Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 205, The National Small Business Regulatory Assistance Act of 2003. This bill amends the Small Business Act to direct the establishment of a program which would provide regulatory compliance assistance to small businesses through participating Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs), the Association for SBDCs, and Federal compliance partnership programs.

Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and I on the Small Business Committee have dedicated much time and energy to addressing the issue small business' burden of complying with federal regulations. One of the greatest challenges facing small business owners is understanding and affording their regulatory requirements. Often, small businesses are so heavily penalized for non-compliance with regulatory requirements, that they are forced out of business. Imagine being a small business, in the current state of our economy, and being faced with paying a $73,000.00 penalty for not submitting enough ``supporting documentation.'' Mr. Speaker, this is not hypothetical--it is reality.

The House Small Business Committee has held many hearings to examine the myriad of regulations that small businesses are subjected to. For example, it is estimated that the Medicaid/Medicare program, alone, has over 100,000 pages of laws and regulations. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services has over 200 forms that generate 1.7 million annual responses from health care providers. These forms consume over 100 million hours every year that health care providers could have been using to treat patients.

Committee and Member staff often serve as an intermediary between small businesses and the federal government in resolving federal regulatory compliance issues. What we are doing in this bill is expanding the scope of the SBDC network to educate small business owners to ensure greater compliance of federal regulations. There are more than 1,000 SBDC service locations in the United States, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa. By using the SBDC network to conduct this pilot program, H.R. 205 ensures that American entrepreneurs receive regulatory information in a proven vessel.

Last Congress, this legislation passed the House but did not get signed into law. I continued support until we are finally able to adopt this into law. I would also like to commend Representative Sweeney for continuing to move this bill forward.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the unfair rule for the FY-03 Supplemental Appropriations bill because it blocks members on my side from offering the Democratic Homeland Security Amendment to add $2.5 billion in needed, additional investments in homeland security to the supplemental bill.

Mr. Speaker, about half of the funds in the Democratic Homeland Security amendment go

to improving first response. This includes $300 million in additional funding for First Responders Grants. These funds would be used to pay for such important needs as training for police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel, as well as, purchasing protective gear. The Democratic amendment also includes $197 million to protect military facilities; $241 million for nuclear security; and $722 million for port and infrastructure security.

As a member of the Select Homeland Committee on Homeland Security, I am keenly aware of the deficiencies that exist in funding for First Responders. Indeed, the bipartisan U.S. Conference of Mayors a week ago released a report which showed that cities would have to pay more than $21.4 million per week in additional security costs to close the $2 billion over 6 months during the increased security alert status brought on by the war with Iraq.

In my own area, the Virgin Islands, the local government frankly can't afford to contribute any additional dollars to strengthen our security because local economy continues to spiral downward. Moreover, we have additional needs in port security defense, as well as, training and equipment for our police and firefighters.

I urge my colleagues to this unfair rule and give our local communities a chance to receive the first responder funding that they badly need.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to direct the Secretary of Interior to conduct a study of the suitability and feasibility of establishing the St. Croix National Heritage Area.

According to the National Park Service, National Heritage Areas are places that are federally designated to preserve an important aspect of America's past and share it with visitors. They are generally started at the grassroots by community members who envision places where the best of the past becomes part of a sustainable future.

National Heritage Areas are not living theme parks seeking to freeze places in time. They seek instead to conserve their special natural spaces and historic places as part of their communities' social and economic futures. The successful melding of past and future is the National Heritage Area challenge.

The unique natural, historic and cultural resources of the island of St. Croix represent distinctive aspects of American heritage that are in my view, worthy of recognition and provide outstanding opportunities for recreational and educational opportunities.

In introducing this bill I hope to utilize our spectacular natural and historic resources to spur economic development on my home island which badly needs it. As Interior Secretary Gail Norton noted during her visit to St. Croix: ``We certainly want to protect the wonderful environment here and to match that great environment with a thriving economy. Heritage tourism might be one option for St. Croix''.

Mr. Speaker, there are currently 23 existing national heritage areas across 17 states. As the Ranking Democrat on the House National Parks and Public Lands Subcommittee, I can confirm that heritage areas are just one of a growing number of collaborative, community-based conservation strategies that have developed in recent years to identify, preserve, and interpret resources.

I urge my colleagues to support enactment of this legislation to provide for a study to determine the sustainability and feasibility of the island St. Croix becoming the 24th National Heritage Area.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 660 and H.R. 1014.

Madam Speaker, I want to begin by first thanking the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) for his leadership on the select committee and for this opportunity to draw attention to the critical issues of homeland security. And I also want to take the opportunity to thank as well the minority leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), for the honor of having me serve on this important committee.

I was placed here, I think, especially because I am a physician. The issue of bioterrorism is central to the work we are charged with and it is a charge we take very seriously. It is especially so for those of us who have long been concerned about the poor state of the public health infrastructure in many of our communities across the Nation, both urban and rural, as well as in our offshore areas.

The ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) has begun working to ensure we will have the hearings, briefings, and roundtable discussions to learn as much as we can about the public health and other needs of our communities so we will be better positioned to respond to them.

We had our first hearing which was on Project Bioshield last week. And while I am a strong supporter of NIH and applaud the work that they do, and while I was impressed with the Department's employment of advanced technology to be able to monitor and be alerted in real time of any potentially dangerous exposure, all of that will be useless if we do not take care of the public health facilities, personnel, and systems at home in our towns, cities, and islands who must be ready to respond immediately.

We cannot in some cases afford to lose 1 minute; in others, to wait the time to takes for DMAT teams or deployable medical units. They are great things. We have used them in the Virgin Islands after hurricanes, and they are very important, but we may not have the time it takes to get them to the site.

The health care disparities in minorities and in our rural areas that I have come to this floor to bring to the attention of our colleagues on many occasions did not just come about by chance. They exist because of the poor public health systems in these communities. The last 2 years of cuts to health budgets have been devastating. The lack of emphasis on minority and rural health and the even bigger cuts that the President is insisting on this year, so that those who already have the best of health care can get a tax cut and other perks, have sent States into a free fall of budget deficits, and local public health safety nets, like those in Los Angeles and Detroit, to near collapse.

So, Madam Speaker, we cannot just throw money at the problem of terrorism, as this administration has a tendency to do, without adequate planning. In this case, we must first and foremost insist that our public health system is intact and that it can ensure that people are healthy and our bodies are in a better condition to fight off infections and the other biological assaults that may come from a bioterrorism attack.

The anthrax scare taught us that lesson. The breakdowns were fundamental ones. Project Bioshield, the administration's centerpiece for public health preparedness and biological countermeasures, would not have saved the two postal workers just a little way away from here who died because the public health system failed to respond. It happened here, but it could happen anywhere.

SARS, although that has not been determined to be deliberate, is testing the world health community once again. I am very pleased to be here with my colleagues and to be working with the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) and our other colleagues on the committee to bring real homeland-hometown security to the people of this country and restore the hope that was shaken so violently on 9/11/ 2001. It can be done. We can be secure again, but the requisite funding must be there in the supplemental tomorrow, and we have to do it by fixing and fortifying the public health systems that we depend on to keep us healthy every day.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1166, a bill to enhance the capacity of Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs) to provide assistance to Native American tribal members, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians. I would like to commend my colleague and friend, Representative Tom Udall, for his work on, once again, bringing this important legislation to the floor.

SBDCs are the premier technical assistance providers to America's entrepreneurs. Many small businesses often operate near or at their profit margin and do not have additional resources to hire legal or technical experts. Research shows that small businesses that receive technical assistance are twice as likely to succeed in the marketplace than those that do not. In addition to providing technical assistance to the general small business community, SBDCs should also target that segment of our population with special and unique needs.

The Native American population is one such population. The United States government has an endless commitment to addressing the economic and health disparities of Native Americans. Although we have passed other legislation such as the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 and the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975, which both encourage self- sufficiency in an attempt to amend the effects of relocation, not enough has been done to ensure success of economic development within this community. That is why I support this bill. The ``Native American Small Business Development Act'' (NASBD) will allow Native Americans to strengthen and expand their small business infrastructure. This would also provide more stable employment and move closer to ending the desperate and disparate conditions on reservations. More importantly, this bill will allow Native American entrepreneurs to better utilize the current SBDC network.

The Native American population represents a disadvantaged and underserved segment of our nation. One-third of Native Americans currently live below the nation's poverty level and suffer from the highest rate in health disparities. Despite these difficulties, Native American small businesses grew at a rate of 84 percent over the last five years. But with technical assistance specifically geared toward meeting the unique needs of this population, we can create a more prosperous economic community in the Native American population, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians.

This legislation passed the House of Representatives in the previous Congress with strong bipartisan support but failed to reach the Senate floor last year. I remain in support of this legislation and committed to seeing its complete passage.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Republican 2004 budget with its $1.3 trillion tax cuts and heavy burdens on States and territories and of course in strong support for the CBC/Progressive Caucus alternative budget. The Owens-Cummings- Kucinich-Lee CBC/Progressive Caucus substitute advances the principles of family, hard work, inclusiveness, and national solidarity by calling for increased Federal assistance for education, health care, housing, child care, and business development. It represents the values and moral principles that have made America great.

As Chair of the Health Braintrust of the CBC, I am particularly pleased that this budget reverses many of the cuts in the President's budget which are seen as an attack on programs which would address the health needs of minorities and women. Our budget also calls for the implementation of a single-payer universal health care plan which will guarantee high-standard health care at a lower cost to every person living in the United States, its territories, and commonwealths.

My colleagues, the issue of health disparities for minorities continues to be worse. Last year the Institute of Medicine released a landmark report entitled ``Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care,'' which documented key findings in areas of health care where minorities receive less than adequate care and recommended various policy changes. These recommendations are reflected in the CBC/Progressive Caucus budget, and they include

increasing the budget of the Office of Minority Health, the budget of the National Center for Minority Health and Health Disparities research at the National Institutes of Health, increasing the budget of the Office of Civil Rights to reverse the low-priority status that this important office has in addressing racial and ethnic disparities in health care. It also provides increases for the health professions, including the Health Careers Opportunity program and provides scholarships and loan repayments in order to address the startling underrepresentation of people of color in the health professions.

Mr. Chairman, we have an opportunity to begin to address a number of important problems facing the majority of our constituents, while at the same time providing the resources needed to support our troops and defend our homeland.

Let us not give tax cuts to those who do not need them. Let us invest in the American people, as this CBC Progressive Caucus budget does.

I urge my colleagues to reject the Republican budget and support the Owens-Cummings-Kucinich-Lee alternative.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Republican fiscal year 2004 budget resolution and in strong support of the CBC/Progressive Caucus alternative budget. At a time when our country is facing serious threats of terrorism, as well as waging war on Iraq, my colleagues on the other side of the isle are ignoring current economic problems by continuing to incorporate $1.3 trillion in additional tax cuts while continuing to place additional burdens on the cash-strapped states.

The Owens/Cummings/Kucinich/Lee CBC/Progressive Caucus Substitute advances the principles of family, hard work, inclusiveness and national solidarity by calling for increased federal assistance for education, health-care, housing, childcare and business development. The CBC/CPC Alternative Budget represents the values and moral principles that have made America great.

As the Chair of the CBC Health Braintrust, I am particularly pleased that the CBC/CPC reverses many of the cuts in the President's budget which were seen as an attack on programs to address the health needs of minorities and women. Our budget also calls for the implementation of a single-payer universal health care plan, which will guarantee high standard health care at a lower cost to every person living in the United States, its territories and Commonwealths.

My colleagues, the issue of health disparities for minorities continues to be worse than ever. Minorities are a quarter of our population, but make-up two-thirds of all new AIDS cases. African American infant mortality is twice that of whites. Diabetes afflicts Hispanics twice as often as whites. And African American men suffer prostates cancer at a rate twice that of white men.

Last year, the Institute of Medicine, IOM, released a landmark report entitled: Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care which documented key findings areas in health care where minorities receive less than adequate care and recommended various policy changes to eliminate these unacceptable disparities.

These recommendations included specific funding increases, which the CBC/CPC budget proposes. They include increasing the budget of the Office of Minority Health; the budget of the National Center for Minority Health and Health Disparities at the National Institute of Health and increasing the budget of the Office of Civil Rights at the Departments of HHS to reverse the low-priority status that this important office in addressing racial and ethnic disparities in health care. We also provide increases for funding for Initiatives for Health Professions including the Health Careers Opportunity program, and to provide scholarship and loan repayment relief in order to address the startling under representation of ethnic and minority groups in the health professions.

Mr. Chairman, we have an opportunity to begin to address a number of the major problems facing the majority of our constituents while at the same time provide the resources needed to support our troops and defend our homeland. We can only do this however if we do not follow the wrong lead of our majority colleagues and cut taxes for people who don't need it at a time when we must increase spending.

I urge my colleagues to reject the Republican budget and support the Owens/Cummings/Kucinich/Lee alternative budget.

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

(Mrs. CHRISTENSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, before I get to my remarks on H.R. 417, this is the first opportunity I have had to be on the floor with the new chairman of the Committee on Resources, and I wanted to welcome the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), the new chairman of the Committee on Resources, and say that I look forward to working with the gentleman.

As stated by the previous speakers, the overall purpose of this legislation is to resolve a long-standing error that included a preexisting concession known as Walters Camp within the original 1964 public land withdrawal that created the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge.

In the 107th Congress, the Committee on Resources determined after a lengthy investigation that the inclusion of this concession was a genuine error in the original withdrawal and agreed that this error should be corrected.

H.R. 417 would make that legal adjustment. But just as important, this legislation will also ensure that all title interests to the 140 acres of land revoked from the Cibola Refuge remain public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management. Allow me to be clear: nothing is being conveyed to the concession operator as part of this legislation. It is simply a transfer of lands from one Federal agency to another.

This legislation has also retained amendments adopted last year by the Committee on Resources to require the Secretary of the Interior to resurvey and conspicuously mark the new adjusted boundaries. These are prudent actions that should help reduce the likelihood of future encroachment by off-road vehicles onto the Cibola Refuge, which has been a growing management concern for the Fish and Wildlife Service.

In closing, H.R. 417 is commonsense legislation. The bill will correct a technical error that could not be resolved administratively. And furthermore, it will help protect fragile refuge habitats

without compromising opportunities for outdoor recreation in a remote area. I urge Members to support H.R. 417.

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

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

(Mrs. CHRISTENSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 699. This bill simply directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of the groundwater resources in certain areas of the States of Washington and Idaho. We support this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do so as well.

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

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

(Mrs. CHRISTENSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 519, sponsored by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis), authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to study the feasibility and suitability of establishing a unit of the National Park System which would include parts of the San Gabriel River, as well as a portion of the San Gabriel Mountains. The study would include parts of Los Angeles County, as well as a part of the City of Los Angeles itself.

During the hearings on this measure held during the previous Congress, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) provided testimony and photographs demonstrating that, although this proposed study area is in the midst of a very urban area, some green space has been preserved and might be appropriate for a park unit.

Clearly, such an urban setting raises conservation and management challenges, and we look forward to the results of this study regarding these issues. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) on her legislation and her diligence in moving her bill through the legislative process. She has been extremely patient while working very hard to move the bill forward. I urge Members to approve H.R. 519.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis).

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

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5 is but another wolf in lamb's clothing, pretending to help doctors and patients, but really only helping the large health care corporations and doing nothing to help lift the malpractice burdens from doctors and other providers, or to ensure fair treatment to their patients. Health care professionals need to see through this sham.

I am a family physician. I see my classmates and other doctors, good ones, many who have never been sued, struggling to keep malpractice coverage and just to keep their offices open under the press of high premiums.

It is truly unfortunate that many of the organizations representing us are mistakenly supporting H.R. 5, because I think they think this is the best they can get. H.R. 5 is not. As a matter of fact, it is no help at all. Doctors are but pawns in what is clearly special interest legislation.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5 is an assault on the poor and minorities as well, because regardless of their injury and needs, the awards would be capped at low levels. For everyone, this bill sets values on human life and suffering that none of us can measure.

I say to my colleagues, defeat this bad bill that does a disservice to all of us, and join with our colleagues, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) and others, to pass a far better bill, a bill that will bring relief to HMOs, health professionals, and the patients who depend on their services and who need to be made whole.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5 is but another wolf in lamb's clothing pretending to help doctors and patients, but really only helping the large healthcare corporations while doing nothing to help lift the malpractice burden from doctors and other providers or to ensure fair treatment to their patients. Health care professionals need to see through this sham.

I am a family physician. I see my classmates and other doctors, excellent ones, many who have never been sued, struggling to keep their offices open under the pressure of outrageously high malpractice insurance premiums. Physicians are desperate for relief from their premiums. Unfortunately, the organizations representing physicians have been strongly supporting H.R. 5 possibly thinking that it is the best they can get, but it is not.

It is truly a disservice to all of us that the Conyers-Dingell bill was not allowed consideration and debate. H.R. 5 does not even compare and is a poor attempt at a solution to this complicated problem.

In fact, H.R. 5 is not of any help at all as has been proven in several states. This is politics and special interest legislation pure and simple, and our patients and us should not be the pawns in this game.

This bill is another assault on the poor and minorities as well because regardless of their needs their awards will be capped at low levels. The cornerstone of H.R. 5 is a $250,000 cap on non-economic damages modeled after the arbitrary $250,000 cap instituted in MICRA. Compensation for economic damages for minorities is often much less than those awarded to white males, and $250,000 in 1975 is the equivalent of $855,018 in 2003. H.R. 5 puts values on human life and suffering that none of us can measure. H.R. 5's severely restricted the statute of limitations would further hurt minorities because they often have less exposure or access to medical care which causes them to often discover their injuries later.

What my physician colleagues and all health providers need is real reform. We need to address all of the factors that cause the rise in premiums. We need to create legislation that includes the measures which have worked in the states that have successfully addressed this issue and brought relief to their health providers. H.R. 5 doesn't do any of this.

I call on my colleagues to defeat this bill, and then join with our colleagues John Conyers and John Dingell to pass a bill that incorporates the measures that will most effectively reduce premiums, and bring relief not to HMO's, but to those who really need it, the health professionals and the patients who depend on their services.

Madam Speaker, as you know, I am a family physician, and I rise tonight to speak about an issue that is critically important to the viability of the health care system in this country.

In addition to the impact of many millions of uninsured on the reduced viability of hospitals and quality health services for every one and our failure to make the proper investment in the health of people of color and in our rural areas, we have, for too long, allowed our doctors and other providers to be crushed by high and ever- increasing malpractice costs. If we continue this way, there will be no health care for anyone, insured or uninsured.

This evening, I want to focus on the malpractice crisis. On issues as complex as this, it is impossible to apply a single fix, yet that is what H.R. 5 attempts to do. Its only remedy is the instituting of a $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, regardless of the number of parties against whom the action is brought. This cap is modeled after MICRA, California's Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, which has clearly not worked.

In addition, underserved minorities, children, and patients with low or no

income are not well served by H.R. 5. Compensation for economic damages for minorities and women is often already much less than those awarded to white males. In a case with caps on punitive damages and the calculated economic ones, if the individual is working for minimum wage, unemployed, a homemaker or a child, awards will be small and possibly not meet the real needs of the individual or their family.

But who knows what a young person's potential might be, or even that of an adult. There are Members serving in this body who were once on welfare. If they had filed for malpractice under what is proposed in H.R. 5, their award would not have reflected the potential they have now realized. I say that to say that we cannot project what a person's earning potential might be.

Then H.R. 5 also caps HMOs. That and politics is what the provisions of that bill are really about, protecting the corporations, as has been offered time and time again in different ways for different businesses in just about every committee, all under the guise of helping the consumer or the little guy.

Medical providers do not want to bear the brunt of political battles. They need real help. Their patients need their doctors and other health care providers. That is why I support the Conyers-Dingell substitute, and I hope they are given a fair rule today so that we can put the two bills side by side. There is no way H.R. 5 can measure up to it.

The Democratic bill includes measures that have been proven to work at reducing malpractice insurance rates. If one thing is clear from States' experience, it is that caps alone do not work. The Medical Malpractice and Insurance Reform Act of 2003, the Conyers-Dingell bill, does not cap damages for corporations. It does not apply caps at all, and it only applies to physicians and other health professionals. It also has a better statute of limitations provision, which especially protects injured children.

The Democratic substitute has several provisions that would cut down frivolous claims, including sanctions for attorneys and physicians, and it provides for alternate dispute resolution that could enable patients to avoid litigation costs altogether.

In addition to creating an advisory commission on medical malpractice insurance, it brings insurance companies under antitrust laws that prevent price fixing and requires savings realized through the provisions of the bill to go toward reducing premium costs, and there are several other great provisions that time does not permit me to list this evening.

Madam Speaker, I came to the floor this evening because there are a lot of misconceptions about H.R. 5 which have caused medical organizations and many of my colleagues to support it. In my opinion, the situation for health care providers is so bad that we are grasping at any straw to save the practices we have dedicated our lives to. But our health care providers and their patients need more than the weak straw offered by H.R. 5. We need real reform, real help.

The Democratic substitute would provide that help and help get us started on the kind of reform that will bring long-term relief to providers and be fair to all parties concerned. I hope this bill will be on the floor tomorrow, and I hope that all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support and pass it. And then let us move on to fix all of the other problems in our health care system and provide health insurance coverage for everyone.

Madam Speaker, I want to begin by commending the leadership of the Hispanic Caucus, past and present, my colleague and current Chair, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez), and my health counterpart, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis), for the leadership they provide for all Americans and for the effective representation they provide to people of Hispanic descent. All people of color face unacceptable barriers to health care, but Hispanics and Latinos face the additional burden of language. Anti-immigrant sentiment places further roadblocks in their way to health services. Because of the leadership of the Hispanic Caucus in collaboration with advocacy groups, attention is being brought to these issues and the barriers are beginning to come down, but there is still much to be done.

Madam Speaker, the racial disparities in health care so ably documented by the Institutes of Medicine report and other reviews continue to show that if you are a minority American, you are likely to receive a diminished quality of care even if you have the same income and educational status. As we recognize the plight of the uninsured this week and the reverberating impact not just on families but on entire communities including those with

insurance, it is important to point out that Hispanics have the highest uninsured rate among all racial or ethnic groups. Studies show that they are at high risk and lack basic access to medical care because of their high uninsured rates. That is why Hispanic Americans are joining other Americans from all backgrounds and parts of this country to rally during this April's Minority Health Month for universal insurance coverage and access to health care. Like other Americans of color and those living in the rural areas of our country, they are at increased risk.

Hispanics are twice as likely as Anglo Americans to have diabetes, twice as likely to have AIDS. Latino children are prone to have asthma, yet less likely to receive care. Too many still use emergency rooms too late in the stages of their illnesses because they lack a regular source of care. We must take steps to turn this around if we are to reach our ultimate goal of wellness for this country.

Further, many of Puerto Rican or Dominican descent comprise a large part of my district in the U.S. Virgin Islands. With their fellow Americans in the U.S. territories, they live under a system that caps Medicaid funding to our hospitals and clinics, leaving a heavy burden of care on municipalities that can afford it least and leaving many residents without access to care. Wherever this or a similar lack of access to care exists, there is also an effect on those with insurance and a direct and adverse impact on the ability of hospitals there to maintain quality health care services for everyone. Uncompensated care affects us all. We must take steps to turn this around if we are to reach our ultimate goals, as I said, for wellness in this country.

And so, Madam Speaker, the minority caucuses of this Congress will host a rally on April 29 on Capitol Hill to bring the attention of our fellow Americans and the Congress to the urgent need for universal access to health care, because this country can no longer afford for so many of its citizens to go without a means to pay for the quality health care that they deserve.

Insured and uninsured alike, we are all in the sinking ship of a failing health care system in this country. The time to become proactive on the health issue that affects Hispanic Americans, African Americans, other minority Americans, rural Americans, and, indeed, all Americans, is now. Access for us, for those of us of color, is access for all.

I want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) for yielding to me. I want to thank my colleagues for inviting me to join them in calling attention to these important issues.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member from Michigan for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to raise concerns of the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands regarding provisions in the technical corrections bill relating to the amount of personal duty exemption for U.S. travelers returning from abroad. The technical correction in the pending bill fails to reflect long-standing Congressional policy to afford a two to one advantage to the U.S. insular possessions in the amount of this exemption.

Tourism is the most important economic sector and is indeed the linchpin of our economy. A critical part of the U.S. tourism base economy in the Virgin Islands is our main street economy, the merchants who sell a wide range of goods to returning U.S. tourists and cruise ship passengers.

A key consideration in travel to the U.S. Virgin Islands as well as in the purchase decisions by U.S. tourists is the amount of personal duty exemption for returning U.S. travelers. Differences in the amount of the personal duty exemption particularly affect the decisions of Caribbean cruise ship passengers who enjoy shopping in a number of different jurisdictions.

For many years it has been consistent U.S. policy to encourage U.S. tourists to make purchases in the U.S. Virgin Islands and other insular possessions by providing a higher duty exemption for insular possession purchases as compared with purchases in other travel destinations. Historically, the insular possessions have enjoyed at least a two to one advantage over these jurisdictions.

In 2002, Congress increased the duty exemption for travelers returning from non-Caribbean jurisdictions from $400 to $800 dollars. However, the duty exemptions for purchases made in the CBI countries and the U.S. insular possessions were not changed, but were kept at $600 and $1,200 respectively.

In a partial effort to correct this, a technical correction provision in the pending bill would increase the duty exemption for CBI purchases to $800. However, the bill makes no change in the duty exemption for insular possession purchases.

This legislation would results in a significant change to long standing U.S. policy. It would abandoned the two to one advantage that Congress has traditionally provided to the insular possessions and would seriously harm our economy and the livelihood of many of our citizens.

For these reasons, the government of the Virgin Islands urges that the duty exemption for purchases in the insular possessions be revised to reflect the long-standing policy and be increased to $1,600.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and both the Chair and the ranking member of the subcommittee for their support. I have also discussed these concerns with the chairman of the committee, and I hope that they will be addressed in the anticipated conference on this important legislation.