Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce a bill to allow treatment using Medicaid funds for men who are diagnosed with prostate cancer. This bill mirrors the measure that Congress enacted in 1999 to help low-income women who would otherwise not qualify for Medicaid, despite being diagnosed with breast cancer or cervical cancer. Congress found that women responded in large numbers to efforts by government and others to encourage early diagnosis using mammography after the Breast and Cervical Cancer Mortality Prevention Act was enacted in 1990. However, in 1999 Congress recognized that because the screening did not provide coverage of treatment for women above the poverty level, the screening legislation had the tragic but unintended consequence of informing these women of a serious disease that demanded immediate treatment but leaving them without the means to seek that treatment. Later, Congress amended Title XIX of the Social Security Act to provide medical assistance for the women screened and found to have breast or cervical cancer under a federally funded screening program.

In today's bill, I have endeavored to provide the same relief for men. This bill allows men, earning up to 250 percent of the poverty level, who are diagnosed with prostate cancer through a Federal screening program for prostate cancer, to qualify for treatment using Medicaid funds. The program would target men who are low-income, uninsured or underinsured men who, nevertheless, do not qualify for Medicaid and do not have private insurance.

Prostate cancer outranks breast cancer as the second most common occurring cancer in the U.S. and the second leading cause of cancer- related deaths. However, diagnosing this cancer is often less expensive, and unlike breast cancer, often does not require immediate treatment. Prostate cancer treatment does not require invasive surgery in many instances. Many prostate cases can be diagnosed with a simple Prostate-Specific Antigen, PSA, test unlike the high technology mammography machines used to detect breast cancer. Many men are advised to wait and watch for the development of the disease before seeking treatment.

However the rate of cancer deaths coupled with available treatment is strong evidence that many lives could be saved at considerably less expense if early detection and treatment were more available. Although race is a factor, every man over the age of 50 is at risk of developing prostate cancer and should be screened. Veterans that have been exposed to Agent Orange also have a higher risk of developing prostate cancer. Many doctors recommend yearly screening for men over age 50, and some advise men who are at a higher risk for prostate cancer to begin screening at age 40 or 45. Many Black men are at the highest risk of prostate cancer--it tends to start at younger ages and grows faster than in men of other races. Currently, Medicare provides coverage for an annual PSA test for all men age 50 and older but men still do not fall within existing requirements to receive Medicaid.

I urge my colleagues to join with me in establishing this program guaranteeing treatment for men diagnosed with prostate cancer. It will meet an immediate and pressing need in communities across the country, and across racial and class lines.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment concerns the Walter Reed Army Medical Hospital.

Mr. Chairman, I thank both gentlemen for accepting my amendment.

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

As a member of the Government Reform Committee, I am pleased to join my colleague in consideration of H.R. 5540, a measure sponsored by Representative Randy Neugebauer.

H.R. 5540 names the postal facility in Dimmitt, Texas, after Sergeant Jacob Dan Dones. Sergeant Dones was killed in Iraq on October 20, 2005. This measure has the support and cosponsorship of the entire Texas delegation, and was unanimously reported by the Government Reform Committee on June 8, 2006.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests at this time, and yield back the balance of my time asking for support of this bill.

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

I am pleased to join my colleague in consideration of H.R. 5504, a measure sponsored by Representative Dennis Moore. H.R. 5504 names a postal facility in Mission, Kansas, after Larry Winn, Jr. A native of Kansas City, Missouri, Mr. Winn was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives and served from 1967 to 1985. He is currently a resident of Prairie Village, Kansas.

This measure has the support and sponsorship of the entire Kansas delegation and was unanimously reported by the Government Reform Committee on June 8, 2006. I urge Members to support this bill.

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

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

I am pleased to join my colleague in consideration of H.R. 5104, a measure sponsored by Representative Jim Davis. H.R. 5104 names a postal facility in St. Petersburg, Florida, after Morris W. Milton. Mr. Milton was known as a creative and courageous attorney who fought for the rights of the disenfranchised and disadvantaged in his St. Petersburg community.

The measure has the support and cosponsorship of the entire Florida delegation and was unanimously reported by the Committee on Government Reform on May 4, 2006.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of H. Res. 826. Youth sports are much more than just an afterschool activity or a great way for young people to spend their energy and free time. Youth sports can help enrich a child's life; and, Mr. Speaker, they serve a much more important role today when so many youth have become voyeurs of sports and not participants in sports. H. Res. 826 is sponsored by Representative Mike McIntyre.

Youth sporting leagues and activities, when combined with healthy parenting and responsible coaching, help children to grow emotionally, socially, and physically. Teamwork, discipline, and the value of hard work that goes with them are important lessons for children to learn. In addition, there are clear physical and health benefits for children who participate in youth sports.

Mr. Speaker, obesity has become a major problem of young people in the United States. This week I am introducing a bill that would allow the FCC to regulate junk food advertising on TV which is so out of hand that physicians and other health care providers have focused in on this advertising in particular.

I am pleased that before Representative Jon Porter, former chair of the HHS subcommittee, left, I was a cosponsor of a bill that has been funded now for the last 5 years with him to establish a program that was extraordinarily successful, as it turns out and according to studies, in getting young people out and active. It was the VERB program. I regret very much that thus far this program has not been funded this year by the committee. I am hoping that it will be funded by Congress before we go home.

No health issue is more pervasive among young people than obesity and being overweight. We appear to be raising a generation that is losing interest in physical activity and, in addition, is consuming nutritionally deficient foods that will guarantee that they have health problems for the rest of their lives.

We have an epidemic of the type II diabetes for the first time in the history of this country. This is not the kind of diabetes people are born with. This is the kind of diabetes people get as a result of lifestyle, and the notion that youngsters now are the fastest growing group of those with type II diabetes should concern all of us and should get us to doing whatever we can to bring this matter to the attention of their parents and their communities. What Representative Mike McIntyre's resolution does in this regard may seem small, but everything we can do we should now be doing.

Children who are not active and maintain poor diets develop health problems that we now know will be with them for their entire lives. The notion that high blood pressure, pediatricians tell us, now starts for many children when they are in elementary school, for example.

Youth sports helps counteract this behavior by encouraging physical activity and healthier diets.

Internationally, many organizations use youth sports to help remove barriers between culturally diverse communities. Basketball and soccer leagues have been successfully used in South America and Northern Ireland to foster reconciliation among troubled youth. Youth sports help train children to become productive citizens and future leaders.

Youth Sports Week, which will be celebrated during the second week of July, will raise awareness of the existence of sports leagues around the country and promote sportsmanship among players, parents, coaches, and officials. I very much urge Members to support this resolution.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the District of Columbia National Guard Retention and College Access Act, a bill to authorize funding for the College Access program, which provides grants for secondary education tuition to the members of the D.C. National Guard. This bill is the eighth in the ``Free and Equal D.C.'' series of bills to remedy obsolete or inappropriate intervention into the local affairs of the District of Columbia or denials of federal benefits or recognition routinely granted to other jurisdictions. I decided on this bill to authorize an education incentive program after meeting with Major General David Wherley, the Commanding General of the D.C. National Guard (DCNG), who suggested that education grants would be useful in stemming the troublesome loss of members of the DCNG to Guard units in surrounding states that offer such benefits. I am grateful that last Congress, Representative David Hobson understood the importance of educational benefits in retaining appropriate D.C. National Guard levels in our nation's capital and was instrumental in getting a D.C. National Guard educational grant program included in the House version of the Defense Authorization bill. Unfortunately, the program was dropped in conference.

However, this bill is necessary now more than before because the D.C. National Guard has been experiencing a disproportionate decline in force as compared to the Guards of neighboring jurisdictions, particularly Maryland and Virginia. For example, although National Guards throughout the United States have had difficulty maintaining and increasing their numbers, the decline of the D.C. National Guard has been precipitous. Since 1994, even before the war on terror, statistics show that the D.C. Army Guard has declined 34 percent, as compared to a 26 percent decline for Maryland and Virginia's 16 percent decline. Between 2002 and 2005, the D.C. Air Guard experienced a 6 percent decline, as compared to Maryland's 5 percent decline and Virginia's 2 percent increase.

The declining D.C. National Guard enrollment is especially serious given the unique mission of the D.C. National Guard to protect the federal presence. This responsibility distinguishes the D.C. National Guard from any other National Guard. The D.C. National Guard is specially and specifically trained to meet its unique mission.

The D.C. National Guard, a federal instrument, is losing personnel to other guards because it is not able to offer the same level of benefits that adjacent National Guards provide. The DCNG is severely under- competing for members from the pool of regional residents, who find membership in the MD and VA Guards much more attractive. A competitive tuition assistance program for the D.C. National Guard will provide significant incentive and leverage to help counteract declining enrollment and level the field of competition.

The small education incentives in my bill would not only encourage high quality recruits;

this benefit would have the important benefit of helping the DCNG to maintain the force necessary to protect federal presence, including Members of Congress, the Supreme Court, and visitors if an attack on the Nation's capital should occur. I am pleased to introduce this bill on advice of Guard personnel who know best what is necessary.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I introduce the District of Columbia Medicaid Reimbursement Act of 2006 today to raise the federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP), the federal contribution from the federal government, to 75 percent from 70 percent and to reduce the District's unique role as the only city that pays the full local cost of Medicaid, a program that is carried by states and counties in our country. New York City, the jurisdiction that powers the economy of New York State, contributes a 25 percent local share to Medicaid while the state pays 25 percent, less than the District's statutorily mandated 30 percent contribution. I introduce this bill because the District's continuing responsibility for most Medicaid costs that are typically borne by entire states is a major component of the District's structural deficit and threatens the stability of the city itself.

The District's Chief Financial Officer reports that rapidly increasing Medicaid costs put the city at risk. In FY 2005, these costs accounted for $1.4 billion or 22 percent of the city's gross funds budget. Total program costs have risen 42 percent since 1999, and are projected to increase by another $39 million this year. Yet the District, unlike other large cities which have lost significant populations, has no state and no state economy to share this burden. More than 25 percent of District children and adults are enrolled in Medicaid compared to 12 percent in Maryland and just 9 percent in Virginia. On average, the District spends over $7,000 per enrollee, while Maryland and Virginia spend $5,509 and $5,177, respectively, reflecting serious health conditions that are concentrated among big city residents.

The D.C. Medicaid Reimbursement Act of 2006 is the seventh in the ``Free and Equal D.C.'' series. This series of bills addresses inappropriate and often unequal restrictions placed only on the District and no other U.S. jurisdiction. Although today's bill cannot address the entire structural problem that the District faces because the city is not part of a state, the bill would eliminate the greater percentage the District pays than any city by allowing a 25 percent city contribution, rather than a contribution even greater than New York City.

In 1997, as part of the Balanced Budget Act, Congress recognized that state costs were too costly for anyone city to shoulder. To alleviate the resulting financial crisis, Congress increased the federal Medicaid contribution to the District from 50 to 70 percent, and took responsibility for a few state costs--prisons and courts--relieving the immediate burden, but the city continues to carry most state costs.

In 1997, a formulaic error in the Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) allotment reduced even the 70 percent FMAP share, and as a result, the District received only $23 million instead of the $49 million due. I was able to secure a technical correction to the Balanced Budget Act of 1999, partially increasing the annual allotment to $32 million from FY 2000 forward. I appreciate that last year, Congress responded to my effort to get an additional annual increase of $20 million in the budget reconciliation bill, bringing D.C.'s Medicaid reimbursement payments to $57 million as intended by the Balanced Budget Act. This amount did not reimburse the District for the years a federal error denied the city part of its federal contribution, and in any case, of course, was not intended to meet the structural problem this bill partially addresses.

The District has taken important steps on its own to reduce Medicaid costs through greater efficiency, and to treat and prevent conditions that prove costly when hospitalization or expensive treatments become necessary. The District Medicaid agency won federal recognition as one of only two Medicaid programs nationwide to exceed the federal government's child immunization goal for school-age children at 95 percent, and improved its fraud surveillance, recovering $15 million in fraudulently billed funds. The city's novel D.C. Health Care Alliance, for which federal approval is pending, would allow coverage of residents and provide more early and preventative care, avoiding huge Medicaid costs when health conditions become severe and Medicaid becomes the only option.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this increase that will help my city's most needy residents.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the 31st Annual Capital Pride Festival, a celebration of the National Capital Area's Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender, (GLBT) communities, their families and friends. The Capital Pride Festival has grown from a small block party in 1975 to the current week-long celebration. This year, Capital Pride culminates with the Pride Parade on June 10th and ``The Main Event,'' a street fair on Pennsylvania Avenue in the shadow of the Capitol, June 11th.

I have marched in the Pride parades since coming to Congress to emphasize the universality of human rights and the importance of enacting Federal legislation to secure those rights for the GLBT community. This year's theme, ``Many Communities, All Proud,'' holds special meaning for the citizens of the District of Columbia and its GLBT community in particular. Washingtonians live in distinct, diverse neighborhoods such as Colonial Village to the North; Fort Drum to the South, Northeast Boundary to the East, and Spring Valley to the West. Yet, we unite in our quest for all the rights guaranteed U.S. citizens by the Constitution.

In 1994, the District of Columbia lost the first vote it ever won on the floor of the House of Representatives, the delegate vote in the Committee of the Whole. The Republicans retracted the District's vote when they assumed control of the House. Our city of 550,000 residents, 10 percent more residents than the entire State of Wyoming, who pay more taxes per capita than 49 of the 50 states, remains the only jurisdiction in the United States subject to Taxation Without Representation. Our Nation's Capital is entitled full voting rights in the House and the Senate. On May 18, 2006, the House Committee on Government Reform reported out the District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act of 2006. This is the first milepost on DC's road to full and equal representation.

This one success is a reminder of the pending legislation that the 109th Congress must pass. The Clarification of Federal Employment Protections Act, The Domestic Partner Health Benefits Equity Act. The Domestic Partnership Benefits & Obligations Act, The Early Treatment for HIV Act, The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, The Family & Medical Leave Inclusion Act, The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act, The Military Readiness Enhancement Act, The Responsible Education About Life Act, The Tax Equity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act, and The Uniting American Families Act.

I ask the House to join me in welcoming the celebrants attending the 31st Annual Capital Pride Festival in Washington, DC, and I take this opportunity to remind the celebrants that United States Citizens who reside in Washington, DC are taxed without full voting representation in Congress.

Mr. Speaker, Memorial Day Weekend, May 26-29, is the 16th Annual DC Black Pride celebration in Washington, DC.

DC Black Pride is an exciting 4-day event complete with dynamic workshops, receptions, cultural arts activities, small and large nightclub events that culminates in the world's largest Black Pride Festival at Metro Center, on the site of Washington, DC's former Convention Center. Many consider DC's Festival one of the world's preeminent Black Pride celebrations. The Festival consistently draws more than 30,000 people to the Nation's Capital. Attendees come from every major urban area in the United States as well as from Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, the Caribbean and South Africa. The Black Pride Festival features activities for the entire family including performances by national recording artists, 200 exhibition booths, book signings from noted writers, participation from national and local health organizations, and arts and crafts.

Black Lesbian and Gay Pride Day, Inc (BLGPD), the celebration's organizing body, chose the theme ``Fire 2006'' to encourage the Black Lesbian Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) people to ``get fired up'' about their health and wellness, to strengthen the Black LGBT Community, and to encourage Black LGBT people to live their lives with pride.

Black Lesbian and Gay Pride Day, Inc, a nonprofit organization with a volunteer Board of Directors coordinates this annual event. BLGPD's 2006 Board consists of Clarence J. Fluker, President; James Hawkins, Vice President; Janisha Gabriel, Secretary; Lisa Washington, Treasurer; the following Members at Large: Ramon Gardenhire, Shanika Whitehurst, Sterling Washington, Ray Daniels, Donovan Anderson, Courtney Snowden; and these Members Emeritus: Earl Fowlkes, Eric E. Richardson, and Cheryl Dunn who lead BLGPD in its mission to build knowledge of and to create greater pride in the Black Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered community's diversity while raising funds to ameliorate and prevent health problems, especially HIV/AIDS, in this community.

I ask the House to join me in welcoming all attending the 16th Annual DC Black Pride celebration in Washington, DC, and I take this opportunity to remind the celebrants that United States Citizens who reside in Washington, DC are taxed without full voting representation in Congress.

Mr. Speaker, what can you say about a woman who has earned two of America's highest civilian honors--the Presidential Medal of Freedom by former President Bill Jefferson Clinton and the Congressional Gold Medal by our current President and Commander-In- Chief George W. Bush? For more than 80 years, Dr. Dorothy Irene Height, current Chair and President Emerita of the National Council of Negro Women (NCNW), the world's largest women's organization, has not only been a leader in the fight for women's and civil rights, but she has also been an activist and crusader for human rights. She has tirelessly dedicated her life's work to serving her community, our Nation and the world.

Dr. Height's Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal symbolize the promise of America and embody the essence of sacrifice and allegiance to one's country. The values that have come to symbolize her life are the core values that should be represented in the lives of all Americans, young and old. She has worked to make America the best Nation that it can be and she is the best of what America represents as a Nation. She has fought to make the promise of the American dream, with justice and liberty for all, a reality in America through her tireless efforts.

Whether you choose to call her the ``Queen Mother of the Civil Rights Movement'' or the ``Grand Dame of the Civil Rights Movement,'' Dr. Height is simply the embodiment of everything that makes our Nation great. She is truly an ``indispensable'' part of the civil, human and women's rights movement. She is one ``America's National Treasures.''

Her distinguished service and contributions to making the world a more just and humane one, have earned her hundreds of awards and honors from local, state, and national organizations and the federal government. Dr. Height has received over 24 honorary degrees, from such institutions as Spelman College, Lincoln University (Pennsylvania), Central State University, and Princeton University. She has not only been the recipient of hope's

most precious gift--freedom, but she has been at the forefront as the giver of hope to millions of men, women and children of all races, colors, and creeds.

On this day, 52 years ago, the Brown vs. Board of Education decision served as a bridge to the promise of freedom for people from all races, creeds and colors. In commemoration of that historic decision, we celebrate the legacy of one woman who epitomizes the fight for freedom in this country and the journey for justice--Dr. Dorothy Irene Height.

In 1954, when the Brown vs. Board of Education decision was announced, Dr. Height led the way for the YWCA to produce the booklet, ``Our Schools and Our Democracy,'' to encourage associations to participate fully in helping desegregate the schools. Dr. Height also convened a Southern Regional Conference in Atlanta to discuss the problems and opportunities of desegregation and worked closely with the student leadership of the YWCA to develop simple things that people could do, such as escorting a child to school when it is first integrated.

Fifty-two years later, her commitment to young people is alive and well today. Dr. Height is leading the way in leaving a lasting legacy for the next generation through the Dorothy Irene Height Youth For Excellence Initiative (YFE) Program in association with the Civil Rights musical, ``If This Hat Could Talk: A Musical of Passion, Power, and Triumph.'' Dr. Height has utilized the musical as a strategy for ``keeping the Civil Rights legacy alive'' and empowering young people to make a difference in their local and global communities.

Because of her unwavering commitment to our youth, the YFE has become a cornerstone of the Musical's program. The YFE provides multicultural students, grades 7-12 with a free performance and materials for their teachers to continue teaching lessons of equality, fairness and respect for diversity in the classroom. The Musical experience allows them to learn about their Civil Rights legacy and continue that legacy through education. They view Dr. Height's journey throughout history and that of others like Rosa Parks, Fannie Lou Hamer, A. Phillip Randolph, John Lewis, Linda Brown and Mary McLeod Bethune, just to name a few. Today, because of her vision, her story, her on-going, never-ending commitment to kids, the Musical has been seen by over 10,000 youth. Dr. Height has set a new standard of excellence in her diligent, unwavering efforts to instill a commitment to Civil and Human rights in the next generation of leaders.

It is today that we, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, celebrate and honor Dr. Dorothy Irene Height. We truly have an affinity for her. For 37 years, Dr. Height's trailblazing efforts have enabled us, as a Congressional Black Caucus, to empower the masses and effectively represent the interest of urban and rural America in this country and address the legislative concerns of citizens of all backgrounds. She has enabled us to be a viable, fair, fearless, and strong governmental force. Dr. Height showed us how one woman of courage, with one voice, could set in motion a mission that changed the world. As we continue as a Congressional Black Caucus, operating in one single voice, while reflecting our own diversity, we have gained strength, insight and instruction from her life. Through her efforts, she has taught us how to turn tumultuous times into turning points, pain into personal victory and adversity into achievement. For this, we are forever grateful.

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

Madam Speaker, each day, peace officers nobly protect our families, friends, and neighbors from crime and work to improve the quality of life for all of us. For that, they deserve our sincere appreciation and respect.

While it is impossible to suitably thank these brave Americans for the tremendous sacrifices they make, we pause this week to salute them for their courage, dedication, and service and to pay our respects to those who have fallen in the line of duty.

In 1962, President John F. Kennedy designated May 15 of every year as Peace Officers Memorial Day. This day was set forth to give special recognition to the brave men and women who protect our lives every day, often at great risk to their health and lives.

On average, a crime is committed in this country every 2 seconds, and you can rest assured that one of the nearly 800,000 law enforcement officers in this great country will respond promptly and courageously, no matter how dangerous the situation might be. It is appropriate that we both honor current peace officers and memorialize fallen heroes for the safety and assistance they provide us all.

Recent events just miles from this building in Fairfax, Virginia, offered a clear and present example of the dangers law enforcement officers face each day. In this past year alone, 155 law officers were killed and over 10,000 were assaulted in the line of duty as they protected and served their communities. While this number is down from the previous decade's average of 169 annually, it is still very unacceptable.

This week, thousands of law enforcement officers from around the country gathered in Washington, D.C., to pay tribute and to mourn together. Those of us who benefit from their hard work and sacrifice also honor their work and sacrifices. We all owe them a debt of gratitude that we can never repay.

Madam Speaker, I support the goals and ideals of Peace Officers Memorial Day, as I am sure every Member of the House does, to honor Federal, State and local peace officers killed or disabled in the line of duty; and I support this day to honor those who stand for us every day in the line of duty. I call upon the people of the United States to observe such a day with appropriate ceremonies and respect, wherever they are.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).

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

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the fourth bill in the Free and Equal DC series. This series includes measures that all involve obsolete or inappropriate intervention into the local affairs of the District of Columbia. The other bills in the series are the District of Columbia Budget Autonomy Act, the District of Columbia Legislative Autonomy Act, and the District of Columbia Hatch Reform Act. This bill would give the Mayor of the District of Columbia the same authority over the District of Columbia National Guard (DCNG) as the governors of all 50 States have over their guard units. My work on the Homeland Security Committee convinces me that this bill is necessary now more than at any time in the District's history. In most circumstances involving a suspected terrorist incident and in all circumstances constituting local emergencies, the Mayor of the District of Columbia should have the same authority as governors. The National Guards in the 50 states operate under similar dual federal and local jurisdiction. Yet the President of the United States as the Commander in Chief alone has the authority to call up the DC National Guard for any purpose here, local or national. Each governor, however, as the head of state, has the authority to mobilize the National Guard to protect the local jurisdiction, just as local militia did historically. Today, the most likely need is to call upon the National Guard to restore order in the wake of civil disturbances and natural disasters. Today it could prove necessary to act quickly without knowing the origin of an event. The Mayor, who knows the city better than any federal official and works closely with federal security officials, should be able to call on the DCNG to cover local natural disasters or civil disturbances without relying on the President, who may be preoccupied with national matters, including perhaps war or security matters, or relying on a delegated official with little familiarity with the city. It does no harm to give the Mayor the authority. However, it could do great harm to leave him powerless to act quickly. If it makes sense that a governor would have control over the mobilization and deployment of the state National Guard, it makes the same sense for the Mayor of the District of Columbia, with a population the size of that of small states, should have the same authority.

The Mayor of the District of Columbia, acting as head of state, should have the authority to call upon the DCNG in instances that do not rise to the level of federal importance necessary to implicate the authority of the President. Today requiring action by the President of the United States could endanger the life and health of DC residents, visitors and federal employees. Procedures that require the Mayor to request the needed assistance from the Commander in Chief for a local National Guard matter are as old as the republic, and are dangerously obsolete. This bill would deprive the President of his authority over the DC National Guard. The President could still nationalize the Guard at will, as he can with the Guards of the 50 states, and particularly here in the nation's capital.

Following the September 11th terrorist attacks, I succeeded in including a provision in the Homeland Security Act recognizing that the District of Columbia must be an integral part of the planning, implementation, and execution of national plans to protect city residents, federal employees, and visitors by including the District of Columbia, as a separate and full partner and first responder in federal domestic preparedness legislation. At a minimum, such recognition also demonstrates the respect for local governance and home rule that every jurisdiction that recruits members of the military to its National Guard deserves, especially today when the Guards are no longer weekend warriors, as the Iraq war demonstrates. The confusion that accompanied the September 11 attack plainly showed the danger inherent in allowing bureaucratic steps to stand in the way of responding to emergencies in the nation's capital. September 11 has made local control of the DCNG an imperative.

This bill is another important step necessary to complete the transfer of full self-government powers to the District of Columbia that Congress itself began with the passage of the Home Rule Act of 1973. District authority over its own National Guard apparently was not raised during the Home Rule Act process. However, it was almost unthinkable then that there would be war in the homeland, much less terrorist threats to the nation's capital. What should be unthinkable after 9-11 in an era of global terrorism is allowing to stand old and antiquated layers. Giving the mayor of the District of Columbia authority to call up the National Guard could make the difference in protecting the safety of the residents, federal employees, and visitors alike. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his kind words. I thank Mr. Porter for his work in bringing this resolution to the floor.

We are right to recognize public charter schools. Public charter schools are the most important innovation in public education since the invention of free public education in our country. They have become so popular, they have become a movement, growing like ``Topsy''.

The Congress, when Newt Gingrich was here, as an alternative to vouchers, helped jump-start public charter schools in the District of Columbia and in the Nation by passing the first public charter school bill right here in the Congress for the District, with the agreement and total home rule involvement of the District of Columbia. That was in 1995. What did the schools do? They helped us jump-start a movement that has produced in the District of Columbia the largest number of public charter schools per capita in the United States. As I look down the list, Mr. Speaker, the District has more charter schools, this one city, than most States. They have really taken off for some years now as an alternative to D.C. public schools.

When a child does not have a school that is offering that child and that family what the child deserves, then the child must have an alternative. It can be going out of its neighborhood; and the best alternative and the only acceptable alternative, it seems to me, would be some other kind of public charter school. That is what has happened in the District of Columbia. That is why the people of the District of Columbia resent deeply that, despite the growth of the charter school movement, despite the fact that we have some of the best charter schools in the country and the largest number per capita, that Congress imposed on us something it would not accept for the rest of the country, and that is private school vouchers.

Well, our people have voted with their feet. They want a neighborhood school near them. These schools are very important. Most of the religious schools are in Northwest. Most of our kids who need or want alternative schools live in Southeast. So Congress did vouchers for itself. It did not do it for us, and it did it against our will when, in fact, we had demonstrated that public charter schools were, in fact, working in D.C. and working very well.

A child must have an alternative, but that alternative cannot be one where the public dollar is not accounted for, where there is no oversight by the public. And I am the last one who wants oversight, for example, of religious schools or anything involving religion. It follows that religious schools must not be that alternative. The thriving public charter school movement is, in fact, and should be that alternative.

All kinds of innovations are happening in the District of Columbia that I invite people to come and see: Shared facilities in large buildings (instead of getting rid of the building) between public and charter schools. Collaboration now between the best of our charter schools and some public schools which are not doing so well. Public schools, public charter schools, unlike many public schools even under No Child Left Behind, are a case of the survival of the fittest.

You lose your charter, in fact, if you do not measure up. That is what happens in the District of Columbia. As far as I know, it happens wherever the schools are well run.

Mr. Chairman, I simply want to note just for the record the kinds of reasons that charter schools flourish. We have technology schools, bilingual schools. We have performing arts charter schools in the District. We have math and science charter schools. We have an enterprising development charter school.

I would just like to have the Congress know some of the charter schools that are regarded as the best in the United States: D.C. Preparatory Academy Public Charter School; the Friendship Edison Charter School; KIPP D.C., The Key Academy Public Charter School; Paul Public Charter School.

Mr. Speaker, the District of Columbia actually has the first public boarding school, and it is a charter school. It is called the SEED Public Charter School. This is what you can do. This is the kind of innovation that comes from charter schools. It doesn't come from religious schools. They have their own way. They have had it for hundreds of years.

If you want innovation in public education, if you want an alternative to your public schools, the best bet are charter schools, which will be located right in your neighborhood, which are so accountable that they lose their charters if they do not in fact produce.

I strongly support this resolution, and I appreciate that it has come forward today.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to introduce the Dedicated Dental Service for HIV/AIDS (DDS for HIV/AIDS) Act of 2006 to establish a loan repayment program for dental school graduates in exchange for their agreement to remedy a critical shortage of dentists for the poor, particularly in areas with a high incidence of HIV and AIDS, by agreeing to serve such patients. This bill is similar to legislation Congress has enacted in the past to encourage other health professionals, such as physicians, nurses, optometrists and pharmacists to provide vital services in underserved areas.

Howard University professors of dentistry inform us that the first indicators of HIV/AIDS infection are often oral health problems. Oral health problems often not only constitute an important early signal of HIV/AIDS symptoms; they also serve as benchmarks for disease progression. One of the most serious problems with the spread of HIV/ AIDS is the reluctance of people to be tested for such a disease, especially in the African American community and other big city and rural areas. Access to dental care, I therefore, is critically important from the earliest onset, especially in high impact areas. Access, of course, minimizes long term oral health complications for patients, but it also provides important linkages to good overall medical care to combat the disease in the community.

A recent RAND health study on HIV costs and services found that the vast majority of patients received care at their local AIDS clinic, not a primary dentist. Moreover, these

disfavored patients must look for service within the context of a nationwide drop in dental school applicants and graduates, and a projected 60 percent loss of active dentists due to retirement. As a result, the average American, especially those with HIV/AIDS, will or already are having difficulty in obtaining dental care.

For HIV/AIDS patients the crisis is palpable. They have even more difficulty than other Americans finding dentists who will accept Medicaid or treat patients at reduced cost. Some dentists are reluctant to provide care. Although only one case of transmission between dentist and patient has been documented, problems of access are acute. Many patients must travel long distances to find care. Many states do not include dental care as part of their Medicaid coverage. Patients often must search for providers such as schools of dentistry or local community clinics which receive some funds from the Dental Reimbursement Program (DRP), administered through the Ryan White CARE Act.

My bill would create a loan forgiveness program for dental school graduates who agree to serve HIV/AIDS populations in areas where there is a high incidence of such cases, as defined by the Department of Health and Human Services. This program is drawn from the nurse loan forgiveness program passed by Congress in 1998. The crisis for the dental profession, especially in the distribution of dentists in underserved areas, is even greater than for physicians. Dental school graduates incur an average loan debt of $100,000. Under the guidelines of the program, the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services is authorized to pay 60 percent of the principal and interest on the loans in exchange for service for a period of no less than two years. If a dentist agrees to participate in a third year of service, another 25 percent of the principal and interest on his loans will be paid. Loan forgiveness programs bring important added value because many recipients remain in practice in the area to which they are assigned. The secretary of HHS is to submit to the Congress a report on the program, with information including the number of dentists enrolled, the number and amount of loan repayments, the placement location of loan repayment recipients, and the evaluation of the overall costs and benefits of the program.

With more than one million Americans with HIV/AIDS, and over 16,000 in the District of Columbia, and its impact among people of color, these health providers need greater attention. We are proud of the overworked and underfunded services that are available in the District of Columbia. The Howard School of Dentistry has a long history of providing dental services to the poor here, and the HU CARES program, provides care for nearly 1,200 patients a year. The vital Whitman Walker Clinic, the largest provider of comprehensive HIV/AIDS services in the District and the region serves over 1,500 dental patients a year.

I urge my colleagues to join with me in establishing this dental loan repayment program that will meet an immediate and pressing need in communities across the country, as we have for other professions.