David Scott

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. May I have my point of order responded to?

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have sat here and have counted 15 straight times that we have ruled on the central question of germaneness. We are here to talk about the Agriculture appropriations.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. My point of order is, where is it in the rules to which this total disrespect for the Chair and the rulings of the Chair continues to be allowed? What is the point of having a rule?

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Point of order.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper) whose intentions are certainly well meaning, here is the situation. This was never brought before our committee. We spent hour after hour, most times till 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning, working on a variety of these issues. Now, if there are charges that he is speaking of, and they appear to be serious, they belong in the jurisdiction of the Justice Department, not in the Agriculture Committee. That is where this argument needs to be taken, but not at this late hour at a time when it has not been brought before our committee. And, as he said, he might have mentioned it to the gentleman, Mr. Pomeroy, at dinner, but that's a hue and a cry from having this discussion in the full Agriculture Committee. The other point is that there are 16 companies who provide crop insurance. If this rather draconian amendment were even adopted, it would severely wreak havoc in the crop insurance industry as we know it and provide fewer choices for our farmers. Again, it is beyond the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Committee. I respectfully ask that we oppose the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Chairman, we are at an extraordinarily important moment. The people of America are watching us all across this country. The U.S. agricultural community and industry employs over 20 percent of our entire workforce and accounts for $3.5 trillion every year in our economy. And it is just somewhat baffling to me as we look, and we have worked together in the committee to get many competing forces together, that the gentleman and gentlewomen on the other side of the aisle would turn their backs on the American people and all the work that we did together and in bringing these competing forces together, whether it was black farmers or our Traditionally Black Colleges, or food stamp recipients, all with compelling needs, country of origin labeling, on a whimsical excuse, because we had to balance and score this at a time so that we would have pay-as-you-go so we wouldn't put it on the backs of our children and grandchildren to pay for this farm bill; went to Ways and Means and asked them to find a way to get us $4 billion, and they went and got a way that was first presented by President Bush. President Bush said, let us close this loophole on foreign companies that are using what is known as earning strippings to stop paying taxes like every other American business. When President Bush said this just 6 months ago, there was no hue and cry about a tax increase. There is no tax increase on this. This is a good bill. Let's pass it.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I serve on both Agriculture and Financial Services, so I can look at this with a very jaundiced eye. And I think what we have to do is make a decision in this move based upon what the lay of the land is. First, we're talking about renewable energy and ethanol. Where is that going to take place? It's going to take place in the rural communities where the products, where the crops are that will make renewable energy. This proposal is tied very tight, and I think that farm credit deserves to have an opportunity to compete in this new burgeoning industry. The businesses that are made eligible are ones that process or handle farm products that are directly used in renewable energy. This is very tight. I do not believe that the farm credit needs to be denied this opportunity. I do not think it blurs jurisdictional lines. We should not close the door on an industry, an opportunity for farm credit to provide a service that is not directly competitive with our bankers.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, if this House of Representatives wants to stand up for the people of America, they will stand up and vote for this rule and for this bill. We spent many hours, way into the midnight hours, working and bringing every party together. This is not a tax increase; the other side knows it. Their leader said these words President Bush said in his 2008 budget: ``Some foreign companies are inappropriately avoiding taxes that other American businesses pay by using this loophole.'' This is what the Republican President said. This is not raising taxes; it is closing a loophole. Vote for the rule.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor one of the finest educators ever to serve students in my congressional district. Please join me in congratulating Carolyn LaVerne Davenport for thirty- four years of outstanding service to my constituents in the 13th Congressional District of Georgia. Ms. Davenport was born in Atlanta and raised in Jonesboro, Georgia, the heart of my district. As a youth, she attended the same school system in which she taught for many years, graduating as valedictorian from the W.A. Fountain School in 1965. She went on to earn a Bachelor's degree from Spelman College in 1969 and received her Master's of Elementary Education degree in 1972. Carolyn taught first and third grades at George M. Kilpatrick Elementary School. Throughout her career, Ms. Davenport received many accolades including an honorary life membership to the Georgia Parent Teacher Association, as well as a Certificate of Special Achievement from the American Red Cross Youth Services. Not only was she a leader in the classroom, she was a leader in her community as well. Twenty-five years ago, Carolyn founded the Clayton County Campaign for the United Negro College Fund. Thanks to the UNCF and Carolyn's activism, thousands of students, including several of my colleagues in this great body, have been able to receive a higher education and pursue their dreams. In 1991, in recognition of her great efforts, Ms. Davenport received the UNCF Star Volunteer Award and the 2000 South Metro Salute to Higher Education Award. She has also volunteered for many civil rights, community and international organizations including the Concerned Black Citizens Coalition of Clayton County, the NAACP, the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition and CARE International. Madam Speaker, Carolyn Davenport is a true public servant. The impact she has made continues to be felt by her colleagues, friends and other members of the community. As she enters retirement, she will still be regarded as an exceptional leader and a model citizen. Once again, I congratulate Carolyn for reaching this milestone.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. The one area we did not mention, because we need to, because it's going to play a very important role in the future, that's nuclear, nuclear energy. I know when you mention the words nuclear energy, folks get a little shaky, but that's an education job, that's a leadership job. But nuclear energy is reliable, it's low cost, everywhere we have the safety necessary, there's a licensing process that we go through, there are all kinds of features there. But nuclear energy is very, very important, it's going to play a very important role, and we have got to invest in it. Finally, I have got to say, I think in reminding a great historian once said, on the bleached bones of many past civilizations are written those pathetic words, too late. Let us hope and let us know for sure with the action we are taking in this Congress that they will not be able to say that about our civilization on this energy and global warming. We are not going to move too late.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Matheson, I would like to maybe pick up on a point you made on the diversity and alternative sources of energy. Let's just take one for a few moments and put this one on the table, because I truly believe that this is one of the major directions we are going to have to go in. As you know, one of the problems with our dependence on oil and petroleum, aside from the Middle East and the political volatility there and the unstableness that is there, even if we had and were able to produce some of this oil on our own here, we have a refining problem. We are very short in our refining capacity. It has been almost a quarter of a century since we even built a new refinery. There are reasons for that, environmental, people don't want them around, but they are not there. But that is another reason. So, one of my interesting visits not long ago was to go down to South America, to Brazil, to visit Brazil. One of the reasons I wanted to go to Brazil was because I wanted to find out what they were doing and how they were doing it with their energy problem. Here is one salient fact: Brazil and Argentina both are not dependent upon the Middle East for oil. They have moved very rapidly and are setting the curve for ethanol production. Now, 85 percent of their automobiles are ``flex'' automobiles, in other words, running on a combination of mostly ethanol made from sugar cane. If Brazil can do those two things, get clean energy, get ethanol, make it from a grown product that continually renews itself, and at the same time not be dependent on oil from the Middle East, surely we can learn something from what is going on in Brazil. And I did. A group of us went down to Brazil. We spent a lot of time down there. We talked to people and we found out some things there. I believe, quite honestly, a major feature, not all of it, but a major feature of our way out and our way forward in becoming energy independent rests in the production in this country of ethanol. Again, we have got to be very responsible as we move forward with ethanol production. We have got to have a level of moderation with it and we can't go overboard with it. It is very interesting that President Bush in his State of the Union, if you recall when he was talking about energy, mentioned it. He said we can solve our problem with ethanol made from corn, and he put some large figure out there. But if we even just went with that, it would put such downward pressure on our food stock, on our cost of beef and poultry and chicken and pork, who feed off of corn. Corn cannot do it alone. So it has to be a dual approach with cellulosic, which is made out of pine straw and pine trees and wood chips and switch grass, which we have plenty of. The point that I am making is we can move rapidly here, and we are. As a part of our farm bill that we will be marking up this week, that we are in the process of marking up, we and the Democrats and Blue Dogs, who make up a large part of the Agriculture Committee, are in the leadership on this, and it is one of the areas in which all of us can be very proud. But certainly within our Blue Dog Coalition, we are providing the leadership on finding a way out of our energy dependence, and we are doing it through our farm bill. Just think, that we can grow our way out of dependence on oil in the Middle East. We have got all of it right here in this country, and I think getting the ethanol plants moving, using corn where we can, but there is a certain limit we have to have there, but use these other means of cellulosity, the wood chips, and putting the incentives in this package, as we have in the farm bill to explore and develop ethanol plants and plants of operation. Also, we have to do it near the points of distribution. And in the process of creating this new industry, we create jobs when we create a clean energy source and that is one of the major steps I believe for us as we move towards energy independence.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I think you made a significant statement there, Mr. Matheson, that when you are in a deep hole, the first thing you do is stop digging. I want to very, very briefly share, and I am sure there are some American people who are watching our discussion this evening, on just how serious a situation we are in. I talked about instability in the Middle East and our dependence upon oil. Clearly there are two known facts. Right now, 42 percent of all of the known oil reserves rest under the basin in the Middle East, in Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. That is nearly half of all of the available oil supplies that we know of in the Earth. And it is not renewable. It doesn't renew itself. Eventually at some point oil is going to run out. When I was at NATO, and we had a meeting over in Paris this past winter, our winter NATO meetings, a question was put to a noted economist, John Malone, and he made a profound statement. He said we didn't leave the stone age because we ran out of stone; nor will we leave the oil age because we have run out of oil. What he said was that civilization as we know it could very well run out before the oil runs out with the rapid rate we are going with the damage that oil-driven energy sources around the world are causing with the greenhouse effects. I thought it would be very interesting to share with the American people just how serious this is given the fact that oil is not a renewable source of energy, given the fact that almost half of it is in a very unstable region, and much of the world is still depending upon. But according to the Energy Information Administration, here are some startling facts. They say that world daily oil consumption is projected to grow by 1.4 million barrels this year in 2007 and by 1.6 million barrels in 2008. That is daily oil consumption. You talk about running out with that rapid rate, and each year it goes up. In addition, the EIA projects a steady increase in natural gas and electric use in the United States which will create upward pressure on prices. This doesn't paint a very good picture. And then it goes on to say that almost all scientists agree that the Earth's climate is rapidly changing and getting warmer, having increased by 2.6 degrees Fahrenheit since the turn of the century. Now as I mentioned earlier, on the surface of it, 2.6 doesn't seem like much, but it is major. The Earth's global average temperature is now approaching or possibly has passed, according to this report, the warmest experience since human civilization began over 12,000 years ago. Now it is approaching the warmest it has ever been in the history of mankind. Global warming is a fact. Climate change is a fact. And it goes on to say that over the past 150 years, measured carbon dioxide concentrations have risen by more than one-third. The question is not whether greenhouse gases will result in climate change, but rather the magnitude, the speed, and the geographic details and the likelihood of impacts stemming from this trend. I am not painting a gloom and doom picture here. We are talking about facts so we can get a sense, a greater sense of urgency in this Congress and in the world. So many places over in the world we are fighting and killing one another over what could very well be in the scheme of things very trivial. We are all in the same bucket as human beings. This earth of ours is precious, and for no other reason more important than saving this earth for our future generations, the air we breathe all rests in the decisions that we make in this Congress today. I know and I share the same feeling with you all that we feel very honored and very privileged to be elected and serving in Congress at a time when this is our challenge. And when they write the history books and perhaps our grandchildren and children will look and say, well, what did grand-daddy or my daddy do at that time, the history books will reflect very proudly that we provided the leadership at a very crucial time to move this Nation forward in getting away from oil dependency and getting into clean energies. We have the means to do it. We know we need to do it, and we have the direction to do it.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Thank you very much. It is certainly a pleasure to be with both the gentleman from Louisiana, and for you as well, Mr. Melancon. This is definitely a major, major priority as far as the future of this country is concerned. Our energy policy is interwoven directly into our vital national security. There is no question about it. We have, for the past 50 years, progressively gotten more and more dependent on oil from the Middle East. There is a reason why Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, those Middle Eastern countries are so vital. It is so important for us to try to hopefully find a way in which we can get peace in that region. We don't know the answer to all of this; it is largely going to be up to those Middle Eastern countries. But we are so directly tied to the future stability of that region, largely because of one thing, that is, our energy. And that has been a mistake, that we are tied to our future energy needs to the most unstable region in the world. And we now need to move very rapidly to excise ourselves from that. The other reason why our energy policy is so vital and so important, and again, part and parcel of our national security, is because of global warming. Make no mistake about it, there may be differing opinions about global warming, there may be differing opinions about climate change, but one thing is certain, the facts do not lie. This Earth is getting warmer by the day, by the year. Scientists have pointed out that the Earth's climate is increasing in warmth at a rate of one-tenth of a degree in each of the previous decades. That may sound like a little. But when you look at just 2 degrees since the turn of the century, that is a major, major fact; the fact of dependency on oil in the Middle East, the most unstable region, the fact that we are experiencing the damage of global warming. The reason for the global warming is the excretion of carbon dioxides into the air, and that gives us the greenhouse effect. So on those two points, we have no choice but to proceed directly ahead and provide the kind of sterling leadership this Nation deserves, as you so aptly pointed out, Mr. Matheson, in a very responsible way, in which both sides of the aisle can come together. Everybody can come together and understand that this is not a Republican issue. This is not a Democratic issue. This is an issue for the future of the American people and the people of the world.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Thank you very much. I think in addition to the plans and the points that we have offered here, there's the other side of this that we have got to face, and that is human behavior. We've got to provide leadership to change human behavior when it comes basically to the one instrument that is causing so much of the pollution, that is causing the earth to get warmer. That is the automobile, and we have to move on both fronts. We have to move on the front of getting the American people to do, and we can do this if we use our policy right, if we use our incentives right. One is that we need to provide encouragement and incentives for individuals to get out of their automobiles, to use other means of transportation, especially in our large urban areas. Let me tell you about my region of the country that I represent which is Atlanta. The Atlanta area has one of the highest carbon dioxide emissions area in this country, and with that is traffic congestion, which is about to choke the great promise of our city, not only in our region, not only in terms of the traffic but the air we breathe. So we have got to move and provide the leadership to get alternative means of transportation moving people from place to place without such great dependency on the automobile. Just think about the time and productivity and hours that's a waste in the human productivity of sitting in traffic jams, let alone the waste of energy and the idling of the motors just in the traffic jams alone. We can't continue that way. We've got to do things. Commuter rail is one of the areas that we are working. That's hard. It's hard to get people out of their automobiles, but it might be good policy for us to move to an area of good Federal tax dollars being used as incentives to be able to give people opportunities to get on these commuter rails. Perhaps we ride for free. Perhaps they're down in a subsidized cost. We've got to do something. In Europe and in France and throughout Europe and in Japan, they have got trains now that are zipping people along at 100. They have got one over in Asia and Japan somewhere that's going about 150, 160 miles an hour. Where would we be without the rapid commuter rail systems we have in the northeast? Can you imagine if we didn't have it? You think traffic is bad between New York, Boston and Washington, D.C. Just think it what it would be like if we didn't have those systems. So there are ways in which we've got to do that. The other thing is; and I am not saying, I know how hard it is, I love my car. We are a society in a culture in America that has just grown up with the automobile. It's a part of us from the drive-ins to all the things that we associate with the good life. Get a home, get a car. You are in America. But maybe, in addition to getting them out of those cars with incentives and the commuter rail and other means, maybe we can do something with the car itself. They are doing some things, American ingenuity is already at work in New York. The Ford Motor Company is now putting together an electric car. They are already out there. We have moved, and I think we are moving with the proposal in this Congress, to give an incentive, to give a tax write-off, tax benefit, some help, for people who will buy cars that run on the batteries and electricity. They have this. I think there is a lot more we can do, in changing the habits of the American people, changing to get them out of the automobiles, and then changing the nature of the automobiles themselves, and then, of course, getting the clean sort of renewable energy we can to put them in. These are the kinds of proposals and approaches that I think this issue calls for, and I think it's the way forward in the future.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Well stated.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I reserve the right to close, if the gentleman from Texas has more to offer.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Let me explain, if I may, Madam Chair, in closing. This is very personal to me. I've grown up in this country. I understand messages and I understand this message. This is a message that is targeted to a group of people, no matter how small they may be, who believe that certain people are categorized as wanting a handout, or that they are lazy, or that they don't want to work. So then the cry comes, before we can give them any help, make them work. Make them get a job. Madam Chairman, that is what this is about. In my humble opinion, 20 hours of work, not even defined, whether it is a day, whether it is a month, whether it is a week, no requirements in it, is an unfunded mandate. On top of that, Madam Chairman, there are already included in this bill a number of provisions to encourage work, to encourage self- sufficiency, including reduced work disincentives. So in closing, may I say, Madam Chairman, please vote against the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. May I inquire as to the balance of my time?

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I will yield to the gentleman to respond.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. We have just heard the gentleman from Texas lay out a scenario that is ripe full of holes. This amendment is drastic. It is costly. It is inefficient. It affects all families and individuals currently using a voucher or living in section 8 project- based housing. It's impossible to administer. Even HUD and the administration itself has not even requested it. It imposes a new unfunded mandate on private sector landlords owning Federally assisted housing, forcing them to assume the role of a welfare agency. The gentleman talks about a boom on the taxpayers. This imposes a significant cost to taxpayers by raising the costs incurred by public housing. And I have in my hands a letter from just about every housing and real estate and housing association in this country saying, in effect, that we are not able to support the Hensarling amendment. Most exemplary of the ridiculousness of this amendment is that he asks for 20 hours of work, but doesn't say how, doesn't say when. Twenty hours when? Twenty hours a week? Twenty hours a month? Twenty hours a year? There is no way to administer it. But Madam Chair, what is so hurtful to me about this amendment; yes, it is mean-spirited. But not only is it mean-spirited, my friend, it is, indeed, bigoted. It is, yes, a bigoted amendment. Let me tell you why. It reflects a very stereotypical negative view of certain economic racial groups of poor people, poor families, because it singles them out for an ill-defined work requirement that does not apply to other families and individuals receiving Federal assistance. This amendment needs to be dealt with for what it really is, and quite honestly, it is an insult to the Congress of the United States. And I submit it is even beneath the dignity of the Congress of the United States to even entertain this amendment. Madam Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver), and I reserve the balance of my time to close.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, let me just very briefly outline exactly what we are after in this bill. First of all, this is a responsible effort for redeployment so that we can refocus and fight the war on terror. The situation in Iraq is a civil war compounded by civil wars that have been going on ever since Abraham, Hagar, Sarah, Isaac, Ishmael, Esau, Mohammed and his son-in- law, which has broken into the Shi'as and the Sunnis; hundreds of thousands of years, folks. None of the people from Iraq came to this country and asked, please come over and pump in $500 billion, 3,600 of the lives of your precious sons and daughters to make a democracy for us. That was a decision that was made counter to the authorization in the first place. It was a go against weapons of mass destruction. It is responsible. It is focused. We need to do it, and I urge passage of this bill.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I stand 100 percent behind this bill for a responsible redeployment of our troops out of Iraq. Much has been said. There are several points I would like to make going forward. First of all, this is responsible. This is not something that was just put together. This was put together with military advisers of the first order, generals on the ground who were consulted, and by two of the most distinguished individuals in this Chamber, our distinguished chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. Tom Lantos, and our distinguished chairman of our Armed Services Committee, Mr. Ike Skelton. Nobody can argue their credentials. Nobody can argue the credentials of the military advisers that put this together. But most importantly, the people that no one has mentioned, the entity that no one has mentioned, the most important entity of all is the American people. This bill represents the will of the American people. Seventy percent of the American people support this action today. Now, let me remind you of the words of Robert Jackson, one of our distinguished Supreme Court Justices in the steel seizure case of 1952, when a similar situation was in place, where we were at loggerheads then with the executive branch and the legislative branch, but at that point, the Supreme Court decided that Congress has the authority. And Jackson went on to say that when the executive branch denies, disrespects and disavows the authority of Congress, we enter into what is referred to as a zone of twilight, or a twilight zone. That's where we are now, to get out of this twilight zone of destruction and mayhem, of instability in the Middle East. You talk about stability in the Middle East. We are more unstable in the Middle East now as a result of what we have done. Get us out of this twilight zone. This bill is the way to do it, and I commend it and hope we pass it overwhelmingly.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor a great accomplishment by students in my Congressional district. I offer my congratulations to members of the Chestnut Log Middle School Reading Team of Douglasville, GA, for winning the Helen Ruffin Reading Bowl. This competition was held at the University of Georgia in Athens on April 21, 2007. Students read from a statewide book list and answered questions from the novels in order to earn points and win the contest. To be eligible for the State competition, Chestnut Log students first won the Douglas County Reading Bowl in February, then a regional competition at West Georgia University in Carrollton in March. In April, they became State champions. I want to recognize the members and coaches of the Chestnut Log Middle School Reading Team. These individuals are Seth Blair, Isaac Carter, Zachary Fowler, Will Gay, Patrick Ray, and Caroline Wesson. Special recognition goes to coaches Jan Easterwood, Margaret Robbins, and Susan Bissell for their guidance of this team and devotion to fostering good reading habits among youth. In closing, Madam Speaker, I want to commend these students for their great accomplishment. As an avid reader, I wish to persuade all of my constituents, no matter young or old, to read and to encourage reading within their communities.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, thank you to Ms. Baldwin, the distinguished lady from Wisconsin for her generosity, and thanks to Mr. King and those on the other side of the aisle who are joining in this effort. Mr. Speaker, without question, this is an extraordinary day, it is an extraordinary bill, is an extraordinary occasion. This is America, the greatest country in the world, and our flag represents greatness. To have now, finally, fruition, the manifestation of those precious words that were captured in the book of Exodus in the holy scriptures, where God said, the greatest and the first commandment in relationship of man to man were these words, ``Honor thy father,'' and then He said, ``and thy mother that thy days will be long in the land.'' Finally, today, on this day, June 11, in the year 2007, nearly 4,000 years since those words were written down and inscribed, we are finally recognizing fathers as well as mothers by making sure the flag flies not just on Mother's Day but on Father's Day as well. In the Hebrew language, the word for ``father'' is ``abba, ``and in the Greek language it is ``pater,'' and together those words mean the begatter, the progenitor, the source. But it also means provider and protector. It is no wonder why God in His wisdom said: ``Honor thy father'' and He put father first, and our mother, and now we are rectifying that situation. I am very delighted to be here. This is an important bill, at an important time, because never before have we needed to stress the role of father, to be a good father. It is a gaping hole in the fabric of America that fathers are not being fathers. Throughout so many aspects of our society, the American flag is one of the greatest symbols of our country. It is the representation of our freedoms, our values, our heritage as a Nation. As Americans, our flag code instructs us to fly the flag every day, but especially on a number of very special significant Federal, religious, and cultural holidays. For many years, this list of occasions has included Veterans Day, President's day, Columbus Day and Mother's Day. In the past several years, the list was amended to include the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.'s observation of his birthday as a national holiday, in honor of his outstanding contributions that he made in his lifetime to the advancement of the civil rights of all Americans. But our flag code currently does not reflect the important roles of both men and women in the raising of children, and never before have we needed to emphasize that. It is time that this body officially recognizes the importance of American fathers by passing this important legislation today. I am pleased that the House is considering H.R. 2356, for fathers play an extraordinary role in the development of children. Psychologists have emphasized that the presence of a father significantly influences a child's development in many ways. Infants not only distinguish between their father and strangers' voices within the first 4 weeks of life, but infants also recognize that a father is likely to engage in play time with them. That first impression, to hear that strong comforting voice of a father, to balance that with the mother, is so critical in the development of our children. In later years, the relationship between a father and his children strongly influences success in the classroom, improves relationships with peers, and decreases the likelihood of negative behavior. Is there any wonder that today in so many reaches and depths in our neighborhoods that there is negative behavior, and that is so much associated because there is not a father being a father in the home and in the life of that child. The presence of a father is also a very important determinant in the child's socioeconomic potential later in life. Unfortunately, over the last four decades, research shows that there has been an unprecedented rise in this Nation in the number of fatherless homes, especially when they are first born, no father. The National Fatherhood Initiative emphasizes that children from families with fathers are five times less likely to be poor. What is the answer to poverty? Getting the fathers who produce these children to be fathers, to take care of these children and be responsible for these children. It is important for Congress to emphasize the significance of fathers and their socioeconomic value of the two-parent family as well, for studies also show that children are more likely to engage in recreational activities when their fathers are present. When fathers are involved in organized sports such as soccer, baseball and basketball, they are not only encouraging physical activity in their children, but also character development and sportsmanship. Fathers also benefit for participating in their children's teams, as physical activity contributes to increased wellness and disease prevention in men. Fathers who are active in child rearing may also find themselves more nurturing toward their colleagues in the workplace, improving other aspects of their lives, by taking younger coworkers under their wing or volunteering more time to charitable organizations as well. Schools across this country are developing innovative programs to reach out to parents and to especially get fathers involved in various and positive activities. In Kansas City, Missouri, the Reconnecting Education and DADS organization developed a specific reading program for fathers to use with their children. The Kindering Center of Belleview, Washington, created a weekly support group for fathers of children with special needs. All over the country, schools are facilitating courses in responsible fatherhood, including education on child development, managing stress and good nutrition for their children and themselves. I want to take just a minute here to acknowledge the important work of a similar organization in my own congressional district in Georgia. These men, these fathers are making a difference in the lives of our children by volunteering their time to improve the learning environment, not only for the children, but the many others who are within the school as well. They call it the DADS organization, DADS, whose acronym stands for Diverse and Dedicated Support, and it is a collective effort by fathers in my congressional district to serve as role models, not the athlete, not the rap guy, not the singer, not the superstars. The great role models for our young people need to be their fathers. By doing this today, this Congress is making this bold and much-needed statement. This program places fathers of students in Clayton County, Georgia, middle schools to serve as hallway and classroom monitors to help with the discipline problems in our schools. Who better to do that, helping faculty to maintain order as students transition between classes throughout the day. This is where the violence sometimes starts. But with a parent there, particularly a father, a strong male presence, these men also serve as tutors when students need the help the most, including Clayton County students to pursue their education and their dreams. One self-employed volunteer at Lovejoy Middle School works while students are in class, and takes breaks throughout the day to monitor hallways and classrooms. That's a father. Another volunteer, a wounded veteran from the war in Iraq, not only sacrificing his life in Iraq, where he was wounded, but he comes back home in Clayton County, Georgia, and walks the halls of Adamson Middle School with a cane. What a sight. These are heroes. No greater role model could we find than this wounded veteran who was wounded in Iraq, but comes back to help shape the lives of our young people in school. He came so that he may assist the faculty in ensuring good discipline among the students. I am so honored, I am so full, I am overflowing up here today to know these fathers are making the ultimate difference in our communities and in my district. These men are not just fathers to individual students. They are dads to the children who lack the involvement of a father in their lives. The expansion of this program to elementary and high school underscores the success to reach out and encourage the involvement of fathers both inside the school and out. In closing, I want to also note that many children from single-parent families are doing well. They are succeeding. But just think what it would be if they had both parents there, if they had been raised to be upstanding and successful members of our community. By passing this legislation today, we will show our support for the important roles that fathers, as well as mothers, play in preparing future generations in this country. Honor thy father and thy mother so that thy days will be long in the land. We are doing that in Congress today, with extraordinary important, meaningful, and significant legislation.