Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to salute the Phillips Beth Israel School of Nursing on the occasion of the centennial anniversary that it celebrates on October 9th and 10th, 2004.

For one hundred years, the Phillips Beth Israel School of Nursing has been one of the leading centers of professional nursing education in the United States. As with so many institutions in New York City, its roots first grew in Lower Manhattan, where it was founded as an adjunct to its namesake, Beth Israel Medical Center, the outstanding health care institution with which it has been so closely connected throughout its history.

Created shortly after the establishment of the Beth Israel Hospital, the School of Nursing was first officially chartered by the New York State Board of Regents in 1904. Thus began its progression toward excellence, a standard that the School quickly met and proudly upholds to this day.

Since its inception as a degree-granting institution, the Phillips Beth Israel School of Nursing has undergone significant changes reflective of the evolving nature of health care delivery over the course of the last century. During World War II, the Beth Israel Training School for Nurses, as it was then called, participated in the U.S. Cadet Nursing Program under the terms of the Bolton Act, which provided subsidies to train nursing students for combat duty. As that great conflict was ending, Seymour J. Phillips, a Beth Israel trustee, Chairman of the Phillips Van Heusen Company, and a leading philanthropist of the day, became Chairman of the School, which was renamed in his honor four decades later. In 1978, the School of Nursing received approval to grant the degree of Associate in Applied Science in Nursing. A major academic affiliation was established in 1983 with Pace University offering the liberal arts component of the curriculum. The Phillips Beth Israel School of Nursing also has entered into articulation agreements with Pace and New York University to offer its students the opportunity to pursue a baccalaureate degree.

In 1985, the Phillips Beth Israel School of Nursing received full accreditation from the National League for Nursing, and was reaccredited in 2002 for a full eight years. Under the able leadership of its current Dean, Janet Mackin, RN, EdD, the School continues to advance its mission with a view to its long term future, and is preparing to move into new facilities located at 6th Avenue and 27th Street in Manhattan. Its current curriculum prepares graduates to practice nursing in the realities of today's health care system, but throughout its century-old tradition of excellence, it has maintained a constant goal: educating nurses to practice with a philosophy of caring and compassion.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in saluting a century of achievement by a proud New York institution, the Phillips Beth Israel School of Nursing.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 774, commending the people of Greece for hosting a successful and safe Olympics.

As co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues, it is my great honor to recognize Greece for its recent achievements.

I am very fortunate and privileged to represent Astoria, Queens--one of the largest and most vibrant communities of Greek Americans in this country.

I never had any doubts that Greece would be an excellent host for the 2004 Olympic Games, truly one of the greatest ever to be held.

For three weeks in August, the people of Greece welcomed the world to participate in an event which allows countries to set aside their political differences for a brief time to come together in the spirit of peace and sportsmanship.

Thousands of athletes from around the world returned to the birthplace of the Olympics to determine the fastest, the strongest, the best in each competition.

From the swimming pool to the volleyball courts to the track and field arena, moments of perseverance and victory will be etched in our memories forever.

As gracious hosts, the people of Greece showed the visiting delegations its beautiful historic and natural treasures, ensuring that they would remember their time in Greece for more than only their events.

We heard much talk in the months leading up to the Games that the Greeks would not be ready.

But they proved everyone wrong.

The venues were completed and were the sites of some of the most exciting Olympic competitions ever.

The opening and closing ceremonies were unbelievable.

The volunteers were phenomenal, and the transportation was efficient.

And most importantly, the outstanding security preparations taken in advance of the Games resulted in the safety of both the athletes and visitors.

The 2004 Games have set an example for how future host cities will prepare for this magnificent event.

The dollars and time spent on security were well worth the investment.

I am tremendously proud of Greece for what it has accomplished.

I an hopeful that its economy will benefit from the Games for years to come.

I am confident that millions of tourists are planning vacations as we speak to Greece so that they can see for themselves the ancient ruins and its gorgeous coastline.

And so that they can meet for themselves Greece's greatest treasure . . . its people.

I would like to thank my good friend Representative Meehan for introducing this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, the Constitution of the United States is the single greatest foundation of law in history. It serves as a model for democracies around the world. Therefore, we should approach amending it with great caution and reverence.

For 215 years the U.S. Constitution has protected the rights of the American people; the right to assemble, the right to worship, the right to speak freely, and we ought to pass a constitutional amendment that gives equal rights to women. Instead, today we are debating a constitutional amendment that would curtail a right. Our predecessors tried this once in the 20th century. Fourteen years later they had to unamend the Constitution by rolling back prohibition.

Our Constitution is silent on marriage, and that is good, because the American people's definition of what is an acceptable marriage has evolved over the years. A marriage once signified that a woman had no legal identity apart from her husband. Within the last 100 years, over a dozen States prohibited marriages between those of a European and Asian decent, and the Supreme Court overruled laws barring interracial marriage less than four decades ago.

No constitutional amendment stood in the way of those changes. Laws governing families and marriage have always been determined by State governments. Dozens of States are already dealing with this issue. It is federalism in action. Many of this constitutional amendment's supporters have preached the virtues of federalism on other issues. You cannot be a federalist except when federalism is inconvenient.

This is not governing on principle, it is practicing the politics of expedience and divisiveness right before a major election, and we should know better than to play politics with the United States Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this legislation.

Nearly thirty years ago, handguns were banned in Washington, D.C. by the will of the people. Yet here we are, once again, dictating to the citizens of the District of Columbia the laws that govern them when their own elected delegate will not even have the opportunity to vote on passage of this bill. Like any metropolitan area, Washington, D.C. has crime,

much of which is because of guns. Therefore, I do not understand why the Majority thinks the solution to that problem is allowing more guns on the streets of this city. We should be reducing crime by preventing gun violence and by ensuring that there are enough policemen who have the necessary resources to do their jobs. At a time when citizens from across the nation have returned to D.C., despite their security concerns, to enjoy its attractions, we should not be passing legislation that sends the message that the city is unsafe.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Drs. Cecelia Cunningham and Janet E. Lieberman who tonight will receive the prestigious Harold W. McGraw Jr. Prize in Education. Dr. Cunningham founded the Middle College National Consortium at LaGuardia Community College. Dr. Lieberman founded the Middle College High School and co- founded the Early College High School at LaGuardia Community College.

Along with Drs. Cunningham and Lieberman, Robert Moses and Geoffrey Canada are being honored during an awards ceremony at the New York Public Library. The four have been chosen to receive the prestigious 17th annual award for dedicating themselves to closing the achievement gap. These individuals have worked tirelessly and creatively to give children with few advantages the opportunity to achieve, both academically and ultimately professionally.

Dr. Cunningham has spent her entire career educating children and firmly believes all children should be given the opportunity to succeed. This belief is what brought her more than twenty years ago to Middle College High School, an innovative approach to educating at risk students, where Dr. Cunningham served as principal. Out of her work with Middle College High School, Dr. Cunningham founded the Middle College National Consortium to provide professional development for secondary and postsecondary educators who work with underserved students.

Dr. Lieberman believes that you should never underestimate the power of an idea. This belief, combined with the faith that all students can achieve, led her to originate new solutions to old problems, resulting in expanded academic opportunities for minority and underprivileged students. Thirty years ago, Dr. Lieberman designed the first public high school college collaborative model to help underserved students graduate from high school and go to college. Her vision of placing a high school on a college campus with smaller classes, committed teachers, intensive counseling and high expectations would keep students in school and encourage them to go on to college. Dr. Lieberman has proved that students who are placed in a college environment can achieve academically.

I salute Drs. Cunningham and Lieberman and the other honorees for their remarkable and untiring contributions to education. America's youth will reap the rewards of their selfless dedication. They are truly gifted educators who have made a tremendous difference in the lives of so many.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my friend, Roy Braunstein, Legislative Director of the American Postal Workers Union (APWU).

Roy was hired in June 1973 with the United States Postal Service, and worked as both a Distribution Clerk and CMU Clerk during his postal career. He will retire on November 6, 2004.

The APWU has more than 300,000 members in every city, town and hamlet in the United States and is the world's largest postal union. Roy was first elected in 1980 as the APWU Legislative Aide, and was elected Legislative Director in 1992. He was elected nine times by the APWU membership.

Before he came to Washington, D.C. in 1960, Roy was active in the New Jersey Shore Area Local where he served as Legislative Director and Shop Steward. He was also the New Jersey State APWU Legislative Director and Editor. He served in community affairs as a member of the Barnegat, New Jersey Board of Education for three years and as a member of the Ocean County New Jersey Mental Health Board.

In Washington, Roy served as a lobbyist for the APWU and has worked on a number of issues important to the membership. During his tenure at the APWU, Roy worked to secure passage of the Hatch Act, legislation granting greater political freedom for postal and federal employees. Roy also played a key role in the eight year battle for the Family and Medical Leave Act which President Clinton signed into law in 1993.

Over the years, Roy worked diligently to help win passage of the Federal Employees Retirement System Act, the Spouse Equity Act, the Postal Employees Safety Enhancement Act, the Veterans Employment Opportunity Act, and many other legislative initiates to help working families.

Roy fought to protect the viability of the Postal Service. He was a leader in the fight against Postal Privatization, and the movement to take the Postal Service off-budget during the 1960s in an effort to stop congressional attacks on the Postal Service. APWU is an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, and Roy worked closely with other labor leaders for the goals of this nation's working men and women.

Roy's wife of 36 years, Marilyn, is also an APWU member, and they are the proud parents of two young men, Rick and Daniel. He has an A.A. Degree from Kinsborough Community College in Brooklyn, New York, and a B.A. Degree from Richmond College in Staten Island, New York.

Roy will be retiring to the Phoenix, Arizona area where his sons are living. He plans to retain full APWU membership, and to become actively involved with the Phoenix Metro Area Local (Arizona) and the Arizona Postal Workers Union relating to legislative issues. He also will be spending time traveling and relaxing with family and friends.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 472, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3734, a bill to name a federal building in Roswell, New Mexico as the ``Joe Skeen Federal Building.'' We were all saddened when our dear friend and colleague retired at the end of the 107th Congress and passed away in December 2003. However, we were fortunate to serve with Joe and the people of New Mexico were better off because of his 20 years of service.

As Members of Congress, we often work with colleagues from different parts of the country and from across the aisle. It was a great privilege to have worked with Joe Skeen. Since his first election in 1980, he served on the Appropriations Committee, chairing the Subcommittee on Agriculture and then the Subcommittee on the Interior. Joe has always been a true gentleman and always told it like it was. When dealing with Joe, I always knew he would give me a fair hearing on an issue and try to accommodate me when he could and politely say ``no'' when he couldn't. I could also always depend on Joe telling me a good story to underscore the point he was making.

On a personal note, I had the pleasure of working with Joe to further the progress of Parkinson's Disease research in America. In 1999, along with my colleagues, Mr. Evans, Mr. Mark Udall, Tom Udall, and Mr. Waxman, Mr. Skeen and I formed the Congressional Working Group on Parkinson's Disease.

Joe Skeen was a true leader in the fight against Parkinson's Disease. Over the years, the Working Group has sought to increase awareness among Members of Congress on Parkinson's related issues. Most importantly, the Working Group advocates for accelerated and increased funding for Parkinson's research in the hopes that we soon find the cure for what leading scientists call the most curable neurological disorder.

We will carry on the fight to cure Parkinson's, in part, inspired by the legacy of the great Joe Skeen. This bill ensures that the people of New Mexico and those around the country never forget our friend, Joe. I fully support its passage in honor of Joe Skeen--a true national treasure.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 475, of which I am a cosponsor, which expresses the sense of Congress encouraging the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to choose New York City as the site of the 2012 Olympic Games. I would like to thank my friends and colleagues Representatives Rangel and Fossella for introducing this resolution.

New York City is the greatest city in the world. As the center of arts, business, culture, tourism, architecture, education, and sports, New York is an ideal candidate to host the world's greatest athletic competition. With its top-notch mass transportation systems, New York already has much of the infrastructure in place to transport athletes and fans to the athletic events. Because New York is a site for many of the world's top sports competitions, including the U.S. Open, and the home of several professional sports teams, our city has the necessary capabilities to handle large numbers of people along with the tremendous security requirements.

Aside from allowing New York to showcase its beauty and infinite attractions to a global audience, hosting an Olympic Games would be a tremendous boost to an economy that continues to recover from the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Our local restaurants and businesses would greatly benefit from the potential revenue that the Olympics would bring.

Greece just hosted one of the greatest Olympic Games ever to be held, and I commend them on their success. I am confident that New Yorkers would open their arms and welcome the world to our doorstep just as the people of Greece welcomed us to the birthplace of the Olympics.

I look forward to working with my friends in the New York congressional delegation and our local officials to bring the 2012 Olympic Games to New York City

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Oxley-Frank- Kolbe amendment.

This bipartisan amendment from the leadership of the Financial Services Committee corrects the Culbertson provision, a major defect in this appropriations bill that would severely damage the ability of law enforcement to track and target terrorist money.

The White House, the Treasury Department, the banking community--both banks and credit unions, the immigration community, and more than 1,000 police departments across the country, are united in their support for this amendment, and in opposition to the Culbertson provision.

The Culbertson provision guts the key financial anti-terrorism law under which the Treasury Department and financial institutions across the Nation work together to combat terrorist funding.

Under the Culbertson amendment, Treasury could not enforce or even publish its regulations telling financial institutions that they must verify the identity of their customers.

This requirement to verify customer's identity was a key piece of the money laundering provisions of the Patriot Act, which were specifically noted by the 9/11 Commission as an important step towards combating terrorism.

The 9/11 Commission was clear on how we need to combat terrorist funding: ``Follow the money,'' the Commission said.

But the Culbertson provision would drive a significant sector of the economy out of banks and into illicit financial systems, where money is far harder to trace and far more subject to criminal activity.

Secretary Snow--the administration's key Cabinet officer in the effort to track terrorist funding--described the Culbertson provision as follows: ``Because this provision could drive large sections of the U.S. population into underground financial services, it would weaken the Government ability to enforce our money laundering and terrorist financing laws.'' This is the position of the administration--including the Department of Justice and the FBI.

The Culbertson provision targets a form of identification known as matricula, which are issued to Mexican citizens who register with their consul in the United States.

Supporters of the provision argue that matricula are unreliable. But this view is uninformed. The matricula system is internationally recognized and well established.

In the aftermath of 9/11, Mexico increased the security features on this card, so that it is now harder to forge or fraudulently obtain than many state drivers' license.

Mexico maintains a national database to prevent the issuance of duplicate matricula or the issuance of matricula to criminals on a ``stop list''.

The cards are accepted by many U.S. banks as a proper and reliable form of identification for Mexican citizens in the U.S.

As many financial associations and institutions have written, eliminating the sue of these cards would undermine the abilities of financial institutions to assist law enforcement in ``following the money'' by verifying customers' identity.

Additionally, the Culbertson provision would deprive many workers in this country of access to legitimate financial services--banks or credit unions--and drive them into underground systems where money is much harder to trace.

We are far safer if these segments of the population transact their financial affairs in the regulated context of banks and credit unions so that law enforcement can track them and ensure they comply with the law.

Moreover, these workers would be deprived of the benefits and consumer protections of our regulated financial system.

Lastly, as the banks note, depriving this segment of the population of access to credit and forcing them to a cash-based system will hurt the local economy.

The Culbertson provision is dangerous and fundamentally misguided.

We must remove it from this bill. I urge your support of this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Gutierrez amendment barring the use of funds to enforce the OCC preemption regulations. This amendment is supported by a bipartisan group of members of the Financial Services Committee who have been

frustrated in our efforts to bring legislation on this important issue before the Committee for full debate and action. We are concerned that the recently issued OCC preemption and visitatorial regulations deny our constituents the benefits of State predatory lending and other consumer protection laws.

The OCC's assertions that it will provide the same level of consumer protection are simply not realistic. To duplicate the State regulatory apparatus would require a huge increase in the size and budget of the OCC--and more to the point, a huge increase in regional experience and intelligence that the agency simply does not have. Recent crises such as the Riggs Bank fiasco have put in doubt whether the OCC can do the job it has now, let alone taking over the job of the 50 State banking regulators.

Legislation has been introduced to address this issue. Ten members of the Financial Services Committee, including myself, signed a letter asking that it be brought up under regular order. But there has been no action to allow members of the Committee to debate and vote on it, and to bring it to the floor.

This matter is urgent, and it is not appropriate to simply bury it by inaction. Thus, we are forced to offer this amendment as a way to arrest the regulations so that we can have the appropriate process to debate and vote on this important issue. It is a regrettable, but, unfortunately necessary, step.

I ask for your support for the Gutierrez amendment so that this body can all have a chance to examine the OCC preemption regulations before they take effects and damage our State regulatory systems.

Mr. Chairman, this bill funds many good projects and will be a welcome relief to many communities. Unfortunately, the current version is woefully deficient because it provides no funding whatsoever for a project that is one of the best in the Nation--the Second Avenue Subway. The Second Avenue Subway is recommended by the Federal Transit Administration and was included in President Bush's FY2005 budget.

On day one, the Second Avenue Subway will move more people than any other project currently planned anywhere in the country. It will (i) relieve overcrowding on the most overcrowded subway in the nation, (ii) add capacity to a subway system that has not added capacity in 60 years and (iii) reach areas of New York City that currently are not served by any subway system. A report released by the Regional Plan Association December 2003 shows that Second Avenue Subway can create 156,000 jobs, boost business creation and retention, improve air quality, save travel time and create alternative routes to the city's business centers-- something 9/11 proved is essential to New York's security.

There is already a strong market for mass transit in New York. Because 70-75 percent of all the people commuting to jobs along the route of the subway use mass transit to get to work, the highest proportion of mass transit use anywhere in the United States. There are

1.2 million jobs and nearly 650,000 residents along the proposed route of the Second Avenue Subway.

This project is moving ahead in a timely fashion. It received a record of decision from the FTA in July and is expected to go into Final Design and Engineering shortly.

The Second Avenue Subway, a sure mass transit success, should be among the earmarks included in this appropriation bill. The Second Avenue Subway was funded in the last four appropriations bills and, thanks to the efforts of Senators Schumer and Clinton, is included in the Senate bill. I hope that the conferees will accept the Senate language and that the Second Avenue Subway will receive funding in the final bill.

Sequential Votes Postponed In Committee of the Whole

Mr. Speaker, in the immediate aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks the Congress created the Victims Compensation Fund (VCF) to provide compensation for victims of 9/11. This fund provided aid to the families of 9/11 victims and to individuals who suffered personal injury. Among other things, aid from the fund pays for medical expenses and lost wages. In return for accepting these funds, recipients relinquished rights to any future litigation. The fund had a deadline for applicants of December 22, 2003.

At the deadline, close to 100% of the families who lost a loved one had filed with the fund, but many individuals who were injured as a direct result of 9/11 had not. After the filing, many of the injured were denied benefits, despite a clear need.

The main reasons for not filing applications included people who did not know they were eligible as well as others whose injuries were late- onset. There are literally hundred of individuals who are now just developing career-ending injuries--such as pulmonary and respiratory ailments--but are not eligible to receive assistance because they developed their symptoms after the deadline.

Largely as a result of the VCF's restrictions on applicants, 1,755 of the 4,430 personal injury claims considered were denied. While there was some leeway, the rules required workers to have arrived at Ground Zero within 96 hours of the attack and would have needed to seek medical treatment within 72 hours. This is reasonable for rescue workers who suffered immediate injuries, but leaves no recourse for individuals with late-onset injuries or who arrived after September 15, 2001 to assist in the recovery effort and are now suffering from injuries.

In order to care for the individuals who are now just developing physical injuries and to provide an opportunity for injured individuals who did not know they were eligible, I am introducing the Victims Compensation Fund Extension Act.

This bill would: Amend eligibility rules so that responders to the 9/ 11 attacks who arrived later than the first 96 hours could be eligible if they experienced illness or injury from their work at the site. Amend eligibility rules so that those who did not seek immediate medical verification for their illness or injury from the disaster, but who have since obtained medical evidence, would be eligible. Extend the deadline for applications to allow those with either late-onset illness from the disaster or those who were never informed of their eligibility for the Victim Compensation Fund to consider applying.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time and for her leadership on oversight terrorist financing and money laundering; and, in fact, she has spearheaded a leadership role on an Anti-Terrorism Task Force on which I serve.

Mr. Chairman, this is a very, very important amendment. FinCEN is currently a small bureau of the Treasury Department, but it has suddenly been put into the position of being at the very center of the government effort to combat terrorist financing. If the 9/11 Commission recommendations were implemented, and I firmly support all 41 of the recommendations and have introduced legislation to implement them, FinCEN would be required by the government to analyze and distribute financial information for all of the United States Government. They have very few members now in their area, and this money is needed for the technology and the infrastructure and the personnel to complete the task that is being thrust upon them.

FinCEN was underfunded in the budget request, therefore this amendment is very much needed and very much in order. We know that the terrorists, like any small business, if they are out of money, they are out of business. And if you track the money, you can figure out what is going on.

Mr. Chairman, this is a tremendously important amendment. I support this $25 million allocation and I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting it in a bipartisan way.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment to increase funding for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), an agency that is critically important to our efforts to combat terrorist financing and money laundering. I am pleased to offer this amendment together with a bipartisan group of my colleagues from the Financial Services Committee.

As a co-founder of the 9/11 Commission Caucus, dedicated to implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, I am also a strong supporter of this amendment because it is an important step in that direction.

In its Report, the 9/11 Commission made clear recommendation on how best to fight terrorism in the financial arena: ``Follow the Money.''

That is the mission of FinCEN, which is dedicated to collecting, analyzing and disseminating financial data for the purpose of combating crime.

The Commission's recommendation puts FinCEN in the limelight, and requires a relatively small Treasury bureau with little funding to assume a key role in fighting terrorism.

FinCEN is essential--as never before--to the work of the intelligence, law enforcement, and financial services communities in tracing terrorist money and disrupting potential terrorist action.

The 9/11 Commission also advised that we cannot succeed in combating terrorist funding without building global alliances.

FinCEN is the United States' voice in that effort.

The present appropriation to FinCEN does not adequately provide for the bureau to assume the responsibilities that have been thrust upon it.

The additional funding provided by this amendment would allow FinCEN to purchase appropriate technology and hire additional staff--steps that would dramatically improve its ability to track terrorist financing and provide critical information to our government and our global allies.

I can think of few investments that are more worth while than this amendment. I ask for your support for additional funding for FinCEN.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3478. This bill makes several changes to Title 44 of the U.S. Code that will improve the efficiency of the National Archives and Record Administration. My colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam), has done a terrific job of detailing those changes.

In addition, this bill reauthorizes the National Historic Publications and Records Commission, NHPRC, for 4 years at the current level of $10 million.

I strongly support the reauthorization of the NHPRC. However, I am disappointed that we did not increase the authorization for this program. It is even more tragic that the administration has not fully funded the commission for 2005. The failure to fund this commission will result in the loss of important parts of the history of every State and local government in our country. Much of the good work funded by the commission will have to be put on hold because the administration cut $7 million from the NHPRC budget.

My colleague on the other side of the aisle detailed how we need to preserve the documents in Florida even when we have catastrophes and hurricanes, and so forth. Let me describe just a few of the programs that have been supported by NHPRC in New York over the past several years.

The New York State archives in Albany was given assistance by the NHPRC to organize and make available materials of the effect of the World Trade Center disaster on the lives of New Yorkers. Channel 13, the local education station, was given funds to preserve shows of particular historical significance from the 1970s onward.

The American Foundation For the Blind was provided funds to archive the records of Helen Keller. Hunter College received funds to arrange 15 collections of materials documenting the history and culture of Puerto Ricans.

In addition, NHPRC had provided funds to assist in preserving the papers of Alexander Hamilton; Aaron Burr; Samuel Gompers; John Jay; the slave diary of Elizabeth Drinker; Florence Kelley, the letters of this great settlement leader; and the writer and activist Harriet Jacobs, just to name a few. The list goes on and on.

NHPRC has also been at the forefront of research on preserving electronic documents. Long before most agencies knew they even had a problem, NHPRC was funding research on this important issue.

Electronic records present historical organizations with two quite distinct problems. First, the technological issues of preserving our electronic documents across time are extremely complex. The methods for creating these documents multiply yearly, as does the way in which these documents are stored. However, very little has been done to assure these documents can be read 10 years later. Secondly, electronic records have resulted in increasing both the volume of records created and the volume of records that historians want to keep.

Electronic records confront State and local archives and historical societies with the very same challenges as they do the Federal Government. The National Archives has spent millions of dollars on the Electronic Records Initiative, and real progress has been made in developing a system for preserving the electronic records of the Federal Government. NHPRC has been one of the few places these State and local organizations could go to get help confronting this complex technological and historical problem. It should also be noted that NHPRC was one of the first Federal organizations to recognize the need for research on preserving electronic documents.

Mr. Speaker, absolutely every day in Washington, D.C., as we go about our business, we are reminded of our Nation's history. Buildings and documents are preserved and displayed for all to see. Every citizen deserves that opportunity, not just when they visit their Nation's Capital, but as they walk about the towns in which they live. NHPRC makes it possible for State and local governments to develop the tools and expertise to maintain their own history.

Even if NHPRC was fully funded at $10 million, that would only be about $200,000 per State. That does not go very far. As I have said at the outset, Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the passage of this bill, and I hope that the chairman of the subcommittee will work with me and the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Putnam) to raise awareness of the many valuable programs sponsored by NHPRC so that we can increase the authorization level the next time that it comes around.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to conclude by saying that if we do not learn from our past, we may repeat the mistakes of those who went before us. If we do not preserve our past, we cannot learn from it, and each locality has their own unique circumstances and their own unique history. Maintaining our time capsule of government words and deeds is a fundamental responsibility of our government. This legislation is committed to that responsibility, and I urge my colleagues to join me and the chairman in supporting this.

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

Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in honoring former Council Member Archie Spigner. I had the great honor of serving with him as a member of the Housing and Buildings and Economic Development Committee of the New York City Council, a committee which he chaired for many years with great distinction, with great judgment, honesty, and fairness. In a city that has a terrific need, a deep need for affordable housing, he was one of the truly outstanding leaders in our city in the area of working to build more housing that is affordable, and truly as a leader in our city, serving for many years as the deputy majority leader.

He was also active on a national level, with the League of Cities. He dedicated, really, his life to the problems of cities; and he used to say that one of the great challenges of the next century would be who pays for the cities, with their ailing infrastructure and their many, many needs for housing and other areas.

He not only was active in the National League of Cities. He was on the Finance Committee and the City Committee on the Budget, and I had the honor of serving with him on the Committee on the Budget where he was a great bridge-builder. He would often negotiate compromises that would enable us to move a budget to the floor for a vote. He is an outstanding person, kind and wonderful. He is very active politically also and played a major role in the election of one of my good friends and colleagues, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks), along with many other important leaders in New York City and State.

Even though Archie retired from the City Council in 2001, he has continued to be an important leader and adviser on both the city and local level. He is a terrific person. To know him is to love him.

I am delighted to join my colleagues today in naming this important building after him and in really applauding his lifetime of service to the communities in Queens and the City and the State of New York.