Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the bill (S. 342) to amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act to make improvements to and reauthorize programs under that Act, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 227: H. Res. 159. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable vote on rollcall No. 228: H. Res. 195. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 229: H.R. 1465. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 230: S. 222. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 231: S. 273. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 232: S. 763. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 233: H. Amdt. to H. J. Res. 4. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 234: Final passage of H. J. Res. 4. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 235: Motion to suspend the rules and pass H. Res. 231. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 236: on agreeing to H. Res. 257. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 237: Motion to suspend the rules and pass H. Res. 177. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 238: Motion to suspend the rules and pass H. Res. 201. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 239: H.R. 1954. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 240: H. Amdt. 154 to H.R. 760. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 241: Motion to Recommit to H.R. 760. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 242: final passage of H.R. 760. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 243: On Ordering the Previous Question for H. Res. 256. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 244: H. Res. 258. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 245: H. Res. 258. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 246: on passage of H.R. 1474. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 247: S. 222. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 248: S. 273. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 249: H.R. 1610. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 250: H. Con Res. 162. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 251: S. 763. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 252: H. Res. 263 to H.R. 2143. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 253: H. Res. 263 to H.R. 2143. Had I been present, I would have voted ``No.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 254: H. Amdt. 159 to H.R. 2143. Had I been present, I would have voted ``No.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 255: Passage of H.R 2143. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 256: H. Res. 252: Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 257: On ordering the previous question for H.R. 2115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 258: On agreeing to the rule for H.R. 2115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 259: On passage of H. Con. Res. 110. Had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 260: On passage of H.R. 1320. Had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 261: H.R. 2350. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 262: H. Amdt. 5 to H.R. 2115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 263: H. Amdt. 4 to H.R. 2115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 264: On passage of H.R. 2115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 265: H. Res. 269 to H.R. 1115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 266: H. Res. 269 to H.R. 1115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 268: H. Amdt.

168 to H.R. 1115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 269: H. Amdt. 169 to H.R. 1115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 270: H. Amdt. 170 to H.R. 1115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 271: Motion to Recommit to H.R. 1115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 272: Passage of H.R. 1115. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 273: H. Res. 270 to H.R 1308. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 274: Rule for H.R. 1308. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 275: Motion to Instruct Conferees H.R. 1308. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 276: H.R. 2254. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 277: H. Con. Res. 220. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 278: S. 703. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 279: H. Res. 276. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 280: H. Res. 171. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 281: Passage of H.R. 658. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 282: S. 342. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 283: Passage of S. Con. Res. 43. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 284: Previous Question to H. Res. 281. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 285: H. Res. 281 to H.R 8. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 286: Approving the Journal. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 287: H. Amdt. 171 to H.R. 8. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 288: Passage of H.R. 8. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 289: H. Res. 283 to H.R. 660. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 290: H. Res. 283 to H.R. 660. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 291: H. Amdt. 172 to H.R. 1528. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 292: Motion to Recommit H.R. 1528. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 293: Passage of H.R. 1528. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 294: Kind amendment to H.R. 660. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 295: On motion to recommit with instructions to H.R. 660. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 296: On final passage to H.R. 660. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 297: H. Res. 264. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 298: H. Res. 177. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 299: H. Con. Res. 209. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 300: Passage of H.R. 2465. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 301: Previous Question to H. Res. 293. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 302: Agreeing to H. Res. 293. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 303: Passage of H.R. 923. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 304: H.R. 1460. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 305: On sustaining the ruling of the chair on H.R. 2555. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 306: Sustain ruling of the chair on H.R. 2555. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 307: H. Amdt. 176 to H.R. 2555. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 308: H. Amdt. 183 to H.R. 2555. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 309: H. Amdt. 188 to H.R. 2555. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 310: Passage of H.R. 2555. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 311: Passage to H.R. 1416. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 312: S. 858. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 313: H.R. 2474. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 314: H. J. Res. 49. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 315: H. Con. Res. 49. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 316: H. Res. 199. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 317: H. Res. 294. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 318: On the Hastings amendment to H.R. 2417. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 319: On the Kucinich amendment to H.R. 2417. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 320: On the Lee amendment to H.R. 2417. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 321: H. Res. 299 to H.R. 1 and H.R. 2596. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 322: H. Res. 299 to H.R. 1 and H.R. 2596. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 323: H. Res. 297 to H.R. 1 and H.R. 2596. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 324: Ordering the previous question on H. Res. 298. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 325: Passage of H.R. 2559. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 326: Passage of H. Res. 277. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 327: On approval of the Journal. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 328: H.R. 2596. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 330: H. Amdt.

197 to H.R. 1. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 331: Motion to recommit with instructions to H.R. 1. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 332: Final passage of H.R. 1. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

Mr. Speaker, due to family reasons, I was unable to vote on Rollcall No. 333: On passage of H.R. 2417. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 276 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution is a standard rule for consideration of conference reports and waives all points of order against consideration of the conference report.

Mr. Speaker, the process of reauthorizing the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act and the Family Violence Prevention Treatment Act completes a promise made to the American people that was begun in the 107th Congress. Unfortunately, the last Congress adjourned before consensus was reached between the two bodies on this very important issue. By taking up the conference report on the reintroduced legislation today, Congress is demonstrating an ongoing commitment to ensuring that programs to prevent child abuse, neglect, and family violence can continue to work and to protect American families.

The underlying conference report that we are debating maintains important Federal resources for identifying and addressing issues of domestic violence. It supports efforts to ensure that the current programs designed to address these issues are operating effectively and efficiently, and that they promote the prevention of child abuse before these heinous acts can occur.

The conference report retains language promoting partnerships between child protective services and private and community-based organizations, including education and mental health systems, to provide child abuse and neglect prevention and treatment services. It improves the training, recruitment, and retention of individuals who are capable of providing services to children and families. It also increases the availability of casework supervisors for oversight and consultation, while simultaneously improving public education on the role of the child protective services system and appropriate reporting of suspected incidents of child abuse and neglect, to reduce the number of false or malicious allegations.

This conference report requires States to have provisions and procedures for administering criminal background checks to prospective foster and adoptive parents, and other adult relatives and nonrelatives residing in the household, and helps to improve the training opportunities and requirements of child protective services personnel to ensure their active collaboration with families, and their knowledge of legal duties with these individuals to protect children's individual rights.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation also requires States to implement policies and procedures to address the needs of infants born and identification as being affected by illegal substance abuse or withdrawal symptoms resulting from prenatal drug exposure, including the requirement that healthcare providers involved in the delivery or care of such infants notify child protective services of the occurrence of such conditions in infants. It then requires the development and planning of safe care for such infants.

Lastly, the conference report retains language that expands priority services to infants and young children who are born with a life- threatening condition or with other very special medical needs, to ensure that these special needs are met and that these special children have a chance in life.

If there is one issue upon which every single Member of this institution can agree, regardless of his or her political belief, it should be the need to prevent child abuse and domestic abuse. These atrocities and often silent crimes do lasting damage to the lives of individuals and the moral fabric of our society. There exists a responsibility incumbent upon each of us to enact laws that protect the most vulnerable in our society, and this conference report will go a very long way to accomplish that exactly that noble and moral goal.

I am pleased to note that the House version of this legislation, H.R. 14, easily passed through its committee of jurisdiction, the Committee on Education and the Workforce, earlier this year and then through the House by voice vote. Today's conference report should continue to enjoy widespread and overwhelming bipartisan support as it has already enjoyed tremendous support throughout the child abuse and family violence prevention advocacy communities.

I would ask each of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to demonstrate their commitment to American families, to American communities, and to America's future by supporting this conference report. In particular today, I would like to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), the House sponsor of this legislation; and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for their hard work in producing this conference report. I would also like to take this moment to commend the conferees from both bodies that have labored to produce this fine product.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the issue we have before us, this rule, this conference report that we are working on, really does talk about ways in which we can go and improve the lives of millions of children, where we can help families. Families, many times single parents, who are under the stress and strain of attempting to go to work, raise their family, meet their obligations in the community, to their schools, need some help, and I think that that is exactly what this bill does. It does it in a way that community-based organizations can become involved in the life and the opportunity to make not only their neighborhoods and their schools and their communities is safer and better, but they did it in a way that is a partnership.

This administration, this President, supports this. This administration, our President, when President Bush was the Governor of Texas, worked extensively in Texas across Texas in poor communities to try to make the lives better of children to provide them an opportunity to grow up and not only be in safe neighborhoods, but also have safety in their schools. So I think that the underlying legislation in this conference report is fabulous. It does a lot of things to make sure that as a Member of Congress, that all of us as Members of Congress, that we can become engaged in things that we not only can hold our head up high about but we can mentor with our President to make sure that people see this Congress as a caring group of men and women who not only want to ensure the success of people who many of whom we will never know their names but the children who live their lives and are prepared for the future.

I think that in the scheme of things this is a question that comes about not just to Members of Congress but as a demand on this country. The demand on our country is do America's greatest days lie in our future? Are we doing those things throughout the 40 some weeks that we are here in Washington, D.C. away from our families, are we handling the business of the people to

make sure that we make life better? And I think that answer is yes. Today the underlying legislation is yet another example of this Congress working together with this President to make sure that America's greatest days lie in our future because we are active, engaged, and involved with our communities and with people back home.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood), from the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, hearing the gentleman from Illinois and the gentleman from Pennsylvania speak about children, about the things that we encounter and learn from time about tragedies that occur in people's lives with women who have problems along life, either drugs or alcohol, and also at the same time at which they are birthing babies and carry life within them, and the impact that it has on those children, not just at birth but throughout their life, it is a stunning problem in America.

But to hear the gentleman from Illinois and the gentleman from Pennsylvania speak about the great parts about this bill, about how this Congress can reach out, how we as a government can keep working with local communities to bring out the best, not only in their interaction with these mothers that are at risk, but also child abuse victims, it is all important.

I am hopeful we can also learn a lot from the things we have learned over the last few years about people who perpetrate crimes upon children, the identification of those kinds of people, so that communities can do a better job spotting these people and protecting their children. That is what this bill is about. That is the good part of what this bill is about.

I appreciate both these gentleman for coming and telling their stories, not only about why they support this bill, but why this rule is fair and important for us to pass and this conference report. Let us get it to the President and let the President continue to do the things for the American people that he did for the people of Texas when he was Governor.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Marietta, Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), one of our bright young Republican Members.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I appreciate the gentleman from Florida for his support of this conference report, S. 342, Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003.

Mr. Speaker, we have had a good debate today. We have talked about the children of this country. We have talked about our communities. We have talked about our schools. We have talked about the desire that we have as this United States Congress, this administration, President George W. Bush and the kind and gracious leadership of this House, including our Speaker, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), and our majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), to time after time take time out of their schedule not only to talk about children, children that are the future of this country and will make a difference, but also that these three gentleman, as leaders of our country, take time to make sure that this administration and the laws of this country are there to protect children, the most vulnerable part of our society.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud of what this will do. This conference report will go to help people. It will strengthen our communities. It will strengthen community-based organizations who work in a way that we need them to become efficient and be efficient and to offer these services.

I am proud of what we are doing. I am proud of what this Congress is doing, and Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), my friend, for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying conference report for the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act. My colleagues know that the rules for conference reports in the House are typically closed, and today's rule is reflective of the longstanding tradition in the House to bring conference reports to the floor in a similar fashion.

Mr. Speaker, every time a child is abused or neglected, the whole human race suffers. With that sobering thought in mind, I support the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act. I support this conference report, because most States are facing severe budget deficits, and this is the only Federal legislation that targets child abuse and neglect. I support this conference report because States are dependent on Federal money to meet the increasing demand for community child abuse prevention programs. But realize this legislation does not begin to solve the overwhelming financial problems that the States are currently experiencing. In fact, critics of this bill including the director of the National Child Abuse Coalition say that there is a $2.5 billion spending gap between the amount currently allocated towards prevention and protection and the amount required to handle this problem effectively.

The statistics on child abuse and neglect in this country are heart- wrenching. The Department of Health and Human Services estimated that in 2001, 903,000 children in this country were victims of abuse or neglect. This figure represents an 11 percent increase from the previous year, and many child advocates say the stress of a bad economy and unemployment could be two reasons for the increase.

This bill includes funding for training and preventative programs for social workers and families and encourages partnerships between State child protective services and community organizations. It also requires foster parents and adoptive parents to undergo criminal background checks and mandates that States expand child abuse services to children born with drug-related problems.

Child abuse and neglect is everyone's problem and it affects us both morally and financially. The cost of training and preventative programs will be offset later when children who might have been burdens on society grow into upstanding citizens. From a financial perspective, the costs of child abuse and neglect to our society as a whole are staggering. Studies have documented the link between abuse and neglect in childhood with medical, emotional, psychological and behavioral disorders in adulthood. Those who are abused as children are more likely to suffer from depression, alcoholism, and drug abuse.

The abused are also more likely to become juvenile delinquents and are 29 percent more likely to become criminals. Using that estimate, 36,000 of the children who were victims of abuse or neglect in 2001 can or may become criminals.

I certainly hope that the work we are doing in this conference report will help curb this number and help those who need it. However, if we are going to come to the floor today and talk about child abuse and neglect, we will be remiss to not talk about the child neglect that occurred last week in this very Chamber when Republicans in this body refused to extend the child tax credit to more than 12 million children living in low-income families without attaching a significant cost to the bill that would have provided for those 12 million children.

Frankly, it baffles me how the rhetoric of Republicans in this body rarely meet the reality of their policies. The All-American Tax Relief Act, which passed this House last week was filled with tax cuts that benefit the more well off in our society more than six times as much as they do the needy. The bill was another tax cut to the wealthy that further drives our country into debt and deficit spending, and it lacked even the slightest bit of fiscal responsibility. In truth, the child tax credit failed to provide relief to more than 12 million children who are growing up in low-income families. In truth, families making between $10,500 and $26,625 were excluded from this tax relief, including 1 million children of U.S. Armed Forces personnel. Perhaps when Republicans talk about all Americans, they are really talking about all Americans in the upper tax brackets.

Mr. Speaker, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson noted, ``A Nation as compassionate as ours should ensure that no child is a victim of abuse or neglect. The number of children that are being abused and neglected in this country is an unacceptable daily tragedy.'' Indeed, Secretary Thompson is correct.

But while this body helps communities fight child abuse and neglect throughout the country, we ought to first fight it right here in the House of Representatives. That we do not, Mr. Speaker, is an unacceptable daily tragedy.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Before I yield to the gentlewoman from California, I would like to respond to my good friend and colleague by indicating that the President's remarks were to pass the Senate bill, and what we did last week was force a conference which is going to delay the tax cuts for the 12 million persons about whom I spoke earlier.

That is a reality, and, to my way of thinking, that is, in some respects, uncaring. It certainly is not compassionate. Everybody that is wealthy, including those of us here in Congress, will get our tax benefits, but many of the persons about whom I speak, including some in the military, will not receive a dime this year by virtue of the actions that we took last week.

Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to yield 5 minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), who has been a leader in the fight for protecting children.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, before I yield, I will just respond to my friend from Pennsylvania, who is an extremely thoughtful Member of this body, when he cites the fact that Democrats want to spend. Let me isolate that on the child tax credit: Democrats did want to spend the $3.5 billion that the United States Senate wanted to spend, and each nickel of it was offset. Toward that end, I would urge that that kind of spending redounds to all of our benefit.

Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to yield 3 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to taking care of children, I just wonder, and pardon me for asking, what $1.1 trillion in the original tax cut during the President's administration and the $350 billion that we passed recently, in addition to the tack-on to the child tax credit, they ran it up to $82 billion, I wonder what those funds could possibly have done for the children of America? I, for one, would have preferred to spend it on them, rather than on rich people.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to 2\1/2\ minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), a continuing fighter and champion for children.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2\1/ 2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel), my good friend who has been a continuing champion for children in this body and in his previous life before coming here.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, at the close of this matter, I will urge that Members pay attention to a request on the previous question, and I will urge Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule, and my amendment will provide that as soon as the House passes the conference report, it will take from the Speaker's table and immediately consider the Senate-passed version of H.R. 1307, the Armed Forces Tax Fairness Act. My amendment will also add to H.R. 1307 the text of H.R. 1308, as passed by the Senate, which restores the refundable child tax credit that was removed from the Republican tax bill passed last month.

This will allow the House to combine these two Senate-passed bills and immediately send them back to the Senate and then, hopefully, on to the President's desk for his signature. If this happens, we can begin helping America's lower- and modest-income families right away, and we can give tax relief to those members of the military who are bravely fighting for this Nation as we speak.

Is it not about time we started giving tax breaks to those Americans who really need it? And is it not about time we put an end to legislation that has no chance of becoming law?

Last week, the President said he would sign H.R. 1308, as it was passed by the Senate, and restore the refundable tax credit to those families making between $10,000 and $26,000. H.R. 1308, as amended by the Senate, will provide immediate tax relief to America's hard- working, but struggling, families by extending the child tax credit to 6.5 million low-income working families and nearly 12 million additional children. This measure will provide help to the families of 8 million children whose parents serve in the military or are veterans. It will also help families of soldiers in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan by extending the child tax credit to many of them.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1307 will also help our brave men and women serving in the military. It will help with travel costs for those called up for the National Guard and Reserves, and it will provide benefits for the families of the Columbia astronauts.

Vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can combine and then consider these two important tax relief bills as they passed in the Senate and rush them back to the Senate. Let us not let tax relief for these two important and deserving segments of our society wither on the vine.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question so we can consider tax relief that can actually become law and really help those most in need of tax relief.

I want to emphasize that a ``no'' vote will not prevent the House from considering the conference report for this very important legislation, the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act. It will allow us to consider the Senate-passed versions of the refundable child tax credit and the Armed Forces Tax Fairness Act, in addition to this important conference.

However, a yes vote will stop us from voting on this package of true tax relief for lower income Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed in the Record immediately before the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I ask Members to vote no on the previous question, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the very distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for yielding me this time.

I have very much appreciated his leadership on the issues dealing with children in America. We have spent some time in Texas listening to many of our social worker, skilled social workers from around the Nation giving us instructions on the importance of providing social services to the needs of our children.

To the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the full committee chairman; and to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller); and to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) for his leadership on this issue, I too rise in support of S. 342, Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003, and will share a number of comments on the importance of this legislation that deals with enhancing the resources and the instructions and guidelines for protecting the Nation's children against abuse and neglect.

It is not my purpose to fault one State over another. Certainly all of us come from jurisdictions that can stand improvement, and this legislation will help us do so. But in the last few weeks and months, we note the tragedies that occurred in the State of New Jersey and Florida, in particular in Florida the missing little girl still yet to be found who was taken away from her grandmother by someone who alleged to be within the children's protective services, and similar stories in the State of New Jersey shows that our system is broken and needs to be fixed. Frankly, this legislation ensures that hopefully that we can focus on that broken aspect.

There is currently a $2.5 billion spending gap between what this country spends on child abuse and prevention and what is needed, and as a Nation we cannot rest. We cannot sit idly by with the knowledge that millions of children are not being properly cared for. Child abuse and neglect victims may experience one or more kinds of maltreatment including neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, psychological or other maltreatment. Neglect is the most common form of child maltreatment; and in recent years, close to 63 percent of child abuse victims suffer neglect including medical neglect.

Of the millions of children who reported abuse and neglect, 24 percent suffered physical abuse, 12 percent suffered sexual abuse, 6 percent suffered emotional maltreatment, and 3 percent suffered from medical neglect. Sadly, almost 40 percent of the children are under the age of six. Unfortunately, in my home State of Texas, 47,400 children were confirmed victims of abuse or neglect. There are over 6 million children in Texas. This legislation will hopefully focus with resources, instruction, and of course aiding and insisting on better services in our States to make sure that we confront this problem head on.

Just a few years ago I joined with the children's protective services in Harris County to tackle the problem of abandoned children, to engage in a billboard campaign along with other outreach campaigns to insist that there are other ways to avoid abandoning a baby and leaving a child unattended and to be able to work with the children's protective services and foster parent care to ensure that our children are never abandoned along a roadside or in a garbage dump. We are still working on that problem, Mr. Speaker; and we have a long way to go.

I would say that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) is absolutely correct. While we are protecting our children against abuse, whether it is sexual abuse and neglect, whether it is by way of medical treatment or nutrition, we also need to look at programs that are headed our way to this floor; and certainly this morning in a hearing sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus it is very clear that the Head Start program is not broken and should not be fixed. Absolutely, legislation that is making its way to this floor should not include a block grant provision that takes moneys away from this vital Head Start program, 38 years old, that provides nurturing and caring attitudes toward our children, a nurturing and supportive atmosphere for our parents, immunization and nutrition, giving some of these children two meals a day that they would have never have gotten. This effort to block grant this program even if it is only in eight States, Mr. Speaker, is misdirected and loses the point of what Head Start has done for 38 years. Clearly, we can work to improve our program; but we should not abolish it, and we have people in Congress today, Head Start professionals and parents, who are advocating do not abolish Head Start; and I hope that our colleagues will listen to them.

I would say also, Mr. Speaker, that we have another job yet undone, and that is to provide a tax credit for low-income children. Yes, this legislation is extremely important. But today, June 17, 2003, America's low-income children still do not have a tax credit. What we can do, Mr. Speaker, is immediately pass the Senate bill and send it to the President's desk and send the Senate bill to our low-income families. In my State of Texas, 2.129 million children are missing the impact of a low-income tax credit because we have stalled this legislation in the House. In addition, 12 million to 19 million children could be helped by the Senate bill along with the children of our military families, some of whom have their loved ones on the front lines of Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, this body should be a problem-solver. As the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) has said, we have a lot of work that we have accomplished, but much work to be done. Let us not abolish Head Start with this misdirected legislation headed to the floor. Let us pass this legislation enthusiastically to protect our children, but yet let us not leave 19 million children out in the cold without an effective child tax credit for low-income families. Let us pass that legislation as we pass S. 342, and let us work to secure and protect Head Start funding to the Head Start programs and not abolish it by block granting those funds to the State.

I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding me this time, and I ask my colleagues to enthusiastically support S. 342.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and the underlying Conference Report on S. 342, the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003. I join my colleagues and reiterate how important it is to protect our children from abuse and neglect.

Many states are dependent on Federal money to meet the increasing demand for child abuse prevention programs. This legislation is important because it is the only Federal legislation that directly addresses the prevention of child abuse. Currently, there is a $2.5 billion spending gap between what this country spends on child abuse prevention and what is needed. As a nation we cannot rest, we can not sit idly by with the knowledge that millions of children are not being properly cared for.

Child abuse and neglect victims may experience one or more kinds of maltreatment including neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, psychological or other maltreatment. Neglect is the most common form of child maltreatment and in recent years close to 63 percent of child abuse victims suffered neglect (including medical neglect). Of the millions of children who are reported abused or neglected, 24 percent suffered physical abuse, 12 percent suffered sexual abuse, 6 percent suffered emotional maltreatment and three percent suffered from medical neglect. Sadly, almost 40 percent of the children were under the age of 6.

I am particularly concerned with that 12 percent of cases involving sexual abuse. Child sexual abuse includes actual physical abuse such as touching a child's genital area or molestation, and it also includes sexual assault, self-exposure (flashing), voyeurism, and exposing children to pornography.

Unfortunately, in my home state of Texas 47,400 children are confirmed victims of abuse or neglect. I want to put that number into perspective, Mr. Speaker. There are over six million children in Texas. Over one million Texas children live in poverty. Many of the children and families I am talking about would not have been eligible for the Republican's child tax credit. Studies have shown that poverty is one of the many societal elements that can increase the occurrence of child abuse. I am glad to say that this underlying bill will lead to services for all families, including those whose incomes are low.

It is beyond reprehensible that anyone would treat children in this way. Furthermore,

it would be despicable for this Congress not to do everything possible to help prevent such abuse.

Between 1993 and 1999, the incidence of child abuse and neglect declined on the national level. However, after 1999 the incidence of child abuse rose. We must turn that tide back around. We must not be discouraged by the size of the problem we must seek to work together, in a bipartisan way. Because the matter of protecting our children is not political or partisan it is simply the most important thing that this body can do.

There is more that we can do. In fact, there is more that we must do. The underlying bill is a step in the right direction therefore I support the rule on the Conference Report for S. 342.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of Senate bill 342, the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act to amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act.

First of all, I want to commend Chairman Boehner and Ranking Member Miller for their movement of this legislation to the floor. Obviously I am pleased with my participation as a member of the conference committee. I also commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) for their participation. Also I would like to thank the House committee Democratic staff, Ruth Friedman, Ricardo Martinez, and Maggie McDow and the Republican committee staff, Pam Davidson, Krisann Pearce, Kate Houston, Rebecca Hunt, and Judy Boyer for all of their hard work and collaboration with the Senate staff in shaping this legislation to better serve some of our neediest and most helpless citizens.

In the year 2000, about 879,000 children were victims of abuse and neglect in this country. Of this number, approximately 1,200 children died of abuse or neglect, and 44 percent of those children were under the age of 1. It is indeed a disturbing thought that an adult would want to hurt an innocent, helpless child. Yet it occurs and it occurs daily in this country. The United States Congress has in the recent past taken to the floor to bring awareness to the problem and the need to deal with child abuse in this country. This resolution allows us to not only acknowledge this tragic problem but also to provide some assistance to the children and the families that are victims of abuse.

I am very proud of the many good provisions of this legislation. One is the increase of funds from $33 million to $80 million for community- based groups that run programs to strengthen and support families in efforts to reduce the level of child abuse that exists and that exists among families. There are also other new funds and emphasis to better meet the needs of abused children, such as providing funds to meet the needs of children who witness domestic violence and have policies in place to address the needs of infants who are born and identified as having been physically affected by prenatal exposure to illegal drugs or to HIV or who are HIV-infected.

However, this bill would only be doing half its job if we did not also look at individuals who assist the victims of abuse. There will be grants made available to improve child protection services, particularly cross-training to enable child protection service workers to better recognize the signs of domestic violence and substance abuse in addition to child abuse. It also calls on States to provide better training and to strengthen efforts toward child abuse prevention programs.

As our economy worsens and the number of unemployed, especially long- term unemployment, rises, we need to recall the correlation between the state of the economy and violence. With high unemployment and a weak economy, more adults will become frustrated and depressed, both of which often lead to child abuse. You mix together an unemployed individual who feels depressed, frustrated and stressed, who becomes overwhelmed, and it is unfortunate that more of them will take out their rage or their emotion on whoever is closest or whatever is closest to them. At times, sadly, this may be released on a spouse or a child.

Just as the bill would be incomplete if it did not acknowledge improvements for child protection systems, we would be incomplete in our focus on improving the status of at-risk children if we did not acknowledge the state of the economy and the need of a tax credit for our neediest families. One may not see the correlation, but it is there. If we are going to stand here today and send the message that we sincerely care about the well-being of the less fortunate victims in our Nation, we cannot then in the next breath send the message to the once-abused mother or father that they are not worth the child tax credit, or to the children who witness domestic violence or violent crimes around their home on a regular and ongoing basis that they are not worth a concrete, comprehensive program like Head Start.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, I am proud of this bill, Keeping Families and Children Safe Act; but I also do not believe that we are doing a complete job, that we are doing enough to help the neediest and the most helpless, and sometimes youngest, victims in our Nation to be safe and secure.

And so I commend the gentleman from Michigan; I commend all of those who have worked and helped shape this legislation. I support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), who is indeed an advocate for children, not only an advocate for children but who is indeed an advocate for whatever is good and wholesome for the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I noticed that the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce has come to the floor, and again I want to reiterate my commendations to him for the outstanding leadership that he has provided in bringing this legislation before us and to the floor of the House.

I have always been told that the greatness of a society can be determined by how well it looks after its old, how well it looks after its young, and what it does for those who have difficulty in looking out for themselves. And when we think about abused and neglected children, we are thinking about individuals who have difficulty looking out for themselves.

For the last 10 or more years each Christmas Eve, I and a group of my friends visit what we call halfway houses for neglected and abused children; and to see little children in the basements of apartment buildings, in the basements of churches or in many instances just places that the keepers of these facilities have found and to see them there with little hope, with no real encouragement, and not even knowing what the season is about, and to see the glee and the joy that they have just when they are given an apple or an orange or some fruit or a toy that someone else may have just given away, that speaks to what this legislation will mean. If we can prevent families from taking out their frustration on children, if we can find children who have left home, who themselves are confused, if we can bring hope to the hopeless and help to those who are helpless, then that is really what America should be about; and that is one of the things that this legislation helps to do. So once again, I commend all of those who have been instrumental in bringing it to this point.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to note it is a pleasure to see as many children in the Chamber as there are to see this bipartisan legislation being approved. I would reiterate that there is nothing more important that America could do than to demonstrate how important children are and prepare for the future leaders of our Nation to emerge, to have the kind of services that they need, the kind of programs.

We cannot afford to lose a single one. So every time we can go out and bring in a child who may have been lost, may have been neglected or may have been abused we are actually doing the best work that we could do. I would urge support of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.