ms. chu, and the gentleman from utah, mr. bishop, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i request five legislative days in which members may revise and extend and insert extraneous material on h r. 5610 into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. chu: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. chu: a month ago we passed h.r. 56 10, the independent living centers technical adjustment act to provide a necessary fict to provide services for many people with disabilities who benefit from the work of the independent living centers this fix will allow states to request that our funds not be included in determining their center's previous year allocations so that the temporary funds provided do not permanently change centers' base allocations. the senate amendment before us today changes the deadline for states to make that request from july 30 to augus

ms. chu: mr. speaker, i request five legislative days during which members may revise and extend and insert extraneous material on h.r. 5610 into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request is granted. ms. chu: i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognizesed. ms. chu: mook, i rise today in support of the independent living centers technical adjustment act. this bill addresses an issue brought to our attention by a number of states who are at risk of having to reduce services for adults with disabilities. authorized under the rehabilitation act of 1973, the independent living center program serves adults with disabilities by providing an array of independent living services, including the information and referral services, independent living skills training, peer counseling and individual and systems advocacy training. this program is administered by the rehabilitation services administration which allocates federal fund

i would now like to yield to my friend, the gentlelady from california, ms. chu. ms. chu: thank you so much and i truly appreciate the gentlelady from ohio for her leadership in putting this special order together on such a critical topic. i rise today to call attention to the plight of millions of american families. across the country, men, women, and children are caught in the crosshairs of republican political calculations. instead of providing emergency relief to americans laid off in the latest recession, a partisan senate minority is blocking this vital aid. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle should be ashamed. time and time again, when asked to solve our nation's problems, they have instead shown why they have been known as the party of no. it couldn't come at a worse time. throughout our country, we face the worst financial crisis since the great depression. it's the legacy of eight years of the bush administration. my hometown, los angeles, lost over 84,000 jobs this past year. that's the greatest decrease for any metropolitan area in america. congre

ms. chu: the gulf oil spill is the worst environmental disaster in our nation's history. it's devastated the gulf coast and taken lives, lives like gordon jones and the 10 other victims of the gulf horizon explosion. congress is smirke the familyings of these men receive the justice they deserve. current law values the lives of those who die at sea far less than deaths on land and to relatives not financially dependent on the deceased, it provides nothing but a check for funeral expenses. this is wrong. it doesn't matter where someone dies. if it's someone else's fault, justice is due. moreover, these losses go far beyond the value of a pay stub or the cost of a funeral. that's why the spill act ends the outdated devaluation of maritime death and opens the door for family members to receive damages based on pain and suffering. but that's not all it does. current law limits the liability of transocean, the company who owned the rig, to just $25 million. now vietnamese shrimpers and all the fishermen of louisiana know the damages caused are so much greater and so does congr

ms. chu: i rise today to support the millions of americans caught in the crosshairs of republicans' political calculations. today a partisan minority blocked relief of those laid off during this recession. this obstruction doesn't just keep food off american tables. it keeps americans out of work. people like annette. last month she lost her benefits. now she can't afford the gas she needs to drive to job interviews. like the vast majority of those on unemployment, annette uses these funds as a bridge to her next job to replace it. the notion that relief discourages people from seeking jobs is not only wrong but outrageous. so today i call on republicans to stop hurting american workers. stop playing politics with their lives. and start letting the senate and millions of americans get back to work. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio rise? >> i rise to address the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. miss shultz: mr. speaker, la

ms. chu: in the 1930's, over half our seniors lived in poverty. they survived on whatever friends and relatives could spare. so congress created a shield against common threats like old age and disability. and for 75 years social security has protected millions of americans. for 75 years it's been our government's bedrock promise. for 75 years it's helped people like janet moore whose husband passed away 13 years ago, leaving janice and their three children to fend for themselves. republicans wanted to hand this over to wall street. it's the same privatization team they tried five years back. if they succeeded, we would have lost trillions in the stock market. but democrats and the american people said no. today we again reject this and say yes to social security's promise, protecting americans' lives for another 75 years and many generations to come. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yield back her time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from arizona rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection

ms. wuerfel appealed that. we withdrew the permit, went back through and talk with supervisor chu's office 20 times. we were told to have a meaningful remediation. she wants to be here and be on tv. that is what she wants. what can i say, this is a safety issue? we have five people living in that house, to veterans. ms. wuerfel would have us remove one of the bed rooms for demolition. she certified with the building department she had photographs of the building in 1984. i was not even american at that time. all of the building inspectors have gone to my house and say it has gone downhill, and why now this brush of nov's? president peterson: with your question answered? commissioner fung: i have not heard an answer. is there time left? >> can i add -- commissioner fung: no, i asked a question. the question is, what is the time line for your application? >> we filed an application in 2007 for the horizontal addition. we sent an informal letter to the neighbors. we have resolved are issues with one of the neighbors. ms. wuerfel, one of her statements was over my dead body and she would appeal. in 2009

inclined to say with regard to remediation, i have spoken with supervisor chu probably 40 times in the last two years to bring ms. wuerfel and to mediation. did we make an effort to resolve this with the neighbors? yes, we did. >> there are many broken windows and the house. i wish it was only windows. the house is not habitable. i will take you down tomorrow. 90% of the windows need replacing. we don't want to eat lose the stained-glass windows. they're fabulous, -- we don't want to lose the stained-glass windows, they're fabulous, why would we? but we need to remove the mold. we have three children and one bedroom. it is no longer ok to have our children in the same bedroom. many issues need to be addressed in the house. thank you. president peterson: thank you. mr. sanchez, mr. kornfield, and a rebuttal? ok, commissioners, the matter is before you. commissioner hwang: can i ask mr. kornfield about. foundation? -- about the brick foundation? ms. wuerfel made the point that either incorrect or not accounting for -- i see existing brick foundation on the foundation plan, and i believe the appellant is claiming t