Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. And, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in strong support of this proconsumer legislation, the Satellite Home Viewers Extension and Reauthorization Act.

I also want to thank the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce for the manner in which this legislation moved through our committee. The Committee on Energy and Commerce moved through the process, it was completely open and bipartisan; and I thank the Chair for that.

The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act expires at the end of this year. Thus, we must act quickly to ensure our constituents continue to receive the services they enjoy.

This bill also does a great service to our communities by preserving and strengthening local broadcasting.

My interest in this legislation was piqued when I discovered that one of the two satellite companies was engaging in a discriminatory practice that forced 95 percent of their customers to pay for services they do not receive.

EchoStar's system requires two satellite dishes on a rooftop to be able to receive all of the local channels and other channels they offer. Nothing is wrong with that. It is how their technology works. However, EchoStar is discriminatory in choosing which local broadcasters would end up on the second dish which is inconvenient. Most often it is Spanish language, public and religious broadcasters.

On top of that, EchoStar does a poor job informing its customers of the need for a second dish, and the company requires a second technician to come out and install the second dish. The company states that only about 5 percent of their customers take the second dish, which means that 95 percent of customers are paying for services they do not receive.

This legislation requires all satellite companies to put all local channels on one of the two dishes. I think that is important, and I think it is a major breakthrough.

This provision is also key to the health of the satellite industry by setting the ground rules for providing local broadcast stations. Local- to-local has been a driving force in the satellite television industry's growth. In 1999, just prior to the establishment of the local-to-local compulsory license, the industry had 10.1 million subscribers. Only 4 years later, after the advent of local-to-local, the industry had more than doubled its subscriber base to 20.4 million.

Another key provision gives consumers of satellite TV service the same choices as cable subscribers. Specifically, the bill gives satellite the ability to import significantly viewed stations from adjoining markets. At the same time, the bill includes safeguards to ensure this new privilege is not abused to the detriment of local television and television viewers.

This means, for example, a satellite prescriber in Baltimore could soon be getting Washington, D.C., local stations if they are significantly viewed. For people who live in or near Baltimore and commute to D.C. to work, the traffic reports are obviously vital.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, this legislation enjoys widespread bipartisan support in Congress as well as the endorsement of nearly all key industry stakeholders, including local television stations, the television networks, cable operators, and DirecTV.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2023, the Asthmatic Schoolchildren's Treatment and Health Management Act of 2004. As a cosponsor of this important legislation, I look forward to its quick enactment. Asthma has had a tremendous impact on our

Nation's health. I represent the Bronx, Westchester and Rockland County in New York, and our community has been hit very hard by asthma, especially our children. My family has experienced first-hand the effects of asthma. My wife has asthma and two of my kids do as well. So I know how important it is that people, especially children, have access to care and have the medicine they need when they need it.

According to the NYC Department of Health in the Bronx, about 25 percent of children in the Bronx have asthma, as opposed to 15 percent nationwide. Hospitalization rates for children are around ten times higher than the national average. The Bronx, in particular, leads New York City in asthma-related hospitalizations and deaths. Audrey Dregante, a Nurse Practitioner at Bronx Lebanon Hospital Pediatric Asthma Center has stated that ``Pediatric Asthma is an epidemic in the Bronx.''

There are many factors contributing to asthma that can easily be addressed and would save lives and greatly enhance the quality of life for so many suffering with asthma. Some of the factors contributing to the disease are inadequate housing conditions, such as mold in homes, dust mites and insects, and the lack of proper ventilation. The poor are less likely to have health care and use emergency room care as their primary care provider, and are not getting the proper treatment. Low-birth weight babies are surviving in greater numbers and problems with lung development may be leading to the rise in asthma cases. Early diagnosis and treatment is critical in these instances, as well as pre- natal care for the poor. The increasing amounts of pollution and congestion in urban areas caused by traffic and diesel-powered trucks and buses increase the risk for asthma.

Children in particular have a difficult time with asthma and, as we know, proper treatment and control of the disease in crucial. the legislation before us today seeks to rectify one situation that is preventing children from even carrying their asthma medication. Amazingly, many states do not allow kids to self-administer their asthma medications in school, which can lead to severe conditions if proper treatment is not available in time. New York does allow kids to carry and administer their asthma medication. I believe it is irrational and irresponsible to prohibit children from having their medication readily available. H.R. 2023 would encourage schools to allow children to carry their asthma medication by giving those schools preference when awarding public health and asthma-related grants. I think this is positive legislation that will encourage school districts to allow their children to carry and self-administer their asthma medicine, which will improve their condition and could save their lives. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, asthma has had a tremendous impact on our Nation's health. I

represent the Bronx, Westchester and Rockland County in New York, and we have been hit very hard by asthma, especially our children.

According to the NYC Department of Health, in the Bronx about 25 percent of children have asthma, as opposed to 15 percent Nationwide; hospitalization rates for children are around ten times higher than the national average; and the Bronx, in particular, leads New York City in asthma-related hospitalizations and deaths. Audrey Dregante, a nurse practitioner at Bronx Lebanon Hospital, Pediatric Asthma Center has stated that ``Pediatric Asthma is an epidemic in the Bronx.''

There are many factors contributing to asthma that can easily be addressed and would save lives and greatly enhance the quality of life for so many suffering with asthma. Many of these factors have to do with the economic status of those with asthma and the fact that they are not educated on the treatments available. Some of the factors contributing to the disease are inadequate housing conditions-- impoverished conditions such as mold in homes, dust mites and insects, and the lack of proper ventilation; the poor are less likely to have health care and use emergency room care as their primary care provider and are not getting the proper treatment; low-birth weight babies are surviving in greater numbers, and problems with lung development may be leading to the rise in asthma cases--early diagnosis and treatment is critical in these instances, as well as pre-natal care for the poor; and the increasing amounts of pollution and congestion in urban areas caused by traffic and diesel-powered trucks and buses.

Children in particular have a difficult time with asthma and, as we know, proper treatment and control of the disease is crucial. The legislation before us today seeks to rectify one situation that is preventing children from even carrying their asthma medication. Amazingly, many States do not allow kids to self-administer their asthma medications in school, which can lead to severe conditions if proper treatment is not available in time.

New York does allow kids to carry and administer their asthma medication. I believe it is irrational and irresponsible to prohibit children from having their medication readily available. H.R. 2023 would encourage schools to allow children to carry their asthma medication by giving those schools preference when awarding public health and asthma-related grants.

I think this is positive legislation that will encourage school districts to allow their children to carry and self-administer their asthma medicine, which will improve their condition and could save their lives. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Mr. Dennis A. Lusardi who will receive the Four Freedoms Award on Friday, November 5, 2004. This prestigious award is given by the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute to exceptional men and women who, in their work and life, are committed to the 4 principles outlined by President Roosevelt in 1941. These principles are the freedoms of speech and expression, worship, and the freedom from both want and fear.

I know that Dennis embodies these pillars in his work with the labor movement. As a dedicated worker, he has served the labor community and union members for over 40 years. He was born in Yonkers and graduated from Christopher Columbus High School and then attended Westchester Community College. I admire his entrance into the workforce in 1958 as an apprentice in the esteemed Ironworkers' Union. My father was an Ironworker, and I have great respect for trade unions, their values, and the work that they do. Dennis immediately showed that he was a dedicated and passionate advocate for improvements to his union. He took his first leadership role in the 1970s when he was appointed to the Pension Fund, and has proven his devotion by continuing his service as Chairman still today. He continued his impassioned work in 1981 when he became a Delegate to the International Convention.

In 1989 Dennis also became the Financial Secretary Treasurer, and since then he has held his position by acclamation from those he serves. Dennis' expertise and experience have truly benefited the labor movement, the community, and those who know and love him. He also lends his services and experiences as the Ironworkers' Union's Business Manager. He is as committed to advocating on behalf of his fellow workers today as the day he began his career. I am delighted to say that he continues this exceptional service as the Vice President of Westchester Building Trades, the Treasurer for the Ironworkers District Counsel of New York, and is also representative for the Ironworkers District Counsel Pension Plan. He exemplifies the hardworking ideals of his union and this country, and truly deserves this great honor. In addition to the incredible and significant work on behalf of organized labor, Dennis is also a proud father of two, and has three wonderful grandchildren. It is my privilege today to speak in the House of Representatives in honor of Mr. Dennis A. Lusardi.

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

Mr. Speaker, why are we standing here today, wasting taxpayer dollars in an attempt to, for the first time in our history, amend our Constitution to deny a specific group equal rights? Why do we not leave it to the States, as our Constitution provides?

Frankly, I fail to understand why gay marriage threatens my wife's and my 24 years of marriage, or anybody else's marriage, or why it would undermine the Republic.

Gay and lesbian Americans want their secular government to legally recognize their committed relationships. They want their secular government to provide equal benefits in tax law, access to health care, Social Security, and death benefits. They want the same benefits as other Americans.

Some of my friends on the other side of the aisle are being disingenuous by saying they simply only want to define the institution of marriage. If that is their only motive, then why do they also oppose domestic partnerships and civil unions, which would give gays and lesbians the same rights as other Americans?

Why are we even dealing with this now? The Senate has defeated it. Could it be an attempt to divert attention from the failings of the Congress to do its work on appropriations and transportation; to divert attention from the war in Iraq, from a poor economy or from skyrocketing deficits; to force a blatantly political vote in this House; to whip up a frenzy in a specific group of voters one month before an election?

Let us stop playing political games. Vote down this amendment. We should not be dealing with something that is best being left to the States.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and distinguished colleague for yielding time to me, and I rise in strong support of the resolution. Being a New Yorker, no one feels the pain of September 11 more than we do. I happen to have been in New York on that fateful day, and my life will never be the same, and I know the life of so many millions of Americans will never be the same.

I think this is a time for Congress to come together and to commemorate the struggle, to talk about September 11, to talk about what it means in all of our lives and to really bring the country together. September 11 was an incident that will forever remain in our lives. For me, it showed that the war on terrorism is a war that needs the participation of all Americans. It does not matter whether you are a Democrat or a Republican or an Independent, or black or white or brown, or from the North or the South or the East or the West. We are all Americans, and this is quite appropriate for Congress to come together.

There may be people who may disagree on a sentence or two here and there in this resolution, but basically I believe that we all ought to stick together and talk about September 11 and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks.

I just want to say as a New Yorker, every time I look at Manhattan, it even chokes me up to begin to talk about it and look at the skyline of New York and see that the Twin Towers are no longer there. It leaves a hole in my heart, and that, of course, only pales by the fact that 3,000 people lost their lives, and countless others were injured. We can see based on what is happening in Russia and every other place, in Israel and every other place in the world, that terrorism is everybody's fight. It is our fight as Americans. It is the fight of all decent people. We have to stand together.

I rise in strong support of this resolution and ask my colleagues to vote for it so that we as a Congress can be united in the fight against terror.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4618. Mr. Lombardi was a dedicated postal employee, and exemplary New Yorker, and it is my honor to dedicate the U.S. Post Office of Nanuet, New York, in the name of the late Anthony Lombardi, retired Army Sergeant, 4th Infantry.

Anthony Lombardi, known to those close to him as ``Tony,'' grew up in St. Agatha's Orphanage in Nanuet. When Tony enlisted in the Army, the United States was embroiled in the European battles of World War II. Tony served in the ground force that stormed Normandy in 1944 and was later awarded the first of his two Bronze Stars for his part in the battle's success. Sixteen days after D-Day, Tony volunteered for a mission in the hills of a German stronghold near Bretteville, France, where he delivered food, ammunition, and water under hostile conditions to the needy frontline troops. During the difficult Battle of Hurtgen Forest, Tony's company commander was wounded by enemy fire. Tony came to his commander's aid and brought him to safety.

Tony Lombardi could easily be honored on his military record alone but

few in Nanuet had any knowledge that he even served in the war until after his death in 1987. His work in the community made Tony a household name in Nanuet. He dedicated much of his time to teaching Sunday school at St. Joseph's of Spring Valley. In 1978, the students of Nanuet High School honored him for his dedication to the school and its pupils in his efforts as head night custodian for over 22 years.

Tony Lombardi is loved and remembered most in Nanuet as a friendly and caring mailman. During his 30-year career, Lombardi estimated that he had walked over 100,000 miles delivering mail. He always greeted everyone with a smile, a handshake and a hug and left a life-long impression on all those who came in contact with him.

The Nanuet Post Office will serve as daily reminder to the community of Mr. Lombardi's contributions to Nanuet.

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

I rise in opposition to this sham. What a shame it is when we have 41 million Americans without health insurance, more than 2 million jobs lost, an additional $2 trillion in debt, that the leadership of this Congress chooses to try again to divert attention to a divisive issue. Having failed to even muster 50 votes in the other body to place in the Constitution language setting one group of Americans aside as second class citizens, this leadership now turns its attention to a full assault on the Constitution itself.

If they cannot amend the Constitution, then attack the balance of power. I keep hearing that activist judges should not change State laws. Five activist judges denied all the voters of Florida the right to have their votes counted, but this bill is far more cynical.

The other side knows it will be thrown out by the Supreme Court. That means they can keep this issue alive for years and years.

Stop this assault. Vote no on H.R. 3313.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2443. I want to thank the chairmen and ranking members for all their hard work. The Coast Guard is an integral part of our Nation's homeland security efforts.

I want to mention that I am a strong supporter of the Deepwater program that is replacing a number of aging vessels with new, high tech ships that I have no doubt will serve the Coast Guard and the American people very well.

Most of all, I want to thank my colleagues on the Transportation Committee for retaining and broadening language regarding security assessments at nuclear facilities. When the House debated its version of this bill, I offered and the chairs and ranking members generously accepted, an amendment to study the vulnerability of the Indian Point Nuclear power plant in Westchester County New York.

I am very pleased that during negotiations with the Senate on the final bill, this version was expanded to include all nuclear facilities that are adjacent to navigable waters.

We have a responsibility to ensure that our Nation is safe. We know that Al Qaeda has plans for our nuclear facilities. This assessment will help us in Congress and the Administration to better plan for protecting and preventing an attack that may be attempted.

I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Sandra Feldman as she retires from the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and thank her for her valuable contributions to education and dedication to the teaching profession. As a former New York City school

teacher and member of the United Federation of Teachers myself, I can personally attest to her strength of conviction and determination. Having known her for many years, it is also a great privilege to count her a personal friend.

Throughout her career, Sandra Feldman became known as an authority on urban education and an advocate for children. No stranger to activism, she began her advocacy work during the 1960s civil rights movement. A former public school student herself, she then taught in one of New York City's public elementary schools. I had the privilege of working with Sandra Feldman when she was President of the United Federation of Teachers in New York City, the largest union local in the United States. She later took over as President of the American Federation of Teachers in 1997, leading its more than 1 million members.

Throughout her career, U.S. presidents, governors and mayors have appointed her to numerous commissions and task forces tackling educational, economic and child-welfare, labor and social issues. However, Sandra Feldman's interests went beyond the field of education; she serves as a board member or activist in many community and civic organizations.

A dedicated activist, educator and leader, I thank Sandra Feldman for her work throughout her career and sincerely congratulate her on her retirement as president of the AFT.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise in strong support of this resolution.

We look at Taiwan today and, as the gentleman from California pointed out before, it is a success story. Taiwan is a democracy. Taiwan has an economy that is the 16th largest in the world. I come from the premise that we should be supportive of countries that are supportive of us, and Taiwan has been a good friend of the United States and has shown that it is a true democracy.

I had the honor of meeting with President Chen in New York several months ago, and I have always been a great admirer of a country that took a system that was autocratic and undemocratic and transformed it into a very democratic country.

Now the Taiwan Relations Act in 1979 was crafted very delicately because, yes, we do have a one China policy, but we do not want to abandon our friends in Taiwan. Therefore, I believe it is the responsibility of our country to ensure that the people of Taiwan have the capability not to be overrun by anyone else and to have the capability to defend themselves.

Now, in the resolution, it says that the Department of Defense report, our Department of Defense report entitled Annual Report on the Military Power of the People's Republic of China dated July 30, 2003, documents, and I am reading, that the government of the People's Republic of China is seeking coercive military options to resolve the Taiwan issue and, as of the date of the report, has deployed approximately 450 short-range ballistic missiles against Taiwan and is adding 75 missiles per year to this arsenal; whereas the Taiwan Relations Act requires the U.S. to maintain the capacity to resist any force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security or the social or economic system of the people of Taiwan.

This is what the Taiwan Relations Act commits us to do. It is what we should do. It is right. It is proper. We stand with the people of Taiwan and their democratic ways, and I am proud to be a part of reaffirming the unwavering commitment to the Taiwan Relations Act by the United States Congress.

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations discredits itself once again,

unfortunately, by having one set of rules for Israel and one set of rules for everyone else; and here is but another example of that kind of hypocrisy that unfortunately has permeated the United Nations. We will soon be talking about a ruling by an international court; and when I spoke about that ruling several days ago on the House floor, I said that one set of rules for Israel at the U.N. and one set of rules for everyone else does not help anybody, but just helps to discredit the United Nations.

Now, there are 191 members of the United Nations, as my friend from California has pointed out, and only one of them is given third-class status. Israel has been a member of the United Nations since the founding of the Jewish state in 1948, and yet it has never been allowed to serve on the Security Council of the United Nations, where you have one undemocratic despotic nation after another serving on the Security Council, sitting on the Human Rights Commission, but not democratic Israel.

So what this resolution does is it simply expresses the sense of the House of Representatives in support of full membership of Israel in the Western European and Others Group at the United Nations. As was pointed out, this will enable Israel to serve in all bodies of the United Nations, to have a vote in all bodies of the United Nations, and to serve on the Security Council if it is elected. If the United Nations is to be an effective group, then all nations must be treated equally; and democratic nations such as the state of Israel cannot be allowed to continue as third-status nations in the U.N.

So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding time to me, and I rise in strong support of this resolution. I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana for the wonderful work that he has done on this resolution and indeed the wonderful work he does on our Committee on International Relations.

I spoke on the floor last Friday after the so-called International Court of Justice rendered its decision. I said at the time that they should rename themselves the International Court of Injustice because their decision is truly a travesty of justice. What hypocrisy. What a double standard. Again, one standard for Israel and one standard for everybody else.

As the gentlewoman from Nevada pointed out, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and India have built fences. Not a peep from the international community or the court of justice about those fences. Israel has built a fence to defend its citizens. This decision from the International Court of Justice comes down. Not a word about suicide bombings. Not a word about terrorism. Not a word about a nation defending its right to exist and defending its citizens.

What is a nation supposed to do? What is more important to be a nation than to defend the rights of its citizens, the killing of innocent civilians that Palestinian terror has done? A nation has a right to defend itself, and that is why I support Israel's security fence.

I have been there. I have seen the fence firsthand. It stops terrorism. It works. And it not only works for Israelis by preventing terrorism, it is working for the Palestinians. Because of the fence, on the Palestinian side life is getting back to normal. The checkpoints are going away. So it is benefiting both sides.

They talk about Israel building the fence. Do my colleagues know who built that fence? Yasser Arafat built that fence. Palestinian terrorists built that fence. If terrorism would end, there would be no need for a fence. And yet the hypocrisy of the International Court of ``Injustice'' condemning Israel for trying to defend its citizens.

I again strongly commend the gentleman from Indiana and urge all my colleagues here to support this very important resolution. Terrorism is terrorism, and security is security. Israel should not be treated differently than any other nation.

Mr. Speaker, today the so-called International Court of Justice, which I think would be better named the ``International Court of Injustice,'' ruled against Israel putting up a security fence, which she put up in order to protect her people against suicide bombers.

No condemnation from the ``International Court of Injustice'' about suicide bombers and the killing of innocent civilians and the terror campaign that has been waged against Israel by the Palestinians for the past 3 years. No talk about the children, the schoolchildren who have been blown up as they go to school on buses, or the pregnant women that have been killed because of Palestinian terror. But only, once again, a ruling condemning the State of Israel.

I do not think that any Nation, having the need to protect its citizens, would act any differently than the State of Israel in putting up this fence to keep suicide bombers out. It is hypocrisy for the International Court of Justice, it is hypocrisy for the United Nations, the hypocrisy of these countries that would have one standard for the State of Israel and one standard for every other country.

Other nations have fences, yet we hear no condemnation towards those countries from the International Court of Justice. India, Saudi Arabia, Turkey all have fences to deal with insurgencies or terrorism, but yet the very countries that condemn Israel for the same thing, we hear nary a peep from them about other countries.

The International Court of Justice should not have even heard this case. But, again, of course, they have one separate standard for the State of Israel and one separate standard for every other country.

Today's decision by the International Court of Justice is in itself a travesty of justice. The Israeli security barrier is not only protecting innocent Israeli civilians from terrorism; it is allowing Palestinians to achieve a greater degree of normalcy as Israeli checkpoints have been removed and terrorists are less able to pass through Palestinian communities.

The Prime Minister of Israel's disengagement plan endorsed by our country, the European Union, the United Nations, and Russia was based in large part on steps by Israel to achieve greater security, including the establishment of this temporary security fence. As soon as Palestinian terrorism ends, there will no longer be a need for this antiterrorism banner. The ruling of the ICJ sets back the Middle East peace process by undermining the disengagement plan and the road map.

The Israeli Supreme Court recently ruled that the security barrier is a legitimate and legal tool to prevent terror, but that there must be a balance between security and the impact on Palestinian communities. I cannot comprehend why an international tribunal has taken up and now reached a decision on a case which had already been competently handled by a national court.

Now, this decision is merely advisory. I call upon the members of the United Nations General Assembly to correct this mistake by not taking up a resolution to implement the recommendations of the International Court of Justice. If they do, the United Nations will once again show that it is not functioning the way it was intended; that instead of being an impartial group, it is leaning heavily on one

side, and as Abba Eban, the late Foreign Minister of Israel, used to say, you could have a resolution at the United Nations saying that the Earth is flat, and if it were put forward by an Arab country, it would automatically get 70 or more votes.

The fence that Israel has put up is a fence that any nation would put up to defend its people and keep terrorism away. Just as we in the United States are doing everything possible to prevent another terrorist attack on our country, Israel has every right to do the same thing to prevent terrorist attacks on its country. Terrorism is a terrible tool that some think can be used as a negotiating tool. We must stomp out this scourge of terrorism wherever it rears its ugly head.

I commend Israel for the security barrier, and I condemn the ``International Court of Injustice'' for once again showing that they are nothing more than a travesty of justice.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 5 o'clock and 8 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until Monday, July 12, 2004, at 12:30 p.m., for morning hour debates.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Sanders amendment. I voted for the PATRIOT Act, I voted for all the appropriations for the war against terror, I voted for all the intelligence appropriations, and will continue to do so. But I think we have to be careful. We have to carefully balance the war against terror with our personal freedoms.

With the passage of the PATRIOT Act, the FBI gained the unprecedented power to search libraries and book-buying records without probable cause of any crime or intent to commit a crime. Furthermore, librarians and others who are required to turn over records are barred from informing anyone that the search has occurred or that records were given to the government. This means that average Americans could have their privacy violated wholesale without justification or proper judicial oversight.

This amendment will not limit the ability of the FBI and the Department of Justice to fight terrorism. This amendment will ensure that library or bookstore records relating to an American who is not the subject of an investigation will not wind up in the government's hands without the benefit or protection of the courts.