Floor Statements

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

On August 19, William Jefferson Clinton, our 42nd President, celebrated his 58th birthday. Today, we honor him not just for serving as our Nation's 42nd President, but for the legacy that President Bush recently described as ``a deep and far-ranging knowledge of public policy, a great compassion for people in need, and the forward-looking spirit Americans like in a President.''

We honor President Clinton for presiding over our Nation's longest ever economic expansion, largest ever budget surplus, and the growth of 22 million jobs during his Presidency. We honor President Clinton for projecting American power on the world stage, to further the cause of international peace and understanding, without antagonizing our historic allies, and we honor him for helping to broker the Good Friday Accords for Northern Ireland, engaging in Middle East peace talks, and bringing an end to ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. We honor President Clinton for encouraging Americans to care for their fellow men and women, creating AmeriCorps, which engages more than 50,000 Americans each year in community service.

At this moment, President Clinton is recovering from an unexpected but perhaps life-saving surgery in New York City. We in Congress are thankful for President Clinton's improved health and send forth our thoughts and prayers to him and his family, especially Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and his daughter Chelsea. We wish him a complete and speedy recovery.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Tom Davis) for moving this resolution through his committee in a speedy manner and to the House leadership for bringing it to the floor for this consideration today.

Mr. Speaker, from his birth in a town called Hope in the State of Arkansas through his education at Georgetown University, Oxford and Yale Law School, to his service in Arkansas as Attorney General, Governor and Chairman of the National Governors' Association, to his two terms as President of the United States, to now as a private citizen, still engaged and thoughtful on our Nation's public policy, we honor President Clinton. President Clinton, happy birthday, and we hope you get well soon.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

(Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

I came to Congress with President Clinton in 1992. It was called the Year of the Woman, where many people voted for women candidates, not as a slogan, but as a force to be reckoned with, and we came to Washington and we worked together, not only for women, children and families, but during this time we doubled the funding for breast cancer research, banned assault weapons, put more police on the streets and more teachers in the classroom. We narrowed the gap between those in poverty and those that are affluent, which is a good trend for this country, an important trend.

During his 8 years, we had really I could say the best economy in my lifetime, the first balanced budget. He came to Washington with a $250 billion deficit, and when he left, it was a huge, huge surplus.

I remember very much his hard work on his initiative to reinvent government and to make government more accountable to the people that we serve.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Ms. Carson).

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

President Clinton's leadership was instrumental in expanding freedom and democracy around the world and really uniting a divided world. He was a uniter, and he worked to bring people together, and he was very, very loved. People felt very comfortable about Bill Clinton and everybody liked him.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).

(Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

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

I want to express the admiration and support of the New York delegation, many of whom are in New York City now at 9/11 events and will be joining me in this Congress in tributes in writing later.

Let me just end by saying that Bill Clinton is loved and admired by millions of Americans and by countless others around the world, and we want him to know that he, as he is recovering, is in the thoughts and prayers of this Congress and the country. We are with him in his courageous battle to heal himself so that he can return to his good works and helping other people.

So happy birthday, Mr. President, and get well soon.

Mr. Speaker, seeing no other speakers, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) for yielding me this time and for her leadership on this important committee.

Mr. Speaker, as a proud New Yorker and a representative of the people of Queens, New York, I am very pleased and honored to rise in strong support of H.R. 1318, a bill authored by my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley).

This bill would designate the Federal Veterans Administration outpatient clinic located at 4103 Queens Boulevard in Sunnyside, Queens, as the Lance Corporal Thomas P. Noonan, Jr. Veterans Outpatient Clinic.

Thomas P. Noonan, the son of Thomas Patrick Noonan, Sr., and Florence, was a life-long resident of Woodside, Queens, New York. He attended school at St. Theresa's parish and graduated from Hunter College with a bachelor's degree in physical education in 1966.

On December 26, 1967, he enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve; and in July 1968 he was sent to the Republic of Vietnam, where he served as a mortar man with his battalion and later as a rifleman in the 3rd Marine Division. He was promoted to Lance Corporal on New Year's Day 1969.

On February 5, 1969, his company was ordered to change the position they had been holding near the Vandergrift Combat Base in A Sahau Valley. This change was made especially difficult by recent heavy rains. Descent down the steep hillside proved treacherous, and four leading men in the company were wounded by North Vietnamese soldiers concealed in the area.

The other members of the company were unable to rescue the four wounded Marines in the midst of heavy enemy fire. Noonan left his position of relative safety and descended through the hazardous terrain. Protected by rocky outcropping, Noonan shouted words of encouragement to his fellow friends who were wounded.

Bracing himself, Noonan then made a dash towards the injured men and had started to drag the most seriously wounded one to safety when he himself was hit by enemy fire. Noonan picked himself up and continued to drag the other soldier, his friend, away but was mortally wounded himself before he could carry his comrade to safety.

His heroic actions in the face of great danger so roused his fellow Marines that they launched an assault on the enemy position that forced the North Vietnamese soldiers to withdraw.

Noonan was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor by President Nixon, as well as the Purple Heart, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, with two Bronze Stars, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

Lance Corporal Noonan's courage, inspiring initiative, and selfless devotion to duty upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service. He gallantly gave his life for his country.

In 1996, to commemorate his life, his spirit, and his heroic acts, the City of New York dedicated a public park in his honor in Queens. Now this Congress is taking the appropriate step to name the VA outpatient clinic in Sunnyside, Queens, after Lance Corporal Noonan. This tribute enjoys the support of every major veterans service organization in New York State, and many local veterans posts throughout Queens, including but not limited to the Queens County American Legion; Queens County Catholic War Veterans; the Vietnam Veterans of America, Queens Chapter; and the John V. Daniels VFW Post.

On behalf of my colleagues in New York and especially my Queens neighbor, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), I urge support of my colleagues for this fitting tribute to an American hero.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for yielding me this time and for his leadership on this and so many other issues. I rise in strong support of this resolution.

As we remember the third anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11, we must not forget the heroes and heroines who selflessly gave of themselves responding to Ground Zero, but who now need our help.

Yesterday the Subcommittee on National Security of the Committee on Government Reform held a hearing on the persistent health effects of 9/ 11. We heard about the 380 firefighters who have had to end their careers due to illnesses and injuries, as well as the persistent respiratory problems among many other responders.

Mr. Speaker, there is a new medical condition as a result of 9/11 known as the World Trade Center cough. We learned from the GAO that 3 years after 9/11 basic questions still have not been answered. We know that thousands are sick, but we do not know the exact number. There are at least six different monitoring or health tracking programs, but there is no coordination among them, and not a single Federal program provides health care to those who responded and who need it now. There is a clear need for leadership, but we learned that not a single person in the Federal Government is in charge.

Quite simply, the heroes of 9/11 deserve better. This was an act of war. Our heroes and responders should be treated like veterans. At the very least, they should be provided with adequate health care as a result of their injuries. This is the reason why I have introduced H.R. 4059, the Remember 9/11 Health Act. This legislation provides for treatment, coordination, research, and long-term monitoring.

As we remember 9/11, let us not forget that there are heroes out there that still need our help. Our first responders were there for us. We need to be there for them with the very least in providing adequate health benefits to those who need it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to acknowledge the achievements of Gertrude ``Gert'' McDonald, a lifelong New Yorker and dedicated public servant. On August 5, 2004, many of Mrs. McDonald's friends and colleagues will gather in her longtime neighborhood of Sunnyside, Queens to celebrate her 88th birthday. I am very pleased to offer my best wishes to Mrs. McDonald for a truly memorable and enjoyable evening.

Gertrude McDonald's decades of service to our community are truly worthy of celebration. Born in New York City, Gert moved to Sunnyside when she was seven years old. For more than sixty years, Gert has worked tirelessly to improve the well-being of her fellow New Yorkers. Gert has been a Democratic District Leader and a Downstate Representative of the Steering Committee of the Women's Political Caucus; additionally, she continues to serve as the President of the Queens of Angels Senior Center Club and the Corresponding Secretary of the 108th Precinct Community Council. Mrs. McDonald is a member of Community School Board 24, the United Forties Civic Association, the Borden Avenue Veterans Residence Advisory Board, the Queens Correctional Facility Advisory Board, the Mayor's Volunteer Task Force and, significantly, has been a loyal member of Queens Community Board Two for nearly thirty years.

Gert has also been a prominent figure in local politics for decades. At a time when women were usually relegated to a supporting role, Gert took the bold step of tossing her own hat into the ring. Her legacy as the first woman to run as a Democratic candidate for public office in Queens is truly inspirational. Although Gert did not prevail in her 1968 candidacy for the New York State Assembly, this bold act encouraged other women, including me, to run for public office.

With a quick wit and undeniable charm, Gert has a reputation for finding clever ways to make her point. When the mayor proposed cutting garbage pickup in Queens to once a week, while leaving Manhattan pickup at three times per week, Gert suggested that Queens residents should take their garbage to work.

I continue to be in awe not only of Gert's contributions to the public good, but also of the level of energy and enthusiasm she brings to her many activities. Mrs. McDonald's life and accomplishments are a reflection of the strength and vitality of New York City itself.

I would like to join Gert McDonald's friends and family in marking this special occasion; I trust that she will be surrounded by the warmth of happy memories, good cheer and loving friendships.

Mr. Speaker, I request that my colleagues join me in paying tribute to Gertrude McDonald, a mother, grandmother, great-grandmother and cherished friend of New York City. To Mrs. McDonald and her dedicated colleagues and friends at Queens Community Board Two, I offer my continuing admiration, respect and support.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to acknowledge the achievements of Captain Scott Shields, his golden retriever, Bear and the more than 300 dogs that served our country at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon after the September 11th terrorist attacks. On that fateful morning, Captain Shields and Bear answered the call for assistance at the World Trade Center and were one of the first search and rescue teams to enter the devastated area. Bear and other highly-trained rescue dogs spent the next few days searching in extremely dangerous conditions for those who lost their lives in the attacks.

Scott Shields raised Bear in Westport, Connecticut, where there were no leash laws. As a result, Bear quickly learned to be comfortable maneuvering and taking direction ``off leash.'' In addition to his regular search training, Captain Shields also took Bear to parks, beaches and even obstacle courses to continue his instruction. This preparation proved remarkably useful on the morning of September 11. Trained in disaster management, Captain Shields felt compelled to respond to the disaster and he and Bear drove to what the world would soon recognize as Ground Zero. Captain Shields and Bear entered the disaster site shortly after the second Trade Center tower collapsed to search for those who might have been trapped in the wreckage. Later that day, Captain Shields organized harbor activities, directing boats to transport emergency workers to the Trade Center site.

Bear and his fellow rescue dogs worked in very harsh conditions without the benefits of protective clothing and gas masks. They climbed through piles of debris and squeezed through tunnels of steel and concrete in their attempts to find any signs of human life.

While working in these dangerous conditions, many dogs, including Bear, were injured. Captain Shields and Bear were walking along a steel beam when a piece of twisted metal gouged Bear's back. Although the gash was deep, Bear kept working. Several months later, however, Bear developed a form of skin cancer around the perimeter of the wound. A veterinarian successfully removed the infected tissue, but from then on, Bear's health declined. Bear passed away on September 23, 2002; the following month, hundreds of mourners gathered at his memorial service aboard the aircraft carrier USS Intrepid.

In Bear's memory, Captain Shields, along with the New York law firm Proskauer Rose, established the Bear Search and Rescue Foundation to ensure that all dogs who participated in search and rescue operations at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon receive appropriate health care. Additionally, the foundation works diligently to provide equipment and instruction to emergency response teams throughout the country.

Mr. Speaker, I request that my colleagues join me in honoring Bear, Scott Shields and the hundreds of search and rescue teams who

served our nation so bravely on September 11th. To these heroes, I offer my continuing respect, admiration and support.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, we are calling this the Patsy Mink amendment, as the first legislation was written and passed by our distinguished colleague and friend that founded the Women's Educational Equity Act. This would restore the $3 million for this program that was taken out in the mark before us, and this has no offset because the money would come out of the school improvement program that has well over $50 million in it.

This is certainly needed. Some people on the other side of the aisle have said that we no longer need the Women's Educational Equity Act, but the figures that came out last week from the Census Bureau showed that the pay gap widened between men and women in 2003, and that women's pay slumped for the first time since 1999, falling to 75.5 cents to the male dollar.

I will include for the Record the census report that shows the gap between men and women growing, and specifically the fact that women's pay has slumped for the first time since 1999.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank very much Patsy Mink for her hard work and leadership in authoring WEEA. It has made a difference in the lives of millions of girls and women for 30 years by training teachers to treat boys and girls fairly in the classroom, teaching about reducing sexual harassment, and encouraging girls to study math and science among many other things. WEEA ensures that girls and women will succeed in school, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, in this tight budget year, WEEA was zeroed out in this bill. Mr. Chairman, I can assure you that cutting the $3 million to girls' education is totally unfair and will not help in any way to balance the budget.

Women have made great strides over the past 30 years, but these strides have not happened by themselves. It is programs like WEEA that provide the training, the materials and the support for our young girls in the educational system, but we still have a tremendous long way to go before we reach a point when WEEA will no longer be needed.

In 2003, male students scored higher on average than female students in mathematics. Girls represent only 17 percent of the computer science AP test takers. Women are roughly 20 percent of IT professionals. Women receive less than 28 percent of the computer science bachelor's degrees, down from a high of 37 percent in 1984. Women make up just 9 percent of engineering-related bachelor degrees. These statistics are unacceptable, but would be worse without WEEA.

As the educational needs of our society change and grow, as math and technology continue to become prominent skills of our everyday lives, gender equity in our education system is more important than ever. Girls must catch up with boys when it comes to math and technology, and WEEA can help.

This amendment, the Patsy Mink Women's Educational Equity Act, will support our daughters, our sisters, our friends. Vote yes on the Maloney-Woolsey-Sanchez amendment.

I also would like to cite a report that came out recently, the Dingell-Maloney report, that showed that there was a consistent gap between the earnings between men and women for the past 20 years, a consistent 40 percent gap. After making up for time for pregnancy or taking care of sick parents, there is still a 20 percent unexplained gap between men and women's pay. This translates into pensions.

I would consider a vote against this amendment a vote against women, a vote against equity and opportunity for women in the workforce. It begins in the classroom. This program is as needed today as when Patsy Mink first wrote it. So I call upon my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for their daughters, their sisters and their friends, and to support this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I will place in the Record the Dingell-Maloney report that shows the persistent 20 percent gap, which can only be explained as discrimination.

I want to thank very much my colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) for her excellent leadership and help on this issue through many Congresses, and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for his fine help.

GAO Pay Gap Report Highlights

(Briefing by Reps. Maloney & Dingell)

The General Accounting Office (GAO) examined 18 years of

data on over 9,300 Americans for an earnings study

commissioned by Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and

John Dingell (D-MI). The new study is a follow-up to the more

narrowly-focused 2002 GAO report on the earnings gap between

female and male managers.

Results of the GAO study show: The pay gap is real. Women

working full-time today are paid an average of 80 cents for

every dollar that men are paid, even when accounting for

demographic and work-related factors such as occupation,

industry, race, marital status and job tenure. This 20

percent earnings gap cannot be explained due to differences

in work patterns or histories.

Differing work patterns lead to an even larger earnings gap

between men and women--suggesting that working women are

penalized for their dual role as wage earners and those who

disproportionately care for home and family obligations. The

GAO study confirms that women in the workforce are less

likely to work a full-time schedule and are more likely to

leave the labor force for longer periods of time than men,

suppressing women's earnings even further. And, men with

children are paid about 2 percent more than men without

children, whereas women with children are paid about 2.5

percent less than women without children.

The pay gap has persisted for past two decades. The GAO

study confirms that the earnings gap between women and men

has been consistent from 1983-2000, despite a sense of

continued progress toward gender equality in the workplace.

The GAO also reviewed other studies and interviewed

employers and earnings experts to round out their analysis,

leading to troubling questions about the persistent pay gap:

Why do workplaces still maintain the same policies, practices

and structures that existed when most of their workers did

not have obligations to care for children and family life?

Why do industries and professions dominated by women pay

disproportionately less than male-dominated industries? How

much does the pay gap between men and women cost families?

In response to the GAO findings, Representatives Maloney

and Dingell seek to establish a new Center for the Study of

Women and Workplace Policy at a public university that would

serve as a nationwide resource for employers, women and

families. The Center would follow up on the GAO study,

collaborate with businesses and women's organizations on

solutions to the earnings gap, and publish yearly guides on

best practices for employers and family friendly workplaces

for women.

[From the Feminist Daily News Wire, Sept. 2, 2004]

Wage Gap Increases Between Women and Men, US Census Reports

Figures released by the US Census Bureau last week show

that the pay gap between women and men widened in 2003.

Women's pay slumped for the first time since 1999, with women

earning only 75.5 cents to every dollar men earn. The Census

Bureau stated that this marks the first ``statistically

significant'' decline in women's pay since 1995,

AccountingWEB.com reports, with real median earnings of women

over the age of 15 fell 0.6 percent to $30,724. The Institute

for Women's Policy Research has stated that the 1.4 percent

decrease in the gender wage ratio is the largest backslide

since 1991.

Though over forty years have passed since the Equal Pay Act

was signed in 1963, at which point women earned 59 cents to

the dollar men earned, progress to attain its goals has been

slow. With more families becoming dependent on women as

breadwinners, and with approximately half of women entering

retirement alone, the wage gap is a crucial issue that

affects the health and well-being of women and their

families. The poverty rate for women and girls increased to

13.7 percent from 13.3 percent in 2002, increasing for the

third straight year, reports Women's eNews. In addition, the

uninsured rate rose more sharply for women at four percent,

with the rate for men only rising one percent.

The Asheville Citizen-Times reports that the typical prime-

age working woman earned $273,592 over the 15 year period

between 1983 and 1998, compared with $722,693 for the typical

prime-age working man. In addition to the wage gap, this

discrepancy occurs because women work more part-time jobs and

take more time out of the workforce to raise children.

However, the Asheville Citizen-Times reports that in October

2003 the General Accounting Office released a report titled

``Women's Earnings'' that examined 18 years of data. The

report found a 20 percent earnings gap between men and women

that could not be explained, even after accounting for

factors such as occupation, industry, marital status, and job

tenure.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the 1974 illegal Turkish invasion of Cyprus.

I have commemorated this day each year since I became a Member of Congress. PSEKA (The International Coordinating Committee ``Justice for Cyprus''), The Cyprus Federation of America, SAE (World Council of Hellenes Abroad), and The Federation of Hellenic Societies are all primarily located in the 14th Congressional district of New York, which I am fortunate to represent. These individuals believe that peace will come to Cyprus, and they have been strong advocates against the division of Cyprus and the human rights violations perpetrated by the Turkish army in Cyprus.

While we must remember this black anniversary, we also have reason to celebrate. On May 1, Cyprus became a full-fledged member of the European Union along with nine other countries from Central and Eastern Europe. Cyprus's accession to the EU is a historic achievement. As an EU member, Cyprus will represent European values and policies and, at the same time, will work toward even stronger transatlantic ties with the United States. This has been a long time in coming, and I believe that Cyprus will have much to contribute to the EU.

Although all of us, including the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots, wanted to see the division of Cyprus end before its accession to the EU, the Annan Plan for a Cyprus settlement was justly voted down by the Greek Cypriots. Prior to the April referenda on the Annan Plan, I and several of my colleagues met with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan to express our concerns and our willingness to work with him to move the process forward. I know we are all hopeful that a just resolution can be reached soon to end the division so that both sides will reap the benefits from membership in the EU.

Now is not the time to give up. Earlier this month, my friend and fellow co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues, Congressman Bilirakis, and I sent letters, along with more than ninety members of the House of Representatives, to President Bush, Secretary of State Powell, and U.N. Secretary General Annan urging them to respect the democratic decision of the people, to remain engaged in efforts to resolve the Cyprus problem, and to work toward a fair and lasting reunification of Cyprus.

A unified Cyprus would promote stability, both politically and economically, to the entire Mediterranean region. The people of Cyprus deserve a unified and democratic country. I remain hopeful that a peaceful settlement will be found so that the division of Cyprus will come to an end.

Thirty years is too long to have a country divided. It is too long to be kept from your home. It is too long to be separated from family.

We have seen many tremendous changes around the world. It is time for the Cypriots to live in peace and security, with full enjoyment of their human rights.

In recognition of the spirit of the people of Cyprus, I ask my colleagues to join me in solemnly commemorating the 30th anniversary of the invasion of Cyprus.

Long Live Freedom. Long Live Cyprus. Long Live Greece.

Mr. Speaker, before the ink was even dry on the 9/11 report, before we even had a chance to read it, some were saying we should delay any action on the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.

I have one simple question: What are we waiting for? Did we miss the point of 9/11? Remember, we cannot spell 9/11 without 9-1-1 and 9-1-1 means urgent, emergency, act now, life or death. It does not mean let us table this discussion until after the election.

The bipartisan commission has called for the creation of a national terrorist center with a new Cabinet-level intelligence chief. They call for the creation of a Joint House and Senate Committee on Intelligence with budget power. I say, great, let us do it, let us act now. What are we waiting for? What part of 9/11 does the leadership of this House not understand?

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule and the underlying bill; and if enacted, this would establish a tremendously dangerous precedent by denying the Federal judiciary the ability to review actions of the legislative and executive branches. It would eliminate the checks and balances that the Founding Fathers of our Nation so wisely established in our Constitution. Such a reckless move would cause lasting and permanent damage to our democracy.

Since John Marshall, the Constitution has had superiority over the legislature. The Constitution gave us the right to speech and privacy, and even if we vote for 435 to 0, certain rights are protected in our Constitution. But if this bill were to become law, it would deny jurisdiction to the Supreme Court and all Federal courts over any cases related to the Defense of Marriage Act.

This bill goes beyond merely preventing same-sex couples from seeking legal redress in our courts. It would deny judicial review to an entire class of citizens because of passing partisan passions, and it is willing to trample on our Constitution in order to do so. No issue is worth paying such a price. This is a low moment in the history of this House. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule and the underlying bill. The Republican leadership is trying to use a wedge issue to appeal to right-wing constituencies in a highly charged election year, and they are willing to trample on our Constitution. No issue is ever worth such a price. I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, the United States Congress should be a role model for democracies around the world. Instead, with votes that are extended up to three hours to change their outcome to allegations of bribery on the House Floor to the alleged stealing of computer files by a staffer, we are increasingly becoming a model of how not to run a democracy. That is why we am introducing the Restoring Democracy to the United States. This legislation sets forth ten changes that would ensure that the U.S. Congress will continue to be a beacon of democracy.

1. This legislation would limit the time of roll call votes to 17 minutes.

2. It would require conference committees to meet and vote before filing their conference report.

3. It would prohibit germaneness requirements for conference reports from being waived.

4. It would prohibit Members from calling the Capitol Police to have a Member removed from a room.

5. It would prohibit redistricting between censuses.

6. It would prohibit a vote on legislation unless it has been available in a searchable form online for more than 24 hours.

7. It would prohibit bribery on the House Floor.

8. It would prohibit the hacking into Member's computer files.

9. It would prohibit Committees from spending more than $25,000 a year on franked mail.

10. It would guarantee the Minority a minimum of one-third of the overall committee budget.

These ten measure would go a long way to ensure that democracy is upheld in the United States Congress. Unless we enact these safeguards, Members working together in a bipartisan manner will continue to see their work thwarted despite having a majority of Members in favor of their proposals. How many more abuses must there be before we say enough is enough? I urge all Member to support the Restoring Democracy to the U.S. Congress Act of 2004.

Mr. Speaker, now is not the time to return to private airline screeners, now is the time to continue to focus on passenger safety.

This November, airports will be given the option to apply to opt-out of having Transportation Security Administration TSA screeners in favor of hiring private screeners. If this is allowed to happen, it will be a step backwards in airline security.

TSA has only been in existence for a few years and has certainly suffered through some growing pains. Because of this, we should be focused on ensuring the success of TSA rather than adding the new challenge of privatization that could jeopardize their future and potentially endanger the security of airline passengers. That is why I am introducing the Passenger Safety Act which will repeal the opt-out language in the law that created the TSA. I urge my colleagues to support this important initiative to protect passenger safety.

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce legislation with Representative William Lacy Clay, D-MO, that requires the annual poverty estimate and the National Assessment of Educational Progress to be subject to certain guidelines on the release of the information to the public. I am deeply concerned at what appears to be the politicization of data by the Bush Administration on important issues ranging from worker safety to the dangers of lead paint to emergency contraceptives. Because data regarding poverty and educational progress are essential to lawmakers at all levels of government to implement policies addressing these issues, it is critical that this information is disseminated in an open and timely process.

Last year, the Census Bureau decided to break with tradition to release its annual poverty estimates on a Friday in Suitland, Maryland, rather than during the middle of the week at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. Because that report was expected to announce the loss of millions of jobs, the questionable circumstances regarding the release of those statistics led myself and Representative Clay to seek an investigation by the Government Accountability Office, GAO, as to why the Census Bureau made its decision. We should not be playing politics with science, which is why I believe this legislation is so important.

Mr. Speaker, no one talks a better game than the Department of Homeland Security. But beyond the bluster, there is reason to feel deeply insecure about this administration's efforts to protect America.

Although we hear a great deal about the war on terror, no competent general in any war would leave his home defenses with so many holes. Every line of critical homeland defense is underfunded and unprepared for an attack on American soil, and we are going in the wrong direction.

Unbelievably, the administration essentially froze homeland security spending in 2003. The President's budget cut port security grant funding by 63 percent, cut first responder funding within the Department of Homeland Security by 15 percent, and provided no dedicated funding whatsoever for rail security or protecting chemical plants and nuclear power plants.

My question is, when is this administration going to get serious about funding homeland security.

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

I am pleased that the Committee on Rules has decided to allow my amendment to protect investors by making companies show their true earnings in their public filings, and I am pleased that they have placed this in order. This amendment keeps whole the authority of the SEC to regulate the contents of public filings by companies issuing stock. The SEC has had that authority since its inception, and for good reason, to protect investors, to protect stockholders, and to protect the safety and soundness of our financial institutions.

This bill would remove the SEC's existing power to regulate whether stock options are shown as an expense. Simply put, a stock option is either an expense, or it is not an expense. My amendment preserves present law and the policy that Congress has followed since 1934, of letting an independent agency make the rules about what information companies must tell their investors and their filings. It preserves transparency to the investing public.

Accounting standards, like interest rates, should not be set by Congress, although we do have oversight. A host of the biggest names in financial policy have spoken out against this bill and in support of my amendment and in favor of preserving independent standard-setting for corporate accounting: Alan Greenspan, Arthur Levitt, William Donaldson, Warren Buffett, John Bogle; and the list goes on and on. Many editorials across this country have come out against the bill that is before us today. I will include the statements of these individuals and the editorials in the Record.

Expensing is the overwhelming view of financial experts, even before Enron. A 2001 survey of over 18,000 analysts and portfolio managers showed that 83 percent agreed that stock options must be expensed. None of these authorities stand to make a dime off expensing. They are standing up for the right thing to do for investors and shareholders in our country.

On the other hand, we have the corporate views of Cisco, Intel, and others who will lose, at least on paper, a cool billion-plus each if they have to show their options as expenses. Now, whose interests do they have at heart? Is it the investors? I do not think so.

It is a tragedy that these few corporations have set up a false war between investors and employees. Nothing in the FASB standard prevents expensing. Over 600 companies in America voluntarily expense. These companies tell the truth about the expense of stock options, but still give them to employees. Other companies can do the same. Is showing the true cost of stock options so damaging to these companies that no one should know how much they are spending for them?

I have received several letters from employees. They say that they need these options because they do not have pension plans or health care plans; and I ask my colleagues, is this what we want to encourage? Employees deserve pensions and health care. Hidden stock options should not be used as a substitute.

Expensing stock options is the right thing to do for both investors and employees; and as Arthur Levitt said, finally and plainly put, this bill hurts investors and the financial markets of America.

I urge a ``no'' vote on this bill and a ``yes'' on the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his leadership and for yielding me this time.

I rise in opposition to this bill and in support of the amendments by the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania

(Mr. Kanjorski) and me. And in opposition to this bill, I am joined with comments from Arthur Levitt, John Bogle, Warren Buffet, Allen Greenspan, John Snow, SEC Chairman Donaldson, and many others. Their comments I will include for the Record.

Some of my colleagues today have said that it is necessary for companies to not show the cost of stock options to investors in order to encourage innovation. So my question is why is it necessary for companies to hide an expense to innovate? Why in the world is this good public policy? On the contrary, this accounting loophole encourages companies like Enron and WorldCom to artificially inflate the value of their stock, deceive investors, and evade corporate income taxes. Many large companies have employee stock options and expense them, including Home Depot, Microsoft, Netflix. We should continue and have one standard.

In understanding stock options and their use, there is probably no greater authority than the indicted Enron president and CEO, Jeffrey Skilling. This is what Jeffrey Skilling has to say about stock options when he testified before the Senate: ``Because stock options are not required to be disclosed as an expense on public filings, corporations use them to hide expenses and inflate the balance sheet. You issue stock options to reduce compensation expense and therefore increase your profitability.'' He ought to know, and he is going to jail.

Hidden stock options encourage accounting fraud. End of story. I urge a ``no'' vote on the underlying bill.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

My amendment preserves the full power of the SEC to determine what companies report and how they report it. This power was given to the SEC in 1934 after the accounting scandals in the 1920s and 1930s. My amendment preserves the current authority to protect investors and the public interest.

Under present law, and I quote from the law, if ``the SEC determines that the public interest or the protection of investors so requires,'' it can set an accounting standard even if it has to override another law to do so, but only to protect the public interest.

This underlying bill takes away the SEC's power to protect investors. It would prevent the SEC from adopting any accounting standard, except the one set in the underlying bill.

So I would urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to be very careful with their vote on this amendment. If you vote against this amendment, you will be walking away from accounting standards that are set on the

principle of protecting the 84 million investors in our country and moving to a different standard, one that does not focus on protecting investors but gives a competitive advantage to a small number of companies.

This amendment protects investors. This amendment saves independent accounting standard setting, and this amendment prevents this body from making what Alan Greenspan called, ``a bad mistake.'' And it is expressly supported by Arthur Levitt, Warren Buffett, John Bogle, the founder of the first mutual fund, and many other financial experts.

So I hope that this body will listen to the overwhelming views of financial experts and professionals and protect investors by supporting my amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.