they have been working hard to figure out the component parts, but adds cindy said, congresswoman lofgren's staff is ready to put the pieces together. i cannot tell you what his bill will look like, what senator schumer's bill will look like. what i can say it is all those pieces work together to ultimately come up with something that is hopefully, at least, something that we can create a foundation from. comprehensive immigration reform has to be broad enough to make -- give us the foundation to build more, but i do not think it will be done at that point. there will be a lot of issues that will not happen in the first go round that will need to be perfected, but me to do enough to turn immigration into something that is not so politicized and is more about really getting down to the problems. i wanted to address briefly some by pointing out, you cannot always tell what will happen based on one set of votes. in the dhhs appropriations bill for 2010, in the senate, and there were a lot of horrible amendments to make e-verify mandatory, inshore every inch of the fence was real, we get ensure

more like experts when we quote his research three-time representing the office of congresswoman zoe lofgren. i was told to talk a little bit about our personal connection to immigration. i think that's easy for me. i'm the only person in my family born in the united states. my family is from mexico did my grandfather was recruited to work here in the united states during world war ii. my father emigrated here. i sister and my mother emigrated in 1967. we have very different experiences for all three of those members of my family. in my entire professional life, i was looking back. i've always been around immigration law. i am proud that it has been so. someone asked me if i ever regretted been so focused on that. i said i did not do it on purpose. somebody just told me once to do what you love and everything will work out. i'm pleased to say that it has. we were told to give our perspective a little bit. it's hard not to speak personally about comprehensive immigration reform and what it means. i had the privilege to work on some of the most meaningful cases to me. i know it's the one place

. >> in the article, you quote mike lofgren, a former republican star for the senate budget committeethe vital center today. that's a pretty damning assessment from a republican insider, isn't it? >> you know, you see -- you know, we've watched this campaign, this sort of right-wing circus, where you've had people who were essentially on book tours, michele bachmanns and herman cains, and even newt gingrich -- >> well, newt gingrich has been on a book tour for the last 20 years. >> exactly. all of these people cycling throughs as the front-runners. if you look at gingrich's tax plan for a second, a 15% flat tax, which is essentially half of what herman cain was proposing, and it doesn't get very much attention, but this would be a fiscally preposterous plan. america would be absolutely bankrupt if this was put in place. this supply-side fantasy that former treasury secretary paul o'neil said to me would be the kind of policies that would be amusing if they weren't so dangerous. >> tim dickinson of "rolling stone" magazine, thanks so much for joinin ining us. >> my pleasure. >> we'll b

lofgren. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for two minutes. ms. lofgren: we are all opposed to the damage that these drugs can do to the american people, but i have to express my opposition to this bill. my concerns about the bill and are its effect on scientific research. when a substance is on schedule i, it is difficult to obtain not only for legal purposes and researchers who wish to study its medical potential. while this may be justified for some drugs, it isn't a a restriction that should be implemented and that's because it becomes difficult for scientists to get permission to obtain these molecules, even for scientific study that we need. in the united states, only 325 researchers have been able to obtain schedule i licenses at this moment. congress established the procedure for scheduling drugs and requires the scientific and medical evaluation. this bill would bypass this process rather than relying on scientific and medical experts. i have heard from faculty at a range of universities and they share the concerns about the impact. here

lofgren: i rise in opposition to the bill. instead of focusing on jobs and helping middle class families, the republican leadership is hard at work today creating additional ways in which corporations and special interests can dominate our elections process. ending the presidential election campaign fund opens the door for large political spenders to enjoy an even greater role in the funding of political campaigns. the voluntary republic financial system for presidential campaigns was created in the early 1970's as a direct result of the corruption of watergate, the largiers political scandal of our generation, stopping croppings and appearance of croppings is as important today as it was during the nixon years. a level of spending by corporations and special interests since the supreme court decision in citizens united should give every american reason for concern. so do my republican colleagues really believe that more corporate and special interest money in politics is going to benefit in any way the 99% of americans who do

lofgren: i rise in opposition to the bill. instead of focusing on jobs and helping middle class families, the republican leadership is hard at work today creating additional ways in which corporations and special interests can dominate our elections process. ending the presidential election campaign fund opens the doofor large political spenders to enjoy an even greater role in the funding of political campaigns. the voluntary republic financial system for presidential campaigns was created in the early 1970's as a direct result of the corruption of watergate, the largiers political scandal of our generation, stopping croppings and appearance of croppings is as important today as it was during the nixon years. a level of spending by corporations and special interests since the supreme court decision in citizens united should give every american reason for concern. so do my republican colleagues really believe that more corporate and special interest money in politics is going to benefit in any way the 99% of americans who don'

lofgren: the extraneous materials is a letter i'm sending to wells fargo bank about mrs. darlene bowland, 68-year-old mother, fighting cancer in wells fargo bank. darlene lived in a modest home in san jose for 41 years until she was evicted a week before thanksgiving. at the time, two weeks from chemotherapy to pack up her own boxes. we appealed to the bank. they knew about her cancer and her chemotherapy, but they didn't care. she owned her home free and clear at one time but was the victim of a pay loan. a way to confuse and basically steal her home. mr. speaker, wells fargo earned record profits last year and in 2010 the c.e.o., john stump, earned more than $17 million in compensation. this christmas mrs. bow lapd will be couch surfing with chemotherapy. mr. stump will be enjoying his $17 million salary. while her home in san jose stays vacant. merry christmas from wells fargo. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new hampshire rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my