Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from California for yielding to me.

I rise today in opposition to the previous question for the committee funding resolution. The resolution at hand underfunds our Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, not compared to previous years but in light of problems that exist and the education that is needed.

At a time crucial to restoring America's faith in our ability to govern ourselves, the Rules Committee dismissed an amendment offered by Chairwoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Ranking Member Doc Hastings which would have allowed us to equip the Ethics Committee with the resources necessary for enacting meaningful reform.

Opposing this previous question will enable the House to consider the amendment to fully fund the Ethics Committee, which I believe will actually save us money in the long run, and I encourage my colleagues to allow us to debate and support this important amendment.

Mr. Speaker, some will say that the increase to the Ethics Committee is already substantial. To those Members, I would like to remind them that when making their request, the chairwoman and ranking member took into consideration the past problems and the recent changes to our rules, and determined the staffing and resources necessary to provide training, oversight and interpretation of those rules to this body.

We have rightfully tightened our travel rules, requiring preapproval; finally banned travel on corporate jets; and we have enacted specific restrictions on accepting food and drinks at briefings, and T-shirts or books from organizations or constituents. Some are allowed, and some are not.

Mr. Speaker, more than a memo is needed to convey these guidelines. Members and staff should already be receiving training on the Rules governing the 110th Congress. Instead, we are beginning the month of March, and it is unclear even when the training could be available.

On top of the new rules already adopted, there is more to be done, in my opinion. We need to have a permanent and professional committee staff, and we need to expand ethics training to lobbyists.

How can we expect the committee to exercise duties of even the most minimum oversight and investigations with a budget that does not meet the stated needs of the chairwoman and the ranking member of that committee?

As elected representatives, we come to Congress with the trust of those we represent. The poor decisions of a few have dishonored this great body and have challenged the faith Americans deserve to have in each of us. Enforcing high standards of ethics and civility may seem to be the responsibility of the majority party, but they are, in fact, essential within every one of us elected to hold the public trust.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to oppose this previous question to allow consideration of this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, since the beginning of the Iraq war, one of my foremost concerns has been the long-term stability of the Middle East, and the potential impact that chaos in this region could have on our security.

Our men and women in the United States military, among the hundreds of Delawarians, are doing extraordinary work under very complex and difficult

circumstances. We owe them an enormous debt of gratitude.

Notwithstanding the heroic efforts of our military personnel, the Iraqi Government has been unable to overcome the constant instability and sectarian violence that has marked much of the last 4 years. We have increased top levels in the past, including Fallujah in 2004, and Baghdad this past July, with mixed results.

Despite the incredible efforts of our brave solders, it is clear to me that an increase in American forces alone cannot resolve this conflict. Therefore, I will support this resolution, because I believe that the surge will be unsuccessful without a comprehensive diplomatic strategy to engage the international community and turn the responsibility over to the Iraqi Government.

That being said, I am disappointed that today's discussion has been structured in such a way that Members are limited solely to an up-or- down vote on the troop increases. On Friday, after Congress passes this resolution, we will still lack the strategy necessary to stabilize the Middle East and bring our soldiers home.

This Congress owes the American people a truly complete and comprehensive discourse regarding our future in Iraq. The situation facing our soldiers is extremely complex, and it is unfortunate that the Democratic resolution fails to accurately reflect that reality.

In December, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group presented a comprehensive blueprint to achieve stability in the region and transfer responsibility over to the Iraqi Government, which I have in my hand and I went back and reread this week. I would encourage everyone to reread it.

In my opinion, one of the important recommendations made by the group was to call for a robust diplomatic effort to stabilize Iraq and ease tensions in the region. In fact, some of our Nation's greatest military minds, including former Secretary of State Colin Powell, have joined the group in recommending that every country with an interest in averting a chaotic Iraq, including all of Iraq's neighbors, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran and Syria among them, participate in this important dialogue.

The group also recommended that we engage the United Nations Security Council, the European Union and other international institutions in launching this new diplomatic offensive. The intensive diplomacy recommended by the Iraq Study Group should be familiar to all of us who remember the Cold War.

One of the best examples of this approach to diplomacy was evident when a week after President Reagan asked General Secretary Gorbachev to ``tear down this Wall,'' he sent his administration to Moscow for diplomatic talks.

The Iraq Study Group's recommendations are by no means a panacea. But their report does represent a new path forward, based on the pragmatic style of diplomacy that helped us win the Cold War.

For this reason, I have joined Congressman Frank Wolf and some of my colleagues in introducing legislation that endorses the Iraq Study Group's call for an integrated diplomatic initiative. In focusing on a true strategy for achieving stability in Iraq, this resolution seeks to improve our global standing and concentrate our efforts on funding an end game based on a genuine commitment to diplomacy.

To obtain these goals, the Wolf resolution seeks to lift our debate above the existing political rhetoric and pursue a comprehensive strategy to build regional and international support for stability in Iraq.

It is equally crucial that we do everything within our ability to accelerate the training of Iraqi troops and provide them with the resources necessary to assume control of their own destiny.

Mr. Speaker, as we speak, thousands of our Nation's bravest and brightest are risking their lives to serve our country in Iraq. Protecting American soldiers must continue to be our greatest priority. I will oppose any attempt to cut off funds for our troops who are serving in harm's way.

Therefore, it is crucial that we advance constructive strategies, such as those identified by the Iraq Study Group, to end the violence and bring our troops home to their families.

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize Mr. D. Wayne Holden and Mr. Sherman L. Townsend for their distinguished contributions to my home state of Delaware. In 2001, the Delaware Community Foundation established an award, now known as the Allen Cup Award, in order to honor the achievements of philanthropic leaders that posses the vision and drive to affect meaningful change throughout Delaware, and more specifically in the central and southern regions of my home state. I cannot think of two more deserving recipients.

Wayne Holden, a Dover, Delaware native, has always been deeply passionate about improving his community. Many of his philanthropic projects are carried out through The Thank You Fund, a donor-advised fund that he and his wife, Betsy, started through the Delaware Community Foundation (DCF). The Holdens are responsible for supporting numerous charitable organizations ranging from the Nature Conservancy to the DCF Youth Philanthropy Board.

Wayne has also played a pivotal role in preserving the quality of Delaware's communities. At a time when the Schwartz Center for the Arts and the Dover Art League experienced serious financial instability, Wayne donated his own leadership skills and financial resources in order to save these organizations. Through his work as First Vice President at Merrill Lynch in Dover, Wayne has been able to inspire others to create charitable legacies and thus furthered his own philanthropic mission of improving Delaware.

Sherman Townsend, has worked alongside Wayne on the Board of the Delaware Community Foundation and also in business as the First Vice President for Investment at Merrill Lynch. Throughout his many endeavors, Sherman has been successful at building a legacy of leadership and charity within his community. As an active board member of the DCF since 1986, he has helped the foundation grow and flourish. His noble efforts have secured $2 million grants, established a $3.3 million endowment and lead to partnerships with organizations such as the United Way.

Sherman's philanthropic spirit shines brightly in all aspects of his life. In addition to advising and helping his clients build charitable legacies, he and his family have established a fund which supports many important organizations such as, the Children's Beach House, Meals on Wheels, and the Bayhealth Foundation. Sherman has further demonstrated his dedication to the community through his involvement on the University of Delaware Board of Trustees, paying particular attention to the development of scholarships for students and the School of Nursing.

I could speak for hours and still not do these two men justice. Their contributions will

have a lasting impact upon our state and I am truly grateful for all they have done. I cannot think of two men more fit to receive the Allen Cup Award. I wish the Delaware Community Foundation warm wishes as they bestow this honor upon such deserving recipients.

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize the accomplishments of Littleton P. Mitchell and Jane E. Mitchell, two of the leading civil rights advocates from my home state of Delaware. On February 6th, Howard High School of Technology will kick off a fundraising drive to establish a chair in honor of the Mitchells at the University of Delaware. I cannot think of two more worthy recipients.

Littleton was born in Milford, Delaware and attended Howard High School. He served as a lieutenant in the United States Army Reserve and spent time at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, as well as the Tuskegee Air Base in Alabama. In addition to his Army service, Lit, as he was known to his friends, worked at the Governor Bacon Residential Treatment Center for Social and Emotional Disturbed Youth for 36 years. Most noteworthy though, were his contributions as State President of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

During his 31 years as President of Delaware's NAACP, Littleton played an important role in several civil rights advancements. He helped integrate all of Delaware's hospitals and worked to eliminate Delaware's Inn Keepers Law that allowed restaurants to refuse service to Black citizens. During the same period, Lit oversaw the integration of local movie theaters and Delaware's volunteer fire companies. I could continue but his accomplishments are too vast to cover in a single document.

Jane Mitchell was not only Littleton's loving wife, but an accomplished registered nurse and community activist. Also a graduate of Howard High School, Jane's nursing career led her to many different hospitals around the United States, including the Tuskegee Institute Hospital in Alabama, the Jewish Hospital of Philadelphia and several hospitals throughout Delaware. She held the distinguished titles of Head Nurse at the Governor Bacon Health Center, and Director of Nursing at Delaware State Hospital.

Jane's impressive career achievements and numerous volunteer activities have earned her a great deal of recognition. Most notably, she was recognized by the National Association of College Women as the Woman of the Year and the Alpha Nu Sigma Chapter of the Rho Sorority awarded her the Outstanding Negro Woman Award.

This couple has achieved so much in their lives, it is truly impossible to do them justice at this time. I am grateful for all they have given to the State of Delaware and I cannot think of two better people to name a chair after. I wish Howard High School luck in their endeavor and I know they will work diligently to honor their distinguished alumni.

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize the accomplishments and career of the Honorable Terry R. Spence. Mr. Spence is the longest serving Speaker of the House of Representatives in the history of the State of Delaware. Speaker Spence also has held the position longer than any speaker in any state legislature in the United States of America.

Mr. Spence was born and raised in Wilmington, Delaware. He received an associate's degree in business from Goldey-Beacom College and he later received his bachelor's degree from Wilmington College. Speaker Spence is truly a born and bred Delawarean and he has served our state honorably for over 26 years.

First elected in 1980, Terry quickly rose through the ranks to become the Majority Whip of the General Assembly. He served in this position for 3 years and was consistently reelected as a Republican, even though he served in a Democratic district.

As a State Representative for the 18th District, Terry has worked tirelessly to defend the middle class. As a member of Labor and Veteran Affairs committees, Representative Spence has fought to protect the constituents of the 18th.

Having worked with Terry during my years as lieutenant governor, governor, and now U.S. Representative, I can attest to his strong leadership and his dedication to not only his constituents, but to all Delawareans. Serving as Speaker of the House is a formidable task,

and Terry has managed to successfully carry out his duties over an extraordinary period of time.

Speaker Spence continues to serve as a dignified leader in the General Assembly and I wish him luck as he begins his work with the 144th session of Delaware's legislative body. I commend him for a life of service and thank him for his tireless dedication to Delaware.

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize the career of Stanley W. Taylor. Stan has served in Delaware's Department of Correction for 30 years. He has proven to be a tough and formidable leader in an organization that requires exceptional skill, knowledge, and dedication. I commend Mr. Taylor for his years of service.

Stanley W. Taylor has been a Delaware resident since the age of 5. He was educated at Indian River High School and the University of Delaware. He began his career with the Department of Correction in 1976 when he served as a correctional officer at the Sussex Correctional Institution. He quickly moved through the ranks at Sussex Correctional, being promoted to the positions of correctional counselor, training academy director, security superintendent, and warden.

Stan's hard work and skill was recognized when he was promoted to chief of the Bureau of Prisons, a position in which he was responsible for all prison operations. When Department of Correction Commissioner Robert Watson retired in 1995, my colleague Senator Tom Carper, who at the time was serving as Governor of Delaware, appointed Stan Taylor to serve as commissioner of the Department of Correction.

For more than 10 years, Stan Taylor has overseen an organization that is responsible for over 6,500 incarcerated offenders, over 18,000 probationers, and more than 10 correctional facilities. He is the first person in the history of the First State to begin his career as a correctional officer and rise through the ranks to eventually lead the Department of Correction as its commissioner.

I join with the people of Delaware to thank Stan for his continued dedication to the correctional system. He has served in a role that can be difficult at times, but is a necessity to the security of our State. I commend him for a life of service and thank him for his tireless dedication to Delaware.

Madam Speaker, it is with great sadness that I rise today to remember the brave and heroic life of Barbaro. This magnificent racehorse connected with so many Americans because of his drive and determination.

A Rocky Balboa figure, Barbaro continued to fight even when the odds were strongly stacked against him. While many veterinarians said that a horse could not survive with the type of injuries Barbaro sustained at the Preakness, he fought for over 8 months, greatly exceeding expectations. What followed the injury was an outpouring of support not frequently seen in our world today. Letters, donations and gifts came in from all over the world, all because of what this wonderful horse embodied.

Barbaro had a strong connection to my home State of Delaware as he raced at Delaware Park and was trained by local trainer Michael Matz. The Barbaro story is an inspirational tale that will be remembered for generations. While a racing champion many times over, Barbaro's greatest talent was bringing people together and inspiring them.

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

I also rise in support of H.R. 392, the District of Columbia and United States Territories Circulating Quarter Dollar Program Act. I want to thank Chairman Frank, Chairman Gutierrez, and Ranking Member Bachus for the Financial Services Committee's support of this legislation and for getting this important bill to the floor early in the 110th Congress. This is a little bit unusual that we are doing early, perhaps early enough to get it done in the Senate as well.

The legislation before us would extend the popular 50 State Quarter project to include coins honoring the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

Madam Speaker, the 50 State Quarter legislation has proven to be a great success. It has reinvigorated coin collecting, has become an invaluable educational tool, and has so far contributed close to $6 billion to the United States Treasury through seiniorage and the sale of products to collectors. With an estimated 140 million Americans collecting these coins, the State quarters have become the most popular coin program in the United States' Mint history.

Madam Speaker, expanding the program to include D.C. and the U.S. territories will further benefit the taxpayer and educate Americans about our Commonwealth. These coins are integral to the history of our country and educate children and tourists about the American way of life. This bipartisan legislation is supported by the members of the Financial Services Committee and has passed the House in every Congress since the 106th Congress. I am pleased that we have brought this much- needed legislation to the floor today and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting the bill.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, at this time I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Puerto Rico (Mr. Fortuno).

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, just in closing I thought I would reference back to what I said in the opening, and that is that this particular program which is known as the 50 State Quarter Program, has made a profit, if you want to call it that, through what we call seigniorage of about $6 billion for the Federal Government. How can that be? It is fairly simple: it costs about a nickel to make a quarter, and we essentially sell the quarters, if you will, for 25 cents; and that amount of money, that extra money is carried over, that 20 cents. And since none of these coins are being basically turned in because of all the collecting which is going on, this is money which the Federal Government can spend, it is called seigniorage, and it has worked out extraordinarily well.

This program not only honors and recognizes these very important entities that have been spoken to by their representatives here today, but also provides an opportunity for the Federal Government to continue to profit from this program, which will, by the end, end otherwise in the year 2008. So I would encourage everybody to vote for it.

I hope, to the distinguished woman from the District of Columbia, that the fifth time is good luck. We have had great luck here in the House; it is in the Senate that we seem to struggle a little bit, and hopefully we can get it done this time.

And let me make a point that I think is important. There has been a lot in the news lately about a delegate voting bill which some people here on the floor may be interested in. This is not that bill, and I am not either denigrating or advocating that bill today. But I think it is very important to understand what this is: it is just a clear recognition of those areas that have been left out of this quarter program that many of us think should be brought in and, for that reason, are very supportive of this legislation. Hopefully this is a bill which both political parties can be very supportive of when the time comes to vote on it.

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

Madam Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 6, the Creating Long-Term Energy Alternatives for the Nation--CLEAN Energy--Act. At a time of record profits for the oil and gas industry, H.R. 6 repeals many incentives that I have not supported over the years and it takes a vital first step in bringing the energy policies of the United States into the 21st century. By recouping Federal revenues through the repeal of nearly $13 billion in subsidies and tax breaks to oil and gas companies, H.R. 6 appropriately dedicates this revenue to create a research and development fund for renewable energy sources including solar and wind energy, alternative fuels like ethanol and biodiesel, efficiency efforts, and conservation incentives.

H.R. 6 rightly creates an incentive for offshore fuel producers to renegotiate leases issued in the late 1990s; an error that has not yet been corrected, which allowed companies to skirt royalty payments because no price threshold was included in lease agreements. It also repeals provisions that authorize additional royalty relief, as well as two tax breaks benefiting oil companies. This is not a tax increase as some may lead you to believe, it is sensible governing. I opposed legislation authorizing the subsidies in the first place and this is why I strongly support directing this money towards conservation and investment in the development in alternative sources of energy.

Continued and increased investment in renewable and alternative fuels, efficiency, and conservation domestically is critical to severing the United States' dependence on fossil fuels, which has been linked to national security concerns as well as significant environmental harm, including global warming pollution.

With the negative impacts of climate change on the security, economy, environment and health in our Nation and around the world abundantly clear, we can no longer delay in implementing policies to address the damaging effects of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We also need to set reasonable CAFE standards, which I believe are both achievable and valuable to a good energy policy.

I remain committed to broadening the energy debate to sound and balanced proposals to meeting America's energy needs--while still acting as a steward of the environment. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 6.

I thank the distinguished gentleman from California for yielding.

Unfortunately, one concern that continues to arise, and has done so since I came to Congress, is the continuously rising cost of a college education. Tuition increases are outpacing the rate of inflation, increases in family income, and even increases in State and financial aid which have grown tremendously in recent years. These cost increases are pricing students and families out of the college market. In a time when we have reports suggesting that today's high school students recognize more than ever the importance of obtaining a college education, these students should not shy away because of skyrocketing costs.

While today's bill does seek to help graduates, it barely skims the surface of the true problem of how we can help increase access and affordability. I will support this effort but hope that this Congress will make substantive steps towards helping current and future students.

We have all heard the statistics, and frankly we all deserve to hear them again. According to the College Board, the cost of attending a private college has soared by 52 percent, adjusted for inflation, since the 1991-92 academic year. Public colleges have increased costs by a whopping 86 percent in the same time span. In conjunction with these statistics, we don't often taught the fact that since 2001 under a Republican Congress, direct student aid has increased from $9.6 billion to $48 billion. During the same period, the number of students receiving such aid soared by nearly one-third, from 7.6 million to 10.1 million. Yet we are still in a predicament of students needing help. We must begin to look seriously and holistically at this issue. There is neither a simple solution nor one entity responsible.

First, it is my belief that one of the best things we can do is raise awareness, and to force transparency in the process. Legislation offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), which I support, seeks to provide parents and students the information that they deserve as consumers. They deserve the opportunity to understand why tuition is increasing at their universities. As educated consumers, it is my hope that they will in turn have the power to demand more, to demand answers, and ultimately drive down cost. Understanding that there are many moving parts to a solution, transparency is a good first step in the right direction.

Second, we all must be part of the solution. The U.S. Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, and the Commission on the Future of Higher Education have helped to bring the issue of access and affordability to the forefront. They too have identified areas in which they may implement solutions, such as simplifying the Free Application for Federal Student Aid. Everyone is clearly beginning to recognize how they can alleviate this dilemma.

Third, the institutions must accept some of the responsibility. There are some fabulous colleges and universities out there making it happen for a fraction of what they could charge. For all of those, however, there are also plenty who are not being as efficient as they should be. I believe that these institutions need to take a long, hard look at every aspect of their budgets to identify savings from within. As highlighted above, despite record increases in student aid, tuition continued to increase. Some have studied and argued that there is in fact a correlation. Further, it was maintained in today's Wall Street Journal that the increase in aid will permit colleges to raise their tuitions in order to reap the benefit. Without the aid, colleges and universities would be forced to be more careful. In December, the New York Times reported that based on the fact that some

equate price with equality, some institutions raise their tuition for the sole purpose of matching their rivals. In some instances they also raise their discounts and assistance, but the fact remains that they are artificially raising the price which unfortunately may scare many students away from even applying. The reality is, Federal assistance does not give license to increase tuition. We cannot continue to offer the solutions. Don't be misled. I do support Federal assistance but do ask that colleges not take it for granted. Today's action must be coupled with responsible governing and accounting by our institutions of higher learning.

Fourth, I believe that Congress has a responsibility to spend efficiently and effectively. While this proposal is well-intentioned and does reach our low- and middle-income classes, it unfortunately may not be the best use of $6 billion. Ideally, this money should be more evenly spent. Aid experts and those in the academic community often identify Pell Grants, the primary source of aid for the neediest students, as the best avenue for increasing affordability. Leading up to this bill, these groups argued that the money would be best spent in this manner. In the future, I hope that this Congress spends more time deciphering the best way to appropriate taxpayers' money.

Finally, I believe that we have to begin gaining a better understanding of private student loans. With the escalation in college costs, students are exhausting their Federal loans and are forced to turn to private loans, something that has not been a part of the conversation. Consider this: 40 percent of private loan borrowers are from the bottom two income quartiles of students going to college. Five years ago, private loans made up only $4 billion of the $850 billion of the asset-backed securities market. Today, it comprises $13 billion. This is a completely different market and is not shaped with the policy goal of increasing access and affordability for students. There are many questions surrounding private student loans and I intend on beginning to ask these questions. If we are to tackle this issue, we must do so completely.

The issue of college affordability and access is complicated but one that I trust we can come together to help resolve, not just those of us in Congress but also those in academia, the lenders, students, parents and institutions.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, legislation I have authored with the distinguished lady from Colorado, Ms. DeGette, to ethically expand the current Federal embryonic stem cell research policy.

We have a real opportunity to make history, to pass legislation that will jump start research and may lead to treatments and cures for countless diseases, including diabetes, HIV/AIDS, Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's, ALS, multiple sclerosis and cancer. There is overwhelming support for this research, with 70 percent of the American people backing it.

There are also 500 universities, medical societies and advocacy groups backing this research, ranging from the American Medical Association and the Academy of Physicians to universities like the University of California and Harvard University and advocacy groups like the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and the Michael J. Fox Foundation.

This research may also provide a better understanding of the biological origins of certain diseases, as well as an opportunity for pharmaceutical testing.

However, this Nation and, more importantly, our scientists are being held back by a policy that is out of date, short-sighted, arbitrary and, most of all, based on politics and not science.

When the decision was made by President Bush in 2001 to allow Federal funding for stem cell research on lines that had already been created, it seemed that a compromise may have been struck. However, the number of lines has shrunk from 78 to 22, and all of the lines have been compromised.

Since that time, over 150 new and improved stem cell lines have been created in the United States and throughout the world. Despite the fact that these lines are much easier for scientists to use and, in some cases, are disease specific, they are off limits to Federal researchers.

Throughout this debate, you will hear many mistruths, and I think it is important to set the stage early about what this bill does and doesn't do. First, you will hear that this bill expands Federal funding. To the contrary, this bill has nothing to do with funding. It has to do with the source of the embryos and the quality of stem cell lines.

Second, you will hear this bill discourages destruction of human life, or that it uses taxpayer dollars to destroy human life. To the contrary, this bill has nothing to do with destroying lives and everything to do with saving lives.

It is important to understand we are only talking about embryos that are going to be thrown away otherwise as medical waste. We support all options for couples, including embryo adoption, but if the couple decides to discard their embryos as medical waste, we would like them to be available to research.

You will hear this legislation will encourage the creation of embryos for the sake of research. Again, not true. Our bill specifically states that the embryos must have been created for the purpose of fertility treatment, and no money may have exchanged hands.

Even worse, you will hear mistruths spread by a physician hired by the pro-life movement. Specifically, he says cures and treatments have been found using adult stem cells for 65 to 72 diseases. However, if you look at the science and not the hype, you will see a scientific research study published by three leading researchers in the Science Magazine this past summer who found that, in truth, the number is 9, far less than 65.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to enter this study into the Record.

Adult Stem Cell Treatments for Diseases?

(By Shane Smith, William Neaves, Steven Teitelbaum)

Opponents of research with embryonic stem (ES) cells often

claim that adult stem cells provide treatments for 65 human

illnesses. The apparent origin of those claims is a list

created by David A. Prentice, an employee of the Family

Research Council who advises U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-

KS) and other opponents of ES cell research (1).

Prentice has said, ``Adult stem cells have now helped

patients with at least 65 different human diseases. It's real

help for real patients'' (2). On 4 May, Senator Brownback

stated, ``I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the

Record the listing of 69 different human illnesses being

treated by adult and cord blood stem cells'' (3).

In fact, adult stem cell treatments fully tested in all

required phases of clinical trials and approved by the U.S.

Food and Drug Administration are available to treat only nine

of the conditions on the Prentice list, not 65 [or 72 (4)].

In particular, allogeneic stem cell therapy has proven useful

in treating hematological malignancies and in ameliorating

the side effects of chemotherapy and radiation. Contrary to

what Prentice implies, however, most of his cited treatments

remain unproven and await clinical validation. Other claims,

such as those for Parkinson's or spinal cord injury, are

simply untenable.

The references Prentice cites as the basis for his list

include various case reports, a meeting abstract, a newspaper

article, and anecdotal testimony before a Congressional

committee. A review of those references reveals that Prentice

not only misrepresents existing adult stem cell treatments

but also frequently distorts the nature and content of the

references he cites (5).

For example, to support the inclusion of Parkinson's

disease on his list, Prentice cites Congressional testimony

by a patient (6) and a physician (7), a meeting abstract by

the same physician (8), and two publications that have

nothing to do with stem cell therapy for Parkinson's (9, 10).

In fact, there is currently no FDA-approved adult stem cell

treatment-and no cure of any kind-for Parkinson's disease.

For spinal cord injury, Prentice cites personal opinions

expressed in Congressional testimony by one physician and two

patients (11). There is currently no FDA-approved adult stem

cell treatment or cure for spinal cord injury.

The reference Prentice cites for testicular cancer on his

list does not report patient response to adult stem cell

therapy (12); it simply evaluates different methods of adult

stem cell isolation.

The reference Prentice cites on non-Hodgkin's lymphoma does

not assess the treatment value of adult stem cell

transplantation (13); rather, it describes culture conditions

for the laboratory growth of stem cells from lymphoma

patients.

Prentice's listing of Sandhoff disease, a rare disease that

affects the central nervous system, is based on a layperson's

statement in a newspaper article (14). There is currently no

cure of any kind for Sandhoff disease.

By promoting the falsehood that adult stem cell treatments

are already in general use for 65 diseases and injuries,

Prentice and those who repeat his claims mislead laypeople

and cruelly deceive patients.

References

1. Posted at the Web site of DoNoHarm, The Coalition of

Americans for Research Ethics (accessed 8 May 2006 at http:// www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm).

2. D. Prentice, Christianity Today 49 (no. 10), 71 (17 Oct.

2005) (accessed 8 May 2006 at www.christianitytoday.com/ct/ 2005/010/24.71.html).

3. S. Brownback, ``Stem cells,'' Congressional Record, 4 May

2006 (Senate) (Page S4005-S4006) (accessed 8 May 2006 at

http://frwebgate6.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=122359256098+2+2+0 &WAI

Saction=retrieve).

4. According the latest version of the list, accessed 12 July

2006.

5. See chart compiling and analyzing Prentice's list of 65

diseases allegedly treated by adult stem cells at the

supplemental data repository available as Supporting Online

Material on Science Online at www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/ full/1129987/DC1.

6. D. Turner, Testimony before Senator Sam Brownback's

Science, Technology and Space Subcommittee on 14 July 2004

(accessed 8 May 2006 at http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/ testimony.cfm?id=1268&wit_id=3676).

7. M. Levesque, Testimony before Senator Sam Brownback's

Science, Technology and Space Subcommittee on 14 July 2004

(accessed 8 May 2006 at http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/ testimony.cfm?id=1268&wit_id=3670).

8. M. Levesque, T. Neuman, Abstract #702, Annual Meeting of

the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, 8 April

2002.

9. S. Gill et al., Nat. Med. 9, 589 (2003).

10. S. Love et al., Nat. Med. 11, 703 (2005).

11. M. Levesque, Testimony before Senator Sam Brownback's

Science, Technology and Space Subcommittee on 14 July 2004

(accessed 8 May 2006 at http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/ testimony.cfm?id=1268&wit_id=3670); L. Dominguez, Testimony

before Senator Sam Brownback's Science, Technology and Space

Subcommittee on 14 July 2004 (accessed 8 May 2006 at http:// commerce.senate.gov/hearings/ testimony.cfm?id=1268&wit_id=3673); S. Fajt, Testimony before

Senator Sam Brownback's Science, Technology and Space

Subcommittee on 14 July 2004 (accessed 8 May 2006 at http:// commerce.senate.gov/hearings/ testimony.cfm?id=1268&wit_id=3674).

12. K. Hanazawa et al., Int. J. Urol. 7, 77 (2000).

13. M Yao et al., Bone Marrow Transpl. 26, 497 (2000).

14. K Auge, ``Stem cells infuse kin with hope,'' Denver Post,

24 Aug. 2004.

11 May 2006; accepted 13 July 2006.

Published online 13 July 2006; 10.1126/science. 1129987.

Include this information when citing this paper.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to point out that adult stem cells were discovered in 1960, and embryonic stem cells were only isolated in 1998. And since 1998, there have been great advances in animal models in the areas of diabetes, spinal cord injury and macular degeneration.

Finally, you will hear about the research concerning amniotic fluid stem cells conducted by Dr. Atala at Wake Forest University. While exciting, this is nothing new, nor do these stem cells have the same capacity to divide into all cell types in the body, as embryonic stem cells do. Yet you will hear opponents say they do.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to enter the letter in the Record on that as well.

Wake Forest Institute for

Regenerative Medicine,

Winston-Salem, NC, January 8, 2007.

Hon. Diana DeGette,

Hon. Michael Castle,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Representatives DeGette and Castle: I am writing in

regard to my research that was published in Nature

Biotechnology that found that stem celts obtained from

amniotic fluid have been able to differendate into several

cell types. This research has the potential to open up an

important field of inquiry that could be critically important

to the development of treatments within the field of

regenerative medicine.

I understand that some may be interpreting my research as a

substitute for the need to pursue other forms of regenerative

medicine therapies, such asthose involving embryonic stem

cells. I disagree with that assertion. It is very possible

that research involving embryonic stem cells will have

critical implications for advancing research into amniotic

fluid stem cells. It is essential that National Institute of

Health-funded researchers are able to fully pursue embryonic

stem cell research as a complement to research into other

forms of stem cells.

Your legislation, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of

2007, H.R. 3, would update the current federal embryonic stem

cell policy and allow federally funded researchers to conduct

research on an expanded set of embryonic stem cells within an

ethical framework. I believe this legislation would speed

science in the regenerative medicine field, and I support its

passage.

Sincerely,

Anthony Atala, MD.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).

(Mr. KIRK asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) for a unanimous-consent request.

(Mrs. BIGGERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

At this time I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield myself 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to continue the discussion that the gentlewoman from Colorado had on the IVF process in the clinics. There is a methodology that many people, even perhaps here, have taken advantage of in terms of being able to procreate, and that is going to an in vitro fertilization clinic, and that is done commonly in this country.

Right now, by survey, there are about 400,000 embryos frozen in those clinics around the country. About 2 percent a year are disposed of. That is about 8,000. Why are they disposed of? For a variety of reasons. People may divorce. Perhaps they have children. Who knows what the reasons may be, but they are disposed of. How are they disposed of? How are those 8,000 disposed of? A decision is made by the original creators of that particular embryo and by the physician running the in vitro fertilization clinic that they will be disposed of, and then they are put in as hospital waste; so they are not going to be life. It is only those embryos that would be used in this situation to develop the stem cell lines that we are talking about. It is very important to understand that they are going to be disposed of anyhow as hospital waste or are they going to be used for research.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time, 2 minutes, to the very distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).

I thank the gentlewoman from Colorado.

This motion is a poison pill in the greatest way, and it goes a little beyond the normal poison pill. It has basically been designed by those who would oppose the legislation in a way of trying to knock it out because they know very well we have the votes for it on the floor here today. But it goes beyond that; it actually eliminates part of the research which may be essential in the implanting of the embryonic stem cells eventually in a human being called Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, which really doesn't relate ultimately to the human reproductive cloning.

I have discussed introducing legislation, I have co-sponsored legislation in the past on banning reproductive cloning. I happen to believe in that, with the gentlewoman from Colorado, we both believe in that very strongly; but the bottom line is that we need to be able to develop the research on embryonic stem cells in every way we possibly can.

Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer is currently legal. It is just not funded by the Federal Government. This bill does not fund SCNT in any way whatsoever.

The motion to recommit is shortsighted. It is very damaging to any possible future research. It should be opposed by anybody who plans to vote for this legislation. And I would hope that 100 percent of the individuals who are going to vote for our bill are going to oppose the motion to recommit which is being presented here today.

I think in the names of those who are supportive of it, be it Senator Hatch or Nancy Reagan or Michael J. Fox or a lot of other people, but particularly all those people out there who are ill, who have some hope, and that is what it is, it is hope, will make absolutely sure that we do not vote for the motion to recommit, that we defeat it and then, right after that, we go on to pass the legislation which is so important and vital for the future of health of people in America.

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize the 90th birthday of The Honorable William T. McLaughlin, former mayor of Wilmington. Bill McLaughlin has led an extraordinary life, filled with exceptional acts of public service, as well as a strong dedication to my home State of Delaware. He certainly has packed a great deal of accomplishment into his 90 years.

During World War II, Bill flew 50 combat missions in the South Pacific as a tail gunner and radioman. After the war, Bill went to night school under the G.I. Bill and spent his career with the DuPont Company. He spent 58 years married to the late Mary McLaughlin, with whom he raised two fine sons. Bill did not begin his political career until 1964, when he was elected to the city council in an upset victory. After serving as a strong advocate for progressive causes on the council, he was elected as mayor in 1976, and served the city from 1977-1984. I had the privilege of serving as Lieutenant Governor of Delaware during his second term as mayor and enjoyed working with him on many different issues.

The McLaughlin years were prosperous ones for both the city of Wilmington and the State of Delaware. Together with Governor Pete duPont, Bill helped to enact the Financial Center Development Act which brought Delaware to the forefront of the banking industry. Mayor McLaughlin worked tirelessly to protect jobs, attract new employers, and grow the local economy.

Not only was the economy successful during Bill McLaughlin's time, but crime rates declined, city and water systems were improved, and low-income families had increased access to housing. While a tireless worker for the city of Wilmington, the mayor should also be remembered for his sense of humor. One St. Patrick's Day, Mayor McLaughlin made his way down King Street in a green leprechaun costume.

Bill continues to serve as a dignified leader in countless service organizations. I commend him for a life of service and thank him for his tireless dedication to Delaware. I am proud to call him a friend.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 35, a resolution to create a Select Intelligence Oversight Panel to advise the House Appropriations Committee.

As a former member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, I strongly believe that we must enact all of the 9/11 Commission's intelligence recommendations, even those that apply to our own congressional committees.

In its final report, outlining steps Congress should take to combat the problems which plagued our Nation in the lead up to September 11, the 9/11 Commission stated that ``Congress should pass a separate appropriations act for intelligence, defending the broad allocation of how these tens of billions of dollars have been assigned among the varieties of intelligence work.''

In the wake of the terrorist attacks of 2001, Congress acted quickly to enact a large majority of the commission's recommendations. Today the House will likely pass some of the remaining recommendations, impacting various agencies and levels of government. However, as it turns out, it has been those recommendations that apply directly to the tangled rules of procedures here in the United States Congress, which have been left unfinished.

Specifically, I am disappointed that the resolution before us today fails to implement the 9/11 Commission's very specific recommendation that Congress enact a separate appropriations bill for our intelligence community. Currently, intelligence funding is concealed in the classified section of the Pentagon's budget and thus is subject to very little accountability. As currently drafted, I have serious concerns that the proposed Intelligence Oversight Panel will have very little control over the actual funding decisions and will only succeed in confusing the process and adding to its complex bureaucracy.

As a former member of the House Intelligence Committee, I believe strongly in the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. For that reason, I will introduce legislation immediately to create an empowered and independent intelligence appropriations subcommittee to oversee the intelligence community funding and to keep our Nation safe from those seeking to destroy our way of life.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 4046, the ``Iraq Reconstruction Accountability Act.'' As our brave men and women in Iraq risk their lives to stabilize the region and rebuild the nation's infrastructure, it is absolutely crucial that the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction remain in place to ensure proper oversight of this important funding.

To date, we have appropriated over $34 billion for reconstruction efforts in Iraq--ranging from projects such as roads and electric power, to training and equipping Iraqi security forces and providing school books and vaccinations for children. While there is no doubt that this funding is crucial to the reconstruction efforts, I have serious concerns about the adequacy of contract management practices at the Department of Defense and I have introduced legislation to begin reforming some of these wasteful programs.

The Inspector General for Iraq plays a critical role, performing audits and investigations that provide Congress with the tools to more closely examine charges of misconduct and ensure effective and efficient use of taxpayer funds. Spending missteps and management weaknesses damage this government's ability to provide our soldiers with the resources that keep us safe. This week, as we review the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, I also urge my colleagues to pass this important legislation to ensure accountability in our military spending system.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Financial Services be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 3885) to provide for a circulating quarter dollar coin program to honor the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam,

American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3885, the District of Columbia and United States Territories Circulating Quarter Dollar Program Act. I want to thank both Chairman Oxley and Chairman Pryce for the Financial Services Committee's support for this legislation, and Leader Boehner and incoming chairman Barney Frank for their help in getting the bill to the floor as the 109th Congress winds down.

The legislation before us would create a 1-year program following the end of the popular 50 State Quarter program that would create circulating quarters that bear images honoring the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

Mr. Speaker, the 50 State Quarter program has proved to be a great success--it has reinvigorated interest in coin collecting, has proven an invaluable educational tool, and has contributed close to $6 billion dollars to the U.S. Treasury, so far, through seigniorage and the sale of products for collectors. These savings will reduce interest on the debt, something we should all support. The state quarters have been the most popular coin program in the United State's Mint history, with an estimated 140 million Americans collecting the coins. Next year, in a program modeled after the state quarters, the Mint will begin issuing dollar coins bearing the images of the Presidents, changing the design four times a year.

Mr. Speaker, DC and the territories weren't included in the state quarter program, but they deserve their own quarters and Americans deserve to be able to get those quarters and learn about their history. This legislation is a good bipartisan bill supported by other members of the Financial Services Committee and passed in the House in every Congress since we approved the state quarter legislation. I am pleased today that we have brought this much-needed bill to the floor. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this important legislation, and I hope our colleagues in the other body now will approve it as well. The Mint needs adequate time to plan the designs for these coins, and sending this bill to the President 2 years from now is too late.