Finally, the fourth quarter of 2008, the last quarter of the Bush administration, the steepest drop in the gross domestic product, what this country produces, really since the Depression, 6 percent drop, gained 5.7 percent in the fourth quarter of 2009. It hasn't gotten us back to even, but it is a lot better. That is what is going on. And what we want to do on our side of the aisle is get those Americans back to work who lost their jobs. That is what this bill is about, the $600 million for job training, for summer jobs. It is to get people back to work. When we get people back to work, when this country has employment that is better than today, then we can really take a good look at the debt, as they suggest, because that is true, we need to look at the debt that exists in this country; but we have to get people back to work. Now, let's talk about what is the guts of the bill that is before us, and that is to fund disaster relief. The disaster relief fund for FEMA is just about out of money, and we need to fund that so we can deal with the disasters that are existing today in North Dakota, in Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, but also the ones that we know are coming over the course of the next 6 or 8 months. So the bill provides for FEMA funding. It provides for job training and summer jobs. And, Madam Speaker, this bill that is before us is about saving lives. It is about dealing with disasters. We need to be prepared and that is the whole purpose. We can't have any more Katrinas. We need to do our best to try to deal with those disasters that we know are coming. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. PERLMUTTER

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I send to the desk a privileged concurrent resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. PERLMUTTER

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Madam Chair. This marks a historic time for our country to take necessary steps to make quality, reasonably priced health care possible and accessible to many more people. The current system is broken, and there is still a lot of work to be done. And I am committed to continuing this work. But ``no'' is not an option. Just say ``no''; just vote ``no'' thats what you hear from the other side. The status quo is not an option. Today we can improve our health care system by extending coverage to people with preexisting conditions like my daughter and 16,800 of my constituents in the Seventh Congressional District in Colorado. I've talked with my constituents in Seventh Congressional District meetings, in the government-at-the-grocery meetings that I have, telephone town halls, town halls all across the board, and they know the system is broken and something has to be done. But for me, this is personal. I have a daughter with epilepsy. She didn't ask to get it. It's just part of her chemistry. I dare say everybody in this room has somebody in their family, a close friend, a neighbor with a preexisting condition, and our system, our health care system, discriminates against those people. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees that every American has the right to equal protection of the laws. The system that we have right now is probably unconstitutional and, I believe, downright immoral and must be changed. More and more families and businesses can no longer bear the burden of this broken health care system. This issue touches every person in their own unique way. Because there are millions and millions of people affected by our health care system, we have to change this. The status quo will not work for us any longer. I'm proud to support this bill. I ask for a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a vote to change our health care system.

Mr. PERLMUTTER

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Reclaiming my time from my friend, this hour should be dedicated to the veterans. That is what I say.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I have had a chance to listen to my colleague from Colorado take what should be really a glorious opportunity to honor our vets, to honor vets who served in one of the bloodiest battles World War II or this world has ever seen generally, and to start talking about abortion and about the health care bill. I can't believe that they are taking this approach, Madam Speaker. I had the opportunity just within the last 2 weeks to work with 11 veterans who served in Iwo Jima who were flying there for the 65th anniversary, which we are honoring today. And to stand with those men, who they and so many others just gave everything they had to protect this Nation, was such a privilege, such an honor. The fact that I and our office could play any role in helping them get back there for the ceremony in which the flag was raised was a tremendous privilege for all of us. To take the time to veer off into health care when we should be honoring these gentlemen for their service I think is a travesty, and I would say that to my friend from Colorado. This is something that is important. These people served us valiantly. Their service is just honored and is so celebrated in Colorado that I just wanted to get up here today, while I am in the midst of the health care debate, to honor them and to thank them for their service.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I yield to my colleague from Colorado.

Mr. PERLMUTTER

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friends from Texas and California for their comments, and their comments indicate that they support this rule. This rule allows for the passage, ultimately, of an extension of time on three important surveillance tools that we now have within our arsenal. There is no disagreement between the sides at all as to the need for the passage of this rule and the need to move forward. So, I would urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. I yield myself such time as I may consume. General Leave

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I also ask unanimous consent that all Members may be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1109.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1109 provides for consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 3961, extending expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act. The rule makes in order a single motion by the chair of the Committee on the Judiciary to concur in the Senate amendments. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion except clause 10 of rule XXI, and provides that the Senate amendments shall be considered as read. Finally, the rule provides 1 hour of debate on the motion, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. The Senate amendments to H.R. 3961 extend for 1 year several expiring provisions essential to our fight against terrorism. One of these provisions allows authorities to seek court orders for business records or any intangible thing related to a terrorism investigation. Another expiring provision reauthorizes wiretaps on terrorism suspects so that law enforcement officials do not have to file multiple applications when a terrorist disposes of phone after phone or shifts from one communication device to another. Otherwise, terrorists could use multiple devices or frequently change cell phone numbers or carriers, with the aim of interfering with surveillance efforts under FISA. The Justice Department has said that this provision has proven an important intelligence-gathering tool in a small but significant subset of FISA electronic surveillance orders. The government cannot use this authority lightly. It must provide specific information that the suspect may employ countersurveillance activities. Finally, the Senate amendments we are considering today will extend for 1 year a provision first enacted in 2004 that allows the government to apply to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court, the FISA court, for surveillance orders involving suspected lone wolf targets. These are suspects who are engaging in or preparing for international terrorism activities, but don't necessarily have ties to a larger organization, such as a terrorist group or a foreign nation. The provision does not apply to any U.S. citizen or illegal immigrant. These three programs are vital tools our Nation cannot let expire. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I am in agreement with my friend from Texas that this rule ought to be passed and we ought to move forward right now. So I don't have any other speakers. I'm going to reserve the balance of my time. I'd ask my friend from Texas how many people he expects to have speaking on his side.

Mr. PERLMUTTER

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I won't take the 1 minute. I'd say to my friend from California, in Colorado we were asked to take over the trial of Timothy McVeigh, who had blown up an office building in Oklahoma. He didn't do it in Colorado. But we said okay, we're part of this country. We're part of America. We have a responsibility. We don't know what kind of crazy people are going to come and try to disrupt or harm our judges, our people that worked in the prisons or the like, but we took that responsibility. We weren't afraid of that responsibility. And our judicial system, our Federal judges, handled that matter, I think, in a very fair, fine, and proper manner. We did it because that's who we are. And we've taken prisoners into our supermax who are terrorists by anybody's definition.