Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution honoring Title IX and the woman who played a key role in its passage, Congresswoman Patsy Mink. I was privileged to serve with Patsy on the Education and Labor Committee from the time I started serving in 1993. She took me under her wing and was a true mentor to me, inspiring me with her example.

There has been no stronger voice in Congress for girls, women, and minorities than Patsy's. Her work here has touched countless women's lives. Women today don't have to face the barriers and discrimination that Patsy faced when applying to graduate school.

Her firsthand experience with gender discrimination--being denied admission to medical school as a promising young science student--did not discourage her or break her spirit, but sparked her desire for change.

Most importantly, when she overcame gender and racial barriers to climb the ladder of success, she did not kick that ladder aside for other women; instead, she led the way and supported their upward rise, most importantly, paving the way with legislation such as Title IX. She never gave up the struggle to give every child access to a quality education.

Her memory continues to be an inspiration for me on the Education and Labor committee and in the legislation that I introduce and cosponsor. This Congress, I will again introduce legislation to start a Patsy Mink fellowship program to help more women and minorities earn graduate degrees and become college professors.

A lot more work remains to be done to give women more educational opportunities: women are still underrepresented in math, science, and engineering-related fields.

Thanks in large part to Patsy's work, a majority of people agree that women should be allowed to apply to college and graduate programs without facing discriminatory admissions policies, sexual harassment in schools when they do get in, or even a lack of athletic opportunities. We are well served by Patsy's legacy, a true guiding star.

Mr. Chairman, maybe, just maybe, if a woman has access to contraceptives, abortion will be prevented.

What is wrong with you people? Where do you come from?

Oh, that's right, you come from the United States of America, where all women are allowed, rich or poor, to have access to and choices over family planning. Lucky us.

There are many choices for preventing unwanted pregnancies, and let us not forget prevention of HIV/AIDS. If you are against abortion, at least support prevention. If you are concerned about HIV/AIDS, support contraception.

Our Nation has a long history of generosity and caring. That should not end today. What are we doing? We are up here with the Lowey amendment ensuring that women in the poorest villages in the poorest countries have access to contraceptives. We are doing that by providing medically approved and necessary contraceptives to women who would otherwise have no other means to prevent unwanted pregnancies and/or to prevent HIV/AIDS.

Unintended pregnancies and illegal abortions have been on the rise in areas where access to family planning has been denied. Chairwoman Lowey's provision is just plain common sense. Let's put women's health above politics and vote ``no'' on the Smith-Stupak amendment.

Mr. Chairman, we have a solemn responsibility to honor the promises we've made to our veterans. Boldly heeding the call to duty, brave men and women from across America have served with distinction in defense of our Nation. They have dedicated their lives to safeguarding the promise and potential of our country, and we have an obligation to repay their commitment.

The veterans of California's 6th District understand that our obligation to our service men and women does not end when they return home. The importance of providing our veterans with the benefits they need and deserve does not abate just because our troops are no longer serving in the field. Our support for troops is a lifelong commitment.

The substandard care, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and deplorable conditions exposed at Walter Reed Military Hospital underscore broken promises to our Nation's veterans. We cannot allow the Bush administration's failure to become the hallmark of our country's commitment to our veterans. Our veterans deserve much better.

The Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2008 is a resolute step toward fulfilling the promises to our veterans that the Republican-controlled Congress neglected during the past 12 years. This bill increases the VA's budget by $6.7 billion above fiscal year 2007 funding levels, providing the greatest single increase in funding for veterans health care in the 77-year history of the VA and, for the first time, exceeding the budget requests of independent veterans service groups. Additionally, this legislation confronts the 400,000 claims backlog from veterans awaiting decisions on the status of their disability benefits by adding more than 1,100 new claims processors. By allocating critical funding to help repair veteran's health care facilities, establish eight new centers to care for veterans suffering from Traumatic Brain Injuries, and facilitate the transition from the Defense Department to the VA, this appropriations bill will go a long way toward fixing the problems that the Bush administration has allowed to fester.

The veterans' community needs our reinvestment in their health care and benefits system. Our service members have proved courage and patriotism, and it's our turn to prove that we can keep our promise to them. This Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs Appropriations bill shows that we can provide our veterans with medical care, benefits and social support in a timely manner. By passing this bill, we can start to repay them for the bravery they have shown.

Mr. Speaker, I have come down to this floor more than 200 times to hold the administration accountable for its actions in Iraq. Since then, we have seen it all, from freedom fries to ``the surge.'' During these dog days of summer, however, we can't relent. We have to join together as never before because this administration is moving in new and even more dangerous directions in foreign policy. Let me give you an example.

Several weeks ago, the administration confirmed what I had been saying

for the last 3 or 4 years; namely, that they are determined to maintain tens of thousands of American troops on permanent military bases in Iraq for many decades to come. To support this position, they draw an absurd comparison between the situation in Iraq and the situation in South Korea. South Korea, where U.S. troops have been stationed for more than 50 years. And then White House spokesman Tony Snow said U.S. troops may have to stay in Iraq indefinitely to perform what he called an over-the-horizon support role. Over-the-horizon support role. George Orwell couldn't have said it any better. Call it what it really is, Tony: Occupation.

Ever since the administration took us into Iraq, I have tried to get at the heart of what is wrong with this foreign policy, and I believe the answer is this: The administration's foreign policy has failed. It has failed because it sells America short. The administration believes that the only weapon we have to fight terrorism is military power, but by relying on military power alone and ignoring our many other strengths, they have made America much weaker, not stronger.

There is another answer: A much different look at diplomacy and foreign policy. First, we must reestablish our moral leadership and regain our standing in the global community by using diplomacy as our first and best resort, and war only as our last resort. President Roosevelt said that the Presidency is preeminently a place of moral leadership, and that is something this administration must learn.

Second, we must rebuild our international alliances. We may be a Superpower, but we don't have super powers like Spiderman. So, we need the help of other nations. International cooperation is by far the best way to dismantle terrorist networks, manage globalization, stop the spread of disease and global warming, and fight the poverty that is the breeding ground of terrorism.

Third, Mr. Speaker, we must stop using fear as an excuse to justify immoral wars, or as a bludgeon to crush dissent and trash our Constitution. Again, quoting President Roosevelt, the only thing we have to fear, he said, is fear itself. Well, this administration believes that without fear, they can't move their agenda.

Fourth, we must end our addiction to foreign oil that pumps billions of dollars into autocratic regimes and props them up. Let's get serious about sustainable energy. And let's export green technology instead of war.

Next, we must renew our commitment to nuclear nonproliferation. It is sheer hypocrisy to demand that Iran and North Korea halt their nuclear programs while we talk about developing new nuclear weapons of our very own.

And finally, we must take the money we are investing in war and reinvest it in what makes us truly strong: education, health care, jobs, child care, the environment, and nonviolent problem solving.

I have offered a national security plan myself which rests on these broad principles. It's called SMART, which stands for Sensible Multilateral American Response to Terrorism. SMART, H. Res. 227, is deadly serious about stopping acts of terrorism. It would beef-up our intelligence capabilities. It would enhance our efforts to cut off financing for terrorist organizations.

Madam Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to share with my colleagues the recent selection of Santa Rosa, California, the largest city in my district, as a 2007 All-America City. The honor was recently bestowed upon Santa Rosa by the National Civic League, and is considered to be the most prestigious community recognition competition in the United States today. Santa Rosa was honored for its exemplary community vision, collaborative problem- solving and the ability to meet local challenges. I have represented Santa Rosa for the past 14 years and these characteristics are just the beginning.

In order to win this prestigious award, a broad and diverse delegation of Santa Rosa public officials and business and community leaders represented Santa Rosa against 20 other community finalists from across the country. The delegation presented not only their innovative programs, but the local solutions they have implemented, before to a jury of their peers from across the United States. The delegation from Santa Rosa included the following members of the community:

Bob Blanchard, Mayor, City of Santa Rosa; Jane Bender, Councilmember, City of Santa Rosa; Jeff Kolin, City Manager, City of Santa Rosa; Michael Frank, Assistant City Manager/Administrative Services, City of Santa Rosa; Patricia Fruiht, Assistant to the City Manager, City of Santa Rosa; Mark Ihde, Retired Sonoma County Sheriff & President and CEO of Goodwill Industries--Redwood Empire; Rhuenette Alums, Area Director, AT&T; Roberta Atha, Administrative Technician, City of Santa Rosa; Neil Brady, Senior Maintenance Worker, City of Santa Rosa; Judy Daugherty, Risk Management Analyst, City of Santa Rosa; Michael Friedenberg, President, Arts Council of Sonoma County; Jesse Guerrero, Artstart Apprentice; Vince Harper, Director, Youth & Neighborhood Services, Community Action Partnership; Mo McElroy, Director, Santa Rosa Convention & Visitors Bureau; Juan Meza, After-School Program Participant; Ernesto Olivares, Police Lieutenant and Manager, Gang Prevention & Intervention Services, City of Santa Rosa; Rosie Rojas, After-School Program Participant; Crystal Tsutsui, After-School Programs Volunteer/Chaperone; Mario Uribe, Creative Director, Artstart; Steve Velasquez, Program Director, Hope Works Santa Rosa; Patricia Wilburn, Production Specialist, Community Media Center Chandra Woodworth, Artstart Apprentice; Donna Zapata, Operations Manager, Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

During their presentation the delegation was able to share the achievements of three Santa Rosa's programs that serve as outstanding examples of public-private partnership to solve address community concerns:

Santa Rosa Downtown Arts Program

The Santa Rosa Downtown Arts Program brings a wide range of arts and cultural programming into the downtown area to strengthen the community's image and sense of place, increase cultural unity and stimulate economic development. The program creates an arts hub that draws people downtown to live, work, and play, which encourages development and increases downtown business. The Downtown Arts Program has a three-prong approach: (1) Physical Environment--Artists design sculptures, informational kiosks, benches, light poles and news racks. Art facilities, studios, galleries, and exhibition spaces are a priority. (2) Cultural Programming includes diverse

music, dance, theater, film, and literary arts. (3) Sustainable Resources--Leadership and funding from public and private sector guarantee the program's strength and growth.

Measure O Public Safety Quarter-Cent Sales Tax Measure

A quarter-cent public safety sales tax measure was placed on the November 2004 ballot, which came to be known as Measure O. The measure generates approximately $7 million per year for Police, Fire, and Gang Prevention and Intervention efforts. The ordinance set up a citizen oversight committee and has strict rules preventing any ``supplanting'' of existing services or funding in the General Fund. This project has allowed significant progress to be made in vital areas at a time when core public safety was threatened.

Mayor's Gang Prevention Task Force

Four years ago, the city of Santa Rosa took aggressive steps to address the rise of local gangs. The city began with a public outreach campaign to educate the community on the growing threat, and followed that up with trips to other cities where staff and policy leaders were able to learn from their programs. In addition, the Mayor became actively involved by establishing the Gang Prevention Task Force in order to confront the issues and the risk to youth. The Task Force consists of policy leaders from throughout Sonoma County, school officials, law enforcement and officials from non-profit and social service organizations. In addition the move was not a drain on existing public resources, and was primarily funded by a quarter-cent sales tax measure that dedicates 20 percent to gang prevention and intervention measures.

While the Santa Rosa delegation brought home the top honors, every member of the delegation was able to learn from the other finalists. As a result they have returned to Santa Rosa, not only energized, but armed with fresh ideas to improve their community. I am very proud of their achievement, Madam Speaker, and invite all of my colleagues to visit this lovely community in the Sonoma County wine country just north of San Francisco.

Mr. Speaker, last month, despite my objections and many of my colleagues, Congress passed a bill to continue funding the occupation of Iraq. Now everyone is waiting for the next big event in the war, General Petraeus's report on whether the escalation, the surge, is succeeding. This report is due in September.

But with our brave American troops and innocent Iraqis continuing to die, we are remiss if we twiddle our thumbs and wait for September. We need to hold this administration accountable for its actions in Iraq, and we need to do it today, not 3 months from now.

So I want to go back to January 10 of this year, the night that the President announced his new surge policy in a speech to the Nation, to see if he is delivering on what he promised. On that night, he said, ``America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.''

But here we are, Mr. Speaker, 6 months later, and the Iraqi government has made virtually no progress on any of it's benchmarks. Even Lieutenant General Douglas Lute, our new war czar, expressed frustration about this in his Senate confirmation hearing. General Lute said, ``My assessment would be that the Iraqis have shown very little progress.''

Mr. Speaker, back on January 10, we were told that the surge would help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence. But the Pentagon's own report on the current situation, which was released last Wednesday, said that the violence continues to be driven by sectarianism. In other words, we've sent our troops to fight a civil war that has nothing to do with protecting America from terrorism.

Also, back on January 10, the escalation speech included these words: ``Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders.''

Yet, Mr. Speaker, in the Senate hearing I mentioned a moment ago, Senator Evan Bayh quoted a top CIA expert in saying that the American presence in Iraq is creating more members of al Qaeda than we are killing.

The President claims that he has the power to grab people off the streets of America, declare them enemy combatants and order the military to hold them indefinitely. But last week, a Federal Appeals Court ruled that, ``to sanction such authority would have disastrous consequences for the Constitution and for the country.''

The President says that he is a strict constructionist when it comes to the Constitution. But he has shown that he is not a strict constructionist, not a loose constructionist, but a non constructionist who simply ignores the Constitution.

It is time, Mr. Speaker, for a new policy in Iraq. We must fully fund the safe redeployment of our troops. We must guarantee the very best health care for our veterans. We must work with the Iraqi people and the international community to provide for the reconstruction of Iraq. We must look to diplomacy, not preemptive war, to help Iraq and its neighbors to achieve political solutions to the region's problems, and there must be no permanent American military bases in Iraq.

And America must rely, once again, on our most powerful weapons in the fight against terrorism, our Constitution and our democratic values.

And, Mr. Speaker, we must bring our troops home.

Mr. Speaker, today marks over 1,500 days of the occupation of Iraq. Since that time, over 3,500 brave men and women have given their lives and at least 2,600 have been injured. We have spent nearly half a trillion dollars, but this occupation is about more than just numbers. It is about the lives, both American and Iraqi, that will be changed forever.

So many brave men and women heeded the call of the Commander in Chief to rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. One could say many of these troops were misled with false or at the very least faulty intelligence. They deserve so much more for their sacrifice and their service.

Last month, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, a newspaper in my district, carried a story titled, ``GIs Voice Disillusionment With the War.'' It outlined the frustrations of our troops, some on their first tour, others who have served again and again.

One account exemplifies the frustration, and I will read it. ``In 2003, 2004, 100 percent of the soldiers wanted to be here to fight this war,'' said Sergeant First Class David Moore, a self-described ``conservative Texas Republican'' and platoon sergeant who strongly advises an American withdrawal.

``Now,'' he says, ``95 percent of my platoon agrees with me.''

Mr. Speaker, that is directly from the front. This is not something that has been run through the administration's spin machine. This is the unvarnished truth from the troops in the trenches.

One more account comes from Staff Sergeant David Safstrom. According the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Staff Sergeant Safstrom does not regret his previous tours in Iraq, not even a difficult second stint when two comrades were killed while trying to capture insurgents. He said, ``In Mosul, in 2003, it felt like we were making the city a better place. There was no sectarian violence. Saddam was gone. We were tracking down the bad guys. It felt awesome.''

But now, Mr. Speaker, on this third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb. When they searched the bomber's body, they found identification showing him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army.

``I thought,'' he said, ``'What are we doing here? Why are we still here?''', said Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the 1st battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. He had changed his mind.

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear, I and every one of my colleagues support the troops. We honor their bravery and we commit to ensuring that they receive all of the promised benefits as a result of their service to our Nation.

I believe that the best way we can stand up for our troops is to bring them home. It is past time for a fully funded and safe redeployment. We will not back out of our commitment to the Iraqi people. We will work with them to increase their security forces and to help in reconstruction.

But we must face the facts. The situation on the ground may be worse than it ever has been before. Military leaders are conceding that the so-called surge is not working, and it may never.

The administration has even said that we needed to look at the situation in Iraq like that of Korea, and we have been there half a century. That is simply not an option.

Let's do the right thing. Let's do the sensible thing. Let's bring our troops home. We owe it to them and we owe it to our Nation.

Madam Speaker, I am introducing legislation today that will require the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to issue an emergency interim final standard, and after 2 years, a final standard to protect workers against a butter flavoring chemical called diacetyl. Exposure to diacetyl has been found to cause a devastating lung disease known as bronchiolitis obliterans, or ``popcorn lung.'' Diacetyl has been described by NIOSH as causing ``astonishingly grotesque'' effects in workers' lungs--often in a very short time period.

Dozens of workers at microwave popcorn factories or factories where flavors are produced have become sick, and several have died. Others are awaiting lung transplants. Thousands more workers are exposed at factories that make or use flavorings throughout the country. The Workplace Protections Subcommittee held a hearing in April on OSHA's failure to issue health and safety standards. Eric Peoples, a former employee of a Missouri popcorn plant who is awaiting a double lung transplant, testified that he was never informed of the hazards of diacetyl while working at the plant. ``I played by the rules. I worked to support my family. This unregulated industry virtually destroyed my life. Don't let it destroy the lives of others,'' Peoples asked the committee.

The interim final standard will apply to the food flavorings industry and the microwave popcorn production and packaging industry. This bill will also require OSHA to issue a final diacetyl standard within 2 years of issuing the interim final standard. The final standard will apply to all locations where diacetyl is processed or used. Although we are expecting OSHA to follow the normal administrative procedures for issuing the final standard, we expect the agency to do whatever is necessary and allowed by the various procedural laws and regulations to ensure that the final standard can be issued within the 2-year deadline. In any case, the interim final standard will remain in effect until the final standard is issued.

It is with some reluctance that I offer this legislation. Over 35 years ago, Congress gave OSHA the authority to address workplace hazards, and gave the agency the ability to issue emergency standards. But OSHA has not acted. OSHA has known that diacetyl causes bronchiolitis obliterans or popcorn lung for over 5 years ever since the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health published evidence in 2002 linking diacetyl to bronchiolitis obliterans, yet OSHA has not even issued an information bulletin. Last year, House Democrats urged the Labor Department to address this serious health hazard. OSHA has not responded. Also last year, two labor unions, supported by a letter signed by 42 of the Nation's leading occupational health scientists and physicians, petitioned the agency for an emergency standard. OSHA has still not responded to that petition.

The measures required by the bill are feasible and affordable. In fact, they are the same measures already recommended by the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association, the main industry association for the flavorings industry, in 2004. The association has voted to support this legislation and the issuance of an OSHA standard.

The measures mandated by this bill are also consistent with recommendations from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH, and we expect OSHA to work closely with NIOSH to ensure that the final standard is fully protective and completed by the deadline set by this bill.

It is clear that an emergency exists and that this hazard presents a grave danger and significant risk of life-threatening illness to exposed workers. If OSHA will not act, then Congress must act.

Madam Speaker, I rise with my colleague Representative Mike Thompson with great pleasure to honor Helga Lemke on her 18 years of service with Community Action Partnership of Sonoma County. Since 1989, when she was hired as the agency's executive director, Helga has shown a steadfast commitment to increasing opportunities for low income residents of Sonoma County to gain self-sufficiency and contribute to their communities. We have found Helga to be fiercely focused on fighting poverty, wonderfully competent in running this large, multi- program agency, and yet very down-to-earth and authentic.

Helga has spent her entire career helping others, from her internship with the National Community Action Foundation nearly 40 years ago through her work at the United Nations to the present. One of the tenets she holds so dearly, says colleague John Way, is making a difference. He notes, ``I have heard her often say that one of the most enriching things about her work is having someone tell her, `What you've done has changed my life.' ''

Helga's well-earned appointment to director of programs for the California Department of Community Services reminds us how much she has accomplished for our community. For one, she transformed a struggling nonprofit into one of the largest and most respected agencies in the county. She also initiated an award-winning staff diversity training program and a community-acclaimed annual conference on poverty, at the same time leading a staff of 225 at more than 20 sites with an annual budget of more than $11 million.

Despite all this, Helga has still made time for public service. The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors appointed her to the Workforce Investment Board and Youth Council; the Santa Rosa City Mayor has appointed her to the Mayor's Task Force on Gangs; and she has also served on numerous boards, including Roseland University Prep School. She has also testified before Congress on Head Start issues where her expertise was valued.

Madam Speaker, we have appreciated working with Director Lemke on the many issues faced by the Sonoma community and thank her for her dedicated service. Her passion and energy are an inspiration to all of us who work with families. Congratulations on your appointment, Helga.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois and thank our ranking member for making this possible this morning.

As a member of the Committee on Education and Labor and as Chair of the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, I truly am proud to have brought H.R. 2637 to the floor today.

The Child Labor Protection Act of 2007 is a narrowly drafted, bipartisan bill that increases penalties substantially for violations of child labor protection provisions that actually cause death or serious injury. Although this legislation does not make the imposition of penalties mandatory, it leaves the decision of whether or not to assess penalties up to the Secretary of Labor, and it provides the Department with an additional enforcement tool to address the most serious labor violations.

There is much more that must be done, Mr. Speaker, to strengthen our child labor laws, but this bill is a small first step. It is a beginning.

Mr. Chairman, providing our police forces, firefighters, emergency medical service personnel, and public health personnel with the resources they need to effectively confront and overcome the threats posed by terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies requires our continued commitment and dedication. Our first responders work tirelessly to protect and aid victims of disasters across our country. It's our responsibility to make sure they have the support necessary to perform their jobs.

The dedicated men and women who serve the people of California's 6th District understand the importance of adequate homeland security resources. Each day, ships arrive to dock in ports throughout the Bay Area, commuters travel across the Golden Gate Bridge and the Richmond- San Rafael Bridge, and travelers fly all over the world. In order to best utilize the well-trained first responders in my District, we need to enhance the security of the Bay Area's waterways, expand our ability to better prepare for disasters, and improve our ability to mitigate their effects once they occur.

In 2004, Congress provided $4.92 billion in grants for port security and our first responders. Since then, the Bush Administration and the last Republican Congress cut funding for these programs every year, despite the fact that the costs of preparing for new homeland security threats have steadily increased. The President has continued to deny the importance of sufficiently funding our first responders by asking for only $2.55 billion for these grant programs this year.

We cannot expect local communities to be the first to respond to an emergency unless we give them the resources to do so. Additionally, we cannot assure safe passage for those traveling into our country, nor that the containers transported aboard the airplanes and ships do not conceal weapons of mass destruction unless we provide adequate funds toward improving the safety and security of both our ports and our airlines.

Fortunately, the Homeland Security Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2008 represents an important step in remedying past failures to support our first responders and to strengthen our national security. This bill provides $4.52 billion for first responder and port security grant programs, $1.97 billion above President's request and $863 million above the total these programs received in Fiscal Year 2007. Specifically, it provides $800 million for firefighter assistance grants, $800 million for urban security grants, and $400 million for port facilities and infrastructure security grants. This bill also eliminates the cap on the number of federal airport screeners that the Transportation Security Administration can employ, which will help to improve security at airports nationwide.

In addition to funding measures to address our country's most pressing security vulnerabilities, the Homeland Security Appropriations bill also increases funding for our country's Disaster Relief Fund to $1.7 billion in order to assist state and local governments following a declared disaster or emergency and provides $230 million to modernize over 100,000 flood maps used to determine rates for the National Flood Insurance Program. Additionally, this important piece of legislation will require that all homeland security contracts will be awarded in an open, competitive process, ending the Bush Administration's practice of awarding large-scale contacts to companies with political connections to the White House. Furthermore, this bill will make sure that all funds allocated in this bill can only be used for projects that comply with the Davis-Bacon mandate, requiring that federal contractors pay workers no less than the local prevailing wage.

Securing our homeland demands a strong partnership between the federal government, state governments, and local communities, and I commend the Democratic leadership and the members of the Appropriations Committee for their diligence in working to strengthen our homeland security. By allocating our country's resources to where they are most needed, we will be able to better prepare for and respond to disasters that that threaten the safety of the American people.

Madam Speaker, Friday is World Oceans Day--a day we celebrate the vast waters that cover two-thirds of the surface of our planet.

A small, but biologically important part of the Blue Planet is offshore of my 6th Congressional District, a stretch that encompasses the entire coastline of Marin and Sonoma Counties.

If you've driven the Marin-Sonoma coast you know how beautiful it is. Most of it is undeveloped or sparsely populated. Its sparkling waters, curling waves, pristine beaches, moon rocked cliffs, surging tide pools, and its soaring seabirds and breeching whales inspire and delight. Thanks to nutrient rich upwelling which provides a bounty of phytoplankton at the bottom of the food chain, our waters support 33 species of marine mammals, including blue and humpbacked whales and elephant seals, at the top of the food chain.

That's not to say that even here there are not problems. Today the commercial fishing fleet of Bodega Bay is just a remnant of past days. Last year, because of a water allotment that devasted the Klamath River fishery, our commercial salmon fishing season was slashed. Meanwhile, native coho and chinook salmon and steelhead trout are on the endangered species list.

These tragic depletions of our fisheries are symptomatic of many things: global overfishing; inland habitat destruction; and water diversions; climate change; pollution, coastal development--all of which were addressed by reports from the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy and the Pew Oceans Commission, and all of which need to be seriously dealt with.

But the ocean is amazingly resilient. Aquatic populations can come back, if we take positive actions.

All of our oceans need enlightened governance and protection, but there are places that are so rich, so vitally important to sustaining marine life that we need to immediately take special measures.

The northern California coast is one of those places, and that's why I have introduced legislation, H.R. 1187, to expand the boundaries of the Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries to include the entire Sonoma and with the support of Representative Mike Thompson and the Mendocino County board of supervisors, the southern Mendocino coast.

The current northern boundary of the Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Banks National Marine Sanctuaries is Bodega Head. Yet research shows that the rich marine geological area of the Gulf of the Farallones actually extends to Point Arena, about 100 miles north of Bodega Head.

The Sonoma and southern Mendocino coast has two great estuaries, the Russian and Gualala Rivers. The Russian River watershed is especially burdened by multiple threats caused by human development. My bill protects these estuaries by banning increased polluting discharges into their waters. And, it will ensure that changes in flow or salinity do not harm marine life.

Marine sanctuary protection will also ensure that the Bodega Marine Laboratory will be able to continue 50-years of studies in these pristine waters--research that will help us learn how to live with an ocean that is not so endless that it cannot be despoiled.

The people of Sonoma and Mendocino love their coast, and because we will bring to it permanent protection, ecosystem management and the vital research that the marine sanctuary program provides, we will pass it on to our children, unspoiled and thriving with life.

That's my commitment as we celebrate World Oceans Day.

Madam Speaker, on June 5th, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to vote on rollcalls Nos. 426-430.

Had I been present, I would have voted in the following:

Rollcall No. 426, H. Res. 327--``aye.''

Rollcall No. 427, H. Res. 422--``aye.''

Rollcall No. 428, H. Res. 430--``aye.''

Rollcall No. 429, H. Res. 451--``aye.''

Rollcall No. 430, H. Res. 452--``aye.''

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I join you here today to honor our colleague, Hal Brown, on his 25 years of service to Marin County. Since 1983 when he was first appointed to the Board of Supervisors to represent the Second District, Hal has demonstrated a caring, thoughtful, and committed approach to addressing the issues facing the residents of Marin.

Hal's priorities have been clear from the start. He focuses on families, education, environment, responsible government and economic vitality. His own vitality and dedication have led him to serve on more than 25 boards and organizations, from the Marin Conservation League to the Rape Crisis Center, from the county Flood Control and Water District to the Disabled Students Advisory Board.

This work has resulted in a long list of notable accomplishments--for example, preserving more than 1,500 acres of open space, promoting free bus rides for students, and authoring Marin's Family Medical Leave law.

After the New Year's Eve flood of 2005, Hal moved to make his district safer by establishing the first regional flood warning system in the Ross Valley. For long-range safety, he has spearheaded efforts for towns and organizations to work with the county, State and Federal governments to implement a comprehensive flood control plan.

``It doesn't make sense to look at just flood control or environmental restoration or water quality issues in isolation,'' Hal has said. ``We need to address the problem with an approach that makes common, ecological and economic sense. A watershed-wide approach could meet the test of all three.''

A San Anselmo resident for 35 years, Hal coached various youth sports while raising his two sons, Mike and Chris.

Madam Speaker, I have appreciated working with Supervisor Brown on the many issues faced by the Marin community, and I look forward to continuing our partnership.

Congratulations, Hal, on your 25 years of dedicated service.

Madam Speaker, the Child Labor Protection Act of 2007 is a narrowly drafted bipartisan bill that amends the Fair Labor Standards Act, FLSA, to increase civil penalties for those who violated child labor provisions. Specifically, it would: Increase penalties from $11,000 to $50,000 for violations that cause death or serious injury; provide that the penalty can be doubled when the violation causing death or serious injury is repeated or willful; and provide that the $50,000 penalty can be assessed for each violation.

This legislation does not make the impositions of penalties mandatory--whether or not to assess a penalty is still discretionary with the Secretary of Labor--but it would provide the Department of Labor with a much needed enforcement tool to address the most serious child labor violations, deter repeat occurrences and further strengthen its enforcement of laws that protect children.

There is much that must be done to strengthen our child labor laws, and this bill is the foundation for future action that I hope my Subcommittee on Workforce Protections of the Committee on Education and Labor will take on these issues.