Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, the purpose of this amendment is to provide $1.5 million in Federal funding for a revival of the National Agri-Tourism Initiative under the USDA Rural Community Advancement Program.

Mr. Chairman, I do not have to explain to anybody in this room that family farmers all over this country are in desperate condition. Commodity prices are extremely low, and we are seeing the loss of thousands and thousands of family farmers and the way of life that many rural communities in Vermont and throughout this country have known.

What this amendment does is pretty simple. What it says is that in many States like mine, people come to rural areas because they enjoy the beauty, the incredible beauty that farmers help create.

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

I thank the chairman very much. I will be very brief. Just to say that I think we can all agree that we want to help family farmers increase their cash flow, and one of the ways we can do that is enable them to come up with ideas that will bring tourists to their farms, and that is what this amendment is about. It has worked well in Vermont up to now. I think it can work well all over the country. I thank the chairman very much for his support and Ms. DeLauro as well.

Mr. Chairman, the purpose of this amendment is to provide $1.5 million in Federal funding for a revival of the national agri-tourism initiative under the USDA Rural Community Advancement Program. This program received $1 million in the fiscal year 2000 Agriculture appropriations bill. The House provided $2 million in the fiscal year 2001 Agriculture appropriations bill, but unfortunately this funding was stripped in conference, and this program hasn't received funding since. Mr. Chairman, it is time to bring this program back to life. Family farmers today need all of the help that they can get if they are going to stay in business, and agri-tourism is one way to help them.

Mr. Chairman, it is imperative that in Vermont and throughout rural America we preserve family owned farms and maintain strong rural economies. As family farmers struggle to survive, it is important that we develop new sources of revenue for them. Reviving the national agri- tourism program will help family farmers increase their incomes. From creating advertising campaigns and working more closely with the tourism industry, to developing farmers' markets, food festivals, bed and breakfasts and farm tours, such programs have great potential for increasing the incomes of family farmers.

Mr. Chairman, family farmers throughout this country deserve more revenue from tourism than they are currently receiving. Many tourists come to rural America because of the beautiful agricultural landscape. Unfortunately, however, family farmers receive relatively little direct revenue from that tourism. This program will help put more tourists' dollars into the hands of our farmers and that is very important.

Specifically, Mr. Chairman, this amendment would help farmers with the knowledge, networks, markets and loans critical to starting-up farm-based businesses that take advantage of the tourism dollars coming into their States.

Let me give you some examples of what agri-tourism is all about and why we need additional help for family farmers to get involved in this growing enterprise. Family farmers throughout this country are converting their guest rooms to small bed and breakfast operations, and are making a few bucks in doing that. To be successful, they might need a loan to convert a room into a bed and breakfast, and they might need some help in learning how to market their enterprise.

Farmers are now encouraging tour buses to stop by and to learn what family agriculture is about. In order to be successful, they might need a loan or a small grant to build a restroom or a parking facility. Farmers might want to build snowmobile trails through their fields in the wintertime. It costs a little bit of money to do that and advertise what you have.

A farm family that grows apples might want to add value to their product and bake apple pies, and they might need some help in buying a large enough oven to do that and to get started in a small business venture.

The list goes on and on. But family farmers all over this country, who desperately want to stay on the land, increasingly are trying to take advantage of the tourism that comes into their region.

Family farmers all across America desperately need the kind of funding that this agri-tourism initiative would provide. The agri- tourism initiative can mean the difference between another family farm going out of business or finding a way to thrive.

To put it simply, agri-tourism funding is about saving family farms.

Without this kind of funding America will lose its family farms, agriculture will cease to be competitive and consumers will pay the price of shortsighted government policies.

Mr. Chairman, family farmers deserve the support of this Congress. I urge my colleagues to stand up for America's family farmers and support this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, first, I want to thank the majority and the minority because my understanding is they have accepted this amendment, and I appreciate that very much.

The legislative intent of this amendment is to increase the funding for the Environmental Protection Agency's EnergyStar Program in K-12 school systems by $1.8 million offset by a reduction in administrative expenses for the Department of the Interior.

Mr. Chairman, our Nation's 17,450 school districts are facing serious problems. Their budgets are threadbare, and most can barely pay their teachers a living wage. To make matters worse, America's school buildings are aging. The average age is over 42 years, and

the vast majority could greatly benefit from energy saving improvements.

According to the EPA, energy costs represent a typical school district's second largest operating expense after salaries, more than the cost of computers and textbooks combined. Amazingly, in a typical school, one-third of the energy used goes to waste, largely due to old and poorly functioning equipment, poor insulation, and outdated technology.

Unfortunately, school administrators are often hard pressed to allocate any of their limited funds toward improving the energy efficiency of their buildings and systems, even when it is clear that such improvements would save them substantial sums of money that could help pay for their other needs.

Fortunately, the EPA has an energy conservation program that can help these schools do just that: to implement energy-saving strategies that save money, help children learn about energy, and create improved teaching and learning environments.

The EPA's EnergyStar Program, in its partnership with America's K through 12 school districts, is committed to building a new national infrastructure of schools that are smart about every aspect of energy.

In addition to helping school districts save up to 30 percent on their energy bills each year, energy efficiency prevents greenhouse gas emissions and improves the students' learning environment. Schools that are well lit, well ventilated, and in good repair create a healthy, comfortable learning and teaching environment. A better physical environment is among the many factors that have been demonstrated to contribute to increased learning and productivity in the classroom, which in turn affects performance and achievement.

Right now, more than 200 school districts across the country are partnering with EnergyStar. But for a Nation whose schools spend $5 billion annually on energy, there is obviously a lot of work to do. Of the 11,000 school buildings that have been rated, only 16 percent of the Nation's total school building inventory, only 530 schools have earned an EnergyStar rating by achieving a score of 75 or higher, a score that means that they use about 40 percent less energy than average buildings.

Fortunately, the EPA is now working with partners such as the National School Boards Association, the National Parent-Teacher Association, and the Sustainable Buildings Industry Council to collaboratively improve the energy efficiency and the indoor environments of many more of our Nation's K through 12 schools. These efforts are helping school districts to save big on utility bills and maintenance costs, in turn freeing up funds to pay for books, computers and teachers, and to improve indoor air quality and comfort. These efforts deserve our support.

In short, Mr. Chairman, the EnergyStar Program helps our Nation's schools to implement energy saving strategies that save money, help children learn about energy and create improved teaching and learning environments. This amendment would add $1,800,000 to this important work in our Nation's K through 12 school systems.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this martial law rule and also strong opposition to the budget resolution that we will be dealing with later this afternoon.

Mr. Speaker, the budget resolution that we will be debating is wrong and very bad public policy for at least three reasons: First, it is grossly unfair at a time when the middle class is shrinking, when the incomes of ordinary people are not keeping up with inflation, at a time when under President Bush 5 million more Americans have slipped into poverty, and at a time when the wealthiest people in this country have never had it so good, it is wrong, wrong, to continue to give tens of billions of dollars in tax breaks to the wealthiest people in America. They do not need it.

Frankly, Mr. Lee Raymond, the former CEO of ExxonMobil, who received a $398 million retirement package, can survive. He will just about make it okay, trust me, without another Republican tax break.

Secondly, while the middle class is struggling, it is just plain wrong, as Mr. McGovern has just indicated, to cut back a desperately needed program. At a time when the cost of college education is soaring, when middle-class families are finding it harder and harder to afford a college education for their kids, how do we cut back on financial aid for college education at the same time as we give tax breaks for billionaires? That is wrong.

Everybody knows that the Veterans Administration is undergoing enormous financial stress. There are waiting lines for veterans in the State of Vermont, all over this country. 17,000 American soldiers have been wounded in Iraq.

More and more are coming back with post-traumatic stress disorder. At a time when the VA is already underfunded, we cannot cut back on the needs of our veterans.

Thirdly, thirdly, we presently have a $8.3 trillion national debt, a heck of a legacy to be leaving to our kids and our grandchildren. This budget resolution will increase the national debt.

This is bad public policy. This martial law rule should be defeated and the budget resolution should be defeated.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, how does my friend feel about a tax bill, the one that the President is signing, which will give $43,000 in tax breaks to millionaires and a $10 a year tax cut to people making $50,000 a year or less? Does my friend think that that is a fair proposal?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for his presentation, but when you talk about who is paying what in income tax, you are forgetting a very important part of the equation, and that is who is making what in income.

As the gentleman knows, or should know, in the United States today we have the most unequal distribution of income and wealth of any major country on Earth. The gentleman knows, or should know, that the wealthiest 1 percent in America own more wealth than the bottom 90 percent. And the gentleman should know that the wealthiest 13,000 families earn more income than do the bottom 20 million families.

So when the gentleman said, my goodness, look at how much the wealthy are paying, those are the people, and in many cases, the only people who are seeing an increase in their income. The gentleman knows that family household income is stagnant, that working people are working longer hours for lower wages because the jobs that are being created by and large in this country are low wage jobs.

Mr. Speaker, Vermont has lost one of its finest, most ethical and courageous residents. The Reverend William Sloan Coffin, Jr., who lived in Strattford, Vermont, has died at the age of 81.

When the Civil Rights Movement began, when a brave coalition of black and white Americans brought the attention of the Nation to the injustice of segregation, Rev. Coffin was there, standing up for what was right. He was a Freedom Rider in Montgomery, Alabama in the early years of the Civil Rights struggle, and was arrested there in 1961. He was arrested in Baltimore two years later in an anti-segregation protest and again a year later in St. Augustine, Florida as he tried to integrate a lunch counter. He was one of those who, in the phrase of the day, ``put their bodies on the line'' to bring about a more equitable and just America.

When the United States entered Vietnam, and the war escalated, Rev. Coffin was an articulate voice for peace. As Chaplain at Yale University, he offered the chapel as a sanctuary for those who refused to serve in Vietnam. He delivered the draft cards of antiwar protesters to the Justice Department in an effort to mount a legal challenge to the draft. Instead, the government challenged him, arresting Rev. Coffin, Dr. Benjamin Spock and three others for counseling draft evasion. He was convicted but the verdict was subsequently overturned by an appellate court.

In his years at Yale and later at Riverside Church in New York, his was an eloquent voice for the disadvantaged and disinherited in America. He showed great courage in questioning the ethics of America's military decisions and unstintingly opposed the nuclear arms race. He was a foremost proponent of nuclear disarmament, calling for a nuclear

freeze. He opposed both the Persian Gulf War in 1991 under first President Bush, and the invasion of Iraq in 2003 by the current President Bush.

William Sloan Coffin, Jr. was a man of strong and passionate views. Needless to say, not everyone agreed with all of his positions. But whoever knew him--and I count myself fortunate to be among them-- recognized his courage, his dedication to ethical reasoning, and his profound commitment to social justice. He served as a model of the engaged intellectual to generations of students and to countless Americans. The Nation will miss him, Vermont will miss him, and I will miss his strength and passion for justice.

Mr. Speaker, I am introducing a bill that would name the United States Post Office in Fair Haven, Vermont, in honor of Matthew Lyon, one of our nation's early defenders of the First Amendment, a former member of the Vermont House of Representatives, and Vermont's fourth Representative to the United States Congress. Matthew Lyon is also recognized as the founder of Fair Haven, Vermont.

Matthew Lyon plays an important role in the history of our country. He was the first person to be tried and convicted under the repressive 1798 Sedition Act. The Sedition Act was sweeping legislation passed during a period when America was engaged in hostilities with France. The purpose of the legislation was to punish Americans who opposed President John Adams' foreign policy toward France. This legislation was unquestionably a direct attack on rights explicitly protected by the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution.

Matthew Lyon's only crime was writing a letter to the editor critical of President Adams' foreign policy towards France and submitting another person's similar writings to a local newspaper that published them. Solely for expressing his views and exercising his First Amendment rights, Matthew Lyon was sentenced to four months in jail, required to pay the cost of his prosecution, and fined $1,000. He was, however, subsequently pardoned by President Thomas Jefferson.

At a time when we find ourselves struggling to balance the security of our nation with the liberties we cherish, I can think of no better time to honor one of our nation's champions of the First Amendment's right of free speech. Naming the Fair Haven Post Office in honor of Matthew Lyon would be a fitting tribute to him and his fight for liberty, and would serve as a reminder of Fair Haven's connection to this great American patriot. I look forward to working with my colleagues on the House Government Reform Committee to move this bill through committee and onto the House Floor.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend Northshire Books, honored as this year's Bookseller of The Year. The selection and award was made by Publisher's Weekly.

Northshire Books is located in the small town of Manchester, Vermont. Owned by Ed and Barbara Morrow, it is a wonderful example of a locally- owned bookstore. It boasts a handsome environment for browsing books and a huge selection of titles. The selection it carries is not chosen by corporate giants seeking maximum sales, or by a central office following national trends. Quite the contrary, Northshire's wonderful inventory of books is the result of the informed knowledge of its staff: people who read and value books.

Northshire Books regularly presents readings by authors, allowing it to serve as a rich cultural resource for all of southwestern Vermont. It introduces young people to reading, through its fine children's section, and ``Story times'' for young readers.

Vermont authors value this wonderful store. ``Northshire is everything one could want in a bookstore,'' said Vermont novelist Chris Bohjalian. ``It's a huge gift to the state.'' And best-selling novelist John Irving agreed: ``What's remarkable about the quality and range of the Northshire Bookstore is that Manchester isn't a college town, or even a very big town, yet the store is both broad and deep--it is literary, friendly to children, and welcoming to tourists. I love the place.'' Novelist Howard Frank Mosher said, ``Every time I walk through there, the first thing I see is a dozen or so of my favorite contemporary novels and non-fiction books. He continued, ``Then, the booksellers that the Morrows have hired over the years are, I think, the most knowledgeable booksellers I've ever met. They've actually read the books they sell and know an enormous amount about them.''

Northshire has not been purely commercial. In 2003 its owners sponsored ``Cry Out: Poets Protest the War,'' a collection of the anti- war poems were read by eleven renowned poets, including Galway Kinnell, Grace Paley and Jamaica Kincaid, to an overflow crowd of 500 in Manchester's First Congregational Church. That event was announced after the White House canceled a poetry reading out of a fear that poems critical of the war in Iraq might be read. The poems read were subsequently published by Braziller. And when the Patriot Act eliminated reader privacy--making it easy for investigators to check bookstore purchases without judicial oversight--Northshire actively opposed the law with American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression. As a result, a petition with 185,000 signatures was sent to Congress, asking that it restore protections for reader privacy which were eliminated by Section 215 of the act.

Small, local business is the heart of the American economy. Local bookstores are, and have been ever since the times of Benjamin Franklin (a bookshop owner), a center of American learning. Congratulations to Northshire bookstore, to owners Ed and Barbara Morrow, to its manager Chris Morrow, to its staff, and to its dedicated and supportive patrons.

Mr. Speaker, the middle class of this country is being assaulted in so many ways. Millions of Americans are working longer hours for low wages. In the last 5 years, 6 million Americans have lost their health care. We have lost 2.8 million good-paying manufacturing jobs. New jobs being created are low wage and low benefits.

But of all of the attacks taking place on the middle class, I think the most unspeakable is the assault by corporate America against the pensions that were promised to American workers. Just think about it. There are millions of people today who have worked for a company for 20 or 30 years, and one of the reasons they worked for that company is that they were promised that when they retire, they are going to have a certain pension. And then suddenly out of nowhere a company says thank you for working for us for 30 years, thank you for not going to another company when you had a better opportunity, but we have changed our mind and we are going to cut your pension by 20, 30, 50 percent. It is too bad you are 60 years of age and you have no place else to go, that is the reality. That is unspeakable, it is unacceptable. When those workers have no place else to turn to, it is the job of the United States Congress to stand up for them.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Miller motion to instruct, and I commend the gentleman from California for his leadership on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, pension anxiety is sweeping this country. Millions of Americans are worried that the pensions they have today will not be there for them when they retire, and with good reason.

Over the past two decades, large corporations have been breaking the retirement promises they made to their employees, and that is wrong. Some companies are declaring bankruptcy for the sole purpose of breaking those retirement commitments. Other companies are freezing pension plans in order to slash retirement benefits of older workers.

Congress must tell corporate America in no uncertain terms that when they make a promise to workers about their pensions, they must keep that promise. That is what Mr. Miller's motion is all about.

Mr. Speaker, last December the House passed a so-called pension reform bill that was hundreds of pages long. Included in that bill was an obscure provision to legalize age discrimination in cash balance plans prospectively. No floor amendments were allowed to strike this provision or offer any alternatives to it. Members were forced to vote up or down on the entire bill, but the Senate did the right thing. In their bill they provided important protections for older workers who would be negatively impacted by cash balance schemes. The Senate language is supported by the AARP, the AFL-CIO, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, the National Legislative Retirees Network, and the Pension Rights Center.

Today, unlike last December, we have an opportunity to do the right thing for American workers. We can and should instruct the conference committee to adopt the Senate language on cash balance plans.

Mr. Speaker, there are some who support cash balance schemes. They argue that these plans benefit employees. Well, interestingly, a couple of years ago I asked the Congressional Research Service a simple question: What would happen if Members of Congress had their pensions converted to cash balances?

If it is a good idea for millions of American workers, it must be a good idea for us, right? We want to lead. Well, guess what, very few Members of Congress thought it was a good idea for this institution. So if it is not good for the Members of Congress, I think it is not good for the American working people, and I urge strong support for the Miller amendment.

Madam Speaker, this is an extremely important debate. I want to begin by expressing my disappointment that this bill is being considered as a suspension along with the naming of post offices. Well, you know what, this is not a post-office-naming bill. This is a bill that deals with constitutional rights. It is an issue about which seven States in this country have raised concerns, as have hundreds of municipalities from one end of America to the other.

This is a bill that should allow for amendments and serious debate and not be considered simply as a suspension.

Madam Speaker, many Americans are wondering how it could be that in terms of national security, our President believes that it is okay for a foreign government with terrorist ties to run major ports in America; that that is okay. But when some of us say that maybe kids or just ordinary American citizens should be allowed to read the books that they want in libraries without being investigated by government agents, without any evidence that they are engaged in terrorist activities or have any ties to terrorism, that we cannot protect.

Madam Speaker, there is growing concern in this country with regard to the state of our civil liberties and our constitutional rights. Whether it is the President of the United States engaging, through the NSA, in illegal wiretaps without court orders, or the widespread use of national security letters, millions of Americans, whether they are progressives, whether they are conservatives or in between, are very concerned about Big Brother investigating the private lives, the private reading habits of ordinary Americans.

Madam Speaker, in June of 2005, I offered an amendment that passed with a very strong bipartisan vote, which said that libraries and book stores should be exempt from section 215, that it is wrong for the government to be able to access the reading records or the book purchases of innocent Americans unless they can establish that those individuals have ties with terrorism.

All of us want our government to be vigorous in protecting the American people against terrorism. But we want to do that in a way that does not undermine the constitutional rights of the American people. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership took that amendment, which passed with strong bipartisan support, and they tossed it out. They rejected the will of a vast majority of the Members of the House of Representatives and did not incorporate that language into the final bill.

Madam Speaker, this is an issue of huge consequence. Fighting terrorism is an enormously important issue, but we can and must do it without undermining the constitutional rights of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak today about an extraordinary achievement by the teachers, administration and students of a small school in Vermont.

The Robinson Elementary School of Starksboro was one of five schools in the Nation chosen to receive this year's ``Creative Ticket National Schools of Distinction Award.'' The Creative Ticket School Awards provides national recognition ``of the role individual schools play in providing a creative learning environment for outstanding student achievement'' by recognizing ``schools that have developed exemplary arts education programs.''

The arts are a vital part of education, by connecting us through words and images and sounds to our past, by connecting us to one another in a vibrant human community, and by helping us to imagine a future where none are isolated or lonely or without hope. The wonderful work done at Robinson Elementary School is testimony that the arts are alive and flourishing--not just in, but especially, in the small towns of Vermont. And most especially, in Starksboro, a town of just under 2,000 residents.

This award is testimony to the inspired teaching which takes place at Robinson Elementary School, where art, drama, music and writing are integrated into the school curriculum. In particular, let me single out Vera Ryersbach, the art teacher at Robinson Elementary.

And of course I want to single out the students, for schools exist for their students, and the success of any program is measured by how hard and eagerly students pursue their studies. Twenty-five of the students at the 142-student school will be going to the Kennedy Center to perform on the Millennium Stage this coming March. But before that, there will be a community dance celebration in Starksboro, so all the students and community members can share in this great achievement.

Congratulations, too, to Robinson's principal Dan Noel, and to the supporting group for this endeavor, the Vermont Alliance for Arts Education and Anne Tyler, VAAE's executive director, and Elizabeth Miller, VAAE chair.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend a group of young people in Vermont who have done a wonderful thing, worth bringing to the attention of my colleagues in the Congress and the American people.

A group of students in the Sunday School of the United Church in Lincoln, Vermont, have raised over $5,000 dollars for Heifer International. Lincoln is a beautiful community in

the Green Mountains of Vermont, but it is not a large community, so a fundraising effort of this magnitude, for the benefit of a rural village in an underdeveloped country is testimony to how much the youth of America care about the world.

This project began with conversations about world hunger. Students, as young as 3 and as old as 14, decided that raising money for Heifer International would be a good way to address, positively, the issue of world hunger.

Many people are trapped by poverty, underdevelopment, and the impossibility of finding the resources they need for self-improvement. Heifer International believes in self-help: if human beings are given the tools they need, they can improve their lives. So Heifer International provides livestock, education in agriculture, and small business counseling, so individuals and entire communities get a hand up instead of a handout.

Over the course of 18 months the kids of the United Church Sunday School made countless cow-shaped cookies and holiday ornaments and sold them for a dollar each. It took a lot of cookies and ornaments to reach the goal of $5,000. They were helped by the school superintendent, Chris Bohjalian and a group of dedicated Sunday school teachers. But the real effort, the real credit, goes to the young people, for on this past Christmas Eve, their goal of $5,000 was reached.

An ``ark'' of farm animals will be delivered to a village, most likely in Armenia, the gift of visionary and committed children from Lincoln, Vermont. According to Pastor David Wood, the ark will have everything ``from fish to llamas to cows. And chickens and pigs, and also trees to provide ongoing food and medicinals.''

Yes, we do live in a global village, and our children are showing us how it can be rich in generosity and neighborliness.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to share with you some information regarding a bold new system that will help a small hospital in my state save hundreds of thousands of dollars annually in energy costs, while dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental pollutants.

North Country Hospital in Newport, Vermont, has instituted an ingenious heating and electricity co-generation system that utilizes biomass wood chips instead of traditional heating oil as its fuel source. It is believed to be the first use of such technology in any hospital in the country. At today's energy prices, this new biomass gasification system could save the hospital as much as $328,000 annually in energy costs.

In addition to providing heat for the hospital complex, the process heats water from the chips into steam, which not only provides a supplemental source of electricity, but will produce the hospital's hot water and also help operate other critical equipment within the hospital, such as sterilization equipment, dishwashers and clothes dryers.

Energy cost savings realized by this environmentally sound energy choice will save the hospital, and hence its patients, substantial money that can be better directed toward critical healthcare services. This system provides an innovative example to hospitals and other public buildings in Vermont, across the country, and throughout the world.

Already, business people, government officials and hospital administrators from other regions are touring the new facility with an eye toward implementing such a system themselves. A company in Spain is designing a system based on North Country's model, with the exception that it will actually burn tomato vines instead of wood chips as its energy source. Surely, a system so versatile has tremendous potential to be effectively used far and wide.

Wood chips are a renewable source of energy, which recycles carbon that already exists in the natural carbon cycle; meaning no new carbon dioxide is added to the atmosphere from this biomass energy source. Wood chips are supplied from within Vermont; hence money spent on wood chips stays in the local economy and supports jobs in the area's forest products industry. For buildings 50,000 sq. ft. and larger, fuel cost savings likely more than offset capital financing costs and additional maintenance staff time requirements; hence, in many cases, a system can pay for itself in 5 to 10 years.

I enthusiastically commend the Board of Trustees at North Country Hospital and their innovative staff, especially Larry Labor, Steve Wolff and Terry Robbins, for taking energy matters into their own hands and raising the bar for how local leadership can have national and international significance and positive impact. Each of them deserves high praise for their efforts. They have given us a sterling example of how American hospitals can save substantial money on energy costs, help improve environmental conditions related to heat

and energy production, and help support their local job markets in the process. I encourage other hospitals and institutions in Vermont and across the country to study the potential of this new system for their own facilities and to duplicate it where appropriate.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2830, the so-called Pension Protection Act. It should be pointed out that H.R. 2830 is opposed by AARP, by the Pension Rights Center, and pension advocates across the country. While I recognize that the Republican leadership included some modest provisions to attract some union support, H.R. 2830 still has a number of provisions that will jeopardize the retirement security of millions of American workers.

Among other harmful provisions, this bill would legalize age discrimination in cash balance pension conversions. Year after year, Congress has voted against cash balance pension conversions because of the harm they have caused older workers.

Mr. Speaker, we do not tolerate discrimination in this country based on race, gender, religion, or disability; and we must not tolerate discrimination based on age with regard to pensions.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what H.R. 2830 does. According to the GAO, cash balance conversions without protections slash the pension benefits of an average 50-year-old by $238 a month. Younger workers are also hurt. As the GAO reported, a typical 30-year-old would see his or her pension benefits slashed by $59 a month under a cash balance conversion. H.R. 2830 would legitimize these harmful pension cuts by legalizing cash balance conversions without requiring employers to protect older workers. That is wrong.

Mr. Speaker, let me read to you what the AARP and the Pension Rights Center have to say about this legislation. According to the AARP: ``We cannot support legislation that would clarify the legal status of cash balance pension plans without providing protections for older, long- service workers involved in cash balance plan conversions.''

I urge a ``no'' vote.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this conference report. All of us are in agreement that the United States government must do everything it can do to effectively fight terrorism and protect the American people from another terrorist attack. There is no debate about that. But some of us believe that with strong, well-trained and well- funded law enforcement, we can in fact protect the American people without undermining the constitutional rights that make us a free country.

In that regard, I am happy to say that there has been a very strong coming together of Members of Congress and Americans from very different political perspectives, people who usually agree on nothing but who have come together to protect the Constitutional rights of the American people as we fight terrorism.

We should be very proud that, on this issue, such diverse groups as the ACLU, the American Conservative Union, the Gun Owners of America, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Library Association and the American Book Sellers Association have come together to say to Congress, please support the Senate version. And this is a message that I hope all Members heed.

The simple fact of the matter is that the original Senate bill is a far better piece of legislation than what we are looking at today, and that is the legislation that we should pass.

Mr. Speaker, day after day, we hear the Republican leadership telling us about the virtues of small and limited government, about how we have got to deregulate almost everything and get government out of our lives. In that regard, are my Republican friends really comfortable with allowing the FBI to access Americans' reading records, gun records, medical records and financial records without judicial approval; allowing the FBI to search someone's home without probable cause and without telling that person about the search; allowing the FBI to serve a librarian or a bookstore owner with a section 215 order demanding records without having to provide facts that a person whose records are being sought is involved in a terrorist investigation?

Please vote no on this conference report.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and along

with millions of American workers in the AFL-CIO, I rise in very strong opposition to this flawed agreement.

Mr. Speaker, here we go again. Once more, the proponents of unfettered free trade are telling us about all of the good jobs that will be created if we pass this agreement and how great this agreement will be for the economy, and once again, they will be wrong.

Let me be as clear as I can be. Our unfettered free trade policies, NAFTA, PNTR with China, and the other trade deals have been a demonstrable and absolute disaster for the average American worker. It is incomprehensible to me that failure after failure after failure takes place, and then people come to the floor of the House and they say let us do it again.

Mr. Speaker, in 2004, we had a trade deficit of $617 billion, and by the end of this year, that trade deficit is expected to top $700 billion. Industry after industry has been decimated in this country by unfettered free trade, and we have lost millions of good paying manufacturing jobs to China, to Mexico and to other low-wage countries. In fact, after losing millions of good paying, blue collar jobs, we are now on the cusp of hemorrhaging millions more of white collar information technology jobs.

When will you stop bringing these agreements forward? When there are virtually no decent jobs left in America? Well, you are doing a good job in that effort.

In the last 5 years alone, we have lost almost 3 million manufacturing jobs, more than 17 percent of all jobs in that sector. Is trade the only reason that we are losing those jobs? No. Is it a major reason? Of course it is.

Why do we have these trade agreements? The answer is obvious. Corporate America comes in here and they say we do not want to pay working people a living wage, we do not want to respect environmental standards, we do not want to provide health care to our workers; so give us the opportunity to move to China, to other low-wage countries; please pass these trade agreements. Congress says, yes, boss, that is what we are going to do, and this is, in fact, what has happened.

Today, at 14.3 million, we now have the fewest manufacturing jobs in this country since the 1950s, and these manufacturing jobs are the jobs that pay workers a living wage with good benefits. What is going on in our economy today and what is destroying the middle class is that we are losing good paying jobs in manufacturing and information technology, and we are replacing those jobs with low paying service industry jobs that provide low wages and minimal benefits.

We have gone from a General Motors economy, good wages, good benefits, producing real products, to a Wal-Mart economy of low wages, minimal benefits and vehement anti-unionism.

Let me say very clearly, that if we do not turn this trend around, including totally rethinking our trade policies, our kids, for the first time in the modern history of the United States of America, will have a lower standard of living than we do.

Mr. Speaker, in America today, the middle class is shrinking, poverty is increasing, and the gap between the rich and the poor is growing wide. Over the past 5 years, more than 5 million Americans entered the poverty ranks. Over 6 million Americans have lost their health insurance. Income for the average American fell by over $1,600, and childhood poverty increased by over 12 percent. In 2003, the last study done by the IRS showed that 99 percent of Americans had an income which did not keep pace with inflation.

Mr. Speaker, we have got to stop the race to the bottom. We have got to reform and rethink our trade policies. Let us vote this proposal down.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

I thank my friend for yielding. You talked about job creation. What kind of wages are these jobs paying people?

I wish to amplify.

You did not answer the question. You talked about new jobs being created. You said exported jobs pay better. That is true, but most of the jobs being created are service industry low-wage jobs.

Mr. Speaker, Hurricane Katrina was a natural disaster. Its effects were

compounded by human ineptitude, as FEMA, State officials and the President all reacted slowly and without adequate concern for their fellow Americans.

We rightly witnessed their inaction and unconcern on our television sets.

But there is another America, an America which responds to distress with generosity and a willingness to pitch in. An America which provides an outpouring of funds for the Red Cross and countless truckloads amounts of donated supplies.

I want to tell you a story about what is best in America.

When they learned of the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina, two members of the Vermont's South Burlington Fire Department, Lieutenant Micah Genzlinger and Firefighter Trevor Poor, volunteered to help their fellow firefighters on the hard-struck gulf coast. They went to areas devastated by the hurricane and helped other fire companies fight fires. They also helped citizens rebuild and recover from the destruction wrought by the storm. And, in the spare time they could muster, they helped their fellow firefighters take care of the damage to their own homes.

And the fire company they left behind? According to their union contract, firefighters must be given notice of shift changes two weeks in advance. Generously, all their colleagues waived this requirement, so that they could cover all shifts, without charging massive overtime to the city of South Burlington. They changed their work schedules to make sure the city was protected and that Genzlinger and Poor's trip to help others did not undercut local fire protection, all at no additional cost.

This story was repeated all over America. In Vermont, firefighters from Barre and Hartford also headed south to help their firefighting brothers and sisters. In other states, firefighters responded to the call to protect and rebuild--as they always do, not only for their own cities and towns, but for Americans everywhere.

This kind of generous solidarity is what makes America a great and wonderful Nation.