Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I will use my remaining time to close, but, first, I wish to insert for the Record an editorial from this morning's New York Times called, ``More Comfort for the Comfortable.'' That is the way they describe the Private Property Rights Implementation Act. They say it is a deeply misguided giveaway for big real estate developers. [From the New York Times, Sept. 29, 2006.] More Comfort for the Comfortable Congress, which has done so little this session to address the nation's real problems, is expected to vote today on a deeply misguided giveaway for big real estate developers. The bill would create new property rights that could in many cases make it difficult, if not impossible, for local governments to stop property owners from using their land in socially destructive ways. It should be defeated. The Private Property Implementation Act would make it easier for developers challenging zoning decisions to bypass state courts and go to federal court, even if there was not a legitimate federal constitutional question. Zoning regulations are quintessentially local decisions. This bill would cast this tradition aside, and involve the federal government in issues like building density and lot sizes. The bill would also make it easier for developers to sue when zoning decisions diminished the value of their property. Most zoning does that. Developers would make more money if they could cram more houses on small lots, build skyscrapers 200 stories tall, or develop on endangered wetlands. The bill would help developers claim monetary compensation for run-of- the-mill zoning decisions on matters like these. It would also make it easier for them to intimidate local zoning authorities by threatening to run to federal court. Zoning is not an attack on property rights. It is an important government function, and most Americans appreciate that it helps keep their own neighborhoods from becoming more crowded, polluted and dangerous. If more people knew the details of this bill, there would be wide opposition. As it is, attorneys general from more than 30 states, of both parties, have joined the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Conference of State Legislatures and leading environmental groups in opposing it. The bill does a lot of things its supporters claim to abhor. House Republicans were elected on a commitment to states' rights and local autonomy, and opposition to excessive litigation and meddling federal judges. It is remarkable how quickly they have pushed these principles aside to come to the aid of big developers. Mr. Speaker, I will be asking Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule to instruct the enrolling clerk to strike from the conference report several last-minute provisions that may compromise chemical plant security. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed in the Record immediately before the vote on the previous question.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce today the Lead Poisoning Reduction Act, a bill that will tackle one of the most dangerous environmental hazards to our children's health-lead poisoning. America has made an important pledge to eliminate this problem by 2010, and it is critical that Congress give our communities the tools needed to eradicate lead dangers. Despite the fact that lead poisoning is preventable, it continues to affect 434,000 American children every year, resulting in serious health problems ranging from brain damage and hearing loss to coma and death. We cannot stand by and watch our children continue to be exposed to toxins when we have the knowledge and tools to keep them healthy. In doing so, we rob them, and our communities, of their greatest potential. Unfortunately, children are often most vulnerable to lead hazards in the places they ought to be the most safe--in their homes and in their childcare facilities. In 2003, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control found that 14 percent of licensed childcare facilities had significant lead hazards. At facilities where the majority of children attending were African American, 30 percent were determined to pose serious risks of lead poisoning. Our childcare professionals work tirelessly to care for our children and keep them safe. But they desperately need the appropriate resources to protect children from the hidden dangers of lead hazards. Like its companion bill, introduced in the other Chamber by Senator Obama, the Lead Poisoning Reduction Act will establish the Select Group on Lead Exposures which will be comprised of experts from the Secretary of Education, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute of Environmental Health Science, the Administration for Children and Families, and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The Select Group will be charged with conducting a study of current State and local programs intended to prevent lead poisoning at childcare facilities. Within 1 year of enactment, the Select Group will establish lead safety standards and abatement procedures for such facilities. The bill provides for lead testing of child care centers, and directs the Select Group to establish and administer a grant program to defray abatement costs to help facilities comply with the new lead-safety standards. Finally, the Lead Poisoning Reduction Act will require that contractors hired for repair, renovation, or reconstruction of childcare facilities are provided with educational materials about lead hazards and the guidance necessary to avoid imposing additional risks of lead exposure. These initiatives will play an integral role in preventing future incidences of lead poisoning. America's children deserve to be safe at their childcare facilities. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Lead Poisoning Reduction Act.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, let me just point out that the minimum wage bill passed here was buried in a bill that gave billions in tax breaks to the Nation's wealthiest. Madam Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the ranking member on Homeland Security.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, at the end of the week, this Congress will adjourn so that its Members can go home to campaign for their seats. I like to think of a campaign as a long job interview. Everyone in the body will have to convince his or her constituents that they are the best person for the job, that they have spent their time here in Washington doing whatever they can to better the lives of the people back home in their districts. Madam Speaker, this Republican Congress has not made that task easy. It isn't just what the Congress has done with its time that is so disappointing, for example, yesterday's passage of a military detainee bill that undermines some of our most cherished and fundamental principles. It is also what the Congress has not done. All the challenges it has not addressed. The responsibilities it has not lived up to. It is all going to leave voters wondering what we have been doing these last 2 years. The American people do not need us to tell them why their country is headed in the wrong direction. Every day that Congress fails to implement the critical recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, they feel less safe. Every day they struggle to get by on real wages that continue to decline, they feel less secure. And every day that seniors and those with disabilities cannot afford their prescription drugs, that students and their families lie awake worrying about how they are going to be able to afford college tuition payments, and that tens of millions of commuters break the bank trying to afford their drive to work in the morning, every day these problems remain unresolved, and people ask themselves why this Congress doesn't seem to care about what really matters to them. They need it to take their troubles and concerns seriously and for us to spend our time passing meaningful bills that will actually help them live their lives and provide for their families. So today, my fellow Democrats and I are offering one last opportunity to our Republican colleagues to make the 109th Congress really mean something. This rule will give us the ability to consider numerous important suspension bills today and tomorrow. In that short amount of time, we can pass legislation that will go a long way towards giving our constituents and fellow citizens the help they need to live in safety and security, to achieve their goals and ensure a brighter future for their children. I want to briefly mention five goals that we should all pledge to reach before we adjourn. Since 9/11, this administration and Republican Congress have tried to convince us that we are in a war for civilization. They used the urgency of that supposed fight to justify reductions in our fundamental liberties and wars that have cost our citizens dearly. And yet they have largely failed to implement the overwhelming majority of the 41 security recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission, recommendations designed to prevent another attack here at home. And as was made clear by the response to Hurricane Katrina, this government is not prepared to respond to disasters. Nor has it adequately addressed weaknesses in our security system that could be exploited at any time, weaknesses in our energy infrastructure, at our ports, and in our intelligence community. And that is why I call on this Congress to immediately pass legislation putting the commonsense recommendations of the 9/11 Commission into law. We have no reason for inaction, and the American people won't accept any more excuses. Threats to the security of our citizens do not come from the outside alone, Madam Speaker. They are threats to that security right here at home. Working families cannot hope to feel secure if they are living paycheck to paycheck and deeply in debt. And if those paychecks are not enough to live on, they do not have much cause for hope left. The real wages of America's workers have fallen for years, squeezing the middle class and making it harder for our 7 million minimum wage workers to even get by. One way to alleviate that pressure would be to increase our minimum wage. The majority leader bragged a few weeks ago that he has spent his entire career in Congress voting against minimum wage increases. And he isn't alone. Under Republican control, Congress has refused to raise the minimum wage for 9 years, not even to adjust it for an increased cost of living. On the other hand, that cost-of-living adjustment has been made to the congressional salaries numerous times. Well, enough is enough. My Democrat colleagues and I pledge here and now we will not support another congressional pay raise until we give America's minimum wage workers a raise as well. There is an easy way to do it. We can immediately pass Representative George Miller's Fair Minimum Wage Act or a similar amendment that Representative Hoyer authored to the Labor, Health and Human Services bill. Doing so would have an immediate and profound effect on millions of lives. Madam Speaker, the deeply flawed Medicare part D legislation rammed through Congress last year has already come home to roost. Millions of Americans face prescription drug premiums they cannot afford, a reality that weighs especially heavy on the elderly and the disabled. This Congress should immediately give the Secretary of Health and Human Services the authority to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices. This would immediately help countless men and women get the lifesaving prescription drugs that they need. Nor should we focus only on the present. If we hope to secure a strong future for our country, we must make access to higher education a right instead of a privilege. In our increasingly competitive global economy, knowledge is power like never before, and a good education is more priceless than ever. And what a shame it is that so many of our soldiers serving us now have joined the Guard and Reserve simply to be able to get an education. During this Congress, Republicans responded to this challenge by cutting $12 billion in Federal student aid intended for our Nation's college students. It was a shortsighted and harmful decision, and it should be immediately reversed. I hope all my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will join the Democrats in restoring higher-education funding and expanding the size and availability of Pell Grants. We can do it by passing an improved Labor-HHS bill, and Democrats have the legislation to get it done. Finally, Madam Speaker, while energy costs have compounded the daily troubles of so many ordinary people, Congress has handed out huge tax breaks to the Nation's largest oil companies and done it while they have made some of the greatest profits ever earned by American corporations. Since Republicans passed an energy bill in 2001, authored in secret by the administration and those same companies, it has been clear whom the Republicans stand with on this issue. But the Democrats always fault for an energy agenda that works for all Americans, not just for the oil industry. We should immediately begin rolling back tax breaks for big oil and using the savings to invest in alternative fuels that would give us true national energy independence and real relief at the pump and force them to pay the royalties they owe this government for their use of public lands. Madam Speaker, today and tomorrow we will be presenting bills that will accomplish all these goals. I ask my friends on the other side of the aisle to think about the questions they will be asked when they go home in October. I ask them to think about how they are going to respond to a constituent who asks what they have done to lower tuition prices, to make our ports and mass transit systems more safe, to get prescription drugs into the hands of those who need it, and to increase the quality of life for minimum wage earners. I ask them to no longer ignore these critical questions and these critical needs of our citizens. In 2 days, with just a few simple bills, this Congress can improve the lives of tens of millions of people. The only real question left to ask is, why would we let such a precious opportunity pass us by? Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I will be asking Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that I can amend the rule to provide that the House will immediately consider five important legislative initiatives that will actually do something to help American workers and their families. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, my amendment would provide for immediate consideration of five bills. The first one would implement the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, something the House should have done years ago. The next bill would provide for an increase in the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour. It has been more than 9 years since hardworking Americans have seen a change in the minimum wage, and this increase is long overdue. The amendment would also allow the House to immediately consider a bill to provide authority to the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices for senior citizens and persons with disabilities. Last week, megastores like Wal-Mart and Target announced that they were cutting prescription drug prices due in part to their ability to negotiate with drug companies. Why should the government not be allowed to negotiate as well? Under my amendment, we will also take up a bill to repeal the massive cuts in college tuition assistance imposed by the Congress and to expand the size and availability of Pell grants. And finally, a ``no'' vote on the previous question will provide for immediate consideration of the bill to roll back the massive tax breaks for large oil companies and to invest those savings in alternative fuels to achieve energy independence. Madam Speaker, these are all measures that will actually do something to help improve the quality of life for all Americans, and will make them safer as well. That is what we were sent here to do. So vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we can consider these important bills today and show the people of this great Nation that they come first. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, the first amendment offered by Representative Meehan would restore habeas corpus, one of the most basic principles in our legal system which allows a person detained by the Government to have a judge review his or her case. The next amendment, which was offered by Mrs. Tauscher, strikes the provision in the bill that would reinterpret and weaken our commitment to the Geneva Conventions. The last amendment, by Representative Loretta Sanchez, would modify the appeals process by providing that the existing and experienced U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, and then the Supreme Court would be used instead of creating a brand new court system that is untested and untried. Mr. Speaker, the bill we will be considering shortly makes very extraordinary changes to the way we deal with interrogation and treatment of prisoners of war, and those incarcerated from the war on terror. It is undoubtedly one of the most deadly serious issues we will deal with in this Congress. The impact of this legislation is not just about the effect that it will have on those individuals that our Nation apprehends in wartime and in the War Against Terror. Every bit as important are the far-reaching implications that it will have for our soldiers and citizens who may be captured. This is about protecting them from torture and other inhumane treatment. The three amendments are critical components in this process. They need to be a part of the process today. Let's do the right thing and vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we may consider these issues today. The lives of the brave men and women protecting our great Nation depend on it. Again, I urge a ``no'' vote. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the minority leader.

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

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I think it is a proven fact that people have been imprisoned for several years without any due process. I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) who did not have an opportunity to have his amendment made in order. (Mr. SKELTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, the critically important legislation before us today is being presented as a bipartisan compromise, but nothing could be further from the truth. It was authored by the administration and by the Republican leaders of this Congress. As Chairman Hunter testified in the Rules Committee yesterday, no Democrats were involved in any way in the negotiations that were conducted over the weekend to produce this bill, nor did the Rules Committee make in order any of the 15 amendments that Democrats offered to address the sections of the bill that most offend our democratic values and violate our most fundamental traditions. The closed rule governing this bill means this Republican Congress is turning its back on a real debate here today. It is a reality made all the more egregious by the historic importance of this moment. We are at a crossroads today, and I fear we will not be judged kindly by future Americans for what my Republican friends want to do to us today. The bill sends a clear message to both our friends and our enemies about what kind of people we are. It shows them whether or not we are really willing to practice what we preach about freedom and democracy and human dignity. It is moments like this one when we reveal our true colors and even our true values. Sadly, Mr. Speaker, those watching today will conclude that when the going gets tough, America's leaders are willing to abandon our values, abandon them in favor of thuggish tactics that they hope might make them safer for a little while. In his second inaugural address, our President used noble words to describe America's role in the world and its duty as a beacon of hope for all nations. He said, ``From the day of our founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this Earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless values.'' That might be disputed by the generations of persons held in slavery and by the women of America who had no say in anything or standing anywhere, but, nonetheless, it sounds good. They are inspirational words. But here is the reality: For years, this administration has circumvented our Constitution in the name of security. Its officials have dismissed even the most important of our legal documents, such as the Geneva Convention, as being nothing more than ``quaint.'' It was described that way by the present Attorney General, the chief law officer, I might add. This administration and Republican Congress have allowed detainees to sit in prison for years without charging them with any crime. They are willing to deprive people of even the most basic due process rights that our country has always afforded those held by the government. They are willing to convict people of crimes without giving them any opportunity to review the evidence the government is using against them. They are willing to try to convict people based on unreliable evidence acquired through cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment that the rest of the world recognizes as torture. They are willing to allow government officials to degrade and torment other human beings in ways that civilized nations outlawed 60 years ago. They are even willing to take any new legislation that we pass today and make it retroactive to protect people who have already committed torture, so that past abuses will be forgotten instead of being sincerely addressed. What this Congress is showing the world today is that they are willing to trade our national birthright for a false and temporary sense of security. Let me emphasize that, because it is indeed a false sense of security, Mr. Speaker. After 5 years of secret detentions, torture, warrantless surveillance, hyped up stories about weapons of mass destruction, are we any safer today from the threat of terrorism? The answer is no, we are not. In fact, as we learned earlier this week, our country's intelligence agencies informed the President a few months ago that we are actually less safe than we were in 2001. Mistreating our prisoners and depriving them of the basic due process rights of our legal system is not making us any safer. All it is doing is slowly wearing away at the fabric of our democratic society, undermining the essential nature that made us different from other countries. When we degrade and mistreat our prisoners, we degrade ourselves and the democratic values we have inherited from generations of brave and decent Americans. We are ceding the moral high ground those who founded this country, and the men and women who served it ever since, won with their blood, sweat and tears. What is more, legislation like this puts our soldiers at risk. During the course of the national debate on this issue, a number of prominent admirals, generals and other military leaders have spoken out against this bill. They have told us time and time again that ignoring our American values puts our U.S. military personnel deployed overseas in danger. That falls on deaf ears here. They have said that respect for the rules of military engagement and prisoner treatment are more than just important parts of our American heritage. They also protect Americans who are captured and imprisoned by foreign powers. Mr. Speaker, how is endangering our troops making us any safer? How is undermining our moral standard helping us win allies in the war of ideas that we face? The answer is simple. It is not. At this very moment, there are hundreds, if not thousands of people held in facilities whose fate will depend on this legislation. I want to take a moment to talk about one of them. Bilal Hussein is an Iraqi who worked as a photographer for the Associated Press. He is also a Pulitzer Prize winner. He has been held in Iraq by American forces for 5 months. He was accused of aiding and abetting the insurgency, but he has yet to be charged with any crime. He has been given no access to a lawyer or to a court and has not been able to see any evidence against him. The Associated Press has stood by him and repeatedly defended his innocence. We want to make sure he is alive. We will be writing the Secretary of Defense today to give us some information on his case. But under this bill, Mr. Speaker, Bilal Hussein could be declared to be an enemy combatant, sent to an American detention facility and kept there indefinitely. No charges would ever have to be brought against him. His permanent detention would never have to be defended in a court of law. Imagine if another nation held an American citizen without charging him of a crime. Imagine if it refused to even let him see the evidence against him. What would we say about such a country? So, I ask my friends on the other side of the aisle, what are we supposed to say about our country today? Again, in his inaugural address of 2 years ago, the President had this say about the soul of America: ``When the Declaration of Independence was first read in public and the Liberty Bell was sounded in celebration, a witness said it rang as if it meant something. In our time, it means something still.'' This bill gives the lie to that speech and it gives the lie to what should be our Nation's greatest asset, our greatest weapon in the fight against terrorism and oppression, and that is our values. I ask everyone in the House to reject this bill. I ask everyone here to chart a new course for America. If we reject torture, if we stand up for a legal system and fundamental rights that are the basis for liberty and the only real source of security that we have, then we will have come a long way in our battle against the threats our Nation faces in the world today. My friends and colleagues, please don't turn your back on the past. It is in its lessons and principles that we will find the key to a safer and more just future. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I reclaim my time. You negotiated with yourselves. We were completely shut out. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the Chair of the Rules Committee that Democrats brought 15 amendments up last night, including amendments by the ranking members of Armed Services and Intelligence, that were not allowed.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, this do-less-than-nothing Congress just returned from another recess, and already the Republicans are preparing to adjourn at the end of this week so they can go home and campaign. This is not what people sent us here to do. They expect us to address issues of importance and to do our best to improve their quality of life. Yet, Republicans in this body seem content to head back home, having had ``dead-horse week'' and bills yesterday that will never see the light of day in the Senate; and they are expecting us at home to do this to improve their quality of life. Democrats are committed to finding solutions, not ones that involve destroying our natural resources for short-term gains or ones that rely on Middle Eastern potentates to ensure our way of life, and certainly not the so-called solutions that provide tax breaks to oil companies and not to consumers. Instead, we are committed to cracking down on price gouging, repealing the $8 billion in tax breaks to oil companies, and investing in new energy technologies to really end our dependence on foreign oil. Mr. Speaker, we do not have time to do nothing about the energy crisis. I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 4479 to repeal the oil company subsidies and give a break to consumers and small businesses.