Timothy Walz

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, the American people do continue to face record high gas prices, and this Democratic Congress has acted and will continue to act on legislation, commonsense legislation, that will reduce the price at the pump. Only now we need to get the support of President Bush and our friends on the Republican side of the aisle who seem content on pursuing the same failed policies that got us here in the first place. Over the last couple of months, this House has passed 9 bills that would lower gas prices. While we received a little bit of bipartisan support, the majority of our friends on the Republican side have opposed those 8 bills. House Republicans said ``no'' to legislation that would enable the Justice Department to take legal action against foreign nations manipulating the price of oil. House Republicans said ``no'' to legislation that would give the Federal Trade Commission the authority to investigate and punish those who are artificially inflating the price of gas. Mr. Speaker, our friends on the Republican side of the aisle need to realize that saying ``no'' is not an energy policy.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Thank you, Mr. Davis, for managing the bill. A special thank you to my colleague from a little further upstate in Minnesota, Mrs. Bachmann. Thank you for your kind words. Your pride and enthusiasm for our State is evident, and I think all of us who live there understand why. I, too, rise to ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the great State of Minnesota, the 32nd State. It is our sesquicentennial, 150 years. From the natural beauty of the Mississippi River, across to the plains near South Dakota, this is a State that amongst the stark beauty has planted the seeds, as you heard my previous colleague talk about, of innovation, from health care to computer technology to agriculture. I am especially proud to represent the southern area of the State, the First District, those many towns, like Winona along the Mississippi River, which were the stopping points near the upper end of the paddle boats that brought our forebearers to Minnesota. The courthouses and the city halls still represent that long heritage, that rich tradition and that sense of community that had people staking out a new life in the ``big woods,'' in the Land of 10,000 Lakes. I am proud to have the City of New Ulm in my district. New Ulm is, as you might expect, a very, very German town. It boasts the ``Herman the German'' statue that is the second largest brass statue behind only the Statue of Liberty in the United States. There is the proud tradition of the Minnesota Music Hall of Fame that captures the tradition of the many musicians and folk artists that have come through and lived in Minnesota. Both Winona and New Ulm were capitals of a day, and I am very proud of them during the sesquicentennial celebration. The City of Rochester, as you heard my colleague mention, the small town on the prairie that the Mayo brothers opened the door to a hospital and have established the most advanced critical hospital in probably the world. The Mayo Clinic is a destination. You must fly there to get there. There is not a large city to draw you there, but there is the absolute guarantee of the most quality care that you can receive anywhere in the world. They are leading the way not only in innovations in medical research, they are leading the way in how we deliver health care to all Americans. Also the City of Austin, known for many, many things, and one also you heard my colleague mention, the invention of SPAM and the SPAM Museum. Mr. Speaker, I invite you and anyone to please visit this wonderful place. You will find out how SPAM is made, first and foremost, but it also is something about the Hormel Institute and this other great company. They have a research lab that is there that is called the Hormel Institute. By most accounts the Hormel Institute will feature the international conference on carcinogens and in cancer research, especially melanomas, and the Hormel Institute, when the story of how cancer is solved, it will probably start in Austin, Minnesota. It is something we are very proud of, a public-private partnership. Minnesotans have always prided themselves on their education, of investing in their children. Garrison Keillor talks about all of our children are above average. We know that we have a ways to go, but we do take pride in that, from our many, many public schools and institutions of higher learning, producing one of the highest graduation rates in the country, and usually in the very top three of all SAT and ACT scores. So there is a great pride in this. It is those residents of Southern Minnesota that I am here today to congratulate, people who have chosen to live in a somewhat harsh climate, to take the opportunity to settle this land, to move into the Upper Midwest and to settle and create not just places to live, but communities that were vibrant and growing, and that understood that the investments we put back in them would benefit this country. So, I am proud of our State. I am proud of what our State contributes to this Nation, just like our other 49 States and territories do. This Nation is strongest when we are altogether, and admission of Minnesota as the 32nd State strengthened this great Union. Today I say congratulations to all Minnesotans, and we are looking forward to the next 150 years.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, today I rise because I am introducing the Veterans Pain Care Act of 2008. This bill will require the Secretary of the VA to develop and implement a comprehensive policy on pain management for veterans enrolled in the VA health care system and to carry out a program of research, training and education on acute and chronic pain. Modern warfare leads to serious, but survivable, injuries. While advances in medical technology have saved lives, many of our wounded soldiers have been afflicted by acute and chronic pain. Pain is a leading cause of disability among veterans. As a result, providing adequate pain management is a crucial component to improving veterans' welfare. The Department of Veteran Affairs has pain care programs, but a comprehensive plan isn't consistently enforced across the system. My legislation will give the VA the necessary tools to serve the needs of our veterans. This bill has the support of a wide range of organizations. I would like to enter into the Record a letter of support from 50 organizations in the Pain Care Coalition. The Senate companion to this bill has the support of both the chairman and the ranking member of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee. I am hopeful that this will garner bipartisan support for this legislation in the House and be passed to support our veterans. Pain Care Coalition, Washington, DC, May 15, 2008. Re Veterans Pain Care Act of 2008 Hon. Tim Walz, House of Representatives, Longworth House Office building, Washington, DC. Dear Congressman Walz: The Pain Care Coalition applauds your leadership in championing the Veterans Pain Care Act. We enthusiastically support the measure, and pledge the assistance of our organizations as you move the bill forward in the House. As your bill mirrors bi-partisan legislation under consideration in the Senate, and complements a DoD pain care initiative included in the House FY 2009 Defense Authorization bill, we are optimistic that it will receive wide support. Pain is a huge public health problem for veterans. Virtually every service member injured in current and past conflicts experienced acute pain at the time of injury. Many others suffered acute pain in connection with non-combat related injury or disease. For too many, the acute pain progresses to a chronic pain condition that threatens the veteran's basic quality of life. These same chronic pain conditions can be cost ``drivers'' in VA health and disability systems. With prompt and aggressive treatment, much acute pain can be alleviated, and much chronic pain avoided or managed. The Department of Veterans Affairs is doing much to provide good pain care and advance important pain research, but much, much more remains to be done. Your bill will make pain care a national priority within the VA health care programs. Millions of veterans who have served our country deserve no less. Respectfully submitted, Richard Rosenquist, Chair.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Thank you to the chairman for his outstanding and tireless work for our veterans. A special thank you also to Mr. Boozman, who has been an unending friend and supporter and effective leader in helping our veterans. I thank you. This is just one more example of your continued work. I stand in strong support of H.R. 3681, the Veterans Benefits Awareness Act. This just simply, as you have heard the speakers talk about, ensures the ability of the VA to reach out and gather our veterans back in, making sure that those veterans understand all the benefits that are available to them, from suicide prevention to health care benefits, training, education, pension benefits, vocational rehabilitation, assistance for homeless veterans, veterans owning small businesses. This Nation and this past Congress in the 110th Congress has done much to care for our veterans. One of the problems is that when our veterans return home, only about 36 percent of them enter into the VA system or apply for benefits, and what this does is take advantage of what all 435 Members of this body know well, is you need to advertise well to get that message out. The Department of Defense has done a great job of advertising for recruitment. It's time for the VA to put that money into making sure our veterans get their care. The Rand Corporation said the capacity of the DOD and the VA to provide mental health services has increased substantially, but significant gaps in access and quality remain. There is a large gap between the need for mental health services and the use of those services. Last year, this Congress put in a hotline for veterans seeking help with possible suicide and suicide prevention, and that hotline has received over 9,000 calls. Those may have been calls that would have never been received. So this 24-hour national hotline is working. I am pleased that the amendment that I put in to address this with the veterans suicide issue has been addressed. I would also like to thank the ranking member, Representative Buyer from Indiana, for his perfecting amendment on this bill. This piece of legislation is a great example of bipartisan support that rises above and transcends politics to care for our Nation's veterans. This will be a good piece of legislation. It will get our veterans in. It will fulfill our moral obligation to care for our veterans and it will ensure that future generations of our young Americans understand that if they raise their hands, take an oath, and service this Nation, we will be there to serve them. With that, I again thank Mr. Boozman. I thank the ranking member and I thank the chairman for continuously moving information and moving legislation forward that helps our veterans. This bill will ensure that the Department of Veterans Affairs is able to use the power of modern advertising to reach out in as wide-ranging and an effective way as possible to our veterans. The bill authorizes the Secretary of the VA to purchase advertising in the national media about the benefits VA makes available to veterans. VA offers health care and mental health care benefits, including for the prevention of suicide, an issue that we have been vigorously addressing on the House Veterans Committee; education, training, compensation, and pension benefits; vocational rehabilitation; assistance for homeless veterans, opportunities for veteran-owned small businesses; and direct opportunities for employment in the Department itself, among other things. But if veterans don't know about these benefits, they're not in a position to take full advantage of them. There is more than enough evidence that advertising works to promote awareness of whatever the advertising is about. Study after study has shown that advertising through the major media works. In fact, the Department of Defense itself knows that. That's why it devotes a lot of time and energy to advertising, including on television, as a means of recruitment. We advertise to recruit our servicemembers, many of whom will put themselves in harm's way; that same means should be used to tell them what benefits they have earned when they return. In effect, we are saying to VA, ``If our veterans aren't coming to you, use the modern media to go to them!'' This bill is also a perfect illustration of how we on the House Veterans Affairs Committee strive to work on a bipartisan basis to serve our veterans. This bill was introduced by Congressman Boozman on behalf of himself and Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin. I offered an amendment to the bill, and then one of my Republican colleagues offered a perfecting amendment, which I was happy to accept. In that way, we worked together to produce a bill that is good for our veterans. My amendment specified that the advertising VA would do could and should include a focus on suicide prevention, which has been an issue of much concern and some controversy lately. There have been several recent reports about VA's sometimes halting efforts to address what appears to be a series of major emerging mental health problems among our veterans. I have a great deal of confidence in the new Secretary of VA, whom I have been working with on a number of issues, and his commitment to resolve the problems that exist at VA and better serve our veterans. An excellent and disturbing new report from the think tank the Rand Corp. observed that ``The capacity of DoD and the VA to provide mental health services has increased substantially, but significant gaps in access and quality remain,'' and went on to say in particular, ``There is a large gap between the need for mental health services and the use of those services.'' My amendment was meant to encourage VA to bridge that gap. On July 25, 2007, the VA began operation of a 24-hour national suicide prevention hotline for veterans. The hotline reported greater than 9,000 calls. Callers included veterans who previously would have called a non-VA suicide hotline, veterans who would not have utilized a non-VA hotline, family members and friends of veterans, and other distressed non-veterans. Bottom line--veterans are calling the hotline. It is common sense that with more outreach, more veterans are likely to call the VA hotline. And advertising in the national media is one form of that outreach. I am pleased that my amendment to this legislation was adopted, and perfected with the help of the Ranking Member on the VA Committee, Representative Buyer. I strongly urge the passage of H.R. 3681.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I thank the chairman of the Appropriations Committee and my neighbor over in Wisconsin for all of his work and, of course, Chairman Murtha for his unending and tireless support of our veterans. I rise today in strong support of the long overdue modernizations to the GI Bill. The original bill, that you have heard so many talk about, was one of the best pieces of legislation that ever left this floor. It allowed millions to attend college that wouldn't normally have been able to do so. I am, like my father before me is, one of those that stands before you because of that. I also stand before you in a humble position of being the highest ranking enlisted soldier ever to serve in this body, and the understanding of what these soldiers sacrifice and what our responsibility is should be known by everyone here. At times of war, we are asking so much, and as Senator Dole told our committee not more than a year ago, you spent billions putting them in harm's way, you spend the billions getting them out. We have a moral obligation to provide these veterans benefits when they return. It is also a national security issue to keep faith with our young people to know that, if they choose to sign up to defend their Nation, we will stand with them. Now I can tell you this. I'm not an attorney like many of my colleagues here. I'm a high school teacher and a 24-year veteran of our military, but I hear people stand here talking about process, talking about legalese, talking about everything like that. Your process when you were in charge, you had 5 years, Mr. Speaker, 5 years to do something about the GI Bill. Mr. Speaker, our colleagues on the Republican side had those 5 years. They chose to do nothing. They spent their time in enacting tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. They tell us today this is a tax on small business. They must be doing well in Louisiana and Texas compared to Minnesota because $1 million a year for a family of two is an awful lot of money. The time to do this is now. We hear all the talk. We hear there's soul searching being done by my Republican colleagues. The only thing you need to do is look in the eyes of those veterans and tell them that you are unwilling to provide the necessary benefit for them to come back and make their lives whole. This provides for our warriors in the field. It provides for our veterans, and it does it by paying for it, and for that, I encourage all of our colleagues to vote with this. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I ask unanimous consent that Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material on House Resolution 1133.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Today we're here to congratulate a basketball team at Winona State University, but I think it's important to put it into the greater context of what our young people are doing here. I'll talk a little bit in just a minute about the great accomplishments of what this team did, but I think it's equally important to understand the institution that they're coming from. Winona State University is in the town of Winona, Minnesota. That's on the western bank of the Mississippi River. Winona State University was founded at the same time as the State of Minnesota was founded. We're celebrating our sesquicentennial in the North Star State this year. And Winona State University was the first teachers college west of the Mississippi River. That institution, that public institution of higher learning has fulfilled its calling and its mission for the last 150 years, at the highest quality of achievement that we could ask for. I congratulate President Judith Ramaley for her work. I also congratulate Vice President Jim Schmidt. He's the Vice President of Advancement. There are some things going on at Winona State University, like the National Child Protection Training Center, the work they're doing educating our teachers, nurses, law enforcement officials that I think are equally as important. But I think it's important to understand that in a well-balanced education like our student athletes are getting at Winona State University, stressing the extra-curriculars and the teamwork that goes to that, and the striving for excellence is important, so I'd like to talk just a bit about this time. A little over a month ago, during our own March Madness in Minnesota, Winona State defeated Augusta State 87-76. This was the second national championship in the last 3 years, and three straight trips to the national championship. We're really proud of this dynasty that's being developed amongst these student athletes. In addition to their national championship, they've won nine conference titles in a row. They've also won three straight Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference titles. In 2006 and 2007 they broke the Division II record of 57 straight victories. In 2008 the Warriors finished with a record of 38-1, an NCAA Division II record. Over the past 3 years, their record is 105-6. Five seniors have been together throughout this entire run, and they should be congratulated. They'll all be graduating this year, and I'd like to congratulate each one of them individually. John Smith, Jonte Flowers, Quincy Henderson, Shane Neiss and Brent Riese. Together, those five individuals compiled a 129-17 record in 4 years. Of course all of this wouldn't be possible without the leadership of coach Mike Leaf, who's done an outstanding job of working with the character as well as the accomplishments of these fine young athletes. I'm extremely proud to have Winona State University in the district that I represent; extremely proud of the student athletes that represent Southern Minnesota so well. I ask today for, hopefully, unanimous consent from my colleagues to recognize them on this great achievement. I would also make, as a side note, Winona State boasts some famous alumnas. One of them is my colleague on the minority side, Mrs. Bachmann, and we're very proud to have her here, and Winona State for producing our Congresswoman from up in the Sixth District. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1133) congratulating Winona State University on winning the 2008 Division II men's basketball championships, as amended.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I congratulate the City of Winona on being selected to serve as the Honorary Capital of Minnesota on May 16, 2008. This year, Minnesota celebrates 150 years of statehood. Over 10,000 Minnesotans participated in selecting cities to serve as Capital for a Day throughout the week of May 11-18 to commemorate Minnesota's Sesquicentennial. I am very pleased that Winona was chosen for this honor. A river city located in the beautiful bluff country along the Mississippi, Winona was settled in the early 1850s and throughout its early history served as a major port, shipping wheat from southern Minnesota and products from its thriving lumber industry. Downtown Winona is rich in history, with over 100 buildings listed with the National Register of Historic Places that contribute to the culture of the downtown district. A number of institutions of higher education also have their home in Winona, including St. Mary's University, Minnesota State College Southeast Technical, and Winona State University, the first public teacher training college located west of the Mississippi. Today, from the heights of Sugarloaf to the Mississippi River, Winona is a vibrant community in which many local events honor its history. I am pleased to join the State of Minnesota in congratulating Winona, Minnesota on this occasion. And I wish them continued growth and success for the next 150 years.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I congratulate the city of New Ulm on being selected to serve as the Honorary Capital of Minnesota on May 15th, 2008. This year, Minnesota celebrates 150 years of statehood. Over 10,000 Minnesotans participated in selecting cities to serve as Capital for a Day throughout the week of May 11th-18th to commemorate Minnesota's Sesquicentennial. I am very pleased that the city of New Ulm was selected for this honor. New Ulm was settled by German immigrants in the 1850's and throughout its early history served as an important trading center for steamboats carrying goods up the Minnesota River. New Ulm was once considered the Polka Capital of the Nation and is home to the Minnesota Music Hall of Fame, where visitors can view the music memorabilia of national and local artists. The city is also home to the famous Hermann Monument, a monument to German-Americans and the cultural influence German immigrants have had on the region. The monument, which was dedicated in 1897, overlooks New Ulm from Hermann Heights Park. Today, New Ulm is a center for agriculture and business and enjoys a thriving tourism industry. Throughout its history, New Ulm has undergone many changes, but it has not lost the historical roots that make it such a wonderful city. I am pleased to join the State of Minnesota in congratulating New Ulm, Minnesota on this occasion. And I wish them continued growth and success for the next 150 years.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I congratulate the Winona State University Men's Basketball team for winning the 2008 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division II Men's Basketball National Championship with a victory over Augusta State University (Ga.) by a score of 87-76 in Springfield. Massachusetts. This victory, which came 1 month ago on March 29, 2008, marked the second national championship for the Warriors in 3 years. This team's accomplishments are almost too many to list. This was their third straight trip to the national championship. They have won the North Central Region title nine times in a row. They have won three straight Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference titles. In 2006-07, they broke the NCAA Division II consecutive win record by winning 57 straight games. In 2008, the Warriors finished the season with a record of 38-1, an NCAA Division II record for most victories in a season by an NCAA Men's Basketball Team. Over the past 3 years, they have posted an overall record of 105-6. The Warriors were coached to these accomplishments, as well as their second national championship, by head coach Mike Leaf, who has been named the Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference Coach of the Year four times. This team was led by five seniors--John Smith, Jonte Flowers, Quincy Henderson, Shane Neiss and Brent Riese--who accrued a record of 129-17 in their 4 years together. Following the 2008 Championship game, Jonte Flowers was named the 2008 NCAA Division II Elite Eight Tournament's Most Outstanding Player, while John Smith was named the NCAA Division Il Player of the Year by three separate publications. Congratulations to the Warriors! I look forward to your next National Championship!

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, today we mark a sad anniversary, the 93rd anniversary of the Armenian genocide, April 24, 1915 was the day that over two hundred Armenian political and intellectual leaders were arrested by Ottoman authorities. Subsequently, the systematic killing of Armenians resulted in well over one million deaths. This horrible mass killing is well-recognized and well documented, including in the United States' national archives, and it has been confirmed by the International Association of Genocide Scholars. It is important to commemorate those who lost their lives. And it is important to recognize the Armenian genocide for what it was. At the time, the United States government and its citizens acted with generosity and diplomatic support in response to the mass killing. Today's observance is a continuation of that response. And only by recognizing and studying past cases of genocide will we have a chance of preventing them in the future.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Thank you for this opportunity to speak on the floor and to give this Chamber a demonstration of what is so great about this country. The previous gentleman's district actually borders mine, but you may not find a more diametrically opposed view of what is happening in this country than you may get in the next 28 minutes. You hear a lot of statistics and you hear a lot things thrown out. You hear a lot of economists talking about different things. The one thing I have found, and I think maybe it comes from being new to this business of politics, coming from a high school classroom, coming out of what most middle class Americans are experiencing is, is that many of those things do not matter to people. What matters to them is the reality in their everyday lives. And that reality doesn't take a whole lot of background from them. It doesn't take a whole lot of statistics. It doesn't take a whole lot of anything, other than for them to make some simple judgments. One of those judgments that the American public is going to ask themselves, and they are going to get to ask themselves in November, after 12 straight years of Republican control of the House of Representatives, after 6 years of total control of both branches of the legislative procession, the American people got a chance to see by the fall of 2006 the direction that those policies had taken us in. In watching that, they made a decision come November. They chose about 45 new Members of this body, many of them without elected office experience, but many of them who came from the ranks of middle class working people, many of them like myself that never had a salary over $50,000. Teaching for 18 years, my salary when I left my teaching position was $48,000 a year. My insurance costs coming off the top of that were $7,200 a year, and then the taxes that came after that. One of the things the American public will ask is, were they better off before that time when President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress took over, or were things going in the wrong direction? Were decisions made that were affecting their lives negatively, and what were those decisions doing to them? What was happening, as you saw the previous speaker talk about, what was happening to the price of fuel? Why was gas going up and who was benefiting from it? Why was the cost of their produce, why was the cost of groceries going up, and who was benefiting from that? What was happening to the cost of tuition? What was happening to their paycheck? What was happening to insurance costs? Those were questions that they don't get to stand here and theoretically talk about and come up with some cute alliteration that I always hear. My colleagues are wonderful at the alliteration, and somewhat weak on the policy that impacts people's lives. So as I listened this week and I watched a concerted effort, and one of the magazines on Capitol Hill wrote about that our friends in the minority have decided they are going to try and pin the energy policies on the new majority, understanding that President Bush will veto any attempt we make to change policy. The policies that we are operating under in this economy are the ones that were put into place by the minority and put into law by the President. The changes that have been attempted and those that have been made, such as CAFE standards, the fuel efficiency standards and improving them for the first time in 35 years, are so overwhelmingly accepted by the American public, those could not be ignored. The ideology being expressed by the previous speaker I think is reflected in some. You don't need the polls when you go out and talk to people, but if you want to get to the data you are hearing them talking about, 72 percent of the American people disagree. Twenty-eight percent of the American people agree that President Bush's economic policies are the right direction for this country. So when I hear talk about supply and demand, as if it is gravity, as if there have not been decisions made to influence either the supply chain or the demand by interests, by the growth, the astronomical growth of lobbyists, especially energy lobbyists at this place, it is bordering on the ridiculous. And when I hear about Adam Smith being talked about, the only ``invisible hand'' that is operating in our energy markets is that invisible handshake that happened in the White House between the oil company executives when they created this current energy policy. I would like to take a chance here to illustrate what has happened on energy as it impacts the economy. Now, again, speaking to the American people, when they are going and filling up, they are rightfully disturbed. They are rightfully concerned, and many of those people are understanding a larger portion of their disposable income is being eaten up in fuel costs, transportation costs. The policy that was put into place that has driven this upward climb and that was so conveniently taken out here, about right in here and shown, has been a steady upward trajectory. And they are right. Several things are happening here. There is no doubt that supply, world supply for fuels, especially with the rise of China and India, is having an impact in this. The only question I would ask on that is, who didn't know that back here? Who couldn't anticipate those changes and start planning ahead, instead of being reactive to everything that has happened? This administration has been wrong on almost every single indicator economically around the world, socially, and they have not gotten any of it correct since they have come to office. So the trajectory is pretty steady, almost exactly what could have been expected on that. But there are several other things at work here. One of the things is about this energy policy. I would love to show you and read from that energy policy to tell the Speaker, my colleagues and anyone in America that would like to know what that energy policy is. But the problem is, the White House claimed executive privilege, and in 2004 the Supreme Court upheld that executive privilege. So that meeting that took place, we do have some reports on who was there, by the way. One of the first visitors on February 14, 2001, just 2 weeks after the inauguration and the President took office, was James Rouse, the vice president of ExxonMobil. He was also the major donor to all of the festivities that happened here with the inauguration of President Bush. A week later was a long-time friend of President Bush and a supporter, Kenneth Lay, then, of course, head of Enron. They had two meetings. By March 5, the country's biggest utilities, Duke Energy and Constellation Energy, were in the White House. Then British Petroleum came on March 22. And that was followed by 20 oil and drilling companies to get meetings. At this point, to this day, none of that documentation is public. None of it has been out there. None of it has shown what happened. And what we saw was a steady increase and a policy that put this entire Nation's energy needs in the hands of oil company executives. Now, I could almost get lucky in my district out in southern Minnesota. There is somebody who was in the room, somebody who knows. That somebody now lives in my district--well, temporarily. That someone is the vice president of Enron, Jeff Skilling. He is in the Federal Penitentiary in Waseca, Minnesota, in my district. He was with Enron. He understood what happened here, and he ended up, after going to court, in Federal prison for 24 years. The policies here have nothing to do with supply and demand. They have everything to do with special interests and corporate interests over the national interests of this country. So as you hear the previous speakers speak, and they talk about us trying to take energy off the market, the fact of the matter is, as I said, the previous speaker's district borders mine, I am very proud that in southern Minnesota my district is one of the Nation's top four producers of wind energy. We have beautiful wind generators going up and down the district. We have small towns, like Minnesota Lake, that are taking their town's energy and deriving over 75 percent of the energy for the town through the use of clean, renewable wind generation. We are also one of the leading producers of alternative fuels and biofuels. And let me be very clear about this. As people talk about, well, biofuels are driving up the cost of food products, of commodities, there is a definite moral argument to be made of the idea of taking food, such as corn or soybeans, and turning it into fuel. The fact of the matter is, most economists agree that the impact on that is negligible, compared to the impact of the price of oil. There is something I would like to quote here, and I would like you to see a couple of things here. When President Bush was asked prior to the election during the campaign back in 2000, he was asked what he would do to help control energy costs, he said, ``What I think the President ought to do when gas prices spike is he ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say I expect you to open your spigots, and the President of the United States starts jawboning with OPEC members to lower the price.'' Well, in April 2005 there is a pretty famous picture here of the President holding hands with that. That is about the point where oil went up. This is from an ally who has promised to help us pay for the war in Iraq and has yet to pay 7 percent of their total cost. Now, if they can't make it on $118 a barrel, it makes it pretty difficult for me to understand when they are ever going to get jawboned into doing something about this. The next thing that I think is a bit of a fallacy here in this whole free market thing and this supply and demand, as if it is going to come down and drop upon us and be in perfect order, is why in the world did my colleagues on the other side of the aisle continue to vote for $18.6 billion in subsidies to the oil companies? At $40 billion in profits for one oil company alone last year, over $100 billion in profits for the three major oil companies, they haven't got it figured out how to run their business to make a profit without the subsidies? And what is at stake here is this isn't about class warfare. This isn't about, as the previous speaker from Michigan talked about, not being a friend of the oil companies or being their enemies. The fact of the matter is they have an unfair advantage on a unlevel playing field. If my wind generation and my cellulosic ethanol producers could get the same amount of subsidies driven back into research and development that we are putting into oil and natural gas exploration, I guarantee you we would compete on that. I guarantee you we would have renewable energy sources that would take several things away. One is the dependence on foreign oil. That driver or that magnet of conflict around the world would be taken out of the equation. We would also start to create rural jobs and rural green collar jobs that would respur the economy. This President and this energy policy that has created these prices that have been on a steady upward climb also took an economy that went from a manufacturing base and a base of middle class workers, who could figure it out. And this is all they are asking for. They go to work, they work hard at their job, they make the right decisions, they work 40 hours a week, maybe a little overtime. Here is what they are asking for. All they want in return is the ability to have a home, the ability to have transportation to get to and from their job and maybe partake in their recreational activities. They would like to have health care for themselves and their children that is affordable and they can go when it is needed. And they would like to get to the point where perhaps they could save enough money to send their children to college to ensure their future. The American people aren't demanding a lot. They are not asking for a lot. But let me give you a couple statistics. Since President Bush has come to office, guess what has happened. We have lost 1.4 million jobs. We need to be creating jobs. We need to be creating about 180,000 jobs a month to keep pace with population growth. Manufacturing jobs have increased by 3.4 million. Income is down on an average, so the person going to work 40 hours a week, the person making the right decisions, the person trying to fulfill the American dream is getting further behind no matter how hard they are working. The number without health care insurance has increased 8.6 percent. We now have 50 million American people without health care insurance. And I guess the debate can be supply and demand: There is a big supply, there is big demand for it, not quite enough to pay for it, so your child doesn't get to go to the doctor. If that is the type of country we are choosing to live in, then go ahead and follow the policies that have been put in place the last 8 years. If we think there is a better way to do this, perhaps we can start having a vision that extends to the next generation, not the next election. Of course, we hear about gas prices doubling. College costs have gone up 36 percent. Foreclosure rates have hit an all-time high. This President created an economy totally predicated on consumer spending. He drove that spending by the only way people could do it under the economy that was dropping their wages, by borrowing on their homes. And then they were given risky loans, and those risky loans-- here is the thing in my district. I trust the bankers in my district; I trust those people to make loans. And do you know what? There used to be a contract in this country. As a borrower, you were expected to repay. I still believe that is true. But there is another part of that equation: As a lender, you actually used to want to get repaid. We have people now who are speculating, who are giving loans with no intention of ever caring what happened to the loan, selling it off into speculation, put in some exotic investment vehicle outside of any regulation, because we can have no regulation. This economy predicated itself on consumer spending, on consumer borrowing. And the driver here was, if we regulate companies, how could they make money? If we ask them to take lead out of toys for children, that would cut into profit. And how dare we think we would do that. If we actually asked that our food be safe before we fed it to our children, we were overregulating and messing with that invisible hand. Well, that is not the way the world works. It is not the way the people of America want things to work. What they want is a sense of fairness. They want that chance to be able to work hard, save a little money, get a house, take care of their family, and let their children have an attempt at living a life equal to or better than their own. There are statistics out there now, for the first time in American history after 7\1/2\ years of this Presidency, that the majority of Americans do not believe their children will live the type of life that they had, that they themselves had a chance to live. That is absolutely criminal. It is absolutely immoral. It is absolutely not the principles this country was founded on. And those that would say by us asking for alternative energy sources, by us asking to try and improve the ability of efficiencies in our automobiles and our building designs, that those of us who are asking oil companies to not be able to take $18 billion, and to think that you are going to drill your way out of this--they just tell us world demand is up. How in the world is drilling going to be a long-term solution? It is beyond me. With those things happening, though, the American people can be glad to know that is the minority opinion. The majority in this House of Representatives is representative of the majority of the American people. Fully 72 percent disagree with the past policies we are on. Only 28 percent of the American people would espouse to believe that the policies you heard from the previous speakers are the direction that we should go in. We should have a civil debate on this House Floor, we should talk about the implications of our policies, but we should also realize what we are talking about is the livelihood and the quality of life of the American public, and we have got work to do in that regard. I wanted to just talk about a couple of things here, too. One of the things that is most striking to me is, is the President's and the rhetoric that happens on this House floor, that disconnect again with the American public, that disconnect of what a person is going through. And you can tell them all of these facts, all of these figures, all of the things that are out there, and they will still come back to the reality as it affects their life. And I want to talk to you, as many of us saw, just for a minute, Mr. Speaker, as many of us were predicting for several years, they felt the fragileness in this economy, they felt they were saving less, they felt costs were going up, they saw that the ability to get their children to college getting further and further out of their reach. We saw policies that when those people of my generation had the opportunity to go to college, fully 80 percent was on the idea of Pell Grants and different types of grants, 20 percent in the forms of loans. We have almost exactly reversed that. And then we took those loans from being low- interest government guaranteed loans to being government guaranteed loans to private lenders with high interest rates. We have absolutely not made an investment in the future a priority. And when you hear people talk about the so-called tax cuts, I ask everyone out there to see if, since 2001 and President Bush's tax cuts, are you better off? Have they fulfilled their promise? Have they filled your pockets with wealth? Have your streets gotten better? Have your schools become more productive? Has everything gone exactly the way they told you they would do? Because the bottom line in this country is, we have seen the single largest shift of wealth to the smallest percentage at the top than we have seen since the 1920s. We have the greatest disparity from those in the middle class and those in the top 1 percent than we have seen in the past 100 years. The policies that were put into place did exactly what they were supposed to do: They shifted that wealth. And in the ideology, and I don't deny that my friends across the aisle believe this, those people in their benevolence were going to reinvest it all, creating great jobs here, and spurring the American dream. The problem was this: They found out that they could invest in manufacturing jobs in places that didn't have worker standards, that didn't have environmental standards, that didn't care if there was lead in the toys. And, as they invested in those countries, their profits rose, and the jobs in America, according to I guess Adam Smith, the invisible hand pulled them and grabbed them to China. And when they couldn't do it in China anymore, they pulled them and grabbed them to Vietnam. And when they couldn't do it in Vietnam, they pulled them to Bangladesh. I am unsure where they will go next, but I can tell you this, there is a lot of people sitting throughout the Midwest through Ohio and Michigan that sure wish some of those jobs were here. And they are not asking for a fortune, they are asking for a living wage. Well, that living wage, and every time we ask for it: That is going to hurt business, that is going to hurt the profits. The bottom line on this is, this country was founded and predicated and was so successful because the middle class was successful. We are the most productive people in the world. Our productivity of workers in America is at an all-time high. Now, the question I ask is, how can that be and real wages are decreasing? How that can be when their buying power has decreased? Unless something is fundamentally wrong with the economy? But if you ask President Bush, all is peachy clean. There are a couple quotes here, I don't know if it would be fair, but it sounds an awful lot like Hoover in the 1930s. But here he was on October 17. Here was the economic news: The Commerce Department reports that housing starts in September fell to the lowest levels in over a decade and a half. Here are President Bush's words: When you got more houses than you got more buyers, the prices tend to go down and we are just going to have to work through the issue. I am not a forecaster, but I can tell people that I feel good about many of the economic indicators here in the United States. The subprime crisis was right on top of our heads, and yet we are hearing this type of rhetoric. It is not based in reality, it is not based on the people who were already behind in their mortgage payments. It is not based and behind some of those exotic investment vehicles that were going to come crashing down. It is not that we didn't see that the Bear Stearns thing was on the horizon. Most people did, including his former Fed Secretary in Alan Greenspan. But, nope, it didn't bother the President. It doesn't matter the people here who for 6 years rubber-stamped every single piece of legislation written by K Street by the lobbyists and sent down here. Everything that was done behind closed door by Ken Lay, by Jeff Skilling, by the rest of them, sent down here, voted on against the objection by the minority party, our party at that time, that, you are heading for disaster, do not do this. Oh, no, no. We will create jobs, we will create wealth, we will create energy. Now, all of a sudden, we have a slim majority in the House, we are equal over in the Senate, and the President vetoes anything that we utter over here. Now all of a sudden all of this is the responsibility here. Well, I have one thing to say. The American people, come November, don't care what side of the aisle you are on, they care about, what are you going to do about it? Here are a couple more from the President. December 17, former Fed Chairman Greenspan, as I was just saying, suggested a tax break or other government help for home owners facing the mortgage crunch. Here is what the President said: This economy is pretty good. There are definitely some storm clouds and concerns, but the underpinnings are good, just fine. February 28, reports show that new home sales in January fell to the lowest level in 13 years, and orders for big ticket items such as cars and refrigerators slumped dramatically. Well, I don't think we are headed into a recession, but no question we are in a slowdown. And then, just yesterday: No recession. No recession. The bottom line on this is, you have got your head stuck in the sand for so long, you tell yourself for so long that these policies are going to work. The American public again, as I said, doesn't care what the economists say. The American public and the average person that is out there, middle-class worker, doesn't care what the exact number of foreclosed homes are. They don't care about the derivatives in these exotic vehicles that were created on the subprime. They don't necessarily care where the oil is coming from or where the energy is coming from. What they know is they have got to get to work in the morning, and that takes gas. And that job is not paying any more. It might not be there tomorrow. They are not saving enough. And I heard the person before me speaking on this floor talking about how great this oil investment is in the 401(K). Well, I should probably get some of his advice, because mine like many others in this country showed a downturn last year because of all of the other drops in stocks and investment vehicles. So, Mr. Speaker, we have opportunities, there is no doubt. This country does, as the President said, have the underpinnings to perform better than any economy in the world. But the one thing the President fails to realize is the most important underpinning of that economy is middle-class American workers, the ones who for 12 years of Republican rule, 6 years of total rule by this ideology have suffered and seen their quality of life decrease dramatically. The good news is, it is starting to change. College is becoming more affordable under the new Democratic Congress, gas prices will start to be adjusted as we start to put research dollars in to moving towards cellulosic ethanol, fast growing poplar trees, switch grass, things that are out there that we can get to. These are the types of things that are going to happen. Our manufacturers in Detroit have already caught on. We are seeing hybrid vehicles now that you can actually buy. We are starting to see Detroit want to compete again. And, guess what? Where was that invisible hand? Where was that market when we were creating cars that got 15 miles to the gallon? When they start competing with everybody else in the world, we will start being able to get to where we need to go. This is an economy that can come back from this, but it will not come back with special interest policies that care nothing about what happens to the middle class, care nothing about the everyday things that people are going through. And the last thing I would say on this is, when I listen to what President Bush says, it reminds me of the time, and I think about this, when his father went to the supermarket about 2 decades ago. And I remember this very clearly, I was in high school, and it was a big story on the news because the first President Bush was fascinated that they had scanners to scan the price. Now, every American in the country had seen that since the early 1970s. They had seen them in their local supermarkets for a long time. But the President was flabbergasted that that would happen. My suggestion would be, there is a Safeway not far, the one I shop at down here, that the President get out there. He can take some security down there and he can go through there, and he can start to see what people are going through. On the way back, he needs to fill up. And then he might want to swing by and check the tuition costs at a university, even a State-run school. And then he would start to understand, saying things like: This economy is fine and that it is a little bit bumpy. Losing your home is not bumpy. Not being able to go to college is not bumpy. Not having a retirement account that you can retire with dignity is not bumpy. That is a fundamental failure of leadership. It is a fundamental failure to have a national economic policy that benefits the vast majority. And, as Justice Brandeis so clearly told us at one point is, you can have a wonderfully strong democracy or you can have the concentration of wealth in the hands of few, but you cannot have both. Well, we tried their way. I would like to go back to having the wonderful democracy. With that, Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to speak on this great floor. I thank you to give a different interpretation of what is happening in America.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, today House committees will hear from General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker about the supposed progress being made in Iraq and the need to keep 140,000 U.S. troops there indefinitely. As we listen to this testimony, it is important to remember what our Nation's true goals are and what true, lasting security actually means. A new report out this week from the same experts who advised the nonpartisan Independent Iraq Study Group concludes that political progress in Iraq is at best ``slow, halting and superficial,'' and political fragmentation is ``so pronounced'' that we are no closer to leaving Iraq than we were a year ago. The experts predict that it could take at least 5 to 10 years to produce any real, measurable political reconciliation. Madam Speaker, I would hope that President Bush would read this new report so that he could see how people outside his administration are viewing the situation in Iraq. Such sobering and nonpartisan assessment should serve as a wake-up call that we should not leave 140,000 troops in Iraq indefinitely while the Iraqis are doing virtually nothing to live up to their promises.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, the war in Iraq has now gone on for more than 5 years. Those 5 years have seriously hampered our military's readiness, and the human and financial costs grow greater by the day. Eighty-eight percent of our current and former military officers believe this war has stretched our military dangerously thin, and 60 percent say it has left us weaker than at any time since Vietnam. Pete Geren, the Secretary of the Army, said, ``We are consuming our readiness as fast as we build it,'' and the Army Chief of Staff, General George Casey, said, ``The last six-plus years at war have left our Army out of balance, consumed by the current fight, and unable to do the things we know we need to do to prepare for the future.'' In addition to spending hundreds of billions of dollars on this war, the cost to care for our veterans and rebuild this Army will take us decades. While our military is standing up and facing these challenges with great dignity and professionalism, there are some here who say we need to stay the course and stay in Iraq for 100 years. This is not sustainable. This is not a plan. This is not security. We need real leadership that understands the cost of staying in Iraq and not redeploying our troops is making America less secure and not more.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I rise in memory of Stephen Feinstein, the director of the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies and adjunct professor of history at the University of Minnesota, who died unexpectedly on March 4, 2008. He was 64. Born in Philadelphia and educated at Villanova and New York Universities, Prof. Feinstein taught for 30 years at the University of Wisconsin at River Falls before joining the faculty at the University of Minnesota. From its founding in 1997, he built the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies into an internationally renowned educational, research, and outreach institution that was engaged with a broad range of human rights issues, including the Armenian Genocide, the treatment of Native Americans, and the humanitarian crises in East Africa. To end genocide, he once said, ``we must study it and understand how it works against what we call `civilization','' if possible to develop an ``early warning system'' to prevent future genocides. Feinstein was known around the world as an advocate for Holocaust survivors and genocide education, and in particular, for his expertise on artistic expression and genocide. In addition to his CHGS responsibilities and activities, he served as an art consultant and guest curator for numerous museums, universities and art galleries in Minnesota, Florida, New York and Washington, D.C. ``Above all else,'' said his colleague Eric Weitz, ``Stephen Feinstein was a great humanitarian, someone with a profound belief in the value of research and education, a person who truly believed that if we had just one more lecture about Darfur, ran one more outreach session with teachers on the Armenian Genocide, taught one more course on the Holocaust and genocides, it really could make a difference and the world would be a better place for all of us.''

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, this Congress has finally understood and is realizing what the American people have known for so long, that after 6 years of mismanagement of our economy by the Bush administration that our economy has failed America's working class. This Congress is working to change that, having already passed a bipartisan economic stimulus package that will help jump-start the economy and create up to half a million new American jobs. Later this spring, recovery rebate checks of hundreds of dollars will be in the hands of 130 million Americans. Most will use it to pay bills, but hopefully some will help to spend it on the economy. Late last month we passed an energy bill that will help create hundreds of thousands of high-paying green collar jobs, lower energy prices, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. And to address the housing crisis, we expanded affordable mortgage loan opportunities, strengthened consumer protection against risky loans, and raised loan limits to increase liquidity in the mortgage market. Madam Speaker, this Democratic Congress is working to create more jobs, jump-start our economy that has clearly stalled. We are committed to addressing those issues that affect America's working class, not just the top 1 percent.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1424, the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act. I'd like to thank and recognize my two colleagues and friends who have led this fight with tenaciousness and with integrity for so many years, Congressman Kennedy, and my friend and fellow Minnesotan, Congressman Ramstad. The two of you represent the best that this institution has to offer, and I thank you. You carried on the fight that was started so many years ago by our late Senator from Minnesota, Paul Wellstone, and you've done so in such an admirable fashion. I can't tell you how proud I am to see this come to the floor. One of Senator Wellstone's qualities was one that you've exemplified. He stood up and he fought for what he believed in. It didn't matter what the political implications were. It didn't matter what others said. He steadfastly believed that discrimination against people because of mental illness or addiction was absolutely wrong and the antithesis of what America stood for. Senator Wellstone represented our State of Minnesota, and due to his work, Congressman Ramstad's work, Congressman Kennedy's work, Minnesota has one of the strongest parity acts in the Nation, and it works. If we can do it there, we can do it in this Congress. I would urge my colleagues to vote for this bill, not accept anything less, not the Senate version, not something from the White House, not a motion to recommit, not a smokescreen. This is the time to get this right the first time. Do the right thing. Pass this piece of legislation. This country will be better for it.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, after a brief reprieve, the politics of fear is back in full force. The White House and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are saying that the expiration of the Protect America Act has made this Nation more vulnerable. That is simply false. The Washington Post did a nice job of refuting this claim in saying Mr. Bush's pass-it-now-or-the-terrorists- will-win rhetoric is overheated fearmongering. Before the Presidents Day recess, I encouraged my colleagues to stay in Washington and forge a bipartisan long-term solution. I regret that we didn't do that, but I'm not afraid of the expiration of the Protect America Act. I voted for that piece of legislation. As a 24-year veteran of the Army National Guard, I know the importance of having the tools to fight the terrorists. However, I'm committed to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to find a long-term bipartisan solution that strengthens national security, protects our civil liberties, and does so without providing blanket immunity to companies that may have broken our laws. I hope that we can end the fearmongering and the political rhetoric that have characterized this debate and get down to America's business. And I think it needs to be pointed very clearly to this Nation's enemies, this Nation is protected, this Nation stands united on the issue of protecting us, and no amount of rhetoric will change that.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, you've heard previous speakers this morning talk about the incredible profits of oil companies. The number is $40 billion last year. That is the largest corporate profit in the history of this Nation. And meanwhile, as these profits are flowing and high energy prices continue to squeeze working-class Americans since President Bush took office, gas prices are up 109 percent, and home heating prices are up 222 percent. And over that same period of time, profits at the oil companies are up 313 percent. Now, to add insult to injury, in addition to these profits, the oil companies are currently receiving tax subsidies from the taxpayers of America. House Democrats do not believe that's right. In the coming weeks, we are going to consider legislation that will end those subsidies and transfer it to renewable energy sources. Renewable energy jobs and investment across America depend on Washington to act on this. Mr. Speaker, by passing this energy bill, congressional Democrats will lower energy costs, improve national security by making us more energy independent, and end taxpayer finance subsidies to the oil companies.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, we are here to talk today about the recent unveiling of the President's budget. I think we should give the President credit. At least he's consistent. Like all of his previous budgets, this one does several things. It leaves most Americans behind and puts this Nation further in debt. At a time of a slowing economy and Americans increasingly struggling to make ends meet, the President focuses on $1 trillion in tax breaks to the top 1 percent of Americans. While the wealthiest few continue to prosper under the President, the President cuts vital energy, education, and health care investments. At a time of rising energy costs, the President slashes low-income energy assistance programs. At a time of college costs skyrocketing, the budget eliminates nearly $1 billion in grant programs. At a time of rising health care costs, the President proposes devastating Medicare and Medicaid cuts that would reduce affordable access to health care for our seniors. The one good thing that people know is the winds of change have been blowing. This Democratic Congress will restore these and put the priorities of American people first.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I say a special thank you to Chairman Miller and the ranking member. As a lifelong educator and a teacher in the classroom for 20 years, the understanding and the work that has been put into this piece of legislation is something that I think we can all be very proud of. It takes in and understands the investment in America's future comes in education. I would like to make one comment. One of the issues that doesn't come up very often in the cost of college expenses is the cost of textbooks. It runs about $900 for an average student. One of the problems we've seen is small changes in textbooks that require students to buy new ones each and every year. There was a very important person in my district, Jared Stene, who was the president of the Winona State University Student Senate. Jared worked for years tirelessly on this issue to bring about some transparency in how textbooks are marketed. Unfortunately, Jared passed away unexpectedly over Thanksgiving, and I thank the chairman for giving me the opportunity and for the work he did in the committee to address this very issue.

Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I yield to the gentleman from California.