Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Terrorism is a psychological warfare. Terrorists try to manipulate us and change our behavior by creating fear, uncertainty, and division in society. To succeed, the terrorists do not necessarily need to land an attack. Threats of an attack and failed attacks can still create fear, uncertainty, and division; and that is the terrorists' goal.

The key battleground in the war on terrorism, therefore, is in the minds of the American public. And how the government communicates about homeland security is central to how the public responds. I would argue that the communications record of the Department of Homeland Security has been an abysmal failure. The duct tape and plastic sheeting fiasco speaks for itself. The color-coded system does not work well and has undermined the Department's credibility.

The gentleman from California (Mr. Cox), chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, and I have talked about this issue over the last year, and I know he is very concerned about it. I am grateful that the committee has instructed the Department of Homeland Security in this bill to fix the problems with the color-coded terror alert system.

As the bill requires, any terror alert system must give people and organizations some indication about what steps they must take to improve their own security and assist in the Nation's security. It also requires that the alert be targeted at specific populations or regions, when possible.

What we have now is a system that tells us to be scared. That is it. We do not find out any information about the nature of the threat. We have no idea what we can do to make ourselves more secure. And this kind of vague warning inadvertently plays to the hands of the terrorists who want us to be afraid.

On the other hand, the American public possesses a great resilience and strength, and good risk communication strategies can tap into and even amplify those assets. In other words, risk communications is crucial to homeland security because it can be the difference between hardening the target and making it more vulnerable.

I have been working on these issues for several years now, and I can tell you that there is a wealth of knowledge out there about how the government should communicate in emergencies about threats. This amendment would simply require that in replacing the inadequate system we have now, that the Department draw on this expertise and research in order to help the government in its risk communications.

In particular, I think it is critical that the Department consult with the Center of Excellence in Behavioral and Social Research in Terrorism and Counterterrorism, which is already funded by the Department. We are already paying for this research, and we should make sure it is realized.

I want to thank the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and the ranking member, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), for agreeing to this amendment and for their leadership. I also want to extend special thanks to Dr. Mike Barnett from my office, who has been indispensable to me in crafting this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I will just close by saying that this amendment is not controversial, it has no cost, and it is very simple: When it comes to homeland security, communications have a lasting impact. So let us make sure we get it right by tapping the best experts.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, as my colleague and I have just spoken on the importance of communications and risk communications, as you know, research shows that the more the public is brought into the terrorism planning and response, particularly through social networks like churches, unions, professional organizations, and business groups, as well as neighborhood associations, the more effective we can be at limiting the impacts of terrorist acts and terrorist threats.

Not only is the inherent resilience and the strength of the American public enhanced by participating, but the American public has a critical commonsense knowledge that the government agencies and community organizations need in order to develop plans that will protect as many people as possible.

For this reason, it is a high priority of mine, as it is of my colleagues, to better integrate the public into the planning at State, local, and Federal levels. Preparedness and response efforts are likely to be far less successful than they should be if we do not have a plan and a substantial public involvement in the process.

Mr. Chairman, in closing, when the sarin gas attack happened in Japan, 90 percent of the people who went to the hospital had no infection or exposure to the sarin gas whatsoever. People died at the hospital because the medical teams were not able to attend to them because they were overwrought with people coming in and clogging up the hospital.

If we had a terrorist attack, the way the people respond is going to determine whether that attack is just a tragedy or whether that attack becomes an all-out disaster. And that is why risk communications are so important. That is why the chairman and I are trying to work to make sure that the Department of Homeland Security does better than it has thus far and does better than the plastic sheeting and duct tape, which they once recommended in the wake of a terrorist threat, in addition to the color-coded system, which has not proven to be very successful.

So I thank the chairman for his assistance in this matter.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the hopes that this day might mark a turning point for our nation's health care. I'm proud to join my friend from Pennsylvania and my co-chairman of the House 21st Century Health Care Caucus, Mr. Murphy, in introducing the 21st Century Health Information Act.

Mr. Speaker, we politicians love to say that we have the best health care system in the world. It's true that we have the best medicine in the world, practiced by the best people in the best facilities. But the system we have makes it harder rather than easier to deliver the best care at the lowest cost.

The status quo is not sustainable. Hundreds, of Americans die every day as a result of preventable errors or health care-acquired infections. Nearly half the time, patients aren't given recommended care. Doctors and other providers face extraordinary bureaucratic demand that, coupled with tightening reimbursement rates, leave them with less time to--treat patients. Administrative costs consume 30 cents on the health care dollar. Duplication, inefficiencies, and unnecessary care result in some regions of the country spending 60% more than others on Medicare, on a risk-adjusted basis, with worse health outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Whether you're worried about Medicaid, access to prescription drugs, malpractice premiums, the uninsured--you name it--the trend lines are going in the wrong direction because we aren't set up to get the best possible health outcomes at the lowest possible cost.

We are living in the information age, and information technology is the underpinning of any effort to improve the long-term quality, safety, and efficiency of health care. And that's why I'm hopeful that the legislation we introduce today will begin the much needed transformation of health care.

Today can be the beginning of the end of us having to fill out that confounded clipboard every time we go to the doctor.

Today can be the beginning of the end of the 150 million calls pharmacists make to doctors every year to clarify handwriting on prescriptions.

Today can be the beginning of the end of the bureaucratization of the practice of medicine, letting physicians get back to what they love, and what we need them to do: take care of patients.

And today can be the beginning of the end of seeing hundreds of thousands of Americans die unnecessarily because our system isn't set up to deliver the safest, most effective care despite the best efforts of doctors and nurses.

This bill is the first bipartisan legislation that addresses some of the systemic obstacles that have hindered the movement of health care into the information age. It is based on a regional approach, catalyzing a process that will bring together providers, patients, health plans, employers--all stakeholders--locally to do three crucial things: first, figure out how to collaborate on getting IT into physicians' hands; second, build a secure, confidential health information network to allow information to be shared as appropriate and authorized; and third, begin coming up with strategies to use the new information capabilities to make sure we get the right care to the right people at the right time as efficiently as possible.

This bill will make sure that the federal government, in addition to getting the process rolling with grants, carries its own weight as a stakeholder in every community. And it takes down existing barriers by accelerating the process of standards adoption to ensure that information can be exchanged across platforms and creating narrow safe harbors in the Stark Act and anti-kickback law.

A key to making this work, Mr. Speaker, is ensuring that privacy is a key priority as we move into an electronic medium. Electronic health records can be significantly more secure than paper records. Unlike with paper, we can create audit trails so we know whenever someone accessed a record. We can set up authentication systems to ensure that people are only able to access the parts of records that they need to see. While people understandably worry about security breaches and hackers, it's a lot easier to limit unauthorized access to electronic records than paper records that are passing through countless hands as they are filed, copied, faxed, transcribed, or simply left lying around. We can and must ensure that privacy and security are paramount as these systems are designed.

It is also important to note that under this bill, no physician will be required to implement anything unless he or she wants to. Physicians will have a key decisionmaking role in deciding how networks will be structured and what information will be shared. The bill does not require the use of a common platform or product but accelerates the development of interoperable electronic medical records and other products so physicians can choose products that are right for them. Well-designed systems should simplify physicians' compliance with HIPAA, not expand their potential liability, and should given doctors new tools to streamline billing, eligibility checks, patient tracking and notification, and public health and quality reporting.

We received a vast amount of help an input on this legislation from too many quarters to mention individually. I would like to single out, however, a distinguished former colleague of ours, Speaker Newt Gingrich. He has been a terrific supporter of this legislation, and I know both the gentleman from Pennsylvania and I are grateful for his help and that of his staff.

Mr. Speaker, with the President's support for health IT, with David Brailer and Secretary Leavitt laying out a vision that's very similar to this bill, with our colleagues in both the House and Senate increasingly interested in health IT, we are poised to finally begin the belated transformation of our health care system.

Each of us, whether as patient, provider, taxpayer, or health care bill-payer, desperately needs to see our health care system to produce better value for the dollar. The stakes are enormous and I look forward to working with my colleagues to see that we meet this challenge, starting today. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise with my Rhode Island colleague, Congressman Jim Langevin, in recognition and tribute to a distinguished Rhode Islander, Irvin Levin. Many of Irv's colleagues in the real estate and insurance business will miss him as he retires, and Rhode Islanders all over the state have been touched by his leadership in the business community, in government, and in his community.

Irvin Levin was born on July 21, 1915 in Providence, Rhode Island and is truly a member of our nation's Greatest Generation. He lived through the Great Depression, served his country honorably with the Army during World War II, and came back to help build America to the great country and society it is today.

Receiving his real estate license in 1959, Mr. Levin's practice was widely respected by his colleagues and valued by his clients, as his numerous honors and awards can attest. He was twice recognized as Realtor of the Year by the Greater Providence Board of Realtors, and he was honored as the Rhode Island Realtor of the Year in 1993. His colleagues elevated him to the President of the Rhode Island Association of Realtors in 1990.

Yet even while managing a successful real estate practice, Irv still found time to represent his community and fight for a better Rhode Island. Irv represented Cranston and the citizens of the 27th District of Rhode Island for 20 years. While in the General Assembly, Irv was Vice Chairman of the House Corporations Committee. Drawing upon his own record of military service and insights as a veteran, Irv chaired the Joint Committee on Veterans Affairs. In 1991, Irv retired from the Assembly as its Dean, the longest serving Member, but he continued his work in public service.

Irv later served as President of the Greater Cranston Chamber of Commerce. Irv continued to fight for his fellow veterans: serving on the Rhode Island Advisory Board of Veterans Affairs, leading the advocacy efforts of the Jewish War Veterans, and later serving as President of the United Veterans Council of Rhode Island.

I'm deeply honored to have served with Irv Levin during his years in the Rhode Island General Assembly and to honor him today on the floor of House of Representatives as he retires. His combination of community involvement, civic leadership, and business acumen sets of model for others to follow in the future and Rhode Island is deeply grateful for his years of service.

Mr. Speaker, just last week, our nation recognized April as Occupational Therapy Month. Occupational therapy is a health, education, wellness, and rehabilitation service that helps individuals engage in everyday activities, or ``occupations.'' More than 100,000 licensed occupational therapists and occupational therapy assistants provide services to children and adults in a variety of settings across the nation, including 766 in my home state of Rhode Island. Services are provided by qualified professionals whose training includes anatomy and physiology, sociology, and psychology, including how disability affects an individual's ability to develop ``skills for the job of living.''

Occupational therapy focuses on performance of meaningful daily life activities, such as education, work, play, leisure, and social participation, despite impairments or limitations in physical or mental functioning. Occupational therapy not only helps children with disabilities to learn in school, but, also assists adults recovering from stroke to lead full and productive lives.

With its roots in mental health, occupational therapy focuses on the relationship between the client and their performance abilities, the demands of the activity, and the physical and social contexts within which the activity is performed. An individuals' performance is evaluated through their psychological, social, and emotional responses, which assists the therapist in implementing specific treatments to address the patients current needs and problems. Occupational therapy was recently profiled by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) on its National Mental Health Information Center's website.

I am pleased to recognize the importance of occupational therapy and the valuable service that it provides for millions of individuals and families.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support legislation to designate The Honorable Judge George N. Leighton Post Office Building in my neighboring State of Massachusetts. Judge Leighton was born to Cape Verdean immigrants in New Bedford, Massachusetts on October 22, 1912. Forced to leave school in the seventh grade to work on an oil tanker, he continued his education by reading books, attending night schools, and studying in Works Progress Administration classes. His education continued at the prestigious Howard University, where he graduated magna cum laude in 1940. He immediately enrolled in Harvard University's School of Law, but left to serve our Nation in World War II, where he earned a Bronze Star.

After earning his LL.B. degree from Harvard in 1946 and establishing a successful law practice in Chicago, Judge Leighton began his career as a Judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois from 1964 to 1969. He then served as a Judge of the Appellate Court, First District from 1969 to 1976. In 1976, President Ford appointed Judge Leighton to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois where he served until 1987 when he became legal Counsel to the Chicago law firm of Earl L. Neal & Associates.

Judge Leighton is certainly a hero for the estimated 15,000 Cape Verdean individuals who currently live in my home State of Rhode Island. His life is an example of how one person can overcome great obstacles to truly achieve the American Dream. Among his several accomplishments and honors, Judge Leighton was the first African- American lawyer to sit on the Board of Managers of the Chicago Bar Association, the first African-American judge to serve as a Chancellor in the Circuit Court of Cook County, and the first African-American judge to sit on the Illinois Appellate Court. I am pleased that his achievements have been recognized by the Congress with the naming of this post office and would once again like to offer my full support to this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, during the day of April 20, I traveled to Rhode Island to attend the Funeral Wake of Providence Police Officer Allen. During this time I missed several rollcall votes.

I respectfully request the opportunity to record my position on rollcall votes.

It was my intention to vote: ``no'' on rollcall No. 112, H. Res. 219. I would have voted ``no'' because this rule and this bill represent an unfunded mandate that shifts $30 billion in clean-up costs of MTBE pollution in the drinking water supply to State and local governments. ``Yes'' on rollcall No. 113, H. Con. Res. 126: expressing the condolences and deepest sympathies of the Congress in the aftermath of the recent school shooting at Red Lake High School in Red Lake, Minnesota. ``Yes'' on rollcall No. 114, H. Res. 208: recognizing the University of Pittsburgh and Dr. Jonas Salk on the fiftieth anniversary of the milestone discovery of the Salk polio vaccine, which has virtually eliminated the disease and its harmful effects.

At this time I would ask for unanimous consent that my positions be entered into the Record following those votes or in the appropriate portion of the Record.

Mr. Speaker, on the evening of April 19, I missed three Rollcall votes. I respectfully request the opportunity to record my position on Rollcall votes. It was my intention to vote ``yes'' on Rollcall No. 109 H.R. 683, Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2005. ``Yes'' on Rollcall No. 110 H.J. Res. 19, providing for the appointment of Shirley Ann Jackson as a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution. ``Yes'' on Rollcall No. 111 H.J. Res. 20, providing for the appointment of Robert P. Kogod as a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution

At this time I would ask for unanimous consent that my positions be entered into the Record following those votes or in the appropriate portion of the Record.

Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to express my deepest sympathy and condolences to Mayor Cicilline, Chief Esserman, the entire Providence Police Department, the friends and the family of Detective James L. Allen, a 27-year veteran of the police force in Providence, Rhode Island who was tragically killed early Sunday morning inside his own police station. I want to honor this heroic man by sharing his story with fellow Members of Congress and the nation.

Detective Allen embodied the great courage and dedication of those who risk their lives in order to protect others. His was known by his colleagues as being exceptionally talented in remembering names, faces and dates--so much so that they endearingly referred to him as ``Rainman'' in the department. He was also known as an extremely hard worker who never sought the limelight for himself, despite the fact that he handled high-profile cases and acted heroically on many occasions during his over two decade-long performance of duty. In 1987, Detective Allen ran through a burning tenement house and evacuated several people who were sleeping inside. In 1989, he received a ``Chiefs Award'' for an outstanding act in the performance of duty. On this past Saturday night, he was once again going above and beyond the call of duty by returning to the police station after enjoying dinner with his family in order to ``pull out all the stops'' in the investigation of a vicious crime which had occurred earlier in the day.

He was clearly very proud of following in the footsteps of his father, retired Providence Police Captain Lloyd Allen. Out of a force of 500 officers, Detective Allen was one of the 20 longest-serving. Sadly, he is the third Providence police officer killed on the job since 1994. Incidents such as this one remind us of the daily sacrifice and risk endured by members of our law enforcement communities, who deserve the utmost appreciation from all of us. Detective Allen leaves his wife, Marguerite, and two daughters, Jennifer, 15 and Caitlin, 14, behind. Although his life ended abruptly in great tragedy, his legacy of selflessness, kindness, and service to his community will continue on.

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the citizens of Pascoag, Rhode Island, who have lived with contaminated water from MBTE, I rise in support of the Capps amendment.

I would like to thank my good friend Congresswoman Capps for fighting to bring this debate to the floor today.

I have seen firsthand the devastation that the gasoline additive MTBE can have on our local communities.

In my home state of Rhode Island, the citizens of Pascoag were unable to use their water for months due to this contamination.

No child should have to turn on the water faucet to have their tap water smell like turpentine.

But the provision in this bill that seeks to protect MTBE manufacturers is simply yet another one of many that puts the needs of individuals and families below the requests of industry in this dangerous bill.

I urge my colleagues to take a stand for the forty-five million Americans whose water systems have been affected by MTBE contamination and vote to strike this provision from the bill.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that we extend debate by 2 minutes on both sides.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding me time.

Mr. Chairman, we had a speaker just a few moments ago who said that we were going to have to give up jobs, taxes and energy security if we had a pipeline that brought gas to Florida from out of the country.

I will tell my colleagues, in Rhode Island we would welcome the chance to have our gas piped in from some other country because the fact of the matter is, our State knows, as every other State that has an LNG facility knows, that if we were to ever have that explode, it would decimate a 50-mile radius.

We will take our lives over our jobs, over our taxes, over our security. Let us support the Castle amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the life of Jay B. Cutler--a dedicated advocate of mental health parity, a talented attorney, and a dear friend. Jay passed away on March 4, 2005 at the age of 74. He was a passionate and skillful advocate of the causes he believed in and was recognized as such by all his peers.

A native of New York, Jay graduated from New York University, as a business major, and Brooklyn Law School. He served in the Korean War in Army Intelligence before moving to Washington, DC, where he dedicated his life to improving the treatment for persons suffering from mental illness and substance abuse. He began his career in Public Service Television production and for the former U.S. Senator Jacob Javits as Staff Director of the Senate's Human Resources Committee. He was the lead Senate staff member in the drafting, introduction and passage of the landmark Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-616) that established the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

Jay joined the American Psychiatric Association in 1978, to begin a 25-year career as Director of Government Relations. He helped broaden Medicare coverage for the treatment of mental illness and blocked government efforts to steer mentally ill patients towards cheaper and less effective medications. Recognized for his remarkable dedication to the education about and destigmatization of mental illness not only to legislators, but also to the public, Jay's involvement helped to change the view of such issues in the public. Thanks to people like him, the Nation has made a remarkable transition from the long-held and destructive view that mental illness and substance abuse are character flaws. He advocated the idea that they are diseases which can and should receive the best treatment that medical sciences can provide. His commitment has been at the core of a profound shift in public awareness and understanding of these disorders.

As an APA lobbyist, Jay had direct impact on virtually every major bill on health policy and mental illness and substance abuse treatment legislation over more than 25 years. The expansion of the Community Mental Health Centers Program, the exemption of psychiatric hospitals and units from the Medicare prospective payment methodology, ensuring their fiscal viability for nearly 20 years, and the increased funding for veterans', children's and Indian mental health services are among the numerous legislative achievements Jay carried on in his career. His role in passing mental health legislation was well depicted in Eric Redman's book, The Dance of Legislation, which followed the development of the National Health Service Corps. It featured Jay as one of its subjects and it makes clear with regards to this major legislation that a great deal would not have happened without his dedication.

Over the years, Jay Cutler became synonymous with the cause of mental health parity and was well known by many Members of Congress. By combining his tremendous experience with a charm and wit that he generously shared with all whom he encountered, Jay was extremely effective. Because of his relentless efforts, millions of Americans received better care. His commitment to protecting patient confidentiality and broadening coverage for psychiatric and substance abuse treatment make him a role model for others to emulate.

Jay was not only a committed and effective advocate; he was an excellent teacher. It was my great privilege to work closely with Jay on numerous occasions and learn from his immense knowledge. He taught me a great deal about mental health policy and the history of behavioral health. And I can assure you that every lesson from Jay Cutler, just like every encounter of any kind with Jay Cutler, was a joy.

While being always at the forefront of efforts to eliminate discrimination against mental illness, Jay remained a loving husband and father. He understood the importance of being a doting father and grandfather, as well as a devoted husband. As in his professional activity, Jay Cutler was respected and appreciated by his friends and relatives.

I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing condolences to Jay's wife, Randy, his two daughters, Hollie S. Cutler and Perri E. Cutler, and his granddaughter, Makayla Lipsetts. We are deeply saddened by his death, and we are warmed by the memory of his remarkable life.

Mr. Speaker, on the evening of March 15, I was delayed and missed rollcall vote 72.

I respectfully request the opportunity to record my position on rollcall vote 72.

It was my intention to vote ``yea'' on rollcall 72.

I supported a similar amendment by Congressman Obey in the full committee mark-up of the bill that would have established a select committee to investigate the awarding of contracts to conduct activities in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the continued reluctance by the Bush Administration to openly deal with the government of Turkey's continued policy of denial of the Armenian Genocide. In the words of scholars and writers, genocide denial is the last stage of genocide, what Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel has called a ``double killing.'' The perpetrators first plan and commit the crime, then refuse to acknowledge responsibility. Finally, their political successors deny this crime against humanity. The present-day Turkish government must stop this shameful policy of denial.

The award-winning writer and Harvard Professor Samantha Power in her recent book on genocide recounted how the United States and the world's other powers have too often been bystanders to Genocide, most recently in Rwanda and as you hear these words, once again in Sudan. Power argued that ``The Armenian Genocide of 1915 set the stage for a gruesome 20th century.'' The international community's failure to properly condemn the attempted annihilation of the Armenians led Hitler to famously declare ``Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?''

The Turkish government spends millions of dollars annually to lobby other governments to advance its revisionist cause, claiming that the subject is ``sensitive'' and that acknowledgment would undermine relations with Turkey. To compound this assault on the truth, Turkish leaders and media accuse U.S. and Israel of genocide, respectively in Iraq and Palestine. These policies are abhorrent and must be confronted.

Mr. Speaker, while President Bush has issued annual statements on April 24, the day of remembrance of the Armenian Genocide, he has refrained from using the proper word. Moreover, as the leadership of the House confirmed last year, the Administration remains opposed to a congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide due to Turkish objections. This approach sends absolutely the wrong signal to Turkey and to the rest of the world. As we promote relations based upon shared values, the United States must never forget the essential value of facing history directly.

Mr. Speaker, of March 8, I was delayed and missed Rollcall votes 53, 54.

I respectfully request the opportunity to record my position on Rollcall votes 53 and 54.

It was my intention to vote: ``yea on Rollcall 53; and ``yea'' on Rollcall 54.

At this time I would ask for unanimous consent that my positions be entered into the Record following those votes or in the appropriate portion of the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong concern over China's proposed anti-secession law that it plans to include in its March 2005 agenda of the National People's Congress.

This anti-secession law is highly provocative, and needlessly moves cross-strait relations away from dialogue and possibly towards open confrontation. I am particularly concerned about the law's assumption that China and Taiwan are now unified and how the law sets up a legal framework for retaliation if Taiwan declares independence. Under this proposed law, China could claim the legal right to push for unification of Taiwan by force, which is the worst possible scenario.

The 23 million people of Taiwan are understandably very upset over this proposed law. As we all know, the people of Taiwan live in a full- fledged democracy and enjoy the highest standards of freedom and human rights. We remember a similar reaction and back-lash by the citizens of Hong Kong when they learned about the enactment of the Article 23 anti- sedition laws. While claiming the theory of ``one country, two systems,'' it appears that Beijing's implementation of its theory may result in the blocking of democratic reforms and the undermining of autonomous self-governance.

Certainly any country has the right to enact their own domestic laws, but I do not feel that any country should use their domestic laws as justification to suppress or intimidate democracy abroad. While the President spoke very eloquently of promoting democracy and liberty abroad in his Inaugural Address, we must remember that our country still has a solemn duty to defend democracy and liberty.

I hope the Chinese leaders will be wise to not adopt this anti- secession law in March. I also urge the international community to join us to voice their disapproval of this provocative law. Inaction by the world will likely send a wrong signal to Beijing.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of overall election reform. What we are doing today is not--contrary to what some would have you believe--trying to change the past, although as long as we are considering the past, I would suggest that today's proceedings are taking place 4 years too late. In any case, today's activity is not an attempt to overturn the results of the 2004 Presidential Election. Rather, we are here today to draw attention to the multitude of people who were unable to fulfill their fundamental, constitutional right to vote in this election, for a variety of reasons. This is about securing our system of democracy--not about ``sour grapes.'' It is unacceptable for any American citizen to be disenfranchised, either by intimidation or a misleading ballot. Every person who is legally registered to vote should be allowed to exercise this essential right and duty of citizenship. Members of Congress should be disturbed by the evidence that tens

of thousands of voters, predominantly from minority and Democratic precincts, had to wait hours or were disenfranchised altogether due to unprecedented long lines, expected challenges, get-out-the-vote disinformation, electronic voting irregularities and questionable practices in tallying provisional ballots and completing the recount. This must spur us to action, to accomplish effective, bipartisan electoral reform--the kind we should already have implemented following the 2000 Presidential Election.

I look forward to hearing the outcome of the ongoing GAO investigation into the reported irregularities in our latest Presidential Election, including possible voter intimidation and fraud. We must continue our legislative efforts, following in the footsteps of The Help America Vote Act, which became law in October 2002, to fulfill our responsibility as elected officials to ensure the right of every individual citizen to have their vote counted. We must support the Election Assistance Commission as it responds quickly to reports of irregularities and possible fraud in the 2004 Presidential Election by holding hearings on voting systems standards, registration databases, and provisional balloting. We also must address allegations of inaccurate results from electronic voting machines by supporting legislation to require such machines to produce a paper trail that can be used in the event of a recount. We must continue to act this session to ensure an election process that, in 2008, will maintain integrity as well as the public's confidence.