Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, during an absence yesterday, I regrettably missed rollcall votes 165-168. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner: rollcall No. 165, ``yea;'' rollcall No. 166, ``no;'' rollcall No. 167, ``yea;'' and rollcall No. 168, ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the more than 2 million taxpayers who are unfairly burdened by the alternative minimum tax. As we know and it was explained today, it was designed in 1969 to ensure that the wealthiest Americans would still pay a fair share of taxes. The AMT now ensnares many middle income Americans in what was once envisioned as an alternative minimum tax has become nothing short of a mandatory maximum tax. And those it sought to protect have become its greatest victims.

Let us be clear on what the AMT is not. It is not a technicality of significance to only a few bureaucrats and the tax intelligentsia. It is not a mere glitch, the repair of which would only help a handful of disproportionately rich individuals. It is a system that affects 2.4 million families this year. A system that, if left unchecked, will affect nearly 75 percent of families making $75,000 to $100,000. It is a system that, in my district, can cost an individual making a good living, but not a lavish living and taking itemized deductions, thousands of dollars more in taxes each year.

In 2008, a family making over $50,000 with three children would be affected. Any family with one child or more, 60,000 would be affected.

Although I am pleased to see bipartisan support to act to ameliorate the AMT, these temporary remedies will only be as valuable as the permanent solutions developed in the interim. These measures have the potential to help millions of families this year, but we must work together to crack the system that protects all hardworking Americans going forward.

I support the fiscally responsible Rangel substitute and urge my colleagues to help put an end to the inequities of the alternative minimum tax.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support the extension of the New York City Watershed Protection Program, and I thank my colleague Vito Fossella for his leadership on this issue.

Ensuring clean drinking water for our communities has always been a priority of mine. Providing a safe and health water supply is not just a public health issue, it is also a homeland security priority.

I am pleased that the bill under consideration today will reauthorize the funding for the Watershed Protection Program through 2010. The program will provide $15 million per year to protect and enhance the quality of New York's water supply, and in the long run will save taxpayers the cost of an alternative water filtration system. This comprehensive initiative demonstrates our commitment to the ongoing preservation of New York's safe drinking water supply, and I am pleased to see communities, environmental groups and state officials join together in support of this cause.

I am happy to support this legislation, which will benefit the health of New Yorkers and the quality of our environment for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this terribly misguided bill. The bill before us today would give a fetus the same recognition as you or I for the first time in Federal law. Let me make something perfectly clear. The loss of a pregnancy under any circumstances is absolutely devastating to a woman and her family. Those who injure or kill a pregnant woman should be severely punished, and families should have the legal tools to have their loss recognized.

Instead of addressing the real issue at hand, the horrible pain for a woman who loses a pregnancy to an act of violence, this bill sends a message that women do not deserve to be safeguarded or valued in their own right; that it is only through their fetuses that they are entitled to any Federal protections against violence. This, in my judgment, is the wrong approach. Of course the woman matters. She matters when the baby is conceived, she matters when the baby is developing in utero, and she matters when the child arrives in the world; yet this bill does not make it a Federal crime to attack a pregnant woman. In fact, its sponsors have explicitly rejected amendments to protect a woman herself under Federal law.

The Lofgren substitute would do just that. It would severely punish crimes against pregnant women without undermining Roe v. Wade. It gets us to the same ends without the overtly political means.

If my colleagues want to crack down on criminals who attack pregnant women, support the Lofgren substitute. If my colleagues want to protect women from violence, let us fully fund the Violence Against Women Act.

Finally, if my colleagues are serious about protecting the unborn, let us focus on giving babies the best start we can by promoting the health of women throughout the entire pregnancy.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act is not about shielding pregnant women or fetuses from violent acts, it is and has always about been undermining freedom of choice. Instead of finding new ways to revisit the divisive abortion battle, I believe Americans want us to focus our efforts on ways of providing women with access to prenatal care, affordable contraception, health care and violence prevention.

If we truly want to protect women and their pregnancies from harm, let us work together to enact legislation that deters and punishes violence against women without unnecessarily engaging in the abortion debate.

I urge my colleagues to vote no on H.R. 1997 and to support the Lofgren substitute.

Mr. Speaker, during an absence yesterday, I regrettably missed rollcall votes 25 to 27. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner: rollcall No. 25, ``yea''; rollcall No. 26, ``yea''; rollcall No. 27, ``yea''.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Yonkers, New York, resident Mario DeSantis on his retirement after 57 years of service on behalf of Americans in Westchester County and all over the country.

As a young clerk at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Mr. DeSantis helped organize the employees of what was then the Manhattan District of the IRS as members of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU). The NTEU is the largest independent non-postal Federal employees union in the country, representing about 150,000 workers in 29 different government agencies. NTEU Chapter 47, to which Mr. DeSantis belongs and which he helped found, now represents 1,600 IRS employees in New York City and Westchester County.

Mr. DeSantis quickly took a leadership role in NTEU Chapter 47. As he rose through the ranks of the IRS to become a revenue officer, Mr. DeSantis also rose through the ranks of NTEU Chapter 47 as a steward, assistant chief steward, and associate vice president. His enthusiastic and effective work in these roles led to his election as national vice president for District 5 at the 1985 NTEU national convention.

He has also served as the legislative coordinator for Chapter 47 for the past 20 years. In this post, Mr. DeSantis has led the chapter's legislative advocacy program on behalf of all Federal employees. He has lobbied for better pay and benefits, against schemes to contract out government work, and to protect overtime pay. He has been particularly successful at organizing voter registration efforts. Each year, these drives have registered hundreds of citizens across Westchester County to vote. Because of his success as legislative coordinator, he came to lead the New York State delegation to the NTEU legislative conferences.

Mr. DeSantis is also a talented jazz musician and a member of the American Federation of Musicians (AFM). He has performed both professionally and at Chapter 47 holiday parties. His work on behalf of members of both AFM and NTEU came together in Las Vegas in 1995 during the NTEU national convention. Mr. DeSantis organized convention delegates to help walk a picket line at Caesar's Palace in solidarity with picketing members of AFM.

This anecdote clearly demonstrates the devotion and enthusiasm that Mr. DeSantis has brought to his struggle in support of workers all over the United States, from Federal employees to professional musicians. We can all take inspiration from the way that he sees a problem in society, whether the high number of unregistered voters or a lack of adequate benefits for workers, and commits himself to help fix that problem.-

I thank Mr. DeSantis for almost 6 decades of public service and wish him the best in his retirement. The IRS, the members of NTEU and AFM, and the residents of Westchester County will all miss him. I am confident that, although he is retiring, the legacy Mr. DeSantis leaves behind will continue to motivate others to embrace service to their country with the commitment and energy that he did.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Purchase, NY, resident Barney Mayrsohn for his life of service to our country, from the snowy forests of the Battle of the Bulge in WWII to the snowy streets of Moscow today.

In 1943, Barney Mayrsohn was hard at work in college, but with the world at war, he would enter the U.S. Army, joining his father and two brothers, who were also serving. In September of 1944, he was shipped aboard the Queen Mary, with 1,500 of his fellow soldiers, to the European Theater. A member of the 106th Infantry Division, Mr. Mayrsohn would find himself thrust into the largest land battle of WWII in which the United States participated: the German offensive in the Ardennes in the winter of 1944-1945 that would come to be known as the Battle of the Bulge.

During the fighting, Mr. Mayrsohn would prove a brave and resilient soldier, getting wounded twice and earning two Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star, and a Combat Infantry Badge. As the battle continued unremittingly, the 106th would lose half of the division, and Barney would be taken captive in December 1944.

He was taken by train, along with other Allied prisoners-of-war, to the Stalag 4B prison camp. Along the way, he narrowly escaped

death yet again, as Allied aircraft, while bombing the German railroad tracks, mistakenly dropped a bomb on the train car in front of his.

Mr. Mayrsohn's transition into life as a prisoner was eased thanks to the generosity of British prisoners, who provided him with some Red Cross food packages and extra clothing that they had stored away. Over time, as the Red Army continued its inexorable advance westward, the Red Cross packages ran out and no more were on the way. Prisoners began to starve. Mr. Mayrsohn lost more than forty pounds.

As the sounds of artillery became louder over the spring, it was clear that the Red Army was near. In April of 1945, the Russians arrived at the gates of Stalag 4B. After more than five months in enemy captivity, Mr. Mayrsohn was free.

The captain of the liberating Russian unit gathered together Mr. Mayrsohn and four of his fellow American soldiers with three Russian female military personnel for a picture. This photo would return with Mr. Mayrsohn to America. And there it lay, untouched for 57 years, in a bottom drawer.

After the war, Mr. Mayrsohn would return to college, have a family, and start a successful international trading business. In 2003, he decided to use a previously planned trip to Scandinavia as the perfect opportunity to visit Russia and attempt to reunite with the three women in the photo and the Russian officer who snapped it. Mr. Mayrsohn worked with the Russian Cultural Center in Washington, DC, and the Office of Veterans Affairs in Moscow to discover the identity of the soldiers. While it proved impossible to find those particular people, the Office of Veterans Affairs was able to find two female and two male veterans of the battles that liberated the camp.

In August of 2003, accompanied by two soldiers from the American Embassy in Moscow, Mr. Mayrsohn took the four liberators out to a banquet dinner at a prestigious restaurant in Red Square. At the event, gifts were exchanged, as were stories recalling an age of unprecedented cooperation between the two world powers.

He then met with the officer in charge of Russian Veteran Affairs, who not only agreed to help find the soldiers in the picture; he also presented Mr. Mayrsohn with the Russian Blue Star--similar to our Combat Infantry Badge.

These meetings were covered in the Russian media. The ``Red Star,'' the Russian Defense Ministry's official newspaper, even printed an article on Mr. Mayrsohn's story. While the search goes on for more of his liberators, Mr. Mayrsohn, through his efforts, has helped to create goodwill between our two countries. With the Cold War over, and each country attempting to put aside past differences to look ahead towards a common future, efforts by people such as Mr. Mayrsohn are extremely important. Therefore, even if it is ultimately not possible to find the women in his photo, I would say that his mission was a great success.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the following names removed as cosponsors of H.R. 2682: Mrs. Tauscher, Ms. Millender-McDonald, Mr. Deutsch, Mr. Walsh, and Mr. Blumenauer.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the great contributions to education made by Dr. Robert Pavlica. I also wish to congratulate him on being one of only six teachers from around the world, and one of only two from the United States, to be honored by INTEL. Innovation in Education with the prestigious 2003 ``Excellence in Teaching Award.'' He received this accolade for his pioneering development of the ``Authentic Science Research in the High School'' program.

Dr. Pavlica, a White Plains, NY, resident, who has a Ph.D. in biochemistry, along with master's degrees in philosophy, cell biology, and biology, has been inspiring students as a science teacher at Byram Hills High School in Armonk, NY, for the past 33 years. In 1990, he began teaching scientific research after one of his students asked for his help in pursuing an independent research project.

This would lead Dr. Pavlica to create the ``Authentic Science Research in the High School'' program, a three-year science research course, in which sophomores, who elect to participate, are instructed in the methods and processes of research. This culminates in each student conducting an original research project into an area of particular interest to the student. To help guide his or her work, each student is mentored by a respected scientist in the student's field of research.

This program has been enormously successful. Since its creation little more than a decade ago, thirty-nine of Dr. Pavlica's students at Byram Hills have become semifinalists for the Intel Science Talent Research Award, formerly known as the Westinghouse. Amazingly, eleven of his students have even reached the finals of the esteemed competition. This program has also prepared many more students for the arduous research that they will face in college.

Dr. Pavlica has taught his techniques to numerous educators, who wish to replicate his success in getting students excited about scientific research. Presently, over 170 school districts throughout the country have instructors who are using his program. In fact, over seventy percent of public and private high schools in Westchester County, NY, now employ the program.

The success of the program at Byram Hills has been mirrored in these schools, as well. Indeed, in 2002 and 2003, roughly forty percent of all of New York State's INTEL Science Talent Search semifinalist awards went to students who were taught using the ``Authentic Science Research in the High School'' program.

I am truly honored that I have this opportunity to congratulate Dr. Pavlica on his well-deserved award and to thank him for helping so many students in Westchester and around the country learn more about science and the potential that lies within them.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to address the fiscal year 2004 conference agreement on Foreign Operations. The agreement as contained in Division D of this omnibus package represents a bipartisan agreement, and most importantly, provides critical funding for a host of essential programs that are vital to our national security.

I want to thank Chairman Kolbe, and Senators McConnell and Leahy, for working with me to finalize this agreement. The Foreign Operations portion of this bill represents a fair agreement between the two Houses that stays within our overall allocation of $17.235 billion.

The agreement provides a total of $1.64 billion for HIV/AIDS, an increase over the House level of more than $200 million. We have provided $400 million for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria, as well as increased funding for bilateral programs. With the $150 million for the Fund in the Labor HHS bill, the total U.S. contribution to the Global Fund for 2004 will be $550 million.

Funds have been provided to the new Global AIDS coordinator, and we have clarified the authorities under which AIDS funds are provided in order to ensure that programs continue with a balanced approach to HIV/ AIDS prevention, awareness and treatment.

It is my understanding that the Labor HHS bill provides $443 million in direct funding for AIDS programs, and an additional unspecified amount in the National Institutes of Health budget for AIDS research. I want to clarify that, while we will hear that total AIDS funding in 2004 will be $2.4 billion, my calculations put us at just over $2.3 billion.

The agreement increases Child Survival funding in every category from amounts provided last year, and funds Basic Education at $326 million. I want to thank Chairman Kolbe for joining with me to acknowledge the importance of Basic Education. Unfortunately our priorities had shifted away from Basic Education in the years leading up to September 11th. This level of funding will continue the reversal of that unfortunate trend by increasing funding by 30% over last year.

The agreement contains $650 million for the Millennium Challenge Corporation and the attendant authorization. While this corporation will be independent, we have built in requirements for the involvement of the State Department and USAID for coordination and decision-making. I have been opposed to the concept of creating a new independent agency, and I remain concerned that little to no attention has been paid to how these funds will be spent, monitored or audited.

The authorization provisions provide Congress with ample opportunity to consult with the Chairman of the Corporation as the effort moves forward.

An additional $350 million for the Millennium Challenge Corporation was added to this bill at the request of the President, and will be paid for with a combination of across-the-board cuts and rescission of unexpended balances from FY 2003 and prior supplementals.

I would like to note that there is no way that these additional funds--bringing the total provided for the MCC to $1 billion--can be spent wisely next year.

In putting together our recommendations for this bill, my top priorities were the core development and health accounts. The President has pledged that all funding for the Millennium Challenge Initiative would be in the form of increases above current foreign aid spending. Given that our 302(b) allocation was $1.7 billion below the President's request, we had to make some critical choices. The bottom line is that we could only afford $650 million for the Millennium Challenge Corporation in our bill.

Apparently, if a program is a ``Presidential Initiative,'' it is not subject to budget targets, or a rational approach to how much can actually be spent wisely in a given year. The addition of the extra $350 million clearly violates the President's pledge that all MCC funding be additive.

As we go forward, I intend to ensure that the President's pledge is kept. Outstanding White House commitments to increase other areas of foreign aid spending and currently unknown requirements for Iraq and Afghanistan will take foreign aid spending well over $20 billion next year. We cannot allow funding for this yet-to-be-formed MCC to take precedence over vital ongoing assistance programs.

The conference agreement contains funding for a host of different countries and programs, which I fully support. I want to thank the Chairman for including the requirement that organizations administering refugee programs adhere to a ``sexual code of conduct.'' Together with funds provided in the recent supplemental, we have made a total of $65 million available specifically for programs to meet the special needs of Afghan women. In addition $11 million is made available for women's leadership training.

With respect to the issues surrounding family planning and reproductive health, I regret that the bill does not reverse the current restrictive Bush Administration policies on family planning. Many of us wanted simply to require that organizations providing assistance in foreign countries not be subject to laws more restrictive than the requirements of U.S. law.

Unfortunately, inclusion of this language would have drawn a Presidential veto. The agreement does provide a total of $466 million for family planning, which is a substantial increase above last year. It also provides at least $34 million to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), based on a Presidential certification. I hope that we can take the President at his word in terms of his commitment to work with China. We should work to reverse its objectionable family planning policies so that funds can flow to UNFPA and so that we do not punish poor women around the world because of the policies of one country.

The agreement contains full funding for Israel, Egypt and Jordan and appropriate conditions on Palestinian statehood and direct assistance. We have also included language urging the United Nations Relief Works Agency to implement the recommendations of the recent GAO report regarding terrorism.

The bill restricts military training to Indonesia unless the President certifies that the Indonesian military is fully cooperating in the FBI investigations into the killing of American citizens in Papua.

The bill funds the request for Colombia but requires certification on compliance with human rights standards and the safety of chemicals used in aerial spray eradication programs.

As with all conference reports, every element in the bill isn't perfect. However, I want to again thank Chairman Kolbe for his friendship and for working with me to accommodate many of my priorities.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to condemn the horrendous and cowardly attacks carried out in Istanbul, Turkey, on November 15, 2003. Twenty-five people were killed and over 300 were injured, as suicide bombers in trucks attacked two synagogues crowded with families attending bar mitzvahs. We should all mourn the unspeakable nature of this tragedy, and we must take decisive action against those responsible.

We are witnessing the resurgence of a pervasive and violent anti- Semitism, last seen on a widespread scale in the 1930s and 1940s in Europe. Some claim that this resurgence can be tied to the continued violence and political conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, but I fear it goes beyond that.

The November 15 attacks struck at Turkey's heart--deliberately-- because since the 15th century, it has been a place of peaceful coexistence between Jews and Muslims. By targeting Jews there, the radical Islamic fundamentalists want to send a message: forget history and forget tradition. If you are Jewish, we will target you in any place, at any time. Ironically, and tragically, most of those who lost their lives in this attack were Muslim.

This is hatred, plain and simple. It is anti-Semitic and inhuman. As it destabilizes the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, it threatens our own national security and the security of our closest allies. I know that this Congress and the entire country have the resolve to combat these destructive forces wherever they might reside. I ask my colleagues to join me in mourning with the families of those killed in Istanbul and to stand firm with me as our long and difficult struggle against terrorism continues.

Mr. Speaker, I rise against this prescription drug bill, because it will prohibit Medicare from negotiating price with the pharmaceuticals to lower prices for our sickest and most elderly population.

Mr. Speaker, we are on the cusp of passing a Medicare prescription drug benefit that should have put seniors first, but, instead, will become the death knell for Medicare.

Some are saying this is a matter of now or never, that we must pass this legislation tonight. That's just not true--where there's a will, there's a way. So, I urge my colleagues to refrain from rushing to judgment, vote against this bill, and work together, Republicans and Democrats alike, through December to craft a plan that will stay true to Medicare's tried and trusted roots.

Mr. Speaker, the bill before us will allow insurance bureacrafts--not doctors--decide which drugs to prescribe and how much to charge seniors; and leaves major gaps in coverage that will affect almost half of Medicare recipients. I will end Medicare as we know it, and will have questionable impacts on some of the most well regarded state- sponsored drug coverage programs, including New York's.

But, my colleagues, the straw that breaks the camel's back is the lack of any attempt to bring down the skyrocketing costs of drugs. H.R. 1 will prohibit the federal government from using the muscle of the 40 million seniors in Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices. And it puts the brakes on the reimportation of pharmaceuticals from Canada and overseas--where drugs are sold for two, three, and four times less than in the U.S.

This one-two punch will not only hurt seniors. It will block hard- working Americans, including the 43.6 million uninsured, from obtaining cheaper drugs--leaving taxpayers to foot the bill for a plan that rewards private industry at the expense of consumers.

The drug companies, with profit margins over 18 percent, have spend hundreds of millions of dollars trying to influence American opinion on prescription drugs. Yet, they will be rewarded with 40 percent profit increases. The same HMOs that left seniors in the cold under Medicare+Choice will be given a $12 billion slush fund to entice their participation in this plan.

I have fought for years to give seniors an affordable, guaranteed, comprehensive, and voluntary prescription drug benefit under Medicare. I am deeply saddened and disappointed that the House leadership in forcing a vote on a bill, which many of us have not even been able to read in completion, that is not worthy of our seniors.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the bill.

Mr. Speaker, Congress has made good progress over the past 20 years in combating drunk driving, culminating when we passed legislation creating a national .08 blood alcohol content level in 2000. I am pleased that New York recently passed .08, which will save 500-600 lives in the U.S. annually when it is adopted by all states. All but a handful of states have .08 laws on the books--a testament to the effectiveness of the sanction.

Despite this progress, a disturbing complacency about drunk driving seems to have settled upon the nation. In 2002, alcohol-related fatalities rose for the third year in a row, and now account for well over 40 percent of all traffic fatalities. Last year, drunk driving took nearly 18,000 lives. Public policy experts are now beginning to grasp the full economic costs of drunk driving. When one factors health care costs, lost work time, collision repairs, and insurance, the price tag exceeds $200 million annually.

Almost 6 years ago, a constituent, Burton Greene, was killed by a repeat offender with a .18 blood alcohol content. Mr. Greene's death inspired me to introduce legislation requiring tougher penalties for repeat offenders and high-BAC drivers.

About one-third of all drunk drivers are repeat offenders. Unfortunately, the lack of a national minimum standard for punishing repeat offenders and high-BAC drivers has created an easily exploitable, unwieldy patchwork of laws that varies from state to state. My legislation would require states to pass laws that employ a comprehensive approach to fighting drunk driving, including license restrictions, effective vehicle sanctions, treatment programs, ignition interlocks, fines, and imprisonment. This comprehensive system of penalties builds on the recommendations of numerous studies, as well as measures proven to be effective on the state and local level.

I am proud that Good Housekeeping magazine, which has always tackled the leading issues of the day, has become a partner in the effort to combat drunk driving. An article about Brigid Kelly, a young woman killed by an impaired driver with a suspended license, appeared in the July 2003 issue of the magazine. Brigid's senseless death, which has brought untold grief to her family and friends, is a wake up call to the nation and a powerful reminder of the stakes in the battle against drunk driving.

I was also touched by the response to the article. Over 6,000 readers took the time to write Good Housekeeping in support of national minimum standards for punishing repeat offenders. This outpouring leaves no doubt about where Americans stand on tougher penalties for chronic drunk drivers.

More than 40 people die daily from drunk driving. We should do all we can to prevent such tragedies. I encourage my colleagues to listen to the voices of Good Housekeeping's readers and support swift passage of the Burton Greene bill.

Mr. Speaker, I want to join my colleagues in saying that we appreciate all the good work that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) has done, and we know of his great, great commitment. I have had the privilege of serving on the committee with him, and we know of his great commitment to education. And I feel confident that if the gentleman himself could put more money into the Pell Grants and into this bill for education that he would like to do so. I know that sometimes these decisions are not just left up to the chairman.

But I do hope that we can get together, Democrats and Republicans, and support the motion of my good friend, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee); that we can work together to hopefully get more money, but, clearly, no less than was in the House bill, because that is the important point we want to make together.

We know the facts, Mr. Speaker. Over the next 10 years, more than 16 million students will be enrolled in America's colleges and universities preparing for the challenges of a high-tech economy and a highly-educated and productive workplace. Yet, affording higher education does remain a serious challenge for so many Americans.

I meet with college students often, and I recently met with several students to discuss the high cost of college tuition. The chairman and I know that most of these students are working two and three jobs. With the cost of college increasing faster than the rate of inflation, many of these students are really struggling just to pay the bills. In fact, one student at a local college told me that his parents were denied credit in purchasing a house because of all the outstanding student loans he is wearing around his neck, and it is so very difficult for him.

We understand how important an education is, and an advanced degree should not be this difficult or this costly. One would hope that during these hard economic times students attending college could count on greater support from the Federal Government, and that is what this is all about. As hard as Chairman Regula worked, and many of us were prodding us all on, neither the House or the Senate bills increase the assistance. For example, we know that the maximum Pell Grant is frozen at $4,050.

And let me remind my colleagues, I think it is important to note that when the Pell grant was started in 1975, the grants paid about 84 percent of college costs and it now pays only 41 percent. So the average student loan debt has nearly doubled over the last 5 years. Last year, the average undergraduate borrower left school with nearly $17,000 in debt due to Federal student loans. With nearly 64 percent of students depending on student loans, how can we in good conscience, Democrats and Republicans, all of us, keep the Pell stagnant and flat fund the very programs that encourage States to implement needs-based aid, especially when colleges across the country are instituting record-high tuitions to make up for faltering State budgets and decreased philanthropy.

So in conclusion, let us remember that over the course of a lifetime, a college graduate can expect to earn $1 million more than a high school graduate, and clearly making college accessible to all Americans is a sound investment. So what I am really hoping with this very important motion, and I want to thank my friend, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), and I hope that Democrats and Republicans will support it, that we work very, very hard to help the 2.9 million graduating high school students, the 5 million Pell Grant recipients, and the millions of Americans who rely on student aid programs to make attending college a reality.

Once again, I know of Chairman Regula's deep commitment to education, and I know that in the conference he will do everything he can, and I hope that at a very minimum the House number is kept and that we will not go below it. Because we all who are committed to education and working so hard on this very important committee, which we treasure, we all hope that we can increase these numbers in years to come because we both understand the importance of it. So let us make sure we do not go below the House number.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate my friends Glen and Lynn Tobias as they are honored for their distinguished leadership by the Anti-Defamation League. The Tobias' years of service, integrity, and commitment should serve as an example to all of us. I ask unanimous consent to submit a letter of congratulations I recently sent them.

November 10, 2003.

Glen and Lynn Tobias

Anti-Defamation League,

New York, NY.

Dear Glen and Lynn: I write with such respect, admiration,

and gratitude for your invaluable contributions to the Anti-

Defamation League. The ADL's Distinguished Leadership Award

is a fitting tribute to your years of service to this vital

institution, and I am proud to join with those who honor you

as you receive the recognition you both so deeply deserve.

A key aspect of your leadership has been your constant

willingness to battle against all forms of racism and

intolerance. The dramatic rise in global anti-Semitism over

the past few years threatens to undermine the stability and

progress we seek in the Middle East, Europe, and around the

world. Through your efforts, the ADL has led the counter-

attack against this scourge, by seeking to measure the rise

in anti-Semitism and to address it in meetings with key heads

of state and foreign ministers, as well as at an

international conference meant to bring Jewish and non-Jewish

leaders together to create a strategy to combat the problem.

On our own shores, your efforts to educate the public have

been greatly appreciated. You have led crucial initiatives to

expand ADL's education programs on campuses and schools,

especially about hate crime prevention. You also educated the

public and Members of Congress on the threats to religious

liberty and civil rights by federal and state voucher

programs for private and religious schools--an effort greatly

welcomed by myself and my colleagues on the Hill.

For all these reasons and many more, you are richly

deserving of the ADL's Distinguished Leadership Award. I

would like to thank you once again for your friendship and

years of service to ADL, to the United States, and to the

global community, which have all benefited from your wisdom,

your diligence, and your desire for equity and peace.

Sincerely,

Nita M. Lowey,

Member of Congress.