David Scott

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I rise to oppose the amendment, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, this is an important and urgent and critical bill. All across this Nation, families are struggling and suffering. In my own district of Georgia and in one of my major counties, which is Clayton County, which is one of the leading counties that has had over a 200 percent increase in foreclosures of homes, they have lost over $158 million in terms of their home equity. Now, Mr. Chairman, the speaker just spoke a moment ago about one of the major features of this bill, and that is trying to grapple with assigning liability. I want to just make sure that everybody understands what we are talking about, because we are going to have that debate. Just what is an assignee? An assignee is a mortgage broker or lender, any loan originator that makes these loans but they don't keep them. They repackage these loans. They often are loans that are delivered to the secondary market to a group of investors and these are parties that own an interest in the loan as it flows through the investment process, and they are known as assignees. Since these loan originators don't keep the loans they make, they often deliver what the secondary market will buy, with little regard for whether the homeowners can make their payments or afford these loans. Unfortunately, many of them get into these loans on what is known as ``teaser rates.'' They put forward a loan at a very low rate but, unbeknownst to the homeowner, in a short period of time the payment balloons out of kilter and the homeowner cannot afford it. Some people say this is not by design. But in so many cases, they are by design. So what does that consumer have? He must have some recourse by which to have an ability to stop the foreclosure on his home. That victim has to hire legal counsel to bring separate action against the loan originator. This bill attempts to address that. An assignee liability is an important feature of this measure.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important because the assignee liability issue did come up, and I think as we move through this debate it would be clear to get a clear understanding of what we have in that so we will have a point of reference. First of all, in this issue, if a consumer gets a loan that violates the minimum standards, in this bill are minimum standards, then the consumer has cause of action against assignees that have purchased that loan. The consumer may sue to rescind the loan and recoup other costs. There has to be an element of liability in the issue. We have worked to get a delicate balance that both protects the consumer while at the same time also saving some elements of liability so that we keep the market free of unnecessary suits. Further, when the holder of a bad loan initiates a foreclosure, the consumer may exercise a rescission right under this to stop foreclosure. This is important. If the rescission right has expired, the consumer may seek actual damages plus costs against the creditor, the assignee or the securitizer. This provision gives real power to the consumer who can sue to stop a foreclosure of a bad loan or to rescind the bad loan. Now, we also have some protections from liability for the loan originator. Number one, somebody may ask, why even give some protection from lawsuits to any entity that buys a loan? I believe that most consumers realize that the market provides the funding for loans and that the constant threat of legal action will indeed increase the cost of those loans for everybody. Somebody will have to pay that cost. And normally, that cost will fall on the consumer. So we have struck a delicate balance in the assignee liability.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I thank my distinguished colleague from New York (Mr. Arcuri). I really appreciate this opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I stand here with 100 percent support for H.R. 3915. Let me just start off my comments by sharing with you and the Members of the House and the people of this country how severe this issue within the mortgage industry is, particularly within my district and my beloved State of Georgia. We are one of the leading States that have been victims of abusive lending practices, predatory lending, and certainly we are at the epicenter of this mortgage crisis facing us in this country. For example, Mr. Speaker, 40 percent of the loans in my district are in the subprime area. Homeowners in my district have lost $159 million in home equity value. One of the counties in my district, Clayton County, is one the leading counties in this State that has suffered so desperately from home foreclosures due to subprime lending, abuses within the lending practice, and certainly the epicenter of it all, the eye of the storm, is predatory lending. My State of Georgia has been fighting this battle for an awfully long time. Even during my days in the Georgia State Legislature as a Georgia State Senator, we had to deal with this issue of abuse from Fleet Finance. So I want to just start with laying that out, Mr. Speaker, so you can see how critical this issue is, not only within my State of Georgia, but facing this entire Nation. That is why we have this bill. It is an important bill, and it is important because it is urgent that we move in a timely manner. Let me just state very quickly, Mr. Speaker, if I may, what the key areas are in the reform of this bill. First of all, it creates a new licensing structure for mortgage brokers and loan originators. This is done to ensure that they are licensed and that they are held accountable for the quality of the loans that they originate. This is very important. Second, it creates a new minimum standard for mortgages and protections to ensure that all loans are properly underwritten, and eases the way for high-quality or qualified loans, qualified mortgages, to be securitized. This is very important. This is especially important because it ensures continued liquidity in the mortgage securities market, and that is what we really need to make sure that we do foremost, is to make sure we have the money there, to make sure we have the liquidity there. The third key area is it expands the definition for high-cost mortgages, which greatly increases the protections available for consumers if they desire to select a subprime mortgage. Now, this bill also addresses reckless loan underwriting, it addresses abusive subprime payment penalties, and it deals with direct incentives for mortgage brokers to steer families into expensive and risky loans. There are a lot of these kinds of unsatisfactory practices that are going on in this industry, let me say not by everyone, but there are some bad actors in this mortgage industry situation. This bill attempts to weave a delicate balance to move in and deal with those that are doing wrong and provide the kinds of protections that our consumers need. This legislation is needed because all Americans should be protected against predatory lenders. Those are the ones that we are after the most, these folks that sit there and they look and they target areas. They target the most vulnerable people among us. They target minorities. They target African Americans especially. They target Hispanics. They target senior citizens, some of the most vulnerable people. They take advantage of the significant complexity of the language and the complicated situations that are involved in the mortgage industry, so that many people don't know what they are signing for on the bottom line, and they take advantage of that. We need this legislation because consumers should get good credit. The best thing we can do for consumers currently on bad loans and for future borrowers is to ensure that they can get good credit. This legislation is needed because credit availability must be preserved, especially in the troubled market that we are in right now. Lenders should not make loans that they know that the consumer cannot pay back. Mr. Speaker, it is almost unspeakable for many of these loan originators, who know that many of these people can't pay these loans, but they go ahead and they deal with it. Let me just deal finally with the arguments that there are some on the side that say the legislation is too weak. There are others that say the legislation is too strong. Well, I would just like to say we in Congress have to work with almost everything. It is sort of like making sausage. We have to pull this. We have to pull that. We have to try to come up with a bill that, first of all, we can get through the Congress. But I am willing to bank my stake on it, Mr. Speaker, that this is a good bill. This is a bill which is a first step which we can deal with. And if they say that this bill is so weak, why are my phones ringing in my office, ringing both here and in Atlanta, Georgia, from bankers and from brokers who are saying that this bill is too strong? This bill is an effort to move. It is important national lending legislation that, for the first time, prohibits steering a consumer to a loan that would do these four things: A loan that the consumer cannot pay, a loan that does not provide net tangible benefits, a loan that has predatory characteristics, and a loan that treats borrowers differently based on their race or their economic standing. In most cases, this bill also will allow States, if they want to, to have even a stronger bill, in most cases. Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate this opportunity. I thank Mr. Arcuri for your patience with me. I hope we will have a chance to come back later in the day and address some of the issues of signing liability and preemption.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3703) to amend section 5112(p)(1)(A) of title 31, United States Code, to allow an exception from the $1 coin dispensing capability requirement for certain vending machines.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I urge immediate passage of this bill and transmittal to the Senate.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3703. This is a very timely and important piece of legislation because as you may recall, the Presidential $1 Coin Act of 2005 requires retailers, including vending machines that are located on Federal property, to both accept and disburse $1 coins by January of 2008. We are talking about 7 weeks from now. That brings about the urgency and the timeliness of the matter. This requirement additionally applies to transit systems, military bases, and those that take Federal subsidies. Now, while most vending machines are already programmed and able to accept $1 coins, there are very few that are programmed to dispense $1 coins. So that is why this legislation is needed, to exempt those vending machines from dispensing requirements that do not have a reason to dispense the $1 coins in the first place. So that in effect, Mr. Speaker, if we do not pass this bill, we will have unintendedly affected a hindrance of the circulation of the coins by compelling them to be stored in vending machines that will never dispense them. This legislation targets machines that have only $1 in currency and exchange. So you can see there will never be a need for the machine to dispense $1 coins. We believe that these Presidential $1 coins are very important. They should be circulated. The public should circulate them, but certainly having them stored in a vending machine from which they will never be dispensed is not the way to do that. That is why we need this bill. I ask that the House urgently pass this measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material therein.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I stand in strong support of this most important piece of legislation. This is the most important piece of legislation to stimulate our economy in this entire session. What we have before us in this House today is a choice: Will you stand with the few, as my friends on the right are doing? Will you stand with the few multibillionaires who are not paying their fair share while the rest of America is paying a 35 percent rate on their income? Will you stand over there on that side with multibillionaires who are paying just 15 percent? Will you stand with 30 million American families who will get property tax relief? Or will you stand with those who have not, who are hiding behind capital gains, when they know very well that they are not putting capital in. That's why we have capital gains at 15 percent. But these fund managers are not. They are being compensated for ordinary income. Why should they be different than the housewife and the fireman? Make the right choice today. Stand with America and let's vote for this bill.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize an important milestone in the life of my constituent Mrs. Maggie Katie Brown Kidd. On December 8, 2007, Mrs. Kidd will celebrate her 103rd birthday. Many family members and friends will recognize this momentous occasion with a party in late November. Maggie was born during President Theodore Roosevelt's second term in office and has lived to see another 16 presidents in her lifetime. Maggie Brown was the eleventh and youngest child born to William (Doc) and Lucy Callahan. She is the sister of Johnny (John S.) Brown, Rosie May Brown, Pearlie Docia Ann Brown Seals, Jasper Brown, Sally Mack Brown Finch, Evie Brown Robinson, Lena Jane Brown Jewell, Mary Lou Brown, Jewell McNabb, Nora May Brown Barrow, Climmie Lee Brown Finch Haynes and James Richard (J.C.) Brown. At a young age, Maggie united with the Mount Zion Baptist Church in Stephens, Georgia under the leadership of Reverend W.M. Combs, and was baptized by Reverend Henry Gresham. After church, she loved to play baseball on Sunday afternoons with her siblings. She remained with Mt. Zion until she moved to Atlanta, and still feels a connection to her home church. On November 30, 1940, she married Willie (Dock) Kidd, III, son of Willie Kidd, II and Annie Lou Dalton, and brother of Bernice Kidd Wingfield, Ceola Kidd Jackson, Janie Kidd Jackson and Carrie Kidd Thomas. Mr. and Mrs. Kidd raised two children, John and Rosalyn. She is also a grandmother to four, and a great-grandmother to three children. As her husband and all siblings have passed away, Maggie is the matriarch of her family. Maggie still takes long vacation trips with her children and participates in family gatherings and activities outside of Georgia. Maggie is an avid quilter and enjoys a quiet afternoon stitching in her favorite chair. In closing, Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the life of Mrs. Maggie Katie Brown Kidd, by wishing her a very happy 103rd birthday.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise in honor of the veterans who have served so bravely in defense of our freedoms to say thank you for your service. November 11, 1918 marked the day major hostilities during World War I ended, and was subsequently adopted as Veterans Day in the United States. This day now gives us an opportunity to reflect on the many sacrifices made by the Armed Forces throughout our history. As members of Congress continue to address the needs of today's soldiers and veterans, I share these thoughts in honor of those who have fought and died for our country. Earlier this year, I made my third trip to the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany where I met with our brave service members who were injured while serving in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Repeatedly, I see the severity of these injuries and I know that properly caring for our returning soldiers demands far more funding than what has been allocated by previous Congresses. Since the beginning of our military engagements in the Middle East, health care for returning service members and veterans has been wholly unsatisfactory. Under the strong leadership of Democrats, we have begun the process of providing the necessary funding to adequately address the needs of our soldiers and veterans. In May, Congress provided $5 billion for the health care needs of soldiers returning from the Middle East, including $1.8 billion for veterans enrolled in VA health care programs. This funding will ensure the Department of Defense and Veterans Administration both have the resources to provide timely and efficient case management services, especially for the young men and women who served in operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. In March, I supported legislation limiting the number of cases assigned to a physical evaluation officer, in order to ensure the utmost attention to soldiers' needs. This proposal would also encourage accountability by establishing a toll-free number for families to report deficiencies in military medical facilities. As nearly one in three soldiers admitted to Walter Reed Army Medical Center presents with traumatic brain injuries (TBI), we will continue to target investments to respond to these most debilitating injuries. I am pleased Congress provided $900 million specifically for TBI treatment and services to soldiers. Additionally, this year the Senate has proposed $10 million for the TBI Program, to improve services for soldiers' families. I also supported legislation that would establish four VA facilities solely dedicated to rehabilitating and tracking the progress of soldiers with TBI. In honor of the brave men and women who suffer these injuries, I will continue to advocate for increased funding throughout the appropriations process for fiscal year 2008. Congress must also continue to take a hard look at the current rating systems for disabled veterans, which many have described as disparate, unfair and outdated. Earlier this year, Lt. General James Terry Scott, chair of the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission (VDBC), expressed concern that the status quo is not meeting the needs of veterans and returning soldiers. The VDBC, and the Dole-Shalala Commission formed by President Bush this year in response to the deplorable conditions at the Walter Reed Annex, both agree that the dual-disability rating system through the Veterans Administration and the Department of Defense needs a permanent fix. With the commissions' detailed recommendations in mind, I will work diligently to ensure a system that equitably compensates soldiers with service-connected disabilities, while reducing the red tape that so often compromises the ability for veterans to receive care. As a representative to the United States Congress for nearly six years now, I have worked tirelessly to represent the interests of the active duty and retired military who call the 13th District home. On this Veterans Day, let us remember our family, friends and neighbors who have proudly worn the uniform. We are forever grateful for their service and we will continue to work persistently to ensure our nation's veterans will want for nothing.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 3547.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge, celebrate and honor the thousands of women throughout the country who have been diagnosed, currently fighting or have survived breast cancer. As the husband of a courageous wife who survived this disease, I, as many others, have been affected personally. I understand the struggle, pain and sometimes heartache it can inflict on the person diagnosed, in addition to family and friends. I believe we all have been affected by breast cancer in some way, whether it is a spouse, daughter, mother or grandmother. Breast cancer really affects us all. I whole-heartedly support additional funding for breast cancer research, screening and treatment programs. Too many women go undiagnosed until it is too late. We must further provide additional education and prevention programs to those women who slip through the cracks, especially those in low-income communities, as a lot of these women lack the health insurance coverage necessary for annual mammograms. We could also save millions of tax dollars if we could detect this disease sooner. The best way of surviving this devastating disease is early detection and programs which ensure the mammogram is fairly inexpensive and which will encourage more women to be tested. I have recently joined with my fellow colleagues in signing a letter to the House Defense Appropriations Conferees urging them to recede to the Senate language that funds the Department of Defense Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program at $150 million for the Fiscal Year 2008. This important program was created 15 years ago and has proven to be highly successful and has become one of the most far-reaching and influential research initiatives in the country. I believe any research program that serves as a model internationally and has actually made critical breakthroughs resulting from its research is a wise taxpayer investment; a small investment which yields big results. I have long been a passionate advocate for breast cancer awareness and research. As a Georgia State Senator, I authored the Breast Cancer Patient Protection law which gives breast cancer patients and their physicians the right to determine their length of stay in the hospital and their level of medical treatment. Currently, the Breast Cancer patient Protection Act has vast bipartisan support and would require health plans to provide coverage for a minimum hospital stay for mastectomies, lumpectomies and lymph node dissection for the treatment of breast cancer. With my support, I am hopeful this legislation will move forward during the 110th Congress. In cosponsoring numerous pieces of legislation in my years in Congress, I will continue to fight for additional provisions in the law and funding for programs which will help the thousands of women diagnosed each year. The statistics can be telling. Every three minutes, a woman is diagnosed with breast cancer and is the leading cause of death among women between the ages of 40 and 55. In fact, 1 out of every 98 women who live to the age of 85 will develop breast cancer in her lifetime. Unfortunately, all women are at risk for breast cancer. About 90 percent of women who develop breast cancer have no family history of breast cancer. Breast cancer is further the most common cancer among African American women. It is true older women are more likely to develop breast cancer than younger women. However, younger women are still at risk for the disease and currently, 250,000 women under the age of 40 have breast cancer. Simply put, the disease can strike from an early to older age and additional research and awareness to this fact is of utmost importance. Mammograms may be necessary earlier than was once thought and only additional research monies will help us determine if this is the case. As a father of two young women, raising awareness and developing more effective screening and diagnostic tools for this age group is vital to affording them the same chances of survival. We must also pay close attention to research being conducted with regards to the environment and how it may affect the incidence of this disease. As a cosponsor of the Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act, I believe authorizing grants for the development and operation of research centers regarding environmental factors that may be related to the etiology of breast cancer could yield miraculous results. There may very well be parallels between the environment and this devastating disease and any findings could help derive new treatments and help thousands survive. Madam Speaker, I urge all Georgians to take measures to protect and keep their health. I encourage my constituents and their friends and family to be aware of measures that can be taken to improve their health and further prevent the incidence of this disease. My goal in representing the 13th District of Georgia has always been to be responsive to my constituents' concerns and to ensure the thoughts and views of all Georgians are heard in Congress. As a member of Congress, it is my duty to help bring attention to issues my constituents deem significant, and breast cancer is one such issue. I join with countless others this month to honor the inspiring strength of breast cancer patients and the dedication of health professionals who care for them. Our inspiration is great: breast cancer survivors who have won their fight, and the friends and families of those women who unfortunately did not. Almost everyone in America has been touched by this disease, and I believe we can work together to ensure in years to come, the incidence is lowered and we indeed find a cure. Again, I applaud the brave individuals fighting this disease and the medical professionals and oganizations who so intently dedicate their time to the cause. God bless.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Chairman Frank, let me commend you for the excellent leadership you have provided on this issue. Mr. Chairman, never before in the history of this country, the United States of America, have we had as great a need for affordable housing as we need right now. We have just come out of perhaps the most devastating storm and natural disaster in the history of our country and the greatest need in that area, not just in the gulf area, but rippling throughout this country as a result of that is affordable housing. And, Mr. Chairman, one in seven households now spend more than 50 percent of their income on housing, and on any given night in America, across the width and breadth of this country, nearly 1 million of our people are homeless, including men, women, and children, and nowhere is it targeted to the elderly and the low income. So what are we doing with this affordable housing trust fund? We're responding to the hue and the cry of the American people, for we need to make sure that we have affordable housing. Now, yes, we have the HOME program. And there may be coming an amendment on here to strike what we're doing and make it a part of the HOME program. And the HOME program has done some good things, but it does not do the most important things that this country needs now, building and constructing new homes. The HOME program doesn't target that, nor does the HOME program target those in most basic need, the lower income and the disabled. Now, let me just explain for my remaining time because I want to show precisely and explain how this trust fund is funded. This is very important. We've had a lot of things said today. This is how it is funded. It's funded with moneys from the proposed GSE affordable housing fund, H.R. 1427, which we passed. It also funds it from the Federal Housing Administration, FHA, savings that result from the enactment of the expanding of the American homeownership program. And it does not go or cost any money. It's pay-as-you-go and does not add to the Federal deficit. The estimated numbers from these funding sources will result in an initial allocation of $800 million to $1 billion to the States and local communities for affordable housing funds, with a 60-40 match with the States and the local governments. Furthermore, not only will these moneys be used for construction, the moneys will be used for rehabilitation. They will be very diverse in usage, acquisition, preservation and operating assistance. These moneys will also be used for both rental housing and for down payments and costs for closing assistance for first-time homebuyers, very, very important considerations. So we're going to hear a lot from the other side, and I respect my friends on the Republican side, but it is us on the Democratic side that are clearly responding to the needs of the American people here. We're creating, yes, and we're expanding. Why? Because the problem has expanded. As I said at the outset, 1 million people every night homeless. We've been ratcheted from one end of this country to the other for displaced people from Katrina, and God knows what else is going to happen with the global warming and the global climate changing. There could be more. No, this is a great program. It's a program that is needed. The timing is right, and the American people are expecting us to respond, and the best way to respond to the American people is to establish this affordable housing trust fund.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Clerk be authorized to make technical corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 2895, to include corrections in spelling, punctuation, section numbering and cross-referencing, and the insertion of appropriate headings.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I too want to thank Mr. Tanner, Mr. Abercrombie, and Mr. Skelton and our Republican colleagues for coming together. Mr. Speaker, this is what I refer to as a soaring golden moment in this Congress because this is the beginning. This is a beginning of effective planning for bringing conclusion in a very responsible way to what the American people truly want. And why is this a golden moment? This is a golden moment in this House because the only way that we are going to bring this Iraqi situation to a positive conclusion is with Democrats working with Republicans. Democrats cannot do it by ourselves, Republicans cannot do it by themselves. The other point why this is a golden moment, Mr. Speaker, is because this shows, and the process of this legislation and the reporting and the involvement of the Congress shows, that we are not going to make the same mistake ending our involvement in Iraq that we made in going in; and that was poor planning, bad information, and ineffective intelligence. That's why I commend this. It's very important for the American people to see us finally, as Democrats and Republicans, working together in this start to take this great step. And let us dare not lose this golden moment of bipartisan cooperation.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, In 1945, Congress enacted a law declaring the first week in October of each year as ``National Employ the Physically Handicapped Week,'' in order to educate the American public about issues related to disability and employment. From there, the week expanded into a month designated ``National Disability Employment Awareness Month.'' And today, I am so pleased to acknowledge and praise those who work to further the necessary awareness of those individuals and American workers who live with a disability. The American worker has enough to handle and manage as it is, but the employee who lives with a disability copes with other barriers many of us will never experience. I commend the work these groups are doing to ensure these individuals, completely capable of employment, find that employment and are not discriminated against. However, there is much work to do. The employment rate of working age people with disabilities remains only half that of people without disabilities. These numbers are far too low and this population has for far too long been a group unable to rise above the employment and earnings gaps. There is a benefit to us all for working toward inclusion of more and more disabled workers. Again, I am pleased to celebrate ``National Disability Employment Awareness Month'' this October and will continue my ongoing efforts in Congress to ensure equality for all, making the barriers facing individuals with disabilities once and for all a thing of the past.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Thank you very much. It is indeed a pleasure to be on the floor with you, gentlelady and good friend from Ohio. You are doing a wonderful job in leading this hour. To the Congressional Black Caucus and the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus, America must take its collective hats off to the Congressional Black Caucus for from the very beginning it has been the Congressional Black Caucus that has provided the leadership in speaking out on this war in Iraq and in speaking out from a standpoint of what is wrong with it. And I am proud to be on the floor with you this evening. I thought that I might come at this from the perspective of where I sit in the Congress. I was not here when the actual vote took place 6 years ago to commit our forces to Iraq. I was a part 5 years ago coming into Congress with that first class that came in after 9/11, and it was an extraordinary time. But I think it's very good for us, as we look at this situation in Iraq, to be able to reflect from it. My father always would tell me, Son, the best way for you to get out of a problem is to remember how you got into it in the first place. And it might be good for us to do that. I happen to serve on the Foreign Affairs Committee. I am the vice chairman of our Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and International Trade. I also am a member of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, and I am the co-chairman of our Democratic group on National Security. I mentioned those positions that I work with here in the Congress so that you can understand the perspective from which I come to this very important issue of Iraq. And let me just state at the very beginning, as I said, it's good to know how you got into a situation. There is one profound fact that happened on 9/11. On the very day of 9/11 after a conference in the White House between our Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfield, and Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz, collectively they said these words: Iraq must pay for this. That's very profound. On the day of the 9/11 attack, the basic architects of this policy said, without one iota of evidence, without one iota of anything, Iraq must pay for this. Not even knowing it was al Qaeda, but automatically. Now, I mention that simply because, as I said, we have got to know how we got into a situation to know how we get out of it. That's very profound. The reason I mention that is that from the very beginning there has been a line of direct effort by some, the major architects of this most misguided foreign policy, to equate Iraq with the war on terror. A colossal mistake and the history books will reflect that. We then prepared to go in and attack a country that did not attack us. I am on the Foreign Affairs Committee, and last week I sat with great admiration and I truly believe I have great admiration for General David Petraeus. He's a general, he's a soldier's soldier, and he is doing and has done a remarkable job, as have all of our military. But as I sat there and I watched him, this general, my mind went back to another general at the beginning of this by the name of Colin Powell. Here was the same situation. After 9/11 we sat there and a general was put in front of us to sell us on going to war with Iraq, with information and intelligence that many in the administration knew was not true. The books that are pouring out now by the bushel tell us that everybody, from the CIA to the Defense Department to so many who were saying this, in other words, that the intelligence books were cooked. Not a single person from Iraq came over to us and asked us, Come over to our country and turn us into a democracy. No, this was a war of choice based upon lies and deceit, and that is why this will go down in history as the biggest foreign policy blunder in the history of these United States. Make no mistake about it. So the question has to be now, why? Here we are in Iraq on lies and misinformation that are out now by the book loads; so we can't deny it. And the American people know it. And they are expecting this Congress of the United States to stand up to this White House and say, ``No more.'' Let me tell you something, folks; I've been over there to Iraq, three times I've been over there. I have met with our soldiers, I have eaten with them. But the most important part of my trips over there was not to Camp Victory or to the Green Zone or to Baghdad. Even my meetings with General Casey, General Abizaid, all of them, which I cherish and I have pictures and all of that, and even the meeting I had with one soldier from Georgia who came up to me and hugged me with tears streaming down his eyes, tears streaming down my eyes, and he said to me, Congressman Scott, when I'm hugging you, it's like I'm hugging a piece of home. I can't tell you how I felt. But ladies and gentlemen, let me just tell you the most significant parts of these trips was on the way back. Each stop that I went over to go to Ramstein Air Base, Landstuhl, that's the hospital, that's the medical center. That's where they come, the injured come when they are injured in down country, as they call it, in Afghanistan and Iraq. That's where they are. You want to know about this war, you want to know why this war needs to be ended, that's the story, to look into these 18- and 19- and 20- and 21-year-old kids' eyes, half their heads blown off, arms missing, blind, and they ask the question, why? Why? Why are we here? I'm telling you, somebody's going to have to answer that question. On the bleached bones of many past great civilizations and nations are written those pathetic words, ``Too late.'' They moved too late to correct a great wrong. I beg and I hope that this Congress has the resolve in it to not move too late now. The whole world is depending on us. One of the things that President Bush did, and we've got to understand it, what he did in sending General Petraeus up is the same he did in sending Colin Powell up. And history is going to write it, not David Scott, not Mrs. Tubbs Jones, not this Congress, history is going to write that this President will go down in history as being a President that highly used and misused our military. That is one of the greatest shames coming out of this Iraq situation. And now, here we are in Iraq. I don't think the American people know that over one-half of our entire combat capacity is involved in Iraq. If I'm China, if I'm Russia, if I'm Iran, which they are, they're sitting back fat and happy, anxious to see us continue to run our military in the ground in this fruitless effort in Iraq. Soldiers, many of them on their third and fourth tours of duty. Fifteen months they've extended it to, not even giving an equal amount of time for rest because they know that the military is at the breaking point. No way we can continue this war. It will run our military into the ground. And now let me just say one word about the President's move here. What this is is the President is saying to us, I'm not going to end this. It's not going to be on my watch. Even out of his own mouth he says we will hand this enduring relationship in Iraq over, as he says it, to my successor. That's what he said, to his successor. So the American people have nixed that. The President is out of the picture, but we here in Congress are in the picture. It's up to us to not move too late. We must correct the direction we're headed, and the first order of business is to end this war in Iraq.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise in recognition of Constitution Week, September 17-23, 2007. The Congress, by joint resolution on February 29, 1952 designated September 17 as Citizenship Day, and on August 2, 1956, requested that the President proclaim the week beginning September 17 and ending September 23 of each year as Constitution Week. During Constitution Week, we honor our Nation's Constitution and encourage everyone to take the time to read and reflect on what the Constitution means to American citizens. It is a time when we can promote the ideals of freedom and opportunity throughout our Nation. Today, I would like to particularly recognize the Augustin Clayton Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution in Jonesboro, GA, for observing Constitution Week this year. Their nationalism and dedication are exemplary, and a model for all Americans. I hope that many other Federal, State, and local officials, as well as leaders of civic, social, and educational organizations, will follow the lead of the Augustin Clayton Chapter of the Daughters of the Revolution and conduct ceremonies and other programs to celebrate our Constitution this coming Constitution Week.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. I had to come back to respond to Mr. King's assertion that Davis- Bacon was put in for some reason to prevent black workers from working. I went back to the point of the law so I could make sure I could clarify that. This is what the law says: Adopted in 1931 by President Hoover as an emergency measure intended to help stabilize the construction industry and to encourage employment at fair wages, not less than those prevailing in the locality of the construction work and not to keep black people from working.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strongly oppose this amendment. This amendment smacks right at heart of our wage structure, of fair wages and protected wages. Long before Taft-Hartley, before the Wagner Act, this was put on the books in 1931, 76 years ago. And I might add Davis-Bacon was put on the books by a Republican administration, President Hoover, because at that time it was needed to have wage stabilization. Davis-Bacon is the cornerstone of the wage protection structure in this country that has produced the middle class that has been the backbone of this country. Davis-Bacon prevents underbidding of any contractor coming in on a government contract, low bidding and attempting to bring in a contract and hire workers below the prevailing wage. It is most important. And I might say, Mr. Chairman, this amendment was dealt with in the Agriculture Committee and soundly defeated at that time. Essentially, what they are proposing is this: In the Ag bill, we have dedicated $4 billion for loan guarantees to set up ethanol plants. Now, Mr. Chairman, these are highly sophisticated operations. In order to come in and to be able to have the opportunity to be able to process an Internet technology, a foreign operation and a product that is clearly into the future, clearly we need the best talent, the best skills. We don't need not to protect the prevailing wage in this community. Now, my opponents are going to come and say they are probably talking about union wages. Nothing in here says that. It says prevailing wages, prevailing wages that are set by a scientific survey that goes in and takes a survey of the wages in that local community. Why should the government be an instrument to come in and undermine a local community's labor standards? That is what Davis-Bacon was put in to protect, and that is why this is so important here today. We need not be a thief coming in to take away from a local community what they have earned and their wage standards at their level. Why should the government come in and allow for this to happen? These protections were put in to prevent fly-by-night operations from coming into a community. Because so many government contracts are to the lower bidder and sometimes they bid low so they can go out and pay these low wages that are below the prevailing wage in that community. It is wrong to do that and, quite honestly, unAmerican. Because this law, Davis- Bacon, has been on the books for 75 years and has done this country good, and we deserve to keep it in.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank very much Mrs. Tauscher. It's such a pleasure to be here. This is an extraordinarily important bill, and it is timely. I think it's very important to answer one of my colleague's questions about the constitutional responsibilities. It's clear in Article I, section 2, of the Constitution. Both James Madison as well as Hamilton concurred when they mentioned not only to declare war is the duty of the Congress, not only to raise the Army, but to support the Army. Those words are there, Mr. Speaker. Now, I have been over to Iraq and Afghanistan and talked and looked at the soldiers themselves. I've gone throughout my district and talked to soldiers' families. The stress is in their eyes as you go. I've gone to Landstuhl in Germany and sat with our soldiers on every trip. I've been three times over there and three times we've been to Germany and talked. The stress is there. In the military report that was just issued, Mr. Speaker, it said that the extension of the duty, the longer the time and the stress of combat, the longer and the greater occurrences of psychological stress. Our Army may not be broken, Mr. Speaker, but it's at the breaking point, and we need to give ample time for our soldiers to come home and rest. If you care about the soldiers, vote for this bill.

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I thank the distinguished gentleman, Mr. Dingell, for his courtesies. This is, indeed, our finest hour of opportunity, and I urge my Republican friends not to blow this. Now, I have come to this well because I come from Georgia, a State that is in dire need of this bill being passed. We have nearly 300,000 children who are affected by this program. And I want to take just a minute because there is so much I want to say I have only a minute to say it. There are so many reasons that the Republicans have used to try to come up against this bill. I cannot for the life of me understand why you are not standing forefront in favor of getting health care for our children. But perhaps the most devious one of all that you use is to try to fight the immigration fight on this bill. In this law, it clearly states, ``No Federal funding for illegal aliens.'' Nothing in this act allows Federal payment for individuals who are not legal residents. Gentlemen, that is a false, false horse to ride. Vote for the children. Vote for this bill.