José Serrano

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to one of the greatest players in the history of baseball, Roberto Alomar. This week, Alomar was inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame, a recognition for the many years he played the sport at its very highest level. To many, being a 12-time All-Star, a 10-time Gold Glove recipient and a four-time Silver Slugger and batting over .300 nine times would suffice, but for Roberto Alomar, these were simply milestones along his route to the Hall of Fame. Induction into the Hall of Fame is a time- honored tradition in America reserved only for the game changers. It is not merely that these men played the sport with superior skill, it is that they so often transformed the game and our conception of what is possible. Roberto Alomar revolutionized the position of second baseman. He combined offensive power and consistency with a range and fielding ability few had ever seen and fewer still have been able to emulate. Roberto is part of a Puerto Rican baseball dynasty that deserves recognition, too. His father and brother, Sandy Alomar and Sandy Alomar Jr. had distinguished careers in Major League Baseball. They must realize that their guidance and support helped guide Roberto to his great career and that they, too, deserve recognition as he is inducted into baseball's most elite and hallowed club. I am sure that the joy of winning the World Series twice was quite indescribable for Roberto, but the thrill of being inducted into the Hall of Fame must be just as sweet. It is a fitting end to a great career. Along with the rest of the baseball world and millions of Puerto Ricans on the island and in the 50 states, I applaud Roberto Alomar and look forward to seeing his plaque placed among baseball's other legends. Mr. Speaker, induction into the Hall of Fame is more than the highest honor a player can receive--it is how fans and lovers of organized baseball are able to say `thank you' to their heroes. Thank you, Roberto, for so many wonderful memories. Thank you for pushing the sport to new heights. Thank you for giving millions of people so many reasons to smile and celebrate and feel joy. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues now join me in saying thank you to Roberto Alomar, a player whose character and quality we may never see again.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Section 5: ``Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.'' Section 6: ``This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within 7 years from the date of its submission.''

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, we call it a dream, but it's a reality. It's young people who are here, who want to continue to be part of the American Dream. It's people, as Mr. Engel said, who know no other country. This is the country they know. This is the country they love. This is the country they're in. This is the country they want to help grow. We talk so much about the future of our country. The future of our country is in our youth, our youth who want this dream to become a reality. Vote for the DREAM Act. It is the proper American behavior at this time.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 4 p.m. tomorrow, and further, when the House adjourns on that day, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 7, 2010, for morning-hour debate.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. I thank the gentleman for the time. I congratulate the leadership of the House and the members of the New York delegation for bringing the 9/11 bill to the floor. I especially want to thank Mrs. Maloney, Mr. Nadler and Mr. King, who in a bipartisan fashion have put together this bill. Mr. Speaker, this bill is long overdue. This bill simply says that we recognize the health needs of the people who volunteered on that day, who volunteered to go for a long period of time and who were told by the Federal Government that the air and the conditions in that area were safe. These folks are now suffering from very difficult and complex illnesses that very few doctors and hospitals understand. Only certain specialized care facilities can manage their health problems. As I said before, the bill has a bipartisan approach, and that's something we don't always see around here, but we see it on this bill because of the importance and of the need to do something and to do it now. It has been a long time since 9/11. Yet we have spent a lot of money, as we perhaps should have, on the war on terrorism--that is correct-- but there is another war. It is a war to bring good health care to those who volunteered and to those who were contracted to do this work. So, today, I join the New York delegation, and I join all Members of Congress in a bipartisan fashion to say that this bill was long overdue and that we should approve this bill today without any stumbling blocks. We should just simply come together as Members of Congress, come together as two parties, come together as Americans to say thank you and to say the least we can do is to provide this health care for you in a very thankful way.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. I thank the gentleman for the time, and I thank Mr. Smith for his kind words and his support of the bill and his suggestions to change the bill. Any Member of Congress, any American for that matter, who has ever been to one of these ceremonies knows that there is no greater joy seen anywhere than when folks dress up and come with their American flags to become American citizens. It is really a wonderful event. I have had the opportunity to attend a few and have seen the joy and the pride. Usually, one person is becoming a citizen, but he or she will bring 25 members of the family, whether they are citizens or not, because it is that kind of an occasion. It is also an occasion where they, for the first time, really get to see government up close in that the people that are invited there are from the community, but they are government officials and so on. So up to now--if this bill becomes law--the only people allowed to administer the oath, as has been said, are judges or members of the administration. This bill would allow Members of Congress and Senators to administer that oath. Now, while the bill does not speak directly to this issue, I will tell you how this idea came about. A member of my community came to me and said, Guess what? I'm going to become a citizen, and I want you to swear me in. I want you to administer the oath. And I was touched. I said, My God, that you would want me to help you become an American, something that I and so many of us have by birth, since birth, it's a great honor for me. Then it dawned on me. I said, I should check with staff to see if I'm allowed to do this. And I found out that I'm not allowed to do it. Now, it won't be that it would take care of that situation of one individual asking for it, but as has been said here, we will not--and this is the change Mr. Smith was so good at including. We will be invited to ceremonies, as we are now. The ceremonies will be set up by Homeland Security. We will not pick the date, the place, or who is going to get sworn in. But when we're invited now, the possibility is open for the administration officials to say, Why don't you join us in administering the oath, or, Why don't you administer the oath. And I will tell you again that I don't know that there is a greater honor for someone to become a citizen and a greater honor for us on some occasions to be able to administer the oath. So the changes that are made, because there will be some questions about it, I think are strong changes. They comply with rules that say that none of these ceremonies should ever be politicized. But I really think that as people are being sworn in, to have present a Senator, a Member of Congress, and every so often to have them administer the oath only strengthens the bond between these new Americans and their government, a fuller understanding. After all, we are a question on the immigration test. A lot of people don't know that one of the questions on the immigration test is: Who is your Congressman? Do you know who your Congressman is? Some don't pass that question; others do pass. It is a great honor. There is not much more to say. It is a simple thought that should have been taken care of a long time ago, and I'm looking forward to the day when I'm invited to a ceremony and I can administer the oath to someone. So I thank all the Members, and I hope that this bill can pass and become law.

Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.

Mr. SERRANO. Reclaiming my time, the gentleman brings up an interesting point that we have discussed at other times on this floor. I must say that I neglected to mention that the bill also includes Delegates and the Resident Commissioner to be able to administer the oath of office. So, interestingly enough, in the territories, new Americans will become citizens on that day with the participation of the Resident Commissioner or the Delegates. So, again, thank you. And all this is an extension of the celebration of, as you have said, Mr. Smith, probably the greatest honor this country gives anyone, which is to become an American citizen. Thank you so much.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize one of the most special places for culture and cuisine not only in the Bronx, but all of New York, the Ferragosto Festival on Belmont Avenue. This is a celebration that grows in size and fame with each successive year. People now travel from across the nation to sample the delicious tastes and wonderful atmosphere on display in the Bronx's own Little Italy. Ferragosto is powered by small businesses, many family-owned, and has built a reputation for generosity to its patrons and authenticity to its cultural source. The Festival is made possible with the support of many people and institutions, perhaps none more so however than the Belmont Business Improvement District, which deserves special recognition for its efforts. One of the landmark attractions of the Festival, and indeed a cultural touchstone for the entire city, is the Arthur Avenue Retail Market, known popularly as simply ``The Market.'' Owned by the City of New York and located in the Belmont Community of the Bronx, The Market has a history and symbolism that is distinctly New York. Back in the 1940s, through the efforts of Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, pushcart venders, who were largely immigrants, were taken off the streets and relocated into buildings and shelters throughout the five boroughs. The Arthur Avenue Retail Market in the Bronx was one such creation, with purveyors of Italian food, craft and specialty items. It retains today the cooperative vendor model and ``old world feel'' from so many years ago, endearing it to all who visit. Importantly, The Market is currently undergoing important renovations that will ensure its stairways, halls and storage spaces will stand up to merchant demands in the new century. The goal of the project is to comprehensively renovate and modernize The Market, while maintaining the atmosphere which has made it so well-known and well-loved. Madam Speaker, one of our most distinguishing qualities as a nation is the passion with which we celebrate our cultural diversity. At the most basic level, festivals like Ferragosto and institutions like the Arthur Avenue Retail Market are expressions of pride and honor. They are part of an exchange of history and ideas and values that link past and future generations together. I will always be a participant and supporter of such festivals and such markets, as I view them as a reminder that no matter where we come from as New Yorkers, we are all here now, together. I ask that my colleagues join me paying tribute to Ferragosto 2010, in Belmont's Little Italy of the Bronx.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to honor Ron Gettelfinger, who retired last week from being president of the United Auto Workers. Mr. Gettelfinger first joined the UAW as a line repairman in 1964 and has now spent a lifetime fighting for the best interests of working Americans. Mr. Gettelfinger was elected to the Presidency of the UAW in 2002 and provided excellent leadership through a difficult time in the history of the auto industry in the United States. The auto industry faced great hardships during his tenure and as a whole needed to make a lot of changes. Mr. Gettelfinger recognized the great changes that needed to be made and ably defended his members while working hard to address the long term needs of the industry. He understood that the automakers and the unions needed to work together to insure that they both could go forward stronger than before. During his time as President he worked hard not only for his own members, but for the rights of all American workers and of all workers around the world. In addition to his efforts working for workers, he understood the importance of universal health care to having a healthy and competitive workforce and he spoke out in favor of health care for all Americans. While I think that he and I would both have liked to see even more extensive reaching reform, we have taken an important step and I applaud his efforts on behalf of health-care reform. Mr. Gettelfinger has spent a lifetime of serving working Americans and making sure that they are given a fair chance at a fair wage and fair work. I wish him the best of luck in whatever he does next, which I am sure will include continuing efforts to defend the rights of workers and all Americans.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to pay tribute to the Fifty-Third National Puerto Rican Day Parade, which will be held on June 13, 2010, in New York City. A radiant and star-studded event, this parade proudly recognizes the heritage of Puerto Rican people here in the United States, and year upon year has proven to be one of our nation's largest outdoor festivities. The National Puerto Rican Day Parade is the successor to the New York Puerto Rican Day Parade, which held its inaugural celebration on Sunday, April 12th, 1958, in ``El Barrio,'' Manhattan. The impact of the first Puerto Rican Day Parade in New York was immediate and resounding. Thousands of New York Puerto Ricans flooded the streets in a very public, very proud demonstration of their emergence in the city as an important and growing ethnic group. For the next 38 years, the New York Puerto Rican Day Parade became a staple of New York's cultural life. In 1995, the overwhelming success of the parade prompted organizers to increase its size and transform it into the national and international affair that it is today. On June 13 delegates representing over thirty states, including Alaska and Hawaii, will join the roughly 3 million parade goers every year who turn New York's Fifth Avenue into a sea of traditional red, white, and blue flags. It's a picture unlike anything you will see anywhere else in the country. Not only because New York is the most international city in the world, but also because of the relationship that exists between New York and the Puerto Rican community. It's an historic relationship essentially born of mutual benefit and respect. Puerto Ricans have helped transform New York into a dynamic, bilingual city that continues to welcome newcomers from all over the globe, and the city of New York, believed by many to be a place of opportunity, has enabled Puerto Ricans to flourish economically, culturally and politically. The success that the parade enjoys each year is brought about in large measure by the continued efforts of a choice few individuals-- women and men of able leadership who believe, as I do, in the unbound potential of people of Puerto Rican descent. The Parade's march up Fifth Avenue, while certainly the most visible aspect of the celebration, is hardly the only event associated with the National Puerto Rican Day Parade, Inc.'s activities. Each year more than 10,000 people attend a variety of award ceremonies, banquets and cultural events that strengthen the special relationship shared by Puerto Ricans and the city of New York. Madam Speaker, the National Puerto Rican Day Parade is an experience unlike any other. It signals to all who witness it that the Puerto Rican community, both in New York and nationally, represents an exquisite tapestry of individuals. Its power can be seen on the faces and heard in the streets, as millions come together to joyously proclaim their heritage. And so, Madam Speaker, as a Puerto Rican and a New Yorker, and as someone who participates in this parade annually, I stand before you and my colleagues in Congress with a full and proud heart to pay tribute to the sights and sounds and wonder that is the National Puerto Rican Day Parade.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to offer tribute to Mr. Waldestrudis ``Walter'' Torres, a Puerto Rican Vietnam War hero from my district who recently passed away at the age of 62. Walter was a brave and committed man. He honored himself and his country on the battlefields of Vietnam before returning home to lead a quiet life of civil service. He spent nearly four decades in service to others, as both soldier and civilian. Walter was born in Coamo, Puerto Rico, on April 10, 1947. In 1967, at the age of 20, Walter joined the U.S. Marine Corps and was soon sent to Vietnam. Like so many of the more than 48,000 Puerto Ricans who served during Vietnam, Walter distinguished himself in combat. For courage and bravery, Walter received the Battle Star Medal, the National Defense Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal and the Vietnam Services Medal with Three Stars. After leaving the service, Walter was gainfully employed and hardworking his entire life. He held positions with the U.S. Federal Government Printing Office as a pressman, the U.S. Post Office as a letter carrier, and later joined the private sector in the board sales business. In 2003, Walter joined the American Association of Retired Persons' Senior Community Services Employment Program, AARP/SCSEP, as a job developer. Walter flourished in this environment, directly impacting the lives of over 1,000 seniors who participate in the program for employment placement services. In 2010, Walter was promoted to be assistant director of the program. In 6 years, he missed only one day of work. Madam Speaker, Waldestrudis Torres was an outstanding individual and an extraordinary example of American strength and character. Hardworking and large-hearted, he placed service to community and country above all else and should be remembered for his deep sense of commitment to others. I ask that my colleagues join me in honoring the life of Waldestrudis ``Walter'' Torres.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. I thank the gentleman. So much has been said today about what this bill does. Yet so little is understood, perhaps, about what this bill really does. The bill continues to be a bill I support strongly because, if nothing else, the strength of it is that it begins a process. When I have told many Members of what the bill doesn't do, they ask me, Then why do you support it? I support it because it begins a process. I support it because, for the first time in 112 years, the people of Puerto Rico will have an opportunity to express themselves, to say what they wish. Then we don't have to act on it. I suspect that we will, but we won't be imposing anything on anyone. Another argument is that this bill forces statehood on Puerto Rico, but that argument is made by people who say there is no majority in support of statehood in Puerto Rico. Therefore, people would be voting out of--what?--ignorance. Well, I'll repeat what I have been saying all week. I grew up in New York. I don't live in Puerto Rico, but I know one thing for a fact, not an opinion, which is that Puerto Ricans, from the age of about 10 or 12, know the status issue, discuss the status issue, and debate the status issue on a daily basis. It is the number one concern on the island. Therefore, no one will vote for statehood who does not believe in statehood. No one will vote for independence who is forced to vote for independence. No one will vote for free association who is forced to vote. They will do it because they believe in it and because they believe it is the right thing to do. Some in Congress have asked, Why don't they do it on their own? Because, when they have done it on their own, we have ignored it. Then there is another reason, one that may offend people if you don't present it properly: Puerto Rico did not invade the United States. The United States invaded Puerto Rico in 1898, and it has held it. According to the Constitution, it is up to the United States Congress to dispose of, if you will, the territory or to adjust the territorial status. If we tell them to do whatever they please, we will ignore what they do. If we tell them to do something, then it will be part of a process--again, that word ``process.'' So it is our responsibility to tell them to hold this vote. Now, if they hold the vote and determine that they wish to become an independent nation, we will then be able to say, Well, you asked for that with 45 percent of the vote. Can you go back and take another vote and come back with 80 percent? Similarly, if they vote for statehood, we could say, No, you didn't come here, asking us for a certain amount. You have to go back. So my point is that this bill does not end the process. With all due respect to my colleagues on both sides who oppose the bill, do you honestly believe that Congress would give anybody statehood just based on the first simple vote? I can assure you that, if statehood is ever to come to Puerto Rico, there will be a vote to accept the results of Puerto Rico's vote. There will be a vote to grant statehood to Puerto Rico. Then there will be a vote asking the Puerto Ricans ``yes'' or ``no'' if they accept statehood. It is just not going to happen. The process will take years. We are not doing what people think we are doing. What we are doing is being honest to the comments we make on a daily basis, which are that we go overseas to fight for freedom and independence, for the ability to be free people and to make free choices. Yet we're going to say today that we won't allow 4 million American citizens to simply advise us on this choice? That is a mistake. That truly is un-American. What do we have to fear--that the territory may ask for a change in its status? It might choose not to do so. One very important point: People say that the Commonwealth is defeated. No. In the first vote, you can choose to remain a Commonwealth. In the second vote, you stop being a colony. Vote for this bill.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time. My colleagues, I come to you today in a unique situation because, you see, I was born in the territory of Puerto Rico; and by being a resident of New York and having been raised in New York, I am able to be a Member of Congress. Not a Resident Commissioner, with all due respect to my brother, but a full voting Member of Congress. And so I come fully understanding how it is to be able to look at yourself and to wonder what, if ever, will be resolved when it comes to the status of Puerto Rico. This is a very significant moment and a very significant bill. For the first time in 112 years, the Congress of the United States will ask the 4 million American citizens in Puerto Rico what they wish their relationship to the United States to be. And it is done, I believe, in a fair way. Now many will argue today that it is not binding on the Congress. That is a good thing because Congress can then take the results and analyze them and determine how it wants to apply the results, yes or no, whether it wants a higher vote for independence, if that is what they choose, or a higher vote for statehood. Congress can make that determination. But I believe the process is fair. It says in the initial vote: Do you wish to remain as you are or do you wish to change your relationship to the U.S.? And then in the second vote if they choose for change, it says: Do you wish to become the 51st State, do you wish to become an independent nation, or do you wish to go and become an associated republic? Well, we have that. Some people say they don't know what that means. We have that. Micronesia is an associated republic of the United States. Palau is an associated republic of the United States. The Marshall Islands is an associated republic of the United States. So we know what that means. I would argue for those who support commonwealth, that the next natural step of the commonwealth is free association unless they have a notice and it is statehood or unless they have been misled and it is independence. I think the next step is free association. Why are those the three options available? Because all three options will remove Puerto Rico from the territorial clause of the Constitution of the United States, meaning it will no longer be a territory and then we can decide what to do. It has been said here that Puerto Ricans have served our Armed Forces. That means a lot to us. And it means a lot to be able to say to those veterans who are now in Puerto Rico that they will have a chance to express themselves. Many have asked me, Joe, if it doesn't do all of the things that some people claim it does, why do you support this bill? Because it begins a process, because it allows people to speak, because we would have heard for the first time that we know that they have something that they want to change. Now, the opponents claim that this bill pushes Puerto Rico to statehood. Now I grew up in New York, but I can tell you one thing as a fact that I know about the Puerto Rican community and Puerto Rico: they know the status issue through and through. I think from the time you are 10 years old, all you debate in Puerto Rico is the status and baseball. And the status is bigger than baseball. So no one in Puerto Rico will be forced to vote for statehood unless they want it. Nobody will be forced to vote for independence unless they want it. No one will be forced to vote for anything unless they want it. They are very adamant. You think I'm excited now, you should see the way they speak about those issues in Puerto Rico. Nobody will force them into anything. At the same time, the opponents tell you there is no majority support for statehood in Puerto Rico, but they'll be forced to vote for statehood. I don't understand that; if there is no support, then they won't vote for statehood. That's a fact. Now, briefly, some of the commonwealth people, with all due respect to them, have proposed a new commonwealth, but they have never presented it in legislative form. They've had years. In the 20 years I've been here, they've never presented the commonwealth in a legislative form. We have presented many bills that speak to self- determination. What they propose, and are you ready for this, Puerto Rico would remain American citizens. Puerto Rico would get more Federal dollars. Puerto Rico would be able to choose and pick any Federal law it wishes to follow and not follow. And Puerto Rico would be able to exchange ambassadors with other countries. That's the commonwealth that has been proposed. I want that for the Bronx. That's a great deal. And I am sure that the gentleman wants it for Florida. And the Texans would jump at it immediately. But that is not what it is. Give the people of Puerto Rico the opportunity to express themselves.

Mr. SERRANO

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

Mr. SERRANO. Well, I am very happy that you're proud of me. Mr. Speaker, I am very happy that she's proud of me. Mr. Speaker, I do want to clarify something, and the question that Mrs. Emerson asked is a very legitimate question: Why are we doing this the way we're doing it? Simply because we have not been able to get the other body, if I'm allowed to refer to them, to accept anything other than these kinds of bills at this point. And in answer to her second question, Which bill will we give the Senate, the one that we passed, or the one hopefully we'll pass today, the answer is, whichever one they'll take to deal with the issue. So that is really the problem here. Hopefully it will be resolved very soon. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4938) to permit the use of previously appropriated funds to extend the Small Business Loan Guarantee Program, and for other purposes.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 4938.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank my ranking member, Mrs. Jo Ann Emerson, who is a true partner in the work we do in our committee. We are an example of how to work together. I want to also thank her, Mr. Speaker, for the fact that she noted that I'm not spending one extra dollar here. This is not raising the deficit at all.

Mr. SERRANO. I will yield.

Mr. SERRANO. I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us provides for a 1-month extension of the Recovery Act small business lending program and provides an additional $40 million for this program. Through March 12 of this year, the small business lending program has supported nearly $23 billion in small business lending which helped create or retain over 560,000 jobs. The program eliminated the fees that borrowers and certain lenders are normally charged for loans through the Small Business Administration's 7(a) and 504 loan programs. The Recovery Act also increased the government's guarantees on the 7(a) loans from 75 percent to 90 percent. Mr. Speaker, 7(a) is the SBA's primary program for helping startup and existing small businesses with financing guaranteed for a variety of general business purposes. SBA does not make loans itself but rather guarantees loans made by participating private lending institutions. Like most commercial loans, these loans are typically variable rate. The 504 program provides growing businesses with long-term, fixed- rate financing for major fixed assets, such as land and buildings, through Certified Development Companies. A Certified Development Company, CDC, is a private, nonprofit corporation set up to contribute to the economic development of the community it serves. When credit markets froze in late 2008, credit markets that service small businesses froze as well and have continued to be hard hit. These provisions have been working to loosen up the credit market for small businesses so they can stay in business, keep people employed, and make new hires. As we know, in a very bipartisan way, we have all felt that there is nothing more important we could do right now but to allow for small businesses to thrive as we move to create jobs in our economy. And so I would hope that everybody in a unanimous fashion, Mr. Speaker, can support this bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I am in total agreement with my ranking member. It is our desire to make this permanent. We will continue to work on this. In the meantime, this provides the assistance that small businesses need in this country.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I want to raise an important issue that is affecting millions of people on the island of Puerto Rico. This issue deserves attention; the four million residents of the Island are U.S. citizens that pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. However, despite this fact, senior citizens living in Puerto Rico are not treated fairly and do not have the same benefits that a senior living in New York, Florida, California, or any of the other States enjoy. Under Medicare in Puerto Rico, senior citizens are not automatically enrolled in Medicare Part B. As a result, it is more beneficial for seniors to enroll in a Medicare Advantage plan to receive all of their Medicare services. Compared to the 50 States where the Medicare Advantage participation plan is 25 percent, in Puerto Rico approximately 83 percent of eligible senior citizens opt for Medicare Advantage. However, the fee-for-service, FFS, cost calculation for Puerto Rico is troubling. In fact, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, MedPAC, reported to Congress that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) ``should expeditiously use its authority to employ an alternative calculation method . . .'' I couldn't agree more with that statement or the report language included in the House Report for H.R. 4872, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. The language clearly stated: The county FFS expenditures calculated by the Secretary are artificially low and unstable from year-to-year. Therefore, the Committee expects that when calculating county FFS rates for Puerto Rico, the Secretary will use utilization and expenditure data from MA plans under current authority and adjust these rates and risk scores appropriately. Mr. Speaker, I support the House Report language because the senior citizens of Puerto Rico deserve nothing less than fair and equitable treatment in Medicare.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Madam Speaker, everybody on that side is throwing numbers around. The numbers I would like to think about for a second are more dates than numbers. It seems that everything that could be going wrong in this country, according to that side, started on January 20 of last year when we had a new administration. The prior 8 years were wonderful years. We were not in a war, we had surpluses, everything was going great. At least that is their presentation. But everything starting January 20 of last year, Oh, my God, that is pushing the country down the road to socialism. We are going into a big, deep hole, and it is the end of America as we know it. Well, the fact of the matter is this bill is a good bill. It is a very good bill for our country. I would like to share with you some good numbers, numbers that affect my congressional district in New York, in the Bronx, New York. But I must tell you that these numbers are reflected throughout the country. Listen to this: 86,500 uninsured residents of my congressional district will now have coverage extended to them; Medicare will be improved for 65,000 beneficiaries, including closing gaps that existed in coverage before; 201,000 families will be given tax credits and other assistance, as will 7,300 small businesses to help them afford coverage. We are talking about the United States of America, the greatest country on the face of the Earth; still, we are close to 40 million people without health insurance. What are we talking about here? Trying to fill that gap and take care of these folks. Now, what was the biggest accusation that we heard for the last year, year and a half: You are moving too fast. Too fast? President Roosevelt, Teddy Roosevelt was the first President to bring this issue up. That is over 100 years ago. Too fast? They have had all these years to do something about it, but still they wasted time looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I will tell you, I found a weapon of mass destruction, and it is close to 40 million people uninsured. That's the real threat to our country. The cost, the cost of health care in this country, that is a weapon of mass destruction. That can destroy us. Who is unhappy? Not seniors, with this bill. Not children. Not the working class. Not AARP, which is not known to be a great liberal organization. They endorsed it today. Not so many people we have mentioned. Who are unhappy? The insurance companies. Well, that's too bad. As we say in the south Bronx, the gig is up and it is about time they began to behave properly. We are catching them, and we are catching them strongly. I support this bill, and I support the efforts of my side to be able to bring it through.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. It is time for us, as a Congress, to have this long overdue discussion on our involvement in Afghanistan. According to the War Powers Resolution, we have a role to play; and it is time that we, as a Congress, exercised our authority. Whether you agree or disagree with the escalation in Afghanistan, we need to debate it. We need to vote on it, and we need to make a decision. We must not give up the powers that we were given in the Constitution. In the wake of 9/11, I did support a military response to the direct threat that Afghanistan posed to our Nation. I believed then that it was the correct response, and I believe now that it was in concert with our NATO allies. Nine years later, I believe that Congress has the duty to reevaluate America's involvement in a war that seems to have gotten bogged down, with very few signs of success. I believe that had we not taken our focus off Afghanistan in order to invade and occupy Iraq, we would not be in the situation we're in today. But pressing ahead without regard to our Nation's best interests and ignoring Congress' war powers prerogative is the wrong course. Let us be clear: We cannot tolerate the presence of terrorists seeking to harm our Nation anywhere in the world, but we must ask ourselves if long-term occupations are the correct answer to this threat. We must also be clear in our analysis of our situation in that country. We have a partnership with a government that seems to be increasingly unstable, corrupt and almost completely incapable of maintaining control over vast stretches of the country. We seem unable to eradicate the Taliban enemy. They scatter before our troops into lawless regions and then return once our troops leave. Without an effective government in Afghanistan, it's hard to see this pattern changing, as the local population cannot count on the Taliban ever being gone for good. This is a costly war without an end in sight. It's a costly war to our brave soldiers and to their families. It is costly because resources desperately needed to feed the hungry, to find a way forward on health care reform, and to fix our failing schools are being redirected to an effort whose success is questionable. Here at home, we have had precious little debate over this war. We have seen our troops' numbers rise to above those in Iraq, and yet we have no real benchmarks or goals after which we can leave. We continue to spend massive amounts of money to maintain the occupation of both countries; and worst of all, we ask our brave men and women in uniform to continue to sacrifice their lives and bodies for this war without our Nation sacrificing similarly. The least we can do to honor their service is to debate and vote properly on this floor and to ensure that our Nation is not sending them into battle without careful thought and reflection. Let me conclude by saying that I am from New York City, the place where 9/11 took place; and so I know firsthand the devastation that this caused to my own community. Although I supported the effort to confront bin Laden and the perpetrators of that act, I cannot now, 9 years later, agree to an effort which has moved in a different direction with different goals. To the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), I commend you for raising this painful subject and allowing our Chamber to engage in an honest and an open debate. Your courage is beyond anything that other Members can ever think of. Our troops and our Nation deserve no less, and you've given us the chance to debate this, and I thank you.