Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I was not able to be present for the following rollcall vote on February 25, 2014 and would like the record to reflect that I would have voted as follows: rollcall No. 63: ``yes''; and rollcall No. 64: ``no.''

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment. As we know, California is in the middle of a severe drought, an emergency with no significant relief in sight. We must do all we can to responsibly manage this situation, working with State and local officials to ensure that our farmers, our businesses, and our constituents have the resources they need now and in the future.

While we work to address the current drought situation, the emergency, we know that severe droughts like this one will only become more frequent in the future due to climate change; and we must do all we can as we deal with this emergency to also prepare for the next one.

My amendment simply requires a study of the resiliency and adaptability of Bureau of Reclamation facilities and projects in California to predict changes to the quality, quantity, or reliability of water resources. Simply put, it will look at how well the Bureau is prepared for the expected impacts of climate change.

Like it or not, climate change is real, and it is already happening. We have seen the evidence all around us in more extreme storms, in wildfires, in sea level rising and severe drought.

Water is gold in California. Scientists have long warned that climate change will make droughts, shortages of water, particularly in the Western United States, longer, stronger, and more frequent. So rather than bury our heads in the sand denying the science, we should be doing all we can to make our infrastructure more resilient and adaptable.

At every point in our water infrastructure, from reservoirs to kitchen faucets, we need to find sustainable ways to lessen the impact of severe droughts like this one. That means more conservation, more efficiency, and more recycling, to be sure, but it also means increasing the resiliency and adaptability of existing infrastructure to maximize the limited resources we have.

That is what my amendment is all about--preparing for the future. Simply lurching from crisis to crisis, from drought to drought, is no way to govern, and that is exactly what we have been doing. According to a FEMA study, every dollar spent on predisaster mitigation reduces the cost of future damages by $4.

The drought emergency may not be destroying structures and infrastructures, like some of our extreme storms do, but it is definitely causing serious damage to our crops, to our critical habitats, to our livelihoods. Yet the underlying bill does nothing to address these serious problems, and it does nothing to alleviate the drought emergency in California, and it does nothing to prevent any in the future. Instead, it uses the drought emergency as an excuse to repeal Federal environmental laws to preempt California law, and it would set a dangerous precedent that would have lasting implications on how water is managed throughout the West. That is why the bill is opposed by the State of California and numerous local government agencies, fishing and hunting organizations, editorial boards, and national environmental groups. Rarely has such a diverse coalition come together to oppose a piece of legislation.

Mr. Chairman, instead of wasting time on a divisive bill that is going nowhere, we should be working together to find comprehensive solutions that get our communities the resources they need.

I want to be clear, my amendment does not fix the serious problems with this underlying bill, and I will oppose the bill even if my amendment is adopted. But my amendment will at least move us one step closer to properly preparing for future drought emergencies, so I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time remains?

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi), my colleague.

Mr. Chairman, this is a straightforward amendment. It simply requires a study of adaptability and resiliency of the Bureau of Reclamation's water infrastructure in California.

Scientists are warning us that severe droughts like this one will only grow more severe and frequent in the future. We have a responsibility to our farmers, our businesses, and all of our constituents to do everything possible to prepare for these impacts. My amendment is a step in this direction, so I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the Pacific Conservatory of the Performing Arts (PCPA) located at Allan Hancock College in Santa Maria, California.

During its 50 years, PCPA has become a nexus of artistic talent on the Central Coast. Over the course of that time it has nurtured thousands of students and provided an oasis for patrons of the arts.

Founded in 1964 by Donovan Marley, the newly formed company quickly gained local support, and in 1965 Santa Maria voters approved $1 million in funding to build the Performing Arts Center building on the Allan Hancock college campus. It was eventually named the Marian Theatre, after Allan Hancock's wife, Marian Hancock. In the summer of 1974, an outdoor theater was constructed in just 58 days to host outdoor summer performances in Solvang, CA. Decades later, these venues continue to put on incredible performances for Central Coast residents.

The heritage of PCPA, however, is not just in landmark buildings, but in the cultural legacy that it has provided for generations. In fact, many of the nation's greatest actors had their beginnings at PCPA and its alumni include Academy Award winners Robin Williams, Kathy Bates, and Mercedes Ruehl.

Many of us on the Central Coast remember our first experience at a PCPA performance, and I know that it will continue to delight us with its excellence for years to come. I applaud the PCPA for its years of dedication to bringing the performing arts to the Central Coast with an unmatched level of quality, passion, and talent. Congratulations on fifty years of excellence.

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

I rise to speak in opposition to H.R. 7.

H.R. 7 is not based on fact. The Affordable Care Act does not secretly funnel taxpayer dollars to fund abortions, and it is not based on the real

experiences of American women and families. They want to make their own personal health care decisions in consultation with their doctors and their spiritual advisors, not with their Congressmen.

Instead, this bill would squarely put the government, namely the IRS, in the exam room by effectively raising the taxes of those who choose an insurance plan that happens to cover abortion services. That includes hardworking men, women, and families who would be penalized, and it would burden small businesses, making each one second-guess its current insurance plan. It would make them change their coverage if they want to keep their health insurance coverage affordable. Simply put, H.R. 7 would dictate what individuals can do with their own private dollars.

Instead of this cynical attack on women's personal decisionmaking, we should be empowering our Nation's families by focusing on the economy, by strengthening the middle class, and by helping parents provide the best for their kids. It is really time to stop reverting back to the culture wars and to start trusting our Nation's women, our Nation's families and small businesses to make their own personal health care decisions.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Madam Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), who is the ranking member of the Health Subcommittee of Energy and Commerce.

Madam Speaker, I am now very pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), a real champion for women's issues.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

I am now pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague from Florida (Ms. Castor).

May I inquire how much time is remaining?

Madam Speaker, H.R. 7 is not about taxpayer funding. It is about what women, families, and small businesses can do with their own money, their own private dollars, and it is about keeping Congress and the IRS out of the doctor's office.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to start trusting America's women to make their own decisions.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this dangerous bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Thank you to my colleague for yielding and to Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member DeFazio for the work that has gone on in bringing this bill to the floor today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my legislation, H.R. 3008. My legislation will authorize the Forest Service to convey a small parcel of land on the perimeter of the Los Padres National Forest in my district to a local nonprofit organization, the White Lotus Foundation.

Over 30 years ago, the White Lotus Foundation purchased property on the border of the Los Padres National Forest in the hills above Santa Barbara, California. Soon after acquiring the property, the foundation received notice of a small encroachment onto a piece of Forest Service land that is detached from the rest of the forest. This encroachment is located on the only road that allows White Lotus and the public access to and from the foundation's property.

Due to the steep topography of the area, there are no other reasonable alternatives that would retain public access to the facility. One piece of the encroachment lies on flat ground that holds equipment for fire and flood emergencies and provides access to a water pump and other necessary equipment. There are no other viable areas to move this equipment. So without this small piece of land, the facility would be forced to close its doors.

White Lotus and the Forest Service have spent several years searching for an administrative solution, but have determined that legislation is the only viable way to permanently resolve this matter. My legislation simply authorizes the Forest Service to enter into a land exchange with the White Lotus Foundation for land worth no less than the appraised market value.

If this land exchange does not occur within 2 years, the Forest Service will sell the small parcel of land to the foundation at fair market value. Prior to the exchange or sale of this land, however, the Forest Service must first certify that it is in the public interest, and it can also impose additional conditions it deems appropriate.

Also, it is important to note that if the land sale does go forward, it will not cost taxpayers a single dime. The legislation requires White Lotus to pay for the land, the survey, and all administrative and related costs. There are no exemptions from NEPA or any other environmental laws, and the land in question is not protected wilderness or any other specifically designated area.

This is a straightforward bill to provide a reasonable solution for the White Lotus Foundation and the Forest Service. In fact, nearly identical legislation, sponsored by our former Republican colleague, Elton Gallegly, passed this House unanimously last Congress. The area is now in my congressional district, and I am pleased to sponsor the bill this Congress.

Again, I thank the chairman and the ranking member for bringing the bill to the floor, and I do urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Sara Miller McCune for a life and career distinguished by tremendous accomplishment, success and generosity.

Mrs. Miller McCune is a prominent business leader, charitable philanthropist and valued member of the Central Coast community. Originally from Queens, New York, Sara and her late husband, George McCune, founded the renowned SAGE Publications in 1965. Since that time, SAGE Publications has flourished as a prestigious institution of academic publishing, employing nearly 1,000 people around the world. The company publishes hundreds of journals and has thousands of academic titles in print. Sara is also the founder of the Miller-McCune Center for Research, Media and Public Policy and the SAGE Center for the Study of the Mind at the University of California Santa Barbara.

Mrs. Miller McCune's philanthropy is far-reaching and has been aimed at improving educational opportunities for all. Her giving represents her commitment to the underprivileged, and fulfilling achievement gaps for students everywhere. Sara and her husband established the McCune Foundation in the 1990s with the goal of empowering underserved populations through targeted grant-making. Today, the Foundation supports a number of community building initiatives that address a wide range of issues up and down the Central Coast. Additionally, Mrs. McCune has endowed a competitive internship program at the University of California, Santa Barbara to provide service-learning opportunities for students to give back to their community.

Sara is also a supporter of Cottage Hospital and the Granada Theater in my hometown of Santa Barbara. These are only a few of the many examples where Sara has proven her benevolent spirit and we cannot thank her enough.

I am pleased to celebrate Sara's countless achievements as she is honored by her friends and colleagues tonight. She is truly a pioneer in the world of publishing and a treasured member of our community.

Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that power generation produces the vast majority of carbon pollution that is causing climate change. In order to mitigate the impacts of climate change, we have no choice but to find cleaner, more sustainable energy sources. The good news is we have been making progress. For example, thanks to both Federal and private investments, my district on California's central coast is now home to two of the largest operating solar farms in the world, and more are on the way.

I had the pleasure of visiting these facilities last week, and they are truly a sight to behold. Together, the California Valley Solar Ranch and the Topaz Solar Farms are already generating 550 megawatts of electricity and powering hundreds of thousands of California homes. The clean energy generated from these two projects alone is equivalent to removing 135,000 cars from our roads. Not to mention that these projects have also created hundreds of local construction jobs.

There is no silver bullet to stopping climate change, but renewable energy is certainly a big step in the right direction. I urge my colleagues to join in in helping to stop climate change. Let's invest in a clean energy future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to give voice to the many out-of-work Americans whose unemployment insurance was allowed to expire.

James, from Santa Maria, California, wrote the following:

I started working at the age of 16 because our father had

died. I had, up until April 2012, gone to work every day. I

am no slouch. I am a citizen, a taxpayer, a U.S. Army

veteran.

But now, his unemployment insurance benefit is gone. For James and for millions of Americans like him, we must act.

Unfortunately, House leadership has ignored this plight and, in doing so, these hardworking Americans will lose the means to keep job searching.

We must extend this lifeline for the long-term unemployed, their children, for our local economies, which gain $3 of economic benefits for every $2 invested in the program. The Senate is on the verge of doing just that. With bipartisan support, we must follow their lead.

James signed his letter to me in bold, capital letters: ``PLEASE HELP.'' I urge House leadership and my colleagues to do just that.

Mr. Speaker, today marks the 100th consecutive legislative day the Safe Climate Caucus has spoken on the House floor calling for action to address climate change.

The science, itself, is clear: climate change is already contributing to significant environmental changes--unprecedented droughts, floods, and hurricanes, to name a few.

But climate change is not only a serious environmental problem. It is a serious economic problem as well. American businesses, large and small, understand this threat; and they are responding accordingly. They are increasing their energy efficiency, reducing pollution, and implementing more sustainable business practices. American businesses understand that the changing climate is already hurting their bottom line, and they are taking action to strengthen their competitiveness and their resiliency.

Congress should be doing the same. Yet our majority continues to stick its head in the sand and do nothing. Climate change poses a real and immediate threat to our economy, and we really can't afford to wait any longer. I urge my colleagues to join with American businesses in taking action now to address this urgent problem.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act is working for many of my constituents on the central coast of California, like Danna in San Luis Obispo County, who tells me she will be saving 40 percent on her family's premiums. It is working for the Pacelas in Solvang, who tell me they now have better coverage while saving $8,000 a year on their premiums. It is working for the thousands of families whose young adult children can continue on their parents' plans, and for everyone who has a preexisting condition who now cannot be turned down for coverage.

I know that this is not the case for all central coast residents, especially those who may have received cancelation notices this year, either because their insurer is only selling in the exchanges, or because the insurance companies have stopped offering plans in our area all together. Cancelation of these plans has caused real pain and confusion for our constituents in California who are faced with Covered California marketplace options that have different provider networks or different premium costs.

After hearing numerous stories from the families I represent, it is clear we must address this problem with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act so we can protect all California families and businesses. The President has offered an administrative fix to this issue to allow insurance companies to offer plans to those already enrolled for the next year, but States will be the final decisionmakers.

That is why I led a letter, with Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren and 22 of our California colleagues, to Covered California's leadership asking them to implement this administrative fix without delay.

Covered California has led the way in bringing new, quality health care opportunities to millions of Californians. The Web site is working, and enrollment is steadily increasing. But with over 1 million Californians receiving cancelation notices of their current plans, we must and we will do more to ensure that no one is left without the opportunity for affordable coverage. These families were told that if they liked their plan they can keep it, and that is a promise we must keep for them.

I thank my colleague from Colorado for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule and to the two underlying bills. In fact, these bills are, themselves, solutions in search of problems. They tear down environmental protections and they restrict public participation in an attempt to expand oil and gas production.

But the truth is, oil production on Federal lands has gone up significantly since 2008, and Federal regulations have not stopped States from implementing their own fracking rules.

These bills are nothing more than reckless giveaways to big oil and gas companies that put American families and the environment at risk.

H.R. 2728, for example, would preemptively prohibit the Federal Government from setting even minimal safety standards for fracking. Fracking, whether onshore or offshore, poses serious environmental and public health risks that we don't fully understand now.

We know very little about the environmental and public health impacts of onshore fracking, and we know even less about offshore fracking. Offshore fracking has been occurring for over 20 years off the California coast, with at least four fracs approved as recently as this year.

Federal regulators and the public only recently became aware of these activities, thanks to FOIA requests released last summer. We know virtually nothing about the size of these fracs, the chemicals being used, or the impacts on the marine environment.

They have been approved with categorical exemptions and decades-old permits that are woefully inadequate, and that is why I offered an amendment to H.R. 2728 to stop these activities until a full environmental review is conducted. Unfortunately, my amendment was not made in order, which is disappointing.

If oil companies get to inject millions of gallons of fracking fluids into

our public lands, then the least we can and must do is study the impacts of those activities. Whether it is done offshore or onshore, we have a responsibility to ensure that fracking is safe, but the bills before us this week greatly undercut this crucial responsibility.

So I urge my colleagues to stop this reckless giveaway to Big Oil, and oppose this rule and the underlying bills.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to tell the story of one of my constituents' experiences with the Affordable Care Act, Allan, from Santa Barbara County.

Prior to the Affordable Care Act, his wife was paying $20,000 a year in insurance premiums. She has a preexisting condition. Even though it costs so much, she was thankful to have any coverage at all.

When Covered California, our online marketplace, opened, she made a call, looked at her options, and found a plan that works for her. This plan saved them $8,000 a year, and it was a much better plan.

We know that the rollout nationally has been sloppy, that the law is not perfect, and that there are real issues we must fix. We must fix those problems without diminishing the true benefits the law is giving to families in my district and across the country. So now is the time to work together to ensure all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care.

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

I rise in strong support of S. 252, as amended.

As amended, this bipartisan legislation would address critical health care issues through the authorization or reauthorization of three different programs.

Title I of the legislation reauthorizes the Prematurity Research Expansion and Education for Mothers who deliver Infants Early Act, better known as the PREEMIE Act. The PREEMIE Act was initially enacted in 2006 in response to an alarming and rising number of premature deaths. Premature deaths, those that occur prior to 37 weeks of pregnancy, are the leading cause of newborn deaths and long-term neurological disabilities in children.

Since 2006, efforts across the Department of Health and Human Services have contributed to 6 straight years of decline in the preterm birth rate. There is no question we have made progress in addressing preterm birth in this country, yet one in eight babies is still born prematurely. Prevention remains a challenge due to the numerous, complex, and poorly-understood causes.

As a nurse, I know too well the physical cost of prematurity on both mother and child, the emotional costs it takes on parents, and the fiscal cost that prematurity plays in our health care system. Reauthorization of the PREEMIE Act is necessary to continue the progress we have made to date and to do better by improving the health of mothers and babies.

Title II of S. 252, as amended, calls for the establishment of a National Pediatric Research Network at the National Institutes of Health. This title builds upon the strong body of pediatric research the agency currently supports and strengthens it to improve research and clinical trials on pediatric diseases, train pediatric researchers, and to disseminate research findings quickly so that all children may benefit.

By developing a nationwide network of pediatric researchers, renewed efforts can be focused to develop treatments and cures for pediatric diseases and conditions, especially those that are rare.

Children have unique health care experiences, treatment needs, and research challenges; and while public and private research has come a long way on pediatric diseases over the years, we know that we are still far behind on important diagnostics, cures, and treatments for far too many ailing children. That is why this title is so important.

Many of my colleagues know that this legislation is particularly important for one family in my congressional district, the Strongs. Victoria and Bill Strong are focused every day on getting the best care and treatment for their young daughter, Gwendolyn, who has spinal muscular atrophy, the same condition that my colleague Mr. Upton just referred to in his district. Her diagnosis has fundamentally changed the daily lives of their family, her school, and our Santa Barbara community.

The low prevalence of these diseases makes them particularly hard to research, but for those affected, like Gwendolyn and others, a new cure or treatment could mean a world of difference. This title is common sense for Gwendolyn and all the other kids out there facing a rare medical diagnosis, and their families. As title II of this legislation, the National Pediatric Research Network Act is an important step forward to helping these families and those who may develop these diseases long into the future.

I noticed over the weekend there was a marathon that Gwendolyn and her father participated in in my community to raise money for the same purpose as this research would do. So it is both from the public and the private side that there is a concerted effort toward this end.

This network, based upon H.R. 225, bipartisan legislation I authored with my colleague Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, passed the House as a stand-alone bill on suspension earlier this year with strong bipartisan support. I am so pleased to see it included in this package today.

Title III of the legislation ensures the National Institutes of Health can continue to care for chimpanzees that have been retired from research. In 2000, Congress passed the Chimpanzee Health Improvement Maintenance and Protection, or CHIMP, Act. The CHIMP Act established a sanctuary system for the lifetime care of chimpanzees no longer used in research, limited NIH spending on care for these chimpanzees, and required matching funds from nonprofit entities contracted by NIH to operate the sanctuary system.

Today, NIH owns or supports hundreds of chimpanzees. Following a report from the Institute of Medicine, NIH has concluded the vast majority of its chimpanzees should be permanently retired from research. This title makes it possible for NIH to continue caring for the more than 100 chimpanzees currently in sanctuary and transition other chimpanzees to sanctuary over time by authorizing appropriate amounts of spending for fiscal years 2014 through 2018 out of the totals made available to the agency. It is a commonsense and humane measure to fulfill the mission of the Institutes and responsibly tend to the chimps in our care.

I want to commend Chairman Upton, Chairman Pitts, Ranking Member Waxman, and Ranking Member Pallone for their leadership in bringing this bipartisan package of public health legislation to the floor, the staff on both sides of the aisle who have worked so hard on this legislation, and the Senate Health Committee leadership of Senators Harkin and Alexander for their efforts on these measures. Moreover, Energy and Commerce members Congresswoman Eshoo, Congressman Lance, Congresswoman DeGette, and Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers are also to be commended for their work on the PREEMIE Act and the National Pediatric Research Network titles.

These are critical bills, all of which deserve strong bipartisan support. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting S. 252, as amended, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I submit for the Record letters of support from the following organizations: the Children's Hospital Association, the Coalition for Pediatric Medical Research, FightSMA, the Humane Society of the United States, the March of Dimes, and a joint letter from several health professional and public health organizations.

I urge my colleagues to support this important package of public health legislation.

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

Children's Hospital

Association,

November 11, 2013.

Hon. Fred Upton, Chairman,

House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, DC.

Hon. Henry Waxman, Ranking Member,

House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Upton and Ranking Member Waxman: On behalf of

over 220 of the nation's children's hospitals, I am writing

to urge House passage of S. 252, as amended by the House.

This bill would advance two important priorities for

children's health: enactment of the National Pediatric

Research Network Act and the Prematurity Research Expansion

and Education for Mothers who deliver Infants Early (PREEMIE)

Reauthorization Act.

The National Pediatric Research Network Act would enhance

the national commitment to pediatric research by authorizing

the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to competitively

select pediatric research consortia, each of which would be

comprised of multiple institutions and focused on a specific

research agenda from basic to translational research. As you

know, children are not just ``small adults.'' They require

highly-specialized care and equally specialized research.

Despite children accounting for nearly 20 percent of our

nation's population, the NIH has historically invested a far

smaller percentage of research dollars--between five and 10

percent--in pediatric biomedical research. As a result it is

far more difficult to attract new researchers into the field

of pediatrics, launch and sustain basic and translational

research endeavors and, ultimately, improve the health of our

nation's children by developing safe and effective therapies

and treatments. The National Pediatric Research Network Act

would help provide the infrastructure--including training and

support for younger investigators--that is needed to advance

the field for decades to come.

The original PREEMIE Act (P.L. 109-450) brought the first-

ever national focus to prematurity prevention. Preterm

delivery can happen to any pregnant woman, and in more than

half the cases the underlying causes are unknown. Preterm

birth is the leading cause of neonatal death, and those

babies who survive are more likely to suffer from

intellectual and physical disabilities. Since enactment of

the PREEMIE Act in 2006, the preterm birth rate has declined,

and now stands below 12 percent for the first time in nearly

a decade. The PREEMIE Reauthorization Act will continue to

fuel our progress by supporting federal research and

promoting known interventions and community initiatives.

Reauthorizing the PREEMIE Act is critical to protect and

maintain the current federal preterm birth-related activities

and lay the foundation for future investments.

The Children's Hospital Association is pleased to offer its

support of S. 252, and hopes Congress will enact this

important legislation. On behalf of our member hospitals,

thank you for your continued commitment to improving

children's health.

Sincerely,

Jim Kaufman,

Vice President, Public Policy,

Children's Hospital Association.

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

I rise in strong support of the HIV Organ Policy Equity Act, commonly known as the ``HOPE Act.'' The HOPE Act is a critical step towards improving the health and well-being of persons living with HIV and AIDS and of strengthening our Nation's organ transplant system.

Many of us remember the fear and worry that surrounded AIDS in the 1980s. At first, no one even knew what caused AIDS, and the diagnosis was considered a swift death sentence. In that time of fear and the unknown, a blanket ban was placed on transplanting any HIV-positive organs, even for the purposes of research. However, in the last 25 years, medical research and technology has transformed HIV/AIDS care and treatment. Now, thanks to these breakthroughs, HIV is a more chronic condition. This has led to improved life expectancies-- something we can and should celebrate--but it also means that HIV- positive people are more likely to encounter medical complications as they age. They face unique complications as the powerful drugs that keep their HIV at bay often take a hard toll on their bodies, putting them at increased risk for ailments like kidney and liver disease, and for some of these problems, the only treatment is to wait on the same long waiting lists, as all Americans do, for an organ transplant.

There might be a better way.

According to transplant experts, each year, we toss out hundreds of HIV-positive organs that could otherwise be viable for transplantation into other HIV-positive people. These organs have the potential to save lives and lessen the transplant waiting lists for all Americans, but, instead, they are wasted because of the archaic, blanket ban that prohibits even the research to see if they could be used by those who already are HIV positive. That is why we need to pass the HOPE Act today.

The HOPE Act would create a pathway, grounded in medical science, to research the feasibility and safety of positive-to-positive organ transplantation. Think about it. This is a chance to possibly shorten the waiting lists for everyone waiting for an organ, to deliver better health outcomes for those in need, and to lower health care costs by moving individuals off of the dialysis rolls, all while maintaining the safety and integrity of our current organ transplantation system. That is what the HOPE Act can and will help to do. It is common sense and fiscally responsible. It is the right thing to do for all Americans who are awaiting transplants.

I would like to thank and acknowledge Senator Boxer and Senator Coburn for championing this issue in the Senate. With their leadership, the HOPE Act passed by unanimous consent in June. Also, I would especially like to thank for their leadership my colleagues Mr. Harris, who is the Republicans' lead on this bill, and also Dr. Burgess, who is a cosponsor and a strong supporter of this bill. Finally, I would like to thank all of the advocates who have worked so hard in support of this legislation.

I am pleased to stand with an incredibly broad coalition of health professionals and HIV/AIDS advocates in backing S. 330. The HOPE Act is a commonsense bill that creates a path forward for research on this issue. It has strong support on both sides of the Capitol and on both sides of the aisle. It is a critically important issue. It is an opportunity to save lives. That is

why I am urging a ``yes'' vote today on S. 330, the HOPE Act.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield whatever time she may consume to my colleague from Washington, D.C., Eleanor Holmes Norton.

I would ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania if he has more speakers?

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Is the gentleman prepared to close?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit for the Record letters of support from the United Network for Organ Sharing and a coalition of health professional and HIV/AIDS advocacy organizations.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important commonsense legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Richmond, VA, January 18, 2013.

RE UNOS Endorsement of Your Legislation to Address HIV+ Organ

Donation and Research

Hon. Barbara Boxer,

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

Hon. Tom Coburn,

U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

Hon. Lois Capps,

House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,

Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Boxer, Senator Coburn, and Representative

Capps: UNOS is pleased to learn of your efforts to take an

important step to make more organs available for

transplantation. As you know, more than 110,000 Americans are

currently on the waiting list for organ transplants--far more

than are likely to find a matching donor in time. Allowing

the careful, targeted use of these organs makes it possible

to save more lives.

If your legislation is successful, UNOS, as the contractor

for the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, stands

ready to work with our HRSA partners to establish appropriate

allocation policies, including safeguards to protect

uninfected recipients from inadvertently receiving HIV-

infected organs or vessels.

We look forward to working with you to advance this

important legislation.

United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) is the private,

non-profit organization that manages the nation's organ

transplant system under contract with the federal government.

Our mission is to advance organ availability and

transplantation by uniting and supporting our communities for

the benefit of patients through education, technology and

policy development.

Sincerely,

John P. Roberts, MD,

President, United Network for Organ Sharing.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to celebrate the dedication of the Warren J. Baker Center for Science and Mathematics in honor of my dear friend President Emeritus Warren J. Baker.

The dedication of the Warren J. Baker Center for Science and Mathematics is a testimony to President Baker's legacy and tireless work on behalf of STEM education for over 30 years at Cal Poly. Under his leadership, several of Cal Poly's programs have become known as some of the best in the country including engineering, architecture and agriculture. His outstanding service to the students and vision for the campus will be felt for decades to come through the work of the Baker Center.

The Center's location in the heart of the campus symbolizes the role of mathematics and science at the nexus of Cal Poly's curriculum. The state-of-the-art center will exemplify the University's ``Learn by Doing'' educational philosophy by providing an environment that inspires innovation, collaboration and practical application. Not only will the center enhance the education of countless students that will pass through its doors, but our community will owe a great debt of gratitude for providing a strong workforce for the future. Simply put, the Baker Center will transform the way science and mathematics are taught and will no doubt play a prominent role in many promising academic careers for years to come.