Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include this personal explanation in the Record.

On June 17, 2005, I was unable to be present for rollcall vote #265 to the Fiscal Year 2006 Science, State, Justice, and Commerce Appropriations Act. I was unavoidably detained by other Congressional duties related to the 29th District of Texas.

I would have voted ``no'' on the Moran amendment to prohibit Federal funds from being used to license the export of .50 caliber firearms. Federal agencies already have the ability to prohibit exports of certain firearms to certain countries or groups when that is in the national interest. In addition, there are countless sources of firearms in the global marketplace. Unfortunately, this amendment would not have provided any benefits in terms of reducing terrorists' access to firearms.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend Horace L. Dickerson, Jr. for his service to the Social Security Administration and to congratulate him on his upcoming retirement. Mr. Dickerson began his career at SSA in 1971 and held several field office positions before moving to Social Security's headquarters as a Division Director, and later Director of Disability Operations.

After a stint as the Director of Social Security's Central Records Operations, Mr. Dickerson was promoted to Regional Commissioner for the Dallas Region in 1997. In that role he has ably overseen more than 4,000 employees in 151 field offices and has been responsible for SSA Teleservice Centers in Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas and part of Arizona.

Mr. Dickerson's work at the Social Security Administration has touched countless lives in these States, where one in every six residents is a Social Security beneficiary. Under his stewardship, SSA has distributed $49 billion in benefits each year and has processed, on average, 740,000 benefit claims annually.

Since becoming Regional Commissioner, Mr. Dickerson has been recognized several times for his outstanding leadership qualities. He is the two-time recipient of the Award as a Meritorious Executive in the Senior Executive Service. Mr. Dickerson has also been named a Distinguished Executive in Senior Executive Service and received the Presidential Distinguished Rank Award in 1999. Most recently, Mr. Dickerson was inducted as a Fellow into the National Academy of Public Administration, an impressive recognition from his peers of Mr. Dickerson's many accomplishments.

For his service to my constituents, the State of Texas and the country, I offer Mr. Dickerson my most sincere congratulations and wish him the best of luck in his well-deserved retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the work and dedication that Mrs. Rose Avalos, Principal of MacArthur High School, has done in the Aldine Independent School District and North Houston community for the last 33 years. She has led MacArthur High School to become a leader in academic achievement regardless of the socio-economic status of its students.

Mrs. Avalos's strong family upbringing enabled her to commit herself to others in educating the children of her own community. She is a role model for all of Aldine ISD as she was one of the first graduates of MacArthur High School in 1968. After graduating from Sam Houston State University, she went on to become a teacher in Aldine ISD and her success as a teacher led to her promotion as Principal of MacArthur High School in 1994.

Through her leadership, student test scores rose consistently and her commitment to educating all students was evident to everyone in the community when the school reached exemplary status in 2001-02. She gained the respect of her teachers, counselors, coaches, and support and administrative staff by setting high goals for the school and achieving them.

Mrs. Avalos will be greatly missed and thanks to her success, the next principal has a steady foundation to build upon. Again, we applaud the efforts of Mrs. Avalos and wish her well in her future endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of HR 1812, the Patient Navigator legislation. This legislation would help reduce health disparities and barriers to health care through the increased use of patient navigators.

Under the program, Community Health Centers, National Cancer Institute centers, Rural Health Clinics and other non-profit groups can utilize federal funding to help patients navigate through the complex health care system. Patient navigators can help to stem the rising number of uninsured in our country by helping individuals understand their eligibility for health care coverage. These kinds of services are needed throughout the country, but they are particularly helpful in underserved communities, where uninsured individuals too often put off health care either because of a lack of coverage or due to the difficulties in finding the appropriate health care home.

In my hometown of Houston, patient navigators have made tremendous strides in helping patients find an appropriate health care home. Our Harris County Community Access Collaborative has implemented a Navigation Services program that has helped 31,000 patients find health care homes.

In a related navigation service, the collaborative began an Ask Your Nurse phone service, whereby nurses are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to steer patients to the best providers for their health care needs. Studies have shown that 57 percent of the diagnoses in Harris County safety net hospitals' emergency rooms could have been treated in our clinics and primary care physician offices. With this kind of ER overutilization, the Ask Your Nurse services are a welcome addition to the public health care infrastructure in our county and steer an average of 2,700 patients each month to the best health care provider for their condition.

This legislation we consider today would allow other communities to replicate the successes we've achieved in Harris County. In addition, the legislation places an important emphasis on patient navigator services for individuals with cancer and other chronic conditions. For these diagnoses, it is extremely important that patients receive the scheduled follow-up treatment, and patient navigators can play a critical role in ensuring that patients receive the necessary care to successfully manage their health care conditions.

I would like to thank my friend and Chairman, Joe Barton, for the bi- partisan nature in which he shepherded this bill through committee. I offer particular thanks to Mr. Barton for his willingness to work with me to eliminate an unnecessary reference in the bill to the H-CAP program--a program that is important to me and my constituents. This is just one example of the lengths he will go to seek consensus, and I thank him for those efforts. With that, Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this bi-partisan legislation that will help many more Americans gain access to quality health care.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight during the 5- minute time in opposition to the flawed free trade agreement the administration signed with the Dominican Republic and Central American countries. My colleague from Ohio (Mr. Brown) has an hour later, but I wanted to do a 5-minute on the Central American Free Trade Agreement and the Dominican Republic.

Over the past year we have continued to learn about this agreement. During this time the opposition to CAFTA, as it is called, has only grown stronger. The more we learn, the more we realize that CAFTA is a lose-lose proposition. It is no secret that CAFTA is modeled after the NAFTA agreement that was supposed to create new markets for U.S. products and lift up the low-income people in Mexico. The unfortunate result of NAFTA was the loss of 50,000 jobs and a widening of the income gap in Mexico.

Make no mistake, wealth in Mexico has increased since NAFTA, but it has not been evenly distributed. Since NAFTA, an additional 19 million Mexicans are impoverished, and President Vicente Fox has stated that 54 million Mexicans are too poor to meet their basic needs. With 10 percent of the Mexican population controlling half of the nation's wealth, it is easy to see that the average Mexican worker has not benefited from NAFTA. One would think our country would learn from the many failures of NAFTA instead of applying the nearly identical trade provisions to the Central American and Dominican Republic.

I have long opposed free trade agreements with countries with substantially lower standards of living than we have here in the United States. I am proud to represent the third most blue-collar district in our country. The workers in our district benefit from the labor laws on the books of our country. While our labor laws could certainly be strengthened, they ensure that our blue-collar workers receive a living wage and make up a thriving middle class in our country, although a shrinking middle class in our country, might I add.

I have no doubts whatsoever about the skills and productivity of our American workers, but they cannot compete against similar workers in Nicaragua, for example, where wages average about $200 a month. This salary differential puts the American worker and American products at a disadvantage, one that this country should not allow to be exploited through a free trade agreement.

The labor laws of the CAFTA countries do not come close to meeting international standards. Each of the DR-CAFTA countries has been cited by the International Labor Organization for policies which provide inadequate protection against antiunion discrimination. Four of the five countries have laws on the books that significantly impede workers' ability to strike, and each of the countries has laws that restrict union formation or union leadership.

Mr. Speaker, free enterprise includes not only me as a businessperson, but also me as a person to be able to collectively bargain for my wages and my working conditions. What is worse, the CAFTA agreement has no real enforcement mechanism to force a change in these labor laws. True, the agreement

technically requires the enforcement of all labor laws, and as a penalty for failing to enforce its labor laws, a CAFTA country must pay a fine to improve the labor conditions. However, the agreement contains no guarantee that the fine will be used for that purpose. In fact, as a party to the CAFTA agreement, the U.S. has the ability to withdraw trade benefits only based on whether that fine is paid, not on how that money is used.

This provision violates the spirit of the fast track negotiating authority under which Congress will consider CAFTA. Under fast track, all parts of an agreement must be subject to equal remedies. Yet under CAFTA, the penalties for labor violations are much weaker than those involved in commercial disputes, whether it be copyright or some other commercial dispute.

Make no mistake about it, this agreement is not in the interest of the Central American worker or the American worker. This agreement would just open the door for American multinational corporations or other countries' multinational corporations to shift their operations overseas for cheap Central American labor. In the interest of both American workers and the Central American workers, I encourage my colleagues to join me, and a majority of this House, in opposition to

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Vision Preservation Act of 2005. I am proud to introduce this legislation today along with my fellow co-chairs of the Congressional Vision Caucus: Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Repesentative David Price and Repesentative Pat Tiberi. The four of us created the Congressional Vision Caucus in 2003 to increase education and awareness of vision problems among Members of Congress and their staff. The Vision Caucus has been fortunate to have the support of Prevent Blindness America and many other vision organizations in these efforts.

In 2004, Prevent Blindness America joined with the American Academy of Ophthalmology, the American Optometric Association, Lighthouse International and the National Alliance for Eye and Vision Research to put together an action plan to address vision problems. The legislation we introduce today is a legislative response to the recommendations outlined in that action plan.

Currently, an estimated 80 million people in the United States have a potentially blinding eye disease, 3 million have low vision, 1.1 million are legally blind, and 200,000 are more severely visually impaired. In my state of Texas alone, more than 370,000 people suffer from diabetic retinopathy. At least 90,000 Texans over 50 live with AMD. And cataracts affect more than 1.2 million people in my state.

Despite evidence that half of all blindness can be prevented, the number of Americans who suffer vision loss is expected to double by 2030 unless more effective prevention and treatment efforts can be implemented. The Vision Preservation Act will enhance current prevention and treatment efforts by focusing increased attention on vision research, expanding current federal vision programs, developing vision screening standards and providing for vision rehabilitation services under Medicare.

The Vision Preservation Act builds on the quality programs currently in operation at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Eye Institute within the National Institutes of Health. These agencies lead the way in health care research and the prevention of disease, and the enactment of this legislation will ensure that appropriate federal resources and research are dedicated toward stemming the vision diseases that afflict too many Americans.

I encourage my colleagues to co-sponsor this legislation in recognition of Healthy Vision Month and ask for their continued support of the Congressional Vision Caucus's efforts to help improve the vision of our constituents throughout this nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution marking the 57th anniversary of the independence of the State of Israel, and to extend my congratulations to the Israeli people.

Israel has had to overcome many obstacles in its 57 years of existence. On May 14, 1948, Israel proclaimed its independence. Less than 24 hours later, the armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq invaded the country, forcing Israel to defend itself. In what became known as Israel's War of Independence, the newly formed, poorly equipped Israel Defense Forces held off the invaders in fierce fighting, which lasted 15 months and claimed over 6,000 Israeli lives, nearly one percent of the country's Jewish population at the time.

This war characterized the struggles the Israeli people have endured since 1948. However, in the face of this hostility from their neighbors, and the numerous terrorist attacks they have suffered, Israel has maintained the ideals it was founded on, pluralism, freedom, and human rights. Israel has served as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East and its shared values with the United States has led to a natural friendship between the two nations. We in Congress stand firmly behind Israel. The United States has a stake in the future of Israel and in the entire region, and we must make every effort to assist Israel in its struggle for security by helping reach a lasting peace with its neighbors.

Mr. Speaker, the commemoration of the independence of Israel is an important reminder of the contributions of Israel to democracy worldwide. Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating Israel's independence by supporting House Concurrent Resolution 149.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Indiana for yielding me this time.

I want to urge strong support for the fiscal year 2006 energy and water bill. This legislation provides investment in water infrastructure essential not only to our country but to the Texas economy. I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson), the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) and also the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) for their assistance on these projects, particularly two flood projects, Hunting and Greens Bayous in my district. Thousands of my constituents' homes and businesses are at risk from catastrophic flooding in these areas, and the funding in this bill, $500,000 and $150,000 each, keeps these projects on track.

I would also like to express my strong support for the $26 million included for the Houston ship channel deepening and widening project. This funding means we are on track to complete the deepening and widening this year and begin the barge lanes and environmental restoration. However, the tough operations and maintenance budget of the Corps could have counterproductive effects. The Houston ship channel budget is $5 million under capability for 2006. If we cannot maintain our channels to the right depth, then modern ships will not be able to take advantage of this new project. The project will also suffer as millions taken out through reprogramming are not returned as promised by the Corps.

The new policy to rein in reprogramming by requiring committee approval over $1 million is very sound. Reprogramming goes against the letter, number and intent of Congress. Financial stability is essential and large investments are made on the basis of congressional appropriations. More market risk equals higher cost for all the projects.

We should note a few brief points about projects that have been lost to reprogramming in the past and need to be made whole. It seems unjust that the solution to restore the letter and spirit of the law falls on the backs of the most recent victims of reprogramming such as our Houston ship channel who had reprogrammed dollars not returned.

Mr. Chairman, I include for printing in the Record written commitments from the Corps under two administrations. The word and spirit of these commitments are to honor congressional appropriations law. Congressional and Corps promises deserve to be honored. That is the same principle behind the extremely wise reprogramming policy of the future in this bill. However, we should allow the Corps to fulfill its past commitments.

Again, I would like to thank the Chair and the ranking member of the subcommittee and the full committee for making this bill possible.

Department of the Army, Southwestern Division, Corps of

Engineers,

Dallas, TX, September 18, 2001.

Hon. Gene Green,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Green: Thank you for your letter dated August 29,

2001, concerning the Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels,

Texas project.

I regret that members of my staff were not able to meet

with you on September 12, 2001, to discuss this project in

more detail. Based on conversations with your office and Mr.

William Dawson of my staff, the following information will

address your primary concern.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers remains fully committed to

completion of this project based on the optimal construction

schedule. I can further assure you that we will reprogram up

to $20 million in construction funds as required to this

project to ensure that this schedule is maintained

irrespective of any shortfall in the fiscal year 2002

Congressional appropriation.

I continue to appreciate your patience and willingness to

work with us on this matter. Please do not hesitate to

contact me if you have any further questions about the

Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels project.

Sincerely,

David F. Melcher,

Brigadier General, U.S. Army Commanding General.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support not only H.R. 2520, but also H.R. 810, the Castle/DeGette legislation to expand Federal research for embryonic stem cells.

Undoubtedly, each of us on this floor today has a friend, family member or neighbor who could benefit from increased embryonic stem cell research, whether they suffer from spinal cord injury, Alzheimer's, MS or juvenile diabetes. As we consider both the Castle/DeGette stem cell bill and the Smith legislation on umbilical cord stem cells, it is important we differentiate between the effects of these two bills.

I support both of them. But one is not a substitute for the other. The Castle/DeGette bill will expand research on embryonic stem cells, which would have the ability to reproduce indefinitely and to evolve into any cell type in the body.

It is this element of embryonic cell research that offers the most hope for finding cures to the diverse set of diseases that plague too many Americans. We cannot take away that hope by shutting the door on Federal research on embryonic stem cells. The President's policy shut that door, and we have lost 4 years of robust research that will be needed to cure the most complex diseases.

Opponents of this bill will say that the embryonic cell research is unproven, but we will never know the true promise of embryonic stem cells if we hold back Federal dollars for the research. If embryonic stem cell research gets us even one step closer to curing Parkinson's, spinal cord injury and Alzheimer's, it is worth every penny. Just ask Michael J. Fox, Dana Reeves or Nancy Reagan.

These tremendous people, as well as countless more in each of our communities, know what it is like to live every day waiting for your cure. Slamming the door on stem cell research slams the door in their faces.

We talk about using our values to pass legislation to help people. Both these bills are important to helping people with such terrible illnesses.

This last Saturday I helped my wife's mom move into a nursing home. She was diagnosed with Alzheimer's in the mid-1990s. We have watched the progression of that terrible disease. Nothing can help my mother- in-law. But by voting today for both these bills, we can help maybe the next generation, instead of sticking our heads in the sand.

I urge my colleagues to do the right thing for the millions of Americans suffering from incurable diseases. Pass both the Castle/ DeGette bill and the Smith legislation and keep the hope for embryonic cell and cord blood research alive.

Madam Chairman, today are considering the Interior Appropriations Bill, which provides Federal funding for our national parks, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency. I agree with the assessment of our ranking member, Mr. Obey, that this subcommittee has done good work with a difficult allocation. I would have preferred more resources devoted to important environmental, land management, and land conservation programs.

As this bill moves forward, I hope to work with the subcommittee to provide EPA funding for a much-needed study on air toxics in east Harris County, which lies in the district I represent. The Houston Chronicle recently completed a five-part series titled ``In Harm's Way'' that investigated air toxics in these ``fence-line'' communities near industrial facilities.

In particular, the series noted that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality found that folks residing in some of Houston's East End neighborhoods experience higher levels of potentially carcinogenic compounds than other areas.

For many years, residents have had concerns and questions about the quality of the air in Houston's East End, the potential relationship to local industry, and the potential health effects on families.

While it came to few conclusions about health impacts of air toxics in Houston, the Chronicle series raised an alarm and confirmed that there is a pressing need for a comprehensive Air Toxics Risk Assessment to properly identify any adverse health effects and their possible relationship to local industry.

With support from the EPA, the City of Houston plans to utilize methods from the EPA's National Urban Toxics Program, which has proven successful in other cities with air quality issues.

The City of Houston, partnering with the University of Texas School of Public Health, is already working to characterize the science and weigh the evidence on health effects. Federal funding would broaden the scope of these efforts to ensure that we can include the full range of risk assessment activities in our efforts to improve the air in Houston.

The folks in fence-line communities are often the workers who produce many of the essential energy and petrochemical products we all use everyday, and they deserve accurate information about their environment.

I look forward to working with the EPA on this effort and hope that the Appropriations Committee will see it fit to include this critical funding during conference negotiations on this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, opening up the Offshore Continental Shelf will save $300 billion in natural gas costs over 20 years for our consumers and manufacturers. It is not just for businesses, but to heat and cool our homes we use natural gas. If we do not explore and produce off our potential, whether it be California, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, or anywhere else, we are going to continue to be held up by the world price. Our consumers will pay for it.

Mr. Chairman, I like the beaches in Texas, I like them in Florida and California, but I also know we need to use our natural resources.

Supply and demand for energy is out of whack and our Nation needs more energy. The Federal Government tried to mandate demand reduction in the last energy crisis and it contributed to a nationwide recession we do not want to repeat.

A recent Gallup poll found that half of family budgets have been seriously affected by the recent rise in energy prices.

Opening the OCS could save $300 billion in natural gas costs over 20 years, for consumers and manufacturers. High natural gas costs are sending manufacturing jobs overseas, following the cheap gas.

Environmentally conscious nations like Norway, Denmark, Canada, Japan and the UK are safely and successfully producing natural gas from their coastal waters.

No nation can produce energy more responsibly than ours. I have been on oil and gas rigs and they have such few discharges into the ocean, a medium sized fishing boat will leak more in a year.

This amendment is a major opportunity for us to respond to today's energy crisis with a national solution. I feel justified in supporting this amendment because I am from a coastal district. My constituents feel the same way as I do on this issue.

Chemical production and oil and gas exploration, processing, and refining are Texas top coastal industries. My colleagues from Florida and California think only they have beaches, but coastal tourism is Texas's second largest coastal industry.

That fact alone shows the argument that oil and gas production and coastal tourism are mutually exclusive is just plain wrong. They are acting like Chicken Little, and cannot point to one beach in Texas that has been ruined by oil or natural gas production.

There will be less need for LNG facilities and LNG tankers when we tap our own offshore resources so we can use the safest mode of transportation in the world--pipelines.

To address the needs of American families, we need a 3 pronged strategy. First, we need more production and infrastructure to meet our needs of today and tomorrow.

Second, we need more conservation to keep our economy going as resources become more competitive globally.

Third, we need more research to transition our economy to future sources of energy, for a time when petrochemicals are only used for materials, and not as an everyday fuel.

Supporting only long-term solutions and conservation is just not enough. It might be easier if it was, but we need to do more for today's energy problems. We will need continued American energy production for some time.

My point is not that we can drill our way to cheap oil or drill our way to energy independence. If we allow domestic production to die out, conservation and research will not save us, and we will have to pay a terrible economic price.

I urge my colleagues to support oil and gas production in the Outer Continental Shelf.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma, my neighbor, for yielding me this time.

It is interesting that there is potential production of our natural resources that people oppose. This amendment only covers the eastern Gulf of Mexico. It only covers off the coast of Florida. Not California, not the northeast United States, even though there may be potential there. This is just the eastern Gulf of Mexico.

I just do not understand what is going to happen to our country if we continue to import more and more oil, and obviously we are having to import more and more natural gas. I do not know what the folks in California are going to do about energy. I know they have high prices. Get ready to have them even higher, unless we can start bringing production on line that is domestic production, and right now the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) and the gentleman from Texas's (Mr. Edwards) amendment is the best potential because off the western coast of Florida is some of the most productive potential for natural gas and oil fields.

I guess it is frustrating because off the nation of Cuba we have Chinese and Spanish companies that are drilling closer to Florida than U.S. companies can drill close to Florida. So we have a foreign country who can drill closer to Florida. This only covers the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and that is why I think some people will say no to anything. And I do not know what is their solution. More windmills? I love windmills and we can do that. We need energy, no matter whether that comes from oil, natural gas, windmills, or anything else.

The United States produces some of the safest energy that we can. The nations of Norway, Denmark, Canada, Japan, and the United Kingdom are successfully producing oil and gas from their coastal waters, and yet we leave a great deal of ours except off of Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Alaska.

So, again, even though those beaches may be pristine, because I like the beaches in Texas and I consider them pristine, but we do not need to keep our head in the sand of those beaches and not realize we have to have more energy resources in our country.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this bill, the Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act.

This is a common sense bill that will address the problems in the current formula that has been used to distribute first responder funding over the past 3 years.

Since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Homeland Security Department has provided nearly $10.5 billion directly to state and local ``first responders,'' such as emergency personnel, law enforcement and other agencies, to enhance their ability to prepare for and respond to terrorist attacks.

The USA PATRIOT Act guarantees each state, plus Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, at least 0.75 percent of the total funding available under the formula-based program. In allocating funding over the past 3 years, the Homeland Security Department's Office of Domestic Preparedness has provided the base amount, and has then distributed the remaining funding based on population.

Under the current system in FY 2004 my home State of Texas received the second lowest amount of funding per capita, receiving only $5.35 per person, despite having the longest international border of any state, the second largest foreign port, and being home to the Johnson Space Center, as well as hundreds of energy production facilities and chemical plants. Wyoming however, which has no international borders or major metropolitan area, received $37.94 per capita.

In its report, the September 11 Commission urged that first responder grants be distributed on the basis of risk, and this bill does that by lowering the minimum guarantee for each state to 0.25 percent, or 0.45 percent for states that have an international border, and by requiring that the State Homeland Security Grant Program, the Urban Area Security Initiative and the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention program be distributed based on 16 threat criteria. This will ensure that Texans are not receiving $32.59 less per capita than citizens in Wyoming.

H.R. 1544 will also require states to develop 3-year homeland- security plans for enhancing their preparedness and response capabilities, and it requires all applicants, which will be expanded in this bill to also include regional organizations in addition to state agencies, to be consistent with the plan.

I strongly support these provisions because it will allow funding to go directly to the communities that need it most, rather than being funneled through the state, and it requires that applicants specify how their grant fits into the plan. Over the past several years there have been numerous reports of states spending homeland security grant dollars on items such as traffic cones in Des Moines, air-conditioned garbage trucks in Newark, NJ, and bullet-proof vests for dogs in Columbus, Ohio. A recent report about Texas found that the Texas Engineering Extension Service, the agency which distributes Homeland Security funds in Texas, was not providing proper oversight and cities and counties were spending this money on questionable items. This is not how Homeland Security dollars were intended to be spent, and this bill will cut down on the frivolous and excessive spending that has taken place with this money over the past 3 years.

Mr. Chairman, because this bill creates a formula to distribute grant money based on threat criteria, because it provides for better oversight of spending, and because it allows regional organizations as well as states to apply for grant funding, I strongly support this

bill and would urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Martyrs and Heroes Remembrance Day, and to remember the 6 million Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust.

Sixty years ago, as American, British, and Soviet soldiers moved across Europe in a series of offensives on Germany, they encountered and liberated concentration camp prisoners. Advancing from the west, U.S. divisions freed the major concentration camps of Dora-Mittelbau, Buchenwald, Flossenbuirg, and Dachau in Germany, and Mauthausen in Austria.

In northern Germany, British forces liberated Bergen-Belsen and Neuengamme.

In the east, Soviet divisions liberated Auschwitz in Poland in January 1945. Just a few weeks before the German surrender in early May 1945, they liberated the Stutthof, Sachsenhausen, and Ravensbruck concentration camps inside Germany.

In liberating the Nazi camps, the Anglo-American and Soviet soldiers exposed to the world the horror of Nazi atrocities.

Today, we must rededicate ourselves to fighting intolerance, racism and apathy so that future generations do not experience the suffering, terror and ultimate death endured by the victims of the Holocaust.

Remembrance Day serves as a reminder that we must never forget the appalling tragedy of the Holocaust, and the six million Jews who lost their lives.

Unfortunately, the struggle against anti-Semitism continues today, as recent reports indicate an increase in violence against the Jewish community around the world. Last year alone there were reports of anti- Semitic desecration and vandalism of about 40 schools, 140 statues and cemeteries, 60 synagogues and 60 businesses around the world. The number of anti-Semitic incidents in the United States also rose by 17 percent in 2004.

Sixty years after the end of the Holocaust, it is important that we strengthen our fight against anti-Semitism and religious intolerance.

It has been said that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Yom Hashoah reminds each of us where racism, bigotry and religious intolerance can lead, so that something as horrific as the Holocaust is never repeated.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Unfortunately, last week when the majority of members in this body passed the Budget Resolution, they also voted to zero out funding for programs under the Carl Perkins Act.

Through the Perkins Act, hundreds of thousands of students have received an education beyond just high school. They have developed marketable skills that enable them to work at competitive wages, often to support themselves or their families as they receive their college education.

Sam Houston High School is in my District. It is a school with hard- working students who often live under circumstances that do not allow them to enter a 4-year university right after high school graduation. Many of these students stay at home and enter the workforce to help support their families.

Due to decreases in state and Federal funding, Sam Houston High School recently lost their vocational education program. This has been devastating to some students who were relying on learning a unique skill that would give them the ability to earn enough to pay for the rising cost of college and get the work experience that will benefit them in the future.

These programs allow high schools to enter articulation agreements with our local community colleges so students receive college credit for many of the courses they take and they develop skills to enter the workforce. Perkins offers a win-win opportunity for many students to earn college credit and get training and job offers from companies such as General Motors, Continental Airlines and Lockheed Martin.

The Carl Perkins Act recognizes that not everyone goes to college immediately, but that does not mean these students do not want to further their education. Many students who participate in programs such as Tech Prep enter higher-paying jobs after high school to help pay for college.

Recently, the National Association of Manufacturers released a report stating the U.S. will face a shortage of almost 10 million skilled workers by 2020. The students who benefit from the Perkins Act also benefit our economy by preventing the outsourcing of jobs and keeping industry in America flowing.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. The students in my district support Perkins and if we pass this bill today, they will be able to continue to pursue their goals.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to rise tonight to talk about a pressing problem of health care, but before I do, I want to associate my remarks with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), my colleague and neighbor, on Craig Washington.

Congressman Washington replaced Mickey Leland, if anybody could replace Mickey Leland, in this House; and I served as a State house member and State senator with Craig. I can only say and echo what the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) said, who I know saw him across from his bench many times, as he was both a brilliant lawyer and statesman, but also one of the most intelligent people I have known.

Again, I want to associate myself with those remarks and thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) for doing that for Craig.

Cover the Uninsured Week

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to talk about one of the most pressing problems facing the health care system in our country, the growing number of uninsured. Every year since 2000, an additional million Americans have joined the ranks of the uninsured.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation recently reported that the number of individuals without any health insurance in our country rose to 45 million this year. This is a problem that we literally cannot afford not to address.

In my hometown of Houston, we are proud to have the world-famed, world-class Texas Medical Center. Some of the most innovative and life- saving research and treatment developments are being discovered in our own backyard. The problem is that too many of our neighbors cannot access these live-saving treatments because they lack health insurance.

My State of Texas ranks number one in uninsured adults, with 31 percent of adult Texans living without health insurance. The statistics for the Houston area are just as troubling with more than 31 percent of our Harris County residents living without health insurance.

When a third of the State and county's population is without health insurance, I think it is safe to say this problem has reached crisis proportions. The increase in the number of uninsured is due, in part, to the changing nature of health care in our country.

Gone are the days when we could count on our employers to provide comprehensive health insurance for us and our families. With health insurance costs reaching $10,000 per year, low-wage workers cannot fend for themselves.

With full-time minimum-wage workers bringing home roughly that much each year, they cannot spend the bulk of their earnings on health insurance, and many small businesses are finding that they simply cannot afford to purchase health insurance for their employees.

As a sideline, not only small businesses, but some of our larger businesses, whether it be General Motors or Shell Oil, talk about the disparities and how much they pay in industrialized countries like Europe and Japan for health insurance, and Canada, as compared to how much more they pay in our country.

It is no little surprise that today 80 percent of the uninsured in this country are gainfully employed. Unfortunately, my State of Texas also ranks number one in the percentage of uninsured working adults, with 27 percent of working Texans currently without health insurance.

This is a problem for all Americans as the uninsured often use emergency rooms as their primary source of medical care. In fact, a study of emergency room use in Harris County found that 57 percent of the diagnoses made in safety net hospital emergency rooms could have been treated in a physician's office or clinic. This increases health care costs for all Americans.

The uninsured are less likely to seek preventive health care and only get care once their problems reach emergency proportions. In fact, nearly 50 percent of uninsured adults have postponed seeking health care because they

cannot afford it. Only 15 percent of those individuals with health insurance have postponed care for this reason.

It is no surprise that the uninsured and underinsured are generally more expensive to treat because they fall through the cracks in our health care system. Unfortunately, the policies that this Congress has supported only serve to widen those cracks.

Despite being faced with record levels of uninsured individuals, this Congress has put Medicaid cuts at the top of the budget agenda. Medicaid is the health insurer of last resort in this country, and subjecting this critical program to budget cuts will only serve to further increase the number of Americans without health insurance.

Where does Congress think these folks will go once they are dropped from the Medicaid rolls? The answer is simple: They will join the ranks of the uninsured, and in doing so, they will be three times more likely to postpone health care, three times more likely to forego filling a prescription, and three times as likely to be hounded by collection agents for payments on medical care they do seek out. This is not the way to ensure that our citizens are healthy, productive members of our society.

The Federal Government needs to renew its commitment to the most vulnerable members of our society. Faced with record levels of uninsured, we should be adding people to the Medicaid and SCHIP rolls, not dropping them. We should expand the SCHIP program to include parents of these CHIP children. That policy option alone would provide health insurance to 67 percent of CHIP parents in Texas.

We should restore funding for the HCAP program, which in my community, has helped enroll an additional 250,000 individuals in Medicaid and CHIP, while also directing the uninsured away from ERs and toward an appropriate health care home. These are programs that work.

What does not work is picking a budget number out of thin air and forcing Members to chop away at a program until it fits that number. It is shameful that Congress is balancing the budget on the backs of low- income families. If we are going to get this country's health care system out of the ditch, we must stop digging that ditch.