in 1974, the national network for youth was founded to coordinate the work of community-based organizations it now represents hundreds of youth organizations and advocate at the federal level, provide information and available services, and train organizations in best practices. i want to thank mr. wolf and mr. stupak and ms. lofgren, my fellow co-chairs of the congressional caucus on missing and exploited and runaway children, who join me in this important effort. i thank the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch, for managing this bill. i also want to thank mr. israel who has worked with me on this important resolution for years. . it is important to highlight the effort of those organizations that work so hard to help youth of america who have lost or are considering leaving their -- who have left

or are considering leaving their homes for a life on the street. if the gentleman has no further speakers, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. >> thank you, madam speaker. i want to urge my colleagues to support jerez lution, 779, and i yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the sgrelt yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to -- and support her resolution, 779. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. without objection, the resolution is agreed. to >> i would like to request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: those in favor of taking this vote by

the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ord. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? >> i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 942. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: resolution commending the real salt lake soccer club for winning the 2009 major league soccer cup. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch and the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts.

mr. lynch: i ask that -- i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and add any extraneous materials. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. lynch: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. lynch: at this time, i would like to recognize for five minutes the principal lead sponsor of this resolution, the gentleman from utah, for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. matheson: thank you a lot of times, when we have a sporting event come up, people predict what's going to happen. but you don't know what's going to happen. while we often do resolutions

to congratulation teams, but this one is special. the real salt lake team had the worst record in the playoffs. but through the the course of the year they've evolved and there was a stretch of 17 days between two games toward the end of the regular season where the team rededicated itself and went through sort of a mini training camp again. when it came out of that camp, it seemed to be a different team. it went into the playoffs, it was an underdog in the first round, it won. it was an underdog in the semifinals and won there too, and then a championship game against the l.a. galaxy in a shootout, they were able to succeed. there's an interesting sign that the locker room of the real salt lake team, it says the team is the star. while we often celebrate individual performances, and there are a number of

individuals that deserve mention, still the concept of a team coming together seems to be a pattern and formula for success. in terms of the real salt lake soccer team, that's what happened. so i was thrilled to have the opportunity to offer this resolution, it was interesting, going around to my colleagues to collect co-sponsorships, this is something that was very accepted on both sides of the aisle and again, i just think it's great we have a chance as a congress to congratulate this team on its great accomplishment on winning the soccer cup in 2009. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert. mrs. biggert: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in support of house resolution 942, congratulating the real salt lake soccer club for winning the major league sobblinger cup. last month in front of over 86,000 fans, at quevt field,

you'd -- at qwest field, youth think we were in the u.k. work the popularity of soccer out there, but the real salt lake soccer cup won the 2009 major league soccer cup, defeating the los angeles galaxy in a remarkable victory, the five-game winning streak did not come easily. they outlasted a formidable opponent through two sudden death overtimes and a shootout and came to a 5-4 victory. congratulations this victory marked the cullmy nation of a remarkable session for a team that barely made the playoffs, and only five years ago was a so-called lowly expansion team. this victory is the first major pro sports championship in utah in almost 40 years and con gadgelations to the the real salt lake soccer club, their

coach, jason green, the youngest coach to win a soccer cup, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. lynch: thank you, madam speaker. i want to amplify what has been said by both the speakers. i think there's a certain magic about this championship that it was totally unexpected. and i, too, want to congratulate coach jason christ who became the youngest coach to win a major league soccer cup, and the goal keeper, the most valuable player. real salt lake won their first major league soccer cup in only the second appearance in the major league soccer

championships. as a red sox fan who waited forever, i envy the success. after compiling a regular season record of 11 wins 12rk losses, and seven tie, real salt lake now are on the final spot of the 2009 major league soccer playoffs, a cinderella team if there ever was one. despite being the underdog throughout their championship run they orchestrated series of at least improbable victories against the defending champion, columbus crew, and the chicago fire, before as has been mentioned here, beating the favored los angeles galaxy in the los angeles soccer cup. in the championship game, the los angeles galaxy struck first with the goal by mike mcgee in the 41st minute of play. many thought that might be it but real salt lake continued to play hard and managed to tie the game in the 61st minute of play with a goal by robbie finley. the game ended in a tie.

eventually it went to penalty kicks which real salt lake won by a score of 5-4. real salt lake's victory in the major league soccer cup stands as a testament to what can be achieve through the hard work, dedication, and relentless team spirit. as "usa today" wrote after the game, major league soccer has its most improbable champion in its history, close quote. real salt like's work in the face of adversity is inspiring and commendable. they deserve our praise and i want to applaud the team's players, coaches, management, and its fans who never gave up, all those who helped in this unprecedented success in the major league soccer cup. madam speaker, let us as a body take this opportunity to commend this year's major league soccer cup champions through house resolution 942, joining with mr. matheson of utah and congratulate salt lake

on winning the 2008 -- 2009 major league soccer cup. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from illinois. ms. big erlt: i yield -- mrs. biggert: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 942. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. lynch: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ord. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 2507bed the chair's prior

announcement, further proceedings on this will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? mr. lynch: i move that the house suspend the rules and pass house concurrent resolution 160 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 160, honoring the american kennel club on its 125th anniversary. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch, and the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert, each will control 20 minutes. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. lynch: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and add any extraneous materials. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. lynch: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lynch: i would like to recognize the lead sponsor of this resolution, representative david price, my friend from north carolina, for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for

five minutes. mr. price: i thank the gentleman, madam speaker, and i rise today in support of house concurrent resolution 160, honoring the contributions of the american kennel club on its 125th anniversary. over the course of these 125 years, the a.k.c. has established itself as our nation's leading not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement, study, reresponsible care and breeding of dogs. today, dog owners throughout the united states can be proud of the work the club does to promote the responsible care dogs deserve. with officers employing 300 constituents in my district in raleigh, north carolina, and additional staff in new york city, the a.k.c. has also become a major source of good-paying jobs. each year, the american kennel club sanctions and regulates over 20,000 sporting events. it is also a lead for the trading inspectors and

inspecting dog kennels, conducting more than 5,200 kennel inspections each year. through its national junior organization, the a.k.c. has enrolled over 21,000 children, age 9 to 18 to promote responsible dog ownership, care, and handling. in addition to serving as the world's largest purebred dog registry, they've started a mixed breed program to allow all dogs to participate in a variety of a.k.c.-sponsored events. various programs support the advancement of canine health and well being and educate the public. madam speaker, i want to thank mr. lynch, mrs. biggert, ranking member issa for moving this forward and my colleague from north carolina, mr. coble and 51 other co-sponsors for their health as well -- for their help as well. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

chair recognizes the gentlewoman from illinois. mrs. biggert: i yield myself such time as i may -- i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: i rise in support of h.con.res. 160, honoring the american kennel club for its service throughout the united states. it operates the largest registry for purebred dogs in the u.s. and is the country's leading nonprofit organizations dedicated to the study of dogs and their care. they have 609 member clubs and monitors 4,000 licensed an sanctioned clubs holding events under their rules and regulations. i did show one dog that i had one time, for a period of time, a bassett hound and in chicago, the american kennel club, at one of the shows. it's quite an experience to do that and it's well-run and well-regulated. the american kennel club has take then lead in promoting

responsible dog ownership and breeding practices as well as supporting thousands of volunteers across the country who teach safety to dog eeners in order to maintain the high standards for which the american kennel club is known they conduct over 5,200 kennel inspections each year. and as mr. price mentioned, youth ages 9 to 18 are enrolled in a national junior organizations, which helps communicate the proper handling of dogs and allows them to participate in shows at an early age. it's also created a canine health foundation, focused on the genetics of dog diseases and clinical study. the club annually awards over $170,000 in scholarships to veterinary students and veterinary technology students. they've helped reunite thousands of dogs with their owners through its companion

animal recovery program. the club has been part of the communities in the united states since 1884, and continues to be a model for teaching responseable breeding, care, and ownership of dogs. we congratulate the american kennel club on its 121st anniversary and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. lynch: i want to stand and join with mr. price of north carolina in honoring the american kennel club for its service on behalf of the study of responsible breeding and ownership of dogs. i do want to add that in addition to mr. price, the lead sponsor, this resolution had the support of over -- it enjoyed the support of other 50 members of congress. as others have noted here, there's been a long and ill lust res you history of the a.k.c. in the united states and they sanction and regulate the

events so that 609 member clubs as well as monitor other 4,000 licensed and sanctioned clubs located throughout the united states. . as been noted the american kennel club sanctions or regulates nearly 23,000 individual events across the country last year. moreover n. promoting canine health and well-being, the american kennel club has implemented a variety of kennel inspector training initiatives with a.k.c. employed kennel inspectors conducting over 5,200 inspections each year. this is all great work that needs to be done and is proudly done by the a.k.c., an organization that funds research projects focused on the genetics of canine disease and to which the a.k.c. has donated over touchdown 2 million since 1995. so -- donated over $22 million since 1995.

i continue to yield the balance of our time. continue to reserve the our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from illinois. mrs. biggert: madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. lynch: thank you, madam speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts yields back his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house concurrent resolution 160 as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the concurrent resolution is agreed -- the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. lynch: madam speaker, qui the call of the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. prayed -- pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 6:30 p.m. today. >> watched live coverage on our companion network c-span 2. with up to its from reporters and editors of the congressional quarterly and now for iphone users -- the c-span app.

find out more at our health care hob. >> this week, more on net neutrality and its possible effects. an insider's perspective. that is tonight on c-span 2. >> a discussion now on government efforts to help homeowners prevent foreclosure. guest: -- host: jim carr, here to talk about refinancing mortgages. particularly those who are under water. this is the chart -- low, low rates is the chart. the charge numbers, the interest

rates are at historic lows, going back to world war ii. why can folks gets refinancing? guest: there are a number of reasons. the number of households underwater are at an historic high, almost 25%. that is a major problem. in addition, numbers have really tightened up in terms of what banks require for consumers to refinance. we have gone through a period of really reckless, irresponsible lending where they did not have to provide any information really. state your income, state your assets, and get these homes -- these loans that were not sustainable. they have gone way to the opposite end now. to the opposite end. you have to have a very high credit score, you have to document everything.

particularly, for those consumers whose mortgages are upside down, the house has lost value pretty substantially, they are in trouble. host: let's take a look at those numbers. "the washington post" had an article, foreclosure relief program is stuck in first. some of the figures, around 31,000 or 4% of the 720 about some people in the program, making home affordable, modified their loans, 30,000 have been disqualified. that number, 728,000, you are with the national community reinvestment coalition. is that a big number? guest: of that number needs to be many, many times higher. that the -- we are on route 4 record foreclosures this year alone. host: how does that compare to other years? guest: a normal year would be 300,000 400,000.

recent years, and believable. last year, 3.3 million. we are talking a foreclosure crisis not only astronomical in terms of absolute numbers but it is still growing. when you dig under that number, 4 million, in fact you see we could see even more foreclosures were it not for a number of the programs being put into place creating moratorium on foreclosures. if those moratorium were not in place, if those loans currently -- for example, you add it is -- mention the of ministrations home loan modification program, foreclosure mitigation, if those don't convert to a long-term or permanent loan modifications, sustainable, you can add those to the pile as well. host: we want to give our viewers involved. host: the house on friday passed

a financial regulations bill. one of the and then is defeated was one by john conyers and others that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to write down or unjust mortgages. would that have been a good thing? guest: bill, that is one of the most powerful tools that could actually move this foreclosure crisis forward in terms of modifying loans. essentiallyñi what it says is a home would be treated like any other major asset -- a luxury yacht, rental property. in the event you are struggling to pay your mortgage, you have access to a bankruptcy judge and that judges -- not talking consumer advocate, but that bankruptcy judge will be able to look at the consumer's perspective, from a consumer and lenders perspective, and strike a reasonable deal that would allow them to maintain their home and at the same time be something working in the interest of the investors as well. that was defeated. the problem was that of that lot

alone would resolve -- could result as much as 30% of the crisis at no direct cost to the taxpayer. it is what the administration asked for at the beginning of the year when it put forward their making home affordable program. congress almost passed it. the house passed it, the senate didn't. that was a real loser for the program because that was the compelling aspect. we do not have anything that could compel behavior by server serves. host: specifically what is the strongest thing that could compel server serves -- servicers guest: avenue there was a third party that could intervene and take a look of the consumer circumstances and not give everything to the consumer but on balance say, this make sense to the consumer and makes sense to the investor. if they knew the consumer had their records, and they would be much more efficient and effective evaluate a loans and either approving them or not

approving them. what we have right now is complete the intransigence in the system. host: are beginning cases were providers say it is cheaper to let it go to a foreclosure rather than modifying? guest: not that it is cheaper. it is just the servicersñi and collectible bunch of fees as it goes to foreclosure and ultimately the, during the process. there are lots of incentives, financial incentives, and there are reasonable ones but they can't compete with the enormous number and amount of fees a servicer and stacked up, and just sending the consumers through the tortures of foreclosure. that is why they need a compelling reason. this is an incentive, it makes sense. financial incentives are good but this is a compelling reason that says we need you to understand, we are in the middle of a national crisis. if i could say one other thing, there is some talk of recovery. but it is a jobless recovery. that jobless recovery is not a recovery in a sense of that it

is unemployment, the largest driver of the foreclosure crisis -- not the products, they worked their way through. we have in all -- whole new set that will be coming next year. right now foreclosure is the largest driver. as long as the problem that caused the crisis in the first place, foreclosure, continues to get larger and larger and taking on a life of its own now, then we won't really recover until we get people back to work and we will not been back to work until we resolve the crisis. it is very circular. host: walter, a republican, indiana. caller: thank you for taking my call. i appreciate it. i came from old school. my mom and dad said the first thing you pay is yourself, take 10%. you don't need a new car, fancy clothes -- you need security. that sometimes means you have to go without for the longer purpose. host: i am going to let you go

-- we do ask our viewers to give you 30 days before calling again. guecaller: i think he's said a lot of things -- the kind of answer my question what you were on hold. so many people don't have jobs right now. correct me if i'm wrong, but i believe it is not a requirement that you have to have a job to get some of these loan programs -- no job, you might not apply. just curious, you're called community reinvestment coalition there. you touched on irresponsibility of lending practices that led up to this. you go back to the community reinvestment in 1997 -- everything was loosened and banks were forced to loan irresponsibly and then the

government stepped in and back everything with fannie and freddie. it was just a snowball that rolled downhill. we see where christopher dodd is in the polls -- he was in it right from the beginning, all the way through, getting a sweetheart loans, no? you seem to have the same nam you seem to have the same nam but you don't seem to agree what you seem to have the same name, but you do not seem to agree with what he said. what is a good example for government? host: thank you for that. guest: you raise a lot of issues. one of the reasons we talked about the reckless loans, and a lot of irresponsible lending was going on. the are aiming in the wrong direction. they are aiming at community borrowers as opposed to the

financial institutions. u.s. -- he referred to the community reinvestment act. the federal reserve board did a study last year. only 6% of the problematic ones -- 6% -- where recovered under the community reinvestment act. again, 6%. almost 95% had nothing to do with that. they had nothing to do with -- they had to do with wall street investment bankers and others who had no involvement with cra. i absolutely understand your concern about deficit spending. we are really in a mess. here is the problem. the problem is how you get out of recession? the best way to pay down debt is to have people employed and have taxes. the question is how do we get people back to work? even the most optimistic economists expect these high levels of unemployment to last

for the next two, three, four, as many as six years. that is one of the reasons why the deficit spending -- if it is creating jobs -- would be the most powerful way to reduce the deficit. if it is spending for miscellaneous and frivolous activities, i am completely with you. we're just digging ourselves a deeper and deeper hole. host: next up is jason in rock falls, ill.. democrats line. caller: my question -- is lending $3 on the $1 good for the homeowner -- is that the practice? why isn't there are regulatory system behind the banking institutions lending $3 on the $1 to keep more people in their homes?

guest: i am not exactly sure what you mean by the question, us $3 on a home. one of the things i can say is the programs to address this financial crisis have been upside down from the very beginning. what i mean by that is going back to last year, when we realize the banking system had a problem, that banks were beginning to fail and ultimately we had systemic failure in the system, the problem was that they had problem loans that had been offered to consumers who were not able to pay them back. i can go into those problem loans if bill asked me to go into them. the way to help the banks would actually have been to a team the subsidies at the consumers to allow them to maintain their homes. instead, week aimed almost all the subsidies at the banks.

most people focus on the $700 billion tarp as if that was the real bailout, the real was over $12 trillion, depending on whose estimate, as many as $23 trillion if you look at the special inspector general for the bank bailout, came from the federal reserve, fdic through loans, investments, guarantees. here's the problem in bailing out the banks. the consumers are still failing on a homes. as much as we are giving to the banks, the consumers are still failing so they keep sending more and more problems to the banks and one of the reasons why, as the bailout has continued and a lot of people are celebrating the are now returning to profitability, lending exactly still falling because the banks are not helping. just one last thing. while we are celebrating a return and putting back into the banking system, we are on route to one of if not the largest number of banks failures in

american history this year. fdic insurance fund is now depleted. so we are still in a crisis mode simply because we have not addressed fully the concerns and the challenges of those consumers who are going to foreclosure. as long as we continue to have millions of foreclosures every year, we continue to have a real negative drag on the economy as well as sending more toxic products to the banks. host: what is the role of fannie mae and freddie mac and refinancing? guest: they are planning a major role in refinancing now. they are part of the administration's new refinance program and it started off working really well. ñrit is a well thought out progm on refinancing. it allows you to refinance if you are as much as 125% upside down, meaning your mortgage is valued as more than 125% of the actual cost of your home. that is a solid program.

the problem we are facing in this market is not so much refinancing, but it is the loans in imminent threat of default or are actually already in delinquency heading to foreclosure. host: you mention the second wave in 2010. how big is it? guest: a huge wave. one of the big challenges, we started with a lot of unfair deceptive products and mostly at households who really were not sophisticated about the market. so when they were told how the mortgages work, which is not accurate, in terms of how the housing market worked, we did not all of the sudden wake up one morning and find 3 million of 4 million people just reckless in america. something happened systemically. a lot of bad products were entering the system. most of the first products that failed tended to be for middle income and moderate income households who just won not that sophisticated in the market.

-- were not as sophisticated and the market. a whole new wave of loans for people with higher credit scores. pay option arms. they don't begin to reset until the middle of next year and into 2011. almost $200 billion worth of those loans. they will reset from minimum payment to fully amortizing loans such as the lone resets on those loans when they reset on average would be more than $1,000 a month. that is $12,000 a year. you can imagine there were lots of consumers particularly in this environment not prepared to step up to the plea to pay $1,000 more for month. that is the crisis still waiting to happen on price -- top of the crisis we have right now. host: then, republican, california. go ahead. you are on the air. caller: i have a loan with washington mutual.

chase came and take over from wamu, went through all the rigmarole, all led what is 30 affixed at lower interest. we have high scores on our credit. we have a lot of income. they refused may. and the appraisal was double what i old. what is my next recourse or what can i do to get out of the interest on late and get into 30 affixed with a lower interest rate? guest: from what you are saying, you are a perfect candidate for the administration's loan refinancing program. i don't have the details on your file so i can't tell you exactly why they would have turned you down. we hear stories like this all the time so it is not surprising people are getting a run around

rather than refinancing as well as loan modification. here is what you can do. united states department of housing and urban development. if you will then, go to their home page and they will have on the home page very prominent, loan modification and loan refinancing. xdthey will explain the making home affordable loan modification program and the refinancing program. just read through that. it is very consumer friendly. you can tell immediately if you are eligible and if you qualify. if so, it will give you instructions right there, including a telephone number as well as other web sites to go through directly to get help. just go straight to hud. host: taylor, atlanta collar on independent line. caller: good morning. i have two questions. late last year they were discussing tax relik for those

people who withdrew from their 41 k programs, retirement programs, to sustain their mortgages, or to those who have taken from their retirement fundñr -- unemployment. is there any discussion of tax relief for those people as far as penalties for early withdrawal of 401k? guest: i have heard some discussions about that. i am one of the number of people who believe some types of exceptions, given this extraordinary crisis, particularly for emergency issues like dealing with a home, loss of a job or something like that. but i can honestly say i have not heard of any legislation that is excellent past or currently debated. but don't take that as a sign that it isn't being done.

i know lots of people have been talking about that here in washington but it is an issue, those 401k plan and others, that i have not followed. host: the home market makes the front page. cover story, can the home market bounce back without more help? host: tell us a little bit about the home market, not just the refinancing, but the whole

market and help your looking for for new home buyers? guest: i smile that i hear the positive news is coming. it is more positive news built on a host of federal subsidies just working its way through the system, coursing through the rain -- veins of the market, in a way that just does not speak to sustainability. for example, tax credit for new home purchases now being extended to purchases for homes for anybody, whether a first- time home buyer or you just want to buy a home in the market. there is nothing wrong with these programs. at least the militant types of programs are important for an economic recovery. -- these similitudes types of programs are important. but are you addressing the fundamental problems negatively affecting the assistance of assimilative putting you on the road to recovery or are you really put on a bridge that goes nowhere because at the end of the stimulus you still have the

underlying problem. the problem in this particular case is you are attempting to use stimulus programs as a substitute for addressing the real fundamental problem. as long as the have 4 million to go into foreclosure, saying you have a lot of housing sales going, you have to ask yourself, what is happening there? we are in the middle of recession. sport is to the stimulus affect -- part as tax credit and part is a lot of these homes are being sold at distress sales, 40%, 50%, 60% of the value. that is not a healthy market. host: san mateo, california. valerie, democratic caller. caller: i'm wondering why the banks don't split their mortgages -- 18 year loan for half of the mortgage now --

loan, and the remaining 12 years collect the other part. why do these consumers think they should just be off the hook for the loans they borrowed? , and the banks carry a couple hundred thousand for 18 years? guest: your question suggests two issues. you said." something, i though, about why is that consumers think they should get all hot and then would the banks being willing to do some unusual or super normal things to modify the loan. the answer is it is an interesting thing. what is in the best interest of the banks and investors actually is in the best interests of the consumers. those two parties are different from the ones who actually service loans, will have a different financial incentive.

this has been the disconnect all along. for example, when homes have gone to foreclosure, it is called loss severity in the industry. the lender or investor losing as much as 60% or more of the value of the home when it goes all the way to foreclosure instead of having modified it and lost maybe 30%. in some cases, less than that and in some cases, maybe a little more. in most cases actually better than allowing it to go to foreclosure. most people have been scratching their heads over the better part of the year asking, why is it of the year asking, why is it these go to foreclosure. you have servicers. their interests are different and they do not have a compelling reason to participate because the law would give them a reason to be more aggressive in modifying -- a law that would give him a reason to be more

aggressive and in modifying these funds is not passed congress. we are paying billions of dollars to support consumers, but in fact, the law that would have one of the most powerful effects and cost nothing to the consumers, we cannot get past the bank lobbyists on cattle hill which are being paid for by the same financial institutions -- lobbyists on capitol hill which are being paid for by the same financial institutions. the bank's turnaround and send an army of lobbyists to capitol hill to work in opposition of the best interests of the same people who bailed them out. this crisis is going to be written about in textbooks and history books for years and no one is going to believe how completely -- house irreal this whole deal has been with this crisis. -- >> house are real this whole deal has been with this crisis. host: what you think you will hear about this from the

president? guest: i think we know what we're going to hear. he is going to pound the table and tell them to do the right thing. the question is what are they going to say to him? hat received the greatest subsidies are showing great profits, on roads to get near record bonuses, and at the same time the lending, which was the whole purpose of bailing them out, had actually been dropping precipitously, like a rock, for month after month after month. what we need to hear from them is what are they going to do to actually contribute to the economy, which was the whole purpose and bailing them out. that is why i am saying a lot of people were saying, well, the bank bailout is a success. it is a success if we ended but foreclosure crisis from a success if we are lending again, putting the economy back to work. but it is not a success if the only thing we haven't is improve bank earnings for those

institutions were bailed out -- if the only thing we have is improved bank earnings. that is not success. host: keith in palm bay, florida. caller: the started hitting on a really good for a minute. the economy seems to be built on artificial basis and not the free-market -- the cars for clunkers, making people by early and everything and taking away the future sales. until we reset and are allowed to fail, we are going to be in big trouble. like me taking out another credit card to pay off another credit card. a new said earlier the government is creating jobs -- you said earlier the government is creating jobs but the borrowed money to do this but the average job is created at a cost of $200,000 to create a $50,000 job which that person does not even pay texas -- taxes so we are perpetually putting

ourselves deeper in the hole. i think you are right that it is more of the buyer beware because kids are graduating from school and then of the culture of different countries but they don't know the difference between a fixed or adjustable mortgage. i don't see buying adjustable mortgage even allowed and subprime. we use subprime to pay off our credit, we got it at a high interest and after five years of living in it, used it to pay off our credit and we used it in the right manner instead of spending it on vacations and stuff. i think it takes both sides to tango. it was the bank's fault to take advantage of the people and it was a lot of people's fault for using their house equity as a piggy bank. guest: just a quick comment. i think that was a really insightful point. and i think the extension, when you talk about public policy from what he said, was really good. for every one of these transactions -- a lot of people say it was all the banks fraught

-- fall and some people say all the consumers fault. let us assume the reality for every bad loans there was a banker and a borrower. so the point is, if you are going to bail out one side or the other, why not bailout the one who will bailout both sides or at least be evenly distributed in the way you address the crisis? we have not been evenly distributed. we act as if the banks were taken advantage of completely and the consumers, all the consumers were exploiting the banks and that has been a big problem. let me just say real quickly on the john ensign, the jobs created when you stimulate -- jobs side, the jobs created in the economy -- the problem is you can't stimulate the economy while ignoring the fundamental problems. you have to both do the stimulus things as well as address the fundamental problems and that is something we've not done a good job on. and be aware if the government

creates jobs, like the cash for clunkers, or even if they put people directly to work in public-service jobs, those people would pay taxes and putting people to work is the best and fastest way to bring down the deficits that we are having. iworking america does it work to bring down the deficit. so if you are really concerned about the economy, we should look at two things, fundamentally addressing the foreclosure crisis and fundamentally putting people back to work, not just short- term stimulus but when you are hearing in terms of the long term because his job crisis we have will last into 2010, into 2011. it does not mean we will have growing unemployment in 2011, but it means of the levels will be very high, at least 9% for the next couple of years, 8%, as much as 8% in 2013. most

thank you for coming in. >> members taking another break before returning for recorded votes and special orders speeches at 6:30 p.m. eastern. among those bills one managing the federal grant process. another congratulating this year's major league soccer champions. more coverage when the gavel comes down here on c-span. president obama meeting with top banking executives was the main topic of today's white house briefing. press secretary robert kids speak with reporters for about 35 minutes. -- press secretary robert kidd speaks with reporters for about 35 minutes. -- press secretary robert gibbs. >> that is all right. [laughter]

before week -- well, before we get started i want to go through just a little bit of feedback i got from the president on this afternoon, the meeting with the bank executives. the president believed that the meeting was positive and constructive. the president opened the meeting by wanting to talk about four specific areas -- credit and lending was one. second was housing. the third was executive compensation. the fourth was financial reform. the bankers all acknowledged they could do more in these efforts. one banker said "cause us to look more broadly" at our landing. [laughter] all the bankers spoke of the

notion of second looks at non- said had been turned down. i think you all have seen it bank of america discussing their desire to see $5 billion more lending in 2010. they had suggestions for streamlining the loan process and paperwork. bankers acknowledged compensation -- they had problems with compensation. that they were taking steps on say on pay and long term equity verus short-term cash -- versus short-term cash. the president said it was the amount that matter to people. all the executives discussed their support for the concept of financial reform. the president said clearly that he and the administration were hearing something markedly different from lobbyists and

from organizations that they funded to lobby on their behalf. the president reiterated that the financial reform was a big priority to him and the american people to ensure the crisis that we saw it never happens again. he suggested that they find ways to be more vocal about the support that they discussed on finance reform. that is a quick rundown of notes from that meeting. we will start with mr. hurst. >> moving of that topic to afghanistan. general rodriguez said it would take nine to 12 months to get the 30,000 troops in afghanistan. the impression after the president's speech at west point was that this was something that was going to be happening within six months -- >> let me -- i would point you

to the remarks that secretary gates and others made when testifying in front of congress. the bulk of our forces will be in by the beginning of summer. the remainder would be in by the end of summer. >> almost the end of september. >> i believe the end of august was the date we originally talked about. i would point you to what secretary gates said. if there are internal discrepancies about that, then that is best directed to the pentagon. i think the president strongly believes in and all the people who participated agree that the president's proposal got more troops into afghanistan faster than any other option he was presented with. that is the policy he chose. >> if it should extend to 11 months, that was what general

rodriguez put forward -- >> again, i would go back and asked secretary gates. i do not want to contradict testimony given before the senate and house. >> is this disturbing to the president? >> the president believes we should get our troops in by the end of the summer. >> did it become clear why bankers have not been lending as much as you would like them to? >> i will let them discuss their business practices. i think the president believes, as you heard him say after the meetings and throughout the weekend, and others in the ministration, that bankers have to play a constructive role in getting our economy moving again. i think the president's -- i think the president said and the banker said that this meeting and passed meetings have caused

them to look more closely at landing, and we take them at their word on that. >> do you feel like you got a firm commitment from them? >> we have a firm commitment from them. the all mentioned, again, ensuring that second looks would be given to loans that had been turned down. we saw a specific announcement from bank of america, an increased amount of lending to small and medium-sized businesses. i think the president certainly believes that. one of the important areas to get our economy moving again is to ensure small and medium- sized businesses that are creditworthy -- you heard the president say, we do not want banks making loans to individuals who should not have loans. but the president feels and i think it sounded like the bankers as well -- there are certainly people who are

creditworthy and need help in getting our economy on stop. >> you mentioned the citigroup paid back. when you expect more institutions to follow up -- how soon should be expect that? is something imminent from other banks? >> i do not want to get ahead of their discussions with their different regulators. i think the president continues to be pleased, not simply that we are getting that money back from institutions, but more importantly, the taxpayers are seeing that come back with interest. i think that is why you saw announcements last week, the amount that the administration believes is likely necessary from tarp shrank $2 billion from last week. >> one year ago, the president said wall street bankers should

for go christmas bonuses. -- forgo christmas bonuses. he called those bonuses shameful in january. they came out and said some of the same things. they wanted to have this discussion. since then, the president has made it very clear he is not happy with the direction things are going. loans are not happening. you just said he would take the bankers at their word. why would you take them at their word? >> i can only tell you what they said. the president is going to continue to ensure we are making progress. i think the president would say if you look at -- again, i do not want to speak broadly for every banker. i think the president would say when an institution decides to forgo a cash bonus in lieu of long term equity in the company,

that that is precisely the type of solution that he was talking about earlier this year. if we take the short-term cash out of the system, that can be much more closely read toward risk, and instead say the compensation should be attached to the long-term health and growth of your company, which is good for you and taxpayers. that represents a type of progress the president would like to see. again, i think all the bankers acknowledge that they have work to do on this issue. the president reiterated that and discussed again, as i said earlier, it is not just the structure. it is also the amount. . .

>> whether it is making a specific recommendation to increase by $5 billion loans to small and medium-sized business, to take compensation issues seriously and quite frankly, maybe most importantly, the house passed on friday a very

important financial reform bill out of the house, which now goes to the senate. the president and his team strongly believe that there are aspects that are crucial to ensuring the type of fiasco the we had happen and september of 2008 never happens again. if as the president heard around that table today, they are broadly supportive of financial reform, i think the president was pretty clear with them and that needs to be communicated from their lobbyists to the broader senate so that we can get something done to ensure that never happens again. >> let's take a housing program to the president unveiled in mesa, arizona in february. he said it was going to help 3 or 4 million homes, help these mortgage holders renegotiate or refinance. about 760,000 americans have

applied in the banks have given roughly 31,000 and the president had a goal of 3 million. we talked to some of the bankers -- >> >> that is not the number of people taking place in modifications. >> moving on. the bankers said that the problem with the program is paperwork. >> that came up in the meeting. there was an acknowledgement that the president and their team would look at the paperwork requirements in streamlining these type of things. the president took notes strut the meeting i can assure you he will discuss with this team.

in the event that the housing lot of fish -- housing modification program is being held back because of onerous paperwork requirements, that we will streamline those people line -- paperwork requirements. >> do you think it is the fact that the banks do not want the loan? >> i do not want to speak broadly for the banks. i know the president's position is it is far more preferable to keep somebody in the house and to figure out the best way for them to ultimately meet, through a modification, their mortgage and their loan requirements. that is far preferable in any economic situation. quite frankly, it is more beneficial for banks to have somebody paying that loan than to have a house that they cannot put anybody in. we will work with anybody in

terms of streamlining the number and the paperwork requirements if there are those that believe that is the onerous part of this program. again, the president was very clear in that housing was one of the main things that he wanted to discuss. obviously there are some banks in there that do not do mortgages but certainly there were some in there that do. >> of wonder if citizens watching this say the president for the last year said he is going to get a stern talk to bankers, meanwhile, taxpayers are giving them hundreds of billions of dollars and nothing changes. the housing modification program is only helping 31,000 americans, not four million. what you say to americans who say this seems like kabuki theater? >> the president did not have this meeting on accident. the president as frustrated as the american people are.

i do not know if you use video from other networks. i think the tone and the tenor of his remarks in the interview that we taped last week that was broadcast yesterday -- last evening, was pretty clear. i did not think the president minced words. i think the president is serious and frustrated on behalf of the american people that as we have all said, the taxpayers ensured the financial stability of many of the people that were in that room and that we should expect that those banks do the same in being part of a positive economic recovery that helps people stay in their homes, which loosens credit for medium and small businesses which addresses egregious executive compensation issues, and again, maybe the most pressing legislative issue that does not

stand in the way of very important financial regulatory reform. if they all said that. the president was clear. if that is what you believe, it should be communicated from those that represent your interests on top of hill. >> when you talk about the tone and the tenor of the comments on "60 minutes" where he called the bankers that cats, then today he said the president -- you said the president feels the meeting was constructive and positive. was that tapping into the populist rage? >> the president was clear. i do not think that begins to enumerate the president's frustration. and i think you could be -- >> you are saying it was positive constructive -- positive and constructive? >> i think it was positive in the sense that the president laid out and enumerated quite specifically the concerns that he directly had on four areas.

i think the president said the meeting was also quite frank. the president did not hand out awards. he talked directly to each and every one of those members about the need to increase lending to small and medium-sized businesses. the president talked directly about increasing the volume of loan modifications to keep people in their homes. the president discussed quite clearly the very real concerns that he has and he enumerated last evening and has for quite some time about executive compensation, which is why a say-on-pay is in the financial reform legislation that passed the house last friday. the president believes this is important. and the larger issue of financial regulatory reform, ensuring that steps are in place that make sure what we dealt with which required this extraordinary response from taxpayers never happens again.

that is one of the single most important things that we can do going forward, again, to ensure that we are never in this position again. " another financial issue is the senate just passed a $447 billion omnibus spending bill and it has thousands of earmarks and double-digit increases for various cabinet departments. if is the president contemplating vetoing this to send a signal to his fellow democrats that it is time to cut the spending? >> i have not talked specifically with the president about whether or not he is quick to sign the bill. i think the likelihood is that keeping the government running is an important thing. i think d.c. within the legislation that there are -- the number of earmarks is down. we have made progress on that. there is no doubt we have still a long way to go, but i think one of the goals is obviously to keep the government functioning. >> when he signed the omnibus in

march, it was called left over, and he said it was a departure point for a more fortunate -- for a more far reaching change. where is the change? the democrats have had their chance to govern -- >> we have seen a chance -- we have seen a decrease by almost 15% in the number of air marks. it is not perfect. the president will continue to make and try to make progress on those issues. the president would like to see congress get to the point where we are doing appropriations bills, not omnibus bills. >> with a veto bring that kind of change? >> i can turn to talk to him about it. i think that right now -- i have not talked to him specifically. >> he is encouraged by the

decrease in -- >> we did not have the same level we had in there before, yes. >> when did the -- why did the president not get a firm commitment from the banks? he gave all this taxpayer money to them. >> the tarp planned, the piece of legislation is something that -- the requirements of that legislation this president is bound by that passed in a different time. the president believes, i think clearly and as i've restated, banks have an obligation to take responsibility for what was caused for their role in that and to step up to the plate now and be part of positive economic reform and positive economic

recovery. why are they not giving these loans? what is their problem? paperwork -- >> that is what the president wanted to push on. that is why the president had them down. i think that is why you see when they come out and talk about taking different and more looks at these loans, some banks lending al in previous weeks have talked about specific amounts that they see in the next year that can be lent to small and medium businesses. i think the president believes that is a positive step. the president will continue -- this was not the first meeting. this is at least the second meeting that has been had. >> why is this the have to tell the bankers what the problem was? >> i am sorry? >> why did he have to convince the bankers that they were not giving loans? >> i do not know why he had to

do that but the president was happy to let them know what their responsibilities are. but it does not sound like he got any kind of commitment for greater loans to small businesses. >> again, i will let them make their own individual announcements. >> they all had media training. they babble and say nothing. >> i am supposed to respond to their media training? and i appreciate the opportunity to go i am asking whether they made a commitment to the president. >> they made a commitment to hire people to process loans, which in many cases they have done. to take those second looks. i have already mentioned at least one today and others in the previous couple of weeks that have announced a greater commitment in the next year in their financial plan to small business. >> you made a point of the foregoing of cash for stock but that's only one institution.

>> did all the world's problems get solved today? i can tell you, know. the president believes that this is not going to be solved overnight. we did not get into the problem that caused a financial collapse in september of 2008 by something that happened earlier in september of 2008. this was going on for quite some time. making loans to people that should have never had loans. that is what the president has put in financial reform and called for a very strong consumer protection agency, the likes of which right now have the responsibility and it is spread out over 10 to 12 different agencies to ensure that people are not taking advantage in terms of teaser loans. >> did they call off the dogs lobbying against french reforms? >> the president mentioned on several occasions that he appreciated that all of them around the table were able to tell the president of the united states they supported financial reform. what he expected them to do was

to go tell their lobbyists and to go tell the agencies and groups that they helped fund that they just tell the president they are for financial reform. i can assure you this. the president is going to get financial reform. it is through the house. if people see it through the senate. we believe the framework for ensuring that the type of thing that the taxpayers had to make up for as a result of risk- taking that culminated in what happened in september of 2008, that that never happens again. that is what the president will do. >> given the president paused this pleasure with lobbyists, which he be willing to issue a moratorium on political contributions from the financial industry for himself and encourage fellow democrats to do the same? >> we do not take contributions from lobbyists. >> i am not tighten about lobbyists. i'm talking directly from the financial service companies. >> i'm sorry, i thought you said lobbyists. >> i have not talking to the

president about that. i think he has been pretty clear in both how he financed his campaign in 2008. we do not take money from political action committees. the president did not take money from registered federal lobbyists. when he became the nominee, the dnc did not do that either. >> could he go further and shun all contributions from wall street and encourage his fellow democrats -- >> i think the people that are taking contributions, most of the people that seem to be taking contributions are standing in the way of financial reform. i read last week that hundreds of lobbyists were called to capitol hill to put the quash by the republicans on the financial reform. that is a great question. the next time there is a show exclusive, it is a good question to pose to him. >> the president could set an example. >> he did. >> if there something

inconsistent about the fact the president is encouraging more lending, banks are reluctant, not -- they are concerned about the creditworthiness of the small institutions -- small businesses or these individuals considering the loose lending practices that led us to the crisis? >> we are not looking for -- the solution to this problem is not to give out loans to people that cannot pay them back. that is in many ways what got us into the problem we are dealing with, certainly on the home side and on credit cards, as well. what the president gets in talking with people and in the letters that he reads each day are millions, not millions, and dozens and dozens of letters that i assume represent millions of people, small businesses that tell the president that they have always been able to get a loan, that they are creditworthy

and that they ought to be able to now get a loan even as the economy starts to make progress. what he wanted to do was to ensure that bankers heard that message on behalf of the small business owners throughout this country, some of whom used to be able to get loans and now cannot. the president does not wish to meet the irresponsibility of what led us into that with future irresponsibility with giving loans to people either to pay credit card debt, to buy a house, or any other type of loan of which they do not have the wherewithal to pay back. that does not make sense for the economy, it is not a sense for anybody taking those loans. >> you cannot force them to do anything when they're not under a tarp. all you can do is jawbone. what does that get? >> it gets some pacific amounts

-- it gets specific amounts that banks say they're going to lend small businesses next year. i think $5 billion -- we will watch them to ensure that they come through in their commitment. that is something i think the president would believe is important. when one of the bankers says to the president that you caused us all to have to take -- you caused us all to have to take a look at how we lend money and who we lend money to, the president thinks that is a positive thing. >> does president obama now believe that these banking executives get it when he said on television that they did not? >> i think the president believes that the meeting was positive, that it was constructive. the important thing is not what somebody says in a meeting but the actions that follow and that's what the president --

>> so it remains to be seen? >> the president will evaluate their actions. >> how big an increase in the debt limit does the president want? >> i have not seen has been specifically called for. i can get from legislative affairs if there's more information. >> did he talk specifically in this meeting about increases in loans, whether by percentage or by certain deadline? did he set any benchmarks? >> it is important that the president does not want to be a loan officer. i think each of these institutions understands, or should understand from the president, what increased lending means. the president did not lay out a specific benchmark. >> are there any legal or regulatory remedies for the

white house in case, down the road, you are not satisfied with the improvement in loans? >> i would certainly have to talk to the lawyers and stuff about that. i do not know on the lending side. there are specific legal things that we think can be done on financial reform that the president is in the process of getting through capitol hill. >> a minor question about the president in his meetings, you mentioned he took notes throughout. are there not note takers in the meetings who then maybe put these -- put these discussions in a memo that goes to the president? >> there were at least four of us that were sitting, not at the table, all taking copious notes, from an ec, from treasury, from,

and as well as the president along with secretary geithner, larry summers, and others. >> why does the president think that the banks are not lending? >> >> i think there is probably a number of different things. what he hears from some is what was mentioned before capital requirements which, i think the president understands and we have to take steps to ensure that what happened never happens again. but i think the president also believes that the letters he gets, there are people that have traditionally gotten those loans

before that ought to have the same access to the capital that they had when all they have done is play by the rules. >> capital requirements is not a sufficient explanation? >> i do not think in and of itself, no. >> the word from regulators is that it is important to have very strong, very defensible loans on your books now is a sufficient explanation? >> i do not make -- >> i do not no at the president evaluates that as a reasonable explanation. >> if the president does not want to see coming from this meeting a series of loans to people that cannot pay them back. i think what the president strongly believes is the letters that he gets and the discussions that he had with small business owners that there is some happy medium that can be reached where you meet capital requirements, where you are making loans to those that have strong credit histories yet at the same time,

there are those that can and should be getting loans that for whatever reason they are not. that was the purpose or one of the purposes of today's meeting. >> is the recession over? >> according to who? >> your economic advisors. >> i think if you look -- there is a technical -- >> larry summers said yes. >> the official definition that talks about when you turn the quarter, when you go from plummeting to going back up. i think we have at least in terms of gdp reached that point. if she would on to say what i think the president said and what i firmly believe, we have not recovered until all those people that want to work are back at work. she would know because she sat on the board before coming to the administration which as you know, dates the official beginning and end to economic

downturns. what christy talked about in this answer was there are, and i think what any economist, i am sure there are many on your network, it is likely the next time this board meets that they'll affix a date to the end of the recession from a statistical economic viewpoint that they are charged to do. in the president's mind, in others mine, has all that needs to happen happened in order for the american people to bask in the glow of recovery? obviously not. if that is why they followed up both of those questions by discussing what the administration is doing directly in order to address the job situation. i think it is safe to say that if we believed all was good in america, we cannot be talking about increased ways to bring

about an environment for the private sector to begin hiring more. >> the senate has now said that it like to expand access to medicare to those aged 55 and above. that is an alternative approach the house is taking. they want to provide access to those on medicare down to age 55. that is a different approach to expanding coverage under the rubric of public option that the house is taken. which of these two approaches that the president believe is better? >> what the president wants to do is see the process through the senate. continue to make progress and that is what the administration is working toward. >> that is a large systemic change to medicare and many budget analysts who are not opposed to health care reform as principle have said this is -- >> let me interrupt. i do not want to get ahead of the because the -- ahead of the

cbo because he is working on that. legislation would slow the health care rate. it would in fact help our fiscal situation. you have seen him talk about the extended life would have in terms of the specific policy. that is what the cbo is evaluating. but of the president is not agnostic about trying to get health care reform through. you said that bank executives acknowledged the problem they have with compensation. how did the president understand that? these bank executives have not come up with an effective way to

pay their people or is it a public perception? >> they understand that given put the taxpayers have done, the extraordinary steps they have taken, that compensation in that environment is out of step with any notion of common sense. that is what the president has talked about before and that is what the president reiterated, not just in structure. the president was clear and picked up on what another of the bankers said. it is not just about ensuring that any compensation should be more directly tied to a long- term equity versus short-term cash but you have to make a strong evaluation about the sheer level and size of your compensation and the environment in which we exist. >> the president believes that the bankers understand it is beyond the just public perception they have. they believe they have a problem

with compensation systems? >> yes. there are those that are taking steps and this is something that we will be able to, as they institute different types of reforms, we will be able to evaluate whether they adopt say- on-pay. that is part of financial reform that is moving its way through capitol hill. whether they are tying much more of their compensation to long- term equity that does not invest immediately instead of to short-term cash. >> is there any concern about a shift in leverage from washington back to the banks now that so many of them are exiting tarp? >> leverage, how so? >> we could not get them to free up lending when we bailing them out with money. how are we going to do that now when they are not so dependent on target? >> they have been dependent upon

the goodwill of the american people and the president wanted to voice his concern and frustration with the inability to match what the people and the public had done with what their actions are. i think that the bully pulpit can be a powerful thing. so that is it? >> the next time the president jawbones you, you'll i guess to the same feeling that they have. i do not know if you will do it quite in the form he did it on "60 minutes but i think the american people understand that the president was clear. what can -- can i ask about copenhagen? by all accounts, most of the major issues are still outstanding. there was a boycott today led by

developing countries. is this going to -- is there going to be something for him to sign when he gets there -- we are receiving this recorded session. votes will be taken in the following order. house resolution 779 by the yeas and nays. house resolution 942 by the yeas and nays. the vote on house concurrent resolution 160 will be taken later this week. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15 -minute vote. the second electronic vote ic v be conducted as a five-minute vote. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch, to suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 779 as amended on which the yeas and nays wered or ed. the clerk will report the titeful -- title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 779, recognizing and supporting the goals and ideals of national runaway prevention

month. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to the resolution as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, 341 yeas, none voting nay. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to. and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection, the title is amended. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch, to suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 942 on which the yeas and nays

were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 942, resolution commending the real salt lake soccer club winning the 2009 major league soccer cup. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to the resolution. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 347, none voting nay. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii rise? ms. hirono: i seek unanimous consent to remove my name from h.res. 648. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair will now entertain one-minute requests. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extends my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> madam speaker, america's workers and america's industries have never shied away from competition. our readiness to compete is a part of who we are. it is a driver that has been fundamental to our nation's success. however competition must be fair if it is to serve us well. this evening i rise to draw attention to a fundamentally unfair competition in our department -- that our department of defense seems

intent on pursuing. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. the house is not in order. the gentleman may proceed. >> the competition for air force's k.c.s. tanker program is unfair. one of the proposals for this solicittation will be based on an air bust 8380 aircraft. it received $5.7 billion in government subsidies that the w.t.o. has ruled to be in violation of the rules that the w.t.o. nations have agreed to. in total, airbus' platforms have received over $15 billion that the w.t.o. has found to be illegal. agreeing with a complaint filed by the u.s. government in 2004. these subsidies have contributed to a 0% decline in u.s. market -- 40% decline in u.s. market share for commercial aircraft and the loss of thousands of

jobs. lock heed and mcdonald douglas are no longer in the business. the department of defense stubbornly refuses to include any provision in the tanker solicitation that accounts for these subsidies. this simply isn't right and i ask to put my statement in the record. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extends my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> madam speaker, over the past several months, airbus and their congressional allies have been pushing the pentagon to change the requirements for the air refueling tanker. so that the french company will win the contract. just last month the airbus team sent the department of defense a clear ultimate tum. if you don't change your requirements, we won't bid. the air force needs an air refueling tanker that meets the needs of the war fighter, not the needs of the french.

airbus is gambling that the threat of not having a competition will force the air force to change their requirements. the very same requirements that were determined by the air force to meet the needs of the war fighter. to change them -- to meet the needs of the competition does not serve the interests of our fighting men and women or the nation. if airbus chooses not to offer the tanker in a bid that the air force needs then that's their choice. and then the decision will be easy -- will be an easy one for the pentagon. after seven years of trying to recapital the tanker fleet, we know what it takes to ensure that the war fighter gets the tanker they need and the taxpayer gets the protections we need. even if a soul source award. our military and american workers shouldn't have to wait any longer for the tanker they both deserve and american tank --, an american tanker built by american workers at an american company and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from connecticut rise?

without objection. ms. delauro: madam speaker, after 23 straight months of job losses we must do more to preserve and create american jobs and we must ensure a fair and level playing field for u.s. manufacturers. the w.t.o. recently found that airbus has been receiving illegal subsidies that violate global rules and stifle real competition in the aerospace industry. we should not reward these illegal trade practices. as such the pentagon should take into account this ruling when considering bids for the next generation air refueling tanker contract. awarding this contract to airbus means the loss of at least 14,000 american jobs to europe and in today's economy we cannot afford any more job loss. we cannot continue to allow our foreign competitors an unfair economic advantage nor can we let our domestic defense manufacturing base erode as we have. i strongly urge d.o.d. to consider these billions of dollars in illegal european

subsidies when bidding the tanker contract. it is time to put our workers, american workers, and our security first and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida rise? ms. ros-lehtinen: permission to address the house for one minute, revise and extends my remarks. thank you so much, madam speaker. i'd like to recognize the noble work of a wonderful south florida organization, shake a leg miami. founded in 1982 by harry horgan, shake a leg miami helps children and adults who have physical, development and economic challenges. how does it do that? through the joy of sailing. harry, who was paralyzed in a tragic automobile accident at the age of 22, did not let his disability keep him from his life long love of sailing. with optimism and determination, harry created shake a leg miami. its programs have made a difference in the lives of over 10,000 individuals.

for the past 25 years shake a leg has been instrumental in empowering individuals so that they can reach their highest potential for an independent life. my youngest daughter volunteered at shake a leg and the experience for both peanlts and volunteers is life changing. shake a leg is a remarkable organization whose contributions have made the lives of countless children more fulfilling. i'm honored to have such a fine organization in my congressional district. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? >> revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. inslee: madam speaker, we cannot allow a great injustice to the american worker, to the american war fighter and to the american taxpayer which would happen if a contract goes for the air force tanker to the airbus contractor without taking into consideration these massive illegal subsidies that the

airbus competitor has received. we have decided and we have determined, the u.s. government, that airbus has received multibillion dollar subsidies which have allowed them to develop a tanker with which they now have to bid against that an american contractor, the boeing company. we are calling upon the administration to do the right thing which is in the contracting process, figure in the respective bids, the amount of the illegal subsidies that the airbus company has received. and they can do that by having the duty section of the houston department of trade representative determine the amount of that illegal subsidy. when that illegal subsidy is added to the airbus bid, the right thing will happen and we'll have american jobs. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: madam speaker, a reported letter to the editor

states, i don't understand why the white house is so upset about two party crashers. is it appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just because they trespassed? does that make them criminals? now, isn't that discrimination? shouldn't they be rewarded for such bold and brave behavior? maybe they were just trying to feed their family. isn't it more appropriate to call them undocumented guests? just because they weren't officially invited guests doesn't mean they should be treated like criminals. maybe they should get free health care, free housing, free legal services and free white house green cards. so next time they can enter legally and they should be able to bring all of their relatives and family members as well. and how can anyone be mad at them just because they crossed over some arbitrary border? they were only doing things that regularly invited guests didn't want to do like hang out with vice president biden. how can they be funnished? madam speaker, how ironic. the government panics about two white house trespassers while

the thousands who illegally trespass across our boffereders -- borders are completely ignored. and that's just the way it is. . chair lays before the house the following enrolled bill. the clerk will report. the clerk: an act making appropriations for the departments of transportation and housing and urban development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2010 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas rise? ms. jackson lee: ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: thank you, very much, madam speaker, and i rise with a very sad duty today as the chair woman of the transportation security committee and infrastructure protection committee on homeland security, i rise to pay tribute to the late edward joseph kelly

iii who passed away, born october 1, 1942 in new york and he joined the navy and served his country and graduated from the university of scranton in 1967 and retired as vice president of emory worldwide in 2000. he is a hero. after 9/11, he could not sit still. mr. kelly left retirement to join the department of homeland security, signing on as the first general manager of the air cargo security for the federal transportation security administration, whose mission is securing the nation's transportation network. air cargo officials have gone on record to say he transform the industry. if future airline passengers feel safe about what is carried in the belly of a cargo plane, they should credit mr. kelly. officials who worked with him said he was a professional and

loved his country, yes, a navy man and the officials of the president of the cargo security alliance said that he was front and center on this work. madam speaker, his contributions were immeasurable. he is a great american hero. i pay tribute to this distinguished american edward joseph kelly iii and may you rest in peace. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida rise? ms. brown-waite: revise and extend. it is a darn good thing that the credit reporting agencies don't factor in each american's share of the national debt when they calculate an individual's credit scores. if the agencies did, there would be a few eligible borrowers who couldn't get a mortgage or a car loan, think about that. i wonder why they don't include the national debt. perhaps no one seems to think it's real. madam speaker, it is real. last year, america spent $250

billion in interest, payments alone, $250 billion. that's $250 billion a year we cannot invest in america's future. yet, in spite of the situation, congress is preparing to increase the debt again by another $1.8 trillion, attaching it to a must-pass defense bill, holds our troops hostage and might be convenient politics, but our country deserves much better. congress could use the tarp returns to pay down the debt and redirect the failed stimulus money to tax reforms that actually work. wouldn't that be unique? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? mr. quigley: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. quigley: coal miners used to keep a canary with them when the

air was getting dangerous. today, the concept is still the same and the canary is dying. global warming is real and potentially catastrophic. no scientific per review studies have found the opposite, none. but some of my colleagues have seized on illegally hacked emails to say that the little bird is fine. it ignores the nasty case of asthma from emissions and the soot that is in the bird's blood and boost harmful eliminations. like monthy python's dead par on the would be funny if it wasn't an imaginary bird, but it is killing our children. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. thompson: request unanimous consent to address the house for

one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. thompson: madam speaker, breast cancer mammograms have been in the news with concern on federal guidelines on who should have a mammogram and what age. breast cancer is the most common cancer in american women next to skin cancer. it estimated 1,470 women will die from breast cancer in 2009. as daunting as that figure is, there is another figure that tells the story, there are more than 2.5 million breast cancer survivors in the united states. death rates have been declining since 1990. the decrease is believed to be the result of earlier detection through screening and increased awareness as well as improved treatment. guidelines are simply that. every woman should talk to her physician about her past history and current health to determine the frequency of mammogram exams. this disease touches us all. i doubt there is anyone here who

doesn't have a relative who suffered from breast cancer. encourage your loved ones to talk to your physicians and have screening tests as often as they suggest. it will save lives. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. smith: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. smith: madam speaker, the white house considers business owners the opposition, but don't take my word for it. in his book, mr. obama wrote, when he worked in the business world, he felt like a quote, spy behind enemy lines, end quote. it's no surprise that as president, he has appointed fewer people with business backgrounds to cabinet positions than any other president in over a century, according to an analysis by j.p. morgan. maybe that explains why the government favors government control of the health care, energy, automobile, banking, insurance and student loan industries. perhaps the administration has

forgotten that without employers, there would be no employees. and small businesses generate 65% of the new jobs in america. it's the private sector, not the government, that makes america productive and prosperous. business owners are our friends, not the enemy. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? >> address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. inglis: this week follows a surreal week last week. last week, we did an omnibus bill that spends 446.8 billion. that's on top of the $634.2 billion from other discretionary spending. those are increases of 6.7% over 2009 levels and 16.8% over 2008 levels. this is on top of the mandatory spending programs like social

security, medicare and medicaid. that's why this week, the surrealness will continue as the majority will find it necessary to increase the debt limit from $12 trillion, which is 20% of g.d.p. they will raise it by another $2 trillion. madam speaker, we must stop the runaway train. we must stop the runaway spending. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? mr. boozman: permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. boozman: i rise today to recognize the valor, sacrifice and contribution of the united states nafe -- navy seals. our seals are you teenly defend our nation in some of the most dangerous places in the world, sacrificing their lives for a mission and our country. yet recently, three of our seals have been forced to defend their honor.

the alleged mastermind of the brutal murder of four security contractors claim that these seals punched them in the stomach while being detained supervision. he was captured without the seals firing a shot. because of the accusation, these seals opted to have a court martial rather than a nonjudicial punishment which would have been an admission of guilt. we should be giving these guys a medal. i'm pleased these men will have the opportunity to defend their honor and i'm confident justice will be served. at the same time, we must not waste the time and resources of our armed forces on political correctness and facts based on hearsay of terrorists and other people who wish our country harm. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

mr. mccaul: i want to give a voice to my constituent, 3 jennifer hyden. she wrote me a letter and said my name is jennifer hydnen, i'm a wife, daughter, mother, sister, professional and grass-roots leader. we are dismayed at this congress. you stress accountability and transparency. but fail to disclose to the american people that its 20-year costs are in the $4.9 trillion price range. you avoid town halls and citizen gatherings since you found out we had questions that you could not or would not answer. you draft bills in secret and give no one sufficient time to read them or answer them. the majority of the americans do not want this bill and you know it. do what this country elected you to do, scrap this legislation and give us health care reform

that will help, not hurt this country and its citizens. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio rise? without objection? mrs. schmidt: i rise once again to remind this body that we must stop the unbrideled spending that continues to raise our deficits. we have been reminded that we are in jeopardyy of using our a.a.a. rating by 2013 if we don't get our spending under control. barron's echoed the same warning. our debt ceiling currently is $12 trillion. it is my understanding we are going to be asked to raise it an additional $2 trillion this week. enough is enough. we must stop this unnecessary spending and stop it now before it is too late. we cannot spend our way into

prosperity. i fear the results. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. abercrombie of hawaii for today until 3 p.m. until tuesday december 15. ms. bono mack. mr. davis of illinois for today. mr. mack of florida for today. mr. wolf of virginia for today. and mr. young of florida for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina rise? >> i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into, the following members may be permitted to address the house, revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous material.

mr. inglis today for five minutes. mr. poe, december 21 for five minutes. mr. jones, december 21 for five minutes. mr. lincoln diaz-balart today for five minutes. ms. ros-lehtinen for today for five minutes. and mr. frank, december 15, 16, 17 and 18, five minutes each. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into, the following members may be permitted to address the house for five minutes to revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous material, mr. altmire of pennsylvania for five minutes, ms. woolsey of california for five minutes, mr. defazio of oregon, ms. kaptur of ohio for five minutes and mr. mazzh massa of new york for five

minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009 and under a previous order of the house, the following members are recognized for five minutes each. mr. altmire of pennsylvania. mr. altmire: i rise to pay tribute to bobby bowden. he will retire following the gator bowl following football's most successful coaches. many of us may not realize he was an outstanding football player in his own right. he graduated from high school in birmingham and played for the university of alabama before transferring to howard college, now stanford university. after college, he worked his way up to become head coach for four years at standford and was head coach for six years at west virginia, but 34 years as head coach of florida state where he will be most remembered.

in 1976, he took the rins of the team that had gone winless the previous season and he built one of the power houses of modern college football. during his 34 years at the hem of florida state, he led his team to 31 bowl games, including the past 28 years in a row during which he once led 14 consecutive bowl games without a loss. . he was named coach of the year six times and from 1987 to 2000 there was a streak of 14 consecutive years in the season-ending top five. during that time he coached two heisman trophy winners and his seminals played in five national championship games winning two. and it was in the beginning of that streak in the late 1980's that i first encountered the coach. as he did with so many, he left

upon me an indelible impression. as a walk-on the seminal football team i had the good fortune to see firsthand coach boweden's rare skill on the practice field. but it was his kindness and generosity away from football that i will most remember. while serious about winning, with the results to prove it, what most stands out about bobby is his love of people. known for his down to earth cloak which willisms and southern drawl he can charm even the most intense personality. he is never at a loss for words and sports writers across the country will surely miss his quick wit and accessibility. on the seminal practice squad i occupied perhaps the lowest possible position on the team yet coach boweden treatmented me and every player with respect. when you crossed paths with him he never failed to ask about your schoolwork, your family, your hometown or some other personal fact about you that he somehow remembered.

and i used to think that this was just coincidence or somehow related just to me. but what you quickly learn in spending any time around bobby boweden is that he's like that with everyone. not just on the team or on campus, but anywhere he goes in the country. whether it be an alumni meeting, a business luncheon or a church service. he has that ability to make a personal connection with everyone he meets. it's why the national citizenship award presented annually by the fellowship of christian athletes now bears his name. so for all his success as a football coach, the true legacy of bobby boweden is the impact he has on people and the lives he has touched. just as much as his coaching record, the relationships that he built and friends he made during his 80-plus years and counting will long be remembered. my best wishes and congratulations go out to bobby and anne boweden as they now

embark on this next chapter of their lives together and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: mr. poe of texas. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: madam speaker, the whole world is watching what takes place in copenhagen, denmark, last week, this week, all the talk is about climate change and manmade climate -- how many is affecting the climate. but what we need in this world is a climate change in iran. that's right. we need to change the atmosphere in iran with what's taken place with the little man from the desert, ahmadinejad. last week an even this week

thousands of students, and here's a photograph of some of them, have taken to the streets to protest the regime of ahmadinejad, how oppressive it is. they're complaining and this peaceful protest against the tyranny against the people of iran. and not only ahmadinejad but they're protesting the radical mullahs and the iranian military. you see, these young people want what everybody throughout the world wants -- freedom. somewhere down in the way that we're made there is this spark, there is this flame of freedom. and the people in iran don't have that. and so the young people have taken to the street, the sons of iran, the daughters of democracy, and protesting the oppressive government. they're protesting the

fraudulent elections that got ahmadinejad elected last summer. they're protesting the fact that they have no freedom in their own country. and they have suffered the consequences for these protests. they have been beaten, they have been tear gassed, they've been hauled off to jail. the press has been oppressed as well. in fact, what has occurred, the internet has been closed. cell phones have been blocked. all in the name of preventing young people and others from protesting this oppressive regime. we all remember this past summer how numerous students were murdered in the streets just because they complained to their government about what was taking place. already 80 of those protesters, political prisoners, have been tried by the star chamber in secret away from anybody in a public trial and 80 of them have received sentences in an iranian prison of 15 years or more. five of them have received a

sentence of the death penalty. why? what is their crime? their crime was objecting to the oppression of their own government and for that they are punished. and of course others have been shot in the street just because they have taken to the streets to protest their government. you know, the students aren't the only ones that have been arrested. journalists have been arrested. clerics who call themselves reformed clerics and other people. all for the same reason. they object to their government. they object to what has taken place. and the government by bureaucracying the cell phones and the internet ac -- by blocking the cell phones and the internet access had hoped to get the word out to the rest of the world about this pollution, this horrible climate in iran but photographs have gotten out. such as photographs here. and here's another one. a young iranian student having been beaten from taking to the

streets for protesting his government last week. this one also escaped the controlled press of the iranian government. you know, iran violates its own constitution by not allowing its people to protest and lawfully assemble. they are standing for basic human rights. that's right. the right to peaceably assemble. and object to your government and what it's doing to you. the right of free speech, basic human right. the right of a free press. a right we take for granted in this country. and so we need a regime change in iran and the way to do that is to help these young people and the people who want to change their regime and support them. this country should support them in any way that we can. yes, president ahmadinejad is the pollution of the world and we need a change of climate in iran. the students are sending a message to iran's rogue government that you can beat us,

you can arrest us, you can imprison us, but you will not stop us, you will not intimidate us because we are not going away. and good for them. we should be proud of those students, we should support them and we should have a climate change in iran and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. ms. woolsey of california. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? >> claim the time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to recognize the ultimate sacrifice made by a young man from my district in the service of the united states marine corps. i'm sad to report tonight that my office has received news last week that marine corporal jacob -- jacob latori died due to wounds received in afghanistan. his fatal injuries were the result of a roadside bomb.

i speak for myself and my constituents in expressing my appreciation for this young man's service in defense of his country. corporal latori who would have turned 22 last weekend is one of america's heroes. i send my prayers and condolences to his family, to his wife, his son and his brother, corporal daniel la it tori, on his tragic loss. we will never forget the sacrifice he has made and i ask those in the chamber this evening to join me in a brief moment of silence. thank you. my colleagues, madam speaker, i've come to the floor tonight to speak about an issue important to my home state and as you can see by the one-minute speeches given here earlier tonight, to this entire nation. connecticut pioneered america's ship building and aerospace industrys.

shops that were once bustling with workers are now silent. when those shops went away, thousands of good-paying jobs for hardworking people in my state went away with them. we just learned recently that connecticut has lost another 1,000 jobs when a major defense supplier shut two of their facilities and moved two of their facilities to singapore. almost 16 million people across this country are out of work, many of those as a result of the transfer of manufacturing, military manufacturing job jobs, overseas. at the same time the department of defense, another federal agency -- and other federal agencies, have granted thousands of waivers to our domestic sourcing legislation like the buy american act which has resulted in billions of taxpayer dollars being sent to overseas companies. working with a group of members that are dedicated to shoring up the rules that require the government to purchase domely, i've been drafting ledgeation that -- legislations that will allow companies to take taxpayer

dollars overseas. my legislation would begin to reorient and build up our domestic manufacturing and construction base which has been hit so hard in recent times by using taxpayer dollars to do it. taxpayer dollars are already going to buy too often overseas products. now we don't seek to interfere with the decisions of private businesses. we do, however, seek to make it clear that the u.s. government values american-made products and the taxpayer money shouldn't be shipped off to a foreign contribute to contribute -- country to contribute to a foreign line when we can produce the same high quality good right here at home. i believe strongly in international trade and i accept the necessity of our interdependent global economy. what we're discussing here is not just economics, it's not simply a race to find the lowest price, it's about national security and it's especially about national security with regard to the department of defense. a stable supply of domestically manufactured defense products is

impertive to this nation's long-term safety and common defense. we have a real opportunity here to both reinvigorate our domestic capacity for manufacturing while enhancing our national security. with that in mind, i along with a group of members are crafting legislation that will seek to assist firms who are victims of the loopholes in our current buy american and buy america regime. this legislation will target assistance to suppliers that a manufacturer could manufacture products that have been deemed nonavailable for domestic sources. under current law, an agency can determine that an item is nonavailable in sufficient quantity or quality in the united states and then can just waive the buy american restrictions. therefore the assistance in my legislation will target firms that make these nonavailable items right here in the united states but might not have the capacity right now to meet the agency's needs. these firms will use this assistance to increase their

capacity so they can be the suppliers to the american government rather than seeding that ground to foreign firms. it will also assist suppliers that manufacture an item that is currently being bought through the buy american provisions. if that firm is in dange -- danger of going out of business, let's help them stay in business so the only place that we are left to go after that firm falls is a foreign supplier. madam speaker, my colleagues who came to this house floor earlier tonight to talk about the major federal tanker contract going to a foreign supplier airbus is just one example, a major example of a growing trend in defense work going overseas. we've had enough. it's time for us as a congress to deem this unacceptable, strengthen the buy america provisions and bring our taxpayer dollars back home. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. jones of north carolina.

mr. jones: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i have the distinct privilege of representing many of this nation's wonderful military families. the third district of north carolina is home to marine core base camp lejeune, see more campus base and cherry point. every year the national marine family association honors the top families from each of the seven uniform services, army, navy, air force, coast guard, marine corps, public health service and the national oceanic, atmospheric administration. . the leeds family is the marine corps family of the year. this family is dedicated and

committed to serving their country and community. their six children, jordan, savannah, bethanie, melissa and carriee ann are giving back. in 2006 after eight years working a civilian job, dennis' love for his country enlisted, took a pay cut and uprooted his family. they embraced life in the camp lejeune community. dennis and cristy run scout meetings, readiness meetings and help their neighbors in anyway they can. she also dead indicates a major portion of her time to home schooling all six of their children. jordan fixes bicycles and donates them to charity. savannah organizes a wounded

warrior thank you project at church. bethanie volunteers to baby sit to moms whose husbands are deployed. the three younger children help out by baking cookies and bread for various project and quick to share with their neighbors. they have taught their children by example what it means to be brave and strong. they have taught their children the importance of volunteering and what it means to serve your neighbor and community. our military families need to know that the members of congress and the people of this nation appreciate them and all they do for our country. may god continue to bless our troops, their families and this great nation. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. defazio of oregon. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from wisconsin rise? ms. moore: i would like to claim the time for the five minutes.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. moore: thank you, madam chair, i could not resist coming to you and speaking to you about my experience when we passed the financial reform bill last friday. you know, wall street has provided an unparalleled lifestyle for americans. the speculation and the brilliance and genius of futures and credit default swaps and derivatives have provided us with a lifestyle where every bride can have a diamond ring and a groom can have a golden ring, we can have two cars, a gazz-guzzling s.u.v., lobster dinner, mcmansions with six bedrooms, five bathrooms, but not enough closet space for

designer shoes and clothes that we have. last fall, the sum of all of this balloon spending came to a crash and it was amazing to me, madam speaker, that when we tried to rein in wall street and some of the speculation, that there was trl tremendous resistance from both parties developing a financial protection agency, putting together an assessment from these too big to fail companies to pay for orderly dissolution of the mess that they created. i can tell you, madam chair, it was amazing to me. but i tell you, this bill that we passed, for those who asked the question, what is government for? this bill demonstrates better than anything i have seen what the purpose of government is and that is to regulate unfettered greed and avirice that can bring

our country and the world to financial brink. and with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. mr. moran from kansas. without objection, the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes. mr. diaz-balart: senator bob menendez gave an important speech last thursday, december 10, opposing dictatorship in cuba. he read out loud an open letter which had been sent by one of cuba's true heroes, a giant of the resistance to the tyranny, here photographed with his wife. a letter to the cuban dictator

raoul castro. he wrote, for months now, my wife and i have been kept in judicial house arrest by your political police. mr. dick tator, let me ask you some questions that may help clarify some doubts for those who may have at some point who may have had hope that you would carry out democratic openings. what do you feel when you insite or allow people who call themselves men to beat and drag through the streets women, like the blogger. how can you sleep after your subordinates cruel beat more than once a pregnant woman.

how can you and you are government talk about the battle of ideas, when ideas constantly face repression. maybe your followers will not dare respond, but i continue to write. i'm on the long list of those who do not fear you, will answer. you act like that because you are a cruel man. insensitive to the pain and suffering of others, because loyal to your undemocratic and dick at that time orial regime, and that even the most minimal of openings can end the only thing that interests you staying in power. and finally, he wrote, speaking of my case in particular, i will respond to you without the need of first having to ask you the motives for such focused oppression.

now he is 45 years old, was a political prisoner for 17 years. your government, he continued to write and it's repressive forces cannot forgive my only two and only crimes that for almost two decades of torture and crueltyy, you are not able to break my dignity or my position as a political prisoner. despite all the violence and harassment and the risk of returning to prison, i have decided to not abandon my country where i will continue to fight for a change that i believe is necessary and inevitable. signed by jose, tuesday, december 8. on friday, december 11, he and his wife, she is a heroine were

violently arrested. the very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence. this is kidnapping. long live human rights as they were being beaten and taken away by castro's political police. i condemn the brutal arrest of these two heroes by the castros cowardly thugs. the days of the castro's racist tyranny in cuba are coming to an end. those who have collaborated with the racist regime will face justice and eternal shame. her brother and many other heroic political prisoners of cuba will be the elected leaders

of free cobba. that change is as necessary as it is inevitable. because of heroes like these, the day of freedom of cuba, the day of freedom in cuba is approaching. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. ms. kaptur of ohio. mr. burton of indiana. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida rise? without objection ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much, madam speaker. i rise to recognize the success of the miami-dade county memory walk sponsored by the alzheimer's association. this event called on volunteers of all ages to be champions in the fight against this terrible disease of alzheimer's which

impacts more than five million americans and their families. over 2,200 people participated in the memory walk in my home county of miami-dade and their efforts raised over $130,000 for research and end to a cure. i was encouraged by the wonderful outpouring of support and participation from our community in south florida. i know from countless personal stories as well as from my own family just how deficient stattings this disease of alzheimer's is. my mom, amanda ross was diagnosed with alzheimer's a year ago. and while i'm blessed to have tremendous family support during this difficult time for her, i recognize how important it is to have organizations such as alzheimer's that can step in and provide families with guidance on how to care for their loved ones.

another individual who knows this terrible disease all too well participated in the memory walk in support of his wife of 37 years, maria, who was diagnosed with alzheimer's four years ago at the age of 55. and since that day, her life and tony's lives and lives of children and grandchildren and their entire family has never been its same. it has changed forever. for tony and his wife, there was no more hope to reach retirement, to travel, to enjoy life. they were both forced to retire from their jobs in order to cope with the new daily challenges of alzheimer's. determined to help his wife, tony made a addition decision to help raise community awareness for this disease. the memory walk was entitled brava' brunch and included over

400 members for his team alone. and he is involved in anes a-writing contest in public sools. today, tonny's wife is 59 years old and can hardly speak and can't even sign her own name and she is not who she is to be. he continues the fight against alzheimer's in honor of his wife and all of those who suffer and cope with this terrible disease. unfortunately as we all know, alzheimer's disease has no survivors and it destroys brain cells and causes memory changes, erratic behaviors and loss of body functions. it takes away a person's identity, a person's ability to connect with others, to think, to eat, to talk, to walk, to find your way home. there is no treatment, no cure, no way to stop the progresses -- progression of alzheimer's

disease. this disease is widespread and growing. every 90 seconds, someone new develops alzheimer's and not only the person diagnosed that is impacted, but also their family members. one in eight people, aged 65 and older has alzheimer's and a higher number of those aged 85 and older. and 87% of that time, it is the family members who are the primary caregivers. the emotional stress of caregiving is so high and they develop symptoms of depression. it takes a financial toll, with mp individuals having to quit work, reduce their work hours or take time off because of their responsibilities. madam speaker, we must continue the fight against this devastating disease before it claims more lives, more lives of our mothers, our fathers, our