Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), the last speaker I have.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, in a moment I will be offering an amendment to the rule, and I want to take this opportunity to briefly describe the amendment. The amendment shifts initial consideration of the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 4853 into the Committee of the Whole. After 3 hours of general debate, a vote will occur on the amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules and the Committee of the Whole shall rise. If the amendment passes, a vote will occur on a motion that the House concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment with the amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole. If the motion fails, a vote will occur on a motion that the House concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, the rule, and the previous question. Amendment Offered by Ms. Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I have an amendment to this rule at the desk.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, on the rule, and the previous question. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the amendment and on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6517, the Omnibus Trade Act of 2010. This bill includes provisions that are critical to our manufacturing base: specifically decreasing the cost of raw materials, extending Trade Adjustment Assistance to workers who have seen their jobs shipped overseas, and making an important technical fix to the Wool Trust Fund program. Trade Adjustment Assistance is one of the most important lifelines for American workers who have lost their jobs due to international trade. The program helps train workers in new fields, and helps bridge the gap in health insurance benefits for workers and their families. In 2009, Congress made significant improvements by expanding eligibility for service sector workers, manufacturing and secondary workers, and by increasing training funding. The expansion also increased the Workers Health Coverage Tax Credit subsidy to minimize gaps in health insurance coverage for workers and their families. Since the overhaul more than 10,000 workers in New York alone have been certified to receive TAA benefits, and over 5,000 of these workers would not have received benefits had the extension not been in place. Across the country, TAA has helped more than 155,000 otherwise misplaced workers with the expansion since 2009. Our vote today will extend the improvements made until June, 2012. If we in Congress don't take action and instead let these improvements expire, we abandon workers who have already suffered from our tilted trade policies. It is imperative that we pass this legislation to ensure that America's workforce is able to adjust to changing economic environment and America can remain competitive in the global marketplace. H.R. 6517 also includes a technical fix to ensure that the Wool Trust Fund is funded at the level authorized in 2004 and 2008. This program provides payments to U.S. suit makers who have been left at a competitive disadvantage due to an inverted tariff--where the duty on the finished product is lower than the duty on the materials used to make the finished product. Without this fix, we are actually disincentivifzing suit makers to operate in the U.S. and that would be tragic for my district, which is home to Hickey-Freeman and 500 of the best suit makers in the world. The workers at Hickey-Freeman know from experience that over the past 2 years, revenue for this program shrank considerably, resulting in cuts of up to 66 percent to payments made to U.S. companies. H.R. 6517 closes the funding shortfall ensuring that our domestic suit makers continue to manufacture in the U.S. and that they are able to compete on a level playing field. I strongly support this legislation because it protects many of the manufacturing jobs we have now and provides funding to retrain American manufacturing workers for the jobs of tomorrow. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 6517.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act. Child marriage is an international epidemic, with 100 million girls projected to marry in the next decade. Not only do these young girls lose the opportunity to achieve their full potential, but they also are at risk for serious health consequences. Childbirth is five times more deadly for girls under 15 than for women in their twenties, and pregnancy is the most common cause of death for girls between the age of 15 and 19. HIV/AIDS is another serious risk for child brides, as they frequently marry more sexually experienced men. In many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, girls under the age of 19 are more than twice as likely to contract HIV as boys of the same age. Young girls frequently experience trauma and violence in these marriages. A front page article in The New York Times on November 7, 2010 told the story of Farzana, a young girl living in Afghanistan. Although she dreamed of being a teacher, Farzana was engaged at age 8 and married four years later. Her husband beat her for the first time on her wedding day, and the beatings continued for four years. She was forbidden to see her mother. Farzana tells us, ``I thought of running away from that house, but then I thought: what will happen to the name of my family? No one in our family has asked for divorce. So how can I be the first?'' Left with few choices, Farzana set herself on fire. After burning half her body, she lived--but only after 57 days in the hospital and multiple surgeries. Farzana's dream of becoming a teacher was killed by a premature marriage. She--and millions of others like her--deserve better. The bill that we are considering today will help realize the dreams of many young girls like Farzana by expanding assistance to prevent child marriage and empower girls around the world. Young girls everywhere deserve the opportunity to make their own decisions and determine their own destiny.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the 20th anniversary of the Office of Research on Women's Health. As the leading agency for women's health research in the United States, the Office has transformed biomedical research and improved the lives of women nationally and internationally. The Office of Research on Women's Health was founded in response to congressional and scientific concerns over the systematic exclusion of women from clinical research trials funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). One clinical trial, the Physicians' Health Study, included 22,071 men--and no women. This clinical trial generated over 300 basic findings that are used today to guide all facets of medicine. Indeed, the common advice to take aspirin to prevent heart attacks is based largely on this clinical trial with no female participants. By excluding women from clinical trials, biomedical research failed women. Scientists and government officials alike recognized the troubling implications of providing medical care based on research that excluded more than half of the world's population. The Society for Women's Health Research was founded to galvanize support and improve scientific research. My colleagues and I in the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues challenged the exclusion of women from federally funded research. In 1990 we introduced H.R. 5397, an omnibus Women's Health Equity Act, an unprecedented package of 22 separate bills designed to improve the status of women's health in the areas of research, services, and prevention. Among the provisions of this mammoth legislation were: the establishment and permanent authorization of the Office of Research on Women's Health; the statutory requirement that women and minorities must be included in NIH clinical studies, where appropriate; the establishment of research centers on osteoporosis, contraception, and infertility; and necessary funding increases for research into the diseases that claim unacceptable numbers of female lives, like breast, ovarian, and cervical cancers. Our interest prompted federal action. The National Institutes of Health announced the creation of the Office of Research on Women's Health in 1990. Many of the provisions of the Women's Health Equity Act were included in the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1993. Thankfully, President Clinton made the NIH bill, and especially its critical improvements of women's health research, one of his first legislative priorities. It was signed into law on June 10, 1993, in a White House ceremony befitting such historic legislation--establishing the Office of Research on Women's Health in statute. Since its creation 20 years ago, the Office of Research on Women's Health has increased our understanding of sex differences, from single cells to biological systems. This new focus on sex differences has transformed epigenetics, endocrinology, immunology, and many other fields. In 1999, the Office initiated the ``Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health initiative'' which supported the career development of approximately 400 early-stage research scientists. By helping these scientists to become independent researchers and obtain academic positions, the Office of Research on Women's Health built a sophisticated, active field of women's health research. In 2002, the Office established the ``Specialized Centers of Research on Sex and Gender Factors Affecting Women's Health'' program to support interdisciplinary research in basic and clinical research. In 2009 alone, this program helped scientists to publish 116 journal articles, 176 abstracts, and 63 other publications. Alongside of the ambitious research agenda of the Office of Research on Women's Health, the Office also educates physicians, providers, and patients about gender-based differences in health care. This education program helps to translate the research accomplishments into tangible improvements in care for women and girls nationwide. The Office of Research on Women's Health continues to press for improvements for women's health care. This fall, the Office launched its ``Vision for 2020 in Women's Health Research'', a far-sighted research strategy for the next 10 years. Their vision--which I share--calls upon our Nation to increase its commitment to evaluate sex differences in both basic science and clinical research. We also must ensure that sex differences are acknowledged in the design and application of new technologies and medications. Furthermore, we need to build a talented, diverse, and active women's health research workforce. We cannot abandon our commitment to women's health research. Indeed, recent withdrawals of medications by the Food and Drug Administration remind us of the importance of evaluating medicines by sex. In 2001, the then U.S. General Accounting Office published an evaluation showing that eight of the ten medications recently withdrawn ``posed greater health risks for women than for men''. The importance of the mission and accomplishments of the Office of Research on Women's Health cannot be overstated. Women and girls deserve health care that has been tailored to their needs, and that requires high-quality research sensitive to gender-based differences. I thank the Office of Research on Women's Health for their achievements over the past 20 years. I know that the Office will use the next 20 years to support excellent science that will benefit women and men alike.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1682 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. General Leave

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1682.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 1682 provides for consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 3081, the Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011. The rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations, or his designee, that the House concur in the Senate amendments to H.R. 3081. The rule provides 1 hour of debate on the motion, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion, except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. And finally, the rule provides the Senate amendments and the motion shall be considered as read. Mr. Speaker, we are here tonight to approve the continuing resolution to maintain a level and consistent funding stream for the government. It is an easy issue to demagogue, and it is my hope that everybody will work together now and quickly move this bill to passage and to the President's desk. The Senate voted earlier this evening on the same straightforward bill that keeps funding even for the fiscal year that begins on Friday. As you know, the CR before us will fund government agencies until December 3, and Congress will revisit the issue in November. There are some on the other side who question why we are considering a CR. They want us to stay here in Washington instead of getting this done and heading back to our districts. If you ask me, we've been here long enough. It has been an historic, groundbreaking session of Congress that will improve the quality of life for millions of Americans and has exceeded all of our expectations. Generations from now, history will show that Speaker Pelosi and our majority helped usher in far-reaching health care reform that had been tried for 100 years and put curbs on insurance companies, restructured Wall Street rules, reformed student aid, increased small business assistance, added new regulations on tobacco, curbed credit card abuses, and protected Social Security. It has been one of the most productive sessions of Congress that I have ever been associated with, and I am proud of all the work that we have behind us. But now it's time to approve the CR and go home. No one should be surprised with the CR. With the exception of fiscal years 1989, 1995 and 1997, one continuing resolution at least has been enacted for each fiscal year since 1955. In the 12 years that Republicans controlled the House, CRs were enacted 84 separate times. As in previous years, we are extending funding with a CR but are making no changes in policy. And I hope all of my colleagues would join me in voting ``yes'' on this rule. Mr. Speaker, before we spend more time on conversations about budgets and currency, I want to pause to pay tribute to a very special person who is retiring from Congress in November. Katharine Hayford, known to the world as Sophie, is more than just a dedicated member of the Rules Committee staff. She is an icon in the House, a symbol of the best attributes of the dedicated staff that keeps this place humming. She is a deep and irreplaceable reservoir of institutional knowledge, and to say she will be missed is a critical understatement. Sophie is one of those rare people in Congress who has always been content to work quietly and professionally in the background. She never sought or wanted attention. Her pride was in being prepared for any scenario that could unfold in the hearing room or on the House floor. And as someone with more than a little experience on the Rules Committee, I can vouch for that. Almost anything can and does happen here every day, and that is one of the things that makes the place so wonderful to work in. It's common knowledge to those of us on Rules that the tiny cubby holes and shelves behind her desk have more yellowed and dog-eared records than the National Archives and more paper and reports than a Presidential library. Sophie saved everything. Whenever the members were on the floor to manage a rule, Sophie was ready and waiting with a massive, double-phonebook-sized binder filled with House precedents, statistics, talking points, and even items that she had culled from the many blogs and Web sites she devoured. My first email from her every morning came between 5:35 and 6 a.m. But she is much more than a mini research factory. Sophie has a smile for everyone and went out of her way to provide cookies, raisins, almonds, crackers, chips, and even doughnuts on a regular basis to our hardworking staff. She did that on her own because she knew it was needed and appreciated. She bakes cakes, even vegan ones, out of deference to our staff that don't eat dairy. Her birthday celebrations are a familiar and comforting routine. Before we had the privilege of working with Sophie, she worked in the personal office of Congressman Joe Moakley, who was a friend to all of us. Sophie spent 10 years on Congressman Moakley's staff before coming to the Rules Committee in 1986, the year that I was elected to Congress, and some of my staff had not yet been born. More recently, she has discovered the pleasures of France and is a frequent visitor to Paris, where she is learning the language and discovering sites. And now, as she prepares to leave the Hill and spend more time with Brad, her quiet and extremely talented musician husband, it is time for us to say goodbye to Sophie and thank her for all this work over these many years.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. I just want to say to my friend, the eternal optimist, that I have served here for 22 years. I served in the State legislature in Albany, and I served in the county legislature. I have been a student of legislatures, Mr. Speaker, believe it or not, and I have never heard of, seen, or even contemplated any legislature anywhere where one party simply opted out and voted ``no'' on every single thing for political gain. They did have plenty of opportunity at the hearings and all the committee meetings to make their input there and had a lot of effect, I think, with quite a bit of legislation that we passed. But we had to pass it, Mr. Speaker, the hard way. I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), from the Rules Committee.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton), a former member of the Rules Committee.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield 30 seconds more to Ms. Sutton.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I am.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, let me talk about some of the consequences if we were to, and I pray we do not, vote ``no'' on the previous question. My colleagues say they are going to extend the Bush tax cuts permanently, with a price tag of $4 trillion over the next 10 years, more than doubling the deficit, while cutting the domestic discretionary Federal budget back to 2008 levels, which they say will save $340 billion over the next decade. Choosing once again to disinvest in America would save less than 10 percent of the increased deficits their policy would cause, but it would result in significant reductions to existing State and local law enforcement and crime-fighting programs. It would slash and burn JAG grants, which help communities to fight crime, by $260 million. It would gut the STOP grant funding that helps States prevent and respond to violent crimes against women. Overall, the Department of Justice would be cut by $2.4 billion. That would result in thousands of law enforcement personnel being laid off. The plan would slash $700 million from new law enforcement initiatives, including $210 million from DOJ and the FBI's cybersecurity, WMD, and counterterrorism programs, and 137 members from DEA, ATF and other agencies, all trying to fight the Mexican drug cartels that are threatening the communities along our borders. The price is really much too great, Mr. Speaker. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I am proud to rise in support of the men and women who risked their lives for their fellow citizens following the attacks on September 11. On that day in 2001, tens of thousands of Americans raced to rescue those injured in the terrorist attacks. In the course of the work that day and the days following, they were exposed to dangerous toxins and physical hazards. After giving so much of themselves, many of the firefighters, police officers, and bystanders face serious respiratory, gastrointestinal, and mental health conditions. While Ground Zero is 7 hours away from my own district in Rochester, the New Yorkers banded together as they joined the chorus of Americans asking how we could help. Just the other day, I talked to a captain of the Niagara Falls Fire Company who broke his leg at Ground Zero in an effort to rescue those trapped under rubble, many of western New Yorkers who answered the call to serve. We recently observed the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and we can't forget those who risked everything to help the victims at Ground Zero. For this reason, I support H.R. 847, the 9/11 Health and Compensation Fund.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I am going to forego the niceties of congressional conversation this afternoon because I have only got a minute to tell you what I really think. There are times when the timidity of the Congress of the United States absolutely overwhelms me into anger. We have sat by in this country since the Second World War was over, watching American jobs go to rebuild the economies of Germany, Japan and Korea, one after the other. We have gone way too far. We have jeopardized our own well-being. If we believe that we can be a superpower, the superpower, and not manufacture anything, I think we are sorely mistaken. When we are dependent on other countries for all the goods that we need, not only domestically but militarily, I think we are in a sorry shape. Now, our trade policies that we have had have been awful, and it is bipartisanly awful. But I will tell you right now that as far as I am concerned, and I hope a lot of my colleagues agree with me, until we get reciprocity, until every trade agreement that we pass says that that country has to open its borders completely to trade from the United States of America, we don't have anything. We are way late on this. We are 20 years too late to be doing this. We are right at the brink right now of financial disaster in this country. Those jobs that we have lost are not coming back. We have got to be rebuilding a new economy. We can't do it if China is going to do it all first and get there and dump on us and undercut. So not only pass this bill today, but demand stronger policies in this country to save us for our next generation.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure to be here with a member of the Rules Committee and my cochair of the Arts Caucus. It is wonderful to work with Mr. Platts, and I appreciate the kind words that he said about the work that we do. I rise today to honor the 50th anniversary of Americans for the Arts. As the leading nonprofit organization for advancing the arts and arts education in the United States, Americans for the Arts continues to be dedicated to representing and serving local communities and creating opportunities for participation and enjoyment in all forms of the arts. Founded in 1960 in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, the original mission was and continues to be to enhance support for the nonprofit arts. In 1965, Americans for the Arts played a key role in the establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts. A half century later, Americans for the Arts continues to foster the arts at the local, State, and national level. Under the remarkable stewardship of Robert Lynch for the last 25 years, Americans for the Arts has provided leadership and training to local public and nonprofit agencies through a national network of arts and business councils, business committees for the arts, and local and State agencies. Research by Americans for the Arts measured the economic impact of the arts, which was a wonderful piece of work and gave us a lot of ammunition on the Arts Caucus. It showed that approximately 100,000 nonprofit cultural organizations generate $166.2 billion in economic activity every year--now that is a great return on not much money-- supporting 5.7 million jobs. In my congressional district alone, there are over 1,200 arts-related businesses employing almost 16,000 people. In addition to fostering art jobs in our local communities, Americans for the Arts has worked to promote the importance of arts education in the public schools. Young people who regularly participate in arts programs are more likely to have better attendance records, to be involved in their school government, excel in their academics, and develop the creative and innovative skills necessary for us to compete in the 21st century global workforce. Through national events like Arts Advocacy Day, Americans for the Arts brings national attention to the importance of arts throughout our Nation. The arts define our culture and instill unique character in the communities across our Nation. Art transcends barriers of language, time, and generation, translating cultural differences, breathing life into history, and bridging experience across cultures. They accomplish the seemingly impossible task of both revealing our differences across the globe while managing to illuminate all that connects us. I thank Americans for the Arts and the wonderful staff and all of the people who have devoted so much of their working careers to this noble effort. And of their wonderful, fine accomplishments that they have achieved over 50 years, I am sure that the next 50 will produce even more great work, and we will all continue to enjoy the richness that the arts provide to each of our lives.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak in recognition of the 90th anniversary of the passage of the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution on August 26th, granting voting rights for women. This day, also known as Women's Equality Day, marks a significant milestone in American history. I know that my colleagues join me in acknowledging the contributions that women have made to America and the importance of this landmark in history. The 72-year struggle of suffragists, from the First Women's Rights Convention in July 1848 to the passage of the 19th amendment on August 26, 1920, bears witness to the sacrifice and dedication of the leaders of the early Women's Rights Movement. We must thank Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, and the other courageous women who organized the First Women's Rights Convention in 1848. Their early advocacy for voting rights, protection from domestic violence, the right to own property, and other social reforms that promote equality are the same goals that we seek for women today. The ``Declaration of Sentiments'' speech that Mrs. Stanton delivered at the July convention called for ``all men and women'' to be recognized as created equal under the law. This is a sacred trust that we must continue to support. On August 26, 1970--the 50th anniversary--the National Organization of Women (NOW) called upon women nationwide to strike for equality in protest of the fact that women still did not have equal rights. In New York City, 50,000 women marched down Fifth Avenue to demonstrate in support of the women's movement, as did women in 40 other cities across America that day. U.S. Representative Bella Abzug addressed the New York City crowd and was instrumental in getting Congress in 1971 to officially recognize August 26th as Women's Equality Day. In 1776, Abigail Adams, wife of John Adams, sent an urgent message to her husband who was a delegate to the second Continental Congress. She stated, ``In the new Code of Laws, I desire you would remember the ladies.'' It took 144 years for women's equality rights to be sanctioned by Congress and I ask, Madam Speaker, that we take this opportunity to honor this 90th anniversary and the remarkable contributions that women have made to this country. The American people owe a debt of gratitude to the early suffragists for remaining steadfast in the face of overwhelming opposition to equal rights for all American citizens that our Constitution supports today.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, many of my colleagues here today interrupted important activities back in their home districts in order to be here today for this unusual August session. Some canceled important community events, put off important meetings with constituents or postponed time with their children to be here. For me, today was the day that I was scheduled to present 11 military medals to Thomas Hetherington, a wonderful Niagara Falls man and decorated Naval officer. Hetherington fought in both the Korean and Vietnam wars but struggled for years to convince the Pentagon to give him replacement medals; his originals were buried some years ago in the casket of his brother, who himself was a decorated Marine and Vietnam veteran. This year, my staff was able to assist Mr. Hetherington with getting replacement medals to compensate for the ones he bequeathed to his brother. It was very important to his family and I was glad I could play some small role in navigating the bureaucracy for this constituent. But last week we called Mr. Hetherington and said we had to postpone the service. Why? Because like my colleagues, I was summoned to Washington to vote on an absolutely critical package of legislation that the Senate approved late last week. We're here today debating emergency assistance for states and school districts across the country, I can't think of a better reason for members to rush back to the Capitol. We're here today to extend a lifeline to teachers and classrooms to ensure that students across this country are not hurt by a weak economy that has forced some states into drastic cutbacks. Despite the failure of the Senate to move this bill during many months of debate until it finally passed this week, the urgency is real. And the appeal is broad. This legislation saves or creates 310,000 American jobs, specifically for teachers, police officers, firefighters and nurses. The funds will go immediately to states to prevent layoffs and in some cases to rehire teachers as summer comes to an end and students to go back to school. Students here in Washington DC will be at school the week after next. In my home state of New York, this package is worth roughly $2 billion in Medicaid savings. Since New York faced a budget shortfall, this bill directs more than $600 million to the state to retain and create teacher jobs over the coming school year. The U.S. Department of Education says the bill will fund 8,200 positions. This legislation is completely paid for, primarily by closing tax loopholes that encourage corporations to ship American jobs overseas. In fact, this bill will help us cut the deficit by $1.4 billion over the next 10 years. Amazingly, some on the other side have argued that this legislation is nothing more than a deal for ``special interests,'' as they say. These funds will assist states so that they can keep qualified teachers in classrooms and pay firefighters and police officers to keep our neighborhoods safe. Shouldn't we do everything in our power to protect those jobs? Widespread layoffs in those sectors would hurt not only schools and children but would further depress the economy. Knocking Americans into the unemployment line does nothing for families--they deserve better. These people form the backbone of our economy. Sadly, one of the reasons it took until the early part of August to pass this legislation is that Senate Republicans filibustered efforts to bring it forward for a vote. Now that this measure is before us, I hope all of my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation and quickly moving to a final vote this afternoon. If protecting public safety and education means that I am helping ``special interests,'' then count me in.