Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor a celebrated colleague of mine in the health profession. Dr. Edward S. Bentley has been selected as the 2006 Physician of the Year by the Santa Barbara County Medical Society. His countless accomplishments truly warrant him the prestige associated with this award.

Dr. Bentley began his medical career at the University of Nevada and the University of Oklahoma Medical School. He then moved to California, where he worked for the University of Southern California Medical Center, serving as Clinical Associate Professor of Medicine, Assistant Professor of Clinical Medicine and Chief Resident.

In 1986, Dr. Bentley established a private practice in Santa Barbara, specializing in gastroenterology. Over the past 20 years, he has proven to be a tremendous asset to our community. He served as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Santa Barbara County Medical Society from 1999-2005 and was president of the organization in 2004. Additionally, Dr. Bentley served as Vice President of the Santa Barbara Select I.P.A., member of the Santa Barbara Consortium on Continuing Medical Education, and delegate for the California Medical Association. He is also a member of the Santa Barbara County Medical Society, the California Medical Association, the American Medical Association and the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease, among numerous other organizations. In addition, Dr. Bentley holds numerous affiliations with many hospitals across Southern California.

Mr. Speaker, clearly I could stand up here all day and list Dr. Bentley's impressive achievements. He is a truly extraordinary doctor, citizen and esteemed member of the medical community. I am proud to serve as both his representative and colleague in health care. I would like to extend to him my most heartfelt congratulations and sincere wishes for continued success in both his personal and professional endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize LOVARC, an organization dedicated to helping Americans with disabilities find employment and live fulfilling lives. LOVARC was established in 1964 as a non-profit organization with the goal of helping those with disability. Its dedication to helping those in need is laudable and should be recognized by the United States Congress.

In 1995, LOVARC was awarded a contract for two dining facilities, the Breakers and the Beachcomber, at Vandenberg Air Force Base. Since that time, LOVARC has won the Hennessey Award for the best dining facility in Space Command seven times. This is an outstanding accomplishment, and I am proud that they have served the people of the 23rd District through their work at Vandenberg Air Force Base.

I am pleased to recognize the administrators, volunteers, and employees of this organization. Their efforts have resulted in the creation of jobs for many in my district, and for that I am grateful. Many Americans with disabilities now enjoy better lives due to this organization's service. I am proud of their work with the military and wish them a wonderful future in service to our community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and to the underlying bill. And I do so because of a ridiculous earmark, despite what the Rules Chairman has just stated, which was added by Chairman Hunter in order to keep the public out of a national park, which happens to be in my district, the Channel Islands National Park.

This provision monkeys around with a court settlement to end a lucrative privately run trophy hunting operation on Santa Rosa Island.

The owners of the elk and deer herds, the Vail family, were already paid $30 million by taxpayers when they deeded over the island back in 1986. They were supposed to end this hunting operation in 2011. A trophy hunt, which, by the way, costs hunters up to $17,000 per weekend, shuts the island to park visitors for 5 months out of each year. Mr. Hunter is seeking to allow private hunting in the park to go on indefinitely, and this will result in more lawsuits.

One might wonder why this provision is in a bill which deals with supporting

our troops. The proposals and reasons behind it have evolved over time. At one point it was to establish a hunting preserve for the military's top brass and their guests. When that didn't fly, it was quickly changed to making Santa Rosa a place for disabled vets to hunt. But when the paralyzed veterans of America actually went to the island, they told Chairman Hunter, and I quote, ``the Santa Rosa initiatives is not viable.''

Then the provision morphed into saving the animals from extinction. That is right. The intention is that we are going to save the animals, though they continue to be hunted indefinitely and on the island. This provision is opposed by the Park Service, the PVA, the Humane Society, and many public lands groups. Even the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution against this proposal.

So why is it in the bill? Who knows. What we do know is that taxpayers who paid $30 million for the island are now being told by our chairman they can't visit it for nearly half the year. This is an insult to our constituents, to all taxpayers. It is also an insult to our troops whose service to this country is being used as a cover for this special interest boondoggle.

Now, I know the underlying bill will pass by a wide margin, and I understand that. I also know that this House has never endorsed this proposal. And given the opportunity for an up-or-down vote, I am sure they would agree with me. And so this is yet another sad day for taxpayers, for our national parks, and for this House.

Mr. Speaker, just in response, because I am happy to accompany the chairman any time he wishes to go to the island. I have been there. There have been many thousands of visitors this year. Yes, it is a rugged place. That is one of the appeals of it. Much of the natural resource that is there, cultural and animal and flora, that have been destroyed in part by first the cattle, now the cattle are gone, and by the deer and elk, it is a prized area for archaeologists and others to understand the history of the geography of our country. That is one of the reasons to remove the elk.

Extermination has been ameliorated by the Park Service's interest, and an invitation has already been extended to offer support to the family in removing without injuring the animals at the appropriate time after the settlement has been arranged.

It is also the case that the park superintendent is looking forward to an opportunity to make this island more accessible to those with disabilities. Veterans are not excluded from the island, nor would they ever be.

Also, hunting has been especially provided for our veterans on all kinds of public lands, including many military bases, as I am sure the chairman already knows. That is why the Paralyzed Veterans said there are many other places we can hunt, and now they would be extended an opportunity with special accommodations to visit the island like the rest of the public has.

There have been many attempts on the part of the Park Service, and this

will continue, to reach out to people with special needs to make available the wonderful resources on the island.

I am happy to take the chairman up on his invitation to visit the island.

I don't have those numbers, but I can certainly make them available to you. Even with it being off limits to the public 5 months of the year, it is either 5,000 or 8,000 visitors that were out there last year. Part of the attraction of the island is its remoteness and the fact that it is set apart.

Madam Speaker, I rise to also support this bill and hope that the initiatives taken in this legislation will enable the National Institutes of Health to best carry out its mission and achieve groundbreaking scientific discoveries.

Sometimes when constituents ask me what good is this place where I work, this Federal Government, I tell them just look out at Bethesda, Maryland, where the National Institutes of Health work every day, hard every day to achieve miracles that translate into lives changed in this country on a daily basis.

I also want to thank Chairman Barton for his great efforts on this bill. He has been working tirelessly to see that this reauthorization actually did happen, and he did it in a bipartisan manner. As he demonstrated at this meeting, he added his own personal motivation for doing it, which, quite frankly, we could see more of in this House.

At the same time, we have missed some great opportunities, and I will mention two, one of which has been mentioned already by my colleague.

First, we are not providing the NIH with enough funds to carry out the amazing work that they do and that we ask them to do. The yearly increases to the NIH budget provided in this bill will probably not even keep up with inflation, especially following these last years of flat-funding the NIH.

But, in addition, during the Energy and Commerce Committee markup on the NIH Reform Act, Mr. Waxman and I introduced an amendment to include the language of H.R. 2231, the Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act, which is authored by Congresswoman Lowey. Although as Chairman Barton pointed out during the markup, the bill's goal is to focus on structure and organization within the NIH, and I understand this, we felt that this amendment was a necessary vehicle to move legislation that has 255 bipartisan cosponsors.

The Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act would direct the development and coordination of activities at the NIH to study the effects of the environment on the development of breast cancer. With National Breast Cancer Awareness Month upon us, let us do something really tangible to really combat the disease, instead of simply issuing proclamations or wearing ribbons. While those acts are very important, it is only through well-coordinated research that we will actually achieve our goal of eradicating this devastating disease.

The Breast Cancer Environmental Research Act fits perfectly into the new initiatives of the NIH Reform Act, considering the emphasis this bill places on trans-Institute research, transparency, and efficiency. We have very little time left in this Congress to pass legislation, and here was an opportunity to attach a related bill that enjoys wide support, but the majority said no to this opportunity.

So now that the NIH reauthorization has been completed in the House, I urge my colleagues to press for passage of the Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act so we can make real a Federal commitment to an overall national strategy needed to discover the environmental correlations with breast cancer. It is time to take some real action to prevent, treat and cure this disease.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3534, Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station Outstanding Natural Area Act.

First, I want to thank my colleague from California, the chairman of the Resources Committee, Mr. Pombo, the chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health, Mr. Walden and Mr. Tom Udall, as well as the ranking member of the full Committee, Mr. Rahall for expediting the consideration of this legislation and for bringing H.R. 3534 before us today.

H.R. 3534 would designate the Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station--located in my congressional district--as an Outstanding Natural Area within the BLM's National Landscape Conservation System.

The Piedras Blancas Light Station is located on an 18 acre-parcel of BLM administered land along the Pacific Coast in San Luis Obispo County. The property is adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway and the Hearst Castle State Historic Monument, and it looks over a pristine coastal area that includes the southern portion of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and California Coastal National Monument.

The Light Station is nationally recognized as an important monitoring point for migrating whales, and is used by the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Marine Fisheries Service and a number of universities and colleges for marine wildlife and plant research.

Finally, the Light Station and the surrounding area are important for tourism. For example, the national historic Light House--built in 1879--is a main destination focal point on the Central Coast, and the peninsula is very popular for viewing sea otters, elephant seals, and sea lions from shore. The elephant seal colony at Piedras Blancas attracts an estimated 400,000 visitors annually.

In 2001, BLM assumed ownership and management of the Light Station from the U.S. Coast Guard. Since then, BLM, state and local agencies, community stakeholders and conservation groups have developed a very successful partnership to preserve the Light Station.

Some of these partners include: the Piedras Blancas Light Station Association; California State Parks; San Luis Obispo County; the cities of Cambria and San Simeon; the California Coastal Conservancy and Coastal Commission; NOAA; and the Hearst Corporation.

As a result of their hard work, the site was re-opened to public tours in 2003--for the first time in 128 years! These partners continue to work together on a series of environmental education, historical restoration and resource protection programs. And I'm confident they will each support and showcase this national designation if enacted.

Mr. Speaker, my legislation tracks the successful model of designating the Oregon Coast's Yaquina Head as an Outstanding Natural Area, which was signed into law in 1980. Yaquina Head was later included in the National Landscape Conservation System.

Like Yaquina Head, the addition of the Piedras Blancas Light Station to the NLCS would be an important step in protecting and preserving this valuable natural and historic resource. It will also focus attention on the restoration of the Light Station and surrounding area, specifically the three on-site National Register properties. And, it will serve as a means to increase public awareness of the Light Station's scientific, cultural and educational values.

Specifically, H.R. 3534 stresses long-term conservation of the Light Station by requiring timely completion of a management plan. The management plan would be developed through a public process and include guidelines for restoration of the National Register of Historic Places buildings, including the Light House; public access; ecological and cultural resource management; and, fostering scientific study and research opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, the Piedras Blancas Light Station is a wonderful resource. It has the potential to serve as a model for future resource management, and therefore would be an appropriate addition to the BLM's National Landscape Conservation System.

Again, I would like to thank the Committee on Resources for supporting this bill to designate Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station as an Outstanding Natural Area, and urge its immediate passage.

Mr. Speaker, my hope is that I can explain and demonstrate sufficiently the enthusiasm for this legislation by my constituents in the city of Oxnard. I rise in support of H.R. 2334, and it is called the Oxnard Water Recycling and Desalination Act.

First I want to thank Chairman Pombo and Ranking Member Rahall for their support of this measure. I also want to thank the subcommittee chairman, Mr. Radanovich, and Ranking Member Napolitano and their staffs for the key role in the bill's passage.

H.R. 2334 authorizes a regional water resources project. It is named the Groundwater Recovery Enhancement and Treatment Act, or, as the initials will summarize to, it is the GREAT program, and it is great in many ways, located in my congressional district.

Oxnard, California, as so many communities today, are faced with the difficult task of providing reliable and safe drinking water for their customers. The city of Oxnard has taken this situation and worked on it. It is one of California's fastest growing cities. The water needs of the city's agricultural users has exceeded its local water resources. Agriculture is the mainstay of the economy and the region, but at the same time many people are moving to the area.

Now, consequently, over 50 percent of its water has had to be imported from outside sources. Recognizing these challenges, Oxnard developed the GREAT program to address its long-term water needs, and as my colleague, Mr. Kildee from Michigan illustrated, the city itself and the surrounding areas grappled with this issue themselves, recognizing that they needed to be creative and come up with a solution that would meet their needs.

This GREAT program includes a new regional groundwater desalination facility to serve potable water customers in the city of Oxnard. It includes a recycled water system to include agricultural water users and an added protection against seawater intrusion.

Finally, it includes a wetlands restoration component that reuses the discharges from the groundwater desalination and recycled groundwater treatment facilities. It is a full-circle opportunity to take every advantage of the water supplies that are there to enhance them and even to reuse them.

Implementation of this GREAT program will provide many significant regional benefits. It will reduce the consumption of groundwater for agricultural and industrial purposes. It will cut imported delivery water requirements, and it will improve local reliability of high- quality water deliveries. It will also add enormously to the restoration of the wetlands in the region.

Mr. Speaker, I commend this Resources Committee for trying to find innovative and effective ways of extending water supplies in the West.

In my view, the City of Oxnard Water and Desalination Act offers such a creative solution.

Again, I thank the Committee on Resources for supporting this bill, and I urge its immediate passage.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2334, the City of Oxnard Water Recycling and Desalination Act.

First, I want to thank my colleagues from California, the chairman of the Resources Committee, Mr. Pombo, the chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Water and Power, Mr. Radanovich and Ms. Napolitano, as well as the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Rahall, for expediting the consideration of this legislation and for bringing H.R. 2334 before us today.

H.R. 2334 would authorize a proposed regional water resources project--the Groundwater Recovery Enhancement and Treatment or GREAT Program--located in my congressional district.

As you know, many communities today are faced with the difficult task of providing reliable and safe water to their customers. The city of Oxnard is no exception.

Oxnard is one the California's fastest growing cities and is facing an ever growing crisis: It's running out of affordable water. The water needs for the city's agricultural and industrial base, together with its growing population, has exceeded its local water resources. Consequently, over 50 percent of its water has to be imported from outside sources.

However, through a series of local, State and Federal restrictions the amount of imported water available to the city is shrinking, while the cost of that water is rising. Recognizing these challenges, Oxnard developed the GREAT Program to address its long term water needs.

The GREAT Program elements include: a new regional groundwater desalination facility to serve potable water customers in Oxnard and adjacent communities; a recycled water system to serve agricultural water users, and added protection against seawater intrusion and saltwater contamination; and a wetlands restoration and enhancement component that efficiently reuses the brine discharges from both the groundwater desalination and recycled water treatment facilities.

Implementation of the GREAT Program will provide many significant regional benefits.

First, the new desalination component will serve ratepayers in Oxnard and adjacent communities, guaranteeing sufficient water supplies for the area.

Second, Oxnard's current water infrastructure delivers approximately 30 million gallons of treated wastewater per day to an ocean outfall. The GREAT Program will utilize the resource currently wasted to the ocean and treat it so that it can be reused by the agricultural water users in the area.

During the non-growing season, it will inject the resources into to the groundwater to serve as a barrier against seawater intrusion and saltwater contamination. To alleviate severely depressed groundwater levels, this component also includes pumping groundwater into the aquifer to enhance groundwater recharge.

Finally, the brine produced as a by-product of the desalination and recycling plants will provide a year-round supply of nutrient rich water to the existing wetlands at Ormond Beach.

Mr. Speaker, I commend the Resources Committee for trying to find innovative and effective ways of extending water supplies in the West. In my view, the city of Oxnard Water Recycling and Desalination Act offers such a creative solution. It will reduce the consumption of groundwater for agricultural and industrial purposes, cut imported water delivery requirements, and improve local reliability of high quality water deliveries.

Again, I would like to thank the Committee on Resources for supporting this bill, and urge its immediate passage.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to French Hospital Medical Center and acknowledge their 60 years of providing quality healthcare to our community.

Founded by Edison French in 1946, this French Hospital Medical Center brought state of the art medicine to the San Luis Obispo community and continues to do so today. Dr. French, a surgeon, actively encouraged other specialists to settle in the San Luis Obispo area. In 1972, Dr. French moved the hospital to its current location on Johnson Avenue, where it serves residents throughout San Luis Obispo County. Currently, the hospital has working relationships with 320 physicians and employs more than 480 people.

On June 1, 2004, French Hospital was acquired by Catholic Healthcare West (CHW), and joined a network of over 40 medical centers and hospitals in three states. Founded in 1986, CHW is one of our Nation's largest not-for-profit healthcare systems and the largest Catholic healthcare system based in the Western United States. In 2005, French Hospital Medical Center provided more than $5 million in care to the uninsured in our community and to other philanthropic endeavors. The hospital is committed to delivering high-quality, compassionate and affordable healthcare services, with special attention to the poor and underserved.

French Hospital Medical Center has set, and continues to set, a positive example with their passion for the practice of great medicine and their commitment to our local community. I am pleased, Mr. Speaker, to represent this community and the many caring staff and administrators of French Hospital Medical Center and am pleased to celebrate their 60-year anniversary.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 982, to support the goals and ideals of National Peripheral Arterial Disease Awareness Week. I was proud to introduce this bill with my colleague and fellow co-chair of the Congressional Heart and Stroke Coalition, Representative Foley.

More than 8 million Americans, that is 1 in 20 adults, have peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

Yet this condition is largely unrecognized and often goes undiagnosed because most people do not have any recognizable symptoms.

PAD occurs when arteries in the legs become narrowed or clogged, resulting in reduced blood flow to the legs.

A diagnosis of PAD is indication that a patient is likely to have narrowed arteries to the heart and brain as well and is a powerful warning sign of existing cardiovascular disease.

However, without early detection and proper treatment, 1 in 4 people who suffer from PAD will also suffer a heart attack, stroke, amputation or even death within the next 5 years.

It is evident that greater awareness about PAD and better detection capabilities will not only improve the quality of life for those who suffer from it, but can actually save their lives.

During National Peripheral Arterial Disease Awareness Week, efforts are increased to make physicians and the public at-large more cognizant of their risks for PAD, the symptoms, and the importance of early treatment.

During this week, we can assist by highlighting those who have high risk factors for PAD: over age 50, African Americans, smokers and those with high blood pressure, diabetes, abnormal cholesterol, a personal history of heart disease or stroke.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this resolution and encourage them to learn more about Peripheral Arterial Disease and how it may affect them.

I thank my colleague for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the rule for H.R. 4157. As a nurse, of course I want to see the expanded use of health information technology, such as electronic medical records. Expanded use of health IT holds great promise for facilitating better care, reducing medical errors, and eliminating burdensome paperwork, but the bill before us today has a glaring omission: It has no privacy protection for patients.

A privacy amendment I sponsored along with Representatives Markey, Emanuel, Doggett, and Kennedy was killed by the Republicans on the Rules Committee even though there is bipartisan support for this measure. As usual, the House won't be voting on a measure because the Republican leadership opposes it but is afraid that if we debate and vote on it in the House, they might lose the vote.

Let's be clear, there is no comprehensive privacy protection in this bill before us today. That means your personal sensitive health information is vulnerable. That means there is no recourse you could take to hold individuals accountable if they improperly obtain or disclose your most personal private information.

Opponents of privacy protection will argue that current HIPAA regulations are adequate. That argument is flawed. The lack of enforcement of privacy protections is widely known in the health community. Because of that, surveys show fewer entities are complying with HIPAA because they fear no consequences for privacy violations. And, these violations are occurring. Our privacy amendment would have guaranteed that you would be notified if your information is improperly disclosed and it would have allowed you recourse.

The amendment should have been made in order because its provisions are essential to protecting patients' rights during the nationwide adoption of health information technology. So I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule until we are allowed to consider a bill that protects our rights as patients and, indeed, the rights of all patients.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding.

I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 4157. Rather than move our health care system into the 21st century, this bill does little other than bestow gifts upon the insurance companies and big businesses. HIT does have great promise, great opportunity. And as a nurse, I know very well the importance, for example, of electronic medical records. But if the leadership was really serious about facilitating wider-spread adoption of HIT that is able to deliver better quality health care for patients, this bill would have contained the following:

A timeline for achieving interoperability; funding so that hospitals and physicians could afford to purchase the technology; and, as I mentioned when I spoke against the rule, privacy protections. What good is health information technology if providers cannot communicate with each? What good is the existence of health IT if nobody can afford to use it? And what good is making our personal, private, sensitive information vulnerable to improper access and disclosure?

Unfortunately, we are still in an age where individuals may be discriminated against because of health conditions. Here is our chance in a bill to protect personal information from being used to discriminate against people. And my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have indicated they do not care about patients' rights to privacy. If you look carefully at the organizations supporting privacy protections, you will notice they are patient advocates, consumer groups, health professionals.

Those opposing it? The industry.

Whom are we passing this bill for today? I thought it was supposed to be for patients so that they could receive better care and for the health professionals so they could provide better care. But it is clear to me that this bill before us disregards patients' needs.

We need to start over and do a better job. HIT is that important. But not this bill. I, therefore, oppose H.R. 4157 and urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Madam Speaker, today is certainly a momentous day. President Bush is about to veto the first bill

of his 6-year Presidency, and we will have the opportunity to override this veto and reaffirm the House of Representatives' support for lifesaving medical research.

I take this moment to remind my colleagues of what H.R. 810 and stem cell research can do. Embryonic stem cells have the unique ability to become any other kind of bodily cell. These cells have the potential to help researchers find cures, that is right, cures, for diabetes, Alzheimer's, ALS, cancer, heart disease, Parkinson's, the list goes on.

Under H.R. 810 these cells would be extracted from embryos that are already created for in vitro fertilization and are no longer needed. Use of these surplus embryos would only be done with the consent of the donor.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the override and put us on the path to saving lives.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Colorado for yielding and for her leadership and, in fact, the bipartisan leadership that has brought us to this point today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill to override the President's veto of H.R. 810.

It is really unfortunate that this veto and other opposition of this bill are born out of misinformation about the issue at hand.

Under H.R. 810, the embryos from which stem cells are extracted for research come from in vitro fertilization only.

Each year thousands of embryos, no bigger than the head of a pin, are created in the process of in vitro fertilization, with the support of Congress, by the way.

A small percentage of these embryos are implanted and will, hopefully, grow into children. The rest will be frozen or discarded. They will not be used to create life. They will never become children. They will be lost without purpose.

But H.R. 810 gives them purpose, and this only with the express approval of the donors.

Now, the majority of Members in both the House and Senate affirmed their support for enhancing our use of stem cells in research because they understand that purpose.

Maybe it really isn't surprising that President Bush has vetoed this bill because he doesn't understand, and it is consistent with his signing into law other bills that have cut funding for medical research, denied proper funding for veterans health care, decreased our Nation's ability to confront true health crises.

This administration has ignored and twisted science in a variety of areas, everything from global warming to abstinence-only education.

The refusal to acknowledge the scientific value of embryonic stem cell research is one more tragic misstep. Let's not be the embarrassment of the world yet again. Let's affirm our commitment to saving lives by overriding this veto. Let's untie the hands of scientists on the verge of cures for the world's most devastating diseases.

I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Madam Speaker, I am voting for this resolution because I absolutely condemn Hezbollah's senseless, unprovoked cross-border attacks on Israel, and the murderous rain of missiles it has unleashed on Haifa and other northern cities. Terrorist groups like Hezbollah, whose actions have caused the death and misery of hundreds of innocent Israelis and Lebanese, deserve no sympathy and no mercy. Hezbollah needs to be disarmed, for the sake of Israel's security and, indeed, for the stability of the entire region.

And I also join my colleagues in condemning the actions of Syria and Iran for their support and arming of Hezbollah. We see the true nature of these regimes when we see the tragic results of their support of terrorist groups like Hezbollah.

But I would have hoped for a different resolution to come before the House. I would have hoped for a more comprehensive resolution that respects the complexity of the issues unfolding in the area, and the necessity for direct U.S. involvement in the unfolding tragedy.

A more appropriate resolution would recognize the fundamental difference between Hamas and Hezbollah. Of course, Hamas should be condemned for its actions and the kidnapped Israeli soldier must be returned unharmed. But Gaza and Southern Lebanon are two separate situations and this resolution confuses that.

The Palestinian people have legitimate grievances and a solution to these grievances can and must be found through negotiations. Hamas exploits those grievances, but we must not allow Hamas's actions to delegitimize the aspirations of the Palestinian people. Hamas's actions do not negate the reality that we simply must resolve the humanitarian crisis now engulfing Gaza and the West Bank.

I believe Israel's security depends on forging a negotiated settlement with the Palestinians that will ensure the safety and security of both peoples. And while I respect Israel's right to defend itself, I am deeply concerned that Israel's response to Hamas' actions is only prolonging the suffering of the Palestinian people and putting off resolution of this decades long problem.

Conversely, Hezbollah has no legitimate grievances with Israel.

Hezbollah seeks nothing more than the destruction of Israel and there is no negotiating with it. Only through Hezbollah's complete disarmament will we be able to remove its threat to the region.

I am also troubled by the unqualified praise in this resolution for the President and his Administration. The President has done little to stop the meltdown of the Middle East that has occurred under his watch. Unlike previous Administrations, including that of his father and President Clinton, he simply hasn't been engaged. And his response here is tragically inadequate, again.

The U.S. must engage immediately to bring about a cease fire and help drive a long term solution for the area. Every major Arab-Israeli crisis over the years has ended with U.S. involvement--at the highest levels--because the players rely on intermediaries to broker agreements.

We may not like it, but that's the reality of the situation. And given that the stability of the region plays so large a role in our own national security interests, we must continue to engage forcefully if we are committed to bringing about peace in the region. Waiting another week before dispatching the Secretary of State is not a viable response.

Finally, I would note that every day this crisis continues brings a greater risk of direct involvement by Syria and Iran. As bad as this situation is now, direct involvement from either Syria or Iran would be much, much worse. Immediate, hands-on U.S. involvement is critical to keep the situation from spiraling even further out of control.

Madam Speaker, the situation in the Middle East grows graver every day. Dozens of Israelis and hundreds of innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians have already died. Beruit, which has only recently been restored to its historic splendor, is in ruins. A key ally in the area is threatened and our national security interests are as well.

I urge the Administration to help bring peace to the region.

Mr. Speaker, as a Member of Congress who is a registered nurse and cares deeply about fostering dialogue between Arabs and Israelis, I wanted to share an inspiring story that appeared in the July 2006 issue of the American Journal of Nursing. Khalil Khoury, MScPharm, BSN, RN is head nurse of an internal medicine unit at Hadassah University Medical Center in Jerusalem where Prime Minister ArieI Sharon was treated in December 2005. At a time of such hopelessness and extraordinary tensions between Palestinians and Israelis, Khalil's story provided me with a little bit of hope and optimism that all is not lost in the Middle East. I urge my colleagues to take note of this story and hope it instills that same bit of hope in you.

[From the American Journal of Nursing, July 2006]

The Hospital as Sanctuary: An Arab Nurse Who Cared for Israel's

Stricken Prime Minister

(By Khalil Khoury)

I am head nurse on a unit known as Internal Medicine A at

Hadassah University Medical Center in Jerusalem. This is

where former prime minister Ariel Sharon was admitted for

several days after a minor stroke on December 18, 2005. (He

subsequently suffered a major cerebral accident on January 5,

2006, from which he has not recovered.) During his first

hospitalization, my staff of Arab and Jewish nurses cared for

him in an atmosphere of mutual respect--a sharp contrast to

life outside of the hospital walls.

Internal Medicine A is a microcosm of Israel. Of 40 nurses

under my supervision--all Israelis--one-third of us are

Christian or Muslim Arabs and the rest are Jews. Yet we work

together as a harmonious unit, an approach that is the basis

for the humane way we treat our patients. I think of my

workplace as an island of sanity within the insanity that

surrounds us. As an Israeli citizen, I have the same rights

as Jewish Israelis, but when security guards at a shopping

center or coffee shop see me or hear me speaking Arabic to a

companion, they demand to see my identification and search my

bag more thoroughly than those of others. My professional

accomplishments, my integration into Israeli society, my

triumphs over the odds against Arabs in my country--none of

this matters.

I was born in Haifa in 1971, and my parents--a construction

worker and a housewife--raised me to respect humankind, to

accept others and to help them. This led me to nursing, but

my career choice was also a practical decision. Because they

are perceived as security risks, Israeli Arabs can get jobs

in nursing more easily than they can in other fields, such as

high tech or the military. I enrolled at the Hadassah-Hebrew

University School of Nursing in Jerusalem in 1992; when I

graduated in 1996, I immediately went to work as an RN on

Internal Medicine A. I was named head nurse in 2001.

When the prime minister was assigned to our department,

there was considerable media excitement. ``The team that

treats prime minister Sharon includes Arabs,'' commentators

proclaimed. Given the political situation in Israel, the

presence of Arabs on the treatment team was considered

exceptional. Yet inside the hospital, we performed our duties

exactly as we would for any patient. The only substantive

difference was the necessity of accommodating the prime

minister's security staff in an adjoining patient room with a

connecting door and the political staff in one of our two

doctors' lounges. We cared for the prime minister and

prepared and administered his medications, including

injections, all without interference from the bodyguards who

were at the bedside around the clock.

I learned about my own prejudices from the experience of

being one of Sharon's nurses. Before meeting him during his

first hospitalization in 2005, I would have described him as

tough, formal, distant, and not very nice, based on his

public image. But he turned out to be pleasant and polite in

conversation; without his bodyguards and political retinue,

he would have been considered simply a nice old man.

I don't see Sharon as my enemy, although Israel does not

always see Arabs as friends. Fighting stereotypes is what I

do almost every day, whether it is prejudice aimed at me as a

man in a traditionally woman's profession or as an Arab

living and working in Israel. I am helped in this by the

principles of nursing, which emphasize patience and tolerance

toward others, without regard to race, religion, sex, or

nationality. This is how I was raised, and working at

Hadassah has strengthened my commitment to these values.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to the City of Guadalupe, located on the Central Coast of California. I celebrate with the residents of Guadalupe today, remembering that on August 3, 1946, the County Board of Supervisors approved the City of Guadalupe as a Municipal Corporation.

Guadalupe was founded in 1843 as one of the earliest communities on the Central Coast. At the time of its founding, it was known as Rancho de Guadalupe and the land was first obtained as part of a Mexican Land Grant. The community developed economically through raising cattle, the dairy industry, and later, vegetable farming, About 6,500 people currently live in Guadalupe. Guadalupe's very diverse population is a reflection of early Chinese, Swiss, Italian, German, Portuguese, Filipino, African American, Hawaiian and Hispanic immigrants to the region.

In addition to Guadalupe's rich cultural heritage, it is also known as the home to the popular Guadalupe Dunes, an area of great physical beauty. The Dunes Visitor Center is located in a 1910 Craftsman style home right in the heart of Guadalupe. The Center provides environmental education in partnership with local schools and offers over 200 guided walks and talks each year. Many residents of the Central Coast know Guadalupe as the location of the Far Western Tavern, famous for their Santa Maria Style BBQ and their ``Suzie Q's'' line of beans, salsa, seasoning and more. Guadalupe is a small town with a lot of history. In fact, it is famous for providing the backdrop for Cecil B. Demille's ``The 10 Commandments.''

Though still a small, quiet community, the City of Guadalupe, like many areas on the Central Coast, continues to grow. I am pleased to be able to celebrate with Mayor Alvarez and the residents of Guadalupe, looking fondly at the past and looking forward to the future.