Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H. Res. 635, a resolution honoring the month of Ramadan, the Islamic holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal. This is an important resolution in support of our Muslim friends, neighbors and citizens.

In my district we have many distinguished Muslim residents who contribute extensively to our community. They work tirelessly to educate our community about their faith and work to build interfaith relationships across our communities. For this I am deeply grateful. Their efforts, along with those of other people of faith in my district, are enabling us to build a strong and pluralistic environment that promotes tolerance and diversity.

In this time of international conflict, it is critical that we demonstrate solidarity with and support for members of the Muslim community in the United States and throughout the world. In two weeks I will be bringing faith leaders from across my district, including Jews, Muslims, Christians and Buddhists, to Washington, DC, for a day of discussions with Members of Congress and advocacy organizations to help further the important interfaith work already underway throughout the Central Coast of California.

I am grateful for all of the people of faith in my district who are working to promote peace and justice through understanding.

May this month of Ramadan bring us all closer to realizing a peaceful society at home and abroad.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this important resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise to discuss an important public health issue, particularly for young women and girls.

As a mother, grandmother and a former school nurse, I know all about the annual back-to-school shopping ritual. Each fall, kids and parents hit the stores to stock up on school supplies and new clothes. Unfortunately, this fall there's a new must-have item being advertised, and believe it or not, it's Camel No. 9 cigarettes.

It's being brought to our daughters, granddaughters and nieces by the folks at R.J. Reynolds, the same company that thought cartoon character Joe Camel was a responsible product spokesman.

Camel No. 9 cigarettes are just the pink version of Joe Camel, or as one Oregon newspaper put it, ``Barbie Camel.'' And R.J. Reynolds' tobacco marketing strategy is complete with fashionable giveaways to young women that include berry lip balm and mini hot pink purses.

The tag line for Camel No. 9 is ``light and luscious,'' which sounds more like a tasty treat than a cancer-causing cigarette. Now there's even a Camel No. 9 stiletto line which evokes images of the sexy shoes.

Well, I'd like to remind R.J. Reynolds that there's nothing sexy about emphysema or dying prematurely from cancer. No amount of pretty pink packaging can obscure the fact that lung cancer is the number one cancer killer among American women, a truth that underscores big tobacco's desperate search for new smokers.

While we expect this kind of sleazy marketing from tobacco companies, I've been terribly disappointed that they've found a new and unexpected ally in women's fashion magazines. These magazines set the styles and trends for the country. They have historically served as legitimate sources for information on women's health and fitness, and they've sold out the well-being of their readers to help big tobacco in their search for new victims.

So back in June, 40 of my colleagues joined me in writing to the publishers of 11 leading women's magazines. We asked them to voluntarily stop accepting misleading advertising for deadly cigarettes, particularly for Camel No. 9. When not one of these magazines bothered to formally respond to our first letter, we wrote again.

This time seven of them did respond, but none have committed to drop the ads. Several defended themselves by pointing to their editorials on the dangers of smoking, but how can a young impressionable reader possibly take that seriously when they can flip the page and find an advertisement for cigarettes that make them look as sexy and sophisticated as perfume?

Just look at this ad printed in the October edition of ``Glamour.'' This ``Dressed to the 9s'' piece encourages the ``fashion forward'' woman to embrace a vintage look and more closely resembles the magazine's regular editorial content on the latest fashions. The ad also helpfully recommends starting a vintage makeover with a little black dress.

Quite frankly, it would be more appropriate to exhibit how it would look with black lungs and yellowed teeth readers would have after a life of smoking.

This sort of deceptive advertising is brilliant in the eyes of marketers but shameful in the eyes of anyone who cares about public health. These ads are obviously targeted to appeal to young women and girls.

And although this magazine may claim that girls and teens are only a small fraction of their readership, I think that everyone can relate to the familiar scene of a young girl in line at the grocery store with her mom, flipping through the magazines that the cool older girls are reading. This is exactly what they would see in this issue of ``Glamour.'' There's two more pages I don't have time to flip through myself.

Newsweek columnist Anna Quindlen recently wrote on Camel No. 9 cigarettes and this deliberate effort to appeal to young women and girls. In her piece she noted that her own 18-year-old daughter had tried Camel No. 9, describing its taste and smell with words like perfume, caramel, and chai tea.

So R.J. Reynolds and leading women's fashion magazines are pushing pink stiletto cigarettes that smell like perfume, taste like chai on ad pages that are virtually indistinguishable from the regular fashion content of the magazine. Yet, they continue to insist that this ad blitz, timed perfectly to coincide with the start of school, is in no way targeting our children? It would be laughable if it wasn't so serious.

Tomorrow, we're going to be having a hearing on H.R. 1108, introduced by my colleague Henry Waxman, which would give FDA the authority to regulate tobacco, including advertising, and I hope that the magazines that are printing these ads don't wait until Congress passes a law in order to do the right thing.

If the Camel No. 9 advertising blitz that greeted our students at the start of the school year is any indication of their intentions, I shudder to think of the tricks and treats R.J. Reynolds and its new friends in the magazine business have in store for our young women and girls this Halloween.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Cardoza- Ross-Reyes Amendment to H.R. 3121, the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007.

This amendment will provide a 5 year grace period for homeowners who are required to purchase flood insurance as a result of new flood maps that decertify previously certified levees. During this period, homeowners would be entitled to a 50 percent reduction in their flood insurance premium while the levees are being recertified.

Recently, while updating flood maps in my congressional district, FEMA asked the Army Corps of Engineers to certify that the Santa Maria Valley levees would protect the City of Santa Maria for the next 100 years. Without the Corps' certification, much of the community will be placed in a flood zone and many of my constituents will be required to purchase expensive Federal flood insurance, something that many of them cannot afford.

The Cardoza-Ross-Reyes Amendment addresses this problem.

Since the Army Corps of Engineers completed the 26-mile Santa Maria Valley levees in 1963, the City has prospered, becoming the largest in Santa Barbara County. However, I over the years, natural deterioration of the levees has undermined their strength, leaving the community vulnerable to potentially devastating flooding by the Santa Maria River.

I am working with the City of Santa Maria, Santa Barbara County, and the area's other elected officials to restore the levees so they can be certified by the Army Corps of Engineers and, more importantly, so our community can avoid a catastrophic flooding event.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment is extremely important to my constituents. It will provide them with much needed relief in a potentially expensive time.

I urge all of my colleagues to support the Cardoza-Ross-Reyes Amendment.

Madam Speaker, I was not able to be present for the following rollcall votes on September 24, 2007. I would have voted as follows: Rollcall No. 891: ``yea''; rollcall No. 892: ``yea''; rollcall No. 893: ``yea''; and rollcall No. 894: ``yea''.

Thank you, Chairman Dingell, for your leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this bill and in support of America's children. We have two choices today: we can vote for this excellent bipartisan bill, which Senator Hatch appropriately called ``an honest compromise which improves a program that works,'' or we can vote against this bill and not only deny millions of children the chance to finally access health care, but strip it away from children who are already covered.

Trust me: as a nurse, I know the power and prudence of providing this health care coverage for our kids. It is indeed an accomplishment that Congress can be proud of.

This bill is responsible, and it's the right thing to do. Make no mistake, it is a compromise bill. But if we fail to pass this bill and even one child loses health coverage, we have failed our most important constituents, our children.

I urge my colleagues, I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation. Vote ``yes'' to protect children's health. ``Suffer the little children.''

Madam Speaker, I was not able to be present for the following rollcall votes on September 10, 2007, and would like the record to reflect that I would have voted as follows: rollcall No. 865: ``yea,'' rollcall No. 866: ``yea.''

Madam Speaker, last week I was fortunate to visit Mexico City as a part of a bipartisan trip organized by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Our trip provided an excellent opportunity for my colleagues and me to meet with prominent Mexican leaders in business, journalism and government.

It also provided a forum to discuss ongoing political and economic changes in Mexico and ways in which we can improve the relationship between the United States and Mexico. We discussed civic and political life in both countries, how we can work more closely with Mexican partner institutions to help bring about a more open, competitive and equitable society. One example is the security issues we both face, one which we share.

Madam Speaker, our relationship with our friend and neighbor Mexico is critically important. It cries out for more cooperation and engagement.

I want to thank the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars and its Mexico institute for facilitating this important dialogue. I know I was better able to get a picture of the state of democracy in Mexico, the shared goals and challenges that confront both of our countries, how we can be better neighbors to one another.

So I hope we can continue this important conversation and build a better future for the United States and for Mexico.

Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Natural Resources Committee, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3221, The New Direction for Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act.

Today, our economy relies on fossil fuels for energy and we simply must change that.

Even President Bush admits we're ``addicted to oil'' and that this addiction is harming our country.

The best way to beat this addiction is to stop using so much oil and gas by reducing demand, promoting renewables and alternative fuels, and encouraging smarter technologies.

Focusing more attention on the potential of clean energy is something that I and others on this side of the aisle have been advocating for years.

And since America is not exactly awash in oil and gas, reducing our dependence on them would be good not only for our environment, but for our economy and our national security as well.

But, to be honest, we have to do more than talk about the potential that clean and safe energy has for this country.

We have to provide the mechanisms to bring these energy sources to market and make changes in energy policy to encourage their use.

And that's exactly what H.R. 3221 does.

It encourages the efficient use of energy by creating new and stronger appliance and green building standards, and it promotes smart grid technology and plug-in hybrids.

It also takes important steps toward restoring sound stewardship to the management of our public lands by ensuring responsible domestic energy development.

And it creates a comprehensive framework to help address the negative impacts of global warming on our wildlife, public lands, oceans, and coasts.

While I greatly appreciate the hard work that has gone into crafting this legislation, I look forward to the House doing more.

Like increasing fuel economy standards for cars and trucks, increasing the use of homegrown renewables like wind and solar by requiring more electricity come from these resources, and adopting a national policy to deal with global warming.

Madam Speaker, the American people want real, meaningful solutions to our nation's energy challenges.

The leadership in the last Congress was driven by a futile desire to drill our way to energy independence.

It attempted to do that by lavishing huge tax breaks on Big Oil and neglecting efforts to reduce demand and encourage clean energy.

This bill delivers on the Democratic majority's promise of a new energy future.

It will strengthen national security, promote economic growth and create jobs, lower energy prices and begin to combat the serious threat of global warming.

I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation because it will pave the way to a cleaner and more sustainable energy future.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is the reason I came to Congress, to continue my work for children's health. It's a blight on our Nation that millions of children in hardworking families still have no access to health care, and today we can undo that wrong. Through this fiscally responsible bill we ensure that millions more eligible children will be able to get primary care, manage life-threatening illnesses, improve their school attendance and grow into healthy, productive adults. And how fitting that at the same time we will improve Medicare for seniors.

I wish to submit for the Record the piece by Ron Brownstein in today's L.A. Times where he calls the Bush and Republican arguments against this bill as not much more than stealing health care from babies.

We do have a choice today. We can continue to ignore the health of millions of babies and children, or we can take the high moral ground and pass this bill which will provide health care to those who need it most.

I want to commend Chairmen Dingell, Pallone, Rangel, and Stark for all the hard work they and the committee staff have done. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the CHAMP Act. Do something positive today for America's children.

[From the Los Angeles Times, Aug. 1, 2007]

Stealing Healthcare From Babies

(By Ronald Brownstein)

Does President Bush really believe what he's saying about

the effort from congressional Democrats and some leading

Senate Republicans to provide health coverage for millions of

uninsured children? He's portraying it as the first step on a

slippery slope toward ``government-run healthcare,'' as if

senior senators in both parties were conspiring with Michael

Moore to import Cuban doctors to inoculate and indoctrinate

American children.

In fact, Congress is moving responsibly to remove a blot on

the nation: the 8 million children without health insurance.

It is doing so by expanding the State Children's Health

Insurance Program, or SCHIP, a state-federal partnership that

the Republican Congress and President Clinton created in 1997

to cover kids in working-poor families. Final votes on the

House and Senate floors could come this week.

Bush, seemingly determined to provoke every possible

confrontation with congressional Democrats, has pledged to

veto the bills. And with the GOP congressional leadership, he

is fighting the proposals with a swarm of misleading and

hypocritical arguments.

Bush complains that expanding the program costs too much.

But cost was no object when Bush and congressional

Republicans sought to court seniors by creating the Medicare

prescription drug benefit in 2003.

Under the bipartisan Senate bill, Washington would spend

about $56 billion over the next five years to cover almost

half of the nation's uninsured children. Over the same

period, the Medicare entitlement that Bush signed (after more

than four-fifths of House and Senate Republicans voted for

it) will cost nearly $330 billion. Is social spending

affordable only when it benefits constituencies Republicans

prize in elections?

Next, Bush complains that the SCHIP expansion would require

``a huge tax increase.'' Actually, both the House and Senate

plans would raise taxes just on tobacco. And the sponsors are

increasing taxes only because they have committed to the

novel notion of paying for their program. When Bush and the

Republican Congress created the expensive Medicare drug

benefit, they did not provide any new revenue to fund it.

They just billed the cost to the next generation through

higher federal deficits. Now Bush is condemning Democrats for

displaying more responsibility.

Bush also disparages the SCHIP expansion as an attempt ``to

encourage people to transfer from the private sector to

government healthcare plans.'' But studies have found that

three-fourths of children covered under the current program

receive their care through private insurance plans that

contract with the states, notes Edwin Park of the liberal

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. In that way, the

program is no different than Bush's prescription drug plan:

The government pays for services delivered by private

insurance companies.

Bush's argument that the SCHIP changes will unacceptably

``crowd out'' private insurance is misleading in another

respect. It's true, as Bush charges, that if the program is

expanded, some eligible families would shift their children

into it from private coverage, hoping to save money or

improve care. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that

children making such a switch would account for about one-

third of the 6 million kids expected to enroll in the

expanded SCHIP program under the Senate plan, and hence one-

third of the added cost.

But as CBO Director Peter Orszag notes, all efforts to

expand coverage for the uninsured inevitably spill some

benefits on those who already have insurance. And the Senate

SCHIP plan, by limiting that spillover to one-third of its

cost, is actually more efficient than most alternatives for

expanding coverage.

Bush, for instance, wants to reduce the number of uninsured

by providing new tax incentives for buying coverage. But the

Lewin Group, an independent consulting firm, recently

calculated that 80 percent of the benefits from Bush's plan

would flow to people who already have insurance. Such numbers

help explain why Orszag recently said that, dollar for

dollar, expanding SCHIP ``is pretty much as efficient as you

can possibly get'' to insure more kids.

Bush's most outrageous argument is that expanding SCHIP

``empower[s] bureaucrats.'' In reality, covering more

children would empower parents like Sheila Miguel of Sun

Valley, Calif.

Miguel used to spend hours in emergency rooms trying to

obtain asthma medicine for her daughter, Chelsea, but since

enrolling her in a SCHIP-funded program, Miguel can take her

to reliably scheduled clinic visits.

Bush says he wants ``to put more power'' over healthcare

``in the hands of individuals.'' By freeing Miguel's family

from the worry and drudgery of repeated emergency room

visits, that's exactly what SCHIP does.

Few of the lower-income working families that rely on this

program have the time to follow this week's legislative

struggle, much less analyze how it serves the White House's

apparent strategy of embroiling congressional Democrats in

unrelenting conflicts with Bush that alienate swing voters.

In that political skirmishing, these families have been

reduced to collateral damage. They deserve something better

from a president who once called himself a ``compassionate

conservative.''

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding and agree with his sentiments.

Mr. Speaker, I am rising now in full support of the rule and of the underlying bill, H.R. 2831. As chairman of the Democratic Women's Working Group, I am proud of how quickly this Congress is responding to a clear misinterpretation of a law designed to protect individuals from gender discrimination.

It has taken us many years to reach a point where Congress now no longer wastes time in correcting an inequity when discrimination against women occurs. This is a real achievement.

The bill before us rightly recognizes that victims of pay discrimination should not be punished because they were not aware of the discrimination against them at the outset. The Civil Rights Act exists to protect individuals precisely when they find themselves in the situation Lilly Ledbetter found herself in. It was never meant to be interpreted in a way that provides a loophole for employers to discriminate, but just to make sure that their employees are kept in the dark for 6 months.

The Supreme Court ruling, if left to its own, signals to employers that it's, that is why it is so important that we now carry out our responsibility here in the Congress to provide a check and a balance against the Court's ruling.

I want to thank Lilly Ledbetter for her courageous zeal in carrying out her efforts to get this injustice corrected. I was impressed when I met her. She came to testify on Capitol Hill, testify before the committee. She knows that this law that we are about to pass will not necessarily rectify her situation. But she knows also, having experienced this inequity over so many years and carrying out her job so faithfully, she got nothing but excellent reports and discovered, as she went to retire, that she had been getting unequal pay all these years. So I commend my colleague from California, Chairman Miller. I think it is so important that we carry out her determination on behalf of her workplace and the women that she represents who are so often sitting in the same situation as she did, finding themselves at their retirement, the fact that they were given unequal pay over all the years. They just didn't know what their colleagues were receiving.

So I support Chairman Miller and the committee as a whole for being such strong protectors of workers' rights, regardless of race, gender or disability. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for the rule and the bill, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

Madam Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to Steven Firestein and Kids Cancer Connection and the American Cancer Fund for Children for the tireless work that they do on behalf of children suffering from cancer.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa proclaimed the week of December 11, 2006 as ``Childhood Cancer Awareness Week'' in the city of Los Angeles, and since then, many other cities have done the same. I am pleased to join Mayor Villaraigosa and Santa Barbara Mayor Marty Blum in thanking Steven Firestein, the founder of American Cancer Fund for Children and its sister organization, Kids Cancer Connection, for his hard work and dedication in assisting children and their families fighting cancer.

For over a decade, Steven has been providing critical services to children undergoing cancer treatments at many hospitals, including Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in my Congressional District. American Cancer Fund for Children provides hand-made caps for children following the trauma of chemotherapy, surgery and radiation. The American Cancer Fund for Children also sponsors Courageous Kid award ceremonies and hospital celebrations in recognition of each child's bravery and determination in his or her struggle against cancer. I have been privileged to participate in these moving ceremonies and I can say that they have a significant impact on the patients and their families.

As a nurse and as Co-Chair of the House Cancer Caucus, I understand firsthand the trauma that these children and their families suffer. I am so pleased to work with Steven as he dedicates countless hours of his time to bettering the lives of so many. He is a tireless advocate and greatly deserves recognition for his efforts. I hope that you will join me in recognizing this generous volunteer.

Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment and associate myself with the remarks and the eloquent statement of Chairman Obey and my colleagues.

And I speak from the perspective of a nurse who worked for many years with these women and their families in the community I'm from. Title X is our Nation's primary program to provide family planning services. According to the Guttmacher Institute, Title X has been so successful that for every public dollar invested in family planning, $3 are saved in Medicaid costs alone for pregnancy and newborn care.

In hundreds of communities across this country, the nonprofit Planned Parenthood is the major implementation of precisely the reproductive health care necessary to carry out effective family planning and to reduce unintended pregnancies. And they are contributing, these nonprofit organizations, to the successful implementation of Title X services.

So I urge my colleagues to stand for family values and to vote against this amendment so that you can protect your constituents' access to proven, effective family planning services which have as their goal to reduce unintended pregnancies.

Madam Speaker, as a cosponsor of the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, I rise in strong support of the bill.

While most government employees enjoy the right to collectively bargain with their employer, many fire fighters, police officers and emergency medical personnel across the country are denied this right. We must take action to end this injustice.

The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act would affirm the right of our Nation's State and local public safety officers to bargain collectively and work cooperatively with their employers. This critical legislation would do so by establishing minimum collective bargaining standards for all States. Such standards include: the right to collectively bargain over wages, hours and working conditions, establishment of a dispute resolution mechanism, and the enforcement of contracts through State courts.

Our public safety officers put their lives on the line every day to protect us. Yet, they are denied their right to collectively bargain to better protect themselves and their families. Collective bargaining leads to higher wages, greater access to health care and better retirement benefits. Furthermore, cooperation between public safety employees and employers reduces injuries and fatalities because first responders are more likely to have the safety equipment and resources they need. Studies also show that communities promoting communication between public safety officers and their employers enjoy more efficient and effective delivery of emergency services.

Over the years, we have expanded collective bargaining laws to protect private sector employees, non-profit association employees, transportation workers, and Federal Government employees. One of the few groups of workers not covered by these Federal laws is state and local public safety officers. They work tirelessly to protect us. We must take this opportunity to help protect them.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Public Employee-Employer Cooperation Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this bill to finally end this disastrous war. President Bush's war in Iraq has been the biggest foreign policy catastrophe in our Nation's history. We have been distracted from doing the job in Afghanistan, the Nation that harbored al Qaeda. Hundreds of billions of dollars have evaporated into the sands of Iraq while vital needs have gone unmet at home. Our international reputation has been battered and bruised. Our Army has been hollowed out.

The war has cut short the lives of more than 3,600 of our bravest citizens, injured tens of thousands more. Yet this President continues to insist that we remain in Iraq.

Today we must tell this President he is wrong. We must take a stand against this tragic war, begin the hard work of repairing our foreign policy. We must listen to the American people and vote to end this war.

Let us truly support our troops and vote to bring them home.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to MSgt Hulan D. Greaves as he retires from the Air Force. He has been assigned to Detachment 1, 345 Training Squadron at Port Hueneme since 2003 and currently serves as Alfa Company Gas Phase Head.

Master Sergeant Greaves was raised in Barbados and attended the Seventh Day Adventist School. In 1977, he came to the United States with his parents and resided in Brooklyn, NY, before joining the Air Force in 1986. Following his graduation from basic training, Greaves attended Technical Training School at Chaunte AFB, IL, and graduated as a General Purpose Vehicle Mechanic. After graduation, Sergeant Greaves was assigned to 27 Transportation Squadron, Cannon AFB, NM. After 2 years in New Mexico, he departed for Germany and was assigned to the 4th Air Support Operations Center, where he spent 4 years before relocating to Andersen AFB, Guam. Greaves then returned to Germany before he was assigned, in 1998, to Eglin AFB, FL to 16 Electronic Warfare Squadron as Vehicle Manager.

In April 2003, Master Sergeant Greaves was selected for instructor duty and reported to Port Hueneme, CA. Master Sergeant Greaves currently holds an Associate's Degree in Vehicle Maintenance from the Community College of the Air Force and holds a Bachelor's Degree in Applied Science from Troy State University in Troy, AL. He has completed course 12, NCO Academy and Airmen Leadership School. Master Sergeant Greaves' decorations include Air Force Commendation Medal with 3 oak clusters, Air Force Achievement Medal with I oak cluster, Joint Meritorious Unit Award, AF Outstanding Unit Award with 4 oak clusters, AF Good Conduct Medal with 1 silver oak leaf, National Defense Service Medal with 1 bronze star, Southwest Asia Service Medal with 1 bronze star, Humanitarian Service Medal, AF Overseas Ribbon Short, AF Overseas Ribbon Long with 3 oak leaf clusters, AF Longevity Service with 3 oak leaf clusters, USAF NCO PME Graduate Ribbon with 2 oak leaf clusters and the AF Training Ribbon.

Madam Speaker, I am honored today to pay tribute to MSgt Hulan D. Greaves and thank him for his tireless dedication to our country and wish him the best in retirement.