Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize 2 young men whose musical talents are exceeded only by their commitment and dedication. As a former high school teacher and coach, I know how important it is to recognize the achievements of our youth. Keita and Hayato Ishibashi are role models for all who believe that creativity and hard work lead to the American dream of success. Both are students at Rancho Bernardo High School, and both are violinists of the highest caliber.

Only 16 years old, Keita has appeared several times with the San Diego Symphony. In fact, he made his career debut with the San Diego Symphony at the age of 13. Keita performed for the last five summers at the Viana do Castelo International Music Festival in Portugal, and he performed in the summer of 2000 at an international music festival in Saluzzo, Italy. He has a resume that any musical prodigy would be proud of. The high school junior began playing the violin in Tokyo, Japan, at the age of three on a 1/16th size instrument. At the age of four, Keita performed publicly at a concert hall in Japan shortly before coming to the United States with his family. It was not long before he began attending international music festivals in cities that included Seattle, Washington; Santa Rosa, California; and Aspen, Colorado.

Meanwhile, Keita's younger brother Hayato was also starting to get his musical legs. Hayato began taking violin lessons in the United States at the age of four. Soon, he, too, began participating in the same music festivals as his older brother. The purpose of the festivals is to help young artists develop their musicianship through an extensive curriculum that includes experience with master classes, chamber groups, and orchestras.

The sons of Shinji and Akemi Ishibashi have enjoyed many high notes in their young musical careers, and they include numerous prestigious competitions. Earlier this year Keita won the First Place Award in the San Diego Symphony's Young Artist Competition, and he received an Honorable Mention Award at the La Jolla Symphony's Young Artist Competition. At the La Jolla Symphony competition, Keita was the youngest participant in a field of 25-to-30 young musicians. The oldest was about 23. Last year, Keita won the blue ribbon at the San Diego Youth Symphony's Concerto Competition, and in 1999 another First Place at the EI Camino Youth Symphony's Concerto Competition.

Like his older brother, 14-year-old high school freshman Hayato has an affinity for high notes of his own. Hayato's 2005 First Place finish at the Young Musicians Foundation's 50th Annual National Debut Competition resulted in an invitation to play with the foundation's symphony orchestra in Los Angeles, California, in October of this year and again in January of 2006. Hayato tied for Second Place at the California International Young Artist Competition last April. He won a Third Place Award in the San Diego Youth Symphony's 2004 Concerto Competition, and he was declared a national semi-finalist at the American String Teachers Association's 2003 Competition in Sacramento, California. During the latter competition, Hayato performed Concerto No.1 by Niccolo Paganini and Concerto No.1 by Max Bruch. Both were recorded on CD and are available through recorded music sources.

Currently, Keita is concertmaster and first chair of the chamber and symphony orchestras at Rancho Bernardo High School, and Hayato is a new and welcome addition to the school's music department. Each of them is pursuing his dream, and in so doing each of them is setting an example for all of us. My sincere congratulations go to Keita and Hayato, and I wish you both continued success throughout your academic and musical careers.

Mr. Chairman, we have been working in the State of California for a long time on this bill. I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner). It is a good bill. We appreciate the compromise that was made. I rise in strong support.

Mr. Chairman, I did not run a program in Head Start like the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), but I visited one, and then I visited another one because when I first came to Congress, and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) was here, I did not support Head Start or WIC. I thought they were a waste of time.

But I will tell the Members that Head Start and WIC and school lunch and those programs are only as good as the local district will let them be and work. They can make a difference. If a program that is working, if Members go down to those districts and see those children, they will tell them, Help us to help other kids that do not have a chance.

Support this bill.

I would say that a friend of mine said that when we are talking about the religious aspect of this, he said, When you come to Congress and somebody will say, You wear the Lord on your shoulder, he said, You tell them that is wrong; you wear them on your whole body.

I have never seen anybody turned away any religion, whether in an emergency or health or WIC. So vote for Head Start.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) Special Agent Clifford D. Link, Assistant Director for Financial Management, who will retire after 30 years of federal service on October 1, 2005.

Assistant Director Link started his federal career in June 1975 as a GS-2 clerk with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in New York. Working full-time during the day and attending classes at night, Assistant Director Link graduated from the distinguished John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. Subsequently, he was promoted in grade and joined the FBI Special Support Group (SSG) conducting counterintelligence surveillances.

In 1978, Assistant Director Link was introduced to the (then) Naval Investigative Service (NIS) during a joint NIS/FBI proactive counterintelligence operation ``Operation Lemonade''. As a member of the FBI SSG, then Investigative Assistant Link was providing surveillance support to the joint operation. Through that relationship, Assistant Director Link was convinced that NIS was a growing, dynamic and progressive worldwide organization and that a NIS career would be challenging and rewarding.

In October 1979, Assistant Director Link was offered a NIS Special Agent position with his initial assignment to NIS Resident Agency (NISRA) Washington, DC. Since then, Assistant Director Link has served as a Special Agent at NIS Resident Unit (NISRU) Bethesda, MD; NISRA Yokohama, Japan; and NISRA New York. Assistant Director Link also served in assignments as the Assistant Special Agent in Charge (ASAC) NISRA Point Loma, CA; ASAC NCIS Fraud Unit, San Diego, CA; SAC NCIS Fraud Unit, San Francisco, CA; ASAC (FCI) NCIS San Diego Field Office; RAC NCISRA Camp Pendleton, CA and DSAC San Diego Field Office. Assistant Director Link's NCIS Headquarters assignments included Program Manager for Defense Counterintelligence Integrated Information Systems, Executive Assistant to the Director for Planning and Strategy, Executive Assistant to the Director for Modernization, Executive Assistant to the Director for Transformation, and his current position as Assistant Director for Financial Management.

During the 26 years of his NCIS career, Assistant Director Link has engaged in practically every aspect of NCIS operations, including criminal investigations, special and undercover operations, counterintelligence investigations and operations, fraud, counterterrorism, antiterrorism, force protection, hostage negotiations and overseas deployments. He also participated in and led protective service operations that put him in the presence of Presidents, Vice Presidents, Cabinet Secretaries, Members of Congress, Ambassadors, Foreign Dignitaries, Flag and General Officers, and various other federal, state and local leaders. Assistant Director Link had the opportunity to travel all over the globe, to include Europe, the Far East, Middle East and Iraq.

After the bombing of the USS Cole, Assistant Director Link served as leader of the Secretary of the Navy's Situational Awareness and Intelligence Working Group and as a member of the Department of Defense Counterintelligence Working Group. He continued as a member of these task forces after the 9/11 attacks.

Transitioning to his NCISHQ assignment, Assistant Director Link was a co-leader in the NCIS Zero Based Review, was a member of the NCIS Strategic Management Council, led the development of the new NCIS Management and Administration Office, participated in the NCIS Modernization effort and, for the past year, has led the Financial Management Directorate. Mr. Speaker, Assistant Director Link has served this nation honorably for 30 years and deserves the recognition of this body, his community and the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding to me at this time.

I will tell my colleagues, if you want to know about defense or intelligence reorganization, education or medical research, I am your guy to tell you what to do. Trade issues is an interest, but I do not know the ins and outs, but I want to speak as someone who is not on the committee that sees it in a little different way.

Mr. Speaker, the vote that we are voting on today, when we talk about amendments, this is the same exact bill that we voted on yesterday in suspension. So the same bill, not amendments, the same bill as yesterday, and we are bringing it up today, we had 240 votes.

China policy. I understand while many of my colleagues on the other side, and some on our side, have difficulty with China, it is a very difficult policy. Is it an opportunity or a threat? China is both. They are building Su-30s, a Russian fighter that destroys our best fighters 90 percent of the time,

and the Taiwan problem with the submarines and the different trade issues.

But I would tell my colleagues that spoke against, both Republican and Democrat Presidents, seven Presidents supported trade with China. Are there some jobs in some sectors that are lost? Yes. And that is where the administration and Republicans and Democrats need to come together to try and help those sectors that have lost jobs, because in other sectors, jobs have increased, and those Presidents, like many Members on the floor, feel that the overall policy is good.

Thirdly, there is no magic bill. If you look at Northern Ireland, you look at the Middle East, look back when Jimmy Carter and President Clinton started peace talks in the Middle East. It takes incrementalism, and it is going to take years of working what other Presidents started to negotiate and to make this sound policy. I do not think they will ever be totally sound, but this is one step, not a magic bill, to make sure that some of those trade agreements are enforced.

That is a good thing, and that is why we are here today, to vote on the same bill that we voted on yesterday. I know my colleagues want amendments, but this is the same bill that 240 people voted for hours ago.

I would remind people that I went to Hanoi, and Pete Peterson, who is a Democrat. He invited us to go to Vietnam. When I was in Hanoi, to the Minister I said, why will you not get involved with President Clinton and trade in Vietnam, and he pointed at thousands of bicycles outside his window and he said, Congressman, I am a Communist. He said, if those people have things, I will be out of office. So maybe trade is good as a fight against communism, as one small increment.

That is why these small bills that go forward are impotant. My colleagues who have legitimate concerns, especially in their own districts, and we need to work those things out, but this is an important bill, and I ask my colleagues to support the rule and the bill.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

I listened to my colleagues on the committee, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), and also the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), and they have legitimate concerns. I do not think there is anybody in this body on either side of this issue that does not have concerns. I would like to see, in particular, a sunset provision, although I do not know what the timing should be. God willing, there should be a day we will not need a PATRIOT Act, and it is easier to vote it back than it is to get rid of it.

Mr. Chairman, 26 nations have been attacked by al Qaeda, and we just saw today England, but look at France and Japan. It also tells us the United States is behind in its security for our mass rail and bus transportation systems, not just aviation but those as well.

Let me cite an example of what happened before 9/11 and how the PATRIOT Act, in my opinion, would have stopped an event, not just may have.

Agencies knew of an outspoken extremist group. They were outspoken in support of Osama bin Laden before 9/11, and they were outspoken about their ethnic intolerance and raising money for al Qaeda. Agencies like CIA, FBI and law enforcement had thousands of leads and limited manpower. Their primary issue at the time was getting out two agents in a foreign country that were under extreme conditions. They were concerned also about if they questioned this group that they would be taken to court on profiling. The rhetoric was there, but no action. The FBI and the CIA were limited in their ability to check out this group.

Mr. Chairman, this particular group was the group that was training in Arizona, the pilots and the crews that flew into New York City, that flew into the Pentagon, and that crashed in Pennsylvania. Mohammed Atta is another example. His roommate, the limitations that our agencies had on questioning him, he knew about the 9/11 bombings, is another reason why I think that we need this act.

I am conflicted, just like my colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and others, because there are things that all of us are concerned about. But Khalid Sheik Mohammed is the guy who planned 9/11. We caught this rascal. His replacement was a guy named Abu al-Libbi, and we caught that rascal. And some of the documents showed that it is only a matter of time, Mr. Chairman, until this country is hit, so we must be diligent. This act helps us do that, and weighing the concerns and is the reason I think all of us need to support the PATRIOT Act.

Mr. Speaker, I support CAFTA but I am here talking about something both sides of the aisle can support. That is to honor Jim Stockdale.

Admiral Stockdale is a true American hero. He died on July 5. He was a prisoner of war for 5\1/2\ years. He was so brutally beaten his shoulders were ripped out of their sockets. He was beaten by the Vietnamese so bad, almost senseless, that Jeremiah Denton had to take over his leadership of the camp at the Hanoi Hilton and of all POWs.

He was then moved in with our Congressman Sam Johnson just to recover. It took him almost a year to do that. Admiral Stockdale and his wife, Sybil, who support our MIAs and our POWs we honor here in this body.

I thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter).

Mr. Speaker, Admiral Stockdale died on July 5 of this year. Some people may not remember the name Admiral Stockdale, but millions of people watched as the TV program portrayed the book that he and his wife Sybil wrote called ``In Love and War.'' It told about the plight of our POWs and how their families suffered. Millions of people saw that.

They also may remember that Admiral Stockdale was Ross Perot's running mate one year in an alternative party, and then the following year Admiral Stockdale supported John McCain in his run for presidency, also a prisoner with Admiral Stockdale himself.

Admiral Stockdale was a prisoner for 7 years. He was awarded the Medal of Honor, not for just being a prisoner of war, but for his leadership and what he had to suffer through. He refused to capitulate to the enemy. That sounds like a big word, but not when you know what Admiral Stockdale went through.

Admiral Stockdale was tortured because of his leadership and the communication system, the tap code that he set up for the other prisoners. He was tortured. His shoulders were ripped out of their sockets. For six months he was tortured until he was almost unable to speak.

He was put in a cell then with our Member of Congress, Sam Johnson, who was a prisoner of war for 7 years. Admiral Stockdale through the tap code turned over the leadership of all the prisoners of war to then former Senator Jeremiah Denton. At that time, John McCain, Sam Johnson, Jeremiah Denton and Admiral Stockdale were responsible for the organization of all of our prisoners of war.

Mr. Speaker, let me read the citation of Admiral Stockdale's Medal of Honor, just so people understand. ``By his heroic action, in great peril to himself, he earned the everlasting gratitude of his fellow POWs and to his country.'' This was Admiral Stockdale. He was our friend, and he died.

Mr. Speaker, it is time that this Nation honor both Admiral Stockdale and his wife Sybil for the sacrifices that they gave to this country. Every dog face pilot, enlisted and officer, knew about the courage, not only of Admiral Stockdale, but the rest of our POWs. Sybil organized, not just for the MIAs, but for the POWs together, the entire program that supported the families of the MIAs and the POWs, and for that we honor them.

We know what the family is going through, even from July 5, the sadness that they have. But they can go to sleep at night knowing that Admiral Stockdale and Sybil, that this country owes a great, great deal to those individuals.

People in San Diego and around this country, it is time to remember Admiral Stockdale and Sybil for not only their patriotism, but the sacrifices of men like Sam Johnson, like John McCain, like Jeremiah Denton and the other POWs and some of those that did not come back.

I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I am a Navy guy, but the F-22 is the only

airplane in the inventory that is projected that will compete with the SU-30 and SU-37.

To give my colleagues a comparison, Admiral Stockdale was flying an A-4 Skyhawk. At the time it was not a bad airplane, but they did not have the new PH or the P-408 engines, which is more powerful. And they loaded bombs on that little Skyhawk and it made it real cumbersome flying. I was lucky enough to fly Phantoms and some F-8s and other airplanes like the Thud and so on, but those little A-4 Skyhawks were pretty vulnerable.

Admiral Stockdale was shot down in 1965 before they each had surface- to-air missiles in Vietnam, he was shot down by Triple A, and those airplanes were slow and cumbersome. That is why we do not want our men and women flying airplanes that are not the best or driving Humvees that are not armored or other things, because if you look at the history of the past, like Admiral Stockdale and John McCain and Jeremiah Denton and all the others, that they were shot down, and not because they had necessarily inferior equipment, but not the best equipment. That is what we want to make sure of today, that our men and women who are serving overseas, as the chairman of the authorization defense committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) has dedicated his life. His son was in the Marine Corps and served I think twice in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, China is building the SU-30, which beats our American airplanes, our best F-14s, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s, 90 percent of the time. It is an opportunity, but it is also a potential threat.

Mr. Speaker, it has been recently reported by the Department of Veterans Affairs that the veterans healthcare system will have $1 billion deficit at the end of FY 05.

I, like many other Members of Congress, am extremely concerned regarding this recent disclosure. As we continue to fight the Global war on terror and in Operation Iraqi Freedom, we need to ensure that the full range of veterans medical services are available for our returning veterans and those that have served before them. Our veterans are not served by taking funds from the VA capital investment account. These funds are vital to the purchase of new equipment and the maintenance and upkeep of VA facilities. I feel that these funds are critical to the total healthcare of a veteran. It is important that we find the funding necessary to address this shortfall and ensure that this does not occur again.

Mr. Speaker, I believe we must provide funding to makeup for the shortfall in veterans healthcare, and I urge you to work with our colleagues on the Appropriations and Veterans' Affairs Committees to move legislation forward as soon as possible to address this shortfall.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, I will not take 5 minutes. I rise in opposition to this amendment. Congressman Ron Packard, a former Member here, was a very strong supporter of Amtrak. He pushed it every year that he was chairman on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. He also realized that we had to reform Amtrak.

If we do not push the Department of Defense to make changes, they will never do it. This week this body made several votes to send a message. Let me give you a good example. I think the total outlay to Saudi Arabia was $24,000, but they voted to cut off funding for Saudi Arabia. Why? It is a message to keep them moving in a right direction.

I read recently where if you took Amtrak from Florida to San Diego, the ticket is about $135, but the Federal subsidy for that is $477. What we are trying to do is send Amtrak a strong message that someway they have got to reform.

Sleeper cars, now, that trip from Florida to San Diego would take 71 hours. Someone that is a senior citizen is not going to sit in a chair for 71 hours. It costs $100 million a year, the food service. $50 million it loses. Let us offer it up for bid and privatize it and at least go some of these reforms. This particular amendment does the opposite. It allows Amtrak to go on without any message to do just as they have. They have even said that ridership is up. Well, then, let us make it profitable for them so we can make a bigger and better Amtrak instead of one that takes billions of dollars just in subsidies to fund.

I am not opposed to the subsidy. Look at the Metro here in Washington, D.C. It costs a lot of money. We subsidize it. But now put all that traffic on the highway and see what it costs with pollution, with extra drive time and so on.

Yes, we do need a cross-country Amtrak, but we definitely need to send them a message. That is why I oppose this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to surprise my colleague, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), and support what he just said, part of it, just parts of it. I voted with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) on the credit card issue in the committee. And I say to the gentleman from Wisconsin, I do not know where the right place is to do this, but just think about the issue itself. Any one of us, our children or anybody else can receive a notice, or the credit card company can get a notice, maybe you do not cash a check on time and you get it there, maybe you miss a payment. That person can notify the credit card company, and they can raise your rates by 30 percent. My own daughter went through a credit card fraud where there were people cashing her credit cards all over the country. And that was hard enough.

But the issue the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) is talking about is a valid one. And I hope somewhere, someplace, if someone does object, I will not. We can resolve that issue because it is a terrible issue.

On the issue of tax breaks for the rich, of course we will arm wrestle. Fifty percent of the money that goes to Sub S corporations provides about 70 percent of the jobs in this country. And if you take a look, the economy is improving. The interest rates are low. Inflation is low. The job rate is 5.1 percent, and we are improving a lot because of the things that we have done together in many ways to stimulate the economy.

Now, the tax relief. I happen to believe that the death tax is absolutely wrong. You work your whole life and pay everything you have to build a farm or business, and then the government comes in and wants to take a portion of that. I do not care if it is a million dollars or a hundred million; it is money, labor that you put in to your investment. And many of us feel that that is just wrong. It is not a tax break for the rich, and it improves the economy.

So I do not disagree with my friend on the issue of the credit card. But what I would ask my colleagues, every single bill that I have seen come forward, it is bashing the administration, it is bashing the Republicans. If we take a look and get our arms around this budget and balance the budget, there is going to be more money.

It is like everybody here, you have a checkbook. If you continue to spend more money than you take in, and whether it is Big Bird, whether it is Amtrak, whether it is other things, most of us support the veterans; and hopefully that will come forward in the other body, and we will be able to add money to that. But I would sure like to see less bashing and us reaching across and trying to work together rather than partisan politics. I have a lot of friends on the other side of the aisle, and it grieves me over these last bills to see the action on the House floor.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the ranking member and the chairman for this bill.

It is easy for some people to vote against foreign ops until they understand what it is. There are four legs of a table: the military foreign ops, intel, and homeland security; and probably a fifth now with the rising cost of fuel, energy.

Foreign ops is critical in that security table. Why? If we think about the position of the Palestinian-Israeli issue with Sharon, for the first time, I heard the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) speak that we have hope in the Middle East, hope. If we take a look, it is easy to think about cutting certain countries, but think of what a thin edge they are on right now. Look at Indonesia with its problems, how they help us. Look at Saudi Arabia that is moving more and more toward a moderate state. Do they have problems? Yes. Look at Egypt, and it would be easy for someone to come up and have an amendment to cut them. But in Saudi Arabia I sure do not want ``King Osama bin Laden,'' or in Indonesia, if we look at the thin thread. Or Pakistan. In Pakistan take a look at Hamboli; KSM, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was a guy who planned 9/11. We just caught Abu al-Libbi, who is the guy who took Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's position. And they have stopped major events and attacks within the United States because of our foreign operations bill.

Look at Sudan. They ethically cleansed probably as many people as Saddam Hussein or in Kosovo or Bosnia, and that brings world peace.

But even worse, look at the HIV threat. There are more deaths in HIV in Africa than during the plagues, and if we support that, A, it makes a safer America, but it also protects and stabilizes Africa itself.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I may not be able to be here during the debate on an amendment for veterans, and I wanted to speak to it. I want to offer a little history, but I think it is a balanced history from both sides. I remember when President Clinton's budget on the veterans, the VFW, the American Legion, Vietnam veterans, all rallied against the budget because it cut veterans health care. We worked with the other body, both of us on both sides of the aisle; and even some of those that voted with President Clinton on his budget voted with us to restore that health care by $1 billion.

We have increased veterans health care by 16 percent. But it is not enough. There is a shortfall and we must attend to it.

Historically, this body works with the other body in conference and I believe that some of those dollars will come forward, maybe not what we all want, but I believe some of those dollars will come together for veterans health care.

I remember in 1993 when my colleagues occupied the White House, the House and the Senate, veterans COLAs were cut. Military COLAs were cut. And there was a tax increase on the middle income.

In 1994, when Republicans took the majority, together with Republicans and Democrats, many of the same Democrats that voted with the President on his budget restored the military COLAs. We worked together to restore the veterans COLAs. And I would have to say probably on this side we will take a little more credit for restoring and reducing the tax on the middle class.

We have worked together, although we have not got what we want on concurrent receipts. For 40 years my colleagues on the other side did not address concurrent receipts. And we have. But at the same time, when it has been addressed under a Republican majority, then the Democrats have come forward and helped us.

Two different sessions we have passed bills on concurrent receipts together. And now there is a bipartisan commission going forward to see what direction we will write down.

I look at TRICARE for life, which we worked together on.

Subvention. I did not write the subvention bill, but my veterans in San Diego, California wrote that bill and put it forward, basically, where you can use Medicare dollars at VA health care.

The Filipino Veterans Equity Act. One of the gentlemen on the other side I very rarely vote with. But we worked together to restore the promise that was made to our Filipino veterans back during the MacArthur days, and we have worked together on that as well.

You do not have to look far to see where we come together, and I do not think any Member on either side of the aisle can look at another one and say, you do not care about veterans; you do not care about our military; you do not care about our Guard and Reserve. That is just not true.

Some people vote against military issues. Maybe their district has got extreme poverty and it is a way of funding their issues and their problems. It does not mean they do not care about the military itself.

The Republican budget looked at many years of substantial increases and almost every account, including veterans, including education and health care. But we decided to get our arms around the deficit.

Many of my colleagues on both sides talk about the deficit and the debt. If we, as Members, or you, Mr. Chairman, if you have got a checkbook and you spend more than you are going to take in, you are going to be bankrupt, and you are going to have less in the future to spend. For us to get our arms around this budget and still fund our priorities, I think we will when we come together with the other body.

A classic case of savings: the welfare reform bill passed many years ago which was lauded by President Clinton as one of the best bills to help people in this country. I also happen to agree with him.

But at the same time we have gone through these increases, we have been fighting the war on terror. If you look at Kadafi, his nuclear weapons are in the United States today. And even more important, we have found the black market that supported North Korea, Pakistan, India, and others. What kind of value is that to us, not just to our veterans, but our military and our homeland security?

I mentioned a minute ago Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Hambali and Abu Halibi, the people that were actually planning raids on the United States. Now, those people are all made up of military that then become veterans, and we owe them a priority.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Alan Bersin, who this June will conclude his seventh year as Superintendent of San Diego City Schools. As such, he finishes his term of service as the nation's longest serving superintendent in an urban district of 100,000 or more students. He has served our community in Southern California with great distinction as United States Attorney from 1993-1998 and as the Attorney General's Southwest Border Representative from 1995 to 1998, the so-called ``border czar.'' Superintendent Bersin has rendered distinguished public service in the course of leading the transformation of the eighth largest public school district in America.

Under Superintendent Bersin's leadership, San Diego City Schools earning the highest academic rank increased by more than a third while the number of schools in the lowest category fell from 13 to 1. Mr. Bersin also promoted and successfully inspired 78.8 percent of the electorate to support a $1.5 billion bond to repair and renovate the physical infrastructure of the city schools. He downsized the central office to streamline operations and directed further resources to the classroom. His outreach efforts set a new standard for community participation and dialogue and helped to foster an atmosphere of mutual respect. By maintaining a relentless focus on enhanced instruction and improved student achievement, Superintendent Bersin achieved great things for public education in San Diego.

Mr. Bersin oversaw a transformation of San Diego City Schools. The district is now better able to serve its students, their families and the broader San Diego community. The credit belongs to thousands of teachers and hundreds of school and parent leaders who were galvanized and energized by Superintendent Bersin's leadership. I am also pleased to announce that Mr. Bersin's service in support of public education will continue as Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has appointed him Secretary of Education for California and a member of the State Board of Education. His term commences on July 1, 2005. I want to offer my congratulations to Alan. He continues to exemplify public service and public servants at their best. I know my colleagues join me in wishing every success to California's new Secretary for Education.

Mr. Speaker, I came on this committee after I had been on the authorizing committee for education. Then the chairman was Congressman Jon Porter, probably one of the best chairmen that have ever chaired that particular committee. I was concerned that because of the delicacies of the programs that this particular bill offers, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) has quite often spoken of it as the caring committee because it involves such things as education, health care, medical research and so on, I was concerned about who was going to replace Jon Porter. The leadership came up and gave the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) the chair, and I watched and watched. Members on both sides of the aisle would agree that the gentleman from Ohio has done every single thing that he can to enhance the properties of this bill.

Now, many will use each of these bills for propaganda against the administration, against Republicans. I would tell you that most of the things that we fight for in this bill are done in a bipartisan way. There are other things that other people would like, but when it comes down to it, education and the different aspects of this bill, we do work together. The House bill is only the start. We have the other body to go through and we have a conference to go through. What we are talking about here today will not be in effect.

I would also like to recognize, Mr. Speaker, that only 7 percent of education is funded by the Federal Government; 93 percent of education is funded by the State. California has had a particular problem with a $12 billion debt left by a different Governor and they are trying to pay that back. In most States, Leave No Child Behind has worked successfully. In California, we

need more flexibility. Many of the State laws do not apply or correspond to the Federal laws and we are having problems, especially in IDEA, attendance and testing. But I will tell you that the items in which this bill are important, Impact Aid that takes care of our military troops and Native Americans, is increased in this bill.

If you look at title I, what is title I? Title I is for the most disadvantaged children we have in our Nation. California has to fight for its fair share. About 1 in 9 Americans live there. But yet title I is in this bill is increased.

Pell grants, as has been mentioned, is the highest level ever. No child should be denied a secondary or a college education if they meet the standards, and Pell grants help that. But, remember, the State pays for 93 percent.

IDEA, there is some reform I think we can work on together in the Individuals With Disabilities Act. There are some students that take over $100,000 a year out of the school system under IDEA because of special needs, and the school has to pay. We need to embrace that because in many areas those costs are impacting the schools themselves.

There is one amendment that I think is a good amendment that I may have to go against my chairman in this today and that is Easy Start, authored by former member Bill Goodling of the authorizing committee, a program in which parents are actually involved with their children at an early age in education, and I think that that should somehow be restored, hopefully in conference or maybe even with this amendment.

But I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio and I want to thank the Members on the other side of the aisle. I am sad to hear the partisan rhetoric when many times we work so closely together.