mr. kucinich: i yield 15 seconds to my good friend. mr. lungren: the difference between tarp and this is the recipients of tarp get money. in this case people get leases which allow them to pay money to the federal government. it's just the opposite. mr. kucinich: wow. i thank the gentleman. reclaiming my time. the oil companies let us -- are not charitable organizations. they make huge profits at the expense of the tax pers and they're making an even more profit because the fact of the matter is we have to modify the costs of all of the pollution that's coming out of the gulf %% no matter what b.p. pays, we'll be paying for generations to come. support the kucinich amendment. thank you. the chair: all time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 4 printed in part b of house report 111-511. for what purpose does the gentleman from

mr. kucinich. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. kucinich: i thank the gentlelady a rise in support of the resolution, june 8 as world oceans day, but for the past 50 days and for the next six months, at least, every other day is going to be ruin our oceans day. and we'd like to think, well, this is all about b.p. i think we have to go a little bit further. we have to understand that we have been pursuing a way of life tt is not sustainable. it's not sustainable for we as human beings. it's not sustainable for our planet. so we can be here today to talk about the oceans and we should. but we have to keep in mind, mr. speaker, that our oceans receive billions of gallons of runoff flows, pesticides, metals like mercury and lead, massive amounts of fertilizer, vital organic compounds, countless of other chemicals, even before the deepwater disaster. this runoff caused the single biggest dead zone in the gulf of mexico. our oceans are absorbing the malfesance of oil companies who are not only responsible for at least three separate major

mr. kucinich: what if the b.p. gusher in thh gulf is unstoppable? this is a challenging question which is making its way through various blogs. what if millions of barrels of oil continue to flow uncontrolled from the hole in the seabed? we should be preparing now for a worst-case scenario. we should be mobilizing our nation now, developing new comprehensive plans for sustainable alternative energy, for environmental protection, for public health, for preservation of species, for security, for rebuilding our economy and repairing commerce. we shoulding challenging our fellow citizens and ourselves to take part in charting a new course for our nation. we have unlimited vision unclouded by greed or partisan advantage. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, the american people are tired of washington politicians

mr. losmalowman, i think congren kucinich, said he had difficulties with your particular company. i would like to echo those. i have a number of cases that are truly disturbing that are loans by chase. this couple, retired schoolteacher, retired husband, chase has lost four sets of applications. this is a story we hear over and over again were documentation is sent, documentation is lost.. when a consumer sends it in four times, documentations that they send in four times and you cannot find it, that is your problem. it reminds me of the issue with the mineral mines service. basically, if they did not permit the horizon deep water rate within three days it was automatically considered -- the deep water rig within three days it was automatically considered approved. now, that it should not be the case, but at some point the lender has to take your responsibility for not having the documentation when it has been sent over and over again. i have two people dedicated to not only doing foreclosures and modifications in my office. that is a lot of staff. i bet every member on my panel w

mr. kucinich? >> thank you, mr. chairman. each of you represents lenders that would not exist in their current form if not for the beneficence of the united states taxpayer. i remind each of you that without the continued support of the american taxpayer there would be virtually 0 residential housing market activity. the issue before us today is why in the world aren't you giving loan modifications to more eligible borrowers? why are you denying loan modifications to my constituents, despite the fact that we have a federal program which pays you, the mortgage holders, an incentive to modify the terms, and compensates you from any of your costs? i would like to hear some justifications. mr. lowman? >> we are helping all of the people that come to us and that we contact. we have made extensive investments in people, systems, infrastructure, and the folks that do not get a modification. it is generally for two reasons. either they failed to pay us during the trial. or they do not qualify for the programs. maybe their income is n

mr. kucinich. >> to the gentlelady at the table. each of you represents lenders. remind each of you that without the continued support of the american taxpayer, there would be zero residential housing activity. the issue is why are you denying loan modifications? there is a federal program that pays you as an incentive to modify the mortgages. would you like to respond? >> we are helping all of the people that come to us and that we contact. we have extensive investments in people, systems, infrastructure . the people who do not get a modification to not get it for two reasons. they fail to pay us or they do not qualify for the program. or they did not provide the required documents. >> let me share this with you. at the end of may, my state of ohio had 136,000 seriously delinquent loans. only 12.5% of those loans were modified. the ratio of h.a.m.p. to ser iously delinquent loans -- in cleveland, ohio, i heard from many homeowners. chasee has been especially slow to process paper work. chase denied borrowers modifications without providing reasons. of the four la

mr. kucinich? >> thank you, mr. chairman. each of you represents lenders that would not exist in their current form if not for the beneficence of the united states taxpayer. i remind each of you that without the continued support of the american taxpayer there would be virtually 0 residential housing market activity. the issue before us today is why in the world aren't you giving loan modifications to more eligible borrowers? why are you denying loan modifications to my constituents, despite the fact that we have a federal program which pays you, the mortgage holders, an incentive to modify the terms, and compensates you from any of your costs? i would like to hear some justifications. mr. lowman? >> we are helping all of the people that come to us and that we contact. we have made extensive investments in people, systems, infrastructure, and the folks that do not get a modification. it is generally for two reasons. either they failed to pay us during the trial. or they do not qualify for the programs. maybe their income is n

mr. losmalowman, i think congren kucinich, said he had difficulties with your particularompany. i would like to echo those. i have a number of cases that are truly disturbing that are loans by chase. this couple, retired schoolteacher, retired husband, chase has lost four sets of applications. this is a story we hear over and over again were documentation is sent, documentation is lost.. when a consumer sends it in four times, documentations that they send in four times and you cannot find it, that is your problem. it reminds me of the issue with the mineral mines service. basically, if they did not permit the horizon deep water rate wiin three days it was automatically considered -- the deep water rig within three days it was automatically considered approved. now, that it should not be the case, but at some point the lender has to take your responsibility for not having the documentation when it has been sentver and over again. i have two people dedicated to not only doing foreclosures and modifications in my office. that is a lot of staff. bet every member on my panel would y

mr. kucinich: i request permission to address the house for one minute.the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. kucinich: in a little more than a year the united states threw $12 billion in cash, much in hundred bills, shrink wrapped, loaded on to palettes. "vanity fair" reported in 2004 that at least $9 billion of the cash had gone missing, unaccounted for. nine billion. today we learn that suitcases of $3 billion in cash have openly moved through the kabul armente. one quoted by the "wall street journal" said, quote, a lot looks like our tax dollars being stolen, end quote. consider this as the american people sweat out extension of the unemployment benefits. last week the b.b.c. reported the u.s. military has been giving tens of millions of dollars to afghan security firms who are funneling the money to warlords. add to that a corrupt afghan government. and now roars indicate congress is preparing to attach $10 billion in state education funding to a $33 billion spending bill to keep the war going. back hom

mr. dennis kucinich. >> thank you very much, members of the subcommittee. thank you for this invitation to testify on a proposed merger of united airlines and continental. in hindsight, it is easy to see the merger is a culmination of continental's efforts over the past to it were yeatwo years. a year ago, it was insisting that it did not need to merge. it was pursuing antitrust immunity to join united and 20 other airlines in the star -- over the objections of the department of justice, continental received antitrust immunity and now is engaged in flight co-sharing and frequent- flier plans and under the joint venture, can even share revenues. now continental and united -- say last year was not necessary. in addition, to sit again antitrust concerns which i will briefly outline here, there is the possibility that continental may not have been completely forthright. -- with congress and regulators with respect to its marketing and joint ventures last year or the proposed merger before us today. yesterday i sent a document request directly relevant to see th