on in the day. the senate judiciary committee, patrick leahy as the chairman. we expect to hear about immigration and lots of other issues. the house will be in at 1034 a morning hour and then at noon for legislative sessions -- will be a net 10:30 a.m. for morning hour and then at noon for legislative sessions. let's listen in. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . .

[no audio] >> this is the dirksen senate office building on capitol hill. janet napolitano will be in front of the committee and will talk about the immigration law signed into eras -- signed into law and arizona. she called the law of misguided. patrick leahy of vermont, the chairman of the judiciary committee, one floor below this hearing, is another hearing getting under way. that is a hearing looking into the financial crisis and the role of goldman sachs.

that is expected to go throughout the day, six hours or so. that is the homeland security investigations subcommittee underway now and coverage is on her companion network, cspan 3. it is also on line at c-span.org and you'll be able to see it later on our schedule. the ceo of goldman sachs lloyd blankfein testifying later this afternoon. janet napolitano, a homeland security secretary is here and we will break away at 10:34 general speeches and the house and once that wraps up, we will take you back to the hearing. [no audio]

[no audio] [no audio]

[no audio] [no audio]

[no audio] [no audio]

[no audio] >> good morning everyone who. have several senators in the

back coming in. i appreciate this and i welcome secretary napolitano back to the judiciary committee. we are delighted to see you here. last year ended with a terrorist bombing aboard a commercial aircraft bound for detroit. , ms. again. the attempt exposed deficiencies in coordination. it also showed other countries screening activities. as a result of that incident, congress and the administration took steps to understand the existing weaknesses in the system and how best to correct them. excuse me. this committee heard testimony from the fbi, homeland security each of whom realize they need

to do better. i am encouraged by the department's recent streamlining of passenger screening policies and a decision to move away from country-specific tactics in favor of a smarter, more flexible approach. i hope that today we will hear more about improve security as well as coordination with the state department. along our southern border, we are experiencing historic levels of drug-related violence and that must be brought under control. families are being murdered, law enforcement is being murdered, officials are being murdered, and brazen shootouts. the department is involved in the fight against cross border smuggling we saw the brutal murders of two u.s. state and -- state to play -- state department employees americans

are concerned about what impact the situation in mexico is having here at home. the department has been involved in the devastating earthquake in haiti. madam secretary, i commend your decision to provide haitian refugees a temporary status. the reconstruction effort will take years but native patients are sending money home to their relatives. i want to recognize u.s. citizenship and immigration services for their help in this case. i work with senator lugar to allow lawful permanent residence to return for a limited time to their countries to assist in reconstruction efforts following a natural disaster or armed conflict. the legislation will encourage

haitian nationals living in the u.s. to go back to haiti without suffering adverse consequences in gaining their u.s. citizenship. the committee acted to assist refugees who wish to serve our government, our military overseas. i work with senator lugar again on this to advance the refugee opportunity act which was unable refugees to serve and game time earned to gain a green card. this marks the 30th anniversary of the 1980 refugee act which was authored by senator kennedy. i recently introduced a refugee protection act. this is to improve where the law falls short and improve our obligations under the refugee convention. we're concerned with many areas

in the department's jurisdiction. the so-called 287g program which is in cages law enforcement officials of immigration laws continues to be a source of concern. president obama said it undermines basic notions of fairness and hurts the trust placed in our community is so crucial to keeping us say. -- keeping us safe. you and i both had the honor of serving in law enforcement capacities and we know law enforcement breaks down as citizens there the police instead of seeing them as protectors and cooperating with them. we have to have oversight to prevent racial profiling and

make sure that local law enforcement has cooperation of the local communities. police officers have a tough enough job as a this. we don't want them to be seen as bosporus is bem in law- abiding community and the women get the support and information they need. i recognize the department's changes in the program and i look forward to hearing about that. there is important in border states and what we normally think of with border states being our southern states and california. we hear from the southern and western states. i hear from many vermonters about towns that are on the canadian border.

i regularly hear from them about checkpoints and federal use of private land. i think you'll find that the vermont problems are as sensitive to their property rights as texas property owners are. the citizens of border states share a great burden. thank you for your steadfast commitment to immigration reform. i share that commitment. i have worked with president george w. bush on that and shared his commitment to it. i hope we can see a bill enacted this year. senator sessions -- >> thank you and thank you madam secretary. we are delighted to have you with us. you lead the largest agency next to the defense department and

you host departments and agencies and you have the challenge of melding them together. that takes years to determine leadership. i know you are focused on that. you have to be because it is essential and the whole purpose of creating, security was to gain better cooperation and better cohesion and better effectiveness. i am sure many people do not realize how many decisions you have to make and how many spats you have to guess what -- you have toassuage. i'm concerned about a number of issues but will ask you about 12. one deals with -- i will ask you about two. one deals with the potential arrest of a terrorist and the united states.

are they going to be treated as civilian criminals and will they be provided the panoply of rights such as miranda and court reported and funded attorneys and the kind of thing? there is some confusion, it seems to me. i believe we have to get this clear. i believe it will be a big mistake if we treat these individuals as normal criminals and title to the appointment of a lawyer and entitled not to speak. not to be taken into military custody if they meet those standards. i hope we can work on that. our main concern about the border, the balance, as you know, is increasing and is a serious threat to law abiding people in arizona and other

places along our southern border. the power of these drug cartels is very real. the power of the kiotis will bring people and is very real and it has to be confronted in a very serious way. i would note that many people might not recognize how much progress has been made in the last 10 years. in 2000, 1.6 million people were arrested at the border. last year, i understand it was a little over half a million were arrested at the border. that indicates, i believe, that the flow is downgraded may not be perfect proof of that but i believe it indicates that a number of people attempting to enter the country illegally is down. the question to me is, how do we follow up on that and create allow lawful immigration flow into our country that serves our natural -- air national interest

that is consistent with the rule of law and allows people who want to enter a proper process to enter and if they don't qualify, they don't qualify, they don't get to come in illegally if they don't qualify legally. those are things i have concerns about. in february of this year, jim shaparo, the operations director offered a memo which encouraged the administration to step up their deportation numbers. it started by noting that ice had removed 56,000 criminal elements. the memo went on to detail that the pace of removal was insufficient to meet the agency's fiscal year 2010 goals of 400,000 total deportations. as a result, the memo suggests a number of steps to achieve that

goal such as increased detention space and increased swedes or removal of people from jail around the country to identify aliens who should be removed and identified aliens eligible for removal and increased identifying aliens who have been dishonest. i think he should have been commended for making recommendations for progress. instead, it appears that when " the washington post"report that the administration might intensify deportation efforts, the administration said they had no intention to do so. i know you earlier indicated

that you are not favorable to sweeps of businesses who have people at large numbers working illegally. we have approximately 8 million people who are illegally in the country working today and we have a substantial amount of unemployment in our country. these are matters that i do believe need clear leadership from you. i am glad to see in your testimony that you have submitted that you expectant increased support for state and local law enforcement. we will also talk about the arizona law and precisely what it is that you disagree with in that. that is certainly one thing we need to be doing. i was disappointed to hear that the administration's plan is to make it tougher for states a local law enforcement agencies to assist in enforcing our immigration laws through the

287g program. they are prohibited from asking aliens about their legal status and in most instances, state and local enforcement are required to release individuals who are here legally because the administration did not want to fill up immigration detention space with minor offenders. we have a real challenge i have always believed that state and local law enforcement in the normal course of their duties who apprehend people who are not lawfully in the country should turn those people over to the federal officials and they should be processed. i have not advocated that they should take the primary role in immigration enforcement. i do believe that a lack of

commitment for enforcing our immigration laws when we basically tell local law enforcement that even if you have apprehended someone here illegally, nothing will be done about it. those and other questions will be important for our discussion today. you have a big challenge with regard to immigration. the decline in numbers puts us on a path to make dramatic improvements in immigration enforcement. we have to get away from the virtual fence, a complete accounting that we are required to do and make sure we have enough people at the border to enforce the law. if we do that, i think people would be surprised how much continued progress we could make. it is only in doing that that we will then be able to have a decent and good discussion about what to do with people who have been in our country for a long time. and how to handle them.

thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. secretary and a polish town of, it is all yours. >> thank-you and thank-you members of the committee for the opportunity to testify. i would like to focus my opening statement on the southwest border security. i look forward to addressing some of the other issues that the two of you raised in your own opening statement let. =. . anyone who has worked directly on the board knows the enormous challenges presented there. we have the murders of the personnel connected with the u.s. consulate as well as the recent murder of a long time rancher in southern arizona. all those things are tragic reminders of the need to

support mexico's fight against the cartels within mexico but also the need to keep up our efforts on the southern border. we now have more manpower, technology at that border than at any time before. the challenge, however, is deep and complicated. we are responding with a partnership among the departments of homeland security, the department justice, the department state with the marita initiative which is focused on assisting mexico in their fight against the cartels on their side of the border. we have also expanded partnerships between dhs and doj because for every up -- apprehension that dhs makes, doj

is responsible for prosecution. manpower is more important and it isn't more than numbers. we need to help investigate and prosecute the cartels and prevent them from proliferating. we also must assist local law enforcement responders to problems emanating from the border. as a result, what i believe to be focused and strategic and consistent pressure along the southwest border over the past month, we have shut down more and more key trafficking routes used by the cartels. that is what i hope we can review today, the significant steps taken in the past 15 months as part of our southwest border initiative. the results of those measures will look at what more can be done over the past 15 months, as i mentioned, we have mobilized

an unprecedented level of resources at the southwest border. this is due in no small part to the action of congress to dedicate resources to the border. the border patrol is better staffed than at any point in its history, more than 20,000 personnel. since 2004, the number of boots on the ground along the southwest border has increased by 80%. u.s. immigration and customs enforcement has dedicated over 1/4 of all of its personnel to the southwest border region, the most ever. we also have more personal than ever strategically dedicated to efforts like southbound inspections, intelligence, and inter agency anti-smuggling task forces. we have more k-9 teams searching for illegal cache of weapons. for the first time ever, we are standing 100% of southbound rail traffic. we have doubled the number of

personnel assigned to border enforcement security task forces known as best teams and weaken toppled the number of border liaison officers -- and we quintuple the number of border liaison officers. we have more proven an effective technology than ever before. these include record numbers of mobile x-ray units and surveillance systems and non- intrusive equipment. those are at our ports of entry and some deployed between. we have increased other resources available such as aerial resources. this means more fixed aircraft, helicopters, and creditor bees deployed than ever before. we fully implement of the western hemisphere travel initiative at all of our southwest border ports and we can now buy diametrically -- by all magically identify individuals entering the united

states -- biometrically identified people entering the united states. we continue to make critical import -- improvements to the ports of entry and the checkpoint between the ports of entry. we have finished all the vehicle fencing that was provided for by congress. we have fewer than 6 miles of pedestrian fencing left to complete for a total of 652 miles. i have also asked for cvp to review their current budget and complete fencing in key areas that is in need of bolster or repair. let me stop a moment to talk about partnership with mexico. they are unprecedented in the history of our country. i say that as someone who is a former u.s. attorney, attorney general and governor of a border state and have been working border issues for a long, long time.

i have never seen this kind of robust partnership with mexico and with its federal government and federal agencies. among the historic agreement i have signed in the past months agreements and sharing cartel- related activities and sharing the criminal history of individuals who are being deported back to mexico from the united states. in addition, our partnerships with state, local, tribal law enforcement are key. we continue to help them, but border crime. one of the primary tools we have used for that is operation stone garden which receive $90 million from last year. that was $30 million more than originally planned. we deployed a full 85% of the stone garden funding to the southwest border and not only

that, we broadened the kind of uses to which those funds could be put so they are more flexibly used by local law enforcement. if i might, we can look at some of the numbers because we are producing results. we have seized 14% or more of illicit cash along the southwest border -- more than last year. we have increased by 39% the seizures of illicit cash going southbound this year over last year. we have increased 15% the seizure of illegal drugs coming in and we have increased by 29% of the seizure of illegal firearms going out. as was noted, apprehensions are down.

there -- they are down 23% between 2009 and 2008. that indicates that your people are trying to immigrate illegally or to cross the border illegally. a few weeks ago, ice agents' conduct of the largest operation of its kind, breaking a smuggling rings in arizona that had transported 80,000 people into the united states illegally. much has been done. much of it is the result of actions taken by this congress and the congress immediately before it. there is much work still to be done. we will continue our efforts to make the most of the resources that we have. we look forward to working with the congress to further strengthen that border in the weeks and months ahead. chairman leahy, senator sessions, i look forward to

addressing other concerns you may have not just along the southwest border but along the northern border and in terms of interior enforcement as well. thought i would use my introductory time to review all the things that have happened along the border. >> we will break away from the testimony briefly. the house is coming in and we will have general speeches. live coverage on c-span. . e a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. april 27, 2010. i hereby appoint the honorable donna f. edwards to act as speaker pro tempore on this day . signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties

with each party limited to 30 minutes and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and minority whip limited to five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington, mr. larsen, for five minutes. mr. larsen: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. larsen: madam speaker, i rise today in strong support of legislation to extend the important programs of the small business administration. small businesses are the backbone of our economy having created 65% of all new jobs in the last decade. however, over the course of the last 18 months, small business owners have had trouble accessing the capital that they need to grow their businesses and to create jobs. the s.b.a. lending programs are a critical piece of helping small businesses access this credit and create jobs, and i support my colleagues -- urge my colleagues to support this bill. now, according to the northwest business development agency in washington state, for every $1 lent under the s.b.a. 504

program, $94 is generated in tax revenue for our communities. congress has made important steps to encourage increased lending for small businesses, including allowing s.b.a. 504 loans to be used for debt relief, and the 504 loan guarantee program, and increasing the maximum percentage of loan guarantee per 7-a loans to 90%. credit is starting to move. in my district alone between october, 2009, and the end of february, 2010, 58 s.b.a. 7-a loans worth nearly $18 million and 15504 loans worth nearly $6 million were provided to small businesses in the second congressional district in washington state. and allowing them to expand and modernize. however at the end of this month authorization for these important s.b.a. programs will expire. as congress stays laser focused on creating jobs, extending these important programs and ensuring small businesses can

act as credit is critical. so i strongly urge a yes vote on this bill, madam speaker, and yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. dreier, for five minutes. mr. dreier: thank you very much, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: madam speaker, we are all encouraged by the positive news that we have been receiving about the economic recovery which appears to be underway. i think it's very clear that with the report that came from the c.m.s., the end of last week, the dramatic increase in spending and the regulatory vision that is proposed that the economic recovery that we are going through at this moment is in spite of not because of policies emanating from here in washington, d.c. madam speaker, when we were

privileged to have the president of the united states stand in this chamber and deliver his state of the union message, one of the things that he talked about was the goal of job creation. we of course have seen signs of economic recovery, but the unemployment rate is still just below 10% nationwide. my state of california it's in excess of 12%. and there are people who are hurting. when the president stood here right behind where i am now, madam speaker, just in front of you, and delivered his state of the union message, he talked about the importance of opening up new markets around the world. he talked about the fact that 95% of the world's consumers are outside of our borders, and we could create good jobs for american workers if we were to proceed with the plan for free trade agreements that have been pending.

madam speaker, 1,253 days ago, 1,253 days ago an agreement was signed between the united states of america and the government of colombia. to open up the market so that we could see jobs created for workers at caterpillar, john deere, whirlpool, other industries right here in the united states. 1,253 days since that measure has been signed. and in that same period of time , we have seen $2,700,000,000 tariffs imposed on products made by workers going to colombia. madam speaker, if we want to create good private sector jobs, we need to unleash the potential, reducing the

constraints that have been imposed on u.s. workers. 211 years ago this month the author of the u.s. constitution became a member of congress, james madison. and representative madison on april 9 of 1789 stood in the house of representatives and said the following, he said, i own myself to be a friend of a free system of commerce and hold it as truth that commercial shackles are generally unjust, oppressive, and impolitic. madison went on to say, madam speaker, that this is more true than the wisdom of the most enlightened legislature. now, is it -- as it comes to job creation and economic growth in 2010, it seems to me that looking back to what was said 211 years ago by representative james madison

about unleashing the shackles that exist to the free flow of commerce could create great opportunities for u.s. workers. and so, madam speaker, while i congratulate the president for the words that he provided to us in his state of the union message about the benefits of opening up new markets around the world, after 1,253 days since it has been signed, i urge the president to send to the united states congress that measure because i believe, i believe that in this election year especially people want to focus on job creation and economic growth, and i'm convinced that we would have a strong bipartisan vote in support of that very important measure. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. quickly -- quigley, for five

minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i rise today to honor the aids foundation of chicago. for 25 years of service to the people of chicago, cook county, and the state of illinois. the foundation has served as a center of aids and h.i.v. services in the chicago metropolitan area, has been a leading advocate of sound policy in legislation in illinois and washington. the foundation has raised and disseminated millions of dollars in grants for prevention, care, and advocacy in underserved communities. praised as a national model of coordinated case management and supportive housing services, many look to the foundation as a way to do business. the aids foundation is the kind of community-based, people-oriented organization that makes america great. thanks to the c.e.o. and all the staff, volunteers, and

board, for being a beacon of hope in the fight against aids and h.i.v. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. stearns, for five minutes. mr. stearns: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. stearns: good morning, madam speaker. last week the chief actuary for the center for medicare and medicaid services, c.m.s., issued a troubling report. but it is not all surprising to many of us who debated the health care bill. the report said that the obamacare health care bill will increase national health care expenditures by $311 billion. that's a deficit. during the debate many of us said on the house floor that this bill will increase the deficit and expand federal powers. i'd like to take a new minutes to outline some of the problems with the bill that's coming to the fore by government officials pointing out that these are the problems. first of all, obviously

increases the deficit. c.b.o. projected the cost of the health care bill to be $940 billion and reduce the deficit by $138 billion. however, that is proven to be wrong. there are budget gimmicks in place and it is unlikely congress will keep those gimmicks in place. the bill assumes a 21% cut to medicare's physician reimbursement rate will stay in place. this won't happen. new taxes and mandate will create economic hardship. businesses will be forced to buy health insurance for their employees or pay a tax for every employee. this will place business noose a position -- into a very difficult position, cutting workers, reducing wages, or prevent companies from growing larger if they wish to avoid these costly penalties. with 10% unemployment nationwide, is this the right time to create a disincentive for a company to hire more workers? expanding a broken entitlement creates more problems not real clution. for example in 2014 medicaid will be expanded to all

individuals making less than 133% of the federal poverty level. half the people covered under the health care bill will be covered because of medicaid. unfortunately most doctors do not participate in medicaid because the reimbursement rate is far less than the private sector and less than medicare. so where are these 16 million people going to go to get health care? it bankrupts state budgets through medicaid expansion with 16 million new individuals enrolled in the medicaid, states will be on the hook for more medicaid spending. in the short-term, the federal government will pay for the expansion of medicaid, but after 2017, states will have to pick up about 10% of the costs. many states do not have the ability to do this. it will make it more difficult for them. medicare cuts jeopardize the care of our seniors. medicare's costs continue to grow and the medicare trust fund continues to be insolvent. so to fix this problem, the

majority cut over $500 billion from medicare, but rather than using the savings to extend the program, they immediately spend it on expanding medicaid and creating subsidies for the health insurance exchange. c.m.s. reports 15% of hospitals will be unprofitable within 10 years just because of these cuts. it creates an inequity against low-income workers. the employer mandate requires businesses to offer a health plan that meets with the approval of h.h.s. this will drive up the cost of health plans and small businesses may not be able to afford a robust insurance plan. c.m.s.'s report further points out how many small businesses may cancel their plans because it's cheaper to pay the tax than to provide health insurance. new regulations increase government control of our health care. h.h.s. gains an incredible amount of power under this bill. they will now have their power to dictate insurance policies, prices, regulate the insurance market, and control benefits offered in your health care

plan. this bill obviously violates the constitution and the fact that the federal government now is mandating that all u.s. citizens purchase the health care plan from a private company. as a requirement for lawful residency in this country. this is an unprecedented extension of federal power. and this is only the beginning. the health care bill was so big and so complex that now we are only learning about the problems and flaws in the law such as the treatment of veterans health plans or weakening the medicaid program for new lawsuits from travel trial lawyers. we need to -- from trial lawyers. we need to fix this bill and rein in all the controls and power that have been provided through this bill here in washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, for five minutes. mr. defazio: as i speak here on

the floor of the house, the republicans on the senate side of the hill are still blocking meaningful financial reform, protecting their patrons on wall street, as they always do. and the lords of goldman sachs are before a committee protesting their innocence. . now we know that goldman and these other people on wall street were too big to fail. i think we should let a few more of them fail personally and i oppose the bailout of wall street. but let's just say they were too big to fail or at least they were deemed too big to fail and they were bailed out by the united states government and the taxpayers of the united states. but something else was going on at the same time. not only were they too big to fail, they had created wonderful new financial products that were enriching them in unbelievable ways,

making millions of dollars a day for the lords of goldman and elsewhere on wall street. they had designed products that were designed to fail. then they sold them after they went to the all too willing ratings firm, so-called impartial ratings firm, goldman would pay moody's to rate them as caviar, a.a.a., then they would go out and sell them to sophisticated investors who should have known better. come on. they should have looked more carefully. they did kind of mess around and they did get the people at moody's by threatening to take away their business to rate the business as caviar, but the other people should have smelled it and known it was garbage. what's wrong with that? then, of course, goldman did just happen to place some bets of its own against the garbage

which they created and knew it was garbage and they bet it was garnl and they won making -- garbage and they won making billions of dollars for themselves and others who were in on the know here. this is a pretty rotten system. now, you could say, well, gee, but aren't they doing things like investing in capital, you know? aren't they building a great america? no. the financial services industry has gone from 19% of the profits in this country to 41%, and for the most part, outside of community banks and some people who still actually do banking unlike most of those companies on wall street, they produce no value. they created a heck of a lot of wealth for themselves and others and occasionally they call us the economy to explode and cost us millions of jobs but they're still doing very well for themselves. and now they're back to business as usual and the republicans in the senate are defending business as you shall under the guise under having a

better bill that won't encourage bailouts. i mean, this is all such a laughful farce. it would be funny except for the unbelievable pain that it cost to the economy of this country who has been suffering for years. it's time to cut these people down to size, cut them down to size by prosecuting them. i've been joined by 59 of my colleagues, and elijah cummings and i have sent a letter to the f.c.c. saying, ok, you uncovered one case of alleged fraud by the securities and exchange commission where they knowingly sold a bad product to investors and then they bet against it themselves. there were a number of others that went through something called a.i.g. which the federal government also bailed out in a cost of $180 billion to taxpayers. we want every transaction between goldman and a.i.g. scrutinized to see whether or

not any of those were similarly fraudulent transactions in which case we could get a few billions of dollars back from the lords of finance to the taxpayers in main street, u.s.a. it's long past time to begin these kinds of investigations and hopefully, ultimately, like with enron, because this is worse than enron, prosecution and we'll let some of them enjoy some federal hospitality for a few years. this is absolutely outrageous. they're creating products designed to fail, that have no useful products. in fact, robbing capital from companies who want to invest, to actually want to make things, who actually would employ americans and who would enhance our economy all for them to gamble on wall street. it's time for the gambling to stop. you know, in a regular casino if the casino goes broke it's only the gamblers in the casino

that has a problem. and the casino of wall street, when they mess up, they destroy the real economy of the united states and people's livelihoods. it's time to cut them down to size. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from louisiana, mr. boustany, for five minutes. mr. boustany: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. boustany: madam speaker, the united states is on an unsustainable path right now, an unsustainable course, with massive debt, trillion dollar deficits going into the outyears, unemployment approaching 10%, and this administration since january of 2009 has enacted $670 billion in gross tax increases with more tax increases planned by this administration and the democratic leadership of congress. it's no wonder we have high unemployment and uncertainty all throughout this country with regard to the business climate. so what can we do, how can we

correct this path? this course? how can we restore american competitiveness for the 21st century? well, i think there are three things we can do. first, let's cut wasteful, massive government spending. let's give the american public confidence that we can get our fiscal house in order. let's send a signal to the bond markets and to our foreign allies and competitors that we can act responsibly. let's lay out a path for entitlement reform, which is causing severe strain on the federal budget and leading to this deficit spending. just laying out a path, a corrective path will send a positive signal. secondly, we can lower the corporate tax rate to make u.s. companies more competitive globally with regard to our trading competitors. let's unleash american innovation, let's get the american -- american companies out there creating jobs again by lowering the tax rate for

our corporations. right now we have the second highest corporate tax rate among industrialized countries. this makes us less competitive. this also means that companies who want to come to the united states and invest to create jobs here also have a high tax burden. so, therefore, if we want to create jobs, let's make this country competitive for investment coming in and for our companies going out to do investment. that's how we'll restore job growth in this country. also, one of the things we need to do with regard to tax policy is to make sure we don't doublely tax our companies who are trying to compete against foreign competitors abroad. because our companies competing all over the globe also create american jobs. and if we doubly tax others well, it's no wonder we're not seeing the kind of job growth

that is necessary. we're not going to see u.s. companies and the u.s. be competitive in this global market. and finally, the third thing. let's promote exports. exports create jobs, good, high-paying jobs. now, the president has announced that his goal, his stated goal during the state of the union was to double exports by u.s. -- by the u.s. over the next five years. well, let's look at a little bit of history here for a moment. it took us 10 years previously to double exports. it required the completion of a round of negotiations at the w.t.o. it took a -- it took implementation of nafta and 10 free trade agreements to be implemented to double exports. this administration has offered none of that so far. we have currently three free trade agreements pending that have been negotiated in good faith and yet this administration and this democratic congress has failed to complement these free trade

agreements. these are a win for the united states because those countries are already bringing goods into our country. we just have barriers in exporting to theirs. why not lift those barriers? implementing these free trade agreements will create good, high-paying u.s. jobs. these three countries, colombia, panama, south korea are markets that are ready for u.s. goods and services. so all we have to do is implement these agreements which have been negotiated in good faith. by failure to do this what we're doing is sending a signal to our competitors and to other countries that the united states does not negotiate in good faith. that's a poor signal to send if we want to be competitive in this global market. meanwhile, those three countries i just mentioned, colombia, panama -- let's take colombia, for instance. the european union and can da are both in the -- canada are

both in the stages of implementing free trade agreements with colombia. and what's happened? we've seen u.s. exports of agriculture products plummet just over the past year at the same time the european union and can da have also increased their exports to fill that gap. we're losing out -- we're losing out on being able to export to colombia simply because we won't keep our good faith negotiation and implement this agreement. the president has announced a national export initiative, but yet there have been no substantive steps to move this forward. why not implement -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. boustany: a small business initiative. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. pierriello, for five minutes. mr. pierriello: i ask unanimous

consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pierriello: thank you, madam speaker. the time for basking deals is over. the time for the washington wall street conclusion that has put main street at risk and risk the pension funds and hard-earned retirement accounts of so many americans, it's time for this to end. how many loopholes is enough for the republican caucus in the senate? we've had the entire republican senate caucus to join with the king of the cornhusker kickback to say, no, not enough loopholes. we need to water it down more. we need less accountability for wall street. that's not what the american people are saying. the american people are saying we need to bring main street values of accountability, decency to washington and to wall street. people want the banks to bank and let those who want to use risky speculative gambling schemes to keep their hands off the hard-earned retirement of those who worked their entire lives for them to be able to

settle in their later years. people worked hard to do this, and yet we now see from the email streams and the memos from wall street that they were all too giddy to risk all that people had earned to make a few more bucks on these schemes. it's time to get back to an economic system built on building things and growing things. to create jobs back on main street, living wage jobs that help people move from the working class to the middle class at the core of the american dream. yet, standing in the way is a set of rules that seem to encourage the riskiest of behavior by the richest among us at the expense of those who are just trying to make it. people aren't asking for punitive damages except where people broke the law, in which case we need more, not less, of the kind of investigations we've seen from the s.e.c. people say why don't washington

and wall street have the same rules? yet, it's too much to ask for people on the other side to ensure they continue to protect the back room deals and the carveouts and the loopholes for wall street. we have a system that is a based on the idea that if you work hard and play by the rules you'll be able to make it in this country. well, people who worked hard and played by the rules had everything they saved for put at risk by tactics that never should have been allowed, but in the tight relationship between this town and wall street we see too often that those basic principles, those main street values of decency, accountability and fairness are apparently too much to ask of too many in this town. but we have a chance this week. we have a chance in the weeks ahead to finally draw a line in the sand and say no. we've had too much of that erosion of values. we've had too much of that

instant gratification. i want it for me right now regardless of the consequences to my country or the economy. it's time for that to end. we have basic rules being offered that simply say decency, fairness, accountability. say that you shouldn't be able to sell a product to people based on one thing and then bet against it so that you're taking their money through the back door. that the most powerful among us can take advantage of the everyday folks who just worked hard and played by the rules to try to secure retirement. how many loopholes is enough for the republicans and the king of the cornhusker kickback at the other side of this building? how many loopholes do they need before they're ready to proceed with debate? it's far pasttime to end the wall street-washington conclusion. it's far past time because we can still build things and grow things in this country. we can build and grow our energy future. we can build and grow the broadband technology, the

electric grids of the future. we can still outinnovate any country in the world. but we need a system that rewards innovation and rewards following the rules instead of bailing out failure and conclusion. that's the line in the sand we're trying to draw now. those days are over of rewarding failure, of rewarding the back room deals. it's time to reward innovation. it's time to reward the small business owner and farmer where two out of three jobs in america will come from that small business owner. so instead of a system that's tilted toward the big players, what about giving everyday americans a chance, small business owners who have great ideas and understand the principle of following the rules? we have for too long had a system that has rewarded all the worst behaviors in washington and wall street together. now, we have a chance. we have a moment to say rules of decency, accountability and fairness, but there are those in this building who say they

will stop at nothing and use all means necessary to make sure that debate never happens because they know that the more the american people understand about the derivative schemes and mortgage-backed securities and exotic mechanisms they came up with the more they realized it was rich and powerful people gambling with their money and their retirement scheme. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. pierriello: it's time for main street values come to washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. purs

>> janet nepolitano testified before the committee. they have been underway for about an hour now cure on c- span. >> some mechanisms by which those legally in the country are required to come out of the shadows to register, to give those their biometrics, to have a clean and chemical -- clean criminal tax record to pay for our laws. you know, there could be -- i could see different paths taken by those who simply remain verses those who seek citizenship. >> you have been governor of arizona and you have seen the recent legislation that the current governor has signed. as i view that legislation, first, i believe the states do have the right to try to solve their problems. the question is, they have to do

it constitutionally. they have to have a reasonable reason to detain anybody, and not only that, i try not be based on foreign ethnicity of, gender, etc. what is your opinion concerning the lot in arizona and what would you like to see done about it? >> as i said earlier, senator, the law does not take effect until 90 days after the close of the arizona legislative session. i think it first thing that needs to be done is for the justice department to review whether the law is constitutional under the laws governing the supremacy clause and the laws governing the prevention, and the case law governing preemption. -- and the laws governing preemption, and the case law governing preemption.

the first thing is to, be done is whether it is constitutional or not. >> do you want to venture an opinion? >> not at this hearing, no, sir. >> ok, it is my i understand in as of today 7 under and $61 million has been authorized for the border security -- $761 million has been authorized for the border security network. in march it was deemed such a failure that it was no longer considered worthy of funding. unfortunately, in my opinion the program is that the taxpayers' expense. has spi yielded any benefit to the taxpayer? >> there are two blogs, senator, that are now at the face -- the first block, called the tucson what is at the phase of

operational testing. -- call the tucson block is that the first phase of operational testing. and i'm told is promising. however, for the amount of money spent and given the alternative kinds of energies that are almost off the shelf available, i have really put this thing to a serious analysis as to whether we should bail out the rest of it, or whether those technology dollars should be deployed for other kinds of technologies. >> when combined with a pedestrian defense, our portions of the virtual fence -- how are portions of the virtual funds basically at stopping the flow into the united states and should we install more fencing on the southwest border? >> you mean like double and triple fencing, that sort of thing? >> yes. >> i have asked the cp to look at that very question and

whether some of the existing fencing, some of the single layer, should be double or triple. they have promised to get back to me with their look at that. >> thank you, madam secretary. i appreciate your testimony here today. çó>> thank you very much, senatr franken. >> thank you mr. chairman for this very important hearing. thank you, madam secretary. i'm going to turn to minnesota for a second. four years ago i see it carried out meatpacking plants in minnesota -- to i.c.e. carried out meatpacking plant in minnesota. one second grader came home that night to find his 2-year-old brother alone and his mother and father missing. for the next week, the boy, a

u.s. citizen no less than you or i, stayed home caring for his brother while his grandmother travel to worthington by bus to care for them. current i.c.e. guidelines allow states social-service agencies to interview new detainee's to help identify if there are abandoned children. this is important because many detainees are afraid to tell officials that they have children at home, afraid that they may be detained as well. but these guidelines only cover enforcement at work sites and it targets 25 or more individuals. do you have any plans of expanding these guidelines to of their smaller and forth and actions? >> senator, let me check with you, but i believe in formally,

if not formally notinformally, if not formally, -- informally if not formally, that is the process of how we do the change workforce -- worksite enforcement. >> but that has not occurred formally, has its? >> let me see. >> thank you, get back to me on that. >> indeed. >> as you mentioned your save arizona passed, and as a new members have mentioned, it requires officers to satisfy the immigration past if it is undocumented. and it does not matter if it is a victim of domestic violence, no matter what their status will

be checked. i want to ask you a separate question. can you tell me what impact you think this will of on the relationship between law enforcement and the communities they serve? >> indeed, senator, and let me be very clear. the constitutional analysis is a separate analysis from whether the law is misguided or not. the constitutional analysis is being done at the justice department. i have already said, and my record would demonstrate i think these kinds of laws are not a value-added to law enforcement. there is a reason why most law- enforcement groups, chiefs of police, and the like oppose them. and your question relates to one of those reasons, which is the

undue barrier it puts between crime victims, human trafficking victims, for example, a growing problem that we are trying to deal with in the u.s. and law enforcement. constitutional or not, there are some real law enforcement reasons why those are misguided. >> thank you. i noticed in both your written testimony and your testimony here today that you are using more k-9 teams along the border to detect both currency and weapons. when i was at the minneapolis- st. paul airport in a couple of months ago, not long after the christmas incident, and the issue in the public discussion was peaceful body scanners.

i talked to the director of the airport there and i asked if dogs might be more effective in detecting explosives. it and a director of the report said, in fact, he was very excited about the fact that they were getting some dogs. he was just very happy for the reason that i had indicated. could you speak for a moment to the effectiveness of dogs and homeland security, both in airports and along borders, and where they will be scaling up their use? >> the senator, i love dogs. the dogs can be trained -- >> me, too. >> we all love dogs. >> dogs can be trained to sniff narcotics, bulk cash, arms, and explosives and we are using them in all those ways.

in airports and at ports of entry along the land. the president's budget and our internal department of resources is increasing the number of dogs as fast as we can. but could -- >> good. you mentioned trafficking, a recent article mentioned many victims of trafficking are being deported before they are screened for trafficking. i find this disturbing. these people are victims of horrible crimes, but we are not even taken the time to figure that out and to prosecute the people who traffic them. how are you making sure that potential trafficking victims are identified before undocumented individuals are deported? overall, how does the department of homeland security promote cooperation between i.c.e. and

the doj and fbi and organizations to promote successful prosecutions of human traffickers? >> senator, we have embarked on a very sick-anti-human trafficking campaign -- very significant anti-human trucking campaign. it is very specific with law enforcement training on how to detect this in terms of trafficking, find victims, and to deal with victims. i just take part of a law enforcement training video this week -- take part of a law enforcement training video this week. demi moore will be in the video. if we will probably get confused, but that is another -- [laughter]

that is part of our program. that program will also be offered where we train federal law enforcement officers. they will be trained on some of these issues about human trafficking. and we will embark over the course of the year in a public campaign on how to tell the difference, and also, how the human trafficking victims can get access to law enforcement. >> thank you. >> thank you. senator kyl? >> thank you, madam secretary. the refocus on the border, particularly paris -- let me focus on the border, particularly arizona. it has been noted in the last five years that we have devoted a number of resources to try to control the border and enforce the law. and yet, progress seems to be somewhat uneven. i think overall we have made to begin progress. part of that is undoubtedly due to the recession.

i suggest that the employment of the various things that you have mentioned here, they do work. the question is, have we done enough of it yet? i think we know what works and just focus on the three key elements of what works. it is a combination of things, but adding personnel, particularly border control, some degree of fencing, which is in assistance to border control, and thirdly, operational streamlining. i think we can conclude this near two sectors, the human sector and the tucson sector. the tucson sector is larger by some number of miles. although, they both have proximity to interstate highways. one of them, the yuma sector, has reduced immigration to virtually nothing.

the tucson sector represents about half of all illegal immigration in the entire united states right through tucson, douglas, and other cities along the border. indeed yuma sector, we have now -- in the yuma sector we have now completed sometimes double and triple fencing. there is some concern that because they are short in other sectors, some of them might be transferred. now that we have yuma under control it will keep it that way. and third, over a course of time, and one that crosses the border will go to jail. and because at least 10% and the boards of 15% and 16% are criminals, is a good thing that they go to jail. and third, they will not want to cross where they know they will

go to jail. that is exactly what happened in the yuma sector. the combination of those three things has worked to bring illegal immigration down in the last five years. the number was about 118,500 apprehensions five years ago and is now down to about 5000 this past year. that is tremendous progress. in the tucson sector, we have seen about 241,000 apprehensions so far this year. xdthat is down from what it used to be, but obviously still too many. the we know we need additional fencing at the suit -- tucson sector. i think you alluded to this a moment ago, we need to replace the old fencing that they can see through because it is dangerous for them right now and not affected. we need additional personnel there and the operational streamline is virtually nonexistent in the tucson sector. madam secretary, you are right that resources are a key issue

and it is significantly court resources, judges, clerks, u.s. marshals and so on. it is not just a matter of resources, but of our will to make it work. in that regard, we have requested -- and as you know, congress is supposed to receive a steady,e1 or was supposed to receive it from the department of homeland security in december detailing what would be necessary in the way of resources and what the costs would be to effectuate a more complete operational streamline. i have two questions here. first, there was going to be a cut of 187 in the first budget. you have been asking to amend that so that there would be no cut, but no increase either. in the 2010 conference report there is a requirement that the northern border increased the number of agents from 1525to 2212. you have said he would maintain

a of force of 17,000 for a hundred along the southern border. how can you increase the number on the northern border -- 17,400 along the southern border. how can you increase the number on the northern border and decrease on the southern border? >> going to your list of three, i would add a fourth and that is technology, in addition to infrastructure streamlining. >> i include technology in that with all of the cameras, the sensors. the radars and better there. >> there is a mobile system, sure. they are somewhat different. the answer is, and we can provide your staff with a briefing that i think is set for later this week, is moving people from non-on the line positions to on the line positions. it is reducing travel costs so we can deploy those costs to

personnel. it is in looking at how we move folks around. let me just suggest, however, senator, it is very difficult in the end when there are mandates that you have to have x here and y there because people and immigration moves. >> my understanding is that you just hope to write a lot for additional troops on the northern border. i think we need more border control. congress will provide them if you ask. second, on the budget for fencing, it is for 1 mile on the fence. that is inadequate, isn't it? >> i'm sorry, i did not hear your question. >> the 2010 budget includes 1 mile offense. we need more than that, do we not? >> it includes what congress enjoyed before it. we should look at what other areas could require fence, but i

also think we need to be looking at what areas need a new kind of fence. >> of course, you yourself testified that there would be 30 or 40 miles of fencing yet to be concluded under the original congressional intent. >> the original congressional content -- intent was to match up with the dhs plan, which was 700 miles. what has happened is the 700 miles has become 653.3, or right around there. we're just about at that number. >> we know we need more fencing in the tucson sector and i love that will be part of your recommendation. because my time -- i hope that will be part of your recommendation. because my time is just about up, you said we need more resources. senator sessions said it is a matter of policy. it is both. i think our policy should be to

expand it. you have asked us to tell you what resources are necessary -- we have asked you to tell us what resources are necessary. please do that. you will continue to have efforts like the arizona law because people realize we are not doing everything that we could do to stem illegal immigration to our border. >> senator kyl, i appreciate that. but as you know, streamlining is an important part of a toolbox of things that need to be done. i am not sure that i would equate to streamline with the arizona law. i think there are reasons for that. but i will get with the attorney general to report back to you. >> all right, just to recap, since i have taken the chair. senator schumer will be next. after that, senator grassley has the right, but if he is not available, senator gramm, and we will bring senator grassley back

into the rotation. and then senator carton on our side and then senator cornyn. senator schumer? >> thank you. and i want to thank you, mr. chairman. you have done an excellent job so far in during this hearing. [laughter] -- anin sharing this hearing. [laughter] and you have done a good job as well as secretary. my first question relates to something that is bothering me and that is securing the city's program. securing the city's is a federally funded effort to protect nyc from the threat of a makeshift nuclear device or a dirty bomb. every time yorkers hear about a potential terrorist attack from al qaeda -- every time new yorkers here about potential terrorist attack from al qaeda

or extremist groups, it sends chills down our spine. i remember every time i think of the stories of those who live in my neighborhood and i knew closely. ray kelly has done a great job to make sure that we are never attacked again. and i know that is mostly a federal responsibility. but one of the things that we have done is set up the securing the cityies program and it provides the reassurance that their government is working or to protect them from a radiological ordered the bomb. it uses all available technology and all the bridges and tunnels and major highways to prevent that from being brought into the country. it is expensive. and we in new york already shoulder an unfair amount of the burden in protecting our city from terrorism. for instance, i live in

brooklyn. we have to station police officers 24/7 on the brooklyn bridge because it was mentioned as a target for terrorist attacks. it is now public. we are not giving anything away. i was truly upset when for the second year in a row the president a limited funding for securing the cities out in his fiscal 2011 budget. the program has reached a near critical operational stage. the state of new york has developed a fully operational program and completed a substantial amount of work in putting in place the radiological defense of ring around manhattan and the city. without continued work, this will go down the drain. this is obviously important and i do not understand why omb 0 this out. i recently requested -- zeroed

this out. i recently requested $30 million and i will like to get your support. you know new york is far and away the biggest target. this idea of letting everyone apply and let's see who gets the money, it does not work because we have to plan. and this year to year existence does not allow for long-term planning. it does not allow investing in things that cost more in the second year and third year. i thought we had been through this fight last year when we essentially got some money. what is going on here? why would omb zero it out? and can we get your support? >> yes, sir. if i can get myself a head of omb, i believe their reasoning is because there had been 50 some odd million appropriated in fiscal year 2009 and $30 million

of that had yet to be drawn down. >> i have loan talks with peter orszag. the money is accounted for. we know what it will be drawn down for, but you cannot say you have to get it down to zero before you get more money as you are negotiating contracts and figuring out what to do with it. that is the stupidity -- that is what i would call it -- of what omb is saying. they know it is not good budgeting. they know that you should let something go to zero and start all over again when you have an ongoing program. >> senator, i will be happy to reengage with omb on this, but there is another point your question has in it that i think is very important for the department has a whole, and that is, being able to look at how grants are being done in a way that is more than your to your to your, but to look at them --

that is more than just a year to year to year. that is something that i have asked our folks to really look at. the current methodology may not be the best. but i will be happy to reengage omb. >> can you help us? >> i will be happy to reengage omb. >> in a positive way? >> in a positive way. >> thank you, i consider that good enough to say he will help us. so, thank you. and i'm not asking you to do it publicly, although i just did. >> [laughter] what else do you need? >> i've got a few items here. [laughter] northern border strategy. my friend, senator kyl, was talking about northern border strategy. and we think of the southern border is getting most of the

resources and attention, and i understand the problem of drug interdiction across the sun -- southern border is real, but as you know, i think the number of arrests in new york for crack and cocaine that is coming from canada is in large multiples. i do not remember the numbers, but almost like one to 18 or 1 to 10 compared to two years ago. we have set up the high- intensity drug trafficking areas and we have several areas that are part of this. and what you think of it and what can you do to further prevent drug interdiction on the northern border? and do you agree that is a growing and serious problem? >> yes, and i would add methamphetamines to that. i used to be the chair of the arizona hiada.

i think it can be done well in that leveraging state and federal resources. what do i think of them? i think on the whole, they're very effective. >> there is a cut in the hiada for the northern border. would you take a look at this? >> yes. >> senator grassley. >> one thing i wanted to say and then i will read a statement about a bill that i introduced and not ask you to comment on either of my first two statements. i will go to question. number one, i just came back from spring break with -- from 24 town meetings and one of the strong messages that came true is that people are irritated. they feel the immigration laws are not being adequately enforced. i just want to be -- bring that message back to you.

and the second point i would make in regard to the christmas day bomber, it highlighted the need to review our be set policies, especially the way that we handle our visa applications. and you, madam secretary, have the authority to revoke any be said that is a threat -- any visa belonging to someone who is a threat to this country. i introduced a bill that would treat visa revocation similar to visa denials because the right of the person to be in the united states would no longer be valid. mine applies the same standard for an individual on u.s. soil who should not have been granted a visa and their rights to major initial review of the decision. -- to a judicial review of their

decision. given this vulnerability of those who have been able to get into the united states, i hope that you would review these are revocations for known terrorists on u.s. soil if they should not have been here in the first place. they should not have access to our courts. and i would hope that you would agree that a change of law, if needed, and you cannot do it on your own, that the visa revocations would not be reviewable in the court and the people who wish to arm americans could be deported immediately. >> two things, senator grassley, one is i would like to offer you and your staff the most current numbers on immigration enforcement, because i think there is a different perception than reality.

its enforcement members have never been more robust in terms of immigration and laws. i think it would be helpful when you have town hall meetings to look at the legislation. i would be happy to look at your proposed legislation. >> and szeged, i applaud your department when it comes to the -- and secondly, i applaud your department when it comes to working and eliminate abuses by third parties. the visa program has led some to seek other avenues to enter and remain in the united states. this is how i see it. i see companies now resorting to the program that allows them workers from one company to work in their branches and affiliates in the united states. it is understandable why the companies would go around the visa and use the other. there are fewer obligations on employers and fewer protections

for american workers. the inspector general found problems in 2006 with the l these are program stating "is vulnerable in several respects." the department of health and human service agents would agree with the inspector general, so i would give you a few examples. one case show that an individual participation for himself came in on a shell company that did not exist. and thanks to a site visit, was obviously not doing business at the claimed address. another case showed that the petitioner never worked at the affiliate, forged documents to enter our country, and the office that he claimed to be working in never existed. and that -- and another case show that managerial experience was not a prerequisite to enter. in fact, a pizza parlor manager

from turkey claimed to supervise two employees. questions, let me ask five questions kind of related. fraud detection and national security director is working on a report on the l-1 these abuse. could you tell me of that has been finished? and can you share that information with me? let me stop on those two questions before i go on to the others. >> sitting right here i do not know the answers to those questions, but i will get that to you. i will say that the director and his group has really been working on -- have been working on making sure those visa programs have been run well and we are looking at the whole issue of fraud. i would also say on the h-1b the says that you mentioned earlier, it is interesting that the amount of applications are down

this year substantially. that allows us to focus on making sure these programs are scrupulously run. >> ok, i think you just answered the other two questions of three. but to the extent that i say -- to which i say there are problems, you might disagree with whether or not there are not "l" these are problems, but if you would agree with me there are problems, would you consider administrative action to fix the problem? >> yes, and let me if i might, first, i think the ig report was in 2006 and we often have this issue with our reports, changes that have already been made and there is a disconnect. but let me commit that we will look at that and get back to you as soon as possible. >> i got several questions on e-

verify. i recently sent a letter to the office of budget expressing concern about money is going abroad. the purpose was to stimulate the economy and bolster our employment. we should be certain we are hiring workers that are legally authorized to work in the united states. could you confirm that recipients of stimulus dollars are using e-verify system? >> yes, and i can confirm that the number of companies using e- verify is growing by a great multiple every week. and the accuracy of the system itself is much better than when it gradually started.

a lot of the reports and error rates and the like are, in fact, iran is. >> ok, if you could look -- erroneous. >> ok, you could look into that other matter, i would be painful. >> secretary nepolitano -- i would be thankful. >> secretary nepolitano, it is good to have you before us on this very important area of homeland security. i want to go into sovereign security, if i might. in november of last year, the terrorism subcommittee of this committee, which i chair, had a very interesting hearing in which we heard from government witnesses as well as private sector witnesses as to the vulnerability of america and as regarding cyber attacks. we all know criminals use cyber attacks to steal money from the people of this nation. there is more cyber stuff that

there was trending gregory days. and barack -- bank robbery days. -- of their is more cyber stuff then there was during a robbery days. and we also know that terrorists target id. it could read -- a target us. it could wreak havoc with our systems. this is not just for the department of justice for crime or your apartment for terrorists, but the arm of defense on national-security issues. -- department of defense on national-security issues. there has been a long-term neglect on coronation of agencies in the government. and we are modest -- coordination of agencies in the

government. and we are vulnerable. the number of the time is that we are not stopping enough attacks on this issue. my question is, the appointment of the person in the white house, with the development moving forward with cyber command in dot with general of the south -- general alexander, my question is, this is not just a military issue. this is an issue that affects our homeland security. i am interested in to -- as to what type of party this has on your agenda and what you are doing in relationship to -- what type of priority this house on your agenda and what you are doing in relationship to what the president has announced. >> yes, senator. first, in our quadrennial the security review, which was the

first ever for dhs, we actually identified the protection of cyberspace as one of our five major mission areas, in addition to counter terrorism, border security, immigration, disaster preparation and response. we do so because of the things you laid out. within our department, it is primarily located nddp because of the critical infrastructure within the private sector. we review ourselves and reviewed with us as primarily responsible for the civilian side of government in terms of production, and the intersection with the private sector, which is where 85% of the critical infrastructure of the country is. the one principle exception to that is that the secret service has a very effective and longstanding cyber crimes and cyber france the capacity within tv%$áq(áqá service.

-- cyber crime is an cyber forensic capacity within the that is -- within the dpdppd. >> i just want to ensure that we have a common objective with cyrus security. and you're absolutely correct, -- cyber security. and you are absolutely correct, the objective is clear. but we are vulnerable and we are vulnerable to the private sector. this all is related to a homeland security. i want to go back to one of the principal recommendations in the 9/11 commission that has yet to be implemented. the 9/11 commission correctly concluded that the choice between security and liberty is a false choice and is -- and there is nothing more likely to endanger american liberty and the success of attack at home. i strongly support this.

but then it was recommended that the oversight board be reconstituted to ensure that liberty concerns are probably considered to -- appropriately considered in relation to efforts to protect the nation against terrorism. i have been in the senate long enough to know that when we deal with the tools necessary and agencies -- that agencies need to protect us against terrorist attacks, we still have a fight going on here. it has been difficult for us to move legislation because of the concern as to whether these tools will be as properly, and whether civil liberties will be protected. it seems having these in place will help us in dealing with legitimate concerns raised by the civil liberties issues so that we do not have this continuous fight every time we try to extend a sunset provision or deal with this issue generally. the administration has requested $2 million for salaries and expenses.

however, we do not have the nominees for the board. can you update us as to the status and the reconstituted recommendation by the 9/11 commission? >> that is probably better directed at the white house. i will say it is a false dichotomy between security and civil liberties. we build privacy protections into the outset as we are looking at technologies and different things that we are doing. secondly, we have suggested to the white house appropriate names for possible nominations, but i think the actual status of the nominees should be directed at the white house. it >> i understand that the responsibility is with the white house to make these appointments, but i know that you have the opportunity to weigh in on this. i would urge you that if you want our cooperation on budget support, etc., it is a lot easier if we have nominees to

consider. it may take some time for that process to go forward. i would urge you to use your position and voice within the cabinet to get this issue moving forward. >> in d. >> thank you, madam secretary. >> and senator gramm? >> madam secretary, welcome. you have one of the toughest jobs in the nation and i would argue that there is no more challenging issue then immigration reform. the would you agree with that? >> i would say it is among the top issues? >> having been involved in this in the past, i can assure you it is difficult politics. but here is where i come down on this issue. i think 70% of americans are in the camp that illegal immigrants need to be fairly and firmly dealt with and fairly and firmly does not mean mass arrest.

do you believe we can put 12 million people in jail? >> no. >> nor do i, and i believe that is not a required solution. do you believe that we are going to deport 12 million people? >> no. >> i do not believe that is going to happen either. and i would say what senator sessions said. all of those kind of looked the other way as long as the labour needs are being met. after 9/11, illegal immigration takes on a different flavor. it is not about people helping our economy. it is about broken systems that could lead to attacks on the country. isn't it true that all of the hijackers, 9/11 hijackers did not come across the southern border, they overstayed their visas? >> i believe that to be true. >> and isn't it also true that one hijacker had of to 18 or 19 multiple hot driver's licenses that were fake?

>> i would have to look. >> just say yes because i know i'm right on this one. [laughter] >> it sounds like you're asking a question. >> just go along with me because i can prove this. the point is that there are two problems in america, and unsecured southern border and a visa system that is completely broken. do you agree with me that the worst thing we could do is bring up immigration reform and it crashed and burned politically? >> you know, senator, i think that as you and i have discussed, and i have discussed with other members of the committee, the administration looks forward to taking up immigration comprehensively and dealing with the visa issues and enforcement issues. >> and so do i.. we look forward to it. do we have 60 votes to bring up comprehensive immigration reform between now and november?

are there 60 u.s. senators ready to deal with this issue between now and november? >> i will not presume to put myself in the place of counting votes. >> the only reason i would suggest is that -- suggest that we need to know is because it is important. somebody needs to talk to republicans nelson, lincoln, web, some of these people voted no in 2007. i am not saying they were wrong to vote no. i'm saying the 2007 bill would not pass. do you agree with that? >> as you state the question, i would give you a tentative yes. >> i would bet everything i own that the answer is this 2007 bill would not pass. would you agree with that or not? but i would bet you everything i own that the congress needs to take up -- >> i would bet you everything i own that the congress needs to take up

immigration reform because it is not going to go away. >> it is not going to go away, but in this environment, not having done anything that is going to reassure the american public that we will not have 20 million more, that you are going to crash and burn. the immigration that comes up this year is devastating to the future of this issue and the southern border is not only not secure, there is a war in mexico that is bleeding over in america. the mayor of war as has moved out of the city and is living in the -- the mayor of wajuarez has moved out of his city and is living in the u.s. the biggest change between 2007 and now is that there is a war in mexico trending the mexican government that also trend people who live along -- threatening the mexican government that also threatens the people who live along the border. look what good people will do when they're under siege.

what happened in arizona is that good people are so afraid of an out of control border that they had to resort to a lot that i think is unconstitutional. it does not represent the best way forward. and it is impossible for me and then the other set -- serious democrat to get this body -- it is impossible for me and any other democrat to get his body to move to secure our borders. quite frankly, madam secretary, we have got a long way to go. but once we get there, comprehensive reform should come out, will come out, and i believe we can do it by 2012. if we are smart and we address the big elephant in the room, and that is, our borders are broken and there is a war going on that will affect the future of this issue until we get this resolved.

>> may i respond to that? >> please. >> and i say this, again, as someone who has walked to the border, written the border, floated, driven economit. i know that border as well as anyone. >> do you think it is secure? >> i will tell you that is as secure now has -- please, let me answer the question. every mile marker that has been laid down by the congress in terms of labor employment and construction and the like has already been completed or is within a hairsbreadth of being completed. one of the questions we need to talk about is whether it securing the border is ever going to be reached before the congress, in the sense of the congress, or whether the goal

post is going to keep moving. and i also believe we need to communicate better with the american people. it is a very different border now. >> i totally agree with that. >> six, seven years ago the number of illegal apprehensions near the tucson sector of the border is over -- was over 600,000. now it is 200,000. it is too much, i agree, but securing the border as we move forward -- >> the law that we tried to pass in 2007 required border state governors to say that the border was secure along their state border. knowing what you know about arizona, and if you can indulge me a little bit, mr. chairman, i would appreciate a bit more time. would you certify that the arizona border is secure? >> if i were asked that question now in this position -- first of all, it is an unfair question.

>> if that is an unfair question, then it would be news to the people of the united states and arizona. if it is unfair to ask a simple question, it is the border secure, then we will never have the confidence to get it secure because it is a fair question. and i will give you my answer, i do not think it is. since our last effort to deter immigration, the border security has deteriorated. and there is a war going on. you cannot ignore the fact that the border is more dangerous because of the war in mexico, which requires more action, not less. >> senator gramm, if i might. >> please. >> let me respond to the way i heard the question. what i would say is that we need to continue with all of our efforts to secure the border and the numbers are better than they have ever been, but that does not mean that we stop and that

there is not more progress to be done. but i would also suggest that the passage of laws like that at the state level illustrate the need for congress to move ahead. >> and i agree with you. i will end this, the chairman is right. you're is my view. i think the border is less secure because the circumstances in mexico make it less secure. you have done some good things. for anyone was watching this issue once released in the hispanic community, you deserve it. but the last thing we can do in my view to get that relief is to bring up a bill where there is no hope of it passing. in this environment, there is no hope of passing. let's get this environment corrected on border security, move forward in this fashion and protect america, and be fair to the 12 million people, but the firm that there -- that we will not have 20 million more in the future.

>> i thank my colleagues for allowing senator gramm the extra time, given the remarkable extent of his involvement in this issue. i think he was entitled to it. i hope my colleagues understand. it has now come to me, madam secretary. i want to talk to you about two things, fema and cyber. i want to thank you for your visit to our -- to ryland after our flooding. i don't armored i called you on a tuesday or wednesday, -- for your visit to rhode island after our flooding. i do not remember if i call join a tuesday or wednesday, but you were there by friday. me your presence was very important. i want -- your presence was very important. and i want to commend the efforts of fema in deploying rapidly and widely and effectively.

the presence has been first-rate and the people who have come in all across the country to help have been very good to work with. there is inevitable disappointment about the fact that the program that fema can deliver has statutory and regulatory restrictions. you get what you get and not more, but the speed and efficiency with which you came in to deliver what fema can deliver was very good and i wanted to say that. there are two areas of problems, and if you could have one of your staff people follow-up to work through it, i would appreciate that. the one is, we have 2000 rhode islanders still not back in their homes. it has been quite a while now to be out. some of them have had problems finding temporary housing and have been reported moving from hotel to hotel.

anything that could be done to help with the problem would be helpful. the other problem that has emerged is that some fema inspectors have disagreed with the local determination by municipal officials whether the building is inevitable or not. it puts the occupant in an impossible position. a resolution of that quickly between those two, some mechanism for resolving it is very important. these people are pretty frustrated to begin with to be flooded out of their homes with flooding that they have never foreseen, never experienced in their lives. and then all of the inconvenience and delay and now is inevitable -- in habitable. if you could sort that out, i would appreciate that. >> we will, and i will get a -- in touch with fema after this

hearing to see what can be done. >> i appreciate that. now on cyber, i guess i would like to ask two questions. one is, you know, we have got maybe three dozen cyber pieces of legislation pending in congress right now. in the professional community that looks at cyber as a national security issue, there is intense interest and activity. it is an area in which an enormous amount needs to be done in order to prepare america better. but partly because of what we do at protectio.gov is classified d with the private sector experience is with .com and .org is tolerable, no one wants to

discuss it -- is vulnerable, no one wants to discuss it. my impression is that the american people are way behind in this discussion. should we try to formalize some way for getting the american people more involved in this discussion? there are very significant questions we will have to answer about the use of the internet, about protecting our companies, about what their rights are for protecting themselves, about our own government, about the cyber piracy we are being engaged in. i contend that cyber prioresses is the biggest theft of value in the history of humankind and we are on the losing end of it. a lot needs to be done. how do we get the american people more engaged? >> well, i think your question actually lays out some of it. the private sector needs to be more engaged. we need greater productivity on

the civilian side. one of the things, senator, that we have been looking at is just plain old good hawk's-eye ever hygiene by anyone who is getting on the net. -- plain old good cyber hygiene by anyone who is getting on the net. we have a meeting next week for some simple sloganing, simple messaging that can be used by anyone on the system. once you're on the system, you get the appendages of the system, but also the disadvantages. -- you get the advantages of the system, but also the disadvantages. . . by your almighty power, uphold our commitment to live according to your revealed truths and the constitutional law of this

great country. let freedom flourish in the lives of your people who seek justice and prove themselves trustworthy. shape virtuous leadership in government of the people. remove fear from their minds and depression from their spirits. may this body prove creative in facing our problems. be decisive in seeking the whole truth as it leads your people to greater security and peace both now and forever. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the chamber her approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from california, mr. mcnerney. mr. mcnerney: i pledge

allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection. mr. mcnerney: madam speaker, today i ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the life of wesley stewart a true american patriot who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to our great nation. in 1943 he joined the united states navy as an aviation ordinance man second class and was trained on aviation on avenger bombers. on september 13, 1944 an aadvantager took off from the u.s.s. enterprise with a three-man crew aboard. the crew was bound for battle over the japanese occupied south pacific island.

shortly after takeoff, the aircraft was shot down by enemy fire leaving no sur you vifors. although the wreckage was later recovered, he is still considered officially missing in action. after 60 years they continue the commitment to keeping the memory alive. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. boehner: mr. speaker, we are seeing a growing credibility gap here in washington. democrats are saying one thing and doing something else. it started with $1 trillion stimulus plan that was rushed through with promises that it would create jobs immediately and keep unemployment below 8%. today unemployment is near 10% and americans are still asking where are the jobs? americans were also promised a

war on deficits, all that's happened is we piled more debt on thebacks of our kids and grandkids. then we have the trillion dollar government takeover of health care that was forced through with promises that it would lower cost. but turns out the new law will actually increase costs for taxpayers and patients. this comes from analysis from the president's administration, their centers for medicaid and medicare services. c.m.s. determined the new law will increase what the nation spends on health care over the next 10 years by $311 billion. the president claimed that this government takeover of health care was the single most important thing that we can do to address our deficits. now it turns out it's just going to make matters worse. just think about that credibility gap when you see the majority insist on rushing through a job-killing regulatory bill with promises that will end wall street

bailouts. the bill doesn't end wall street bailouts, it makes them permanent and institutional a's -- institutionalizes too big to fail. this bill doesn't get the government out of the private sector it creates a a bureau style of regulators who can seize any business. the bill doesn't address the real reasons for the financial meltdown, it gives a free ride to fannie mae and freddie mac. the government mortgage companies that started this crisis. americans were promised a new washington. instead it's just more of the same. more spending, more government, and more empty promises. i think it's time we start listening to the american people. let's work together on commonsense lutions -- solutions to indthe bailouts, reform fannie mae and freddie mac and hold wall street kibble. -- accountable. let's work together to repeal the government takeover of health care and replace it with commonsense reforms that will

lower the cost of health care. let's work to ban earmarks and stop out-of-control spending. and most importantly, let's work on commonsense solutions that will help small businesses create the kind of jobs that americans are looking for. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, this week i introduced the sum bill protection act of 2010. this legislation will improve the federal subcontracting process. here's the problem. the federal regulation -- federal acquisition regulation holds the government to transparent reporting standards as it hires contractors. but it does not hold those prime contractors to the same standards when they hire subs. mr. wilson: this is a complete lack of oversight. a company in my district, summit bill tiles, was denied

the opportunity to present a formal bid precisely because of this problem. my legislation would level this playing field and require that prime contractors meet five sections of the federal acquisition regulation as they hire subs. i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. cantor: i ask to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cantor: thank you, mr. speaker. at the start of the health care debate last year, president obama made two critical promises. he assured american -- the american people his bill would, number one, lower costs, and if they liked the coverage they had they could keep it. on the first count an independent c.m.s. report released last week states the health care cost also skyrocket under this bill by an astounding $311 billion over the next 10 years. that's more than the previous estimate for each individual bill passed in the house and the senate.

and if you like what you have, you truly may not be able to keep it. even care for our seniors is jeopardized. the c.m.s. report warns the medicare cuts may trigger a slight of hospitals and other health care providers from participation in medicare. it also states that 50% of the seniors participating in medicare advantage are set to lose their coverage. the american people deserve better, mr. speaker, and that's why we need to repeal the $1 trillion government overhaul of health care and replace it with a bill that makes lowering costs the first priority. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? >> permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. polis: i rise today to discussion immigration. the lack of federal action and the failure of the federal government to establish the rule of law has completely and utterly failed. so severely that states are trying to take federal law into their own hands.

on the right you have states like arizona, which passed a law that allows for racial and ethnic profiling. on the left you have states contending with whether they issue driffers licenses or in-state tuition to our growing undocumented population. this is a federal failure. it is our failure. congress needs to act now. we should not have 10 million, 15 million, 20 million undocumented immigrants in our country. it strains law enforcement, undermine wages for working families, and is a very real security threat. i'm a proud co-sponsor of comprehensive immigration reform in the house and parties effort are also underway in the senate. i urge my colleagues to join me in demanding comprehensive immigration reform now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pence: after months of debate and assurances that their government takeover of health care would actually result in lowering the cost of

health care for americans, the truth landed with a thud last thursday. a new report from the obama administration's own medicare agency confirms a what we have known all along. the president and congressional democrats passed a health care law without any idea how to pay for it. they promised to lower the cost of health care but instead obamacare will send those costs soaring by $311 billion. again, this is from their own analysts within the administration. the same report says in some way -- the same way the democrats set out to pay for the bill are unsustainable and the some of the methods they use to control costs are "negligible." the reality is we need to relegal owe bomba care and replace it with the kind of health care reform that will lower the cost of health care without growing the size of government. and house republicans are determined to be on the side of the american people until we do just that. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. sires: mr. speaker, earlier this month we witnessed a tragedy over an intercountry adoption gone wrong when a 7-year-old boy was forced back alone to russia. last year over 12,000 children from around the world were adopted by american families, yet only a fraction of these adoptions were processed by accredited adoption agencies. the others occur under an unregulated process. just over two years ago the united states became the full member of the hague convention. under the convention the it is required that intercountry services prove transparency and accountability. unfortunately these rules only apply to adoptions that have signed the convention. adoption agencies who worked for nonaccountable countries

aren't allowed. we must strengthen the adoption pros requiring aconsidered as read tation for all countries. universal accreditation will create adoption and process that is lawful, safe for the child, and respectful to the families involved. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. walden: thank you, mr. speaker the speaker of the house told the national association of counties a while back that congress needed to pass a health care bill to find out what's in it. we are finding out now. the chief actuary for the centers for medicare and medicaid services is the independent scorekeeper of legislation like this. their report that they just issued said half of all seniors in america who are on medicare advantage plans, half, are going to lose that coverage under the bill that was signed into law. that's a big problem for seniors in oregon. oregon has had one of the highest penetration rates in the united states of seniors who wanted medicare advantage.

and signed up for it. it was out in ontario, oregon, not long ago an the seniors there raised their hands and said why are they taking away the medicare advantage i have? we now know under this independent evaluation half will lose that care, 38,000 seniors in my district alone. we need to repeal and replace this law that was jammed through this congress, mr. speaker. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. baca: yesterday, i urged all americans to boycott the state of arizona until this law is appealed. this law is unjust. it will only lead to the increase of racial profiling and hate crimes in the state, especially towards hispanics. this is a violation of the fourth and 14th amendment in the united states constitution. and does not require local police officers to have a warrant. this new law will create a divide between people who are asked for legal documents and

those that are not. this law will create distrust between police and the communities they protect. this law is backward and sets us times back. i urge sport of the boycott and wear a red, yellow, and blue wrist band. this is an unjust law and must be overturned. an example why we need comprehensive immigration. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: while some may believe the debate over health care is behind us, the report that we received last week stating very clearly that this administration had determined that we would see a $311 billion increase, increase in health care costs over the next decade, was completely counter to what we and the american people were promised. we were promised there would be savings. so i think with this report it's very clear that the debate

continues to be alive and well. mr. speaker, we need to take a step by step approach. ensuring that people can have access to insurance products across state lines. meaningful lawsuit abuse reform takes place. small businesses should be -- should be able to come together to buy at lower rates. we should have pooling to deal with pre-existing conditions, and we should expand medical savings accounts. those five things, mr. speaker, will go a long way towards decreasing costs to ensure that every american will have access to quality, affordable health insurance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from hawaii rise? ms. hirono: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. hirono: mr. speaker, we need wall street reform. the collapse in the value of securities as a result of wall street's conduct caused our nation's economic crisis. while americans struggle to find work and pay their mortgages, wall street tibs to pay huge bonuses and focus only

on their profits. a woman shared her story recently. last august janet's son-in-law lost his job in the bad economy. this led her daughter and son-in-law losing their home. now her daughter, son-in-law, and 5-year-old grandson live with janet and her two teenage children. with everyone living with them, janet and her husband have had additional costs which they charge to their credit cards. each month they fall farther behind. janet said, quote, we middle income americans are suffering while powerful wall street financial companies lobby against financial reform, end quote. i share janet's anger, without reform the current system will continue to harm the well-being of families like janet's. the house has passed wall street reform. it's high time the senate does likewise. . the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> remember we were told the whole point of the new health care bill was to lower health care costs and insure all americans? well, the c.m.s., under control of the obama administration, estimate the law fails on all counts. 20 million americans currently can't afford health care, will be forced under dueress to buy a product or face fines and i.r.s. action. four million americans will still not be able to provide health insurance and will pay $ 33 billion in fines. 14 million will lose mayor employer-supports ord insurance. and 21% of the gross domestic product will be spent on health care after this law is implemented. much higher if the congress had done nothing. and you have to wonder, when did we know all this and why didn't we know about it before the vote was taken? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. inslee: to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. inslee: after the collapse on wall street and the multiple abuses, the american people are very disappointed that one party in the senate is fill bustering so that we can't -- filibustering so we can't move forward to have a bipartisan wall street reform bill. and the republicans' filibuster kind of makes me remember of the old "get smart" show where we had -- they had the code of silence. when nobody wanted to know the secret, they brought down the cone of silence. and that's what the republicans want to do about wall street reform. they want a cone of silence over the senate so nobody knows whose side everybody is on. we're on the side of the american people to have aggressive wall street reform. the people who are over there filibustering that is wrong. you know, maybe the answer no

is the right answer to some things, but it isn't the right answer to wall street reform. end the filibuster, get a vote and let's tame wall street the way it ought to be regulated. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. sessions: mr. speaker, thank you very much. we're being told by the democrats, trust washington and trust them. yet the obama-pelosi legislation that passed this house earlier last year promised that if congress passed the $787 billion stimulus package national unemployment would never rise above 8%. today, the national unemployment is 9.7% and hombering near a 25-year high. i think it's time for the american people to recognize that the answers do not all

reside here in washington, d.c. but that we need to take care of our business. and our business should not be about trying to do a lot of things to a lot of other people but to focus on jobs for this country. jobs are the number one issue. jobs are the things that will spur the american entrepreneurship and the creativity that will allow us to be competitive with the world. where are the jobs? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. capps: mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of wall street reform. wall street shenanigans led us to this recession, and if not for taxpayers bailing them out would have melted down our entire financial system while they made hundreds of billions of dollars for themselves. last year the house of representatives passed commonsense wall street reform it would protect small businesses and families from

predatory loans, undecipherable fine print. it would end taxpayer-funded bailouts and too big to fail banks. it would impose tough new laws for -- on the riskiest wall street practices that got us into this mess in the first place. house democrats voted yes on wall street reform, but unfortunately republicans all voted no. and yesterday their senate colleagues again voted no. this time to even start an open, honest debate. it's time to stop the obstructionism and let the debate again. if senate republicans have problems with the bill, make them known in public. make amendments, take votes. show us where you stand. with main street or with wall street. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. wilson: last week the administration's own report by the centers for medicare and

medicaid services said the government takeover will increase costs, hurt seniors and put employers in a position to drop employee coverage. this is not what the american people wanted when it came to health care reform. according to the c.m.s. report, national health care costs will increase by $311 billion over the next 10 years and will force millions of seniors off their current medicare coverage. this information was released over a month after the health care takeover was rushed through congress. clearly congress needed to wait to vote on this legislation after the report was released. it is time for us to come together to repeal the government health care takeover and swap it for a patient-centered affordable health insurance reform that expands access and continues to cover pre-existing condition. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin rise? mr. kagen: to address the house for one minute.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. kagen: mr. speaker, everyone in wisconsin wants to know the answer to the question -- whose side are you on? yesterday, the part sans in the united states senate voted to return to the good old days, the good old days of unregulated financial market of voodoo economics on wall street and the continued deregulation of big banks on wall street. we cannot afford to go back to the losing policies of the bush administration where wall street was allowed to consume the wealth of an entire generation. people in wisconsin believe if you're too big to fail then you should not exist. people in wisconsin know that we're on their side. and when wall street innovates, main street pays the price. we have to work hard together to catch all the crooks, following their trail wherever they may lead. we have to make certain that we balance our budgets, live within our means and rewrite our financial regulations to make things fair for people on

main street. that's what we have to do together. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman wreeleds back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: mr. speaker, because the federal government refuses to secure the border, states like arizona have become desperate to solve the crisis. arizona has a new illegal immigration law that's causing some heartburn to the open borders crowd. the new law makes being in arizona without proof of legal status a crime. the consequences range from a misdemeanor to a felony, depending on whether one is a repeat offender, trafficking drugs or smuggling human beings. the open borders law doesn't want the laws they don't like enforce so they protest it outside the arizona state capitol building when the governor signed the bill into law. they pelted police with rocks and bottles, even even assaulted a cameraman. it calls the peaceful tea party people fringe terrorists, but

the violent pro-immigrant rock throwers get a pass. no matter how the open media crowds spins it, entering this country illegally is still against the law. the federal government should do its job and secure the border and that's what they're there for. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky rise? mr. yarmuth: i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. yarmuth: mr. speaker, i'm very happy that our republican colleagues have brought up the c.m.s. report because while they try to proclaim this is some kind of revelation, what it actually verifies is what we've been saying all along. that we will expand the coverage in this country, not by the 30 million people that it was originally protected, but now by 34 million people. for a 1% increase in our total health care costs, something said we were always going to do, we are going to insure 11% more of the population. that's a pretty good deal. another big surprise in that

c.m.s. report, not just that we're going to insure more people than we thought, but we are going to extend the life of medicare's trust fund, not by nine years but 12 years, all the way to 2029. yes, there was some news in the c.m.s. report. it's good news for the american people. it's good news for medicare, and it's good news for the democratic congress which did this great service for the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized -- the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. we have some interesting news from the obama administration's own number crunchers last week. it comes to no surprise to those who opposed the government takeover of health care that became law last month. we learned that this takeover increases national health care spending by $311 billion. plus the federal actuaries reported that 18 million taxpayers will be socked with $33 billion in fines for not purchasing government-approved

health care. and in direct contradiction to president obama's promise that if you like your plan you can keep it, the report says half of the 14.8 million seniors who enjoy medicare advantage will be forced to leave the plan due to lower benefits. that means 20 million in my district will lose the plan. too bad we didn't have this report before the government takeover became law. but as the old saying goes, better late than never. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. altmire: mr. speaker, this week is national v.a. research week, recognizing 85 years of v.a. medical research. since 1925, the v.a. has led the way in cutting edge medical research, turning ideas into discoveries and innovations that have improved the quality of life for generations of our military veterans. many americans may not realize

that some of medical scientists' greatest achievements have been the result of research conducted at the v.a. the cat scan and the cardiac pacemaker are but two of the trail blazing innovations through v.a.-funded research. today, the v.a. is the worldwide leader in important medical research, such as diagnosis and treatment of traumatic brain injuries and neuro prosthetic technologies related to spinal chord injuries. so this week as we celebrate the pioneers of the past 85 years, let us also recognize today's v.a. researchers who are leading the way to finding the medical break throughs of tomorrow. -- breakthroughs of tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. harper: mr. speaker, governor haley barbour has pro claimed today is a day of

prayer in my home state of remember to remember mississippiians who suffered devastating loss of lives and properties during saturday's horrific tornadoes and families who lost loved ones in the oil rig explosion. and one was communities that came together who cleared debris and accumulated properties. as neighbors and families mourn, we are reminded of the character of mississippiians in the aftermath of hurricane katrina. today, i join folks from across mississippi in praying for those families affected. i commend governor haley barbour for his leadership and for appropriately designating today as a day of prayer. though tragic, neither of these events will break the spirit of mississippi and her people. our people will persevere. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from nevada rise?

ms. titus: to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. titus: thank you, mr. speaker. later today the house will consider legislation to stop the automatic pay raise for members of congress during this fiscal year. i'm proud to be a co-sponsor of this bill because i believe strongly that members of congress should not receive a pay raise when so many families in nevada are struggling with job loss, homes that are underwater and uncertainty about their economic future. unemployment in my district has reached record levels, the highest in 25 years. families are tightening their belts, and too many hardworking nevadans are desperate to find a job. it would be unconscionable in this time of economic hardship for members of congress to receive an automatic pay raise. our actions today will send a message to the american people that we are changing the way the way that business is done in washington and we are serious about putting our economy on the path to recovery

and restoring economic security for all americans. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. neugebauer: in case there's any doubt about the new report raised by the c.m.s. this week, the report says it all. the democrats' health care bill fails to provide the reform the taxpayers deserve and expected. the report clearly states the health care spending will go up by $210 billion over the next 10 years-$310 billion over the next 10 years and the long-term care program pose as a serious risk of being unsustainable. this is -- we have set ourselves up for more spending, more burdens we simply cannot afford while taking away benefits from seniors and disabled americans who need them most. while republicans offered positive solutions to tackle

the spending, democrats created massive new government-run health care plan that hurts the economy, interferes with patient choices, and does nothing to bring down the cost of health care. mr. speaker, the american people deserve better than that. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> it's not even three years since bear stearns landed flat on its back. that lehman brothers landed flat on its back. that a.i.g. contributed to a destruction of our economy which resulted in the destruction of $17 trillion of the household wealth of the american people. we have spent the last year assembling a commonsense, marker oriented package of reforms, bringing derivatives on to exchanges, create an agency which prevents mortgage brokers from selling mortgages to american families that that broker knows can't be repaid.

yet the other side is saying no. is saying no to the kind of commonsense reform that will restore americans' faith in their system. make them comfortable investing in america. yesterday in the other body a big step back was taken. the time is now if we are to be serious about addressing the crisis that this country is only now emerging from, for this house to setaside partisanship and pass financial regulatory reform. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from west virginia rise? mrs. capito: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. capito: thank you, sprike. i rise today to voice my deep concern over the rising tide of unemployment across america and particularly in my home state of west virginia. in my state the unemployment rate has risen now to over 10% with some counties reaching well over 12%. beyond these staggering figures, we must take a moment to pause and ask ourselves, are the policies we are pushing through this congress creating real job growth?

absolutely not. sadly we all know a family member, friend, colleague, who has lost their job and struggling to get back on their feet. the so-called stimulus bill along with the jobs bill has failed to produce the jobs the administration and democrats in this congress promised. and worse yet, the policies of this administration are actually causing job loss in my state. instead, we should be enacting policies to get americans back to work and awaken main street across our country. mr. speaker, it's time of increasing unemployment for american families, we must keep repeating where are the jobs? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. murphy: we need to pass financial reform and it's time for republicans to stop standing in the way. when i'm home in the can account i never hear anybody disagree with me about the need to reform wall street. their retirement account statements are all the proof

that they need that wall street played a hand that was too dangerous for their own good. we need to make sure our financial system does what it does best. help get money from investors to businesses so that they can innovate and expand. when wall street sticks to this commission, we all win. but over the last decade, much of wall street became a las vegas casino. without money our mortgages, investment, and pensions being used as casino chips in trading schemes that add nod value to our economy. wall street needs to get back to what it's good at and teams time for republicans to stop standing in the way, join us so we can lock the door together. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? ms. ros-lehtinen: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. ros-lehtinen: april is autism awareness month and i called for increase research into and treatment for this leading developmental disorder. autism impacts more of our children every day and it is becoming exceptionally

prevalent in our american society. the number of american families who must learn to cope with autism is growing every day. and that's made it one out of every 110 children born in the united states are now diagnosed with autism. we've got to invest in the research that will allow us to better understand and to treat this serious disorder. for individuals already living with autism, and those children who will be diagnosed this year, we must make this a priority. autism's hold on our families, our children, and our country must be broken. i look forward to the day when children diagnosed with this developmental disorder can live full and healthy lives. lit's pass this bill before us today. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania rise? >> ask permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. dahlkemper: mr. speaker, i rise today to offer congratulations to the

northwest pennsylvania collegiate academy of erie, pennsylvania, on the second straight victory of the united states academic decathlon. on saturday the nine-member team won the division ii small school title and placed sixth out of 40 schools overall at the competition in omaha. the students showcased their knowledge in 10 subjects, music, art, language and literature, science, history, economics, essay, interview, speech, and math. the coach led these bright students to victory and helped four team members, rachel, bronte, stan, and reed earn individual medals at the competition. sean, ben, john, carl, and rose round out this championship team. on behalf 69 united states -- of the united states house of representatives, congratulations to northwest pennsylvania's collegiate academy's academic team on its great victory and future

successes. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? texas. >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. olson: mr. speaker, each day i'm more convinced i was right to oppose the health care reform bill that was pushed through this congress last month. all along republicans questioned how it's possible to increase medicaid enrollees and cut costs at the same time. lo and behold, we were right. the centers for medicare and medicaid services, or c.m.s., recently concluded that implementing this bill means health care will be 21% of our g.d.p. in 2019. up from 16% today. taxpayers will be forced to spend $410 billion to expand medicaid to 20 million new beneficiaries. and that's only at the federal

level. that doesn't count the state level spending in which my home state of texas has been estimated to incur a $24 billion unfunded mandate over 10 years. mr. speaker, there's a better way to provide access to quality, affordable health care for all americans. we should repeal and replace the government plan with one that makes sense. the american people deserve no less. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from massachusetts rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. miss tsongas: last week i met with a businessman who showed me several months of his credit card statements. due to one day late payment after years of on-time payment, his credit card company increased his interest rate by 15% informing him because of the increase he will pay off his balance in 2,820 years. thanks to the credit card act,

such abuses are now illegal. but only after more than a decade of trying to move these bipartisan and commonsense reforms through congress. in response to the law, credit card companies are already devising new ways to exploit their customers, trusting in congress' inability to respond quickly. the consumer financial protection agency will give small business owners like my constituent an advocate that can respond to shady practices as they evolve. groups like the aarp have endorsed the idea of a strong consumer financial protection agency because it will be able to stand up for the little guy against the giants who have been able to set their own rules. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. lungren: thank you very much, mr. speaker. -- -- the biggest issue on the minds of american people are jobs. imagine my surprise when i took

another look at the so-called health care reform bill and found a provision which is just another job-killer provision. beginning in 2012 under section 906 -- 9006 of the owe bomba care bill, any company -- owe bomba care bill, any -- bow bama air bill, any company that purchases from any corporation during the previous year will be required to file a 1099 with the government and with that company. that means you have to keep track of all the food that you buy, the paint that you buy. the secretarial supplies that you buy. and then you have to give this information to the government. not because any obligation on your part to pay something, but on the part. other individual. the assumption is that everybody else cheats. so what this is nothing more than a universal snitch act. it requires all americans to give up information on somebody else. repeal this nonsense, get rid of this burden.

save small business. and co-sponsor h.r. 5141. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri rise? >> to address the body. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, a little over two years ago our nation was on the presscies -- precipice, many americans are perhaps unaware of the fact we were very, very close not to a major recession but a depression. and for this body to pass financial reform was, i think, one of the better things we have done. for financial reform to remain on the table over in the senate is just abominable. many people were out trying to survive during this crisis and still losing money, still losing homes. we saw wall street playing around with derivatives that many of them didn't even

understand. they hired physicists to actually describe what would happen with the derivatives. and so if we don't do financial reform, we are going to leave the american public vulnerable. we've got to do it. we've got to establish a financial consumer protection agency and we need to do it now. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, as a nation one of our strongest allies in the middle east is israel. for decades we have stood with this free and democratic state as it has been assaulted. we have always respected the right of israel to defend itself and build for itself a stronger nation. but now our president is causing problems for our ally. the president takes offense at the bureaucratic approval of settlements. these are not settlements deep in the heart of the west bank. they are in their capital, jerusalem. east jerusalem is an area where

half the jewish population of the capital city currently resides. the prime minister has made clear this is an area that will be part of israel in any peace settlement considered. and just a few weeks, israel will celebrate its 62nd year as an independent nation. the united states was the first to stand and recognize israel on the day of their independence, and since that time we have remained close allies. let's not let this close relationship move apart. the president should stop giving the gold shoal shoulder to our friends -- cold shoulder to our friends in israel. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. costa: mr. speaker, april 24 marked the 95th anniversary of the armenian genocide. last saturday i participated with the armenian community in fresno to commemorate this horrific tragedy. i once again call upon this body to pass the armenian

genocide resolution. in my remarks before the foreign affairs committee markup of house resolution 252, i indicated that historians have clearly documented this event. back home as i grew up my armenian friends told me the stories of the systematic approach to eliminate the armenian communities from their farms, their homes, and their lives. it was the first genocide of the 20th century. they believe it and so do i. thee door roosevelt once wrote, the armenian massacre was the greatest crime of world war i and the failure to act against turkey is condone it. no one holds modern day turningy responsible for the past sins of the ottoman empire but they should recognize their history, apologize, and move on to establish diplomatic relationships with armenia. we cannot wait around for a convenient time. i urge we pass this resolution. . the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. broun: mr. speaker, it's another three-day workweek for congress. and there's still nothing on the agenda to spur the economy and to incentivize growth. job creation remains the top concern of the american people. shouldn't it be a priority of congress' will? for 15 million unemployed americans, it's neglect not to prioritize job creation in the private sector today. through my jobs act, h.r. 4100, we can empower small businesses by reducing their tax burden and provide relief to the lowest two individual income brackets. mr. speaker, i urge this body to seriously consider my legislation or any other bills

that put people back to work. and provide lasting solutions to the problems facing our economy. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. watson: mr. speaker, i rise today to honor a life well lived. the life of audrey lamont battles who passed away on april 15 of this year. mr. battle was born in los angeles where he was known for his sense of humor, caring for others, his faith in god and his talent for cooking. this led him to a fulfilling career in the restaurant and catering business, a job that allowed him to share his love for food and for meeting new people. he came into my life when he was caregiving for a lifelong

friend of mine, and he said, i just love your mother. she just turned 100 years old and he was going to prepare the meal for 300 guests. however, his illness did not allow him to do it, so i want to honor mr. battle today for living among us, who was a good and decent american and who will certainly be missed because he reached out to others and was more caring about others than he was of hisself. so we lost him, but i just want to pay tribute to him for a life well lived. i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, here in washington in these hallowed walls we have the power to do many things. at time there may seem no riddle so hard that we could

not overcome it. the affordable care act was to help citizens' access to health care. yet, the foster of the chief of c.m.s. lay truth of these consequences. mr. foster states unequivocally that this bill will make hospitals, long-term care facility and other part a providers unprofitable. it's clear to me, madam speaker, that while we in washington can pass words on paper that guarantee americans health care, that doctors and hospital throughout this america may not be around long enough to provide them care. more jobs, mr. speaker, being lost to wrong-headed people in this majority. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from vermont rise? mr. welch: to address the house for one minute and to rrks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. welch: we have a debate on health care, but the

fundamental question that we face is whether we were going to stick with the status quo or we were going to put a stake in the ground, to have a health care system where all are covered and all help pay. we did this without bipartisan support. the question we now have is making this work. the status quo was broken. we're spending two, three times the rate of inflation, the rate of wage growth. our businesses can't afford it. we spend more and get less with 45 million americans uninsured. now, folks want to repeal it and that includes the provisions where your child can be on your health care policy until age 26, where the doughnut hole is going to finally be closed so seniors can get the prescription drugs that they need, where folks who need preventive care and long-term care are going to have access to the care that they need, where there won't be a lifetime cap on coverage. and so if you get really sick and need that you're going to be able to get access to it. so now the debate is, are we going to improve this health

care system and health care bill or repeal it? i say move ahead. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, during the recent health debate, the speaker ominously said we have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it. well, they passed the bill and now we're finding out what's in it. they told us it would keep costs down. well, now they admit health care will soar $300 billion, increasing to 21% of g.d.p. by 2019. they told us if you like your plan you can keep it. well, now they admit that seniors on medicare advantage could lose their plans. companies that offer health plans to their employees, retirees, are considering dropping them. they say it's good for the economy. now they say employers were correct by downgrading by billions of dollars that will come out of employee's wages

and benefits. this issue is not going away. it will continue to plague those responsible until they replace it or until they themselves are replaced. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas rise? ms. jackson lee: to address the house for one minute and i ask unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: thank you, mr. speaker. the republicans always want to talk about distractions, but i believe the american people are waiting for the health care reform bill to be implemented and that it will and it will save lives. but why are the republicans standing on the side of big business and big companies too big to fail? now, we need the wall street reform and consumer protectionability to be able to respond to make's -- america's cry. right now one of the biggest wall street casinos, goldman sachs, is testifying and i don't know whether they can find the facts to be able to defend the astroshese acts of causing millions of americans to lose money.

i personally know of a small business that they literally destroyed because they were unwilling to look at ways of allowing that business to survive. and so the $14 million of net worth loss, $22 million of decline in net worth, and 2.2 million homes lost is because of wall street. pass a legislation that will end bailouts, protect family's retirement funds, college savings, homes and businesses, protect consumers and, yes, inject transparency. goldman sachs, what is your answer to the question? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from michigan rise? mrs. miller: unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. miller: mr. speaker, time and again during the health care debate, the american people were told that the health care bill would lower costs and republicans continually argued that the big government takeover of our health care would actually increase the cost of taxpayers. well, who was right? the nonpartisan office of the actuary at the centers for medicare and medicaid services

has released the analysis of the new health care law and the actuaries are reporting that the new law will increase health care costs over the next 10 years by $311 billion, which was much more than the estimate to both the house and senate bills. and published reports have indicated that this report incredibly was submitted to the secretary of health and human services more than a week before the final vote in the house. but that information, of course, was not shared with at least on the republican side with members of congress or the american people. so much for the most open and transparent administration in history and so much for providing the american people with real health care reform that would help lower costs. america is at a crossroads, mr. speaker, and this difficult economy and why the american people spoke out very loudly that they did not want a government takeover -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mrs. miller: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

ms. sutton: thank you, mr. speaker. congressional republicans threat to take us back to the failed policies that created the economic crisis. siding with special interests, wall street banks, credit card companies, big oil and insurance companies. these bush economic and fiscal policies created the worst financial crisis since the great depression with job losses of nearly 800,000 a month. and nearly doubled our national debt. democrats in congress are working to create american jobs and a strong new foundation for our economy, protecting main street and the middle class. not siding with the insurance companies and wall street. this week's news provides evidence that american families are beginning to feel some effects of an economy headed in a better direction. "usa today" headlines reads, "economists say recovery looks stronger than expected." bloomberg says the plan to increase employment, survey shows. "new york times" from the malls to the docks show signs of rebound. no matter how much they tried

to side with wall street, democrats will side with the american people and build a recovery and an economy that will work for them. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from louisiana rise? expressing support for the goals and ideals of national child abuse prevention month to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. expressing support for the goals and ideals of national child abuse prevention month mr. speaker, -- mr. boustany: the president's new health care law will increase health care over and above what was expected, premiums for families and small businesses will rise what was expected and access to a physician will suffer for many, many americans. they also showed that the $500 billion in indiscriminant cuts to medicare to pay for a new entitlement is a very deep cut that will hurt access to care for many of our seniors. half of all seniors in the medicare advantage program will lose their current coverage. i have 140,000 seniors in my

state of louisiana who depend on medicare advantage in rural areas where access to a doctor, and they're going to lose that kind of coverage that gives them that valid access to the -- valued access to the physician of their choice. this bill, this law, fails to lower costs, it creates red tape and bureaucracy and it really does nothing to enhance quality for most americans. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? mr. defazio: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. defazio: well, you got to give it to my friends on the republican side of the aisle. they are incredibly consistent. they have sided with the big pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry. sadly, they lost that debate, but they want to revisit it with the changes we made in health care and some of the insurance things we reformed. they are fighting to change the

subject here, because they're also trying to stop the reform on wall street, their biggest patrons of the pharmaceutical industry, the insurance industry and wall street. and they just want to protect the status quo for those folks. over on the other side of the hill, the republicans in the senate are blocking financial reform. reform of wall street, doing away with the abuses that crashed our economy and put millions out of work. and every single house republican voted against reforming wall street here on the floor of the house. no, two of them were absent. but all of those that voted voted against it. now, they want to change the subject back to health care, except they lost that debate too. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> to speak for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. issa: mr. speaker, i have heard both sides talk past each other. mr. speaker, the american

people, they get it. they get it that in fact cap and trade will increase cost of doing business. that health care, which is also too big a piece of the family budget, is going up, not down, that government is increasing spending at a time in which the revenue is far less than what we're spending. in fact, 40% of the budget is being borrowed. and now we're having the human being russ to call financial reform -- huberous to call financial reform something a bailout guarantee. under president clinton and a republican congress glass-steagall was eliminated. why wouldn't we be talking about simply re-creating the separation between real banks, that the fdic does have a fund for created by the banks, and investment banks which you recognize if they fail they fail and you are only guaranteed on the underlying stock? mr. speaker, i call for real reform and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the