for us to be doing these minor changes, if the e.p.a. administrator finds it will create more than 1,000 job the real reason, though, that we are opposed to this amendment is that under the clean air act, boilers already have three years to comply and incinerators have five years to comply. we want boilers and incinerators to have a minimum of five years to comply. we think that this -- that that provides certainty. it certainly reflects the testimony and our concern from witnesses who testified at all of the hearings that they in many instances need five years. the e.p.a. administrator may allow it to go longer than that if he or she chooses to do so but i don't believe that regulation creates jobs. and i think most of the testimony would indicate that there are more jobs at risk a as a direct result of these

regulations and for that reason, i would oppose this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question son the amendment offered by the gentleman from minnesota. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. ellison: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by minnesota will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from vermont seek recognition? mr. welch: thank you, mr. chairman. i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 19 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. welch of vermont. the chair: the gentleman from vermont is recognized for five minutes. mr. welch: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, we have an ongoing debate in this congress about regulation. my friends on the republican side believe we have too much. those of us on the democratic side think we need careful

regulation. we shouldn't have too much, but we shouldn't abolish it altogether. an appropriate regulation levels the playing field for our businesses and industry but it also gives a fair shot to the health, safety and concerns of our people who have no control over the production processees and how those may affect their health. the issue presented in my amendment is not about a regulation but it's an effort to roll back regulation at any cost and any price and any consequence. my amendment would include in the bill a finding that the american people who are exposed to mercury from industrial sources addressed by the rules listed in section 2-d through the consumption of fish containing mercury face a health hazard. there really is no dispute about that.

scientifically or medically. so the question may be, why do we need the finding? the reason we need the finding is because we have to acknowledge when industrial processees actually create health risks in order that we can accept our responsibility to address the risk that's created in the production process. and the cement and boilers do produce mercury. now, it's so self-evident that they produce mercury that this map here shows every single state in our union has issued a mercury advisory. the reason those states locally, not from washington, have issued those mercury adviseries is to give a heads up to their citizens to be

careful about eating fish that may be contaminated. and that is the responsibility of government to let people know when there is a health risk and to help them avert it and to stop it. my amendment, mr. chairman, simply incorporates what the scientific and medical community know and that is that mercury is a toxin, and if we ingest it, particularly if it's a child, an infant, that it does enormous health damage long term. so why don't we acknowledge what we know, namely that mercury is a toxin, that we include this in the findings so that in so doing we accept the responsibility that this country has that all of us have to do everything we can to avoid unnecessary health care risk? this amendment simply does that. it's not an additional regulation, but it's a finding of what we know and 50 states

have found that mercury is a threat to the public health of its own citizens. i yield back, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. whitfield: yes. i rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. whitfield: there really is nothing in h.r. 2250 that would in any way prohibit or discourage states from continuing to give these advisory opinions about mercury and the dangers of mercury. so our legislation would not prevent the states in any way from continuing to do that. the gentleman's amendment would place particular attention on industrial sources, and as we have stated in the debate last week, the department of energy itself has said that over 11 million pounds of mercury were emitted globely from both natural and human sources.

and a vast majority of the human sources from the u.s. comes from outside the u.s. so coupled with that fact and the fact that e.p.a. said the benefits of mercury reduction from the boiler mact rules have not been quantified, this really seems to be a duplicative effort because the states are going to continue to issue their rulings, their warnings as they should do so, but it's important that the american people also know that there is a lot of mercury coming from natural sources and also from outside of the u.s., and our legislation i do not believe would put at further risk the american people and their health. and with that i would respectfully oppose the gentleman's amendment. and yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from vermont. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. welch: mr. chairman, i

request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by offered by the gentleman from vermont will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 printed in the congressional record offered by ms. jackson lee of texas. the chair: the gentlelady from texas is recognized for five minutes. ms. jackson lee: thank you very much, mr. chairman. as i listened today i listened to some enormously bipartisan commentary about jobs. as mr. waxman knows, our ranking member, we have been working on creating jobs for a very long time. democrats are hoping for a vote

in the other body on the president's american jobs act. in the last congress, although we documented three million jobs, i can assure you that our stimulus package created unless of -- millions of jobs unrecorded because it was emergency funding that did not require that funding -- that recording. my amendment speaks to clarity, and it is not conflicting with jobs. for those of you who are listening to this debate, it's about the industrial boiler industry. they do have jobs. and i frankly believe that the regulation that they have lived with do not impair their ability to promote jobs. what most people don't know is there is an indefinite language or allows an indefinite time

frame for noncompliance. there's no industry for no timeline for the industry to comply with clean air rules impacting our children. just like this little one being seen by a nurse suffering from any number of respiratory illnesses. so the bill in its current form also gives the e.p.a. discretion to go beyond five years. you know how long that is? that may be job-killing time because when businesses look to move to areas, even if there are older industries, they want to know that there is an effort made to create a better quality of life. this amendment will help the industry. it indicates that the time for compliance is three years, and, yes, there may be discretion to expand but three years. i believe this is a fair

approach because in actuality, the rules that the e.p.a. passed has resulted in 1.7 million -- excuse me -- 1.7 million tons in reduction in air pollution per year. that's a good thing for job creation. and so this amendment is a simple approach to indicating that outdoor air pollution is damaging. small particles and ground level ozones come from car exhaust, smoke, road dust, factory emission. why wouldn't we want to improve the quality of life? i can only say to you that out of those polluting elements, chest pain, coughing, digestive problems, fever, sneezing, shortness of breath and a number of other ailments. and so my amendment is a good thing to be able to talk about jobs, clarity, knowing when you must comply and preventing premature deaths and protecting our children.

but let me say what else it does or what else this bill does. this bill causes an extra $1 million in new discretionary spending by the e.p.a. to comply. we're supposed to be in a budget-tight atmosphere. we're supposed to be budget cutting, but, my friends, that is not what we are doing here. so i would simply say that even though my good friend indicates that 200,000 jobs would be saved with this particular bill, i don't know where the documentation is but i will assure you that areas where the boiler industry is that has a defined clarity on what the time frame is for making sure that you're in compliance, i can assure you that that creates jobs and that creates a clean atmosphere, quality of life, clean air for more industry to come into your state, for you to diversify. so i ask my colleagues to support a simple amendment that

ensures that the compliance is for three years, clarifying that to the industry, giving them a time certain to comply and also giving discretion to the e.p.a. to help america grow jobs. i hope we all will join in growing jobs and voting for the american jobs act. and right now i hope we will vote for the jackson lee amendment that gives clarity and time frame for compliance and, again, saves lives like this little one that we all want to protect. with that i yield back and ask my colleagues to vote for the amendment. the chair: the gentlelady yields back her time. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. whitfield: claim time in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. whitfield: i would say to the gentlelady from texas, first of all, that under the regulations of e.p.a. today, incinerators are give five years to comply with section 129 standards and boilers are only given three years to comply with section 112

standards. that's one of the reasons that we introduced this bill is because businesses, manufacturers, institutions, universities all came to washington and in their testimony they asked that we have some uniformity on times to comply. and that's why we decided to extend the compliance deadline for the boiler industry up to five years which is the exact same that incinerators have today under section 129. and they asked that we do that because, one, they said it would provide certainty and that, two, in many instances they do not have the time, the technical -- the technical knowledge and it's not economically jfble to do it within -- justifiable to do it within that shorter time period. so your legislation would basically roll back even the time for incinerators.

so for that reason we would respectfully oppose this amendment and, then, i would just make one other comment about the argument that regulations create jobs. i do not -- i genuinely do not believe in the history of our country jobs have been created by regulation. jobs have been created in america because of entrepreneurs, spending money, spending capital, developing a product, creating jobs, helping our gross domestic product which increases our tax revenues which allows us to do more on the government sector. so as you've indicated, e.p.a. said there would be a net job gain of maybe 2,200 jobs, but all of the affected industries, the universities, the labor unions and others say there is putting at risk in excess of 230,000 jobs. ms. jackson lee: will the gentleman yield? mr. whitfield: i'd be happy to

yield. ms. jackson lee: for clarification, i did not argue that regulation creates jobs. i do believe that you can produce the kind of regulatory climate will, but my point is clean air, better quality of life encourages businesses to move into areas and grow jobs. i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. whitfield: i understand. as you know, the e.p.a. went to court to ask for additional time on these boiler mact rules. they were denied that, and our legislation, that's what it's designed to do, to give them a little bit more time and give the industry more time to comply. . because of that, i would oppose the gentlelady's amendment and ask it be dwighted. and i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. waxman: stike the last word. i support the amendment. it returns the bill if it became law, to what are the times

specified in the clean air act and i think those times are reasonable. but let me just say e.p.a. is working on these regulations, these rules. this is not a finished product. i believe they are taking into consideration concerns raised by the boiler industry, especially the paper, pulp industry. they have been important and legitimate concerns they have raised. they want to know if they can continue to use the same traditional fouls that they had been using. they don't want to be considered incinerators, because they are not. they want to know what the rules are and want time to comply with them. these things are under discussion at the e.p.a. and industry is weighing in and letting its feelings be known.

should the environmental protection agency need legislation, which they may or may not, we should be ready for assistance. i don't think the industry wants to throw out the clean air act and allow mercury to be considered nothing, no problem. which is what you would expect when you hear the debate on the republican side of the aisle. i don't think they would like all of this issue of public health to be so minimized as we hear in the republican debate. this is not a practical solution. this is a blunt instrument that the republicans are putting forward that will not become law. so let reasonable people talk about the issue and try to resolve it. if we need to pass legislation, let's pass reasonable legislation and get something done, not just show that the

republican party is being macho about jobs when they take a report, that's not even based on what e.p.a.'s rules are going to be and claim that it costs all of these jobs, which has already been debunked when they put forward this report when it was based on the original e.p.a. rule. i urge support for this amendment. and we ought to get on with the job of working on what can become law and not just fighting this fight of science denial and minimizing health risks, which we hear from the republican side of the aisle. i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from texas will be

postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky rise? mr. whitfield: i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. >> mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house having had under consideration has reported there is no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the committee has had under consideration h.r. 2250 and has come to no resolution thereon.

mr. dreier: how are you, mr.

speaker? i ask unanimous consent that the committee on rules be permitted to file a supplemental report to accompany house resolution 425. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. dreier: by the direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 425 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 79, house resolution 425, resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution, it shall be in order to take from the speaker's table the bill, h.r. 2832 to extend the generalized system of preferences and for other purposes, with the senate amendment thereto and consider in the house without intervention of any point of order, a motion offered by the chair of ways and means or his designee that the house concur in the senate amendment. the senate amendment shall be considered as read. the motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member on the

committee on ways and means. the previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motion. section 2, upon the adoption of this resolution, it shall be in order to consider the bill h.r. 3078 to implement the united states-colombian trade promotion agreement. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. the bill shall be debatable for 90 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority committee on ways and means. the previous question shall be considered read without intervening motion without one motion to recommit. section 3, upon the adoption of this resolution, it be be in order to consider the bill h.r. 3079 to implement the united states-panama trade promotion

agreement. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. the bill shall be debatable for 90 minutes with 30 minutes controlled by representative camp of michigan or his designee, 30 minutes controlled by representative levin of michigan and 30 minutes controlled by representative michaud of maine or his designee. pursuant to section 151 of the trade act, the previous question shall be considered on the bill without final passage without intervening motion. section four, on the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider the bill h.r. 3080 to implement the united states-korea free trade agreement. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are

waived. the bill is debatable for 90 minutes with 30 minutes controlled by representative camp or his designee, 30 minutes by representative levin or his designee and 30 minutes controlled by representative michaud of maine or his designee pursuant to the trade act of 1974. the previous question shall be considered on the bill to final passage without intervening motion. section five, house resolution 418 is laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one hour. mr. dreier: for the purpose of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend from worcester, mr. mcgovern, and yield myself such time as i might consume and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. mr. speaker, during consideration of this measure, all time yielded will be for debate purposes only and also, i would like to ask unanimous

consent, mr. speaker, that all members have five legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this resolution. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognize dollars. mr. dreier: on november 6 of 1979, ronald reagan announced his candidacy for president of the united states. and in that speech he saw an accord of free trade among the americas. he wanted to eliminate all barriers for the free flow of goods, services and products among all of the countries in this hemisphere. on october 3 of 2011, president obama sent three trade agreements to capitol hill for consideration. it's been a long time -- i mean 32 years, i guess this coming november 6, which we will mark the anniversary of president

reagan announcing his candidacy for the presidency which he saw this accord and been a difficult struggle to get here, but, mr. speaker, today marks the first step in this last leg of what, as i said, has been an extraordinarily lengthy journey towards passage of our three free trade agreements with colombia, panama and south korea. for four years, workers and consumers in the united states and in all three f.t.a. countries have waited for the opportunities that these three agreements will create. republicans and democrats alike and let me underscore, republicans and democrats alike have worked very hard to bring us to this point. we have done so first and foremost for the sake of job creation and economic growth. we are regularly hearing discussion on both sides of the

aisle about the imperative of creating jobs and getting our economy on track. the president of the united states delivered a speech here to a joint session of congress in which he talked about the need to pass his jobs bill. and mr. speaker, this is a very important component of that proposal that the president talked about when he was here. as i hear a great deal of discussion about lack of willingness on capitol hill to address the president's jobs bill, it's not an all or nothing thing. we are taking the important components that the president is proposed to addressing and we have worked in a bipartisan way and this measure before us is evidence of that. we've done, as i said, passage of these agreements will allow us to have the opportunity to create good jobs for union and non-union americans, who are seeking job opportunities. together, mr. speaker, these

agreements, these agreements will give u.s. workers, businesses, farmers access to $2 trillion, $2 trillion of economic activity and we will, mr. speaker, our workers, union workers and non-union workers, people across this country, will have access to 97 million consumers in these three countries. now, president obama in his address here made it very clear and has said it repeatedly the independent international trade commission has said that in the coming months, we will add a quarter of a million new jobs right here in the united states of america. again, union and non-union jobs and independent international trade commission has projected we will see a quarter of a million, 250,000 new jobs for

our fellow americans seeking job opportunities. jon to explain to anyone in this place why this is so critical for our ailing economy. but those of us who have joined together to finally pass these agreements are working towards something that is even bigger. we are working to restore the bipartisan consensus on the issue of open trade. mr. speaker, eradicating partisan politics on the debate of economic globalization is essential to move our quest forward. these three agreements are enormously important, but, mr. speaker, as you know, there is still much work that remains to be done. i understand that the opponents of economic liable ralization are very well inextension tensioned and i don't fault fl. we are in the midst as we all

know very well, deeply troubling economic times. and it's easy and we want to point the finger of blame and trade is a natural target. i often argue that i have constituents in southern california when they get a hangnail they blame north american free trade agreement on that hangnail. this is a natural target for frustration. and i know there are people who believe that passage of these trade agreements, which according to the i.t.c. would create 250,000 new jobs right here in the united states of america. . . trade is the wrong argument, mr. speaker. the worldwide marketplace, as we all know, is a big, dynamic and complex operation. it offers tremendous opportunity for those who engage in tremendous peril for

those who follow the isolationist path. those who innovate, who aggressively pursue new ideas and new opportunities are able to compete and succeed. the u.s. has proven this, mr. speaker, time and time again. the american entrepreneurial spirit has enabled us to not just succeed but as we all know we are the largest, most dynamic economy on the face of the earth. these agreements will allows us to reaffirm and strengthen that. we all know this, mr. speaker, our country, the united states of america, is the birthplace of google and facebook, of ford and i.b.m., of caterpillar and whirlpool and of coca-cola and ebay. unfortunately over the last several years while the three free trade agreements have

lange wished, the united states of -- languished, the united states of america has stood still. we have let our competitors to chip away at our market share. if we compete, mr. speaker, if we compete the united states of america wins. if we compete we win. but what happens when we take ourselves out of the game, which has been the case for the last several years? we've literally taken ourselves out of the game of breaking down barriers, allowing for the free flow of goods and services and capital. what happens? we lose jobs. we lose market chair and, mr. speaker, we lose our competitive edge. now, i'm not going to say we would not have gone through the terrible economic downturn that we've suffered over the past few years if we had several years ago passed these freegget

-- free trade agreements. if we stepped up to the plate when the negotiations began, mr. speaker, back in 2004 for these agreements, if we stepped up to the plate i think we would have mitigated the pain and suffering the americans are going through the ailing economy that we have. getting our economy back on track and reasserting our american leadership role in the worldwide marketplace will require far more than simply pacific these free trade agreements. -- passing these free trade agreements. mr. speaker, it's a key and very important step. the agreements will open new markets for, as i said, workers and job creators in the united states. and perhaps even more important, it will send a signal to the world that the united states of america is back, open for business. we are once again choosing to

shape -- the united states of america is once again choosing to shape the global marketplace rather than to allow ourselves to be shaped by it. because, mr. speaker, if we don't shape the global marketplace, we will continue to be shaped by that global marketplace. we will also send the very powerful message to our allies that the united states of america is living up toth commitments. you know, mr. speaker, it is utterly shameful, utterly shameful that we have forced three close friends of the united states, two of our own neighbors right here in the americas and one in an extraordinarily strategic region to wait for four long years. our friends and allies who

negotiated with us to wait as long as they have. mr. speaker, one of the things we observed is that the world has taken note. our would-be negotiators, not only on trade agreements but on other issues as well, our would-be trade partners and negotiating partners, as i said, on issues beyond trade have taken note. i don't believe that our credibility will be immediately restored with the passage of these free trade agreements. but, mr. speaker, we will at least begin the process, we'll begin the process of demonstrating credibility on the part of the united states. we will signal that the u.s. is recommitting itself to its partnerships that our word at the negotiating table can be trusted. very sadly over the past several years our partners could come to no other

conclusion other than our word cannot be trusted at the negotiating table because of action taken a few years ago rejecting an opportunity for consideration of these agreements. mr. speaker, this rule puts in place a lengthy debate process during which the tremendous economic and geopolitical benefits of these three trade agreements will be discussed and the misinformation, the misinformation surrounding these agreements will be able to be refuted. that's why i think this is a very important debate. it's vitally important that we have this debate so that the facts can get on the table and the ability to refute specious arguments can be put forward and that's what's going to happen this evening and tomorrow leading up to the votes that we are going to cast. this rule provides, also, for the consideration of trade adjustment assistance, a modest

program that has helped to build that bipartisan consensus that i've been talking about and i believe is essential to our economic recovery. now, i don't believe that the t.a. program is perfect -- t.a.a. program is perfect. meaningful reforms have been incorporated. and most important, most important, mr. speaker, the passage of trade adjustment assistance will in turn help us not just pass the f.t.a.'s but it will help us maintain what i have had as a goal going back two decades ago when we put together a trade working group that has had bipartisan participation. it will allow us to where he build the bipartisan consensus that i think is so important. mr. speaker, that will send a powerful message to the markets, to job creators, to workers in this country, to americans who are seeking job

opportunities and it will send a very important message to our allies and we hope future allies throughout this world. so, mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to come together in a strong bipartisan way and support the rule that will allow us to have a very, very rigorous debate and the underlying agreements and trade adjustment assistance. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time is reserved. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman from california for providing me the customary 30 minutes, and i yield myself five minutes of that time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, today we consider up several trade bills. the rules committee guaranteed sufficient time on each agreement and ensured that the time would be equally divided for those who support and those who oppose each bill. that's the way we should be debating these bills. it's the fair and the right

thing to do, but farpse was not part of the discussion -- fairness was not part of the discussion in the rules committee. instead, we have a rule that gives more time in support of these bills and those who have less legitimate concern about them. if that were not bad enough, this bill waives cut-go. mr. speaker, i strongly for the t.a.a. and g.s.a. bills. it provides companies and workers with fairness and stability and some minimum resources because of those trade agreements. they have earned our support. but i cannot say the same about the free trade agreements and i'd like to focus my remarks on one of them, the colombia f.t.a. mr. speaker, i've gone to colombia seven times over the past 10 years. nearly every one i talk to, the poor, the most vulnerable, those who defend the most basic human rights and dignity, they all believe that the united states stands for human rights, that we stand for justice, and

i'd like to believe that's always true, but not if we pass this f.t.a. colombia is still the most dangerous place in the world to be a trade unionist. each year more labor activists are killed in colombia than the rest of the world combined. a staggering 2,908 union members murdered since 1986. that's about one murder every three days for the past 25 years. 150 in just the past three years. if 150 c.e.o.'s had been assassinated over the past three years, would you still think colombia is a good place to invest? in 2010, 51 trade unionists were murdered. 21 survived attempts on their lives, 338 received death threats and seven disappeared, their bodies may never be found. 40 had been murdered since president santos took office. as for justice, well, in colombia that's still just a

dream. human rights watch just released a study that looked at convictions in cases of murdered trade unionists in the past 4 1/2 years. they found virtually no progress in convigs in these killings. just six out of 195 cases and not a single solitary conviction for more than the 60 attempted murders and 1,500 death threats during that same period. there's a name for them, mr. speaker. it's called complete and total impunity. mr. speaker, just look at the faces of six of the 23 unionists murdered so far this year. this man at the top right here, luis diaz. he was a regional leader of the university workers union and a security guard at the monterria in cordaba. it's controlled by paramilitaries, drug

traffickers and many local officials, judges, prosecutors and police are corrupt or benefit from the violence. they are also the most likely parties there to profit from the colombia f.t.a. another fellow here, jorge de los rios. he exposed damage to communities by open pit mining. on june 8, he was shot several times on the campus school. this young man right here, dionis vergara. carlos castro, over here, murdered on may 23. shot in the neck by two armed men. he was 41 and the father of three. here is hernan pinto drinking a cup of coffee. he took the lead in the farm worker struggle. and silverio sanchez, just 37

years old, mr. speaker. a school teacher. he died from burns on 80% of his body from an explosive. mr. speaker, these men were husbands, fathers, brothers and sons. if we don't stand up for them then we also abandon the children, families, workers and communities they left behind, those who continue to fight for labor rights, human rights and basic human dignity. as the old song goes, mr. speaker, which side are you on? i ask unanimous consent to enter the human rights watch study into the record, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: thank you very much. mr. speaker, i yield myself 30 second to say colombia has gone through incredible tragedy over the past several years. it's been absolutely horrible and the suffering that my colleague from worcester has just shown is very, very disturbing. i think we should note that we have seen an 85% decline of the murder rate.

there are cities in this country that has a higher murder rate that exists in colombia today and we should also observe and i yield myself 15 seconds, mr. speaker, we should also make it very, very clear that it is safer to be a union member, a union leader in colombia because of the protections provided by the government than it is the average citizen. let's solidify those gains and that's exactly what these agreements will do. with that i'm happy to yield two minutes to a very, very thoughtful individual committed to the trade agenda, my good friend from illinois, mrs. biggert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mrs. biggert: thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the chairman for yielding to me. today i rise with great enthusiasm because at long last the house and senate are poised to act on the most bipartisan economically compelling jobs bill of the obama presidency. by supporting this rule and ratifying these agreements we are taking a huge step towards

leveling the playing field for u.s. goods and services and in doing so we can create hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs right here in america. and thanks to the pending free trade agreements with colombia, panama and south korea, the tariffs on many american products will come down immediately. giving a massive boost to our economy at a time when we need it more than ever. all told, these free trade agreements would support an estimated quarter million american jobs and increase exports by 13 million dollars. in my home state of illinois will be among the first to benefit. illinois ranks sixth in the nation in terms of total exports. 109 companies in my district alone export abroad and local exports support nearly 65,000 jobs in just dupage, cook and wilkes county. this is not just boeing, navastar and kraft, there is

also a handful of employees. exporters are small businesses exporting everything from computer chips to financial services. . trade with south korea supports 1,137 jobs and that number has the potential to rise dramatically after this week's agreements go into effect. imagine that impact multiplied hundreds of times across congressional districts throughout the nation. mr. speaker, passing these agreements is one of the commonsense, low cost and one of the most economic sound things congress to do now to boost job growth and now that the president has september the agreements to capitol hill, we must act immediately. i urge my colleagues to support this rule and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i want to give myself time to respond. in 2009, the total number of

murder in mexico was 23 labor leaders and six priests were targeted and murdered in los angeles so far this year because of the work in their community. and the gentleman would be up in arms about that, but that's the reality in colombia. i yield to the gentleman from new york, mrs. slaughter. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. slaughter: i cannot state strongly enough i'm opposed to the three free trade bills we are considering today. on behalf of the businesses in western new york i implore to vote against this. none of the free trade bills we voted on in the last 20 years were designed to protect american manufacturing and american jobs. they were designed to protect

multinational corporations operating in the towers of new york, london and shanghai. these companies care less where the goods are made so long as we sell them all over the world. we have different responsibilities. we must care where goods are made. we must care to do everything we can to make sure they are made in the u.s.a. and i think many people would be shocked to know that there is little in the current trade agreement to present our own trading partners from developing new regulations that we have done all these years making it harder for us to sell goods in their country. using the nontariff barriers they could place restrictions on american-made cars and they do in order to stop them from being sold until south korea. do you know how many american-made car dealers sell cars in south korea?

>> 26. there is something wrong with that picture. this is not free-flowing trade. we are restricted. but under these proposed free trade agreements, we can't do a thing. and they call it a good deal. currently, the barriers are playing a vital role in preventing u.s.-made cars being sold in japan. for every one car that the u.s. exports to japan, japan exports at least 180 vehicles to the united states. that is one to 180. u.s. exporters in japan were limited to 8,000 cars. that's all we could sell in japan. quote, a variety of nontariff barriers have impeded assets to japan's markets. sales remain low and is a serious concern.

but despite that, the government's right hand is going to sign more trade deals that do exactly the same thing. it defies common sense. instead of voting for a new trade bill that will ensure a fair playing field for american manufacturers, h.r. 1479, that will require the u.s. government to have tariff and nontariff barriers in negotiating agreements with another country and not reduce our tariffs until that has been done. this would guarantee that american manufacturers have the same opportunity as foreign competition. may i have another minute? mr. mcgovern: i yield an additional minute. ms. slaughter: it's time to have a snap-back provision. it's a no-nonsense approach and

bipartisan in the house and has been endorsed by american trade coalition, united steel workers and auto workers even though they are the only union that will benefit somewhat by the korean pact. congress needs to wake up and make countries like china and germany who is going to dominate the green manufacturing. we pioneered here. over and over again we have waited and watched and most recent ones that trouble me is general electric, giving away the -- the intellectual property, airplane engines to china and gm forcing to give its technology of the volt to be able to sell there. mr. speaker, the time is now. we aren't going to maintain superpower status if we give each other hair cuts and serve each other dinner. we have to make things here at

home so our businesses can benefit from fair trade. i yield back. mr. dreier: i yield myself 15 seconds, free trade is fair trade and interesting to note that the united auto workers support the agreement that exists and i concur with my friend from rochester in arguing that we must enforce the agreements that we have, including on intellectual property issues. with that, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from california, ranking democrat on the education and work force committee, mr. miller. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. miller: mr. speaker, members of the house, one of our most important responsibilities as elected officials is to promote and protect american jobs and values. when it comes to trade, jobs and values go hand in hand. to promote american jobs, we

must promote american values. we do this by ensuring our workers are protected with countries who keep wages artificially low and suppressing the democratic rights, to speak out, the right to organize, the right to bargain, a better life without fear. and so as we now consider the trade agreement with colombia, what do you get when you exercise your right in colombia today? death threats and death squad activities against you and your family. colombia is the most dangerous place on earth for workers to cheers their rights. during the last eight years, 570 union members were assassinated. 10% of the thousands of killings over the last 25 years have been resolved. the frontier is undenable. i appreciate that they have brought labor rights into the equation and agreed to a labor action plan requiring them to

change labor laws and fight violence. but the plan is flawed. it only demands results on paper, it does not demand real change. colombia could have a record year for assassinations and still meet the requirements of the plan. and sure enough, real change is yet to come to come yeah. since president santos took office last year, 48 trade unionists have been murdered, 16 since the labor action plan was announced. this past june, i met with union leaders about his concerns with the free trade agreement and told me that he was not provided protection. that the system was still in place despite commitments made by the colombian government to remedy both. and two weeks later, this leader received death threats. the message said if you continue to continue problems, you will

die. under these conditions that we are asked to approve this deal. if we approve the deal now, any incentive for colombia to truly improve will vanish. now is not the time to reward violence with impunity with the sale of approval by the united states. the deal with colombia is neither fair nor free. if they seek out for higher wages, they will die. that's not freedom. telling american workers to compete, that's not fair to our workers or values. stand for american values and reject the colombian free trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: at this time, i'm happy to yield two minutes to one of our thoughtful, hard working new members, the gentleman from from kansas, mr.

huelskamp. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. huelskamp: every day that goes by without these agreements is a missed opportunity. hundreds of missed opportunities have passed because of years of delay, which is why we cannot afford to waste one more day. the fact is today in south korea, for example, beef costs nearly $24 a pound. pork costs nearly $10 a pound. these facts can only work to the benefit of u.s. producers and korean consumers. when america is starved for jobs and economic growth, agreements with colombia, panama and south korea present an occasion for washington to address these challenges. up to a quarter million new jobs and $100 billion boost to the country's g.d.p. which is a glimmer of hope and not a dime has to be spent to create good american jobs. for america to be part of the

21st century economy, it is not enough to simply buy american, we have to sell american. america's he ag, energy production makes america a trading partner. americans can compete and we can win. when the ambassador of vietnam toured a hog farm in my district, he was impressed and astonished by the safety and cleanlyness of our facilities. that anything naled to me that america and kansas in particular, has much to offer the world. this is an opportunity for nations seeking more affordable safe and goods with jobs and economic growth. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this rule and underlying agreements. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from connecticut, ms. delauro.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. delauro: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to this rule and the trade agreements underlying it, particularly the agreement with colombia. nothing is more important to our economy right now than creating jobs and putting america back to work. and yet, we have now before us three nafta-style trade agreements with south korea, colombia and panama, that we know from experience will lead to more jobs being shipped overseas and greater trade deficits. in fact, the economic policy institute has estimated this agreement with colombia will result in the loss of 55,000 american jobs. the colombia deal is particularly gentleladying because it will do more than just destroy american jobs, but bring into question whether our nation is a defender of human rights and workers' rights

around the world. more unionists are killed every year in colombia than in the rest of the world combined and last year, saw 51 murders as the afl-cio noted if 51 c.e.o.o had been murdered last year in colombia, this deal would be on a very slow track indeed. this year, we have seen 23 more men and women killed. human rights watch reviewed these and hundreds of other cases of anti--union violence there and concluded that colombian authorities have, quote, made no progress in obtaining convictions in killing in the past 4 1/2 years, end quote. only 6% of the 2,860 murders since 1986 have there been any conviction. that means 94% of the killers are walking away.

worse, 16 of the murders this year have occurred after the labor action plan put forward by the administration and the colombian government was put into effect. this action plan is a if anything leaf, pure and simple. it is not legally binding and makes promises that the colombian government will step up its protections but demands no concrete results before this free trade agreement is implemented. according to the national labor school, if congress passes the free trade agreement, quote, the limited willingness for change will be further reduced and action plan will be turned into a new frustration for colombian workers in addition to causing other serious consequences, end quote. more violence and murders against trade unionists and will be the cost of doing business. we should not be sanking such a system of violence, terror and abuse. we have a responsibility to protect working families in

colombia who are exercising and only exercising their fundamental rights and we have a responsibility to stand up for our american working families who do not need to see any more good, well-paying jobs shipped overseas. i urge my colleagues to oppose this rule and this unconscionable agreement and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i yield myself one. we are going to respond to these arguments that have been made. we've been dealing with the armed forces, the farc, the revolutionary armed forces of colombia, the paramilitary's and serious, serious problems that have existed in colombia. no one is trying to white wash or dismiss the serious

challenges that exist there. but it is important to note that nearly 2,000, nearly 2,000 labor leaders in colombia, mr. speaker, have around-the-clock bodyguards protecting them and in colombia it is safer to be a unionist than it is the average citizen. so i'm not saying that things are perfect. no one is making that claim. but when we've seen an 85% decrease in the murder rate since 2002, when we've seen more murders take place, tragically in some of our cities, than have taken place in some areas of colombia, that is something that has to be seen as progress. i yield myself an additional 15 seconds, mr. speaker. to say that i believe we can in a bipartisan way work to address these very important issues. and we are going to do just that. we are going to ensure that this kind of agreement effectively addresses these problems. my friend, mr. farr, and i have sat together in the office of

the fiss -- fiscalia in colombia, i yield myself an additional 15 seconds, we have sat and pain stakingly, with several of our colleagues, democrats and republicans alike, we have gone through these pending cases to bring about a resolution on this issue and in just a few minutes i'm going to be yielding to my friend, mr. farr, to talk specifically about this and the challenges we had. with that, mr. speaker, i'm happy to yield a minute and a half to my very good friend, the chair of the committee on foreign affairs who represents what she calls the gateway to the americas, i think los angeles comes pretty close to that, too, but miami, mr. speaker is the gateway to the americas and they're very ably represented by my colleague, ms. ros-lehtinen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. ros-lehtinen: i thank the speaker and i thank the esteemed chairman of the rules committee for highlighting what a transformation colombia has made in recent years, thanks to the strong leadership from the

top down to the cop on the beat. if the american people are listening to this debate they would think that colombia's a war zone equal to iraq and afghanistan. and i believe that those members have not gone to colombia in many a year. but i rise in strong support of the free trade agreements with colombia, panama and south korea. i thank my good friend from california for his strong leadership on these three trade deals that we've been waiting so many years, mr. speaker, for them to be sent to congress. i'm pleased that at last we have the chance to vote on them. because their passage will mean american businesses will finally have a competitive, level playing field. and to give you just one example. american industrial exports to panama, one of our sister countries to south florida, we have so many panamaan-americans living in our -- panamaan americans living in our area,

now face tariffs as high as 81%. but almost all of these will be eliminated thanks to this drade agreement. by the administration's own estimate, mr. speaker, the u.s.-south korea free trade agreement, that one alone will generate around 70,000 new american jobs and as the rules committee chairman pointed out, south florida is indeed the gateway to latin america. if i could ask for an additional -- mr. dreier: i would like to yield my friend an additional 30 seconds. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you. we will see significant benefits in south florida and not just for large companies but for small and medium sized ones as well. let's talk about colombia. flower importers in the area estimate that they will save $2 million per month in duties that they now are paying on imports for colombia. and also we should point out how important these trade agreements are, because these three allies are of great importance to our national security. you can't ask for a better

partners, for peace and making sure that we have democracies in the region than south korea, colombia and panama. i thank the gentleman for the time and i'm pleased to support the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself 20 seconds. mr. speaker, if colombia is so safe, then why do 2,000 labor leaders need round-the-clock protection? why are there nearly five million internally displaced people? and over one million colombian refugees in neighboring countries? it's because they're fleeing the violence and civil unrest. i yield to mr. michaud. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. mitchell: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to -- mr. michaud: thank you, mr. speaker, and i want to thank my friend for yielding to me. this makes in order three

nafta-style free trade agreements. one with korea, one with panama and one with colombia. all of which -- all of which i opposed. i want to focus my remarks at this time on the trade agreement with colombia because it hits so close to me at home. you will hear from members that feel passionate by will colombia from their experience in that country. they support the free trade agreement and i respect their perspective. but there are some of us who feel just as passionately about our brothers and sisters who are killed in colombia just because they are members of a union. and we oppose the agreement. i am a proud card-carrying member of the united steel members union, a member of the union for over 39 years and served as vice president of local 152. workers in colombia are being killed for the exact same thing. since january 23 unionists have

been assassinated. 51 were killed last year. more than the rest of the world combined. just for carrying a union card like mine. nearly 3,000 workers have been killed in colombia or the past 25 years -- over the past 25 years. the administration's labor action plan is intended to address some of the decade's old problem of violence against unionists and a lack of impunity for the perpetrators but it falls far short from doing so. first, there has not been meaningful collaboration with a colombian union to make sure the action plan is being implemented thoroughly. second, the attorney generals office, according to the human rights watch, hasn't made any progress in investigating the murder cases over the last four years. ensuring that murder investigations are conducted and completed and the real killers are brought to justice is a critical component of protecting our union brothers and sisters in colombia. so far the government hasn't done it. and third, employers continue

to force workers into collective pacts so they cannot form unions. by passing this f.t.a., congress is blessing this lack of rights and this long standing trend of violence. we are choosing to stand in solidarity with a government that can't protect its own people, instead the people who need the protecting. i urge my colleagues to think about it. the fact, if they had a card like this and if they were a leader in a union in colombia they would be a target. we should not reward this country's disregard for basic rights with an f.t.a. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the rule and vote no on the colombian free trade agreement. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i yield myself 30 seconds to say that it's obvious that colombia's not a safe place. i'm not claiming that at all. and there have been murders

that have taken place there. it still is -- still is a very dangerous spot. but it's important to note that a mr. gomez who is the leader of one of the three main labor organizations in colombia has said that the labor agreements included in this package are the single greatest achievement for social justice in the last 50 years of colombia's history. we still have a long way to go, mr. speaker. we still have a long way to go. but progress is being made. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. mr. defazio: this is momentous.

we're finally talking about jobs on the floor of the house of representatives. and the united states of america is number one. let's have a little enthusiasm. we're number one. we're number one. and we want to make certain that we continue that status. what are we number one in? we are number one in exporting jobs to foreign lands. over the last 20 years. every day we lose 1,370 manufacturing jobs because there are failed trade policies and guess what? these agreements are duplicates of all failed past trade agreements. now, the chairman of the committee says we're going to have lengthy debate and we will dispel misinformation. well, the first misinformation is that we're having a lengthy debate here on the floor of the house. 4 1/2 hours for three trade agreements, 270 minutes, boy, i a -- boy, a lot of time. not exactly like we're burning the midnight oil around here or

working five days a week. couldn't we have a little more time? fast track would have allowed for 20 hours on each of the two fast track agreements. so that would have been 40 hours. no, we're going to have 165 minutes by the proponents to dispel the misinformation and 105 by those of us who are opposed to these job-killing trade agreements. that's fair. 165 on their side, 105 on our side because their arguments are honest -- our arguments are honest and theirs aren't. that is how things break around here. that's clengy debate. let's talk about colombia. in colombia the average income is $3,200. think of all the u.s. manufactured goods those colombians are going to buy with $3,200 of income. whoa. thousands of americans go to work. does that remind you of the myth about nafta? no, this is about yet one more platform to get an access of

abused labor, unorganized labor under colombian law, to provide -- to send goods back to the united states of america. mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds. mr. defazio: i thank the gentleman. and then there's the issue of, yes, we will get some moring a kilt exports. insignificant to our industry. won't employ any americans. may employ some more people who are in this country to harvest the crop. but it will cut dramatically into the principle form of employment in colombia. there will be a 75% drop potentially in rural employment in colombia and where will they turn? the noted economist says they will turn from traditional farming and farming for their own economy to growing coca. so not only are we going to facilitate the collapse of their agricultural economy like we did mexico, we're going to facilitate the drug lords with this crumby agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i yield myself 30 seconds to say to my friend that we have been debating this issue since the negotiations

began in 2004. time and time again on this house floor we've had very rigorous debate on these agreements. and i will acknowledge we do have problems with job creation and economic growth. what this measure does, mr. speaker, is it eliminates the barrier for union and nonunion workers and farmers in this country to have access to new markets. on august 15, on august 15 colombia, because we have done nothing, i yield myself an additional 0 seconds, mr. speaker. on august 15, because we have done nothing, our colombian friends negotiated a free trade agreement with the canadians. with our good friends to the north, the canadians. and guess what, mr. speaker? in literally one month there was an 18.5% increase in canadian wheat exports to colombia. this is the kind of opportunity that we've been prevented from having and we've been debating this for five years. it's high time that we vote and

that's exactly what we're going to do, after hours of debate, both tonight and tomorrow. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself 25 seconds. to respond to the gentleman from california. he mentioned a labor leader in his remarks before as saying how wonderful the labor action plan was. i should point out to him that last monday, october 3, that same labor leader joined a press conference to express his frustration with the colombian government's failure to implement the labor action plan. i would also point out that the colombian labor school also has issued a -- launched a statement about how the colombian government has failed to enact labor action plans. i don't care what the canadians do. the united states of america, we're supposed to protect human rights. i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from illinois, ms. schakowsky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from illinois is recognized for three minutes. .

ms. schakowsky: thank you, mr. speaker and thank you for your tireless commitment to promoting human rights. i rise in strong opposition to this rule and three pending trade agreements. the bush-negotiated agreements expand the nafta trade model which is destructive to the american economy and harmful to the workers in the united states and abroad. instead of considering a jobs bill, we are voting on trade deals that the economic policy institute eliminates will eliminate or displace 200,000 american jobs. in particular, i believe we should not extend additional trade privileges to colombia without seeing significant progress on human rights and it is not sufficient just to say, well, colombia is a dangerous place to live.

colombia has a long-standing legacy of serious abuses and despite positive rhetoric by the santo administration, we have yet to see it. it includes language to punish abuses, but it is not legally binding or nor is it included. we need to see results before granting preferential trade treatment. under this agreement, if violence and impunity continues, the u.s. will have no mechanism for holding the colombian government accountable under the labor action plan. human rights abuses are not just a thing of the past in colombia. recently published statistics show that colombia is still the deadliest place in the world to be a trade unionist with 51 murders in 2010. 25 trade unionists have been

murdered so far in 2011 and 16 since this labor action plan wept into effect. and this cycle of violence is going to continue because the colombian government has made little progress towards prosecuting perpetrators and ending impunity. the action plan reward promises, not progress. mr. speaker, the considering of any trade deal with colombia is inappropriate until we see tangible and sustained results. as the afl-cio president has said and think about this, he has said, quote, we have no doubt that if 51 c.e.o.'s had been murdered in colombia last year, the deal would be on a very slow track indeed, end quote. i urge my colleagues to oppose this rule and the three under hiring trade -- underlying trade

agreements. i thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i yield myself 30 seconds to say that my friend from illinois is absolutely right, colombia is not a safe place, but we have seen an 85% reduction since 2002 in the murder rate among trade unionists. it is not perfect and still a dangerous place but that is progress. i would like to say to my friend to worcester, mr. gomez is still in support of the free trade agreement that he mentioned in his remarks and he voiced frustration over the implementation of agreements. that is something that takes place in a free society. implementation of this will help with that enforcement. with that, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: my privilege to yield two minutes to the gentleman from michigan, ranking

member on the ways and means committee, mr. levin. mr. levin: the bush administration negotiated three flawed f.t.a.'s. it violates a fundamental principle of sound overall trade policy two-way trade. it locked in auto trade, the source of three-quarters of the american trade deficit with korea. last year, urged by congressional democrats, they have opened up the korean market for auto products made in america. these changes would not have happened if the republicans continually insisted the f.t.a. had passed as originally negotiated. panama f.t.a. originally negotiated by the bush administration failed to carry out another key provision of

sound trade policy incorporating international standards and worker rights. congressional democrats and the obama administration successfully worked with the government of panama to correct these flaws and also took the necessary, concrete steps to change its role as a tax haven. the colombian f.t.a. fell far short of addressing the long-standing concerns about the specific challenges in colombia to worker rights and the persistence of violence and impunity. the obama administration and the new santos administration undertook the importance of discussions culminating in an action plan relating to labor rights. there remains shortcomings in the plan's implementation. given congressional republican insistence, it is completely lacking any link in the implementation bill to the

action plan necessary to assure its present implementation and future enforcement actions under the f.t.a. in view of those conditions, i oppose the colombia f.t.a. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: may i inquire of my good friend and rules committee member how many speakers? mr. mcgovern: mr. mcdermott and then we'll close. mr. dreier: i have a couple of speakers. and let me say -- how much time is remaining on each side. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california has 7 1/4 minutes remaining. the gentleman from massachusetts has 4 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. mcgovern: i will reserve. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, at this time, what i would like to do, i mentioned the bipartisan nature of this and to stress that and

being the only one who will yield time to democrats, i yield 2 1/2 minutes to my very good friend and a man with whom i spent time in colombia on numerous occasions, the the gentleman from car mel, california, a peace corps volunteer, mr. farr. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. farr: i look forward to this debate. i lived in colombia and i have a different perspective. we have to put it in perspective, latin american market is important. if you take brazil, mexico and colombia, they equal the entire european trade and exceed the trade with japan and china. it's a very important market. colombia is a country that you heard a lot about, particularly on crime and big drug production

and a lot of crime, killing of labor leaders, but colombia is one of the few countries in the world that keeps track of crime against people who happen to be unionists, not necessarily they are killed because they are unionists, but because they are killed and happen to be a member of a union. we don't do that in the united states. come yeah has set up a separate minimumes try to put judges, prosecutors, investigators, everybody in place in every single one of the departments in colombia. we don't do that in the united states. colombia has created a protection system for unionists, including people who want to form unions and advocate for unions, teachers and retireys of unions who may be threatened. we don't do that in the united states. they have set up a hotline, full disclosure and do it anonymously, email in or call in

anonymously to the government reporting any violations. we don't do that in the united states. there are a lot of issues we ought to recognize. but most of all, we have to talk about this as american jobs. we sell a lot of things that we make here in america to colombia. let's take catter pillar, for example. canada has adopted a free trade agreement. europe is about to adopt a free trade agreement with colombia. our goods will be more expensive in colombia and they won't buy from us. they will be buying heavy equipment from europe and from brazil and canada, countries that have entered into a free trade agreement. let's preserve american jobs. this is a huges porters. it's the number one country to

export produce to. let's have the debate. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. the gentleman from california? mr. dreier: i have another speaker and i'm going to close. mr. mcgovern: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from washington from the committee on ways and means, mr. mcdermott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, in my district, one out of three or maybe one out of four people make their job some way in relationship to foreign trade, either directly through the seaport or through the companies that operate in my district or district of eastern washington. all of us in seattle know that trade is not bad if it's done right, and that's really the

issue that we're debating here tonight under this rule, which i support. two of the agreements that we have before us, korea and panama, are examples of doing it right. the bush administration went in and signed agreements that were flawed and in fact were held up and then were renegotiated andr in my opinion, a good place for the trade issue for these two countries. we rejected those flawed agreements because we wanted to do it right. now with the new rewritten agreements. in panama's case, it is no longer a tax haven. it was the best tax haven on the face of the earth before. we have a trade agreement and implemented tax agreement that will make it transparent and no longer let it happen. unfortunately, colombia is a glass that you can hold up and

say is it half full or half empty. there are problems and many of us have been resistant to this for a long time and i will resist tonight because, and most importantly, colombia has moved. they made beautiful speeches. speeches don't change anything. my old friend, ronald reagan, who admired greatly said trust, but verify. when republicans refused to put into this trade agreement that the work action plan would be included, they sent the message, we're not serious and that's why you are going to get so much opposition. i urge the adoption of the rule and debate the issues later. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. dreier: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognizeed for two minutes. mr. meeks: while we have -- meek meek mr. meeks: >> and we have moved forward and trade is never just about economics but our relationships with other nations, our allies, about strengthening the rule of law and deepening ties. a report a recent report by the council of foreign relations said it well, trade has been a major strategic instrument of foreign policy and binds together countries in a broad and economic network that constitutes a bulwark against conflict. let me talk specifically about the colombia free trade agreement. many of my colleagues have

talked about the violent past in colombia and having traveled extensively in colombia, i can tell you personally that colombia is not what it used to be, far from it. even if it is not where it wants to be just yet, there has been major progress in colombia and this has been with a tremendous amount of cooperation with and between our great nations. the agreement with colombia certainly has its many economic benefits for america. we are leveling the playing field for american business. but beyond that, what i want to emphasize the role that the agreement plays in strengthening the rule of law. the agreed-upon action plan between the obama administration and the santos administration brings about important changes that labor groups in colombia have sought to so lid file for years. several labor organizations have made statements about the

importance of the action plan. one of the federations lauded the action plan saying it is one of the results of advancement of labor and guarantee of freedom of association and the federation and others have stated that this action plan will continue to fight against impunity. . i am pleased to say that just last month the obama administration announced that colombia has fully complied with its commitment under labor action plans, that the same time the state department has also notified the colombians meeting statutory criteria for human rights and the call for obligations of the u.s. assistance funds for the colombian armed forces and i thank the gentleman for yielding. let's pass this agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts

has 2 1/4 minutes. the gentleman from california has 21 fourts minutes -- 2 1/4 minutes. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, congress was right in refusing to take up the colombia f.t.a. when it was signed in 2006. supporters of the f.t.a. now talk about those years as colombia's dark past but they supported the f.t.a. then just as they do now. the house was right to block the f.t.a. in 2008, supporters then ex tolled the virtues of the government, but colombia's new attorney general has revealed hind boggling corruption in every agency of the government. criminal acts were the norm. i believe the santos government is colombia's best chance to bring about much-needed reforms and institutional change. i want him to succeed. but goodwill is not enough. we've had promises before. we need times to see if good intentions result in concrete change of labor and human rights. this is tito diaz. he was a mayor.

in 2003 he denounced the links between public officials and paramilitaries. for this he was tortured and murdered. his body was found strung up like a crucifix, shot 11 times, his fingernails ripped out, his knees plungened and his i.d. card taped to his forehead. his son carried on his father's work, leading the victim's movement. he survived four assassination attempts but finally fled the country. others took his place. since 2006 five more victims rights leaders have been murdered. two this year. this is reality for colombia's human rights defenders. 29 of whom have been killed this year. 51 priests murdered in the past decade. six so far this year. in this violent reality, colombia workers attempt to exercise their rights. i ask my colleagues, think about the lives, all the brave labor leaders, human rights

defebbeders, religious and community leaders, do not turn your backs on them. demand concrete change on the ground before approving the colombia f.t.a. you know that that is the right thing to do. if the united states of america stands for anything we ought to stand out loud and foresquare for human rights. let's remember that as we deliberate on the colombia f.t.a. it is just wrong to rationalize or explain away the human rights situation in colombia. we are better than that. we should demand more on behalf of the workers and the human rights defnders in colombia. vote no on the rule and vote no on the colombia f.t.a. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized for 2 1/4 minutes. mr. dreier: i yield myself the balance of the time. mr. speaker, i'd like to get the debate back to where it was. we have before us four pending issues. we have trade agreements with colombia, panama, south korea and we have the very important trade adjustment assistance. mr. speaker, our fellow americans are hurting. job creation and economic growth is something that democrats and republicans alike are talking about.

i was listening to the words of one of the protest leaders up in new york and this guy was saying that the protests are about economic and social justice and he said, working class americans can no longer be ignored. now, mr. speaker, this measure that is before us, according to the international trade commission, will create 250,000 new jobs here in the united states of america. i argue that if we had had these agreements in place, the pain that so many of our fellow americans are feeling at this moment would not be as great as it has been because for half a decade, half a decade these agreements have been languishing, waiting to be considered. now, the last two speakers i yielded to happen to be democrats. i'm very proud of working -- having worked closely together with sam farr and gregory meeks on these agreements. there are lots of other people who have been involved and worked tirelessly for years.

over the last two decades i've had a working group that i started with former ways and means committee chairman, bill archer, going all the way up now to working with dave camp and kevin brady and wally herger and others. democrats have joined with our bipartisan trade working group because there are democrats and republicans who want us to get back to the bipartisan approach to our global leadership role. they want to open up markets around the world for the united states of america and with passage of these three agreements, mr. speaker, we're going to have access to $2 trillion of economic activity and 97 million consumers. mr. speaker, we need to support this rule, we're going to have debate going into this evening and we're going to have debate throughout the day tomorrow. let's support the rule and with that i move the previous question and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman's time has expired. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: on that i ask for a roll call. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman requests the yeas and nays. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are 281, the nays are 128, the resolution is agreed to. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. pursuant to house resolution 419 and rule 18, the chair declares

the committee in the whole for further consideration of h.r. 2250. the clerk: a bill to provide additional time for the administrator of the environmental protection agency to achieve standards for industrial, commercial and institutional boilers, process heaters and incinerators and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: will the gentleman from texas, mr. thornberry, retake the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 2250. when the committee of the whole rose earlier today a request for a recorded vote on amendment number 3 printed in congressional record by the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee, had been postponed. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in the congressional record on which further proceedings were postponed in

the following order. amendment number 11 by mr. waxman of california. amendment number 18 by mr. connolly of virginia. amendment number 7 by mr. markey of massachusetts. amendment number 2 by mr. edwards of maryland -- by ms. edwards of maryland. amendment number 1 by ms. schakowsky of illinois. amendment number 12 by mr. ellison of minnesota. amendment number 19 by mr. welch of vermont and amendment number 3 by ms. jackson lee of texas. the chair will reduce to two minutes the time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 11 printed in the congressional record offered by the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 11 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. waxman of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote.

[captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 164, the nays are 254, the amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 18 offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, on which further proceedings were postponed, on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 18,

printed in the congressional record, offered by mr. connolly of virginia. the chair: a recorded vot has been requested. those in favor of a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is requested. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 168, the nays are 50,

the amendment ♪ agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number seven printed in the congressional record and offered by the gentleman, mr. markey, and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 7 offered by mr. markey of massachusetts. the chair: a recorded vote is requested. those in support of a recorded vote will rise. a you have is -- a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 162.

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 166, the nays are 252, the amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number two printed in the congressional record, offered by ms. edwards of maryland, on which a the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number two, offered by ms.e wards of maryland. the chair: members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 157, the noes are 260, the amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 1 printed in congressional record offered by the gentlelady from illinois, ms. schakowsky, on which further proceedings were postponed and which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in the congressional record offered by ms. schakowsky of illinois. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 168 f 69, the noes are 249, the amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 12 offered by the gentleman from minnesota, mr. ellison, on which further

proceed, were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 12 offered by mr. ellison of minnesota. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 154, the noes are 261, the amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 19 printed in the congressional record offered by the gentleman from vermont, mr. welch, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 19 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. welch of vermont. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote.

[captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 169, the nays are 249. the amendment is not adopted.

the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 3 printed in the congressional record offered by the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee, on which further proceed, were postpone and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 printed in the congressional record offered by ms. jackson lee of texas. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-man vote. -- two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are -- the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 156, the nays are 262, the amendment is not adopted. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i move that the committee now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. the chair: the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h r. 2250 and directs me to report it has come to no resolution throp. the speaker pro tempore: the committee of the whole house on the state of the union has had under consideration h.r. 2250 and has come to no resolution thereon.

the house will be in order. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on the motion to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote of the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the number of votes incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to the suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1263 as amended. the chair: the clerk -- the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 153, h.r. 1263, a bill to amend the service members'

civil relief act to provide certain surviving spouses with pr texts relating to mortgages and mortgage foreclosures. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. runyan, and the gentleman from california, mr. filner, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. runyan: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. runyan: thank, mr. speaker. one of the top duties of the committee on veterans affairs is to help enforce and improve service members civil relief act or scra, as it is designed to relieve economic burdens on military personnel on active duty status. it is designed to postpone or suspend certain obligations during their period of active duty and does this in part by regulating certain legal actions against military personnel.

h.r. 1263, as ameppeded, makes several changes to strengthen the current protections as it may -- and it is my pleasure to recognize for as much time as he may consume, mr. stutzman, chair of the subcommittee, to discuss these. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. stutzman: i thank the gentleman from new jersey for yielding. i want to thank ranking member filner and mr. braley for helping us move this piece of legislation to improve the service members civil relief act. earlier this year, allegations surfaced of mortgage violations of the scra. it was alleged that they were unlawfully foreclosing on service members' homes and

charges interest rates above the 6% cap required by scra. the full committee held an oversight hearing to review these allegations and receive testimony from captain jonathan rowels and mrs. squlea rowels about the trouble they'd had with j.p. morgan chase when they tried to assert their rights under scra. they commented when they called thele to free number provided by the bank, their employees were woefully inadqut in their knowledge of scra and there didn't seem to be anyone in charge to ensure the bank was complying with the rules. in response to this hearing and committees' continued oversight of the abuses, section two of this bill clarifies requirements for them to comply with provisions and maximum interest rates. it requires all lending institutions affected by scra

to employ or designate an scra compliance officer. this will make it clear that all banks and other lending institutions must take scra seriously and have at least one person responsible to ensure their institution's compliance. the section further requires banks to have annual assets of $10 billion, to have ale to-free hotline for service members to call and ask questions about their mortgage and scra. i want to thank mr. johnson of ohio for originally proposing this provision in h.r. 2329. sections one and three expands foreclosure protections under scra for service member and surviving spouses. the section prohibits foreclosure and -- this section prohibits foreclosure within 12 months of a service member coming off of active duty or for a surviving spouse, 12 months following the service member's death on active duty or as a result of service connected injury.

when a service member separates from the armed services, they need sufficient time to establish good economic footing to be successful. some military families experience difficulties, often related to owning a home where the service member is stationed in the transition from the military to the civilian world. by providing this expansion, we will be providing more time and options for estimate -- for an estimated 9,000 service members who are estimated to be facing foreclosure every year. these are important protections that help our service members and their families who already have given so much in defense of our country and for our freedoms. once again, i thank the chairman ff oh v.a. committee and the ranking member for moving this bill forward and i urge all members to support h.r. 1263 as amended and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. runyan: i urge all my colleagues to join me in

supporting this legislation and i reserve the plans of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. waxman: i yield myself such time as i macon -- mr. filner: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. filner: we know how banks foreclosed on military family the most notable case that of captain rowels and his family who testified movingly before our our -- before our committee. now we have news that some of the biggest banks and mortgage company have defrauded veterans by charging illegal fees in their home loans to add to their profits. i think some folks who kid that -- who did that did it knowingly, did it against the law and ought to be in jail today. when a service member separates from the armed services they need sufficient time to establish good economic footing to be successful.

at times, military families have had a difficult time making a transition from the military to the civilian world. therefore, we ought to provide enough time for them to work with their lender, get a new loan if necessary or in worst case scenario, sell their home. a home is often a veteran's largest financial asset and they should have an opportunity to capitalize on their equity and avoid a negative mark on their credit history when they have the means to do so. this will extend mortgage foreclosure for a year for those separating from service and extend those to our service member's widows. it also requires a requirement for lending institutions with over $10 million in assets to have a compliance officer and a toll free number for veterans to call. we should require lending institutions to be informed about the protections for our military and have a number that they can call for information and help with their loan. mr. speaker, i would like to yield at this time to the

gentleman from iowa, mr. braley. as much time as he may consume. the speaker: the gentleman is recognized. mr. braley: thank you, mr. speaker. in may of this year, i introduced the protecting veteran's homes act after reading the news and hearing in the committee that recently returned soldiers were facing foreclosures on their homes. i thank the chame of the economic subcommittee for his inspiring words about this problem. i rise today to talk about the responsibility the government has to protect our heroes who have recently returned from afghanistan and iraq. i'm pleased that today the protecting veteran's home act is being considered part of this bill. we had a legislative hearing on this bill in the veterans' affairs subcommittee on economic opportunity on july 7, which i have the honor to serve as ranking member. at that time, we heard from the american legion, the reserve officer association, the reserve enlisted association, the paralyzed veterans of

america, the v.f.w., iraq and afghanistan veterans of america. all acknowledged the need to protect returning service members from foreclosure and all endorsed this legislation. this bipartisan bill will help service members who are returning and facing foreclosure stay in their home and ensure that surviving military spouses have additional protections that prevent foreclosure on their homes. furthermore, this bill establishes that lending institutions have compliance officers to provide information to veterans and service members about foreclosure protections available to them. the protecting veteran's homes act would protect veterans from being foreclosed on by banks and give those soldiers like the iowa national guard soldiers returning from afghanistan the peace of mind of knowing that they will have more opportunities to protect themselves from unwanted foreclosures. too often, these soldiers

return from combat only to face new challenges here at home. whether it's due to an injury or a financial crisis caused by long deployments and time off from their civilian jobs, our veterans deserve to know that we're standing up for them and this bill will make sure they have time to get back on their feet. currently, similar protections are set to expire in december of 2012. the protecting veteran's homesing at would make these protections permanent and extend the grace period from nine months to a full year for service members and veterans returning from deployment. this will allow them to work with their lenders, secure new loans, secure employment, get over a family tragedy, deal with a serious family health issue or in a worst case scenario, be able to sell their home and avoid possible foreclosure, bankruptcy, or damage to their credit rating. that's why this bill is so important and i ask all members to support it and with that, i yield back. -- i yield back my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. runyan: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman resebs. mr. filner: i have no further speakers, i urge support of the bill and yield back the plans of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. runyan: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on h.r. 1263. i once again encourage all members to support h.r. 1263 and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1263 as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative,

the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. runyan: madam speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1025. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend a moment. without objection, the title is amended. now the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. runyan: i move to suspend the rules an pass h.r. 1025. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 152, h.r. 1025, a bill to amend title 38, united states code, to recognize the service and the reserve components of certain persons by honoring them with status as veterans under law. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. runyan, and the gentleman from california, mr. filner, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey.