[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 19]
[House]
[Pages 26187-26192]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



        ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE FIRST SESSION OF THE 107TH CONGRESS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2001, the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mrs. WILSON. Mr. Speaker, during the next hour, I want to talk about 
some of the wonderful things that this House has achieved in this first 
session of the 107th Congress; but in my view, probably one of the most 
important things we have achieved, we finished today here on the floor 
of the House, and that is the President's education bill.
  Going back almost 2 years ago before the last Presidential election, 
and before even the primaries were finished, I was looking at the 
people who were putting themselves forward as potential candidates in 
the Republican Party, which is my party.
  There was a governor from neighboring State of Texas, which being a 
New Mexican, is sometimes a disqualification in itself, who seemed to 
be saying some things that I liked to hear. Not only just saying them, 
but obviously deeply believing them and passionate about them.
  George W. Bush was talking about no child should be left behind. 
There was a commitment that he made in his State of Texas, and it was 
not just some kind of a campaign slogan, it was something that he 
passionately believed, that there was a subtle bigotry of low 
expectations, and that, in itself, condemned children to a life of 
underachievement. He believed it was possible for a public school 
system to reform itself and to commit itself to excellence, and that 
every child is entitled to a great education, and that education is the 
next civil right.
  I listened to him for several months and I decided that I liked this 
guy, and that I was going to back him as my preferred choice as 
President of the United States. After he was elected, both in his 
inaugural address on the steps of the west front of this Capitol and in 
this body in this room, when he made his first State of the Union 
speech, he asked us as Members of Congress to join him to ensure that 
no child is left behind, to reform the Federal laws on education, to 
make a commitment to reading, not just in the schools where all of us 
who are middle class have moved to, but to the schools that maybe all 
of us do not want our children to go to.
  I believe that every parent wants a great school in their 
neighborhood that their kids can walk to. But even more as a community 
and as a society, we need to have a great school system so that a kid 
who gets himself up for breakfast and gets his little brother and 
sister up and makes their lunches and gets them out the door and walks 
with them to school, those are the kids that this education bill we 
passed is for. For the kids whose parents are not there and do not 
care, but that kid who still has a dream, that in America he is part of 
the American dream.
  The bill that we passed today is a landmark piece of legislation, 
something that required work in both bodies and on both sides of the 
aisle. It is the most important Federal education bill that we have 
passed in 20 years. We would not have done it without the leadership of 
the President of the United States.
  Why does it matter? Why should we care so much about education? I 
represent Albuquerque, New Mexico. A third of our kids in Albuquerque 
do not graduate from high school. For our parents and certainly for our 
grandparents, that was probably okay because there were still jobs that 
somebody could get and be able to support a family that you could do 
without a high school education. But in the 21st century, those jobs do 
not exist anymore. What was good enough for our parents and 
grandparents is not good enough for our children. Every child has to 
graduate from high school being able to read and write and work 
together and hold a good job. That is what this bill is about.
  The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 significantly increases Federal 
aid to education. Last year we had about $18 billion in the budget for 
Federal aid to education, mostly to schools that serve poor communities 
and for special ed. The bill that we just passed authorizes $26.5 
billion in the next year for Federal aid to education. That is almost a 
40 percent increase. In the last 5 years, we have close to doubled 
Federal aid to education. But this also includes the elements of 
reform, which I think will help get those dollars to the classroom 
where they can matter in the lives of children.
  This new legislation requires annual testing in reading and 
mathematics for every child from grades 3-8. Some States, like New 
Mexico, have already moved toward annual testing and accountability for 
results. But if we let kids fall through the cracks, if we move them on 
from one grade to another grade without demanding and giving them an 
opportunity to master the subject matter in first grade, they are not 
going to make it in fourth grade.
  Before I was elected to Congress, I was the cabinet secretary in the 
State of New Mexico for children. We had the

[[Page 26188]]

delinquent children, the abused and neglected children, the children 
that were mentally ill, early childhood education. We had all of the 
children that nobody wanted.
  When I looked at the kids that we had in our juvenile justice system, 
on average they were 16 years old. At that point in their lives when 
they first came to our juvenile prisons, they had, on average, nine 
prior felonies. It was very rare to have one of those kids who could 
read at grade level. It was very rare to see a father in their life. 
Very often there was drug and alcohol abuse in the family.
  But the number one indicator that a kid is going to be in trouble as 
a teenager is their third grade reading score. Education is the way up 
and out for all kinds of kids. Poor kids, kids that come from broken 
homes, kids with fathers who are not there or who come home drunk. The 
public school system and the ability to read is the ticket to a dream. 
This Federal legislation emphasizes the importance of reading, 
particularly kindergarten, first, second and third grade. We must make 
sure that children are able to read by the third grade.

                              {time}  1615

  This bill requires all students to be proficient at reading and math 
within the next 12 years. We do not just set a lofty goal, we set a 
goal, we provide resources, we provide the tools to achieve that goal, 
and then there will be accountability for results.
  It also requires that we narrow the gap between the rich kids and the 
poor kids, between the Anglo kids and the minority kids. The truth is 
since we started the title I program to help schools that are in 
neighborhoods that do not have as much money to put in from the 
outside, we started that Federal program and in some areas, the gap 
between rich and poor, Anglo and minority, has widened rather than 
narrowed. The whole purpose of Federal aid to education for poor 
schools is so we can narrow the gap, not so that it can be widened. We 
must narrow that gap.
  There is $1 billion a year in this bill for the next 5 years to 
improve reading, three times as much as this year, with a goal of 
making sure every child can read by the third grade.
  This bill also consolidates programs. There are wonderful ideas that 
legislators and the administration comes up with over the years and 
often those are put into law or into program documents, and you end up 
with small pots of money and 20,000 school districts across the country 
with grant writers and administrators chasing after a little piece of 
those pots of funds. As a result, we have all of these programs that 
take so much to administer and compete and award that 65 cents on the 
dollar even gets to the school district level, let alone down to the 
classroom.
  We needed to consolidate those programs and get the money down to the 
local level, to give some flexibility to local school districts and 
principals so that you do not say, well, we have got this pot of money 
and you can use it for middle school math and science instruction and 
another pot of money that you can use for software for elementary 
schools; but what we really need is to send some money back for 
continuing education in how to teach reading in a particular school. We 
do not have any money for that even though that is the need. We have 
got to give some flexibility to move funds around at the local level, 
because the challenges that we face in Estancia, New Mexico, are not 
the same challenges we face on Long Island, New York. Let us give some 
flexibility to local school districts, to parents and teachers and 
principals; and then let us look at results. Let us let America 
surprise us by their ingenuity.
  It is a wonderful bill. It took a great deal of work and bipartisan 
work and bicameral work. But we have achieved it. I hope that before 
Christmas it will be on the desk of the President of the United States 
and we can begin both to celebrate it and to implement it. But we also 
have much more work to do.
  I want to talk for a little bit about the state of the economy and 
jobs. In November, consumer confidence fell, plummeted really, for the 
fifth consecutive month. In June, July, and August when we passed the 
first stimulus bill, we were all hoping and we thought it was quite 
likely that the recession that we were on the cusp of would have a soft 
landing, that if it turned into a recession at all, it would be very 
shallow and very short. September 11 changed all that. When we saw 
those planes crash into the towers in New York and we saw the plane 
crash in Pennsylvania and here in Washington, D.C., we saw and felt a 
shudder through the American economy. It was not only travel and 
tourism that were hurt, it was consumer confidence that was hurt. We 
need to pass another economic stimulus bill. The President called for 
it in October and the House of Representatives responded.
  Our economic stimulus bill in the House is not perfect. There are 
things about it I did not like as an individual legislator. There is 
almost no bill here that everybody can say, By gosh, that's something 
that I can support a hundred percent. There's not a word that I would 
change. It is not the nature of this body.
  But we moved it forward. We moved the process along for a good 
reason. Since September 11, 700,000 Americans have lost their jobs. We 
have 700,000 families who are worried about where the next paycheck is 
coming from. Unemployment has spiked, particularly on the east coast, 
in the New York and down to the mid-Atlantic region. All of those 
families are worried about their health insurance. What happens if they 
do not get another job before that COBRA runs out? What happens if the 
unemployment benefits run out? What happens if we do not get back to 
growing jobs in this country? Those families are hurting. We need to 
help them. We have passed an economic stimulus bill in the House. I 
think we may end up having to pass another one next week without any 
additional action because things have not moved forward.
  What do we want to see in an economic stimulus bill? Certainly first 
and foremost, we need to be able to extend health care benefits and 
unemployment benefits so that people who have lost their jobs due to 
the slowdown in the economy can make it through. All of us know 
neighbors who are worried about losing their job sometime this year and 
all of us are willing to say, ``Look, we're going to help you over the 
hump. We're going to make sure that this awful time for you is not made 
worse because you can't feed your family or that you lost your health 
insurance.'' So we must have health care coverage and unemployment 
insurance extenders in any economic stimulus bill.
  The second thing we are going to need to do is to restore confidence. 
We are in the Christmas season. About two-thirds of the American 
economy is consumer spending. There are retail outlets and companies 
where half of their sales are in the Christmas period. We need to 
restore confidence in our consumers so that we do not have a further 
collapse in retail sales. We have got to restore confidence in 
consumers, and we have to restore confidence in the markets. If you 
talk to anybody around town about their retirement plans, most 
Americans now have 401(k)s or IRAs or pension plans. We are now 
investors in the stock market. One hundred million Americans own 
stocks, mostly in IRAs and 401(k)s, pension plans through work or 
Thrift Savings accounts. All of us have seen the value of our 
retirement savings go way down because of the economic slowdown. We 
have got to restore confidence in the stock market that our economy is 
back and turned around. We have to pass an economic stimulus bill that 
does that.
  The third thing our economic stimulus bill has to do is to create 
capital to create jobs. Most of our jobs created in this country are 
created by small business. That is where the real job growth is. That 
means we have to do things like accelerate depreciation. I was a small 
business owner for 3 or 4 years before I went into State government. 
One of the things that was amazing to me is that when I did my books at 
the end of the year on what my profit was and my loss and how much 
corporate tax I had to pay, if I bought new computers as I did one year 
for the

[[Page 26189]]

whole office, the whole company, new computers, upgrade everything, all 
at one time, at that time I could only say that I spent $10,000 that 
year on what they call section 179. So even though I had to pay as a 
small businessperson 20 or $30,000 out of our bank account to buy the 
things, as far as telling the government what I owed on taxes, I could 
only say it was $10,000. That did not seem right, that did not seem 
fair, and it certainly discouraged me the next time from getting 
$35,000 worth of computers at one time. Certainly one of the things we 
need to do for small business is to raise those limits so that a small 
business looking at buying equipment, going and doing some 
construction, expanding their computer setup, can do so, and that will 
stimulate our economy.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) has joined me, 
who is a member of the Committee on Ways and Means and is someone who 
has worked very, very hard on economic stimulus and particularly 
looking at small business and what can we do to get back to growing 
jobs in this economy.
  Mr. WELLER. I want to thank the gentlewoman from New Mexico for 
yielding and also commend her for her leadership, particularly in 
technology and research, which is so important to the future of the 
economy of our country.
  Our country has a great challenge before us. Obviously, we are 
working to win this war against terrorism as a result of the terrorist 
attack, this horrible attack on our country on September 11; but also a 
key part of our effort in the war on terrorism is to address the 
economic impact of the terrorist act on September 11.
  President Bush inherited a weakening economy. Economists point out it 
was in the spring and summer of 2000 that the economy began to turn. 
When he was sworn in as President in January of this year, the economy 
was already starting to weaken. Unfortunately, there was a 
psychological impact of September 11, a terrible day when our Nation 
was attacked by terrorists on our own soil.
  Of course, as a result of that, many things happened. One of those is 
there was a psychological impact on our economy. Business decision-
makers and consumers who had previously made decisions to move forward 
on investments and purchases stepped back from those investments and 
decisions to spend money. Of course, now we have seen the result. 
Thousands if not tens of thousands of residents of the State of 
Illinois where I live as well as New Mexico and all across our country 
have lost their jobs as a result of the downturn in our economy. In 
fact, today there are hundreds of steelworkers in the south suburbs 
that I represent that are here in town expressing their concern and 
calling on the Congress and the President to work together to find a 
way to get this economy moving again.
  I want to point out that the House has been doing its job. Seven 
weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed legislation to 
revitalize this economy, the Economic Security and Recovery Act, 
legislation designed to encourage investment by business decision-
makers, to create capital for investment as well as to reward 
investment and the creation of jobs and also to put more money in the 
pocketbooks of consumers to spend. I would note that some of the key 
provisions of the legislation that we passed and sent to the Senate 
obtained strong bipartisan support here in the House. I have been very, 
very disappointed in the other body and particularly in the leadership 
of the other body and their failure to move forward on economic 
security and economic stimulus.
  I particularly want to point to one of the provisions in the 
legislation that the gentlewoman from New Mexico and I have been 
working together on, as have many other Members of this House.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Platts). The Chair will remind Members 
that it is not in order in debate to characterize Senate action or 
inaction. This prohibition includes debate that specifically urges the 
Senate to take certain action.
  The Chair would ask the gentleman to be conscious of that.
  Mr. WELLER. I certainly will, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may proceed.
  Mr. WELLER. That is, legislation to draw attention to the expensing 
provision that is in the Economic Security and Recovery Act of 2001. 
When you think about it, we are looking for ways to encourage 
investment and the creation of jobs. If we can encourage an employer or 
a business to invest in a personal computer or hardware, a pickup 
truck, a car, we have to remember that there are American workers who 
produce those products. So if we encourage business to buy them, there 
is a worker who is at the other end where they are being produced who 
is going to keep their job. We also have to realize that when someone 
purchases that pickup truck or that car or that other piece of 
equipment, there is going to be a worker that is going to operate it as 
well. So really any incentive that is going to attract investment is 
going to help create jobs.
  I would note that the 30 percent expensing provision that is in this 
legislation which means that a business would buy a personal computer, 
for example, and they would be able to deduct 30 percent of the 
purchase price of that asset in the first year. Currently they have to, 
of course, depreciate a computer over 5 years. This is much more 
attractive. It will encourage business to purchase hardware.
  I would also note, as my colleague from New Mexico pointed out, in 
the Economic Security and Recovery Act that the House of 
Representatives passed that we also provided for an increase in 
expensing for small business, which means that small business would 
have the opportunity to deduct 100 percent of the purchase of capital 
assets. Currently it is $24,000. We increase that to $35,000, a 
significant increase, to help small business, allowing them to deduct 
more from their taxable income, freeing up capital that they can then 
turn right around and invest in the creation of jobs.
  When it comes to real estate, businesses are out there, they are 
working in real estate that employs the building trades, carpenters and 
plasterers and others. When they make improvements in their buildings, 
we call that buildout or tenant improvements, we change the 
depreciation schedule for that in this legislation as well. Currently 
it is 39 years, a ridiculous period of time. We reduce it to 15 years 
for inside buildout of a business.
  The bottom line is we have accelerated cost recovery and we have 
expensing as well as depreciation reform in this legislation, 30 
percent expensing. We increase the small business allowance up to 
$35,000, and we reform how we depreciate inside improvements in 
buildings, providing jobs. That is the bottom line.
  I would particularly note from the technology sector's perspective 
that in our legislation that the House passed 6 weeks ago, we also 
recognize there are companies losing money this year. These companies 
losing money are looking for capital so they can reinvest and, of 
course, create jobs and preserve the jobs of their workers today. Under 
our legislation, we allow a company that is losing money this year to 
carry back for 5 years. What that means is they can take this year's 
loss and credit against a previous profitable year sometime in the last 
5 years, essentially get a tax refund, and they can use that money to 
reinvest in the creation of jobs. The accelerated cost recovery, the 
expensing and depreciation reform, helping companies that are losing 
money this year, is going to create jobs.
  I would also note in the Economic Security and Recovery Act that we 
also help the middle class. We have to remember, the vast majority of 
Americans are middle class.

                              {time}  1630

  In the legislation we passed out of the House, the middle class tax 
rate is the 28 percent tax rate. That affects folks who make $60,000 a 
year. That is average middle class in the district

[[Page 26190]]

that I represent in the south suburbs and South Side of Chicago. We 
lower their tax rate, which is currently 28 percent, effective 
immediately of January of 2002 we lower it to 25 percent that is going 
to lower taxes, giving more spending money to middle-class taxpayers.
  We also want to help low income and working families too, those who 
probably never pay income taxes today and may not have benefitted 
directly and received a tax rebate this year from the President's tax 
cut that we all worked together to pass earlier this year. I would note 
that 24 million Americans will receive a $300 dollar stimulus payment 
under the legislation we passed, extra spending money. I am one of 
those who believes that low income families when they receive that 
stimulus payment check, they are going to tax it and they are going to 
spend it. That is going to help the economy, creating jobs and demand 
for goods and services.
  Now, one thing I noted as we discussed this economy, unfortunately, 
hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost their jobs, tens of 
thousands in the Chicago area that I represent. I would note that in 
the Economic Security and Recovery Act, legislation we passed 6 weeks 
ago in the House, that we provide help for those who are unemployed, 
and we provide help for those who may have lost their health insurance 
coverage. In fact, we provide $12 billion in assistance for the 
unemployment benefits, as well as covering the cost of health care. So 
we put together a pretty good package.
  I would note the Economic Security and Recovery Act, legislation that 
passed this House of Representatives with a bipartisan support, was 
passed by the House of Representatives 6 weeks ago. When you think 
about it, when Americans are in jeopardy of losing their jobs, I am one 
who believes that Congress needs to act very, very quickly and put on 
President Bush's desk legislation to get this economy moving again.
  One of the most important reasons is not only to provide incentives 
to invest and give consumers more money to spend, but also to give the 
psychological confidence to business investors and consumers that it is 
okay to invest again, that it is okay to spend money on their family's 
needs, and that their job is not going to be in jeopardy.
  So my hope is we can work things out with the Senate quickly and get 
on President Bush's desk as soon as possible legislation to revitalize 
and stimulate this economy. The bottom line is we want to provide 
economic security for all Americans. We want to protect those who have 
jobs, and those who recently lost their jobs, we want to give them the 
opportunity to go back to work and provide a safety net while they are 
out of work.
  Mrs. WILSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois, 
particularly for his expertise on what we need to do with respect to 
the economy.
  There are two other areas of the economy where the House has taken 
very important action and we need to get a bill to the President's desk 
without any further delay. One is energy, and the other is Trade 
Promotion Authority, so that we can promote international trade. I 
would like to maybe take those in reverse order. The one we passed most 
recently was the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act which we 
passed last week.
  Now, international trade is not something that people usually get 
excited about, unless it is your job that depends upon being able to 
sell American products abroad.
  There are about 130 trade agreements that exist in the world 
internationally. America is party to only three of them. What that 
really means is that when we try to sell our products to Latin America 
or Asia or Europe, our companies are more heavily taxed than our 
competitors in Canada or Europe.
  I have a little company in my district called SEMCO, and they make 
rock crushers. These are big barrels and drums that crush rock for the 
mining industry, to be able to get the minerals out of rock. It is not 
a very high-tech business. It is a family firm.
  But I was talking last week to the owner, and he said, you know, they 
do not even bother to bid on jobs in Chile any more, because their 
competitors are Canadian and European countries, and Chile has a free 
trade agreement with them, and there is only a 2 percent duty on a 
crusher that is made in Europe or in Canada, a 2 percent tax if a 
Chilean mining company imports a piece of equipment. But for him, it is 
about 17 percent.
  You cannot under sell somebody by 15 percent, 15 cents on the dollar, 
so he does not even bother bidding on those jobs any more. He employs 
maybe 30, 35, 40 people in his operation in Albuquerque, New Mexico. I 
would like to be able to see him building more rock crushers and 
selling them to mining operations, whether they are in Australia or 
Canada or Latin America or Chile.
  But unless we give the President the authority to negotiate tough 
trade agreements that reduce the tariffs on American goods abroad, we 
do not have a fair shot, and neither does he. To me, that is part of 
what it will take to get our economy back to growing jobs, and that is 
what this is all about.
  America now is disadvantaged. On any kind of fair playing field, 
American companies and American workers can beat the best. We are the 
most productive workers in the world. We have the best technology, we 
have well-trained workers, and we can compete head-to-head and we can 
win, but we need a fair chance, and right now we do not have the fair 
chance.
  Mr. WELLER. If the gentlewoman will yield, I absolutely agree with 
you. If you think about it, the globe's population, billions of people, 
96 percent of the consumers on the Earth today live outside the 
boarders of the United States. So if we want to increase the 
opportunity to find new markets for American farm products, for 
technology, for manufactured goods, for entertainment, we have to 
increase our access to international markets. Ninety six percent of the 
globe's population.
  Trade Promotion Authority, it is kind of a funny name, but the bottom 
line is all it means is that we give President Bush the full 
negotiating power he needs to break down trade barriers. Without the 
full negotiating power, our trading partners and competitors and those 
who are trying to open up markets into their markets are not going to 
take us seriously, unless the Congress gives President Bush the full 
negotiating power that he needs.
  I was so very, very pleased that we passed out of the House this past 
week with bipartisan support legislation giving President Bush what he 
needs. I think it is a shame there is almost 130 bilateral trade 
agreements, and bilateral means a trade agreement between two different 
countries; but out of 130 bilateral trade agreements, only about three 
involve the United States.
  Something is wrong when the globe's greatest economy, our country, is 
unable to negotiate the kind of trade agreements we need to break down 
barriers and reduce tariff barriers and other barriers that stand in 
the way of markets for American manufactured goods, for farm products, 
for technology. That is why it is so very, very important to give the 
President what he needs, and that is the full negotiating power that 
Trade Promotion Authority gives to the President.
  Mrs. WILSON. Our American farmers feed the world. In my State of New 
Mexico, most folks would not suspect this, but New Mexico is the tenth 
largest dairy producing State in the country. It is a very fast growing 
dairy industry. Of course, our cattle industry in the West has always 
been really strong. Our New Mexico cattleman, I was talking to a 
rancher, and he said we really want free trade, because most people 
outside the United States do not eat as much beef as people inside, and 
we want to introduce them to the wonders of beef.
  There are things that we can do to promote trade, but we have to give 
trade authority to do it. As you can see by this chart here, the House 
has passed the economic stimulus bill. We did that on October 24. We 
have passed now bipartisan trade authority, which would give the 
President the power to

[[Page 26191]]

promote international trade and promote international business and get 
business for American companies abroad.
  We also passed something way back actually the second of August, 
before the August break, the Energy Security Act. When we talk about 
jobs, we have lost 700,000 jobs in this country since the 11th of 
September. The estimates are that this energy bill, and this kind of 
just surprised me when I saw these two numbers, went back and looked at 
my notes from August, the estimate is it would create 700,000 jobs in 
domestic energy suppliers.
  We are more dependent on foreign oil today than we were at the height 
of the energy crisis. Fifty-seven percent of oil is imported for 
America, mostly from the Middle East, a very volatile region of the 
world. Most folks do not know, but the number seven supplier of oil to 
the United States and the fastest growing supplier is Saddam Hussein's 
Iraq.
  We need a balanced long-term energy policy that promotes both 
conservation and increases in production. We need a very diverse supply 
of energy. People get complacent. We all have gotten complacent a 
little bit here. The price of gasoline has gone done, the price of 
natural gas has gone down we have had a pretty mild winter so far, and 
maybe there is a sense of urgency that has left us. But the reality is 
we need an energy policy, and we need to reduce our reliance on oil 
coming from the Middle East. We should not be over a barrel begging 
Saddam Hussein to keep the oil spigot open. We need to be more 
independent.
  The House passed by a very broad bipartisan vote the Energy Security 
Act on August 2. That should have been on the President's desk months 
ago. We need the first energy policy that we will have had in 20 years, 
and the House has passed it, and I would like to see the President be 
able to sign it.
  I yield to my colleague from Illinois.
  Mr. WELLER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. On energy, of 
course, the gentlewoman has been one of the leaders, particularly in 
research and development of new sources of energy and new sources of 
conservation, as well as helping our country be more independent of 
foreign sources of energy.
  I remember one of the questions that I was asked shortly after the 
tragedy of the terrorist attack on America. Every day I was in my 
district I would visit a school and I would talk with students. One of 
the high school students at Wilmington High School, a high school 
junior, asked me a very good question. He says, ``You know, 
Congressman, Americans have very short attention spans. Will we keep 
our attention and will we eventually lose interest in what occurred to 
our Nation on September 11?''
  I said, ``You know, young man, you have a very good question, and 
that is, will America appreciate what complacency has cost us?''
  Clearly what we were reminded on September 11 was the consequences, 
number one, of thinking it will never occur here, but also the 
consequences of being dependent on others in unstable areas of the 
world for sources of energy.
  To me, I think there is something wrong when the policy of this 
country over the past decade has been to allow our Nation to be 
dependent on a majority of the oil that we use to power or our economy 
comes from outside the borders of the United States. Clearly, we in the 
Congress, I believe, have an obligation to improve the security of our 
country by reducing our dependence on imported energy, particularly 
oil.
  I was proud to say that, earlier this year, and all the way back in 
July, now, think about that, in July we passed the Energy Security Act, 
legislation designed to make our country more energy independent, to 
emphasize conservation, to emphasize renewable sources of energy, and 
also to promote domestic sources of energy.
  Well, think about it. How many months have passed since July? July, 
August, September, October, November, December. Six months have passed 
since we passed legislation which would provide for an opportunity to 
make our Nation more energy independent. Unfortunately, while the House 
has acted, we are still waiting for Congress to be able to send to the 
President legislation that brings about energy security.
  I would note, not only do we provide for an opportunity to reduce our 
dependence on imported oil from the Mideast, but also we provide for an 
opportunity for investment in new technology, which will promote energy 
conservation.
  One of the provisions in the legislation that we passed provides 
incentives for homeowners to make their homes more energy efficient, 
where they can receive up to a $2,000 tax credit, up to 20 percent of 
the first $10,000 they would spend if they better insulate their home 
or put in better, more energy efficient windows and more energy 
efficient heating or cooling for the house. And also for a home 
builder. A home builder who builds a new building, whether a condo or a 
stand-alone house, would also be able to receive that tax credit.
  I was talking to a home builder in the area that I represent in the 
South Suburbs, a gentleman who has built thousands of homes in the 
Mokena-Frankfort-New Lennox, the Lincoln Way area we call it, just east 
of Joliet. He said in the last 2 years he has built about 1,000 homes, 
but only about a dozen of his customers, those who purchased new 
houses, brand new houses from this home builder, said they wanted an 
energy efficient house. People were more willing to invest a little 
extra money in the kitchen or bathroom, something they can see, than 
into making their house more energy efficient.
  But he also said when there is an incentive to help recover the cost 
of making that investment, those consumers are much more inclined to 
invest in energy efficient improvements to their existing house or to 
purchase a home which has more energy efficient technology in place.
  That is one of the most basic centerpieces of the legislation we 
passed. While the House has done its job on energy, while the House has 
done its job on trade opportunities, while the House has done its job 
on revitalizing this economy, we are still waiting for the other body.
  My hope is we can work together soon, within the next few days, and 
put together a bipartisan agreement. We all know it is in the best 
interests of our Nation to get this economy moving again, because far 
too many Americans have lost their jobs. 700,000 Americans are now 
unemployed, and we have yet to put on the President's desk legislation 
to help revitalize this economy. Something is wrong.

                              {time}  1645

  President Bush has asked us to send him a stimulus package, what we 
call an economic security package, to help create new jobs, protect 
jobs, give those that are currently out of work an opportunity to go 
back to work. I think it is wrong that this Congress has not completed 
its work, but I am proud to say the House has been doing its job. In 
July we passed energy security. Six, 7 weeks ago, in early November, we 
passed economic security. This past week we provided for greater trade 
opportunity. We need to work together, and I hope the other body and 
the House can find a way to get this job done in the next few days.
  Mrs. WILSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois. When I 
started out, I talked about how we had worked together to finish the 
education reform bill and what a tremendous achievement that is and how 
it will make a wonderful difference for our communities and our 
families and our children over the next couple of decades. It is a 
landmark piece of legislation. It showed that if we focus on something, 
with the leadership of the President and the determination of the 
House, that we can get things done. But there are things on the economy 
and jobs that we also need to get done.
  We have worked cooperatively with the President and with the entire 
Congress to get things done with respect to the war on terrorism, and 
that war is going very well, although we always must expect that there 
will be bad days and there will be good days. But there

[[Page 26192]]

is something else we need to focus on, and it cannot be put to the back 
burner. It has to be put front and center, and that is growing jobs.
  The House has passed the economic stimulus bill. We passed it on 
October 24. We may actually pass another economic stimulus bill. It is 
almost as if we are pleading to get something done so we can get it to 
the President and get back to growing jobs. We have passed Bipartisan 
Trade Promotion Authority so that we can export more and grow our 
businesses at home so we can sell products abroad. We passed 6 months 
ago the Energy Security Act, which also would create jobs, probably 
700,000 jobs in the energy sector. We have done things with farm 
security, and things are really hurting in the agriculture industry, 
and the House has passed a farm bill. Even back in June, in mid-June we 
passed an Invest for Fee Relief Act.
  Most folks do not even know it, but when one trades a stock in an IRA 
or in a 401(k) or just in a stock account that one might have with T. 
Rowe Price or whomever, there is a few pennies or actually less than a 
penny on each transaction that goes to pay for the Securities and 
Exchange Commission. That rate was set when we were not doing so much 
stock trading and there were, instead of 100 million investors in 
America trading on line, there were really only a little more than a 
million, maybe 10 million investors and they were mostly large 
stockbrokers. We do not need that much money coming from all of these 
little trades. What this bill does, it just says, let us just have the 
amount of money taken off the trade that one needs to fund the SEC. 
That is what it was intended to do.
  Six months ago we passed that legislation. It is a simple little 
bill. But if we watch the values of our stock portfolio go down, the 
IRA or 401(k), it kind of hurts that we are not acting faster and it 
feels as though we are throwing things over the net, and there is 
nobody there.
  I yield to the gentleman from Illinois before we wrap up this hour.
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from New 
Mexico for her leadership and setting aside this hour to talk about 
what the House has done. We have been hard at work over the last 12 
months working to bring about change, but also working to bring about 
security to the average American, for our communities and for our 
country. We have supported the President in the war against terrorism, 
giving him the full war powers that he has asked for. We provided for 
$40 billion in emergency funds and we have helped our aviation sector 
and stabilized that after it was literally shut down for days, which 
cost the aviation sector billions of dollars.
  But we have also worked to respond to other situations that have 
occurred since the terrorist attack on September 11. The bottom line 
is, we have to get this economy moving again. That is why the points 
that the gentlewoman has made are so important, when she referred to in 
July when the House passed energy independence and energy security 
legislation to reduce our dependence on imported energy.
  It was in October when the House passed and sent to the other body 
legislation which would stimulate this economy, reward investment and 
the creation of jobs, help displaced workers with unemployment benefits 
as well as health care benefits, give extra spending money to 
consumers. It was in November when the House passed the Farm Security 
Act, legislation to help our farm economy. Again, the House has been 
doing its job.
  It was just this past week that the House moved in a bipartisan way 
to give the President the full negotiating power he needs to reduce 
trade and tariff barriers that stand in the way of American 
manufactured goods as well as farm products that we produce here on our 
soils. Mr. Speaker, 96 percent of the Earth's population lives outside 
of our borders. There is a tremendous amount of market, a tremendous 
amount of opportunity to move goods from the United States out of our 
work places and manufacturing places and our farms on to the tables of 
those who are hungry overseas, not only for our food, but for our goods 
and services.
  The bottom line is, we have worked hard in this House. We have been 
on schedule. Energy in the summer, passed energy security legislation, 
we have given the President full trade negotiating powers, we have 
worked to stimulate this economy. Unfortunately, it takes 2 Houses to 
get the job done. My hope is that in the next few days that the other 
body will come together with the House and that we can work together to 
stimulate the economy and to help bring greater security to our 
country.
  I want to thank the gentlewoman for her leadership and this Special 
Order.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Platts). The Chair is required under the 
House rules to remind Members that it is not in order to characterize 
action or inaction by the other Chamber, and would ask Members to 
comply with that rule.
  Mrs. WILSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for 
coming down here and joining me this evening. I also wanted to commend 
him for his leadership in the Committee on Ways and Means, not only on 
issues of economic stimulus and the committee and the gentleman have 
done a grade job, but on trade promotion, and particularly the things 
that affect our high-tech economy where the good-paying jobs are and we 
want those good paying jobs to be in America, and I want to thank the 
gentleman for all the hard work that he has done this year.
  Today, the Congress had a tremendous success. We passed an education 
bill which is now on its way to the President that will implement his 
idea and his passion, that no child will be left behind in America. We 
have given the President legislation and money to fight the war on 
terrorism. The people who attacked America on September 11 
underestimated the resolve of this Congress, this President, and this 
country. We will find those responsible, we will root them out, and we 
will destroy them. We are united in that resolve.
  The House of Representatives has passed numerous measures to 
stimulate this economy. We have passed an energy bill that would give 
us 700,000 new jobs. We have passed an economic stimulus bill that 
would reduce the tax rates on middle-class Americans, put money in 
consumer pockets, and let small businesses invest and create jobs and 
restore confidence to our capital markets. We need to move forward and 
grow jobs in this country. Mr. Speaker, 700,000 Americans lost their 
jobs since September 11. We are in a terrorist-induced recession. Now 
is the time to act and get back to growing jobs.

                          ____________________