Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for yielding me this time.

I rise today in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill, H.R. 3893.

Hurricane Katrina highlighted the failure of the Republican leadership's first attempt to create a national energy policy. We now have a second chance to craft a forward-looking strategic plan. Unfortunately, H.R. 3893 fails to do this. Instead of tackling America's very serious energy challenges, we are looking at the cast- asides from the earlier legislation. I therefore urge my colleagues to support the substitute.

Every American now clearly sees that our energy policy affects everything, from a family's monthly budget to our national security. My constituents, like the other Members, are paying over $3 a gallon at the pump. Yet H.R. 3893 does not include price gouging provisions that would sufficiently protect American consumers, particularly when we have oil companies making as much as $80 million a day.

We owe our constituents more than empty promises on high gas prices. And we can do this with the substitute. It gives the FTC real authority to investigate the energy supply chain. The substitute provides for significant fines that actually have the power to deter companies from gouging consumers.

H.R. 3893's shortcomings are not exclusive to its attempts at immediate relief. The legislation also fails to address our Nation's long-term needs. Constructing new facilities would increase the Nation's capacity to process crude oil and soften the effects of future supply disruptions, but the oil refiners are not interested in incentives to do so. In fact, they have minimized capacity to maximize profit.

Again, Congress has a responsible alternative: Establish a strategic refinery reserve, a logical complement to the existing Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This would give us the increased flexibility and control to respond to future energy disruptions.

But this legislation fails to do that; and worse still, it ignores the larger causes of our energy security. A forward-looking energy policy should curb our reliance on unstable foreign oil markets and accelerate research for alternative sources of energy.

This bill takes only nominal steps toward that goal. There is an almost laughable $2.5 million for an education program and encouragement to Federal agencies to buy energy-efficient light bulbs. This is not exactly the bold out-of-the-box thinking that will free the next generation from dependence on foreign sources of energy. Congress needs to pause and examine our energy stance in a long-term strategic manner. We owe that to our children and our grandchildren.

I urge my colleagues to vote against the rule and reject this opportunistic legislation.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor George Donald Basye, a man who through hard work and dedication has become one of the most respected and accomplished water and flood attorneys in California. As his friends, family and colleagues gather to pay tribute to Mr. Basye's remarkable 50-year career with the Central Valley law firm of Downey Brand, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in saluting this great American success story.

George was born on June 21, 1926 in Porterville, California. After graduating from high school in 1944, George served in the U.S. Navy. As an enlisted sailor, George held the rank of Seaman Second Class Musician Striker and performed in Navy dance bands.

Upon honorable discharge from the Navy in August of 1946, George enrolled in the College of the Pacific and graduated in February

of 1948 with a B.A. in Economics. After graduation, George sought to expand his horizons and enrolled in a one-year graduate program at the University of Stockholm in Sweden.

Upon returning to the United States in 1949, George took an aptitude test which suggested that he was best suited for a career as a social science teacher, not a lawyer. As a result, he enrolled in the UCLA Graduate School of Education in the Spring of 1950 to take up a career in teaching. However, it soon became clear to George that law was undoubtedly his true calling. It was in August of the following year that George applied and was admitted to the new Boalt Hall School of Law at Berkeley.

Although George was about to pursue a legal education, he could never truly abandon his love of music. Thus, in a short stint before law school, he fulfilled one of his lifelong ambitions by playing the upright bass in a traveling jazz trio known as the Krazy Kats.

His decision to enroll in Boalt Hall would prove to be a pivotal point in not only his career in law, but in his personal life as well. It was during his time at Boalt Hall that George began dating Mary Alice Johnson, a student at Mills College. They were married in December of 1952. Today, more than 50 years later, George and Alice are the happy parents of four children, Anne, Jennifer, John, and Paul, and four grandchildren.

George graduated from Boalt Hall 7th in his class with an LLB degree. Upon graduation, George enrolled for a graduate degree in law and spent a year studying at the Uppsala University in Sweden. After returning to the United States in 1955, George began his new job at Downey, Brand, Seymour, and Rohwer starting on September 20, 1955.

While working, George wrote his Master's thesis and obtained his LLM degree from Boalt Hall in 1956.

When George began his career at Downey Brand in 1955, he was one of 8 lawyers in what would later become a 120-lawyer firm. For the first few years, George spent much of his time doing probate work, but then began to focus his efforts on water law and flood control matters for clients such as Reclamation Districts 537, 1000, 900 and 999, the California Central Valley Flood Control Association, and many mutual water companies. For the next 45 years, George's knowledge and experience in water and flood control law became expansive, and George shaped much of the law in these areas through his position as General Counsel for the California Central Valley Flood Control Association.

George also focused significant efforts on making Sacramento and California a better place by acting in leadership positions for the California State Library Foundation, the California Historical Foundation, the California Historical Society, the Sacramento Metropolitan YMCA, the Sacramento Symphony Association, the Crocker Art Museum Association, the Sacramento YMCA Foundation, the California Capitol Historic Preservation Society, the Sacramento Trust for Historic Preservation, the Pfund Family Foundation, and the Sacramento Pioneer Association.

Throughout an almost 50-year career, George Basye has been acknowledged as one of the modern fathers of water and flood law in California. His years of commitment, hard work, and dedication to the Central Valley and the law firm of Downey Brand have undeniably contributed to the firm's amazing growth and positioning as one of the top law practices in the region.

Mr. Speaker, as George's friends, family and colleagues gather to celebrate his admirable career, I am honored to pay tribute to one of Sacramento's most selfless and dedicated citizens. I ask all my colleagues to join with me in wishing George Donald Basye continued success in all his future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to the men and women of Sacramento Fire Department's Swiftwater Rescue Team and the Sacramento Urban Search and Rescue Team for their tireless and heroic actions in response to Hurricane Katrina. Between the Sacramento Fire Department and the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District, sixty-one senior level managers, firefighters and rescuers went to the devastated areas in New Orleans and across the Gulf Coast to help those most in need. I ask all my colleagues to join me in honoring and thanking some of our nation's finest first responders.

At the behest of FEMA, senior leaders from both departments were called on to manage the rescue efforts that grew to include hundreds of personnel from across the country. Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District Chief Rick Martinez led an Incident Support Team in Gulfport, Mississippi with Assistant Chief Mike Johnson, Dave Stoddard, Dave Odgers and Hank Linscott. Coordinating rescue efforts in New Orleans from this Incident Support Team was Assistant Chief Ed Vasques, Ford Davies and Larry Hopkins from the Sacramento Fire Department, along with Ron Pierce and Hernando Carson from the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District.

Sacramento's Swiftwater Rescue Team quickly responded to the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina by immediately flying to New Orleans to assist in the rescue efforts. Trained on the often unpredictable currents of the Sacramento and American Rivers, they quickly adapted to the situation in New Orleans. This team led by Sacramento Fire Department Assistant Chief Jay Bowdler and Battalion Chief Kristi Seargeant included Chris Costamagna, Craig Wiedenhoeft, Michael Bartley, Charley Sprague, Jeff Cooke, Niko King, Brian Morr, Chris Swarbrick, Martin Cordeiro, Sage Peart, Dave Baldwin and Greg Powell.

Once on site, the team worked long days in the flooded city to rescue hundreds of people stuck on rooftops, trapped in their attics and stranded in the streets. Working in challenging and unfriendly conditions--at risk to their own health and safety--these dedicated individuals brought hope and medical care to those most in need.

Members of Sacramento's well praised and highly trained Urban Search and Rescue Team also spent over two weeks working in many severely damaged communities along the Gulf Coast--searching for survivors trapped in their homes and in other buildings where they had sought shelter from the storm. Many on this team had previously responded to crises in Oklahoma City and at the World Trade Center following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Leading this team was Dave Whitt, a Battalion Commander with the Sacramento Fire Department.

Serving on the Urban Search and Rescue Team from the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District were Dave Brown, Jeff Metzinger, Kyle Johnson, Mark Wells, Mike McGuirk, Ron Von Allworden, Randy Gross, Mike Daw, Mike Hazlett, Jim Johnson, Chris Anaya, Bob Gorman, Randy Wootton, Tyler Wagaman, Mike Wiggington, Bob Santee and Phil Allen.

Also on this team from the Sacramento Fire Department were Erik Saari, Rick Lee, Teresa Ortenberger, Lisa Stumpf, Doug Ross, Ernie Partridge, Randy Browning, Rodney Tateishi, Micki Anacleto, Scott Williams, Ken Murray, Joe Jackson and Ed Crum. They were joined by Dr. Dennis Gardner, Blake Rothfuss and Mike Kaszpurenko who served as medical and structural support staff. Teresa Ortenberger handled the cadaver dog.

Additionally, Darren Taylor, Scott McKenney and Larry Savage of the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District headed-up an Incident Logistic Management Team at the Stennis Space Center in Mississippi.

Each of these men and women left their families and loved ones in Sacramento; placing their lives on the line to come to the aid of their fellow citizens from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. And when Hurricane Rita hit land mere weeks later, many again answered the call for assistance. For their efforts, we owe them our thanks. I am truly honored to represent these renowned individuals and the fire departments they work for in Congress. Once again, I thank the women and men of the Sacramento Fire Department's Swiftwater Rescue Team and the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District's Urban Search and Rescue Team for their unwavering dedication and service to our country during this tragedy.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me this time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, this rule will allow us to debate H.J. Res. 68, a continuing resolution that will fund the Federal Government past September 30. While this is an essential procedural measure, it also represents an opportunity. Between now and November 18, when the resolution expires, Congress has a responsibility to step back and consider its priorities. The facts on the ground have changed, and our agenda here in the House must change accordingly.

I am confident that we will do right by those affected by the hurricanes, but we still need to ask ourselves where our financial and legislative duties are in response to Katrina construction, continued funding for Iraq and Afghanistan, and increasing fiscal deficit. Are we looking at the big picture? Are our priorities in line with our financial obligations? We know that because of Katrina, the victims, those displaced from their homes, are more likely to rely on medicaid. With that known expense, can we honestly reduce the funding for this responsibility and still extend tax cuts?

Mr. Speaker, we need to take care of our fellow citizens, but what we do now should not mean we pass on an unsustainable debt to future generations, especially when we know there is a way we can offset these costs. For the costs of this year's installments of the tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, $225 billion this year alone, we could pay for the gulf States' recovery from Katrina. We know that we need some of these cuts, such as AMT relief, but let us at least be reasonable and put them on the table.

We must have an honest discussion about our fiscal situation. I urge my colleagues to step back and take a hard look at how we will move forward, not just this fall, but next year and the decades after that.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that all of my colleagues have heard me talk about my granddaughter Anna, and we all have someone like her, someone we see as our future, someone that means the world to us. I believe that she will grow up to a better future. But, to do right by them, we must all step up to the plate, not as Members of one party or another, but as leaders and statesmen willing to accept the reality of our fiscal situation and make the difficult decisions.

Our priorities in the coming months should not waver from the ultimate goal.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall).

(Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of a program that works, Head Start, and our efforts today to reauthorize the program in this School Readiness Act.

Head Start has proven itself time and time again to be an effective program and a worthwhile investment of Federal dollars. For every dollar invested, we see a $7 return. Imagine those returns on the stock market. An investment of $100,000 means that ultimately you would see $700,000 in your account. In fact, with those returns, we should be authorizing a higher level of funding.

We are all aware of just how critical a child's first years are, and this is a program that is so much more than just early education and reading skills. It is also about health care, nutritional and social benefits for the children as well as their parents. Head Start is about ensuring children are on the right path as they begin their education careers.

Earlier this year, I visited two of the over 110 Head Start centers in Sacramento County in my district. During the visit, I witnessed the tangible reward of this program, as well as the harder-to-define benefits.

At one of the centers, they were learning about shoes, from slippers and sneakers to work boots and rain boots. The children were not only learning about how the shoes indicated what people were doing, but about all of the possibilities available to them; that one day they, too, could be wearing those doctor's booties or those firefighter's boots.

With a goal in mind, maybe not consciously outlined but still a hint of an idea, these children began to dream about the positive benefits of education and where in life an education can take them.

Lifting children out of poverty, offering them hope and possibility instead of despair is truly a worthwhile endeavor, a lesson that Head Start works to teach.

I do have one concern today, and that is about the possibility that an amendment allowing religious discrimination could be added to this legislation. The idea of discrimination is not something we should be teaching our children. By allowing this discrimination, we could be blocking countless parents from rising out of poverty. Already, thousands of parents have transitioned from parent volunteer to a full- time paid Head Start teacher.

There is a bigger and more fundamental issue at stake. Head Start emerged from the civil rights platform of equality and minimizing the reach of poverty in this Nation. Yet, this amendment is about allowing discrimination.

Discrimination only serves to divide us. It pits one individual against another, one group against another, something we see far too often. This is not a lesson the children should learn.

Head Start is a good program. We should keep it that way, for all the children of Sacramento and all across the country. I would hope that during consideration of this legislation today, we would vote down the religious discrimination amendment so we can see this good bill move forward.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Samuel L. Jackson, a man who through hard work and dedication has become one of the most successful and well-respected attorneys in the state of California. As his friends, family and colleagues gather to pay tribute to Mr. Jackson's remarkable career and to celebrate his retirement, I ask all my colleagues to join me in saluting this great American success story.

Sam was born in 1947 in Pensacola, Florida. At the age of four, Sam's parents separated. Thereafter, Sam's mother, Annette, raised her six children alone while working two jobs. Mrs. Jackson taught her children that education was the key to success, and Sam graduated from high school in segregated Pensacola, Florida. However, despite the fact that Sam was on the honor roll for nearly all of his childhood, he was unable to attend college immediately due to the lack of scholarship money available to graduates of all-black high schools.

To earn money for college, Sam joined the United States Air Force, where he served honorably from 1966 until 1970. Sam's military career included stateside service at Mather Air Force Base in Sacramento and Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield, as well as thirteen months in Vietnam. After receiving numerous medals, ribbons, and awards, Sam was honorably discharged, and returned home to enroll at Sacramento City College.

While still in the Air Force and stationed at Mather, Sam served as best man in a friend's wedding, accompanying the bride's sister Esther. The next time Sam and Esther walked down the aisle together, it was as bride and groom. They married in 1970 upon his return from Vietnam, and recently celebrated their 35th anniversary. Sam and Esther have one child, Andre Reginald.

After earning his Associate of Arts degree from Sacramento City College, Sam continued his education at California State University, Sacramento. He received his Bachelor of Arts degree in only three years of college study, despite working full time for the United States Postal Service throughout his undergraduate career. After concluding his undergraduate education, he proceeded to law school at McGeorge School of Law, where he graduated in 1977.

As a first-year lawyer that same year, Sam was hired as a Sacramento Deputy District Attorney. After two years of working in this capacity, he decided that civil litigation suited him better. Sam obtained a lateral appointment to the position of Deputy City Attorney in 1979, and was promoted to the top of the deputy attorney hierarchy in the minimum amount of time allotted for such advancements.

In 1994, after fifteen years of distinguished service in the City Attorney's office, Sam was appointed by the Sacramento City Council as the 36th City Attorney in Sacramento's history. He has held that post for over 11 years, but last year Sam notified the City Council that he would be retiring no later than December 30, 2005.

Along with his impressive career achievements, Sam has also made substantial contributions to Sacramento through community involvement. The highlight of his community service occurred in 1981, when he undertook the management of a little league baseball team that had never enjoyed a winning season. As to be expected, Sam led the youngsters to a dominating 18-4 record by emphasizing teamwork and respect for others.

Mr. Speaker, as Sam's friends, family, and colleagues gather to celebrate his admirable career, I am honored to pay tribute to one of Sacramento's most selfless and dedicated citizens. Although his legal career may be over, Sam's involvement in his community is, fortunately for us, far from complete. I ask all of my colleagues to join with me in wishing Samuel L. Jackson continued success in all his future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, when Hurricane Katrina came ashore and ravaged the gulf States and the levees in New Orleans, Americans united in their support of those in need and the communities devastated by this terrible disaster. As Katrina passed over the gulf States and in the days that followed, Americans saw firsthand the devastation and human suffering that resulted. We were also eyewitnesses to the tragedy of hundreds of thousands of people who had escaped the wrath of the terrible storm only to then be stranded in the Superdome, the convention center, or trapped on the roofs, surrounded by rising flood waters with little in the way of food, water, or medical care. Mr. Speaker, we saw and felt the ensuing heartbreak. Mothers became separated from their children, elderly parents were unaccounted for, and siblings were trying to look after each other.

With the passage of time, our outrage and frustration set in. Reporters and the media managed to get to the heart of the disaster; yet there was little sign of our Federal relief efforts. Just as the American people united to aid the victims of Katrina, so too must Congress. Our constituents demand no less. They are more interested in getting answers than pointing fingers. They want to know that we are finding solutions and making recommendations to ensure our responses are never again at a snail's pace.

It is time for Congress, as part of the Federal Government, and therefore an element of the relief response, to shoot straight with the American people. An independent commission, removed from the partisan fray, is better positioned to find answers. Why were we not preparing our responses to Katrina near land? Where was the coordination between Federal, State, and local efforts? There are many questions that must be answered and an independent commission is a means that can provide the answers.

We saw the successful implementation following the tragedy of September 11, and following this model Congress will reassure the American people the answers that the independent commission finds and the recommendations they make are ones in which the Nation can trust.

I know my constituents are closely following this. My hometown of Sacramento lies in a floodplain at the confluence of two great rivers and faces the constant threat of floods. If we find ourselves in dire circumstances, can my constituents be assured that they can count on prompt Federal Government response?

This is not a blame game. I am not interested in pointing fingers, nor are the American people. They are more interested in identifying areas of weakness and making the necessary improvements. This is about preventing another tragedy similar to what we witnessed in New Orleans and the gulf States. We must ensure that the Federal Government does its job of protecting the American people, and with an independent commission we will do so.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me this time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we are here today to consider the rule for H.R. 3132, the Children's Safety Act of 2005. This rule has a requirement that all amendments be preprinted in the Congressional Record to be in order for today's floor debate. While this rule is less restrictive than most rules we report out of the Committee on Rules, I must point out that it is not an open rule. It restricts the debate we will be able to have today on this bill by preventing Members from offering any new amendments.

For example, if a Member came up with a good idea for an amendment today based upon the discussion, he or she would not be able to offer it. That is unfortunate, because the Children's Safety Act is important legislation that aims to protect our children and allow them to grow up unharmed and free from abuse, but it is not perfect.

This legislation ties the hands of the judiciary. We must allow those most competent, the judge who has presided over the case, who has seen and heard from the victim, to determine the appropriate punishment. Our judges are best positioned to hand down sentences that correspond with the crime committed.

Mr. Speaker, it is our responsibility to create laws that protect our children from harm.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, our thoughts and prayers are with the people of New Orleans and all other Gulf Coast residents affected by this horrific disaster. As a nation we have watched with horror as the city of New Orleans has faced Hurricane Katrina and been overtaken by the waters of Lake Pontchartrain. We have seen the heart-wrenching stories that restore your faith, but sadly we have also seen the opposite.

Lives have been interrupted. Families separated. And many now face an uncertain future of trying to locate family and friends as well as begin to rebuild their lives, many from scratch. With the victims dispersed across this nation, when this can begin is not known. The full impact of Hurricane Katrina--emotionally, physically and financially--will not be known for years and more realistically decades.

It is during tragedies like this, that we must come together as Americans to help our fellow citizens in their time of need. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to praise the hundreds of Americans who are working day and night to help rescue and bring relief to the thousands of people trapped in the affected area.

From the start, the American people have again shown their unity of spirit and their willingness to aid those in the midst of this devastation. And these are not only professional rescue personnel but simply kind-hearted neighbors who may have a boat, or some extra water or blankets and are scouring the area looking for survivors. I cannot imagine the difficulties they are facing and the sacrifices they have made to help their fellow Americans. I thank them for all their efforts and pray that they remain safe themselves and return home to their families.

I commend the generosity of the American people, including my home town of Sacramento, which because of its location at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers has a unique understanding of being a flood-threatened city. I am proud of their generosity and extension of assistance--sending its firefighters, search and rescue teams and opening its doors to hundreds of victims of Hurricane Katrina who are unable to return to their homes. Their efforts to restore a sense of normalcy for those who have been so up-rooted are a testament to them.

I also share the frustration of so many with the early response of our government to this crisis. While the conditions under which the relief workers are functioning are catastrophic

we can and must do better. Our primary focus must be on getting to those who are still stranded and need immediate assistance. Once that is accomplished I feel strongly that Congress must take a critical look at this response effort.

This is a moment of national sorrow. Sorrow at not preventing the preventable and sorrow for the tragic circumstances that came to be. Yet it is also a moment of national unity that is truly heart-warming.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I send my thoughts and prayers to all those affected by Hurricane Katrina and I thank all those brave and generous Americans who are working to bring assistance and relief to the region. The outpouring of generosity from Americans across the country can make us all proud.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me the customary time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, we are here to debate the rule for the Fiscal Year 2006 Legislative Branch Appropriations conference report, and although I support this report, I would just like to express my general concerns over the exorbitant cost overruns of the Capitol Visitors Center. Funding contained in this report is based on the GAO's assessment of needs, and I truly hope that this will be the last installment needed to get the center completed.

Through this measure, we will also fund the operations for our institution and the many supporting bodies that we rely upon daily, like the Library of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, the Congressional Budget Office, and the Capitol Police.

I would just like to take this opportunity to draw attention to those who help keep Congress running. There is a tremendous operation that helps my colleagues and me do the business of the American people, from the personnel at the Congressional Research Service that aids our offices in keeping up with the latest issues, to the Clerk's staff that records every word we speak, tracks each bill introduced, and, no matter the hour, is here to support us as we debate the priorities of the Nation. It is also the curators who impart the history of this great Capitol Building to visitors every single day, and painters and archivists that maintain the historical integrity of the buildings. It is not without the maintenance crews, food service workers, and so many that I cannot even begin to name that keep the trains running smoothly on the Capitol complex. I thank them all for their service.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to seeing one of the first appropriations conference reports move forward today.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to Dr. William W. Tipton, Jr., a man whose level of career achievement was matched only by his passion for living life to its fullest. Sadly, Dr. Tipton passed away on May 19, 2005 at the age of 64. As his friends and family gather to celebrate Bill's remarkable life, I ask all of my colleagues to join with me in saluting this outstanding citizen.

Born in San Francisco and raised in Sacramento, Bill's commitment to service began as he entered the Catholic Diocesan Seminary at age 14 to study for the priesthood. In 1967, he graduated from Creighton Medical School, an institution that would 36 years later recognize him with its alumni achievement award for his ``distinguished service to his profession and humankind.''

He first used his medical training to serve his country during the Vietnam War, first serving as a General Surgeon for Deployment on the U.S.S. Ticonderoga, and then as an Orthopedic Resident at Great Lakes Naval Hospital. After his honorable service, he returned to his native California to complete his orthopedic residency at the University of California, Davis.

Throughout his illustrious career in medicine, Bill enjoyed many personal accomplishments. However, his focus always remained on the health and well being of his patients.

For over two decades, Bill was an active member of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. From 1994-2003, he led the AAOS, serving as Executive Vice-President & Chief Executive Officer. He then served as AAOS Medical Director from 2003-2004.

One of Bill's proudest accomplishments at the Academy was the creation of ``Healthy Athlete's Initiative,'' which provides medical screening for participants in the Special Olympics. He also, more recently, helped the Academy realize the program ``Legacy of Heroes,'' a film chronicling the contributions of the surgeons of World War II and the influence they have had on modern medicine. The film was aired on PBS and was distributed through the Academy as a DVD.

Although Bill left us at far too young of an age, he made the most of every day that he spent on this earth. There was nothing in life that he wanted to do that he didn't do. All of us would do well to follow his example.

Mr. Speaker, as Dr. William W. Tipton's friends and family gather to honor this great American, I am honored to pay tribute to one of Sacramento's most honorable citizens. His achievements are truly a great inspiration. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in acknowledging Bill's invaluable contributions to Sacramento and the United States of America.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying measure to implement CAFTA. As we debate CAFTA, I can only express my disappointment from the restrictive rule limiting debate to the failure of the administration to use the full force and weight of the United States in negotiating all aspects of this agreement.

Because CAFTA has sparked much debate, the House needs robust discussion of this legislation. And during the Rules Committee hearing on CAFTA, I offered an amendment to allow 8 hours of debate, the same as for NAFTA.

But the Republicans on the committee voted down the amendment. And we have a mere 2 hours to debate an agreement, which in its entirety is over 3,600 pages, the implications of which may well determine the future direction of U.S. trade policy.

As a world leader, the United States has a crucial role to play on trade. We cannot step back from the global community. However, free trade must be tempered with meaningful policy which acknowledges that each trade agreement produces winners and losers, and it is our responsibility to do right by those displaced in the process.

CAFTA falls far short in this regard and is thus fatally flawed. Those flaws are apparent throughout CAFTA's chapters and are most egregious on labor and environmental protections, for CAFTA offers only tokens and symbols.

In contrast are the intellectual property provisions where it is obvious the United States Trade Representative used the full weight of the United States to ensure protection for business interests.

This administration's handling of workers' protections relative to other issues raises troubling questions about their agenda for these negotiations. The only enforceable worker protections in CAFTA state that participating countries must enforce their own laws. It does not set any standards those laws must meet.

Yet CAFTA countries already have a history of failing to provide even minimal worker protections.

There is nothing within CAFTA to prohibit these countries from weakening their labor laws. If a CAFTA country wants to pass a law that encourages child labor, CAFTA merely requires that country to enforce its own law. These enforcement provisions are a step back from the previous accord governing trade with Central America established in 1984.

This is different than labor management debates here in the United States. This is about basic human decency and fairness. There is a reason for the bipartisan opposition to CAFTA. It cannot pass this Chamber on its merits.

I am sure no one will be surprised if this vote is held open until enough Members relent, as we have seen before. But this flawed agreement should be returned to the President to be renegotiated.

Trade is a powerful phenomenon that is capable or raising living standards, encouraging innovation, and building lasting ties between nations. And as we work to conclude the Doha Round, global trade is at a critical point.

America must promote trade policies that acknowledge the fundamental rights of workers and reassert our belief that the benefits of trade should flow throughout the population. If the House passes CAFTA, we will be abdicating this duty.

The future direction of trade will be shaped by our actions today, as the implication of the vote will resonate far beyond Latin America. While trade agreements encourage the flow of goods and services, they also embody important values and principles.

What message does it send if we start passing trade agreements that concentrate benefits in the hands of special interests and the privileged few at the expense of workers in the United States and in some of the poorest countries in the world?

I have heard some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle hesitantly talk about this agreement saying trade is usually a good thing, so I guess I will vote for CAFTA.

I say to you, that, yes, free trade agreements are a good thing, but only when based on solid principles that reflect the concern for all parties involved. CAFTA fails to meet the standard.

I urge my colleagues to reject this inferior agreement. If we do not get CAFTA right, we risk undercutting support for all future trade agreements.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) for yielding me this time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to this rule and the underlying measure of H.R. 525. This country leads in medicine and technology. When combined with increased education and awareness, we have made diseases more preventable and treatable. We have made huge strides, for example, diagnosing and treating breast cancer. Women are now going in for annual mammograms. In and of itself, mammograms do not prevent breast cancer, but they can save lives by finding breast cancer as early as possible.

For example, mammograms have been shown to lower the chance of dying from breast cancer by 35 percent in women over the age of 50. And studies suggest for women between 40 and 50, they may lower the chance of dying of breast cancer by 25 to 35 percent.

Having worked on educational campaigns for over a decade, I know that it has not been easy to convince women that they should be asking their doctor for a mammogram, nor, I might add, has it been easy to ensure that health insurance companies cover the cost of these mammograms. But through the tireless efforts of doctors, survivors, and advocates, the insurance companies relented.

Today we are increasingly catching and treating breast cancer in the early stages, yet the legislation we are debating here on the floor today would effectively roll back these advances, and, even worse, doctors would now have to tell the 28-year-old woman who thinks she has found a lump in her breast that her health care insurance does not cover a mammogram to better see the abnormality; that her health care coverage is no longer subject to minimum standards established by her State because she is covered by an associated health plan, an AHP, which is located in a different State with far more relaxed laws on health care coverage.

Too many Americans are already without sufficient health care coverage. They are being forced to accept health care that does not provide what they need when they fall ill, whether it is breast cancer exams, diabetes medication, or childhood vaccinations. Why would we increase the number of these individuals without adequate health care coverage?

Some may claim that these standards for health care treatments, like those that require insurance companies to cover mammograms, are nothing but burdensome regulations, but these safeguards go to the heart of what responsible health care is all about: providing necessary care to those in need. And AHPs would not even reduce the cost of the premiums. Under the legislation we debate today, AHPs could skim off a small minority of small businesses, those with younger and healthier workforces. As a direct result, 80 percent of small businesses would see an increase in their health care premiums.

Mr. Speaker, I truly question what we are doing today. Why would we create a situation that increases the already skyrocketing health care costs for four out of five small businesses? Sadly, this is what we are doing. We are putting our small businesses in the awkward position of not being able to offer health care coverage to that young woman facing the possibility of breast cancer, or offering access to a health care plan that will not cover her diagnosis and certainly not a treatment.

We could do better by that young woman and our Nation's small business owners. Congress could pass the Democratic substitute offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), which would allow small business employees to access the same quality health care coverage which Federal employees enjoy. The substitute's Federal partnership would allow this plan to be offered at an affordable price. This alternative would truly have a positive impact, ensuring that Americans have access to affordable and quality health care. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Unfortunately, the legislation we debate on the floor, H.R. 525, which would create AHPs will most likely worsen health care situations. Mr. Speaker, if we, Members of Congress, would not accept a health plan that does not include minimum coverage, why then should the American people?

We have an opportunity today. We can support the Democratic alternative and pass legislation that actually addresses the critical health care problems facing small business owners, or we can pass the legislation in front of us that does the opposite. It should not be a difficult decision. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to votes against the rule and the underlying bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to comment that only 1 out of every 14 people enrolled in an AHP will be newly insured. Overwhelmingly, this is a bill that shifts the already insured into plans with lower coverage.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Earlier this month, the Los Angeles Times ran a story that I think cuts to the heart of this discussion. It is the story of a husband and wife living in Southern California. After successfully battling bone cancer 7 years earlier, Doug did what so many Americans would like to do. He started a small business making boat parts. Soon, he was approached by an AHP offering a $400-a-month health insurance policy which even included special cancer coverage.

Tragically, a few months after he purchased the policy, his cancer returned and it became quite clear that the quality of that association plan was not what Doug or his wife, Dana, expected. It turned out that this particular plan covered less than 18 percent of Doug's $550,000 treatment cost. Doug and Dana rapidly found themselves buried under hundreds of thousands of dollars in bills. And as his wife recounted to the Los Angeles Times, at several points before the cancer ultimately claimed his life, Doug begged her to divorce him so that she would not be responsible for his debt.

I cannot believe this is the solution we are offering to small business owners like Doug and Dana. The American people deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, this bill offers no health care solutions for small business owners. It raises premiums on 80 percent of small businesses; will increase the number of uninsured by 1 million people; and reduce coverage for another 7 million individuals who are most in need of care. My friends on the other side might find these facts inconvenient, but that does not make them less true. And it will accomplish all of this by loosening or removing consumer protections and by walking away from State mandates that guarantee treatment for diabetes and screenings for breast cancer.

We can do much, much better than this for America, Mr. Speaker. I urge Members to oppose the rule, oppose the underlying bill, and support the Kind-Andrews substitute.

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

Mr. Speaker, the PATRIOT Act was passed in October 2001 in response to the horrendous terrorist attacks on our country. Its aim was to give the women and men of our law enforcement community the authority and tools needed to prevent future attacks and save and secure the lives of American citizens.

There is no question, Mr. Speaker, that many of the provisions of the PATRIOT Act have been useful to law enforcement and have helped to prevent terrorist attacks and secure our Nation. But we must also be vigilantly aware that some of the provisions of the PATRIOT Act have the potential to be abused and violate the civil liberties of innocent American citizens, the same citizens it is meant to protect. Congress understood this when it passed the PATRIOT Act and required that 16 provisions of the act be made to sunset, forcing us to revisit them.

I am very proud to be standing here today with the opportunity to debate the fine balance that must be struck between security and civil liberties. The acts of September 11 were not the

only events in our history where our Nation's leaders were asked to strike this balance. During World War II, under the banner of security, the civil liberties of 120,000 Japanese Americans vanished. I clearly know how deeply this affected my parents, both American citizens born and raised in this country.

Mr. Speaker, once again we are in a time of crisis. I implore all of us to proceed with caution. It is this type of bill, one that affects the most cherished rights we have as Americans, that requires constant and vigilant oversight by Congress. That is our duty. The surest way to ensure this oversight is to place sunsets on those provisions of the legislation that can be abused. Unfortunately, this bill places sunsets on only two of the original 16 provisions, making the rest permanent.

I also have concern about what this measure does not address, the ability to secure library records and allow sneak-and-peek searches. These provisions are wrought with great potential for abuse. Mr. Speaker, the civil liberties of the American people are too important and the potential for abuse too great for us not to place sunsets on all of the 16 provisions. Like our Constitution, our liberties are a symbol of America. The freedoms in our country are known throughout the world. What we do today sends a message throughout the world. We here in this body have a sacred responsibility to protect what our Nation stands for. We are certainly responsible for the safety of this Nation, but we are also certainly responsible for shaping the laws that determine what it means to be an American.

Mr. Speaker, all of us agree that we must do all we can to secure and protect the United States, but we must also be mindful of those rights and privileges upon which this great Nation was founded.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia for yielding me this time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and strongly support the underlying measure, H.R. 2864, that would provide for the water infrastructure needs of our Nation.

The Water Resources Development Act before us today reflects a shared commitment to the larger goal of developing our national water resources to address economic, environmental, and also public safety needs.

H.R. 2864 is a comprehensive bill. It does more than just authorize nearly $10 billion for the construction of nearly 700 water resource development projects and studies by the Army Corps of Engineers. It seeks to improve the corps' implementation of projects.

From working with the corps year after year, we know there are better ways to implement projects. This bill includes provisions to ensure that corps projects are managed in a coordinated and efficient manner, with improved financial management.

To improve the planning and execution of ongoing projects, the committee is asking that the corps submit yearly financial reports, including anticipated spending needs for future years.

The measure also streamlines the project review process for environmental reports and analyses.

Further, it would also allow for better coordination between the Federal review and State agencies affected by the project. And these are just a few examples of the many provisions this bill includes to encourage better management and coordination of U.S. Army Corps projects. These improvements are common sense. They will not only facilitate better economic and environmental benefits of the projects, but they will also allow projects to reach completion faster.

With a number of ongoing water projects in my district of Sacramento, California, these provisions will translate into real and tangible results. Sacramento has a long history intertwined with floods.

When the city endured a near catastrophic flood in 1986, the community quickly realized it did not have nearly the level of flood protection necessary to fully safeguard the region. After the city again faced more floods in 1997, the community redoubled its efforts to achieve 200-year flood protection. However, until that day arrives, flooding remains a very constant and genuine threat. And continued Federal assistance plays an important role in obtaining that goal.

Despite years of effort, Sacramento still remains one of the most flood-prone and threatened cities in the country, paling in comparison to the level of protection enjoyed by other river cities.

Thanks to the leadership of this committee, much has been done to address the flood control needs of the region. Indeed, several project authorizations already in place that, once completed, will provide in excess of 200-year flood protection for much of the area. With the continued support of Congress, Sacramento has already made incremental progress toward our initial goal of achieving 100-year flood protection for the region, and ultimately moving as quickly as possible towards 200-year flood protection.

Fortunately, as a result of lengthy bipartisan negotiations, Congress has authorized a suite of projects that will achieve 200-year flood protection. Upon completion of the authorized projects to improve area levees, modify the outlets of Folsom Dam and raise Folsom Dam by 7 feet, Sacramento will obtain its long-term flood control goal.

I deeply appreciate the years of support of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has provided to ensure these projects continue to move forward, providing Sacramento the level of flood protection that it both needs and deserves.

In this bill, the committee embraced a project which seemed to be bogged down and hopeless, but because of a little bit of innovation and a strong commitment to finding success, it will be authorized today.

After the Corps of Engineers recommended a flood control project at Magpie Creek in Sacramento, the project faced an unavoidable redesign that nearly doubled the total cost of the project. The cost increase put the project out of reach of local affordability, and the project seemed to be stalled indefinitely. Taking the initiative, the local sponsor, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, developed a revised plan that is not only less costly, but also has less of an environmental impact.

What is significant is the cooperation between the local stakeholders, the Corps and Congress to work together to find a solution. Because of this cooperation, Sacramento now has a more efficient project which will better protect us.

Just as thought went into this project's plan, it is apparent that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee put great deliberation into this bill. I would like to offer my deep gratitude for the hours of work that the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Tennessee (Chairman Duncan) and the ranking members, the gentleman from

Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) have put into this bill. Their long negotiations have produced a bill that will save lives, homes and businesses from devastation of floodwaters and improve the quality of life.

These are stakes Sacramento knows well. My district is located at the confluence of the Sacramento and American rivers. Sacramento is the hub of a 6-county regional economy that provides 800,000 jobs for 1.5 million people. A major flood along the American River will cripple this economy, and cost between $7 billion and $16 billion in direct property damages and likely result in significant loss of life.

The risk of serious flooding poses an unacceptable threat to the safety and economic well-being of Sacramento and to California's State capitol. It is because of the bipartisan commitment in the Sacramento region and the bipartisan commitment of these committee members that Sacramento is slowly reducing its risk of flooding. We are on a path, and I thank the committee for forging ahead with my community, to bring Sacramento the long-awaited flood protection it needs and deserves.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

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

I encourage Members to support the rule. I look forward to the debate and hopeful passage of the underlying bill.

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