Floor Statements

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

Mr. Speaker, I oppose this bill to reinstate the draft, but I really want to thank the Republican leadership for bringing the bill to the floor, even though they oppose it, to highlight this administration's complete mismanagement of the war in Iraq.

Imposing a draft is not the right solution, but it is time we recognized a real problem. Our military is overstretched, overcommitted, and close to the breaking point. Last week, Paul Bremer, the former Iraqi administrator, acknowledged that we should have had more troops in Iraq to deal with the counterinsurgency which has resulted in over 1,000 Americans dead. He is only the latest to call for an increase in the size of our military.

From former Army Chief of Staff General Shinseki, whose appeal for more troops in Iraq fell on deaf ears, to General John Riggs, the head of the Army's transportation efforts, who called for an increase in end-strength beyond 10,000 troops, to the Pentagon's own Defense Science Board, which warned last week that inadequate troop size means that the United States cannot sustain current and projected global stabilization commitments, the strain on our military is increasingly obvious.

Guards and Reservists make up 40 percent of our mission in Iraq, and those who have served and survived are not able to come home because there is nobody to replace them. The Army Guard will fall short of its recruitment goal by 5,000 personnel for the first time since 1994.

I have a bill to increase the end-strength of the military, which is a responsible way to reduce the stress on the force. But instead of scheduling my bill, the leadership has scheduled a vote on the draft that they do not even support.

I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and join me in calling on the Pentagon to substantially increase the size of our voluntary military.

Madam Speaker, I take that as a high compliment from the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), and I thank him for yielding me this time.

Madam Speaker, at a time when the House has so much important work to do, I am deeply disappointed that I have to arise to address the political posturing occurring on what should be one of the most important bipartisan bills before us, the defense authorization bill.

As a member of the House Committee on Armed Services, I strongly support the motion to instruct offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and to agree and to accede to the language passed in the other body that includes this hate crimes legislation.

We have been here before. I am also a proud cosponsor of the gentleman's Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Congress needs to be on the record supporting State, local, and tribal governments in their efforts to combat crimes committed against people based solely on their race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion.

I support including this hate crimes provision in the final version of the defense bill and urge the conferees to do so, as they have done before. We have included this vitally important language in previous defense bills with bipartisan support, only to have the Republican leadership strip it out in the end.

Mr. Speaker, it is irresponsible and unacceptable that Congress has not been assisting those in need in the fight to eradicate these crimes. Now is the chance to improve upon our previous actions and work with the conferees to allow this hate crime legislation to become law. Please support the Conyers motion to instruct.

Mr. Speaker, on October 8, 2004, Lieutenant General Robert R. Dierker, U.S. Air Force, will complete his tour of duty as the Deputy Commander, United States Pacific Command. At the end of his tour, General Dierker will retire from the Air Force after 32 years of service to our nation.

Robert Dierker represents all that is good about the United States military. He is a distinguished graduate of the United States Air Force Academy. He has served honorably throughout his career in various key operational and staff positions in the United States, Southeast Asia, Northeast Asia, and Europe. And he has commanded a fighter group and a fighter wing.

Lieutenant General Dierker is himself an accomplished command pilot. He has logged more than 2,500 flying hours, primarily in tactical aircraft, and is a master parachutist with more than 130 military jumps.

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the United States Congress and the nation, I take great pride in formally recognizing the exceptionally meritorious service of Lieutenant General Robert R. Dierker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize September 12 to 18 as National Assisted Living Week. Created in 1995 by the National Center for Assisted Living, National Assisted Living Week is being celebrated this year for the first time in collaboration with the American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging and the Assisted Living Federation of America.

Along with good health and access to family and friends, nothing is more important to the senior citizens of our communities than their independence. National Assisted Living Week recognizes senior citizens who prize their independence and honors the professionals, volunteers, and investors who support the facilities and services that help them keep it.

The 2004 NALW theme, symbolized by a family tree and a heart, is ``Caring for Our Heritage''. The focus is on diverse cultural traditions that enrich our communities at all stages of life and are especially meaningful and comforting to residents of assisted living environments.

Mr. Speaker, I commend NCAL, AAHSA, and ALFA for working together to promote National Assisted Living Week, beginning this Grandparents' Day. We as a nation are grateful to the members of these three organizations for their mission and expertise in advocating and caring for and preserving the quality of life of our senior citizens.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to your attention the accomplishments of the Wellness Community of the San Francisco East Bay area.

The Wellness Community provides support, education, and hope for people with cancer and their loved ones, serving more than 1,000 participants in the Bay Area annually.

Cancer affects three out of four families across our Nation, over 1.3 million Americans each year. Cancer does not discriminate, crossing all ethnic, racial, age, national origin, sexual orientation, and socio- economic lines. It is one of the most devastating diseases afflicting Americans today.

The Wellness Community of the San Francisco East Bay area provides services to improve the quality of life for cancer patients, their families, and loved ones. Services include weekly and monthly support groups, monthly educational programs, stress management and gentle movement programs, and a cancer resource library.

In addition to providing a close-knit, home-like atmosphere, the Wellness Community's programs also enable those with cancer to take an active stance in combating the disease by forming a support network for patients and their families.

The Wellness Community believes that hope is a valuable tool for combating cancer. Rather than identifying themselves as passive victims, the Wellness Community empowers patients to play an active role in improving their own lives by working directly with their healthcare teams to bring about the possibility of recovery.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and commend the Wellness Community on over twenty years of dedicated service in improving the lives of individuals, families, and loved ones who are affected by cancer in the San Francisco Bay area.

I urge the House of Representatives to recognize their declaration of September 18, 2004 as ``The Wellness Community Day of Celebration.''

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride and pleasure that I rise today to recognize the achievements and activities of John A. Coleman. Mr. Coleman currently is serving as the President of the California Association of Sanitation Agencies otherwise known as CASA. CASA is a statewide association of wastewater treatment agencies that is responsible for ensuring the protection and improvement of California's water quality for more than 22 million Californians and their related businesses and our state's natural resources. He was elected CASA President after serving as a member of this association since 1990. It is also noteworthy that he assumed this leadership role after he was elected to the Board of Directors of the East Bay Municipal Utility District that provides water quality and water supply services to many of my constituents of the 10th Congressional District.

Mr. Coleman was the first CASA President to serve a two-year term of office, having been unanimously elected by the General Council of the California Association of Sanitation Agencies on August 9, 2002 and re- elected August 15, 2003. He will conclude his term as the 46th President on August 7, 2004.

Mr. Coleman's performance on behalf of CASA has been one of strong leadership. He has provided important guidance on complex legislative and regulatory issues affecting the management of local public wastewater agencies as these agencies strive to comply with the myriad of federal requirements. On many an occasion I have had the opportunity to review a number of these matters with Mr. Coleman in his capacity as President of CASA and as a member of the East Bay Municipal Utility District Board of Directors.

In each of these roles, Mr. Coleman displayed the highest level of integrity establishing a threshold of performance that served CASA well. He used his position at CASA both as President and a Member of the Executive Board to encourage all CASA members to maintain the highest level of professional performance in the course of conducting the public's business.

Of special note, during Mr. Coleman's tenure as CASA President, he launched a state wide program to promote the beneficial use of biosolids to improve the quality of our lands and minimize the inappropriate disposal of a useful byproduct of water quality programs. This program has generated a better understanding on the part of the public on how we can be better stewards of our local communities and their natural resources.

Most recently, Mr. Coleman oversaw the first CASA Federal Legislative Outreach Seminar, bringing to Washington 40 public officials to meet with their congressional delegations and U.S Environmental Protection Agency officials. This effort typified Mr. Coleman's commitment to working to enhance the CASA members' understanding of the policymaking process and to promote increased public participation in the legislative and regulatory processes. Through this activity, he has elevated and solidified CASA's leading role as one of the most effective, respected, and influential California public association dedicated to wastewater and water quality improvements.

As Mr. Coleman prepares to complete his term as CASA President, I want to take note of these accomplishments and to commend him for his tireless commitment to improve the water quality of California's lakes, rivers, streams and coastal waters. His commitment and leadership at CASA means that valuable recreational, economic and social activities that today's Californians enjoy will be available for California's future generations. I congratulate him on his many achievements.

Mr. Speaker, I regretfully rise in opposition to the bill as it currently is constructed; and as a Californian, I fully understand the urgent need to pass legislation to reauthorize CALFED; but if we fail to reauthorize this program, we will sacrifice millions of dollars scheduled to go to important water infrastructure projects. But in its current form, this legislation will jeopardize the delicate balance of water interests in California that we have worked so hard to achieve and make it more difficult for us to reauthorize CALFED.

Instead of codifying the Record of Decision that was agreed to in the CALFED process, this bill disrupts the balance that it created. This bill sets the dangerous precedent of authorizing large-scale projects before they have undergone comprehensive review and analysis. The preauthorization language is bad policy and bad politics.

The gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), and I will offer a motion to recommit this bill

that would strip the preauthorization language from the legislation. I urge my colleagues to support the motion so that we can pass a CALFED bill this year and get it signed by the President.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise in strong support of the Miller-Tauscher motion to recommit.

As a member of California who represents a large part of the San Francisco Bay-Delta, I fully understand the importance of reauthorizing the CALFED program. Now more than

ever, California needs the Federal Government to be an active financial partner in helping restore the delta's ecosystem and meeting our State's growing water needs.

However, the preauthorization language in this bill severely jeopardizes our ability to renew this critical State-Federal partnership. Not only is it bad economic and environmental policy, but insisting on preauthorization, knowing that the other body will reject it, is a failed strategy for reaching agreement this year. Passing this bill as it is currently drafted is a divisive step that fails to really help Californians.

Mr. Speaker, with less than 30 legislative days remaining in the 108th Congress, we must have a smart strategy to get a CALFED bill done for the people of California before we adjourn. I urge my colleagues to support this motion, which will simply remove one paragraph from the bill and immediately return it to the House for consideration.

Our constituents sent us here to make timely progress on water policies that will help them. Removing this objectionable roadblock provision will help us move forward. I urge my colleagues to support the motion to recommit.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to one of the finest Members of this institution, Doug Bereuter of Nebraska. After 26 years of service, Doug is retiring from the House to be the president of the Asia Foundation, and this body will not be the same without him.

In his time in the House of Representatives, Madam Speaker, Doug Bereuter has embodied the best of public service. His commitment to his constituents and his Nation has never waivered. While staying true to his values, he has worked across party lines to achieve compromise and advance sound public policy. He is known all over Capitol Hill as a man with strong convictions but even stronger commitment to working in a bipartisan, collegial manner and a dedication to doing good.

Doug Bereuter is a committed internationalist who understands that in this world of ever increasing globalization, it is essential that our Nation maintain strong relationships around the world. Doug has dedicated a significant part of his career to improving international cooperation, and he is known and respected around the world.

I have had the opportunity to travel with Doug and Louise Bereuter as a member of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. I have been very impressed by his knowledge of our European allies and his grasp of the issues the alliance faces. I have seen the ease with which he relates to foreign leaders. And I have also seen the grace with which he conducts diplomacy.

On a very personal note, and I am sure to the great good news to my colleagues from California, I am pleased to tell you that not only will Doug and Louise be relocating to the San Francisco Bay area, they are moving not only to my district but my home town. So I have the blessing of not losing Doug and Louise completely. Although he has a very nonpartisan job, I believe that they will enjoy living in my town, and it is a beautiful place indeed. And we will be very, very blessed to have them. They will add greatly.

Louise is especially someone I have gained tremendous appreciation for. She is an artist, a great mom and a great grandmother; and I am happy to say that we are proud to have Doug Bereuter and Louise Bereuter moving to California. We are happy to have his service to the people of Nebraska and our Nation, and I wish him the best of luck. When he sees the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), he will be drinking California wine.

I thank the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) for hosting us.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to one of the finest members of this institution, Doug Bereuter of Nebraska. After 26 years of service Doug is retiring from the House to be President of the Asia Foundation, and this body will not be the same without him.

In his time in the House of Representatives, Madam Speaker, Doug Bereuter has embodied the best of pubic service. His commitment to his constituents and his Nation has never waivered. While staying true to his values, he has worked across party lines to achieve compromise and advance sound public policy. He is known on Capitol Hill as a man with strong convictions but an even stronger commitment to working in a bipartisan, collegial manner and a dedication to doing good.

Doug Bereuter is a committed internationalist who understands that in this world of ever increasing globalization it is essential that our Nation maintain strong relationships around the world. Doug has dedicated a significant part of his career to improving international cooperation and he is know and respected around the world.

I have had the opportunity to travel with Doug as a member of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. I have been impressed by his knowledge of our European allies and his grasp of the issues the alliance faces. I have seen the ease with which he related to foreign leaders. And I have seen the grace with which he conducts diplomacy.

On a personal note, Madam Speaker, I am pleased that Doug and his wife Louise will be relocating to the San Francisco Bay Area and that they will live in my district. I hope to see them regularly and continue to benefit from their kindness and wisdom.

I am grateful that Doug Bereuter has given so much of his life to the people of Nebraska and to this Nation. I wish him the best of luck as he leaves Congress and begins the next chapter of his life.

Mr. Chairman, I must rise reluctantly to oppose this amendment. As an energy consumer and a strong environmentalist, I fully support the increased development of renewable sources of energy. California, my State, has suffered tremendously in recent years from felonious manipulations, interruptions, and fluctuations in the energy market. Increasing the availability of renewable energy is absolutely necessary to achieving energy independence, and that is why this House should have passed a more balanced energy bill that makes the right investments in renewable energy and resources.

Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, this amendment would take needed money away from the Advanced Simulation and Computing Initiative, better known as ASCI. ASCI is an essential component of our Nation's Stockpile Stewardship Program, which is designed to evaluate nuclear weapons so we do not have to return to nuclear testing. The ASCI program has developed some of the most powerful computers in the world to examine the aging of our nuclear stockpile. It has also led to breakthrough discoveries in science that have important civilian applications.

The funding for ASCI in this bill is already $75 million below the level requested by the President. Mr. Chairman, while I strongly support increased development of renewable energy resources, I cannot do it at further expense of the ASCI program. So I urge my colleagues to oppose the Sanders amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment redirects funds in the defense authorization bill from new nuclear weapons to conventional programs that meet the same threats. The amendment that I am offering with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen) transfers funds for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator and advanced concepts to, instead, improve conventional capabilities and intelligence required to defeat hardened targets.

The President called for international cooperation to control the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in a February speech at the National Defense University, but his vision is directly undermined by the contents of this defense bill. By calling for new, more usable nuclear weapons, the United States sends a message to the world that nuclear weapons are legitimate weapons that should be acquired. Resorting to nuclear weapons to destroy hardened targets is a disproportionate response with too many negative ramifications and little benefit.

There are several reasons not to consider new nuclear bunker busters. Here are a few:

First of all, the military has not asked for them.

Second, they will produce massive collateral damage and expose our own troops to massive doses of radiation.

Third, a nuclear strike against a WMD stockpile could release deadly agents into the atmosphere.

Fourth, even the most powerful nuclear weapons cannot destroy bunkers over a certain depth, and rogue regimes will just dig deeper to avoid them.

Fifth, an RNEP will cause mass casualties miles away from the targeted bunker and potentially harm our allies.

And sixth and furthermore, developing new nuclear bunker busters would undermine decades of United States leadership aimed at preventing non-nuclear states from acquiring nuclear weapons and encouraging nuclear states to reduce their stockpiles.

They are also unnecessary because the United States already has conventional programs to defeat hardened targets.

My amendment strengthens these conventional programs and improves intelligence needed to get at hardened targets. The costs of missing the target with a conventional weapon is bad enough, but missing it with a nuclear warhead is far worse. Even the hawkish Defense Science Board that advises the Pentagon recently stated that U.S. interests are best served by preserving into the future the half-century-plus nonuse of nuclear weapons.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member of the full committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from the State of Washington (Mr. Dicks).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), another cosponsor of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, as our final speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), a cosponsor of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp) for trying to fix the Sick Worker Compensation program at the Department of Energy. His State of Tennessee has 3,000 claims from sick workers pending, and I have two facilities in my district where workers are waiting for their claims to be processed.

This amendment primarily increases the rate of pay for DOE to attract more doctors to review claims in the physicians panel, which is useful but does not fix structural flaws in this program.

The GAO panel has found that even after claims go through a physicians panel, there is no willing payer and that by order from DOE, that is no one to pay these claims for at least 20 to 33 percent of valid claims.

When there is no willing payer, as we have in States like Alaska, Colorado, Ohio, Iowa, Missouri and Kentucky, and we have workers in Nevada, construction workers in New Mexico, Idaho, California and in most other States that DOE cannot find willing payers, without a willing payer, workers who get a finding from the physicians panel will have a piece of paper from DOE saying their illness was caused by exposure to radiation at DOE sites, but they will not get paid.

I support an amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) that fixed this problem, but it was rejected by the Committee on Rules.

DOE also does not have a clear mechanism to value claims, inviting additional litigation when the goal of Congress was to take DOE out of the business of fighting sick workers who have served our Nation by building our Cold War deterrent.

This amendment does not fix that either. The Department of Energy's record is catastrophic. Two and a half years into the program, of the 23,000 people who have applied for compensation, the Department of Energy has rejected 5 percent of them and completely processed about 6 percent of them. In other words, 94 percent of applicants are still waiting for their cases to be addressed.

Sick workers were told help was on the way. Four years later, DOE is projecting its caseload will not be completed for at least another 3\1/ 2\ years. I reluctantly oppose this amendment, as it offers a minor technical fix to a program that remains structurally flawed. Throwing more money at DOE only rewards it for failing to compensate sick workers and will make it harder in the future to make real improvements to the program.

There is a bipartisan amendment on the Senate side that I hope many of our colleagues will be able to support in conference. In the meantime, I reluctantly call on my colleagues to oppose the Wamp amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), the author of the amendment that I wish I could have supported.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to express my support for the Davis amendment. This amendment would provide fairness and equity to women in the military who are serving overseas.

Currently, women who have volunteered to serve our country and female military dependents are barred from exercising their legally guaranteed right to choose simply because they are stationed overseas.

Military women should be able to depend on their base hospitals for all of their health care needs. A repeal of the current ban on privately funded abortions would allow military women and dependents based overseas the same range and quality of medical care available to women in the United States. No Federal funds would be used to perform these procedures and no undue burden is placed on military physicians overseas.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, this amendment simply repeals the statutory prohibition on abortions in overseas military hospitals.

I hope we can all support this amendment and ensure that American women overseas are afforded access to quality reproductive services, as they would be if they were home in the United States.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Captain Jim Jennings, who is retiring from the city of Concord Police Department after 35 years of serving the residents of Concord as well as the larger community.

Captain Jennings was born in Placerville and is a life-long resident of California. He married his wife Jennifer in 1970 and they have spent 34 wonderful years together.

Captain Jennings' public service career began even before his time with the Concord Police Department. He served in the U.S. Army in Vietnam from 1967 to 1968. During his service, he received several commendations and medals for his work.

Captain Jennings was hired as a patrolman with the Concord Police Department in May 1969. His distinguished career of public service includes serving on the board of directors of the Peace Offers Research Association of California. For 8 years, he also served as the organization's president.

In 1992, he collaborated with the Contra Costa County Superior Court to develop a protocol that law enforcement officials could follow to handle weapons seized from individuals. This protocol is now followed by all law enforcement agencies in Contra Costa County.

In 1994, Captain Jennings was honored for his on-the-scene help to prevent an individual from jumping to his death. During the following year, he was responsible for creating the Concord Police Department's Northern District Field Office. More than 1,000 individuals attended the Field Office's Grand Opening, demonstrating the widespread public support for his work.

For 35 years, Captain Jennings has served the Concord Police Department and surrounding community. His hard work has improved the safety of the city as well as bettered the overall quality of life for all members of the community. I am proud to commend him today for his leadership, dedication, and commitment to the people of the city of Concord.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the members of the San Francisco Bay Area Congressional Delegation, including Representatives Stark, Pelosi, Miller, Lee, Lantos, Lofgren, Honda, Eshoo, Pombo, Woolsey and Thompson, I rise to pay tribute to Mike Healy, Department Manager of Media and Public Affairs for the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) District. For his steadfast commitment and dedication as the face and voice of BART, even before the system carried a single passenger, we would like to thank Mike Healy and wish him well in his retirement. His thirty-two years of energetic leadership at BART have helped shape one of the largest and most vital mass transit systems in the United States for the better, for all of those who call the San Francisco Bay Area home.

Born in South Bend, Indiana, Mike Healy was raised in Los Angeles and graduated from the University of Southern California with a Bachelor's Degree in Journalism and Telecommunications. Though initially more interested in writing screenplays for movie studios during his early career, it was transportation that was destined to attract and retain his attention.

When BART first hired Mike Healy, he was told his tenure there would most likely end before six months had passed. Instead, Mike Healy has worked for six different general

managers and many more elected directors since he first began work for the system in 1971.

During Mike Healy's tenure at the transit district, directing media and public affairs, BART has gone from serving 17,000 passengers daily to more than 300,000. As the service added more patrons and more trains, the need to communicate quickly and effectively with the public and media took on added significance. Reaching such a large and complex audience was at times a monumental task, but one to which Mike Healy never faltered. Indeed, his calm professionalism serves as a model for public relations to countless transit systems throughout the nation.

He is most often remembered for his striking performance during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. It was, as has been said, BART's ``shining hour.'' BART was shown to be indispensable to the region. When the Bay Bridge failed, BART was there. And Mike Healy's reassuring voice told an uncertain public that BART would be there to help the Bay Area move past the wide reaching natural disaster. He was right.

Mike Healy has contributed his energy to serving the people in so many ways. He has served on the Board of Directors of the Oakland Visitors and Conventions Authority and has worked with the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) as Chair of its National Public Affairs and Community Relations Committee.

It has been our great pleasure to have worked with Mike Healy over the years on transit issues affecting our great region. He has been a supportive colleague and a good friend. We wish him and his wife, Joan, best wishes in their future endeavors together.

Mike Healy has made a singularly unique and constructive impact upon the lives of those who live, work, play in and visit the communities of the Bay Area. He has been an invaluable servant to the public. It is with honor that we commend Mike Healy for his 32 years of service and for his contribution in making travel easier for millions of people in one of the most populous metropolitan areas in America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to recognize Earth Day and discuss the clean water challenges facing America. Over the last three decades our nation has made significant progress in addressing the pollution of lakes, streams, rivers and estuaries. However, these crucial gains in water quality are in jeopardy of being lost. The wastewater treatment facilities that have been the cornerstone of the Clean Water Act's success are now in need of critical upgrades and the resources for this environmental imperative are no where to be found.

The Government Accounting Office, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Water Infrastructure Network have all found a wastewater infrastructure funding gap in excess of $500 billion, over the next 20 years. These assessments come at a time when we continue to reduce the federal commitment to clean water infrastructure. The FY 2005 Administration budget calls for less than $2 billion in federal investment for both wastewater and drinking water infrastructure. This declining investment in America's clean water comes at a time when we are providing nearly $4 billion to Iraq for water infrastructure.

The time has come for our nation to rededicate itself to the importance of clean water and the infrastructure which makes it possible. It is time for Congress and the Administration to give serious consideration to making significant new investments in clean water infrastructure. We have dedicated funding sources to support our highway, aviation, and navigation infrastructure and it is now incumbent upon us to find similar funding support our nation's most critical infrastructure--water infrastructure.

Mr. Speaker, I have introduced legislation to reauthorize the Clean Water State Revolving Fund in the last three Congresses that would increase the federal investment in clean water infrastructure ten-fold. This investment would help clean our environment and help our economy by producing thousands of new, good paying jobs. Unfortunately, this year's version of this important legislation is being held up over ideological issues that have nothing to do with cleaning up the environment or providing future Americans and our habitats with clean, safe water.

I call on my colleagues this Earth Day to reflect on the importance of water in our daily lives and provide the infrastructure that makes clean water possible with funding that it requires.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of National Minority Cancer Awareness Week.

This year marks the 18th annual National Minority Cancer Awareness Week, a national awareness campaign which focuses on the disproportionate cancer burden experienced by racial and ethnic minorities and other medically underserved communities.

Despite all the progress that has been made in the battle against cancer, there is still much work to be done to eradicate this horrible disease.

In California alone, 125,000 new cancer cases will be diagnosed this year; 52,200 people will die from cancer. Out of every 100,000 people living in California, 186 will eventually die of cancer.

Mr. Speaker, we all know that a disproportionate burden of cancer continues to fall on a number of populations. African Americans have the highest death rates for all cancers and cancer is the leading cause of death for Asian American women.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, the average annual death rate per 100,000 people for all types of cancers was 257 for African Americans, 199 for whites, 138 for Hispanic-Americans, 138 for American Indians, and 125 for Asian/Pacific Islanders.

For every 100,000 people living in California, 65 African Americans in that group will die each year from lung cancer, 17 Hispanic women will die from breast cancer and 13 Asian Americans will die from prostate cancer.

Inadequate access to preventive services and early detection means that diseases like cancer are more often diagnosed at later stages when the severity is likely to be greater and options for treatment are decreased.

The future health of America as a whole will be influenced substantially by our success in improving the health of minority and other medically underserved populations.

I rise today to commend those working in my district and state who work tirelessly on this issue in the hopes of one day beating cancer.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in Congress to come together and find a way to fund crucial research into cures for this disease. I hope we can reduce and ultimately eliminate the disproportionate burden cancer and other diseases pose on minority and medically underserved communities in our country.