Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the wonderful life and exceptional accomplishments of a remarkable woman in the 1st Congressional District of Colorado. It is both fitting and proper that we recognize this distinguished citizen for her impressive record of civic leadership and invaluable service. It is to commend this eminent citizen that I rise to honor Dolores Dickman.

Dolores Dickman has been on the front lines of progress for decades and has proven to be a potent force in transforming the landscape of our city and State. Her indomitable spirit has sustained her through many challenges and molded a life of notable accomplishment. Dolores came to our community from her native Kansas and graduated from the University of Denver. She has used her talents and skills to advance the public good and the well being of working men and women. She has been a political activist, labor leader and has remained in the vanguard of those dedicated to economic and social justice. Dolores was the first woman State director of the Committee on Political Action for the AFL-CIO and was a powerful advocate for the rights of working people and the well being of our families. Some of us do not comprehend how far we've come. There was a time when fundamental decency and equity for working people were not part of our shared values. Dolores worked along side Ceasar Chavez, brought food to striking workers and has engaged in the struggles that have improved the human condition. At the international level, Histadrut has honored her for her immeasurable contributions to the labor movement in Israel. For all of her efforts in this regard, we owe Dolores a great debt of gratitude.

Those who know Dolores know that politics matter. She is well known for her outspoken commentary and years of service to the Democratic Party. She marched in Selma for the civil liberties of all people. She took a seat on a plane next to Martin Luther King, Jr. to share her thoughts and visited then President John F. Kennedy at the White House. She has recruited notable civic leaders for public office and has been instrumental in winning many local, State and national elections. Dolores has been the recipient of numerous public honors and has been characterized as the ``grand dame of North Denver politics'' and a political ``powerhouse.'' While all of these truly reflect the standing and regard in which we hold Dolores, I would simply add that she has the rare ability to balance pragmatism and high purpose, which is uncommon among those engaged in public life. She knows that politics is not easy nor has it ever been. Dolores has perspective--she knows that the contest is never over and the field is never quite taken. I remember Dolores referencing in a Denver Post column that all the political posturing in the world doesn't mean squat if people don't vote. As usual, Dolores cuts to the heart of the matter. She understands what is vital to our democracy as well as what is important in the calculus of public affairs.

The contributions of Dolores Dickman are rich in consequence and on behalf of the citizens of the 1st Congressional District of Colorado, I wish to express our gratitude. Her service, accomplishments and civic virtue command our respect and admiration. Please join me in paying tribute to Dolores Dickman, a distinguished citizen. It is the values, leadership and commitment she exhibits on a daily basis that serve to build a better future for all Americans.

Mr. Speaker, at the First Annual Congressional Conference on Civic Education held recently in Washington, D.C., a new report was released that deserves our highest attention and concern. The report, ``Citizenship: A Challenge for All Generations,'' showed that young people are disengaged from the political process and lack the knowledge necessary to be effective citizens. According to the public opinion survey described in the report, more young Americans know the name of the reigning American Idol than know the political party of their state's governor.

The survey did provide a source of good news, however. It reported that courses in civics and government make a significant difference in sparking young people's interest in government and increasing their understanding of the American system of government.

Both the landmark Congressional Conference on Civic Education and this new national survey of youth civic attitudes, knowledge, and participation were products of the Representative Democracy in America Project, a new congressional initiative designed to reinvigorate Americans and educate them about the critical relationship between government and the people it serves. This national project is a collaboration among the National Conference of State Legislature's Trust for Representative Democracy, the Center on Congress at Indiana University and the Center for Civic Education. The project, which is strictly nonpartisan, is funded by the U.S. Department of Education by act of Congress. I would like to submit for the record the executive summary of the report ``Citizenship: A Challenge for All Generations.''

Executive Summary

This public opinion survey shows that young people do not

understand the ideals of citizenship, they are disengaged

from the political process, they lack the knowledge necessary

for effective self-government, and their appreciation and

support of American democracy is limited. The older

generations have failed to teach the ideals of citizenship to

the next generation. But there is hope. The report provides

new evidence that civic education makes a big difference in

the attitudes toward citizenship, knowledge and civic

engagement of young people.

The report is based on a national public opinion survey

designed to tap how the civic attitudes, knowledge and

participation of young people--the DotNet generation between

15 and 26 years of age--compare to those of older

generations. The poll was conducted by Knowledge Networks, a

research firm that conducts scientifically based Internet

surveys. The sampling error for the two age groups--15 to 26

and over 26--is approximately 4 percentage points

each.

The survey results reveal a breakdown in how older

generations pass on the values of democracy to younger

Americans, especially in the area of what it means to be a

good citizen.

Here are some key findings regarding the qualities of good

citizens:

Seventy-eight percent of those in the older generations say

we need to pay attention to government and politics compared

with 54 percent of the younger generation.

Less than half of the DotNets think that communicating with

elected officials or volunteering or donating money to help

others are qualities of a good citizen.

Only 66 percent of the DotNets say that voting is a

necessary quality for being a good citizen, compared with 83

percent of those over age 26.

Among the DotNet generation, 64 percent report that they

have taken a high school course on civics or American

government. Those who have done so are much more likely to

believe they are personally responsible for making things

better for society and have a more expansive concept of the

qualities of a good citizen. On the importance of voting, for

example, there is a 24 point spread between those who have

taken a government class and those who haven't.

In the area of civic engagement--the act of governing

ourselves:

Only half of the DotNets reported that they voted in the

most recent elections or that they follow politics, compared

to three-quarters of those over age 26.

In many areas of civic participation, two or three times

more DotNets who have taken a civics class report that they

have engaged in civic activities than those who have not.

On civic knowledge--the tool that enables us to govern

ourselves:

Three-quarters of the older generations correctly

identified the party of their state's governor and three out

of five knew the Republicans control Congress. But only one-

third could correctly identify the party in control of their

state's legislature.

Among DotNets, eight out of 10 know that the cartoon

Simpsons live in Springfield, and the great majority know

that Ruben Studdard is the reigning American Idol. But less

than half know the party of their state's governor, and only

40 percent can say which party controls Congress.

On attitudes toward representative democracy--our

appreciation and understanding of the complexities of the

legislative process:

The majority of Americans grasp the fact that people

disagree on the issues and the system has to work to resolve

such disagreements.

The public is cynical about the people and processes of

government. They are about equally divided on whether

legislators care what people in their districts think or

don't care about the opinions of ordinary people. Two in five

believe that those elected to public office are out to serve

their own personal interests, while only one in three thinks

they are trying to serve the public interest. A majority

believes that the system is run by a few big interests rather

than for the benefit of all.

Americans believe the country would be better off if the

people decided issues directly by voting on them. Support for

representative democracy is limited.

The gap between the civic attitudes, knowledge and

participation of the new generation of DotNets and the older

ones is substantially greater than the gaps between previous

generations. It suggests that the DotNets will never be as

engaged in democracy as their elders, even as they age.

Civic education makes a big difference in the attitudes,

knowledge and engagement of young people. Thirty-nine states

have civics or government class requirements for high school

graduation. All states will want to review their civic

education requirements, standards, assessments, teacher

training and course content to determine if they are

delivering effective civic education that produces informed

citizens.

Mr. Speaker, the Hypocratic oath requires that doctors first do no harm. There is no such oath for Members of Congress. But we would be wise to heed it when we consider the Medicare prescription drug benefit tonight, for this bill certainly will do harm to millions of Americans. I know this. My constituents know this, and seniors across the country know this. They are furious with the organizations and the Members of Congress that support this plan.

This is not an abstract debate. This has a huge impact on real people. It will do harm to people like Helen Lay, my constituent, a retiree in Colorado. Helen is worried because, as she sees it, this bill has something in it for everyone except the senior citizens. Helen and her husband, Frank, are fortunate enough to have good prescription drug coverage through their retirement plan. Right now, they spend about $800 a year on prescription drugs. Without insurance, they would be spending nearly $12,000.

This bill will do great harm to Helen and Frank and millions of other seniors because it will encourage employer retirement plans to end prescription drug coverage, forcing seniors into substandard plans that cost more, and no one knows what the coverage or the price will be.

Helen and Frank have other serious problems. They take 12 brand-name medications per month. But this bill specifically prohibits Medicare from negotiating drug prices, even though private companies like Wal- Mart and agencies like the Veterans Administration are able to negotiate cheaper drugs. That means even if this bill passes, Helen and Frank will still pay exorbitant prices.

I say to Helen that we are here to stand up for her today.

Congress first must do no harm. Send this plan back.

Mr. Speaker, the United States needs an energy policy for the 21st century. We need to reduce our reliance on Middle East oil and increase our energy independence. Unfortunately, this Republican conference report completely fails to do any of this.

We need an energy policy for 2003, but the plan we have before us was designed for 1973. The authors of this plan act as if reliance on foreign oil, climate change, and the need for energy conservation are of no consequence. The plan gives billions of dollars to the oil and gas industries so that our Nation will continue to rely on the Middle East for petroleum.

It does nothing to encourage energy conservation. It does nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It does nothing to encourage investment in renewable energy, a technology that was new and exciting in the 1970s and, with proper congressional support, could finally be part of our energy infrastructure in the future.

It is our duty as Congresspeople to lead and not follow. Sadly, this conference report is not forward-looking. I must vote ``no'' on this energy bill because it is nothing more than a whole lot of yesterday.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the exceptional endeavors and notable undertakings of an extraordinary professional membership organization in the State of Colorado. It is both fitting and proper that we recognize this outstanding association for its leadership in government and the legal community and for its enduring service to the people of our state. It is to commend this distinguished organization that I rise to honor the

Colorado Trial Lawyers Association on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary.

The Colorado Trial Lawyers Association (CTLA) has been on the front lines of progress since its inception and has proven to be a powerful force in transforming the legal landscape of our state. CTLA's statement of purpose merits mention. ``The Colorado Trial Lawyers Association is comprised of Colorado trial lawyers who are committed to the protection and advancement of individuals rights and to the advancement of trial advocacy skills, high ethical standards and professionalism in the ongoing effort to preserve and improve the American system of jurisprudence.'' Within this unequivocal statement lies the touchstone that has guided CTLA's work with government and its immeasurable contribution to the legal profession in Colorado.

For the last half-century, CTLA and its members have been resolute in their commitment to protecting the health, safety and welfare of Colorado consumers. It has been active in educating the public concerning the efficacy of individual rights and the pivotal role of the trial lawyer in protecting those rights. CTLA has recognized, and continues to recognize, that it has a public trust of considerable magnitude. Through its legislative advocacy, CTLA has provided vital information and invaluable counsel to Members of the Colorado General Assembly and the United States Congress on issues that protect consumers and impact our civil justice system. Due in no small part to CTLA's advocacy, many detrimental legislative proposals have been defeated, particularly those that would have prevented or hindered access to the courts for redress of grievances.

Trial advocacy is facing considerable change, technological and otherwise. CTLA has given the legal profession inestimable service through its outstanding legal education programs by providing state-of- the-art instruction concerning law, ethics and professional conduct for members and non-members alike. CTLA has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to those in need. Countless members have provided pro-bono legal aid, including free legal assistance to the victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11th through the Trial Lawyers Care Program. My membership in CTLA has had a profound impact on my career in the practice of law and public service.

Please join me in commending the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary. It is leadership, advocacy and commitment of the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association that continually enhances our lives and builds a better future for all Americans.

Mr. Speaker, given our current military situation in Iraq and Afghanistan, I believe it is incumbent upon us to send an unequivocal message of support for our troops

who are currently in the field. It is equally important that we provide veterans--those who have made sacrifices in order to protect the safety of our country, the benefits they have rightfully earned.

Not since the Korean War have we as a country relied on the members of our reserve forces and National Guard as we do now. We are depending on them to preserve the peace in Iraq and protect our safety at home. We have uprooted them from their families, taken them away from their jobs and put them in the line of fire. Yet, it is not uncommon that after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, members of the Reserve forces return home without the basic benefits they so rightfully deserve. While this legislation is far from perfect, it takes an important step by ensuring that activated members of the Reserve forces and National Guard and their families receive health benefits.

Importantly, this legislation extends the increase in ``combat pay'' and a Family Separation Allowance for all of our troops who are currently serving in the military. Given the sacrifice that our troops make in the name of protecting our country, it is only right to guarantee that they and their families have adequate financial resources in their time of need.

Additionally, this legislation addresses the unfair Disabled Veterans Tax. It allows certain disabled military retirees to receive both their retirement and disability benefits. However, it only allows concurrent receipt of these benefits for one-third of the approximately 700,000 disabled veterans. I believe this is sorely inadequate and is the reason why I voted to recommit this bill so conferees could have the chance to repeal the entire Disabled Veterans Tax and let all disabled veterans rightfully receive both their military benefits as well as their retirement benefits.

While I do not believe this bill is perfect and I am particularly concerned with certain provisions regarding civil service reform and the environment, I do believe that given our current military obligations, it is essential that we support our troops. By extending benefits for our troops and veterans, we are guaranteeing that those who have dedicated their lives to serving our country are not left behind during this critical time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) for the great work they do for NIH.

I am here as the cochair for the Diabetes Caucus to encourage Members to vote for this motion to instruct. Diabetes is one of the fastest growing and deadliest diseases in the United States. Approximately 17 million Americans, or 6.2 percent of the population, have diabetes. NIH funding is essential to preventing, treating, and curing this disease. Research done at the NIDDK has been critical for the prevention and treatment of diabetes and its complications, which include blindness, kidney failure, heart disease, and amputation.

NIH research has shown that it is possible to stop the progression of the disease in newly diagnosed individuals; it has helped pinpoint the genes that cause the disease and its complications; and it has proven that normalization of blood glucose levels can help many people with the disease avoid complications.

Nothing, however, has shown more progress than the results we have seen in clinical trials involving the transplantation of insulin- producing cells into individuals with Type I diabetes. This groundbreaking research has truly brought us within the reach of a cure. So far, we are seeing an 80 percent success rate. By actually funding this research, we can help the Immune Tolerance Network support further clinical trials so that islet transplantation will be available for the millions of Americans with diabetes.

The tiny 2.5 percent NIH funding increase passed by the House means that some studies by the NIH will not be continued and that researchers with promising ideas will not be funded at all. We are stifling research with this anemic increase, and we are limiting the quality of health care available to all Americans.

Diabetes costs $132 billion a year and one in four Medicare dollars is attributable to individuals with diabetes. A larger investment now in this research will save money in the future.

Let us keep our promise to the children who visited this year. Let us remember them, and vote for the Bell amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the exceptional endeavors and notable undertakings of an extraordinary professional membership organization in the State of Colorado. It is both fitting and proper that we recognize this outstanding association for its leadership in government and the legal community and for its enduring service to the people of our state. It is to commend this distinguished organization that I rise to honor the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary.

The Colorado Trial Lawyers Association (CTLA) has been on the front lines of progress since its inception and has proven to be a powerful force in transforming the legal landscape of our state. CTLA's statement of purpose merits mention. ``The Colorado Trial Lawyers Association is comprised of Colorado trial lawyers who are committed to the protection and advancement of individuals rights and to the advancement of trial advocacy skills, high ethical standards and professionalism in the ongoing effort to preserve and improve the American system of jurisprudence.'' Within this unequivocal statement lies the touchstone that has guided CTLA's work with government and its immeasurable contribution to the legal profession in Colorado.

For the last half-century, CTLA and its members have been resolute in their commitment to protecting the health, safety and welfare of Colorado consumers. It has been active in educating the public concerning the efficacy of individual rights and the pivotal role of the trial lawyer in protecting those rights. CTLA has recognized, and continues to recognize, that it has a public trust of considerable magnitude. Through its legislative advocacy, CTLA has provided vital information and invaluable counsel to Members of the Colorado General Assembly and the United States Congress on issues that protect consumers and impact our civil justice system. Due in no small part to CTLA's advocacy, many detrimental legislative proposals have been defeated, particularly those that would have prevented or hindered access to the courts for redress of grievances.

Trial advocacy is facing considerable change, technological and otherwise. CTLA has given the legal profession inestimable service through its outstanding legal education programs by providing state-of- the-art instruction concerning law, ethics and professional conduct for members and non-members alike. CTLA has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to those in need. Countless members have provided pro-bono legal aid, including free legal assistance to the victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11 through the Trial Lawyers Care Program. My membership in CTLA has had a profound impact on my career in the practice of law and public service.

Please join me in commending the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary. It is leadership, advocacy and commitment of the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association that continually enhances our lives and builds a better future for all Americans.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the FY '04 Supplemental bill.

In April 2003, President Bush asked the American people to provide $77.9 billion for military and reconstruction spending in Iraq. At the time, his administration repeatedly assured Congress that they would not need additional money for Iraq. We now see that this was either poor planning or a calculated and gross underestimation of the cost. Today, congress is being asked to vote on $87 billion in additional spending for our military actions in Iraq and the reconstruction of both Iraq and Afghanistan for 2004.

Congress needs to start acting in a fiscally responsible manner. In this bill's current form there are no corresponding spending cuts or revenue generators to pay for the nearly $87 billion cost. President Bush is asking for $20.3 billion in reconstruction funds with no strings attached. This proposal has no accountability and, equally as disturbing, there has been no effort made to provide an offset to cover the cost. As a result, the proposal would add significantly to the already massive $500 billion federal budget deficit.

I have attempted to inject some fiscal responsibility into this process by offering an amendment that would eliminate the Bush tax giveaway for taxpayers in the top federal income bracket. My proposal would only impact the top 0.7 percent of all taxpayers with annual incomes of more than $312,000 and would restore approximately $90 billion to the federal budget. Unfortunately my amendment was not allowed and we are left with a bill that we are utterly unable to afford.

We have an obligation to protect our troops in Iraq and to help rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan so that they are no longer havens for the tyranny and misery that spawn violence. This must be done responsibly and within the context of a clear plan for the U.S. to accomplish its goals and turn over both the governance and security of Iraq to the Iraqi people.

Unfortunately, the bill before us today encapsulates all of the problems with the Administration's Iraq policy. President Bush has not explained how the $87 billion in spending helps us meet our goals of protecting our troops and restoring order in Iraq. The President has failed to make clear how many more American tax dollars will be spent on Iraq or the duration of our occupation. The President has no plan for how to pay for the $87 billion without adding dramatically to an already record federal deficit.

The spending for our troops is vital. However, the President's plan needs to include guarantees that the $67 billion in military spending will go to getting critical supplies to our troops in a timely fashion. This is particularly important in the wake of a report this week that more than 40,000 G.I.s in Iraq still do not have the protective body armor for their Kevlar vests that stops rounds from AK-47s, the assault weapon favored by Iraqi guerrillas.

The most troubling portion of this proposal is the $20 billion allocated for the rebuilding of Iraq. To this point, many of the reconstruction contracts have been awarded without competition to companies with close ties to the White House. These no-bid contracts preclude the accountability that is critical to ensuring that our tax dollars are not wasted and that every contract is implemented to meet the goal of a quick restoration of order and self-governance in Iraq.

The question of cost points to the other major concern I have with this request. The President did not provide any way for us to pay for it. Instead of cutting spending or finding another revenue source, he is borrowing on our children's future by adding to the federal deficit. This is the continuation of a reckless economic policy that has already turned a budget surplus in 2000 into a projected $500 billion deficit for 2004.

There is also the question of whether this plan makes our nation more secure. Last year, I voted against the Iraqi war resolution because I believed that there was no clear evidence showing Iraq was an imminent threat or that there were ties between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. I was extremely concerned that the Bush Administration's unilateralist approach would seriously harm our international standing, our ability to wage the War on Terror and our ability to rebuild Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein.

These concerns have been borne out. Weapons of mass destruction have yet to be found and the Bush Administration has recently admitted that there is very little evidence to tie Iraq to al Qaeda. There is a growing consensus that the Bush Administration did not have the solid evidence they once claimed to have in order to justify invading Iraq.

Congress has an obligation to pass a bill that contains a clear and coherent plan for our troops and the reconstruction of Iraq and does not balloon the deficit. This proposal does not meet these standards.

I urge a no vote on the Supplemental.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the exceptional accomplishments and extraordinary life of a woman in the 1st Congressional District of Colorado. It is both fitting and proper that we recognize this distinguished public servant for her impressive record of civic leadership and invaluable service. It is to commend this outstanding citizen that I rise to honor Arie P. Taylor.

Arie Taylor was a remarkable woman who lived a remarkable life. She was on the front lines of progress for decades and proved to be a powerful force in transforming the landscape of our city and state. Her indomitable spirit sustained her through many challenges and molded a life of notable accomplishment. Born in Bedford, Ohio, it was evident at an early age that politics would play a major role in Arie Taylor's life. At age 19, she served under the first African American woman on the Cleveland City Council. After studying at Miami University of Ohio and Case Western Reserve University, she served a four-year stint in the Women's Air Force as a Staff Sergeant where she was the first black classroom instructor and noncommissioned officer in Women's Air Force training. Arie Taylor distinguished herself in national politics when as a delegate to the 1968 Democratic National Convention, she fought against seating all-white Southern delegations.

Arie Taylor's lengthy career in public service began in 1972 when she was elected to the Colorado House of Representatives representing House District 7 in northeast Denver. She was the first African American woman elected to the Colorado General Assembly and served six terms. As a state representative, she burnished a reputation of being forthright, outspoken and wearing great hats. She became a powerful advocate for African Americans, women, the poor, the elderly and other disadvantaged communities. Arie Taylor carried legislation that amended state civil rights statutes to include sex and gender. She carried fair housing legislation permitting women to access credit in their own names instead of having to rely on their spouses. She sponsored legislation for homemakers displaced because of domestic violence which, after passage, led to creation of a state income tax check-off to support organizations assisting victims of domestic violence. Arie Taylor further sponsored legislation that created treatment centers at the University of Colorado Medical Center for hemophilia and sickle cell anemia.

Her service to the City & County of Denver began as Deputy Clerk of Denver District Court and Chief Clerk of the Denver Election Commission. Her career culminated in being appointed Denver Clerk & Recorder by former Mayor Wellington E. Webb in 1991. It comes as no surprise that Arie Taylor was the recipient of numerous awards including the Harriett Tubman Award for extraordinary efforts against racial violence. In 1999, the municipal center in northeast Denver was dedicated in her name.

Arie Taylor lived a life of meaning and one that was rich in consequence. It is the character and deeds of Arie Taylor, and all Americans like her, which distinguishes us as a people. Truly, we are all diminished by the passing of this remarkable woman.

Please join me in paying tribute to the life of Arie P. Taylor, a distinguished public servant. It is the values, leadership and commitment she exhibited during her life that serves to build a better future for all Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add my thanks to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) for taking the lead on this important piece of legislation and also for his diligence in making sure that it was brought to the floor today and the leadership on both sides of the aisle of the House subcommittee of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. It is always a pleasure to write and pass a bill with full bipartisan support.

The bill will improve the public's health, the efficiency of FDA's drug approval process, and perhaps most importantly to some, the health of the family pet and of our livestock in this country. In our society, pets have become even more important to Americans, and just like with humans, pharmaceuticals have helped improve the quality of our pets lives. My sister has a 16-year-old dog that is on insulin and several antiinflammatory drugs for arthritis just like senior citizens in this country, and her pet's health has been helped by these drugs, and thereby her family's situation has been improved, and they are happy to have their pet.

Unfortunately, up until now, drugs have not been able to be approved with speed like they are for humans, and the Animal Drug User Fee Act is closely modeled after the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, which was enacted 10 years ago. The purpose of this legislation is twofold: to increase resources available to the FDA so that it may speed up the approval process for pharmaceuticals, and also to maintain monitoring of the safety and efficacy of all pharmaceuticals. Decreasing delays of the approval process is a necessary step to keeping up with medical innovation, and this applies to drug for animals as well as for humans. The monitoring is an essential function that safeguards the public's health.

Ensuring the safety and efficacy of pharmaceuticals is of paramount importance. I am well aware of some of the issues with PDUFA, some of which were discussed by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), but I feel strongly that we must increase the FDA's work capacity. This bill has been carefully crafted on both sides of the aisle to avoid the problems of the past, and as my colleagues have heard, it was unanimously passed by the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

This bill, ADUFA, requires the Center for Veterinary Medicine at the FDA to meet performance standards in exchange for a 5-year infusion of funds.

By collecting fees from animal drug manufacturers, the FDA will be able to decrease the review time of new drug applications. These delays, which have been considerable in the past, prevent pharmaceuticals from entering the market. I am very pleased that the FDA has also worked very closely with us on the bill and is willing to implement the new program.

Increasing access to animal drugs not only helps lengthen and improve the lives of the family pet, but it will also, and perhaps more importantly, have a wide-ranging impact on our Nation's food supply and will improve prevention of food-borne disease epidemics. For example, for more than 40 years, antibiotics have played a critical role in keeping our Nation's food animals healthy. Without such treatments, illness would be transmitted to humans,

and the livestock market would be more susceptible to devastation. Therefore, we must continue to develop new treatments and quickly bring them to market, but we cannot do that without the speedy approval of the FDA.

I am particularly concerned about the food and medicine supply of this country. This commitment to safety that we are showing today through this legislation starts with the FDA's examination and approval of new pharmaceuticals and continues as these legal drugs are manufactured and distributed throughout the Nation. Commitment to safety must always be a part of the system.

The benefits of this bill are substantial, and, therefore, I am very pleased to cosponsor the bill. Vote yes on H.R. 1260, the Animal Drug User Fee Act.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation will harm patients. It will harm the children, and it will harm the elderly. It lacks the necessary guarantees of safety and we should not subject the American people to it.

Permitting reimportation would significantly increase the risk that counterfeit, misbranded and adulterated drugs would show up in U.S. pharmacies and American homes. Every one of us here tonight is concerned about the high cost of prescription drugs, but we should not and must not substitute the hope of lower prescription drug prices for the fundamental safety of the drugs that we are providing to our citizens. We have a duty to protect the people of this Nation.

Every expert agrees, this bill will not help Americans. The Food and Drug Administration, along with the U.S. Customs Service, currently cannot enforce the existing laws. Counterfeit drugs are pouring across our borders. I used to think I supported this legislation, and then the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations had hearings. This chart is just one example of counterfeit Viagra that was received in the Miami office. There are tons of counterfeit drugs coming into this country right now.

Proponents of the bill say that the quality of the drugs will be protected.

I have not heard one Member on either side of the aisle say how that will happen, when you have drugs that are coming in from all parts of the world. This is counterfeit Voltaren. It is a pill that is used to relieve pain, tenderness, inflammation and stiffness caused by arthritis.

Every one of these pills is marked with the manufacturer. It looks real. There is no active ingredient in these pills. I challenge anybody who just thinks that we will be safe to come get on a plane to Miami and see the counterfeit drugs that are coming into this country.

The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry) said the country will be flooded with cheap prescription drugs. That may happen under this bill, but we cannot guarantee that any of those cheaper prescription drugs will have any active ingredients in them. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoekstra) asked why the Canadian drugs are 40 percent cheaper. I have a different answer than the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) had. I think they are cheaper because Canadian law allows the government to negotiate with pharmacies for lower prices. And that is what we should do too in this country. We should not go in a roundabout way letting these counterfeit drugs come in, putting our citizens at risk simply because we want lower prices.

Here is the bottom line. We were elected to preserve the health and safety of the people we represent, over 600,000 each. Let us not sacrifice that fundamental right for a convoluted bill that is not even guaranteed to do what it is supposed to do. Vote ``no'' on this ill- conceived legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the exceptional accomplishments of a prominent citizen in the 1st Congressional District of Colorado. It is both fitting and proper that we recognize this distinguished public servant for his impressive record of civic leadership and invaluable service. It is to commend this eminent citizen that I rise to honor Wellington E. Webb, Mayor of the City & County of Denver.

Mayor Webb has been on the front lines of progress for decades and has proven to be a powerful force in transforming the landscape of our city. His career in public service began in 1972 when he was elected to the Colorado House of Representatives representing northeast Denver. In 1977, he was selected by then President Jimmy Carter to serve as Regional Director of the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. In 1981, then Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm appointed him to his cabinet as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies and in 1987, he was elected Denver City Auditor.

In 1991, Wellington Webb was elected mayor of Denver and is the first African American to hold this office. He led our city through an era that has been characterized as a time of vision, energy, progress and economic transformation. Under his leadership, Denver's open space has increased by approximately fifty percent. Denver's economic turnaround during the 1990's is considered a national model. Mayor Webb's commitment to children and education spurred city investment into initiatives including the Safe City Program and the Summer Youth Employment Program. He stood up to violence in our community on numerous occasions and continually affirmed tolerance as a essential civic value. Mayor Webb has brought a passion for the Arts dedicating both time and resources to making our city a leading cultural center. He implemented some of the nations' most progressive historic preservation policies and our city has witnessed the economic benefits resulting from the preservation of Denver's historic core.

During his tenure, Mayor Webb led successful ballot initiatives to enhance our economic vitality and quality of life including expansion of the Colorado Convention Center and the Denver Zoo, renovation of the Quigg Newton Auditorium and construction of the Pepsi Center and INVESCO Field at Mile High. The expansion of the Denver Central Public Library and construction of the Blair-Caldwell African American Research Library and the Webb Municipal Building are also to his credit. Additionally, Mayor Webb promoted the redevelopment of the former Stapleton Airport and Lowry Air Force Base sites--two of the largest in-fill projects in the country--as well as guided the transformation of Central Platte Valley.

During his tenure, Denver International Airport established a reputation as one of the best run airports in the world which has enhanced the ability of existing firms to do business internationally and contributes to the region's ability to attract new businesses on a global scale. Mayor Webb led trade missions to China, Africa, Mexico and Europe to encourage investment and business development between nations. Under his leadership, Denver hosted World Youth Day with Pope John Paul II and hosted President Clinton and other world leaders for the Denver Summit of the Eight, an event that helped to put Denver on the global map.

Mayor Webb has held several prominent national positions including most recently, President of the United States Conference of Mayors. Magazines including Newsweek, Fortune and Ebony have recognized him as one of our nation's most influential civic leaders. He continues to collaborate closely with his wife, former six-term Colorado State Representative, Wilma J. Webb. As Denver's First Lady, she has worked on various issues impacting our youth and families. She previously served as the Secretary's Representatives for Region VIII of the U.S. Department of Labor and has chaired various governmental groups, represented the city at public and private meetings and hosted national and international dignitaries.

Wellington Webb's tenure as Mayor of the City and County of Denver is quickly drawing to a close. He has worked to preserve and improve the quality of life in our neighborhoods' and has been the catalyst for major civic enterprises and economic development undertakings in our city. The success Denver has enjoyed in recent years has been due, in large measure, to Mayor Webb's efforts in cultivating a shared vision and promoting inclusion. His leadership has been exemplary and his contributions are rich in consequence. On behalf of the citizens of the 1st Congressional District, I wish to express our gratitude and look forward to his continued involvement in our civic life.

Please join me in commending Mayor Wellington E. Webb, a distinguished public servant. It is the strong leadership he exhibits on a daily basis which continually enhances our lives and builds a better future for all Americans.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me this time. I rise in opposition to the Taylor amendment and in strong support of the Udall amendment. Interior Secretary Gale Norton has resurrected an arcane and archaic rule that defies common sense and threatens beautiful and remote areas across the West. Surely there was a time when we needed laws like RS 2477 to settle the land and win the West, but the West is won; and now we face a new battle, a battle for the splendor of the few remaining wild places. And it is not going to be an easy battle with an administration that consistently comes up with increasingly creative ways to remove public land protections and shut the public out of the process.

But if this administration hoped to bamboozle Westerners with their stealth attempts to undermine existing protections, they have got another think coming. I have heard from hundreds of constituents back home who understand that these disclaimer decisions have momentous scope. They have not been blinded by the arcane and arbitrary nature of these decisions. That is why Congress should not be, either.

I will state it baldly: build a road across an area, and it is forever eliminated from wilderness consideration. Behind all the trickery, backroom deals and sleight of hand, that is what is happening here. With these decisions, bureaucratic agencies have limited Congress' opportunity to exercise its exclusive authority to designate qualifying lands as wilderness as well as taking away an important management tool of the BLM.

Over the last decade, citizens from my home State and Mr. Udall's home State of Colorado took to the trails to develop the Citizens' Wilderness Proposal that is the basis of the act I have sponsored called the Colorado Wilderness Act. These are the voices that will be silenced by the backroom wheeling and dealing of the Department of the Interior.

I believe that truly wild places define who we are as citizens of this country. As such, they deserve protection. But even those who disagree that we should have more wilderness and fall squarely in the private property camp should be leery of opening up RS 2477 claims. My staff met with a property owner from Boulder County. She and her husband purchased her then vacant lot in 1993 and built a home. This parcel had an existing driveway for access. But since the neighbors had gotten used to using that driveway, even though it is a private drive, they cannot use adverse possession, the neighbors, so now they are resorting to RS 2477 claims. No matter that the maps do not show this claim, no matter that the aerial photos confirm that the road did not exist during the 1930s and 1940s. She and her family have been consistently harassed by individuals who think they have a right to go across these private lands. So if you do not think we should protect the wilderness, if you do not think we have a right to introduce legislation

without these arcane claims being asserted, do it for private property rights.

Vote ``no'' on this amendment and vote ``yes'' on the Udall amendment.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, just to underscore the point, Utah got a sweetheart deal in the settlement, but as my esteemed colleague from Oregon said, California, Colorado, all the rest of the country does not have this deal, so we are all betting on the something. Why not put this memorandum in the underlying bill if it is such a great idea.