Bobby Scott

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the majority leader, 1 minute.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the House.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to my colleague from Virginia (Mr. Boucher), the representative of the Ninth Congressional District, the home of Virginia Tech. (Mr. BOUCHER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to offer my deepest sympathies to the victims and their families who suffered the horrific shooting tragedy at Virginia Tech on Monday morning. My thoughts and prayers go out to them, the students, faculty and staff of the university. Virginia Tech is one of the largest schools in Virginia, providing higher education to more than 28,000 students. The effects of this tragedy can be felt all across the Commonwealth of Virginia, in the Halls of Congress and in every corner of this Nation. I represent hundreds of Virginia Tech families, perhaps thousands of alumni, and members of my staff have friends and family who currently attend Virginia Tech. Schools are meant to be sanctuaries of learning and, most importantly, sanctuaries of safety. Parents who send their children off to college with all the potential that a college education represents should be content that their children will be safe. As we mourn with the Virginia Tech community, this Congress must explore every possible avenue towards determining what can be done to prevent this kind of tragedy in the future, whether in high schools or college campuses or on business premises or other places where people may congregate. Yet we must be realistic. From what we are hearing regarding this tragic incident, it is not clear that any law would have been effective in deterring the kind of senseless acts that occurred. Anyone willing to indiscriminately shoot down innocent people and then kill themselves afterwards would not likely be deterred by any law. Nonetheless, we must work with our colleges and universities in developing ways to anticipate, identify and prevent any such threats that we can. Some evidence is emerging that indicates that there may have been signs of mental disturbances in the alleged shooter, and this may suggest information which could lead to things to look at to avoid these tragedies in the future. But, Mr. Speaker, today we stand together to wish a speedy recovery for the injured and to mourn with the families of the victims who died in this horrific tragedy. Virginia Tech is and will remain one of the Commonwealth of Virginia's finest institutions of higher learning, and its proud traditions will carry on beyond this darkest hour. This event will be with the students, faculty and staff of Virginia Tech for the rest of their lives, but we must not let tragedies like this stop people from living their dreams. I hope that some day all members of the Virginia Tech community will be able to celebrate life and learning on the campus again. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce into the Record the powerful statement presented at the service yesterday at Virginia Tech by Nikki Giovanni. That service was attended by nine of the eleven members of the Virginia delegation to Congress and both of our U.S. Senators. So I will insert that statement into the Record. We are Virginia Tech. We are sad today, and we will be sad for quite a while. We are not moving on, we are embracing our mourning. We are Virginia Tech. We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly, we are brave enough to bend to cry, and we are sad enough to know that we must laugh again. We are Virginia Tech. We do not understand this tragedy. We know we did nothing to deserve it, but neither does a child in Africa dying of AIDS, neither do the invisible children walking the night away to avoid being captured by the rogue army, neither does the baby elephant watching his community being devastated for ivory, neither does the Mexican child looking for fresh water, neither does the Appalachian infant killed in the middle of the night in his crib in the home his father built with his own hands being run over by a boulder because the land was destabilized. No one deserves a tragedy. We are Virginia Tech. The Hokie Nation embraces our own and reaches out with open heart and hands to those who offer their hearts and minds. We are strong, and brave, and innocent, and unafraid. We are better than we think and not quite what we want to be. We are alive to the imaginations and the possibilities. We will continue to invent the future through our blood and tears and through all our sadness. We are the Hokies. We will prevail. We will prevail. We will prevail. We are Virginia Tech. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. SCOTT of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I request 5 legislative days during which Members may insert material relevant to H. Res. 306 into the Record.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 306) offering heartfelt condolences to the victims and their families regarding the horrific violence at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia, and to the students, faculty, administration and staff and their families who have been deeply affected by the tragic events that occurred there.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Chairman, we need to review, again, where we are, because we have heard lectures about fiscal responsibility, and this chart shows where we are in fiscal responsibility, way down in the ditch. In fact, in 2001, we were on a trajectory to pay off the entire national debt by 2013. The gentleman from Wisconsin had a chart that showed that by 2040 we would almost have enough money to pay interest on the national debt and a little bit of Social Security, and that was it. Well, the main change in that was interest on the national debt. There would be zero interest on the national debt if we hadn't gotten into this mess. In fact, at this point, the gentleman talked about what he called entitlement reform. For those that aren't aware what entitlement reform means, that means cutting Social Security. Well, in 2001, we had a 10-year surplus of $5.5 trillion. We needed $4 trillion at that point to make sure that we had enough money to pay Social Security for the next 75 years without cutting benefits. So we had entitlement reform covered. The gentleman mentioned jobs that have been created: remind him, worst job performance since Herbert Hoover. The gentleman mentioned economic development: worst Dow performance in a quarter of a century. The gentleman mentioned all these revenues we have gotten: worst revenue performance in the history of recordkeeping back to 1934. We repeal some of the policies, some of the policies that got us in the mess to begin with. This is one of the tax cuts that got us in the problem, and you can see who gets the benefits. But not only do we eliminate some of the tax cuts that put us in the mess, we are fiscally responsible. We use that to improve the deficit. Our deficit has improved, over the Democratic budget, $100 billion, over the President's budget, $300 billion. And, finally, we saved so much that we saved interest on the national debt, $14 billion in the last year of the budget. And we are able to fund children's health care, enough money in our budget to fund health care for all children in America, enough in our budget to fund $158 billion more on education than the President's budget. $158 billion. If you have a city, 300,000, $158 billion is enough for $158 million in additional funding for education over 5 years. Imagine what your city could do with $158 million. We have enough for veterans, $42 billion more than the President's budget. We make sure that our cities and communities are secure with investments in gang prevention, juvenile justice, COPS and other programs in the justice area. We help our communities with community development grants, billions of dollars. Diplomacy. That is a compassionate budget. It is compassionate, but it is also fiscally responsible. Madam Chairman, we have a budget that gets us out of the mess that we got into. It compassionately invests in our priorities. It is a proud budget. On behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus, I ask for your support for the Congressional Black Caucus budget. I thank the gentlelady from Michigan for her leadership on this budget and particularly her leadership in the Congressional Black Caucus.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I want to thank the gentlewoman from Michigan for her leadership in the Congressional Black Caucus. We first need to start off with the Congressional Black Caucus of where we are. We were in a ditch in 1993 and Democratic policies dug us out of the ditch, and Republican policies put us right back into the ditch. This is where we are, and this is what we are trying to dig ourselves out of. Now, we have gotten in this ditch. We just need to respond a little bit. We heard that we created all these jobs. Go back, this administration, count them up, add them, subtract them, add them up, tied for worst job performance since Herbert Hoover. This is what they are bragging about. They talk about economic growth. The Dow Jones Industrial Average for the last 4-year increments, this administration's 6 years has not done what anybody since 1980 has been able to do in 4 years. They talk about increased revenues: you cut taxes, you increase revenues. Since 1960, only 2 years did we not set a brand-new revenue record, and then we set a new record the following year until we get to this policy. We have gone 6 consecutive years without new record revenues, three consecutive years in decline. That has never happened since they started keeping records in 1934. What we do is we repeal part of what got us in the mess. This is one of the tax cuts we repeal, and you want to look and see, we call it tax cuts for the wealthy. They get mad, but this is who gets $20 billion in tax cuts that we repeal: over $1 million, $200,000 to $1 million, $100,000 to $200,000, under that zero. This is what you get. This is one of those that we repeal. We are able, after we repeal that, we use part of it for fiscal responsibility. The Congressional Black Caucus deficit is better than the President's deficit every year. We balance and go into surplus in the fifth year. In the fifth year, we save $14 billion in interest alone compared to the President. Now, we use the rest of that money to address our priorities: health care that we hear about, education, veterans, justice, making our communities safer, diplomacy. Madam Chairman, just to close, let's see what we would have to do to go from the Congressional Black Caucus' responsible budget to the President's budget. We would have to cut $150 billion out of education. We would have to cut $100 billion out of child care, eliminating the promised health care for all children, putting 9 million children out in the street without any health care. We would have to whack $42 million out of the veterans' budget and many other priorities that we are going to describe in a few minutes. Then we would have to borrow $339 billion, mostly from foreign countries, in order to fund tax cuts that primarily benefit that portion of a family's income over $200,000, that portion of the income under $200,000 virtually unaffected. To fund the tax cuts that put us in the mess that we are in, we would have to cut education, health care, veterans, other things, and then borrow $339 billion from foreign countries. That is a bad choice. Fiscally responsible and address our priorities, that is the Congressional Black Caucus budget. We are proud of it and would hope that you would support it.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. We have been lectured. And sometimes you just have to be reminded about what's been happening to the deficit. We have been lectured by the people who created this chart. You don't create charts like this by accident. Those that created this chart are the ones that are lecturing us on what to do. Just look at the chart. Now, one way to improve this mess is to improve the economy. Some economic policies help the economy, some don't. We know that creating jobs is extremely important. If you look all the way back to Herbert Hoover, the job growth under this administration is tied for last since Herbert Hoover. We know that the job growth during this administration in fact isn't even as good after two major budget-busting tax cuts, isn't even as large as the Congressional Budget Office suggested it would be if we had done nothing. They had a projected job growth if we do nothing. They cut the taxes, and we actually didn't even do as well as that. So, the worst job performance since Herbert Hoover. And what has it done to the stock market? Every 4 years, since the first Reagan administration, the first 4 years of Reagan, the second 4 years, the first 4 years of the first Bush administration, Clinton, the aggregate 4 years change in the Dow, worst since before 1980. That is what is the result of the economic policy. Now, we know that we can grow the economy if we reduce the deficit, reduce the vulnerability to foreign countries. Three-fourths of our net debt has been financed by foreign investments, China, Japan, Saudi Arabia being three of the largest. You can't negotiate trade deals if you are borrowing money from somebody. You can't negotiate oil prices if you are borrowing money. We can also grow the economy with investments in education, job training, and science. The Democratic budget does it. You can help with health care, with help in productivity. You can invest in agricultural, rural communities, and transportation. Our budget does that. And we can grow the economy with fiscal responsibility, and the Democratic budget will help dig us out of the ditch that was formed by the Republican policy starting in 2001. There will be a number of budgets introduced. I will be introducing the Congressional Black Caucus budget that I frankly think does even a better job and makes tougher decisions. But this budget will dig us out of the ditch because it will make those important investments in the economy.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, the gentlemen on the other side are right, we have charts. Because you can see what is going on with a chart. We have been lectured by those who have created these red lines. The Democratic plan is the blue line, and this is what has happened in the last 6 years: the red line. We are being lectured by people who have put us in the ditch. In fact, the Republican policies turned a $5.5 trillion surplus into approximately a $3 trillion deficit, deterioration of the budget of about $8.5 trillion. Now, the $500 billion we have spent on the war is about 0.5; $8.5 trillion deterioration, 0.5 on the war. Now, they say we have stimulated the economy. This is the change in the Dow Jones Industrial Average: Reagan's first term; Reagan's second term; Bush I's term; Clinton; Clinton, 4 years. In 6 years, the Dow has not increased as much as it had in each of the previous 4 years back through the Reagan administration. So there has been no economic growth. They brag about job growth. Add them up: Tied for last place since Herbert Hoover. Now, they keep talking about this 2003 tax cut. You ought to talk about the 2001 tax cut, add up all the jobs through the tax policy: worst since Herbert Hoover. We can do better than that. We don't want to be lectured by those who put us in the ditch. We need to make sure that we have good economic growth, good tax policy, balance the budget, and go forward.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia Mr

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. It is bipartisan legislation. We have listened to all of the people who have worked long and hard on this legislation. I hope it will be the pleasure of the House to pass the bill.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlelady from California, Ms. Sanchez.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), the lead Democratic sponsor of this measure.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), chairman of the Judiciary Committee. (Mr. CONYERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 137 is a bipartisan effort by the Judiciary Committee, led by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) as the chief sponsor and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) as the lead Democratic sponsor. Both have worked long and hard on this issue. I would also like to express my appreciation to Chairman Conyers, Ranking Member Smith, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Forbes for their leadership and support in moving this matter forward, and also the former chairman of the committee, Mr. Coble, who is with us today. The Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007 addresses the growing problem of staged animal fighting in this country. It increases the penalties under the current Federal law for transporting animals in interstate commerce for the purpose of fighting and for interstate and foreign commerce in knives and gaffs designed for use in cockfighting. Specifically, H.R. 137 makes violations of the law a felony punishable by up to 3 years in prison. Currently, these offenses are limited to misdemeanor treatment with the possibility of a fine and up to 1 year of imprisonment. Most States make all staged animal fighting illegal. Just one State currently allows cockfighting to occur legally. The transport of game birds for the purpose of animal fighting and the implements of cockfighting are already prohibited by Federal law, though the current law only allows, as I have indicated, the misdemeanor treatment. In 1976 Congress amended title 7, U.S. Code, section 2156, the Animal Welfare Act, to make it illegal to knowingly sell, buy, transport, deliver, or receive a dog or other animal in interstate or foreign commerce for the purposes of participation in an animal fighting venture or knowingly sponsoring or exhibiting an animal in a fighting venture if any animal in the venture was moved in interstate or foreign commerce. Amendments to the Animal Welfare Act contained a loophole, however, that allowed shipments of birds across State lines for fighting purposes if the destination State allowed cockfighting. While Congress did amend section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act to close this loophole in 2002, the penalty section and other provisions of the act have not been updated since their original enactment in 1976. This bill is designed to address those shortfalls to more effectively cover modern problems associated with animal fighting ventures. As I have already mentioned, the legislation increases current penalties to provide a meaningful deterrent. One of the primary reasons for enacting the increased penalties under title 18 is the reluctance of U.S. Attorneys to pursue animal fighting cases under the current misdemeanor provisions because they view the penalties as ineffective against an animal fighting industry, which has continued unabated nationwide. H.R. 137 further makes it a felony to transport cockfighting implements in interstate or foreign commerce. These implements take the form of razor-sharp knives, known as slashers; or gaffs, instruments shaped in the form of curved ice picks that are attached to birds' legs for fighting. Proponents of these implements within the game fowl community apparently contend that they inflict cleaner wounds upon the birds which are then quicker and easier to heal. Since penalties against animal fighting were codified in 1976, Federal authorities have pursued less than half a dozen animal fighting cases, despite the fact that the USDA has received numerous tips from informants and requests to assist with State and local prosecutions. In addition, despite the fact that all 50 States have banned dog fighting and all but one State has banned cockfighting, the animal fighting industry continues to thrive within the United States. Numerous nationally circulated animal fighting magazines advertise fighting animals, and paid lobbyists continue to advocate for animal fighters' interests. Thankfully, H.R. 137 will seek to bring an end to these practices. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this bill affects matters within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture and the Judiciary Committee. Both committees have worked closely together to ensure that all matters are dealt with appropriately. We appreciate their assistance in bringing this bill expeditiously to the floor, and I will insert into the Congressional Record at this point an exchange of letters between Chairman Peterson of the Agriculture Committee and Chairman Conyers of Judiciary. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, DC, March 8, 2007. Hon. Collin C. Peterson, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your recent letter regarding the Agriculture Committee's jurisdictional interest in H.R. 137, the ``Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007,'' which the Committee on the Judiciary reported by voice vote. As ordered reported, the bill establishes criminal penalties for violations of Federal prohibitions on animal fighting. I appreciate your willingness to discharge the bill from further consideration by your Committee, in order to expedite its floor consideration. I understand and agree that this is without prejudice to your Committee's jurisdictional interests in this or similar legislation in the future. In the event a House-Senate conference on this or similar legislation is convened, I would support your request for an appropriate number of conferees. I will include a copy of your letter and this response as part of the Congressional Record during consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank you for your cooperation as we work towards enactment of H.R. 137. Sincerely, John Conyers, Jr., Chairman.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 137) to amend title 18, United States Code, to strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, the PHONE Act is a strong bill that has gained bipartisan support. Members on both sides of the aisle have agreed that we need urgent reforms to protect privacy rights and to crack down on identity theft. With over 10 million Americans affected by some form of identity theft each year, we need to tackle this issue at every possible level. Spoofing is one form of identity theft in which criminals coax victims into giving up their most sensitive personal information by making it appear that a call is coming from a legitimate institution such as a bank. Misleading caller ID information also allows a spoofer to cause a victim to accept a call they otherwise might have avoided, leading to harassment and further privacy intrusions. Advances in technology such as Voice-Over-Internet-Protocol have made caller ID spoofing easy and readily available. H.R. 740 includes a number of important provisions to fight spoofing. The legislation creates a new Federal crime to prohibit using or providing false caller ID information with the intent to wrongfully obtain something of value. The section also prohibits using or providing the caller ID for information of an actual person without his or her consent and with the intent to deceive the recipient. It correctly targets spoofing done to perpetuate financial fraud, and reserves harsh punishment for such crimes, including felony penalties of up to 5 years in prison. In addition, the bill significantly improves the tools available to law enforcement to fight noncommercial spoofing while preserving the legitimate uses of the technology. For example, women's shelters may use misleading caller ID numbers, and many businesses do if they are calling from one of many lines. They may want the caller ID information to just reflect the main line. The bill does not infringe on these instances because the caller would not possess the requisite intent to defraud or deceive. Finally, the bill is narrowly tailored to permit caller ID blocking in which one prevents one's number from being known at all. Caller ID blocking is not used to mislead because a person knows he is not getting any number and it has been a standard telephone device for many years. In sum, the PHONE Act will deter telephone fraud, protect consumers from harassment, and will enhance protection of sensitive personal information. Mr. Speaker, let me conclude by saying this started as bipartisan legislation and has continued. The information was brought to us when the chief Republican counsel on the committee, Phil Kiko, received such harassment because his number had been used by somebody else making annoying calls. He got called back because his number was appearing as the caller ID. Mr. Murphy introduced the bill last year and we have worked to improve the bill and have made significant improvements since last year. Chairman Conyers, Ranking Member Smith, and Ranking Member Forbes, we all worked very closely together to make sure that we could have the best product possible. I urge my colleagues to join together and pass the legislation.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, 125 years ago, Virginia State University was founded. I want to thank my colleague from Virginia for his leadership in introducing this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 182 is a resolution commending and congratulating Virginia State University on the occasion of its 125th anniversary. H. Res. 182 was introduced by my colleague from Virginia from the Fourth Congressional District of Virginia, Mr. Forbes. Virginia State University was founded on March 6, 1882, as the Virginia Normal and Collegiate Institute, making it the first fully State-supported 4-year institution of higher learning for African Americans. Today, it is one of Virginia's two land-grant institutions. The first president of Virginia State University was John Mercer Langston who upon his election to Congress in 1890 was the first African American elected to Congress and, until my election in 1992, had been the only African American elected from Virginia. In 1935, Virginia State University founded a 2-year satellite school at Norfolk, Virginia. That school today is known as Norfolk State University. Today, Virginia State has an enrollment of nearly 5,000 students who live and learn on a 236-acre main campus overlooking the Appomattox River in Chesterfield County, Virginia. The school also has a 416-acre agricultural research facility. The University's academic programs include the ``Bridges to Baccalaureate'' program for students transferring from 2-year colleges who want to major in science, as well as the Honda Campus All-Star Challenge and the Ronald E. McNair Scholars Program for students planning to pursue doctoral degrees. Virginia State has helped set the standard for minority-serving institutions in Virginia and across the Nation by providing quality higher education opportunities for 125 years. My family has a proud Trojan tradition. My mother attended Virginia State, my older brother is a graduate of Virginia State, and I am honored to have an honorary degree from Virginia State. So I congratulate Virginia State University on its 125th anniversary and wish them another successful 125 years. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.