Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, for several Congresses now we have had hearings and markups in the Energy and Commerce Committee on the nuisance of spam, but no progress has been made. I am pleased that a bill has finally come forward that looks headed for passage into law.

Through all this time, the flood of unsolicited e-mails has only grown, ISPs have become more and more overwhelmed, and consumers more aggravated.

I know that this bill will come as a welcome relief to many who are fed up with opening their e-mail accounts only have to unwanted commercial e-mails clogging up their Internet mailboxes.

Consumers have to waste time deleting numerous spam emails, and even worse, if they do unsuspectingly open one of these e-mails, they are often faced with offensive pornography.

I commend the members of the Judiciary and Energy and Commerce Committees for their ongoing efforts to address this problem, and I am pleased to support this bill.

I do believe that the bill falls short in one area, in that it does not provide a private right of action for individual consumers to seek their own remedies. But this legislation does much to strengthen enforcement, provide protection from harmful pornographic e-mails, and to set up a Do Not Spam Registry, which I can only guess will be as popular as the Do Not Call Registry.

I hope that this bill will put control over Internet mailboxes back in the hands of consumers, so that they can choose to receive e-mails that they want, and to get rid of e-mails that they do not.

And to those businesses and individuals that violate these provisions and send out spam illegally, this bill will provide the Federal Trade Commission, state attorney generals, and Internet Service Providers with the tools to crack down on these violators.

As the House attempts to wrap up its work for the session, there have been several bills coming to the floor that I do not believe have merit. This bill, however, shows that when we want to, Congress can truly act for the public benefit.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this Medicare bill with limited prescription drug coverage.

This plan is bad for America's seniors and especially bad for rural areas like Northern Michigan, which I represent.

Medicare should be a right--this Republican Medicare bill threatens to undercut this right and destroy a program that seniors have trusted for nearly 40 years.

For most seniors, the prescription drug plan does not begin until 2006 while the Democrats' plan would have begun next year.

The Republican plan has a gap in prescription coverage the size of the Upper Peninsula. This gap starts at $2,250 and goes on until you hit $5,100.

We should be giving our seniors a real prescription benefit not one that gives you part-time coverage.

Illnesses and diseases do not take time off--you're not sick part of the time--seniors need full prescription drug coverage now.

Those seniors who now have coverage may lose it--CBO estimates that up to 3 million could lose their existing prescription drug coverage.

I cannot support a bill that will undercut our seniors' right to Medicare.

While Congress provides universal health coverage for Iraq that includes full prescription drug coverage--seniors in America will receive part-time prescription drug coverage but pay 100 percent of the costs.

Vote ``no'' on this ill-conceived bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor His Holiness Pope John Paul II as Roman Catholics throughout the world celebrate his Silver Jubilee anniversary this year.

The resolution before us, H. Con. Res. 313, recognizes the Pope for his enduring and historic contributions to human dignity and peace and urges President Bush to present him with the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

I can think of no more fitting a tribute to Pope John Paul II, our first ever non-Italian pope, in honoring his 25th year as Bishop of Rome and Supreme Pastor of the Catholic Church. His service began on October 22, 1978.

As the spiritual leader of more than one billion Catholic Christians worldwide, including 66 million in the United States alone, the resolution memorializes the gratitude of many. During his tenure he has visited more than 125 countries and traveled more than 750,000 miles making unprecedented contributions to the freedom of the world community.

The Holy Father's remarkable work has been globally reaching--from his diplomatic leadership toward the peaceful liberation of his Polish homeland and demise of the Soviet empire, to his promotion of human rights in rogue nations, to his efforts to heal historic divisions between the Catholic Church and other worldwide religions.

Mr. Speaker, whether you are Catholic or not, no one can deny the significant impact Pope John Paul II has made on world peace and freedom. His efforts have improved the lives of Christians and non- Christians alike.

I urge my colleagues to support this special resolution for the honored accomplishments of His Holiness Pope John Paul II--a positive inspiration to Catholics and all humankind.

I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, the pediatric research equity bill is not a bad bill. I agree with the premise of the bill. As the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Health said, it is unfortunate that we have not had a hearing on this bill, we have not had a chance to mark it up, we have not had a chance to amend it. Because I would wish that Congress would stop for a minute and look at this bill before we make another fatal mistake when we deal with pharmaceuticals dealing with young people. As the other speakers said, it is necessary to test and do proper labeling on drugs before we give them to children. We need to know, I think is what the chairman said, all the ramifications before we give young people drugs. This bill goes halfway. This bill only goes halfway. This Congress should not allow the continuation of the practice of pharmaceutical companies being able to develop drugs but not put on proper labeling.

Or when it is time to change the label, to expeditiously change the label, as the other speakers have said, we have been cutting pills in half thinking for young people half a pill is better than a full pill. When they do this testing, when it comes time to label, doctors, families, patients need to know how should the drug be used in dispense. What is the proper dosage for young people? What duration of time should the pill be taken and how often? What are the side effects of the use of this drug? These are the questions that are required for proper use and labeling, but yet it is not required in this legislation nor was it required in the pharmaceutical act of 2002.

So before a drug is marketed, it should be properly labeled with all the necessary information to be used in pediatric patients. Doctors and patients and families have no idea on how to administer drugs or what the effect will be on young people without proper labeling. All I am saying is we should have had an opportunity to amend this legislation to make sure before a patent is extended, before a drug is given for pediatric patients, that the proper labeling is done and made available to doctors, patients, and their families. It is marketed and given to children before we know what the effects are on young people.

As we said earlier, the Best Pharmaceutical Act of 2002 did require a strengthening of labeling requirements, but it did not mandate proper labeling before marketing of these drugs. While the FDA can misbrand a drug for improper labeling, it has never used the enforcement power it has. It has never used the enforcement power granted to it by Congress. As a result, case after case, the pharmaceutical companies have been granted patent extensions and then not gone through with the labeling of the drugs for years. And these drugs were not labeled misbranded by the FDA. Between 1997 and 2002, the year of the Best Pharmaceutical Act for children, the average time for labeling was 9 months after the extension of that patent. Now based upon the Best Pharmaceutical Act of 2002, it is still 5 months after the drug has been used in the marketplace. How on God's green Earth can we stand here and say we will label the proper use of drugs after it is marketed? Five months, that is what it is right now. Some of them are a year. The average is 5 months.

If we would have had a chance to have this before our committee, we could at least have offered some amendments. To uphold the true intention of this legislation and the true intent of the Best Pharmaceutical Act is to make sure we have labeling before drugs are put on the marketplace and not after, requiring, and not suggesting, that the Secretary of HHS label drugs as misbranded if companies fail to test and label these drugs for use in children.

I would like to see this legislation defeated. That will not happen here today. But once again, the Congress of the United States has punted an opportunity to protect our children. We once again said we will allow drugs to be used; we will worry about the side effects on young people after. There is no reason why we could not mandate proper labeling before. And if my colleagues read the language of the bill, it says may, the Secretary may.

We have asked and we have talked to the sponsor in the Senate and we have talked to others. We said why can they not just make it mandatory, label before they market and use in young people? Once again, Congress is avoiding its responsibility to protect the health, safety, and welfare of our young people. The ideas behind this legislation are great. The intent is great, but we have to follow it through. And we have all sat in committees and heard the stories of young people receiving drugs that were improperly used or administered that were not to be used for young people. We find out after the fact, after the drug has been used in the mainstream of commerce and being used by physicians.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the mission and accomplishments of Saginaw Valley State University in Saginaw County, Michigan as it celebrates forty years of educating students for a modern world.

I can attest to the quality of the learning experience that Saginaw Valley State provides its students, because I received a bachelor's degree from SVSU in criminal justice in 1977 while I was a Michigan State Trooper. As a returning adult student who also worked full time as a Trooper, it was particularly important to me to have accomplished professors and to be enrolled in classes that were academically challenging but also geared to practical accomplishment in the real world.

SVSU was chartered as a private college on November 13, 1963. In 1965 it was made part of Michigan's system of state supported colleges. The first class of ten students graduated in 1966.

That small but dedicated graduating class led the way for student enrollment that had grown to more than 8,000 students by the end of the millennium. International students by the hundreds now walk the campus.

SVSU is known for its programs in teacher education, an engineering program that is well-recognized in the area's automotive serving industries, programs in nursing and allied health sciences, business administration and the humanities, to name just some of the university's successful curriculum efforts.

In the past ten years, the university campus has grown by leaps and bounds, adding Founders Hall and the West Complex with its Performing Arts Center, Rhea Miller Recital Hall, Groening Commons, new classrooms and faculty offices, as well as conference facilities. Curtiss Hall, the new Herbert Dow Doan Science Building and the Student Center and Fitness Center were all completed. A Regional Education Center, the Zahnow Library addition, additions to the Marshal M. Fredericks Sculpture Museum and to student housing also were dedicated in 2003.

It would be understandable if the faculty, staff, students, alumni and supporters of Saginaw Valley State University took a moment to rest on their laurels, but my understanding is that all of the new facilities and programs are instead powerful motivation for the SVSU learning community to continue to grow and to seek excellence in all its endeavors.

I heartily congratulate everyone involved in the dramatic success of Saginaw Valley State University. As an alumnus of SVSU, I take personal pride and pleasure in its forty years of achievement.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my colleagues join me in offering congratulations to Saginaw Valley State University on its fortieth anniversary.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

I would like to enter into a colloquy with the ranking member from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).

I thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for recognizing the importance of implementing national maritime safety initiatives on our Nation's waters. In a little over a year, carriage of electronic technology for nonvoice chip communication that would exchange navigation and ship data between ships or ship and coastal stations, called the Automatic Identification System, will be required in certain vessels that operate in vessel traffic service zones.

While I certainly understand the need to implement further navigation safety and maritime security on our waters, the fact is that the Coast Guard estimates that the cost of the AIS is over $9,300 per vessel. This is a considerable amount of money for small passenger vessel operators.

In Michigan's first district, small island ferries and the Soo Locks Boat Tours operate small passenger vessels seasonally from May through October that have a maximum capacity of under 300 passengers per vessel. Although most tours and passenger services carry less than 100 passengers per trip, my concern is how are these small governmental transit authorities and small mom and pop businesses in rural America going to be able to bear the extraordinarily high cost of AIS.

I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for working with us to ensure that the costs of this technology is more conducive to small business. I look forward to working with him and the majority on this.

While I have the ranking member here, I would like to ask him, and thank both him and the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) for their support, including my provision in the manager's amendment calling for the timely review and adjustment of pilotage rates by the United States Coast Guard.

I would ask the gentleman if he knows anything further on this issue that we have raised.

Mr. Chairman, I urge the Members to support the legislation, and I urge this committee and this Congress to continue to urge the Coast Guard to follow its own rules and regulation and adjust those pilot rates as soon as possible on the Great Lakes. The season is just about over. I appreciate the gentleman's concern.

Madam Chairman, I would like to thank Committee Chairman Young and Ranking Member Oberstar for their support in including my provision in the Managers amendment calling for the timely review and adjustment of pilotage rates by the United States Coast Guard.

Every foreign vessel that enters the Great Lakes must secure the services of a ship pilot, whose primary responsibility is the safe navigation of the vessel. The rates that American

pilots charge shipping companies for pilotage services are set by the Coast Guard.

The Great Lakes pilotage system performs a critical safety and environmental protection function for the Great Lakes. It doesn't make sense to underfund a pilotage system that is crucial to the largest freshwater body in the world. Yet the Coast Guard failed to complete a rate adjustment of any kind last year. At the beginning of this year it announced that it intended to establish a new rate in time for the beginning of the 2003 shipping season yet with the shipping season now over, that still has not occurred.

The Coast Guard continues to set funding levels for key elements of the pilotage system at 1997 and even 1995 levels. This is particularly disturbing because the Coast Guard regulations require rates to be reviewed and adjusted on an annual basis. Setting rates to 1997 or 1995 levels will inevitably result in the fraying of the Great Lakes piloting system.

It has been reported that the delay of any rate adjustment is a result of objections from foreign shipping companies, which pay for pilot services. I have made the protection of the Great Lakes a crusade throughout my years in Congress. My Congressional District is surrounded by three Great Lakes. I would object in the strongest possible terms if the Coast Guard is placing the bottom lines of foreign shipping companies ahead of adequate funding for a pilotage system that is designated to protect the Great Lakes. The Coast Guard should not put the economic interests of a few foreign shipping companies ahead of the safety of the Great Lakes.

I urge the Coast Guard to follow its own regulations and adjust pilotage rates on the Great Lakes as soon as possible. Until they do so it places the entire Great Lakes in jeopardy.

I urge all members to support.

Madam Speaker, last week I could not be present for votes on October 28, 29, or 30 due to the death of my mother. As a result, I missed a number of rollcall votes. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows:

On Octoer 28, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall 569, ``no'' on rollcall 570, and ``yes'' on rollcalls 571, 572, and 573.

On October 29, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcalls 574 and 575, and ``yes'' on rollcalls 576, 577, 578, and 579.

On October 30, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcalls 580 and 581, ``yes'' on rollcalls 582 and 583, ``no'' on rollcall 584, 585, 586, 587, 588, 589, and 590, ``yes'' on rollcall 591, ``no'' on rollcall 592, ``yes'' on rollcall 593 and 594 and ``no'' on rollcall 595. I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall 596, ``no'' on rollcall 597, ``yes'' on rollcall 598, 599 and 600, and ``no'' on rollcall 601.

Mr. Speaker, public safety agencies all across our nation are charged with ensuring the security of our critical infrastructures and the safety of our citizens and their communities. September 11 served to highlight how critical it is that our public safety agencies have the funding, spectrum, and equipment that they need to communicate with each other if they are to fulfill their mission.

The Federal Government has called upon our states and localities to be ever more vigilant and prepared against possible acts of terrorism.

Yet, as hearings in Congress and numerous reports have shown, our public safety agencies continue to lack the ability to communicate with each other interagency and interjurisdictionally. Firefighters cannot talk to police, local police cannot talk to state police, and so on and so on.

We expect our public safety agencies to act with haste and urgency to meet all of our needs and homeland security goals. Therefore, we must provide them with the tools they need to assist us. It is critical to fund radio equipment and technology so that they can talk to each other and be effective responders.

It is for this reason, that along with my colleagues Vito Fossella and Eliot Engel, I am introducing today the Public Safety Interoperability Implementation Act to address this urgent need.

Our bill looks at both the short term and long term funding needs that face our public safety agencies. We set up a Public Safety Communications Trust Fund in the U.S. Treasury, to be administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). While the program will be administered with collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security, we believe NTIA should take the lead.

The Department of Homeland Security has shown itself to be still sluggish in responding to the needs of our nation. We cannot afford to waste more time, money, or red tape. NTIA, an agency well familiar with telecommunications and information technology issues, will be better able to address the communications problems that exist and expeditiously move our nation's public safety agencies into state-of- the-art communications.

In the short term, the Public Safety Communications Trust Fund it will be funded by a 3-year grant program funded through the traditional appropriations cycle, authorizing up to $500 million a year, so that grants may be provided to implement interoperability.

In the long run, the funding for the trust fund will come from the sales of spectrum conducted by the Federal Communications Commission. Our bill dedicates 50 percent of net revenue from future spectrum auctions to the trust fund.

Grants will be allocated to eligible entities to achieve interoperability, with multiyear grants available to ensure that agencies can develop long term plans without having to worry about funding from one year to the next. Preference will be given to those applicants that present

regional or multijurisdiction plans, to encourage true across the board interoperability.

Our Nation's public safety agencies' communications should not be at the mercy of Congress' funding whims. This issue is too important to require public safety agencies, year after year, to wonder what the annual funding might be. By dedicating funds from the sale of spectrum, we will ensure that funding will be set aside, no matter what happens in the annual appropriations process.

I look forward to working with my fellow members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Chairman Tauzin and Ranking Member Dingell in moving this legislation so that we can help our Nation's public safety agencies perform their important missions.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and acknowledge Gerald Losey,

of Crystal Falls, Michigan for decades of devoted and effective service to his community.

Jerry is one of those people who saw the light and migrated up to Iron County in 1983, after making his mark near Flint through years of hard work as a political organizer and Democratic campaign worker. He was chairman of the Political Action Committee of the United Autoworkers Local 651 in Flint at AC Delco. He also served during this time as alternate committeeman, district committeeman and shop committeeman for Local 651.

Jerry served the DORT Federal Credit Union at AC Delco as a member of its board of directors, as chairman of the credit committee and as chairman of its building committee.

In 1960, Jerry was actively involved in John F. Kennedy's campaign for President in Genesee County and helped organize an extremely successful Democratic rally for JFK at the Atwood Stadium in Flint.

Aside from his union contributions, in the early 1960's Jerry organized the Vienna Township Democratic Club in the Flint area. His guidance of its grass roots activities resulted in the defeat of all but one of the long-standing Republican office holders in Vienna Township.

In the early 1980's, when Jerry learned that The Landing supper club in Crystal Falls, Michigan was for sale, he bought it and began his journey to becoming a respected businessman and fixture in Iron County community life. Jerry hosted many receptions for candidates and dinners for the Iron County Democratic Party at The Landing over the years until he sold the restaurant in December, 2000.

It was also during this time that Jerry met his lovely wife, Shelly, who is a happy part of his life today.

After coming to Iron County, Jerry eventually embarked on a campaign of his own and was elected to the Iron County Board of Commissioners. He served with distinction from 1990 through 1992, acting as vice chairman of the board and chair of its law enforcement committee.

During his tenure as a County Commissioner, Jerry served a number of community organizations, including the Dickinson-Iron District Health Department, the Iron County Department of Social Services, the Iron County Community Hospital and the Iron County Rodeo Committee.

He has also been president of the Iron County Trailblazers and actively participated in its snowmobile trail work. Jerry has been a member of the Iron County Fair Board, the Stambaugh Township Compensation Committee and the Executive Board of the Iron County Democratic Party.

Lower Michigan's loss has been northern Michigan's gain, and it is clear that Jerry Losey has become a vital and valued part of the Iron County community. He is a true example of dedication and service, which was recognized by his selection as the Burr Sherwood Vintage Democrat of 2003 by the Iron County Democratic Party. I am happy to join in the applause and congratulations for Gerald Losey in recognition of his lifetime of service to his fellow Michiganians.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

I ask that my amendment to provide a $1,500 bonus to the men and women who have served in Iraq be joined by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle), the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson), the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza), and the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), and all those who have cosponsored my base bill, H.R. 3051. They have all asked to join with me in providing this bonus to the men and women who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan during fiscal year 2004.

This amendment provides a $265 million increase in the base pay for all of our military services' troops. This is the amount that is needed to provide a $1,500 bonus to each person serving, including our National Guard and Reserve units serving in Iraq or Afghanistan.

This $1,500 bonus is paid for by cutting the appropriate sum from the bill, from the amount set aside to import petroleum products into Iraq. In this $87 billion supplemental appropriation for Iraq, we surely can afford to boost the pay of the service men and women by $1,500.

What this amounts to when we look at the total bill, for every $328.30, we are giving our troops $1. Certainly, we can afford $1 for every $328 we spend in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our troops are really carrying the true burden of our commitment to Iraq and Afghanistan, and at least we can give them $1 compared to $328 which we are pouring into Iraq and Afghanistan.

Our soldiers have lived basically in nearly primitive conditions. We had an amendment yesterday on the floor, the Obey amendment, which would increase the quality of life for our Armed Services while there, and when they come home. Unfortunately, that amendment was defeated. This is an opportunity to show our troops that this Congress is united behind them in the service they are providing.

These deployments that we are now undertaking of our troops, our Guard and our Reserve units, is the longest deployment we have had of military personnel since Vietnam. They have now been deployed for up to a year in Afghanistan and Iraq. Recently, the Pentagon provided a 2- week leave for our troops after they serve 12 months. We know some 700 soldiers a day come back to the United States. They are only paid to fly into BWI, Baltimore-Washington International Airport, and then they are stuck. If their family is in Michigan, Iowa, Tennessee, they have no way of getting home. They do not even get a government rate to finish the trip home. The military does not provide a ticket for them to see their families.

And how about our National Guard and Reserve units over in Iraq and Afghanistan, first they were only going to be called up for a few months, then 6 months, and now it is a year. While our National Guard and Reserve units are proud to serve, and are willing to leave their civilian jobs to serve, how do they support their families back home, when they leave their civilian jobs?

In my district, National Guard Unit 1437 from Slt. St. Marie, Michigan, just came back. They told me about the financial hardship it is to make ends meet at home while they are over in Iraq.

Right now the U.S. Army Reserve Unit 652, a bridge-building unit, is in Iraq. It is from the Harvey and Marquette, Michigan area. What about their financial burdens? What about the financial burdens we place on the families? Well, this $1,500 bonus is not going to solve all of these financial burdens for these people, and I do not believe that asking for $1 out of every $328 we are going to pour into Iraq and Afghanistan, to give our troops $1 is asking too much.

Again, to pay for this, in the amendment we propose to cut the oil import into Iraq. Iraq possesses the second largest oil reserves in the world. I did not know why we even have to import into Iraq, but I think we should at least be able to cut that and provide this bonus to these people.

I know some may argue that Iraq may not have enough diesel fuel or kerosene to see them through the winter. Therefore, we somehow ask the American taxpayers to make sure that they will have the diesel and kerosene to get through this winter to heat their homes. But what about our own energy needs here in this country? What about this winter? Heating oil, natural gas, and propane is expected to go sky high, and we will be in short supply here at home. Americans will be scraping and sacrificing to get through the winter. The Iraqis should at least share in this sacrifice when it comes to their oil needs.

Mr. Chairman, it still does not make much sense to me to have oil imported into Iraq which, again, possesses the second largest oil reserves in the world.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to let my colleagues know that October is National Spina Bifida Awareness Month and to pay tribute to the more than 70,000 Americans--and their family members--who are currently affected by Spina Bifida--the nation's most common, permanently disabling birth defect. The Spina Bifida Association of America (SBAA), an organization that has helped people with Spina Bifida and their families for nearly 30 years, works every day--not just in

the month of October--to prevent and reduce suffering from this devastating birth defect.

The SBAA was founded in 1973 to address the needs of the individuals and families affected by this disease and is currently the only national organization solely dedicated to advocating on behalf of the Spina Bifida community. As part of its service through 57 chapters in more than 100 communities across the country, the SBAA puts expecting parents in touch with families who have a child with Spina Bifida. These families answer questions and concerns and help guide expecting parents. The SBAA then works to provide lifelong support and assistance for affected children and their families.

Together the SBAA and the West Michigan Spina Bifida Association, the Spina Bifida Association of Southeastern Michigan, the Spina Bifida Association of Upper Michigan, and the Southwest Michigan Spina Bifida & Hydrocephalus Association work tirelessly to help families meet the challenges and enjoy the rewards of raising their child. I would like to acknowledge and thank SBAA and these local Spina Bifida organizations in Michigan for all that they have done for the families affected by this birth defect, especially those living in my state.

Spina Bifida is a neural tube defect that occurs when the central nervous system does not properly close during the early stages of pregnancy. Spina Bifida affects more than 4,000 pregnancies each year, with 1,500 babies being born with Spina Bifida each year. There are three different forms of Spina Bifida with the most severe being Myelomeningocele Spina Bifida, which causes nerve damage and severe disabilities. This severe form of Spina Bifida is diagnosed in 96 percent of children born with this condition. Between 70 to 90 percent of the children born with Spina Bifida are at risk of mental retardation when spinal fluid collects around the brain.

The exact cause of Spina Bifida is not known, but researchers have concluded that women of childbearing age who take daily folic acid supplements reduce their chances of having a Spina Bifida pregnancy by up to 75%. Progress has been made convincing women of the importance of consuming folic acid supplements and maintaining diets rich in folic acid. However, this public education campaign must be enhanced and broadened to reach segments of the population that have yet to heed this call.

Although folic acid consumption reduces the risk and incidence of Spina Bifida pregnancies, we will still have babies born with Spina Bifida who need intensive care and families that need guidance and support in caring for and raising these children. The result of this neural tube defect is that most babies suffer from a host of physical, psychological, and educational challenges, including paralysis, developmental delay, numerous surgeries, and living with a shunt in their skulls in an attempt to ameliorate their condition. Today, approximately 90 percent of all babies diagnosed with this birth defect live into adulthood, approximately 80 percent have normal IQs, and approximately 75 percent participate in sports and other recreational activities. With proper medical care, people who suffer from Spina Bifida can lead full and productive lives. However, they must learn how to move around using braces, crutches or wheelchairs, and how to function independently. They also must be careful to avoid a host of secondary health problems ranging from depression and learning disabilities to skin problems and latex allergies.

After decades of poor prognosis and short life expectancy, breakthroughs in research combined with improvements in health care and treatment children with Spina Bifida are now living long enough to become adults with this condition. However, with this extended life expectancy people with Spina Bifida now face new challenges in the fields of education, job training, independent living, health care for secondary conditions, aging concerns, and other related issues.

I am proud to Co-Chair the newly established Congressional Spina Bifida Caucus with my colleague Representative Christopher Smith. The Congressional Spina Bifida Caucus will bring increased attention to this condition and advance initiatives that will improve the quality of life for those individuals and their families living with Spina Bifida.

I again wish to thank the SBAA and its chapters for all of their hard work to prevent and reduce suffering from this birth defect and for their commitment to improve the lives of those 70,000 individuals living with Spina Bifida throughout our nation. The Spina Bifida community and our nation owe a tremendous debt to the SBAA for its work over the past three decades. Much more work still needs to be done, and I am confident this fine organization and its chapters will lead the effort for decades to come. I wish the Spina Bifida Association of America the best of luck in its endeavors and urge all of my colleagues and all Americans to support its important efforts.

Mr. Speaker, today the House of Representatives is expected to vote on the President's $87 billion supplemental appropriations bill for Iraq.

This $87 billion is on top of the $79 billion we approved last spring.

This is not an easy vote, and I appreciate hearing from my constituents on this issue.

I have no objection to spending every dime necessary to make sure our troops are safe and well-supplied with everything they need to do their jobs, but the $18.6 billion in the bill for civilian reconstruction is simply too big of a handout.

Iraq has vast oil reserves, and we should lend the money to Iraq. The President has refused to separate the military portion of the bill from the reconstruction money.

I will offer an amendment to set aside enough money to pay a $1,500 bonus to every serviceman and woman who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Another amendment would require the use of American steel to be used in the rebuilding of Iraqi infrastructure, helping to keep jobs here in America.

Our people at home are hurting for jobs for health care, for quality education, prescription drug coverage. I do not believe we can ask them to continue to sacrifice even more to assume an enormous additional debt for Iraq's civilian reconstruction. That is why I intend to vote against the supplemental appropriation bill.

I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 408 would accomplish the goal of allowing the National Park Service to acquire nearly 105 acres of land along the Crystal River adjacent to the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.

This legislation would facilitate the preservation of this rare and valuable land by allowing the National Park Service to add this property to the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, and, at the same time, would fairly compensate Bayberry Mills, Inc., a company affiliated with The Homestead, a large, well-known resort, for their property.

I have a particular interest in and a high degree of familiarity with the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore and Bayberry Mills' property because for the last 10 years, it was located in my congressional district. It is a land of majestic beauty, and is a valuable environmental contribution to the area which lies along the pristine Crystal River.

For more than 17 years, there has been controversy about development along the Crystal River. Several proposals for development by the property owners have met with bitter opposition by environmentalists and some in the local community. There have been plans to build a golf course and develop homesites on the property. There is also a proposal to swap the property for lands within Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. That, too, aroused controversy.

We must be grateful to Bayberry Mills and The Homestead for not developing this acreage and for their willingness to work with the National Park Service and our committees to preserve this land. However, now it is time to purchase this land and allow The Homestead to move on.

Last year, I introduced legislation to allow the Federal Government to purchase the land for inclusion into the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. This year, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp), who has worked hard on this and who now represents

the area, and Senator Levin in the other body, have introduced similar legislation, which I fully support and have cosponsored.

This legislation has garnered the support of Bayberry Mills, the Park Service, the local community and many of those in the environmental community who opposed previous development plans for the property.

Mr. Bob Kuras, President of Bayberry Mills, is to be commended for his willingness to complete this sale, and Congress needs to act quickly to take advantage of this opportunity. I truly believe that this legislation is the only solution to a 17-year-old dispute, and it is extremely important that the House and Senate act now, so we can have closure on this issue.

The Park Service will benefit greatly by having the property included in the Lakeshore, the local communities will support this purchase, and Bayberry Mills will be fairly compensated for their property.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my staff for their work on this issue over the past 10 years. I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp) and his staff for their diligent work on this legislation we are voting on today. None of this could happen without the support of the Committee on Resources, and we certainly appreciate their help and support in this effort. This is a win-win-win situation, and I strongly urge my colleagues to join us in the passage of H.R. 408.

Madam Speaker, this week as the other body takes up the President's request for an $87 billion supplemental appropriation bill for Iraq, we must do more for our troops and their families who are under increasing duress. Specifically, Congress should grant a $1,500 bonus to all those who serve in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not since Vietnam have such a large number of troops been deployed for so long. The pressure this puts on our troops and their families is tremendous. This summer, the Department of Defense increased deployments for troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan to 1 year, and not until last week did the Department of Defense offer these troops who are living under highly primitive and stressful conditions a 2-week leave for rest and recuperation. And tragically this month, our U.S. casualties in Iraq surpassed the number of those killed in the first gulf war. We now have lost more than 300 soldiers, sailors and airmen.

Recognizing the increasing gravity of U.S. military involvement abroad, I introduced H.R. 3051 to qualify all active duty military personnel deployed for any length of time in Iraq and Afghanistan for a $1,500 bonus. This bonus proposal should be made part of the supplemental appropriation bill. As Members of Congress, we may have different ideas about the U.S. policy in Iraq, but we can all agree our service- men and -women deserve our sincere recognition for their courageous efforts. $1,500 will not only help boost morale but will send a strong bipartisan message to our troops that Congress is unified behind them.

The Bush administration is lobbying Congress for $21 billion in direct grants to support infrastructure developments in Iraq in this $87 billion supplemental appropriations bill. First of all, I see no reason why we cannot separate this $87 billion into two separate bills: one, the $66 billion defense portion, which I think we all support, and $21 billion for the reconstruction portion and then let us as a Congress require Iraqi oil to be used as collateral for international loans to finance Iraqi infrastructure projects and ensure that Iraq construction contracts are competitively bid. Either way, U.S. citizens should not be expected to support Iraqi development while many Americans are facing shortfalls in funding here at home, in health care, prescription drug coverage, schools, road construction, and other critical infrastructure improvements. Congress must continue to work to restore Iraq to a stable and self-governing state, but not at the expense of Americans here at home and our troops abroad.

I also question several items contained in the administration's supplemental bill for Iraq, like the $4 million to develop a set of telephone numbers and $150 million for a national 911 system; $100 million to build seven planned communities with 3,258 houses;

$10 million to finance 100 prison-building experts; $100 million for 2,000 garbage trucks; $20 million for Afghanistan consultants; $850 million for health facility construction and medical equipment replacement; and $900 million to import petroleum products, such as kerosene and diesel, to a country with the world's second largest oil reserves.

Instead of again coming back and dipping into the pockets of working Americans and risking veterans benefits for our troops when they return home, I support proposals to suspend the tax cut for the top 1 percent of income earners to pay for the Bush administration's $87 billion supplemental appropriation bill for Iraq. Again, I urge Congress to consider my bill, H.R. 3051, to include support for our troops in the supplemental aid package to Iraq. Again, my bill provides a $1,500 bonus to military personnel who serve under the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, National Guard and Reserves in a combat zone in Iraq or Afghanistan. In the coming year, an estimated 150,000 young men and women will not see their families. They will be deployed overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan. A record number of Reservists and Guards- men and -women will put their private sector opportunities and jobs on hold, and thousands of children from every part of America will pray for their parents' safe return.

These extraordinary times deserve an exemplary measure. I urge my colleagues to support my bill, H.R. 3051, to provide for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and to make it a part of the supplemental appropriations bill. Give our troops the $1,500 bonus they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, this week the other body takes up the President's request for $87 billion in supplemental aid for Iraq and Afghanistan. The supplemental appropriation should do more to support our troops who have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Specifically, to support our troops and their families who are under increasing duress, Congress should grant a $1,500 bonus to all those who serve in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not since Vietnam have such a large number of troops received such long deployments. This puts tremendous pressure on our troops and their families.

This summer, the Department of Defense upped deployments for troops serving under Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom to one year, and not until last week did the Department of Defense offer these troops, largely living under very primitive, highly stressful conditions, a 2-week leave.

Tragically, this month, our U.S. casualties in Iraq surpassed the number of those killed in the first Gulf War, Desert Storm. We have lost more than 308 people in Iraq.

Recognizing the increasing gravity of U.S. military involvement along, my legislation, H.R. 3051, qualifies all active duty military personnel deployed for any length of time under Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom for a $1,500 bonus. This bonus should be made part of the supplemental appropriations for Iraq.

Although as Members of Congress we may have different ideas about U.S. policy in Iraq, we can all agree that our servicemen and women deserve our sincere commendation for their courageous efforts. $1,500 will not only help boost morale but will send a strong bipartisan message to our troops that Congress is unified behind them.

The present administration wants to talk about its proposed $21 billion in direct grants to support infrastructure development in Iraq. In this $87 billion supplemental appropriation, there is another part, $66 billion for military operations. I see no reason why these two parts, the $21 billion and the $61 billion, cannot be separated out and why we cannot require the use of Iraqi oil to be used as collateral for international loans to at least pay for the $21 billion for the infrastructure improvements in Iraq and ensure the reconstruction contracts are competitively bid to all companies internationally.

We should also consider using Iraqi oil reserves to pay down Iraq's $200 billion international debt. Either way, American citizens should not be expected to support Iraqi development, while many Americans here at home face shortfalls in funding for health care needs, prescription drugs, school construction and critical infrastructure needs we find throughout this country.

Congress must continue to work to restore Iraq to a stable and self- governing state but not at the expense of the American people here at home and our troops abroad.

I also question several items contained in the administration's supplemental appropriation for Iraq, like $4

million to develop a set of telephone numbers, $100 million to build seven planned communities with 3,258 houses, $10 million to finance 100 prison building experts, $50,000 for garbage trucks. How about $850 million for health construction and medical equipment, $20 million for Afghanistan consultants, whatever they are, and $900 million to import petroleum products such as kerosene and diesel to a country with the world's second largest oil reserves?

Some of these requests do not make sense. Instead of again dipping into the pockets of working Americans and risking veteran benefits for our troops when they return home, I support proposals to suspend the tax cuts for the top 1 percent of income earners to pay for the President's $87 billion request for Iraq; and I urge Congress to consider my bill, H.R. 3051, to include support for our troops in this supplemental package on Iraq.

Again, my bill provides for a $1,500 bonus to military personnel who served under the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, National Guard or Reserves in a combat zone under Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom.

In the coming year, in this coming year, an estimated 150,000 young men and women will not see their families. A record number of Reservists and Guardsmen and women will put their private sector opportunities and employment on hold, and thousands of children every night will say a prayer for their parent's safe return. These extraordinary times deserve extraordinary measures. I urge Members to support my bill, H.R. 3051, to provide our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan a $1,500 bonus, a bonus they certainly deserve, and make this part of the supplemental appropriation bill.