John Sarbanes

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I oppose H.R. 1190. If the Republican appetite for the repeal of the Independent Payment Advisory Board was based solely on its merits, I might be a little bit more charitable about their bringing this bill to the floor because, as you have seen from the speakers on our side, there is a legitimate debate on the merits. I have some concerns myself about the IPAB. But, unfortunately, I think that where this is coming from is this impulse, this kind of ceaseless impulse to undermine and dismantle the Affordable Care Act, and the evidence of that is in the pay-for. Why would you want to go undermine the public health portion, really, a significant commitment that was made through the ACA to begin to turn our healthcare system towards prevention, towards public health? Frankly, we need as many resources as we can muster to put behind that. And the pay-for for this repeal would take $8.85 billion that has been set aside for the prevention and public health fund away from that fund and undermine all of the various activities that are being funded by it. I don't know why it is that our colleagues on the other side cannot restrain themselves when it comes to this shiny object of repealing the ACA when we now have plenty of evidence at our fingertips as to the positive impact that the Affordable Care Act is having: 3 million young people who now can stay on the health insurance coverage of their parents, who were not covered before; millions more that are benefiting from the health exchanges across the country; seniors who now have less anxiety about falling into the so-called doughnut hole under the part D prescription drug benefit program because, under the ACA, we are beginning to close that doughnut hole; insurance companies now being barred from discriminating against people based on a preexisting condition; preventive care screening for our seniors under the Medicare program; tests and other screenings that they used to have to come out of pocket for, now that is completely covered as a result of the Affordable Care Act. You ask the average person out there about any of those things I just mentioned, and they say: Why would we want to give these up? These are important to our health, important to the strength of our families and our community. Yet our colleagues just don't seem to be able to help themselves when it comes to wanting to attack the Affordable Care Act. Furthermore, if you view this IPAB as an important mechanism in terms of controlling costs, as has already been said, the trigger mechanism would not kick in for a number of years here anyway. In other words, the costs are being controlled currently. So that basis for sort of the urgency of it now in terms of bringing these other pay-fors into the mix doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Let's acknowledge that one of the reasons that that trigger isn't going to come any time soon is because, again, the Affordable Care Act is working when it comes to controlling costs. So that is the other side of the discussion. The Affordable Care Act is working in terms of providing more coverage and improving treatment and management of chronic care on the one hand, and the evidence is that it is also reducing cost on the other hand. So it makes sense to try to preserve that, and I think the public health fund and prevention fund is a critical piece. I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation for the reasons enumerated. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I just want to read into the Record, so that we have this information, a couple of observations from some of the groups out there that are most engaged in prevention and public health across the country and the perspective that they bring in terms of this offset, of undermining and depleting the prevention and public health fund. The American Lung Association said, using money from the prevention fund as a pay-for would have a devastating effect on our Nation's public health. The American Heart Association: Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death in the United States and is our most costly disease. The fund supports evidence-based initiatives like WISEWOMAN, a preventive health services program that provides lifestyle programs and health counseling that help low-income, uninsured, and underinsured women ages 40 to 54 prevent, delay, or control heart disease and stroke. The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network observes that the national breast and cervical cancer early detection program is funded in 31 States through the fund. And there are others that have observed--the March of Dimes, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids--that it doesn't make any sense to go raid the prevention and public health fund to support this repeal of the IPAB. For those reasons and the others that have been presented here today, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 1190. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, Barbara Lumpkins, a longtime champion for children with disabilities who spent many years as an activist for adoption for special needs children, passed away on May 24, 2015. In keeping with that deep commitment, she and her husband adopted four children into their family along with their two birth children. She was an active, consistent, positive, caring adult presence for children in the Irvington community since she and her family moved there in 1970. Her smile and her large heart will be greatly missed, but her presence will continue to be felt in the many people she supported and inspired over the years. Please join me in expressing sympathies and thanks to her family for this remarkable life.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, on April 24, the arc of the moral universe will intersect with the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide. Many will bear witness to that intersection, but sadly, official recognition of the genocide by the United States Government will be conspicuously absent. Let us review the facts. In 1915, more than 1.5 million Armenians were systematically annihilated by Ottoman-era Turkish authorities. Men, women, and children were massacred, deported, and condemned to death marches into the Syrian Desert, where they died of thirst and starvation--no final rights, no burial, an assault on the dignity of a dignified and proud people. This indisputable tragedy of history has been acknowledged by innumerable scholars and historians, including the International Association of Genocide Scholars, the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, and no less than 53 Nobel laureates. The European Parliament and Pope Francis recently joined the chorus that honestly labels this horrific chapter of Turkey's history a genocide. Hopelessly infected by the disease of denial, modern-day Turkish authorities have now made it clear they were never going to acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the genocide with anything approaching candor, honesty, or the most minimal degree of self-reflection. It heaps insult upon injury that they have chosen the genocide anniversary of April 24 to commemorate something wholly different, the 100th anniversary of the landing of British imperial forces at Gallipoli, a landing that actually occurred the next day, on April 25, 1915. Turkey's treatment of the Armenian genocide is no surprise. It is a conditioned reflex that has been codified into the laws of the state. In Turkey, anyone who uses the word ``genocide'' to describe the massacre of the Armenians is subject to criminal punishment under article 301 of the Turkish penal code. Obviously, we should have dramatically higher expectations for our own country. That is the reason that, as a Member of Congress who has long supported a resolution to recognize the Armenian genocide, I have dreaded the prospect that the 100th anniversary would come and go without official recognition from either the United States Congress or the President of the United States. I share the deep disappointment and sense of betrayal felt by the Armenian people and all who support their cause. It is lamentable that, on Capitol Hill, advocacy for recognition is being undermined every day by Turkey's intense lobbying campaign to block passage of the Armenian genocide resolution. In the face of this, it is easy to be cynical and angry, but we should remind ourselves and be inspired that, on April 24, hundreds of thousands of Americans will defy the lack of official recognition with their own personal and heartfelt acknowledgment of the Armenian genocide. In Turkey, there are brave citizens who, at great personal risk, condemn state authorities for their tragic silence. Ultimately, the voices of individual citizens have a special power to move the heart, in this instance, to bless the unmarked graves of 1.5 million Armenians whose own voices and spirits were trampled into the ground 100 years ago. This year, I will resist the temptation to mark the anniversary of the Armenian genocide with anger and frustration at the lack of official recognition from those who should know better; rather, I will draw strength from the conviction that the arc of the moral universe will ultimately bend toward justice, toward the eternal memory of those who perished in this undeniable tragedy of history. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding. I want to congratulate her as well on her amazing advocacy on behalf of consumers across this country and her leadership on the Committee on Financial Services. Mr. Speaker, here we are again forced to ask the question: Who calls the shots here in Washington and in Congress and on Capitol Hill? We shouldn't have to ask that question. It should be the people that call the shots. It should be everyday Americans that call the shots here, but unfortunately it is big money on Wall Street that continues to call the shots. It is big money that is leaning on Congress to water down, once again, the Dodd-Frank rules in ways that will harm consumers. With the mortgage crisis barely in our rearview mirror, the hidden hand of Wall Street is intent on rolling back critical consumer protections and stripping away important reforms that have been made to our mortgage market. Exhibit A for today--and I say ``for today'' because there has actually been dozens of exhibits of this kind of legislation that have come forth over the last few months authored by Wall Street interests. But Exhibit A for today is called Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act, H.R. 650. Preserving access; it sounds good, but it is a wolf in sheep's clothing. That is how they title these things around here. This legislation would roll back critical consumer protections for our Nation's most vulnerable families, undermining a simple proposition that the owners of manufactured homes deserve the same protections as traditional homeowners; specifically, the legislation would cause interest rates to spike and would reintroduce conflict of interest into the manufactured home market. By the way, Mr. Speaker, later on today we will see Exhibit B for today. That is called the Mortgage Choice Act, H.R. 685. That is legislation that would scrap vital consumer protections put in place by Dodd-Frank to prevent unscrupulous lenders from steering consumers into higher fee mortgages. That is what is going on around here. Of all the areas in need of Congress' attention, the Republican majority has chosen to once again focus on giveaways to the Wall Street crowd. American consumers deserve better than that, and I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 650 and later against H.R. 685.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the 194th anniversary of Greek independence, to recall the day that the Greek people established modern Greece as a free and independent nation. America's Founding Fathers drew upon the example of the ancient Greeks in forming our constitutional Republic. The relationship between Greece and the United States is based on shared democratic values and respect for individual freedom. The spirit that guided the Greek people in securing their freedom nearly 200 years ago resides with them still. Today Greece faces tremendous challenges. We all acknowledge that. But I am confident that Greece will ultimately overcome its economic and humanitarian crisis and thrive again. A strong Greece will be able to take full advantage of new opportunities that are emerging in the eastern Mediterranean and move forward as a vital economic and cultural resource for a critical region of the world. As we say each year when celebrating Greek Independence Day, long live Greece, long live America, long live freedom--Zito Ellada, Zito Ameriki, Zito Eleftheria.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge the Republican leadership to bring a clean funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security to this floor. The Department of Homeland Security provides vital programs and services that ensure the American public's safety. This Congress must also ensure that DHS has adequate funding to continue its important and effective work protecting our borders, our ports, our aviation systems, and all of our communities across the country. Without funding, DHS will be forced to shut down critical counterterrorism and natural disaster programs that safeguard millions of Americans. It is the height of irresponsibility for Republicans to hold DHS funding hostage for the sole purpose--and the dangerous purpose--of partisan politics. Instead of putting forth a clean DHS funding bill, Republicans put forward legislation that is littered with unrelated policy riders. We all agree that withholding funding for DHS is bad for our Nation's safety and security, so let's pass a clean DHS funding bill and debate these separate issues on their own merits. It is time for the House to pass a clean DHS funding proposal and stop playing games with the safety and the security of the American people.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on ordering the previous question, so that we can consider the constitutional amendment, the Democracy for All amendment, that would rein in the excesses that have been unleashed by Big Money on our political system. That occurred 5 years ago in the Citizens United decision. We have an opportunity, acting on behalf of the millions of Americans who feel their voices are drowned out, to push back on the influence of Big Money in this town and on this Chamber. It seems, Mr. Speaker, that every week we get another example of how Big Money is influencing policy here in Washington. Last week, it was the influence of Wall Street leaning on the institution to pass legislation that would get them out from reasonable regulation. This week, it is the energy industry leaning on the institution with respect to this Keystone bill that we are going to see--example after example of how Big Money has undue influence here in Washington. It is time that we fought on behalf of the American people and made sure that their voices are the ones being heard, not the voice and the megaphone of Big Money. Let's vote against ordering the previous question. Let's consider the amendment to the Constitution that would allow us to push back on the undue influence of Big Money here in Washington.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the underlying bill. There are two provisions in this bill that are deeply offensive to the American people and their sense of fairness. Over here, you have a provision that would backstop with taxpayer money increased risky activity on the part of Wall Street. This would allow them to go out, make more money with less risk, and then if they run into a problem, the taxpayers of this country would be asked to come in and bail them out. So you have that provision for Wall Street. Over here, you have a provision that would allow Wall Street, the wealthy, and the well-connected to pour 10 times more money into the political apparatus up here on Capitol Hill and buy influence. Over here, you have got a Wall Street giveaway, and over here, you have an opportunity for Wall Street to put more money into the political process. These two provisions bumped into each other somewhere in the middle of the night in the corridors of Capitol Hill up here. They bumped into each other. Maybe they were introduced, and one said, ``I will be the quid,'' and the other one said, ``I will be the quo.'' Madam Speaker, I don't know which is which, but I know this is a quid pro quo, and it is the kind of quid pro quo that is corrupting the machinery of our government and is offensive to the American people. We need to get rid of the quid, we need to eliminate the quo from this bill, and we need to bring it back in a way that we can actually support it. That is what we need to do for the American people.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Thank you for yielding. It is a privilege to rise and acknowledge the incredible service of George Miller and Henry Waxman. I had the honor of serving with both of them on each of their committees, the Education and the Workforce Committee in the case of George Miller, and the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Oversight Committee with Henry Waxman. As public servants, they are unrivaled. At a time when unfortunately many Americans have become cynical and wonder whether their voice is heard here in Washington, these are two individuals that when you look back over their careers in public service, you cannot have a shred of cynicism because they got up every day determined to do the right thing to help people across this country. In the case of Henry Waxman, his fight on behalf of consumers is legendary. His work to guarantee access to affordable health care is before us every day. His desire to see that every citizen be able to live in a world where they have clean air and clean water, a world that is protected against the ravages of climate change, is his legacy. In fact, when it comes to climate change, I think we can say he is the conscience of the Congress. In the case of George Miller, he is somebody who was deeply committed to making sure that the next generation had decent educational opportunities and fought for that during his entire time here in this Congress; of course, he was always putting the priorities and the needs of working families first. If legislating is a profession, then these two individuals reached the height of that profession. They knew the substance of the work. They fought hard for what they believed in, but they knew how to reach compromise when it was demanded. As people, they are both decent, ethical, and caring, and most importantly, down to Earth, getting up every day saying, ``I have got a job to do,'' and going out to do it. We will miss them. We thank them for their service. As long as we have the privilege of serving here, we will cherish their legacy.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Daughters of Penelope on its 85th Anniversary and to recognize the organization's civic contributions and commitment to public service in the United States and abroad. Since its founding in 1929, the Daughters of Penelope has become a preeminent international women's organization and affiliate of the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association (AHEPA), the nation's leading association of American citizens of Hellenic heritage. Today there are 250 Daughters of Penelope chapters around the world. I am especially proud to recognize the Daughters because I believe the organization embodies the spirit of philotimo; a conviction for civic duty and deep honor in volunteerism that all Hellenes strive to uphold. The Daughters of Penelope was first established with the mission of improving the lives of all women and providing them the opportunity to make significant contributions to American society. Today, the organization strives to promote the ideals of ancient Greece: education, philanthropy, civic responsibility, and family and individual excellence through community service and volunteerism. Through this enduring commitment to the philotimo ethic, the Daughters of Penelope has achieved remarkable accomplishments: providing educational opportunities for youth, tirelessly caring for the elderly and victims of domestic abuse, and raising funds for important civic causes and medical research. Demonstrating strong character, determination, and hard work, it's no surprise that Daughters of Penelope members often rise to become leaders in their respective professions, from government to business to the arts. On this 85th Anniversary, I congratulate the Daughters of Penelope for its tremendous accomplishments and thank the organization for its enduring commitment to public service.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate my friend Jay Wolvovsky on his 30 years of outstanding service to the residents of the greater Baltimore community. At the end of this month, Jay will retire from his position as CEO of the Baltimore Medical System (BMS), a position he has held since he founded BMS in 1984. Under Jay's stewardship, BMS has grown into Maryland's largest Federally Qualified Health Center system. Since taking over the operation of four East Baltimore clinics from the Baltimore City Health Department in 1984, BMS has expanded to thirteen health centers reaching the whole city and even Baltimore County, including eight school-based health centers that provide essential medical care to more than 1,000 children each year. When struggling communities have faced the loss of healthcare providers, BMS has stepped in, absorbing practices and patients from the Baltimore neighborhoods of Highlandtown and O'Donnell Heights. All told, BMS provides medical care to over 45,000 underserved patients each year. I consider myself lucky to have worked with Jay for many years. He has had an enormous impact on the Baltimore region and he has changed the lives of countless families in the State of Maryland and beyond. His compassion and dedication to give back to his community and to bring medical care to those who could not otherwise receive it has been the driving force behind BMS' incredible success over the past three decades. His keen eye for innovation, whether in working with the Baltimore City Health Department to provide seniors with pharmacy services 20 years before Medicare Part D, or in building relationships and partnerships with local foundations and national groups to expand BMS' reach, has been an invaluable asset to the organization. Jay has been a true friend to the Baltimore community and to me; I thank him for all he has accomplished and congratulate him on his well-earned retirement.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. I thank my colleague for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I urge a vote ``no'' on the previous question as well so we can allow consideration of the Democracy for All constitutional amendment, which would allow us to put some reasonable limits on this outside spending, these huge expenditures of funds by Super PACs and outside groups that are crowding out the voices of everyday citizens. When I go around my district, when I talk to people, the average person feels like their voice can't be heard. When they go into the political town square to try to make their views known, there is a megaphone being held by these Super PACs and these outside groups that is drowning out the voice of everyday citizens, so that their opinions, their perspective can't be heard. If you go to a town meeting, usually, the way they organize it is you sign up and everybody gets a chance to talk for 5 minutes. The way the system is headed with these Super PACs, because there are no limits on the amount of speech they can buy, if you go down to the town hall meeting now, in a sense, you get there and you find out that some Super PAC has reserved 59 minutes out of the hour of time for talking on the issues, and everyday citizens only have 1 minute left. That is why we need some reasonable limits, because the big money is taking over the microphone, and they are not letting anybody else have their opinions heard. A constitutional amendment, the Democracy for All constitutional amendment--I want to salute my colleague, Ted Deutch of Florida for leading the effort on this--would put reasonable limits in place so that everybody can have a voice, so that everybody can participate in a pluralistic democratic society where all voices are heard. I urge that we vote ``no'' on ordering the previous question to allow consideration of this important constitutional amendment to give a voice back to everyday citizens out there in our country.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark 40 years that Turkish troops have unlawfully occupied the Republic of Cyprus, an occupation that undermines stability in an already volatile eastern Mediterranean, weakens the NATO alliance, and defies the European Union's peace project. For 40 years, Turkey has frustrated every meaningful attempt to advance a just solution in Cyprus. Instead, its program has been one of systematically dismantling the religious, cultural, and ethnic identity of the island. The sad irony of Turkey's forced division of Cyprus is that it separates two communities, Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot, that are, themselves, ready and willing to seek reunification. This Congress, this administration, our Nation must insist that Turkey act in good faith to achieve what the people of Cyprus--all the people of Cyprus--so deeply desire: an end to this tragic occupation.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate Dr. David M. Paige for his more than forty years of dedication to patients, students and public health in Maryland and across the country. David is a Professor of Population, Family and Reproductive Health with joint appointments in International Health and Human Nutrition at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and in Pediatrics at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. He is a member of the Maryland State WIC Advisory Panel and the Director of the Johns Hopkins WIC Program. Through his work as a physician, researcher and professor, David has made indelible marks on the state of public health in this nation. In response to a crisis of malnourishment among low-income infants and pregnant women in Baltimore in the 1960s, David created a voucher system for food assistance that served as the prototype for the federal Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children. This program provides essential food assistance to almost 9 million individuals each month and more than 143,000 people in Maryland alone. David remains a vigilant defender of this critical program and has testified more than 20 times before House and Senate committees. David has also produced significant research on the increasing prevalence of lactose intolerance in children and young adults. His findings have had far-reaching effects on the availability of lactose free foods and prenatal nutrition for lactose-intolerant mothers. He is also the recipient of numerous awards, including the March of Dimes National Agnes Higgins Award for Distinguished Achievement in Maternal- Fetal Nutrition. On a personal note, it has been my privilege to know David for over twenty years and to benefit from his passionate advocacy on issues of public health. At all times, David's service to his profession and to the broader community have been characterized by a generosity of spirit and a selfless dedication to improving the lives of those too often left behind. I am proud to call David my friend and I commend the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health for recognizing David's long and distinguished record of accomplishment. This tribute could not go to a more deserving person.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Madam Chair, I'd like to note that I intended to vote in support of the Waters amendment to H.R. 4413, the Customer Protection and End User Relief Act, when it came up for a vote earlier today. Amendment No. 5 Offered by Ms. Moore

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I encourage my colleagues to support Congressman Cartwright's bill establishing a clearinghouse which will assist schools in identifying existing Federal programs available to help schools initiate, develop, and finance energy efficiency, distributed generation, and energy retrofitting projects. I congratulate Congressman Cartwright. This is a very thoughtful bill. It has broad stakeholder support. It makes a lot of common sense because there are these programs out there that are available to assist our schools, but sometimes connecting the dots is the challenge. This clearinghouse will help solve that. This bill received unanimous bipartisan support in the Energy and Commerce Committee. It is my pleasure now, Mr. Speaker, to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. SARBANES. I am prepared to close.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support Congressman Cartwright's bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the Collinsville hydropower legislation introduced by Congresswoman Esty of Connecticut. The bill would authorize the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to reinstate licenses for two hydroelectric projects on the Farmington River and to transfer these licenses, as was indicated, to the town of Canton, Connecticut. This noncontroversial, but very, very important legislation has passed the House by voice vote in three consecutive Congresses and has now passed the Senate with a few nonsubstantive changes. It is high time to get this bill to the President's desk, Mr. Speaker. With that, I would like to yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Esty), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to congratulate Ms. Esty of Connecticut. This is an important bill. I salute her persistence. With that, I urge my colleagues to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill sponsored by Mr. Kinzinger and Mr. McNerney. The bill is straightforward. It simply tasks the Department of Energy with preparing a report on the impacts of using thermal insulation in Federal buildings. Insulating ducts and pipes can prevent a significant amount of energy from being wasted. That saves taxpayers money and it reduces pollution. This bill would ensure that the Department of Energy quantifies those potential savings so that the Federal Government can make commonsense energy efficiency investments. The bill has broad stakeholder support and was reported by voice vote in the Energy and Commerce Committee. Again, I congratulate my colleagues for their collaboration on this bill, and I urge my colleagues in the full House to support it. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to come down and rise in opposition to this bill, and I wanted to get on the Record because I predict that there will come a time when there will be another financial crisis, and people will look back and they will say: Where were you when the CFTC reauthorization came up? Six years ago, our economy and the lives of millions of Americans was thrown into a tailspin by a devastating financial crisis, spurred in large part by reckless behavior on Wall Street and a lack of transparency of and oversight over the global financial systems' derivatives market. So we acted. Congress acted. We took steps. We passed Dodd-Frank. We strengthen the rules of the road. We brought derivatives markets out of the shadows, allowing regulators to better assess and reduce systemic risk, all working towards the goal of decreasing the chances of another financial crisis. The problem is the opponents of reform did not give up. Over the past several years, the fight for meaningful financial reform has in large part now migrated to the regulatory agencies overseeing the implementation of Dodd-Frank, and now we return to the legislative arena with H.R. 4413, which represents in my view a dangerous attack on the authority and efficacy of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. It erects an assortment of redundant hoops for regulators to jump through, empowers courts to unilaterally undercut the CFTC oversight, and dramatically reduces CFTC's ability to regulate overseas derivatives. The forces opposing strong oversight of our financial markets have the luxury of existing in a political system that too often gives voices to the wealthy at the expense of the rest of America. The only way we would pass this legislation is if we were suffering from collective amnesia, if we had completely forgotten what happened in 2008 and 2009 and were sleepwalking through our oversight responsibilities. We need to wake up and protect the American people from another financial crisis. I urge opposition to the bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for pulling us together this afternoon to talk about this important development that the EPA has taken to address climate change, to reduce pollution across the country. I want to start by thanking the EPA. I mean, a lot of people are piling on right now, critics of this action, and saying this is going to cost jobs and it is too disruptive and so forth. I have a completely different perspective, and I wanted to mention a couple of things along those lines. First of all, this is an important step to take, just from a health perspective. In other words, there are many ways you can come at it. You can look at it in terms of climate change, which is kind of a slow- moving crisis, and I will speak to that in a minute, but it is accelerating. But if you just look at it in terms of protecting the health of the American people, frankly, and beyond, but let's talk about America's interests here. If you cut down on these carbon emissions, particularly from coal plants, you are going to be promoting clean air. You are going to be promoting clean water. The Chesapeake Bay, which I hold very dear, representing the Third District in Maryland, and having parts of the Third District which touch the Bay, and many tributaries and rivers and waterways that lead into the Bay from across the Chesapeake Bay watershed, the Chesapeake Bay, the pollution that comes into the water often is from air deposits that come into the water because of this carbon pollution that we have. So whether you are talking about breathing clean air, which we all want for ourselves and for our children and for our grandchildren, or drinking clean water and having clean water and high water quality, this is a very, very important step to take, this notion of now setting a goal to cut by 30 percent the carbon emissions from power plants across the country. But let's look at it through the lens of climate change, which my colleague has already raised. We are seeing the effects of climate change, as I mentioned, accelerating every single day. So, obviously, there is a warming going on of the planet, generally speaking, and the scientific support for that being connected to the activities of humankind is pretty incontrovertible. We have the opportunity in the Energy and Commerce Committee to get a lot of testimony on that front. We are seeing violent weather events across the country which are having a tremendous impact on communities, damaging those communities, harming, actually producing harm to individuals, but also having a terrific impact on economic productivity across the country. So the average American out there, I mean, everyday citizens, when they look at this issue, the great majority of them are saying, we need to do something about this. We can't just sit on our hands. In fact, there is recent polling that indicates that 70 percent of Americans favor stronger limits on the amount of carbon that is emitted by power plants. Well, okay. That is exactly what the EPA is doing here. It is taking action to reduce the carbon emissions from power plants. The EPA is listening to the American people. The Obama administration is listening to what the American people are saying, day in and day out, about the action that we need to take. Unfortunately, this Congress, the leadership in this House, in particular, has not, apparently, heard the cry of the American people when it comes to doing something about climate change. So I congratulate the EPA for taking these measures because this is what the American people want to see, and it is going to have a tremendous positive impact. On climate change per se, 80 percent of Americans think the U.S. should take action to address climate disruption, 80 percent of Americans. So those are like commonsense people getting up in the morning, going outside, getting their newspaper, opening the newspaper and seeing that there have been violent storms here, or that there is a drought happening here, or that the water supply is in danger there, all connected back to what is happening with the climate and affecting their communities. So they are saying, okay, the commonsense thing for us to do is to take some considered and reasonable and rational steps to try to address one clear cause of climate change and pollution, and that is the carbon emissions from power plants. Thank you to the EPA for taking this initiative and responding to what the American people are saying. Before I hand it back, I do want to touch, though, on what I think is part of the problem here, why it is that the EPA is the one that is having to step up here and take the initiative, and why we are not taking more initiative right here in Congress. I think it is because the machinery here has sort of gotten gummed up by the influence that some of these polluters have. There was a report recently issued that indicated or estimated, I guess, that the fossil fuel industry is getting a 5,900 percent return on the investment it is making here in Washington through campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures. That estimate comes from looking at some of the taxpayer subsidies that continue to flow to that industry, even though this is an industry that makes over $100 billion in profits every year. But the influence is also found, not just in sort of that corporate welfare that that industry is taking out of this Congress, but it is seen in the way in which our efforts to try to address climate change, to try to address the issues of promoting clean air and clean water, keep getting stopped by certain industries. So we need to look at reforms on that front. What do we do to lift up the voices of everyday Americans in a world where money is speech? How do everyday people and people of modest means have speech in that environment and push back on those influences so that we can actually process their will here in Congress? Then let me just close with this observation, because it goes to the argument that is made that somehow this is going to harm us economically as a country, to put those goals in place and begin to cut these emissions. My colleague pointed to the sky is falling narrative at the time when we were going to do something about acid rain. And people said, industries aren't going to be able to handle this. It is going to cause parts of the industry to shut down. Americans are going to lose their jobs. What happened? The country, America, stepped up to the challenge and found its way to new opportunities. And I hear a lot of times from industry who say, well, you know, putting these measures in place, particularly when maybe peer nations aren't doing as much on that front as they could, it is going to put us at a competitive disadvantage. We need to have a level playing field and so forth. I get that, but sometimes it makes sense to push us to go find a new playing field. And I think that is what the EPA is helping us do. It is expressing what the American people want to see. Go innovate, go figure out a way to do these things differently. Find, create a new energy portfolio that makes sense from a health and safety standpoint, makes sense in terms of combating climate change, but also will create tremendous new economic opportunities and generate millions of new jobs across the country. So these things are not mutually exclusive. Economic productivity and innovation are not mutually exclusive with doing the right thing with the environment. In fact, if you look back with a clear eye, historically, you will see that when we push ourselves to do the right thing for the environmental reasons, for the health and safety reasons, we often get ourselves to a place of increased economic productivity and innovation. In closing, and I thank my colleague for giving me a few minutes here today to talk on the topic, I want to thank the EPA for carrying out-- listening to what the American people are saying about the steps we need to take to address climate change, to address our health and the environment out there, and taking this very, very important step that I think is going to be productive and positive for the American people. Thank you.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, on April 24th we commemorate the Armenian Genocide--the deportation, forced march and massacre of 1.5 million innocent Armenians at the hands of the Ottoman Turks nearly a century ago. In what has become a bitter annual ritual for Armenian-Americans and those who stand with them, we once again call upon the Obama Administration and the United States Congress to formally and officially recognize the Armenian Genocide as a tragic and unambiguous fact of history. Such recognition is critical to fortifying America's moral standing in the international community and, as we prepare in the coming year to mark the 100th anniversary of this tragedy, is long and painfully overdue.