Floor Statements

Once again, I am grateful to the gentleman from California for the opportunity to offer a slightly different perspective. While I continue to associate myself with my good friend Mr. Lantos in the celebration of the imperative of human rights globally, I have specific concerns about the tenor of this resolution and its relationship to the administration's policy of ramping up for a war against Iran.

Again, I want to state that this is the third resolution that has been brought before this House this evening. You have to read it in the context of administration actions, which have been documented in published reports, that relate to an attempt to interfere in the internal affairs of Iran by sending elements of the Department of Defense inside of Iranian territory; number two, by planning a bombing, targets inside Iran; number three, by planning a naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz where 40 percent of the world's oil flows through.

We have to look at this in a broader context of an administrative foreign policy, which is really aimed at creating not stability, but instability in the region. You can look at the July 2006 Vanity Fair article, which goes into detail about the unfortunate administration escapade of tricking up a case for uranium from Niger with respect to Iraq. One of the administration's key advisers in that article basically made the case for chaos, which is an administration, I believe, policy. Now we are looking at Iran.

Now, this resolution, 976, in the third article, expresses its unity with all the Iranian people, shares their desire to see Iran become a free country with transparent democratic institutions and equal rights for all.

I pointed out earlier in debates that Iran had a democratic government under Mossadegh; that in October of 1951, under Mossadegh, Iran sought to nationalize its oil industry. That then resulted in a draft resolution submitted to the United Nations by the United Kingdom, and supported by the United States and France, as depicting Iran then as a threat to international peace and security.

Then we saw a coup d'etat that was organized by the U.S. and the U.K. Yes, we ought to stand for democracy. We ought to also stand for truth with respect to the historical unfolding of what we say we stand for.

Where does this resolution lead? Does it lead to a continued insistence that the Government of Iran restore human rights to everyone in Iran? If it does, wonderful. We all ought to go along with that. But if his resolution is just another brick on a path towards war, look out. This looks like Iraq all over again, and that is what my concern is.

If this resolution sets us on a path to war, how many of us in the Congress are prepared to see this administration borrow money from China and Japan to go to war against Iran, as they have

borrowed money from China and Japan to go to war against Iraq? We have to look at what we are doing here.

While this resolution, I am sure, will pass overwhelmingly, we have to see that circumstances are being set in order which could lead us towards a path of war against Iran. We have to ask ourselves, is that what we really want?

I can stand here with my colleagues and say, absolutely, I support the religious freedom of the Baha'i. I do. Absolutely. I support human rights for all people in Iran, and I do. Absolutely. I support democratic principles in Iran and every other country in the world, and I do.

But I am not for war against Iran. I don't believe the American people want war against Iran. I don't think they wanted war against Iraq, but they were dragged into it.

I am just offering these remarks as a cautionary note to make sure that we have our eyes open as we walk in the days ahead with respect to policy and Iran. Yes, we need to make sure that Iran has peaceful uses of its atomic energy. We have an obligation to do that.

But, in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I maintain that we should begin first with direct negotiations with Iran. Second, we should assure Iran that we are not going to attack it. Third, we should demand that Iran open itself up to inspections once again by the IAEA. Fourth, we need assurances, and they are fair, that Iran is not going to be developing nuclear weapons.

There is a way out of this, and I am hopeful that in our stand for human rights, we are not paradoxically beginning a process that would deprive millions of Iranians of their human right to life.

I thank the gentleman from California for his friendship and also for his willingness to see debate in this House of the people. You have always done that, Mr. Lantos. Whether we have agreed or not, you have always been willing to see the debate continue.

Mr. Speaker, the United States must begin to use its influence in a positive way in the Middle East to help secure Israel by first bringing all parties together in the region, without preconditions, for peace talks. The U.S. made a mistake by standing aside during the 34-day war. We now must help to create the circumstances which stabilize the Government of Lebanon by assisting with the recovery and by helping with the restoration of housing, businesses and infrastructure.

Secondly, the situation in Gaza is desperate. Unemployment is approaching 50 percent. The government workforce, 40 percent of all workers have been paid only about a dime on a dollar due in wages since the beginning of the year. Childhood malnutrition cannot even be resolved by the massive U.N. aid now, which characterizes 70 percent of the population as refugees.

With no jobs, little or no electricity, limited access to water, conditions are dire. The U.S. cannot stand by and permit this humanitarian disaster to continue. We must do everything we can to help Israel secure itself.

We also have to remember that we must use our influence to bring about peace by recognizing the conditions which exist.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, Mr. Lantos, Mr. Hyde and Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.

I want to present a different perspective here because I think it is possible to address 9/11 in a way that is not particularly partisan, and maybe it is time that we do that as a Nation.

As jarring as 9/11 was to all of us, what is even more jarring is that many of us have forgotten who we were on 9/10, what our dreams and aspirations were for America before 9/11.

I ask you to think about this because if we are going to create for America a new direction, it is really imperative that we reconnect with the high aspirations that we had for ourselves, for our community, our Nation and the world. 9/11 caused a truncation of that kind of thinking, and it really detached us from our higher aspirations.

It was many years ago on September 13, 1814, that Francis Scott Key was inspired by the American defense of Fort McHenry to write the Star- Spangled Banner. We should remember that the Star-Spangled Banner is a map to our future, it is not just about the past because Francis Scott Key raised the question: ``O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave o'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?''

In that he made a connection between freedom and bravery, between freedom and courage.

We have a moment in this country's history that challenged us to our core on September 11; but we should never let it be a point at which we cause ourselves to be so fixed that we forget who we were on September 10.

For that reason, Mr. Chairman, my wife came up with this idea that I want to share with you right now. It is to create what is called a 9/10 Forum, discussions all over the country, Republicans, Democrats, whatever your politics, so we can reconnect with the deeper truths of who we are. In a 9/10 Forum, we would talk about who we are as Americans. It goes way beyond Republicans and Democrats, to create new possibilities and a new future for America.

The 9/10 Forum is born of this idea that there is something more essential in all of us than the partisan politics that has racked this Nation for the last few years. We need to find a way to transform this tragedy, but we can do it in a way that remembers the strength of who we are and who we were. So we are having discussions like this around the country, but it is important that we bring it into this forum. We can find our way. We can become secure again. We need to remember those times in our lives when we felt the most secure, felt courage and felt a deep love of our country.

I think that Lincoln, who looked at a Nation that had been racked by a Civil War, at his second inaugural Lincoln said ``with malice towards none and charity towards all.'' I think that could be a guiding principle for America as we seek to heal our Nation in the face of this great tragedy of 9/11

I want to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for his own commitment to human rights and thank Mr. Lantos for the lifetime of work that characterizes not only himself but Mrs. Lantos as well.

This is an important moment for this Congress because through recognizing the Dalai Lama with the Congressional Gold Medal, we also recognize his lifetime of work which has been about elevating the human spirit. Because in that we transcend the little labels of Democrat and Republican, liberal and conservative, and we come to an understanding of human unity, those principles which unite us all. We learn through celebrating the Dalai Lama's life and his contributions the transformative power of love, the transformative power of compassion.

In his work, he has challenged us to look at those things in our lives which cause anger, to look at those things in our lives which relate to negativity, and to consciously work on those things so that we become more perfect. Wasn't that really the message of our Founders with respect to the creation of the United States itself, that the work of our government should ever be to form a more perfect Union?

So it is that the spiritual work of the Dalai Lama informs all of us that we can perfect ourselves, that we can practice daily, taking a walk down the path towards a more meaningful life. He teaches us patience. And certainly, in this great body, patience is something that lends us to understanding of each other, to having compassion for each other.

This is an important moment for this Congress, when we understand that the Dalai Lama's teachings involve karma, an understanding of the power and the consequences of every thought, word, and deed, knowing that for every action there might be another action that follows. The symmetry between Buddhism and some of the teachings of Christianity is instructive here. Buddhists talk, and the Dalai Lama talks, about the law of karma. Christianity, we know of teachings that say as you sow, so shall you reap. So much of our lives are penetrated by spiritual dimensions that we often don't pay much attention to. But in moments like this when we celebrate the life and the work of a single person, we come to an understanding of not only his relationship to us and our relationship to him, but of our relationship to each other. And so when we celebrate him, we are celebrating ourselves, too, and our higher potential, not only as public servants but as human beings.

The Dalai Lama speaks about a path to tranquility. Is it possible in a public forum which is centered on such vigorous debate that we can find tranquility? His teachings would say, yes, because tranquility is an inner condition.

So, Mr. Speaker, the honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, our leader Ms. Pelosi, this is an important moment for this Congress, and I am proud to play a small part in recognizing the great work and person of the Dalai Lama.

Madam Chairman, I rise today in honor of our country's beloved horses. It is my hope that Congress will pass H.R. 503 unamended, the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act. This bill will end horse slaughter for human consumption in the United States and the cruel practices associated with this inhumane industry.

When horses are sold to slaughter they are often transported in overcrowded trucks, deprived of food and water, exposed to the elements and made to stand in their own waste. The slaughter bound horse can be sick or injured but forced to suffer a lack of appropriate veterinary care. The stress that horses are subjected to, both during transportation and at the slaughterhouse, triggers horses' natural flight response. At the slaughterhouse a horse can be ineffectively stunned before dismemberment, meaning that a horse may remain conscious while being bound and then elevated by one leg prior to having its throat slit.

H.R. 503 encourages responsible horse ownership. For horse owners, who are no longer able or willing to care for a horse, H.R. 503 finds appropriate alternatives to slaughter that may range from finding a new home for the horse to humane euthanasia preformed by a licensed veterinarian.

Documentation from the three remaining equine slaughterhouses in the United States show that America's wild horses have been among their victims. Additional victims include stolen, as well as healthy horses. This legislation will stop the sale of wild, stolen or healthy horses to slaughter houses for human consumption at a profit.

The word humane is defined as being marked by compassion, sympathy and consideration for animals. The question we must ask ourselves is if subjecting horses to this kind of circumstance is indeed humane? Is horse slaughter marked by compassion, sympathy and consideration for the animal? The only realistic conclusion is no.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 503 and to oppose all amendments designed to weaken this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute and recognition of Gregory D. Jackson, Fire Chief of Bay Village, Ohio. Mr. Jackson is retiring after serving and protecting the people of Bay Village for over 33 years.

Gregory Jackson served our country as a member of the U.S. Air Force in Korea. Upon his return from military service, Mr. Jackson became a firefighter, working at NASA's Lewis Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio, before joining the Bay Village division in September 1972.

During his career, Jackson became one of the first firefighters trained as a paramedic. In 1976, he helped create the WeShare--West Shore Area Rescue program--that raised the standards of fire fighting skills. Mr. Jackson volunteered countless hours as an Emergency Medical Technician and fire academy instructor, training future generations of emergency responders. With a genuine concern for his community, it is no surprise that Jackson was also involved in the establishment of a centralized emergency response center for nearby suburbs.

In August 1979, Jackson was sworn in as fire chief. His tenure is the longest in Bay Village's history. Throughout his career, his wife, Kim; daughters, Michelle and Connie; and the people of his community have been thankful for his leadership.

Mr. Speaker, please join me in tribute and recognition of a man whose career has been spent sacrificing his own safety, for the safety of others. His commitment to the protection of the people of northeast Ohio will be missed tremendously. May he enjoy a retirement filled with happiness and good health.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tribute and recognition of Herman Boone. As a high school football coach in Alexandria, Virginia, Mr. Boone inspired players to set aside racial differences and unite into one of the most successful teams in Virginia's history.

In 1971, Mr. Boone was named head football coach of TC Williams High School, a high school recently formed from smaller, segregated schools. In order to promote cooperation and teamwork, Mr. Boone used a game plan that was as strong on the field as off the field. Mr. Boone's leadership and love of the game led his team to an undefeated, 13-0 season. But his most memorable win was helping the community of Alexandria traverse

a racial divide. Mr. Boone's affect on the people of once segregated towns was an unconscious one, fueled by his willingness to put prejudice aside and cooperate with coaches and players from white schools. With an open mind, Mr. Boone set the standard and fans followed.

Today, Mr. Boone travels the country as an inspirational speaker. His story, which inspired the Disney movie, ``Remember the Titans'', has been brought to northeast Ohio. Mr. Boone will be honored at the 40th anniversary luncheon of the West Side Ecumenical Ministry this month.

Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in tribute and recognition of Herman Boone. His leadership as a high school football coach tackled the challenge of racism. Now more than 30 years later, he continues to lead players, coaches, and teams to victory through his message of persistence and teamwork.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tribute and recognition of the West Side Hungarian Reformed Church, which is celebrating its centennial anniversary. This month, the congregation will also commemorate the 50th anniversary of the 1956 uprising against communism in Hungary.

The Church has supported its members and community faithfully during its 100 years of service. In has served as a haven for immigrants and refugees during various stages of its historic pilgrimage. The Church has become a spiritual community comprised of Hungarian old timers, newcomers, and others associated with the congregation through family and religious ties.

All the people of the greater Cleveland area have benefited from the West Side Hungarian Reformed Church's participation in the community's social and cultural activities. People of the Cleveland area have joined the congregation to honor Hungarians who, half a century ago, resisted oppression, fought in a heroic attempt to restore freedom to Hungary, and made sacrifices to advance the cause of liberty.

My official congratulations and best wishes are extended to the Reverend Zoltan Sandor Kelemen, as well as to the members of the congregations, past and present, for their selfless efforts to serve the church and community.

Mr. Speaker, please join me in offering a proclamation of congratulations to the West Side Hungarian Reformed Church on its 100th anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and remembrance of Cleveland Police Detective Jonathan Schroeder, who bravely and selflessly heeded the call to duty and made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of our community.

Family, friends and service to others enveloped Detective Schroeder's life. He drew personal strength and faith from those close to him, especially his wife, Amy, and infant son, Eric. His generous spirit and humble nature made him a role model for those around him. He would often help shovel neighbors' driveways and sidewalks, and when his premature son left Fairview Hospital in a healthy condition, he vowed to make an annual donation to the hospital.

Detective Schroeder's steadfast focus on hard work and serving the public were evidenced throughout his life. He grew up in Monroeville, Pennsylvania and was a 1992 graduate of Kent State University. Detective Schroeder finished the police academy in 1996 and heroically served the Cleveland Police Department for ten years, five of those years as a detective. His calm demeanor and sense of fairness reflected in his colleagues' deep admiration and respect for him, as a police officer and as a human being. Detective Schroeder had a reputation for handling victims, as well as suspects, with an equal amount of respect.

Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of Detective Jonathan Schroeder. I extend my deepest condolences to his family members and many friends. The ultimate sacrifice, significant service and true heart that framed the life of Detective Schroeder will live forever in the memories and hearts of all those who knew and loved him best. His legacy of service and courage will be honored and remembered by the Cleveland community, today and for all time.

Mr. Speaker, I sent the attached letter along with my colleagues to the Secretary of Health and Human Services regarding avian flu data on July 6, 2006.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, July 6, 2006.

Mr. Mike Leavitt,

Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services,

Washington, DC.

Dear Secretary Leavitt: As the looming threat of a pandemic

flu continues, the need to take cost effective and time-

saving steps to boost our capacity and response speed is

vital. The free flow of information, in particular, can

accelerate research, and the development of vaccines, saving

lives. In the case of Avian Flu, the very properties we fear

the most--the ease with which the virus is transmitted and

its ability to kill its host--are encoded in the virus'

genome. Yet the genetic sequences are currently only

immediately available to a select group of researchers, a

practice which is hampering and delaying our ability to

respond to the threat of the pandemic influenza. We will need

as many scientific eyes as possible examining the problem.

Though an adequate response to a future pandemic will

require the cooperation of all involved countries, the US

should show leadership commensurate with its expertise and

wealth. We therefore applaud your request of the World Health

Assembly, the decision making body of the World Health

Organization, that they ``pledge with me to abide by four

principles of pandemic preparedness: Transparency, rapid

reporting, data sharing, and scientific cooperation.''

We ask that you set these principles into motion by

requiring data from HHS-funded research on avian influenza

and genetic sequences, in particular, to be promptly

deposited in a publicly accessible repository such as

GenBank, the sequence database of the National Institutes of

Health. Researchers for the Human Genome Project published

their sequences in a public database within 24 hours. Calls

for the immediate deposition of sequence data have come from

some of the most renowned scientists in the world in the

field of avian influenza.

Some scientists and countries are reluctant to release

their genetic and clinical data for fear of loss of

scientific credit or that the information will be used to

create a technology, such as a vaccine, that will then be

priced out of their reach. In particular, certain countries

are refusing to release their sequences. Unfortunately, those

countries are reported to include several current or past hot

spots for H5N1. These concerns can be satisfied. There are

already public databases holding tens of thousands of genetic

sequences that have intellectual property protections in

place to prevent just such problems. While many countries may

have policies in place to prevent the open sharing of such

information, stressing the importance of rapid response

worldwide is vital.

In the event of a pandemic, the public will need to be able

to trust that their government and scientists are acting with

the transparency, speed and cooperation you requested. The

United States can take this opportunity to take on a critical

leadership role.

Sincerely,

Dennis J. Kucinich, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Jim McDermott,

John Conyers, Jr., Wayne T. Gilchrest, Tammy Baldwin,

Diana DeGette, Ellen O. Tauscher, Lynn C. Woolsey, John

W. Olver, Major R. Owens, Barbara Lee, Dale E. Kildee,

William J. Jefferson, Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Bernie

Sanders.

Mr. Speaker, I sent the attached letter along with my colleagues to the Director of the National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences regarding environmental health research on July 11, 2006.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, July 11, 2006.

Dr. David A. Schwartz,

Director, National Institute of Environmental Health

Sciences,

Research Triangle Park, NC.

Dear Dr. Schwartz: We are writing to encourage you to

ensure the continued focus of the National Institute for

Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) on preventable health

risks associated with environmental sources and exposures, as

you develop a program of greater relevance to human disease.

An emphasis on discovering the role of environmental

exposures in human health, disease, and disabilities will

increase the importance of your proposed ``roadmap'' for

NIEHS. We look forward to the future support and growth of

the following established initiatives:

research on community health and environment

Environmental exposures, and often diseases, occur with

disproportionate impact on the health and well-being of local

communities, particularly those already impacted by other

risk factors for health disparities. Thus, continuing the

focus of NIEHS support for community-based research will

serve the health needs of the American public. It will also

contribute to increased knowledge of acquired factors in

complex situations involving other preventable risks that too

often track with economic and political inequalities. The

men, women, and children of unfairly impacted communities

often must work, live, play, and attend school in

environments that are contaminated at levels that exceed

national averages, and sometimes even exceed legal limits,

but often lack the resources to initiate scientific

investigations. NIEHS research and outreach provides critical

data that supports strategies to prevent or treat disease and

disabilities among these communities, as well as regulatory

action to identify contamination sources for targeted clean

up.

research on children's health and environment

Chronic diseases that show up later in life are frequently

the result of preventable environmental exposures to

pesticides, air pollution, and many other exposures that

occur early in life. For this reason, continued support for

research programs focused on children's health and

environmental contaminants is a priority for our constituents

and for the future of America's health. Examples of this kind

of research currently supported by NIEHS include: pesticide

impacts on cancer and brain development among children of

agriculture communities; air pollution impacts on asthma and

allergies among inner city children; and, industrial

pollution impacts on learning and behavior among school

children.

timely and complete report on carcinogens

In order to efficiently manage environmental health risks

like chemicals, we must have accurate information on their

toxicity. The Report on Carcinogens (RoC) is a biannual,

congressionally mandated report that scientifically evaluates

the scientific evidence to compile a list of all substances

known or suspected to cause human cancers and to which

Americans are exposed. The RoC is a reference standard for

the private sector, for certain legislation, and is even used

overseas as an authoritative text on carcinogens. The timely

release of this critical Report is a priority for state and

federal regulators, for international regulatory bodies, for

communities, and for Members of Congress.

Sustaining these strategic initiatives in connection with

your new initiatives will contribute to the success of new

research directions at NlEHS, and ensure that research

findings on environmental factors are fully translated into

protecting public health. We look forward to working with you

to properly fund and support these programs.

Sincerely,

Dennis. J. Kucinich.

Louis Capps.

Rush Holt.

Bart Gordon.

Barbara Lee.

James E. Clyburn.

Mr. Speaker, I made the attached statement in the House Government Reform Committee regarding global warming on July 20, 2006.

Statement of Representative Dennis J. Kucinich, U.S. House of

Representatives, Government Reform Committee

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this important hearing

on Climate Change, the first such substantive hearing in the

House in recent memory. If we are to successfully deal with

global warming, it cannot be a partisan issue. It will

require our full attention and an inestimable share of our

resources, which requires united leadership. This hearing,

therefore, is a major step in the right direction. However, I

was disappointed to hear the Administration's testimony today

which is decidedly partisan. Indeed it continues to try to

put a happy face on bad policies and take credit for work it

has not done.

A good place to start is the Administration's claim to have

reduced greenhouse gas ``intensity'' during its tenure.

Efficiency gains make the ``intensity'' go down anyway.

Moreover, this deceptive rhetorical device diverts attention

from its failure to set a goal for greenhouse gas emissions

reductions that is consistent with that which is justified by

the current science. California has done so, calling for an

80 percent reduction. Holland is now cutting emissions by 80

percent in 40 years. Tony Blair has committed the UK to

cutting emissions by 60 percent in 50 years. Germany has

obligated itself to cuts of 50 percent in 50 years. Several

months ago, French President Chirac called on the entire

industrial world to cut emissions 75 percent by 2050.

In fact, this is only one of the instances in which this

Administration has thumbed its nose at the international

community. There is not only an unwillingness to move forward

with substantive action on global warming, there is active

resistance, and, in fact, bullying of other countries. The

Administration started by walking away from the Kyoto

protocol. I was in Johannesburg for the World Summit on

Sustainable Development in 2002. Nothing of significance from

the U.S. I went to Buenos Aires for the Conference of the

Parties in 2004. Nothing of significance from the U.S. In

Montreal, Harlan Watson walked out of negotiations in what

was perceived in international media as a tantrum when the

Administration didn't get its way. There was an agreement in

the G8 that the U.S. re-engage on the issue. It did not

happen.

Instead, we see not only rhetorical red herrings, but we

see Enron accounting techniques being used to create the

illusion that something is being done. The GAO released a

report in August 2005 called Climate Change; Federal Reports

on Climate Change Funding Should Be Clearer and More

Complete. This report listed suspect activities claimed by

the OMB as spending on global warming, including such efforts

as the ``Andean Counterdrug Initiative.''

Making matters worse, the Administration advocates for

dealing with global warming by advocating for nuclear power.

Nuclear power has been shown to be greenhouse gas intensive,

it is far less cost effective than renewables, far less

polluting than renewables, and facilitates further

proliferation of nuclear weapons materials. We are trading

our addiction to oil and all the problems that go with it,

for nuclear power and a whole new set of equally pernicious

problems that go with it, when common sense alternatives are

readily available or within our reach.

In the meantime, it is becoming increasingly clear that the

effects of global warming are already being felt. The United

Nations has declared that at least 5 million cases of illness

and more than 150,000 deaths every year are attributable to

global warming. The 2003 European heat wave killed over

20,000 people. The 10 hottest years on record have occurred

in the last 15 years. Two consecutive record-breaking

hurricane seasons.

Exactly how bad does it have to get?

Mr. Speaker, I made the attached statement in the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee of the House Science Committee, regarding the National Academy of Science's Decadal Plan for Aeronautics on July 18, 2006.

Thank you Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member Udall, and

members of this subcommittee for the opportunity to speak

today about aeronautics. Under your leadership, this Congress

has been tremendously supportive of aeronautics and I am

grateful for that. I am also grateful to my colleague,

Representative JoAnn Davis who has fought for strong

aeronautics programs.

NASA's role in aeronautics is fundamental. Its research is

important because NASA is able to develop long term, high-

risk enabling technologies that the private sector is

unwilling to perform because they are too risky or too

expensive. In fact, this has historically been the role of

government-sponsored research. This is true not only with

aeronautics but also with pharmaceutical research, defense

research, energy research, and environmental research.

When the government sponsored basic research yields

information that could lead to a service or product with

profit potential, the private sector transitions from

research to development in order to bring it to market. While

it is not always as simple as this, it is clear that where

there is no basic research, there can be no development. This

research has resulted in monumental innovations that affect

our daily lives. Its contributions are especially significant

in the areas of national security, environmental protection,

and airline safety.

NASA's aeronautics programs also contribute substantially

to the nation's economy. The NASA Glenn Research Center in

Brook Park, Ohio, for example, is a cornerstone of the

state's fragile economy and a stronghold of aeronautics

research. In FY04, the economic output of NASA Glenn alone

was 1.2 billion dollars per year. It was responsible for over

10,000 jobs and household earnings amounted to 568 million

dollars.

Civil aeronautics is also the major contributor to this

sector's positive balance of trade, contributing $29 billion

in 2005 alone. Aeronautics contributes to a stronger economy

by lowering the cost of transportation, enabling a new

generation of service based industries like e-commerce to

flourish by performing the research that leads to inexpensive

and reliable flights.

These are only a few of the reasons that the proposed cuts

to aeronautics are so pernicious. Many of the recommendations

by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) are already headed

down the path of irrelevancy because we simply won't be

able to pay for them. We will be feeling the effects of

the proposed cuts--about 25% in FY07 alone--immediately in

terms of economic jolts and then in the long term from the

loss of innovation. In addition, the Administration's

projected further decline of aeronautics research in the

out years erodes our workforce by sending a clear signal

that funding in the long term is unstable at best, a

concern echoed by the NAS reports. Our NASA workforce is

the reason for our aeronautics dominance. It is that

simple. But the cuts are already causing us to struggle

against rising expertise in countries like China as well

as an aging scientific and technical workforce at NASA.

This subcommittee and this Congress have spoken

unequivocally in the past few years on this issue by keeping

aeronautics strong in NASA authorization and appropriations

bills. Yet the NASA budget requests have not changed. We are

still underfunding the Vision for Space Exploration, forcing

the agency to take money from smaller programs like

aeronautics, the first A in NASA. In the process, we run the

risk of taking away one of NASA's great strengths--diversity.

If NASA becomes a one trick pony focused almost exclusively

on space exploration, NASA as a whole is vulnerable to

political wind shifts.

Our priority should be to correct this. Earlier this year,

I attempted to offer a bipartisan amendment to increase

funding for aeronautics in the Budget Resolution by $179

million dollars, which would have left funding flat for FY07.

But it was blocked by the Rules Committee. However, the

Senate Appropriations Committee reported a bill last week

that adds 1 billion dollars to cover the emergency costs

associated with the loss of space shuttle Columbia. That

would free up money for Aeronautics. It also included a ban

on involuntary reductions in force, protecting the most

valuable part of NASA, its world-class workforce. The House

should support these provisions in conference.

In the long term, my hope is that this subcommittee will

continue to defend aeronautics at NASA. I will most certainly

do what I can to help.

Mr. Speaker, I sent the attached letter to the Director of the National Eye Institute, inquiring about the role of publicly funded research in the development of the drug on July 12, 2005.

Congress of the United States,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, July 12, 2006.

Dr. Paul A. Sieving, M.D., Ph.D.

Director, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of

Health, Bethesda, Maryland

Dear Dr. Sieving: I write to request your assistance in

understanding NIH's contribution to research and development

of the drug, Lucentis. According to your website, ``the NEI

alone has spent nearly $95 million and has sponsored more

than 300 research studies that have investigated

neovascularization in the eye.'' The studies have

``discovered specific biological pathways and proteins that

trigger the growth of new blood vessels.'' Specifically, a

protein called vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) was

found to be ``important in the growth of new blood vessels in

retinal degenerative diseases such as advanced AMD. The

abnormal blood vessels leak blood and fluid, causing severe

vision loss.'' Subsequently, ``several pharmaceutical

companies began developing anti-VEGF therapies.''

Please provide a detailed overview of the research NIH has

funded in this area. Please also indicate whether NIH

supported any of the research that led to the Lucentis

patents, or any of the research that was undertaken by

Genentech or partners, including support for clinical

testing, related to Lucentis. The intent is not to be able to

review the findings of each of the relevant studies. Rather,

it is to understand the role and contribution of NIH in the

development of this important product.

Thank you for your assistance and your time.

Sincerely,

Dennis J. Kucinich,

Member of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I sent the attached letter to the Secretary of OSHA, inquiring about the Asbestos-Automotive Brake and Clutch Repair Work Safety and Health Information Bulletin on July 12, 2005.

House of Representatives,

July 10, 2006.

Mr. Edwin G. Foulke,

Assistant Secretary, Occupation Safety and Health

Administration,

U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC.

Dear Assistant Secretary Foulke: In 2002, OSHA began work

on Asbestos-Automotive Brake and Clutch Repair Work Safety

and Health Information Bulletin (SHIB) regarding exposure to

asbestos-containing brakes. The Bulletin was completed in

2005. OSHA and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) met

to discuss the matter in August 2005, whereupon the draft

SHIB was sent to Dan Crane of OSHA for technical review. Mr.

Crane gave it a favorable review, agreeing that mechanics

should be warned about the health risks of exposure. However,

seven months later, the Baltimore Sun reported that OSHA was

delaying issuing the SHIB.

When does OSHA intend to issue the SHIB? If the Sun's

article is correct, what are the reasons for the delay? Was

this decision made by OSHA or OMB? Please provide a copy of

any meeting minutes and a list of attendees of the August

2005 meeting between OMB and OSHA. Please also provide any

correspondence between OSHA and OMB regarding the SHIB during

the time period beginning in 2002, extending to July 10,

2006.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Dennis J. Kucinich,

Member of Congress.