[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 161 (Friday, October 3, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H10818-H10819]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION PACKAGE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the speaker very much, and again 
for his leadership.
  I rise not because I would have wanted this vote today on the 
Emergency Economic Stabilization rescue package to be characterized as 
it has been characterized as ``a vote of the moment'' historic vote 
because I believe historic votes are votes that are absolutely 
imperative, that no one could foresee, that the challenges cannot be 
handled in any other way.
  In this instance, we have been floating money for the past 8 years, 
ignoring regulation, ignoring the spiraling unemployment. And even 
though the motives were good to give opportunities to those who eagerly 
work every day and seek the American Dream, the vehicles, the 
facilities by which we allowed them or gave them the opportunity to 
seek and to attain those dreams was not theirs, it was the financial 
houses that saw big dollars in the eyes, the minds and the hearts of 
hardworking families that simply wanted to provide a homework desk for 
their children, their children's own room. So it caught Members, if you 
will, cast about in the suggestion and the characterization made by the 
administration, but made as well by media rushing to hysteria.
  Then, of course, in the midst of this debate did not come the 
Senate's vote, which many people will think was one-upsmanship, but 
really what came as startling numbers--the numbers of 159,000 people 
who lost their jobs in this last month, the highest in 5 years; the 
fact that we needed to extend unemployment, not because people are 
deadbeat, but because they're out of luck, because they need this 
opportunity; came the number of 759,000 jobs that we have lost; came 
the unfortunate facts that credit crunching was going on, not 
necessarily for the seventh grader who may want to go to college 5 
years from now, but for the person who desperately needs to buy a car 
or the small business that desperately needs to make their payroll.
  So as a person who voted no because I believe the restraints on the 
Secretary of the Treasury were unfettered, the vote that I took on 
Monday, these rising issues drew on my conscience. No one had to call 
me. I wasn't pushed by this candidate or that candidate. It was the 
deliberation that Members individually reflected upon as they listened 
to constituents, as we, in essence, refuted some of their points or 
agreed with some of those, no to the bailout. But I think we have to 
take stands sometimes that are painful; and not that anyone should be 
sympathetic to that, that is our job. But this was not a historic 
moment. And the only reason I say that is it was the making of 
something that did not have to happen.
  So how do we go forward? Well, I am grateful to a leadership that 
understood that we had to take this particular position. And they did 
it with diplomacy and acumen and smartness. So I thank them, all of 
them, the Democratic leadership. But at the same time, we have to be 
vigilant. My support came today because I believe that we are, if you 
will, recessed at the call of the Chair. If we find that this is not 
helping Mr. and Mrs. America, Mr. and Mrs. Main Street, this Congress 
can come back lickity split, and I will be there.
  We also recognize that there may be unfettered powers by this 
particular Secretary of the Treasury, but we have the Constitution, we 
have our powers to stop any use of power that may be abusive.
  In addition, we can again question the FDIC and make them function, 
the SEC, and make it function, the Federal Reserve, and make it 
function. We should continue to emphasize that those who engage in 
criminal improprieties should be subject to criminal prosecution. We 
should press for the American man and woman and homeowner the rights of 
bankruptcy so individually they can go in in a dignified way and 
restructure their loan and keep their house.
  We should recognize that section 109 should be a section that is 
required. It has to do with working out mortgages. It says ``encourage 
it.'' We want to make sure that we prioritize those who are holding bad 
mortgages, who have a home they want to save, and make sure that the 
Secretary is working to require them to change.
  And on judicial review, we need to make sure that it really works. We 
need to put aside money for those who need that to restructure their 
loans.
  Mr. Speaker, I close by saying yes, I voted ``aye,'' because those 
who were victims needed something to move the

[[Page H10819]]

credit crunch along so that they could be helped, and I hope that we 
have done something that makes a difference.

                          ____________________