Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I have 30 seconds to explain why H.R. 2, the State Children's Health Insurance Program, means everything to a school nurse.

And I'll just tell you, I can see the faces of the children I cared for as best as I could who would have benefited so dramatically from this program. And I'll tell you what this feels like now, as so many moms and dads are losing their jobs and need this program even more. And my State, California, is cutting even the children who presently are served so dramatically.

And give States the option of covering pregnant women. That is the greatest thing we can do for the health of a child is to cover the mom.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation to strengthen SCHIP and in strong support of America's children.

As a former school nurse, I consider it a crime that there are children in America who cannot access all of the healthcare services they need.

And today we have an opportunity to fix this injustice.

The excellent bill we have before us will ensure that millions of children in working families can get the proper preventive and primary care they need to ensure a healthy childhood.

I am also pleased to see that this bill preserves State options to cover pregnant women.

After all, the health of a mother is the greatest contributor to a child's health.

The current economic climate only adds to the urgency of this legislation.

States are experiencing budget shortfalls which threaten the status of children already enrolled in SCHIP.

And as parents lose their jobs; their health coverage is lost, too.

So I hope every one of my colleagues will join me in voting ``yes'' on this bill today and secure a better future for the health of our children and grandchildren.

I thank my colleague.

Madam Speaker, I rise in full support of H.R. 11. I was extremely proud last year when the House swiftly acted to pass the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The Supreme Court had made a terribly misguided decision and failed to fully recognize the rights of women to seek remedy for pay discrimination.

And how proud I am today that we are wasting no time and again passing legislation to clarify that victims of pay discrimination should not be punished because they were not aware of the discrimination against them earlier.

The Civil Rights Act exists to protect individuals precisely when they find themselves in the situation Lilly Ledbetter found herself in, and it was never meant to be interpreted in a way that provides a loophole for employers to discriminate--if they can just make sure that their employees are kept in the dark for 6 months.

Lilly Ledbetter will never be compensated for decades of discrimination by her employer, but let us ensure that none of our sisters, our daughters, our granddaughters are ever punished in the same way.

I urge my colleagues the vote yes for the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 12, the Paycheck Fairness Act. I want to commend our colleague Rosa DeLauro for her stellar work on this legislation and thank our leadership for making sure that this bill is one of the first we are considering in our new Congress. I am thrilled, and I know it is a testament to our commitment to equality for all.

H.R. 12 closes existing loopholes that otherwise prevent employees from recouping deserved wages. Existing law

allows employers to use a myriad of excuses to justify a pay disparity between men and women. This is true even if the excuse has nothing to do with the job itself. Furthermore, women cannot always safely discuss salaries with their coworkers to determine if there is discrimination occurring for fear of retaliation from their employers. The Paycheck Fairness Act will ensure that women can safely discuss wages with other workers and modernize the law so that companies must show more proof that pay disparities did not occur because of gender.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this important legislation to ensure a better economic future for all American women.

I thank my colleague for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I will vote for this resolution today, but I'm disappointed that we are doing, once again, what we've done so often. Of course we all condemn Hamas and support Israel, but we should be saying and doing so much more. I applaud the statements of the chairman and of our Speaker, and I wish they were part of the resolution.

We must call for greater U.S. engagement to achieve a durable cease- fire and to restart the Israel-Palestinian peace process. We all know the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will never be settled militarily. My fear is that this action by Israel, justified as it is and provoked by Hamas, will not enhance Israel's security but only further endanger it.

Achieving peace in the Middle East is in Israel's best interest, and it is in America's best interest; but the violence that now permeates Gaza only puts off the serious and difficult work of diplomacy that is a predicate to peace, and it obscures the remarkable progress that is even now being made in the West Bank. And in the meantime, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza has grown to unspeakable proportions, and millions of innocent Palestinians and Israelis are suffering.

I urge my colleagues not only to make statements of support for Israel but to call for a cease-fire and to press for peace.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Commerce be discharged from further consideration of the Senate bill (S. 3663) to require the Federal Communications Commission to provide for a short-term extension of the analog television broadcasting authority so that essential public safety announcements and digital television transition information may be provided for a short time during the transition to digital television broadcasting, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 3663, the Short-term Analog Flash and Emergency Readiness Act.

On February 18, 2009, full-power television stations in the United States will stop broadcasting in analog and transition to all-digital broadcasting. This is undoubtedly an important step forward for our country; it allows us to more efficiently utilize our airwaves, and to lay the groundwork for a nationwide public safety network. However, we must proceed with caution to ensure that segments of our population are not left behind and remain informed in cases of emergency.

That is why I introduced the SAFER Act. This bill creates a program within the FCC that allows for the continuation of analog signals to televisions for 30 days following the DTV transition. It ensures that, once the digital television transition has taken place, unprepared analog televisions will receive a short ``slide''--in English and Spanish--explaining that the digital transition has occurred and what viewers need to do to continue receiving television broadcasts. The bill also allows for emergency communications, such as natural disaster alerts, to be broadcast to unprepared analog televisions. The fires that raged through my congressional district and other parts of southern California last month are an example of alerts that could be broadcast to television viewers who were unprepared for the DTV transition.

According to the GAO, over 17 million households rely exclusively on analog over-the-air television, and while broadcasters, the FCC and others have been working furiously to let them know about the upcoming transition, there will inevitably be some folks left behind. In fact, that is exactly what happened after an FCC ``test'' transition in Wilmington, NC. Despite saturation advertising announcing the change and a geographic topography most conducive to it, nearly 2,000 households woke up to find that their televisions did not work; when extrapolated to the entire Nation this could mean that at least 1.5 million households will wake up on February 18 without a working television.

We also know that certain segments of our population will likely be disproportionately impacted by the digital transition: Latinos, African Americans, and seniors. As someone who represents a congressional district that is 42 percent Latino and has many senior citizens, I find this very troubling. Clearly, we should be doing everything we can to ensure that no Americans are left behind during this important time.

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to my colleague Senator Rockefeller and his staff for taking leadership on this important bill in the Senate, and to Chairman Dingell and his staff for working closely with us to ensure that no one is left behind by the DTV transition.

I urge my colleagues to support S. 3663, the Short-term Analog Flash and Emergency Readiness Act.

The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill that was just passed by the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Education and Labor, and Ways and Means be discharged from further consideration of the Senate bill (S. 3712) to make a technical correction in the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill just passed by the House.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to acknowledge Mr. John Scherrei, Fire Chief of Santa Barbara County, upon reaching his retirement after 38 years of fighting fires.

Fire Chief Scherrei was appointed as the Santa Barbara County Fire Department Chief in 1999. He previously had a 28-year career with the City of Los Angeles Fire Department where he held all ranks from firefighter to Assistant Chief and was often the highest ranking fire official on duty for the Los Angeles area.

During Fire Chief Scherrei's time with Santa Barbara County, the Fire Department has added paramedics on its engine companies; created and integrated two brush clearing crews to the department; acquired the County's first high-rise tower ladder truck to its firefighting equipment inventory and has successfully deployed two firefighting and rescue helicopters.

Fire Chief Scherrei also oversaw the merger of the Solvang and Orcutt fire departments into the County Fire Department and guided the Fire Department through both recent wild land forest fires: the 2007 Zaca Fire--at about 240,000 acres the largest fire in the County's known history--and the 9,400-acre Gap Fire that occurred earlier this year. In both major tires, no lives were lost and no homes were destroyed. Most recently, Fire Chief Scherrei helped supervise efforts related to the 2,000-acre Tea fire, which damaged or destroyed 219 residences.

Over the last decade, Fire Chief Scherrei has worked with concerned citizens to form the Firefighter Alliance, which helps the department acquire urgent, unbudgeted tools and equipment and he has helped establish a firefighter Benevolent Association which is a charity to assist the fire family with personal loss, and family tragedy situations.

Fire Chief Scherrei was also instrumental in creating the County's first memorial event at the historic Courthouse Gardens regarding the September 11th terrorist attacks and also the 75th anniversary event commemorating the founding of the County Fire Department.

He has a master's degree in public administration from Cal Lutheran University and a bachelor's degree in sociology from California State University, Northridge. Fire Chief Scherrei also proudly served in the U.S. Marine Corps and is a Vietnam Veteran.

Madam Speaker, Chief Scherrei will retire from the County of Santa Barbara on January 23, 2009. To his wife, Piper; his four children; his 11 grandchildren; and to everyone whose lives have been enriched by him, Chief Scherrei is a man of courage, vigor, and guidance.

Throughout his tenure as Fire Chief, Mr. Scherrei has advanced the state of fire and all-hazard emergency response in the County. As a result, our residents, businesses and visitors have benefited from his leadership and duty to serve. Therefore, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Mr. John Scherrei for his 38 years as Fire Chief and honor his admirable service to the community and our country.

Madam Speaker, I rise again in reluctant support of this legislation.

I spoke earlier this week about the necessity for the underlying economic rescue legislation and I stand by that statement. If anything, the events of the last week have demonstrated that point even more vividly.

The credit crisis that is gripping America is choking Main Street and affecting Americans of all walks of life. Businesses, small and large alike, are finding it more and more difficult to get credit to run their businesses. This slowdown is costing American jobs. Just today the administration announced that another 159,000 jobs were lost in September, the largest monthly loss in more than 5 years. That means we've lost nearly 800,000 jobs in the first 9 months of this year.

I share my constituents' deep anger over this situation created by the greed of lenders and Wall Street players, the inattentiveness of Federal regulators, and the overall failure of the Bush administration's policies. We must act quickly and this proposal to meet this crisis is the best option we have. I know it would be much easier for me to take the easier, more popular route and vote against this measure, but I believe that would be the wrong choice for my district and my country for all the reasons I laid out earlier in the week.

This legislation adds a number of provisions to the economic rescue package the House considered on Monday, most of which are unrelated to the financial crisis. I support many of them and oppose others.

First, the bill temporarily raises deposit insurance from $100,000 to $250,000 in federally insured banks and credit unions. This is a good step to increase confidence in our banking system and a long overdue update to this critical protection for the assets of millions of American families and small businesses.

Second, the bill protects some 22 million taxpayers from the effect of the Alternative Minimum Tax. This is a tax provision intended to keep the wealthiest in our society from avoiding all income taxes but, because it hasn't been updated in decades, now threatens to ensnare millions of middle income taxpayers with higher taxes. I hope that in the next Congress we can permanently fix this increasingly difficult problem but we must at least stave off its ill effects for this year.

Third, the bill includes critically important mental health parity legislation. It would require insurance companies to treat coverage of mental health services the same as other medical services. As a public health nurse, I know there should be no distinction in the necessity of treating heart disease, bone disease, or mental health disease. I have long supported this effort to destigmatize mental health and ensure that Americans suffering from mental health problems can receive treatment. This is an extremely positive step forward for health care in America.

Fourth, the bill extends Federal support for the development of wind, solar, geothermal, and other renewable energy sources. I have been arguing for a 5-10 year extension of these provisions to encourage the development of alternative energy so we can finally break our crippling addiction to fossil fuels. Establishing a long term investment horizon for these efforts is critical to making that work. These extensions should be for longer than the 1-3 years included in this bill but they cannot be allowed to expire, which most would do by the end of this year.

Unfortunately, included in these energy tax provisions is support for so-called clean coal production and shale oil extraction. The oil and gas industry could not possibly be more profitable and needs more taxpayer support like Warren Buffett needs investment advice. In addition, both the oil and coal industries already received overly generous taxpayer subsidies in the Republican's 2005 energy bill. I do not support these provisions and believe they should be removed or repealed in the next Congress.

Also, much of the cost of these energy tax breaks are not offset so they will increase the already huge Bush deficits. In an effort to reinstate fiscal discipline, House Democrats have consistently voted to pay for these alternative energy production tax breaks by closing corporate loopholes and other measures. It's a shame the Senate cannot follow suit and we are faced with a take-it or leave-it choice on continuing these important alternative energy provisions.

Finally, I am very concerned about the inclusion of language giving the Securities and Exchange Commission, SEC, the go-ahead to alter or suspend so-called ``mark to market'' accounting principles. The SEC just issued what it calls ``clarifications'' on these rules at the behest of the financial services industry and I believe this could be a big mistake. Investors simply must be able to trust that a company's financial statements give a clear and accurate portrait of the health of the company and ``mark to market'' is part of ensuring that is the case. I understand that today's market conditions make establishing prices for securities difficult, but we have to be careful that we don't enable the kind of opaque accounting that has led to numerous financial debacles in recent years.

Despite my concerns about these provisions, I still believe it is in the best interests of the country to pass this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise in very reluctant support of this bipartisan effort to address our nation's economic crisis.

I do so because the very core of our American economy is at risk and we must act now in order to prevent its collapse. This is the diagnosis presented to us by Treasury Secretary Paulson, Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke and countless economists. In my own survey of the finance and banking world, I have heard the same analysis of our current predicament and the need for Congress to act quickly.

What we face here is an economic meltdown brought on by a housing bubble, fueled in part by the subprime mortgage scandals, and made possible by the lack of regulatory oversight by the Bush Administration. Wall Street now sits on billions of dollars of mortgages it cannot price and it cannot sell. The response to this uncertainty has been a near freeze of credit markets, increasing unemployment and a slowing of our economy. Already, car, home, student and business loans are drying up across the economy and should this continue--or get worse--the markets would likely drop precipitously and the economy would come to a standstill or worse.

Obviously, my concern is not with the effect on large financial institutions. They got themselves into this mess and if we could just turn our head while they failed that would be fine with me. My concern is how this economic calamity would affect ordinary Americans. And here the prediction is truly dire.

If the Secretary is correct, lending would come to a near halt. That means it would be much, much more difficult--and expensive--to obtain loans to buy a car, a home or to run a business. Small, medium and large businesses alike would begin layoffs because the ability to obtain a loan is such a critical part of running a business today, much less growing a business. We have already seen over job losses of over 600,000 people in the U.S. this year. The unemployment rate in California has increased to 7.7 percent, the highest in over 12 years and up from 5.5 percent only 12 months ago.

Foreclosures would continue unabated. So far this year, over half a million foreclosures have been filed in California, and the state is on pace to see more than 841,000 foreclosure filings this year. Eight of the 10 metropolitan areas with the highest foreclosure rates in the nation are in California. As bad as those foreclosures are for the people losing their homes, they also contribute to the downward pressure on home values for other properties in the neighborhood, hurting homeowners who are totally innocent in all this.

In addition, more innocent and hardworking Americans could see their life savings sapped, as IRAs and 401Ks lose value in a plummeting stock market. And increased unemployment also means lower tax revenues and greater calls for government assistance, resulting in even more exploding federal deficits.

In short, we could be facing a huge recession if we're lucky, a depression if we aren't. This is what our economic leaders tell us is the future we face if we don't act now.

I share my constituents' disgust with this situation. The idea that hardworking taxpayers have to put their money at risk to stabilize the economy because of the bad choices, nefarious actions and utter incompetence of Wall Street, its regulators and the Bush Administration is nauseating. But, if Secretary Paulson and the others are correct, the alternative is much worse and a serious threat to every single American.

Madame Speaker, the proposal originally offered by President Bush to address this crisis was completely unacceptable. True to form, the President simply asked the Congress to provide him with a blank check, no questions asked.

The Administration wanted no oversight--by Congress, the courts or anyone--of how it would spend the money it asked for. It rejected calls to limit CEO pay in companies that would be bailed out by taxpayers. It refused to help the growing number of Americans facing foreclosure and the millions of Americans whose housing values affected by those foreclosures. And it failed to ensure taxpayers would benefit as much as the Wall Street firms getting this federal assistance.

The legislation before us today is very much the President's product. But Democrats have made critical improvements. Most importantly, the bill contains mechanisms to ensure taxpayers get their money back by requiring taxpayer ownership stakes in companies that benefit from this rescue plan, so if the companies return to profitability then taxpayers prosper as well. And it sets up insurance collections measures and a potential new tax on the financial services industry after 5 years if repayment of taxpayer rescue funds hasn't occurred.

We limit the compensation of top corporate executives whose companies benefit from taxpayer assistance, put a halt to ``golden parachutes,'' and require repayment of bonuses based on company profits that may vanish at a later date. We establish an oversight board and a special inspector general to oversee Secretary Paulson's actions, and require the details of his actions to be posted on the Internet.

The bill also should help small business and families that need credit by aiding smaller banks hurt by the mortgage crisis, expanding eligibility for mortgage refinancing help and encouraging loan servicers to make problem loans more affordable. While these steps are helpful to homeowners potentially facing foreclosure, they are critical to innocent families whose home values are plummeting from record foreclosure rates and abandoned, foreclosed properties in their neighborhoods.

Finally, while the immediate need is to stabilize the markets and get our economy back on track, we begin the process of reestablishing common sense regulation protecting

consumers and encouraging stability in our markets. Much of this current mess arises from the governing choices of President Bush and his party, especially their undying faith in deregulation and a systematic policy to dismantle vital consumer protections. That has to be reversed. On President Bush's watch we have seen widening income inequality, anemic job creation, skyrocketing energy prices, record federal budget deficits and now a potential historic financial meltdown. This record of failure is clear and we have to turn a page on it.

Madam Speaker, this is not an easy vote to cast, but it is necessary for the future stability of our economy and the lives of everyday Americans.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments on 40 years of success.

The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, SLOCOG, is an association of local governments in the San Luis Obispo County region. Its members include all 7 cities Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Mono Bay, Paso Robles, Pismo Beach and San Luis Obispo, as well as unincorporated areas of the County. SLOCOG provides transportation, public works, and environment planning and funding for the region, and serves as a forum for the resolution of regional issues.

Over the course of four decades, San Luis Obispo County residents have looked to SLOCOG to lead our community forward. They have adopted a regional infrastructure plan, and helped certify several important projects, including the Cuesta College siting plan, the Lopez Lake water project and numerous community sewer and water plans. In addition to preparing the region's infrastructure plan, SLOCOG works in coordination with local transportation agencies in the region, including the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority, the Air Pollution Control District, and the California Department of Transportation.

Since 1998, I have had the pleasure of working closely with SLOCOG to successfully address important regional priorities, such as the designation of Highway 1 north of the city of San Luis Obispo as a National Scenic Byway and All American Road, and securing Federal funding for such high priority regional transportation system improvements as the widening of Highway 46 East and the Santa Maria River Bridge, and bikeways, boardwalks and streetscapes throughout the region.

During its 40 years of existence, SLOCOG's activities have touched every aspect of the lives of the citizens of the Central Coast. I rise to express my appreciation and gratitude to its board members and staff, and applaud them for the work they continue to do to improve the economic well-being and quality of life of the residents of San Luis Obispo County.

Madam Speaker, in closing, I call upon my colleagues to join me in congratulating SLOCOG's past accomplishments and in wishing them the best of luck in the many years to come.

Madam Speaker, 750,000 American teenagers will become pregnant this year. This is clear evidence of a serious problem in our country. According to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, teen parents are less likely to complete their education and more likely to depend on welfare.

Unfortunately, for the last several years the Bush administration has insisted we waste money on abstinence-only education programs that the GAO has deemed ineffective. In fact, a University of Washington study revealed that students who receive comprehensive sex education are less likely to become teen parents than those who receive abstinence-only information.

Not surprisingly, my home State of California, which rejects title V abstinence-only funding, has a teen birth rate that is lower than the national average.

Madam Speaker, we need to teach our children commonsense decisionmaking skills and not withhold vitally important health information from them. I urge my colleagues to join me in rejecting any future funding for abstinence-only education. Instead, let's spend it where we will see real results.

I thank the chairman of our Health subcommittee for recognizing me.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6568, for which I am proud to be the lead Democratic sponsor.

I want to commend Congressman Kevin Brady for his tireless work on behalf of pulmonary hypertension awareness over the last several years. As the name of this legislation indicates, our dear friend and former colleague, Tom Lantos, was a champion of working against this disease because of a very personal connection, his lovely granddaughter, Charity.

I am so proud that we could help the Lantos family fulfill their goal of seeing this bill acted on during the 110th Congress. I am sure that many of us will remember forever the day that Charity testified, that was in December of 2005.

She testified before the Energy and Commerce Committee. She so eloquently relayed to us the challenges of getting properly diagnosed and then adjusting to her daily complex routine in order to cope with her illness at the same time she pursued her musical career.

Pulmonary hypertension is a very rare disease, which is marked by increased blood pressure in the pulmonary artery, as has been described. There are very few treatments available, and this legislation is aimed at improving research and awareness about the disease so that we can find more effective treatments and, one day, a cure.

I want to thank the Energy and Commerce majority and minority staff for working hard to bring this bill up today, for the ranking member of the minority Health committee for insisting that it come before us today, and for the lead sponsor, again, Kevin Brady, for his efforts on behalf of the pulmonary hypertension community.

Of course, we thank the Lantos family for their advocacy on behalf of pulmonary hypertension, and the efforts to ensure this bill's passage in Tom Lantos' memory.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2994, the National Pain Care Policy Act.

I want to thank the chairman of our subcommittee, Mr. Pallone, for yielding me the time and also for his leadership in making sure this bill has gotten to this point.

I thank the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Dingell, and our staff who are here and have been working diligently on both sides of the aisle to get this bill to where it is today. I thank our colleague from Michigan, Mike Rogers, for his work in paving the way for the passage of this bill today.

The National Pain Care Policy Act would take important steps to improve the coordination of research and treatment of pain. More than 75 million Americans suffer from pain, both chronic and acute, making pain the most common reason Americans access or try to access the health care system.

Yet they often face significant barriers in receiving the proper diagnosis and treatment. Pain is often, too often, only researched and considered as a symptom of another disease, and best practices haven't always been shared across disciplines.

H.R. 2994 would amplify research at the National Institutes of Health and also improve education and outreach efforts for health professionals and the general public alike. I am proud of the significant support we have received in the community from various advocacy groups, health professionals and providers.

I urge all of our colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2994.

American Association

of Nurse Anesthetists,

Washington, DC, September 22, 2008.

Hon. Lois Capps,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Congresswoman Capps: On behalf of the more than 39,000

members of the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists

(AANA), I am pleased to express the Association's support for

HR 2994, the National Pain Care Policy Act of 2007.

The AANA is the professional association for Certified

Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs) and student nurse

anesthetists, representing over 90 percent of the nurse

anesthetists in the United States. CRNAs are advanced

practice nurses who administer about 30 million anesthetics

to patients each year in the U.S., provide assessment and

evaluation for acute and chronic pain and deliver pain

management services, and are the sole anesthesia providers in

most rural hospitals, affording these medical facilities

obstetrical, surgical, and trauma stabilization, and pain

management capabilities.

AANA is pleased to support HR 2994, which seeks to

eliminate barriers to pain care and improve pain care

research, education, and clinical practice. Recognizing that

pain is both a significant public health challenge and a

burden to millions of Americans' quality of life, we believe

that adoption of the National Pain Care Policy Act would help

focus our nation's healthcare research in a new and important

way on the cause, prevention, treatment and management of

pain. As recognized experts in the field of anesthesia and

pain management, America's CRNAs have made substantial

contributions to clinical practice in pain care, and help

provide millions of patients relief from pain. As HR 2994

would help focus national resources on research and translate

research findings into improved clinical practice, we ask

that upon the measure's enactment that representatives of the

profession of nurse anesthesia be represented on government

panels and councils that the legislation authorizes, such as

the National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Pain Care

Research Advisory Committee, the development of the Institute

of Medicine Conference on Pain, the development of the

Secretary of Health and Human Services' Public Awareness

Campaign on Pain Management, and any others intended to guide

and lead this critical healthcare policy agenda. In addition,

we ask that grants that the legislation would authorize for

expanding education and training to health care professionals

in pain care also be made available to accredited nurse

anesthesia educational programs.

The AANA applauds the work of the Committee on Energy and

Commerce for its bipartisan effort in advancing the National

Pain Care Policy Act and will continue working toward its

enactment. If we can be of further assistance, please contact

Frank Purcell, AANA Senior Director Federal Government

Affairs.

Sincerely,

Jackie S. Rowles,

President.