Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) for his leadership in education.

Mr. Speaker, tonight's debate really is not about fiscal responsibility. That ship sailed almost 2 years ago to the day when the Republican majority passed the largest expansion of entitlement in the last 40 years with the new prescription drug bill that they refused to pay for. They sold it as $400 billion. It is closer to $1.2 trillion today with no cost control and refusing to pay for it.

Tonight's debate is about what the values and priority of our Nation will be. Is it going to be another round of large tax cuts for the most well off, or will it be an investment in the education future of our students? They are choosing the tax cut.

This raid on student aid that we have been talking about is the largest cut in the student financial aid program in our Nation's history. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has stated that it is going to add, to the average student, over $5,800 in up-front fees and higher interest payments through their collegiate career.

This is happening when one-half of low-income students in this country today who are qualified and want to go on to school cannot because they cannot afford it. This is happening when countries like China and India and South Korea and Japan are ramping up their education investment in their students' future. This is happening when China last year graduated nine times the number of engineers that we did. China last year graduated more English-speaking engineers than we did in this country. This is a recipe for economic disaster in their budget.

Instead, what we need to be doing is investing in economic growth. We are leaving too many of our students behind today when we need them advancing their skills and knowledge base more than ever. At a time when our long-term economic and national security hangs in the balance, it is as if the Republicans want to unilaterally disarm in the race for global creativity and innovation. Instead of being so eager to dismantle the New Deal, we should be offering the American people a new, new deal with the hope and promise of helping all Americans develop the skills and tools they need to compete in the global marketplace. This budget does not do it. We can do better.

I encourage my colleagues to defeat this proposal.

Mr. Speaker, this year marks the 30th anniversary of the end of Vietnam War and the 60th anniversary of the end of Second World War. It also marks the fifth anniversary of the Veterans History Project.

Five years ago Congress unanimously passed legislation that I authored creating the Veterans History Project. It was ushered through Congress with the help of Representative Amo Houghton, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), and Senators Cleland and Hagel.

The idea behind the project is simple, to collect, preserve and share with current and future generations alike the stories and history of American veterans and those who supported them on the home front. The project spans from World War I to the present, covering both World Wars, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War and the current conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It acts as both a learning tool and a living memorial to our Nation's veterans. Since its inception in 2000, the Veterans History Project's success has far exceeded our expectations. Despite modest funding, the Veterans History Project has an ever-increasing collection with more than 40,000 histories contributed by America's veterans, making it the largest oral history collection in the world today. Each story is unique, but taken together as a whole, the compilation puts a familiar face on the universal realities of war, courage and fear, horror and exhilaration, sorrow and triumph.

These collections include oral interviews, written, audio and video recordings, and authentic diaries, maps, letters and photographs. Thanks to the dedicated staff at the Library of Congress, where it is being housed, and the thousands of contributions from our many veterans across the country, the Veterans History Project has captured the American spirit better than any history book ever could.

The project also provides a way for local veterans to connect with students, community groups and each other. Across the country teachers have used the project as an eye-opening history lesson for their students. Veterans have been able to meet with classes, sharing their experiences with students and having their stories recorded as part of the project.

Two of the biggest supporters of the Veterans History Project in my congressional district are Bill Bruning, a veteran and Patriotic Officer for American Legion Post 52 in LaCrosse, Wisconsin, and Karen Schoenfeld. Karen teaches at a charter school in LaCrosse and includes the Veterans History Project in her class. Inspired by the veterans she and her class have met as part of the project, Karen wrote this beautiful poem that I would like to share. It is entitled ``I Never Saw Your Face Before.''

``I never saw your face before, I never knew your name. But now our paths have crossed, and I will never be the same.

``I never saw the flag before. Not really, not its soul. I only saw the stars, the stripes, a fabric on a pole.

``Now as I gaze upon our flag, I can see young faces, all called away from our proud land to other distant places.

``They did what they were called to do. They put their dreams on hold. They knew that others needed them. They did what they were told.

``And you, my friend, have taught me this, the sacrifices made. You helped me know what I have earned from the price that others paid.

``I've been in class, I've read the books. I've seen the movies, too. But now I know our freedom's price, all this I've learned from you.''

This beautiful poem is a testament to the power this project has had in educating Americans about our bravest men and women.

The Veterans History Project is a salute and an ongoing memorial to these many brave individuals who have sacrificed to protect the ideals of this great Nation and those who continue that proud tradition of service today.

On this Veterans Day, I invite my colleagues in Congress, as well as all Americans, to participate in this nationwide effort to honor our veterans. Anyone can contact their Representative's or Senator's office for more information on the Veterans History Project, or you can contact the Library of Congress through their Web site at loc.gov.

On this Veterans Day may we all take time to thank the veterans in our life, perhaps do an oral history interview with them or find some other way to show them our gratitude.

May God bless our men and women in uniform wherever they may be serving our country today. May God bless our veterans and their families and may God continue to bless these United States of America.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution and commend my colleagues from Texas and California for offering the resolution today.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure there is not one of us in the House of Representatives that has not been impacted by one of our Guard and Reserve units being called up and mobilized in regards to the operations ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. All of us are terribly proud of the tremendous sacrifice and courage and service that has been exhibited by our Guard and Reserve units throughout the country.

Recently, I had a chance to return to Iraq for my third trip in country. It is invaluable experience in getting a firsthand account in regards to the ongoing operations, the progress that is being made, what is working and perhaps, more importantly, what is not working. The time that we were able to spend with our troops on the ground is time well spent because they do tend to tell us like it is, what is working, what is not, what we need to improve upon in regards to the policy of what is taking place.

But having gone to Iraq now on three separate occasions, I can honestly state that nothing has made me prouder to be an American than seeing our troops in uniform there performing their duties. They are so well-trained, so well-motivated. They are, in short, the best our Nation has to offer.

Yet, their service to our country would be made much more difficult if they did not receive the support from back home, first and foremost from their families and loved ones, who also have to endure extreme sacrifice and hardship by allowing them to serve for extended periods of time overseas, typically 1 year boots-on-the-ground in theater like Iraq today. But there is another component to this, another entity that oftentimes gets overlooked, and that is what this resolution today speaks to.

It is the countless employers out there that have to, by law, a law that Congress has passed, allow them to serve our country while keeping their jobs open and safe back home. It is one of those items that people tend not to think too much about, but it does go to alleviate a lot of the concerns that our serving Guard and Reserve units have, and that is maintaining financial security for the families back home and knowing that when they do return from serving our country there will be a position for them at their place of employment.

In Wisconsin, we have had two companies last year that were recognized for their outstanding service to the Guard and Reserve employees that they have. One is Harley Davidson. The other was Schneider Trucking, located up in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Every year there is a process to try to recognize some of these companies throughout the country that are going above and beyond in regards to their support for Guard and Reserve units, and we commend them here today with this resolution.

In the congressional district that I represent in western Wisconsin, Mr. Speaker, we have had numerous National Guard units who have been called up. This past week we have the 700-member 128th Infantry Guard, who are returning home from their 1 year tour in Iraq, and there is no more happy occasion to attend than the reunion ceremony of those troops when they step off the plane, being reunited with their families for the very first time in a long time.

Beyond the 128th, we are hoping to be able to welcome home soon the 1158th Transportation Guard unit in western Wisconsin, hopefully within the next few weeks. We have also had the 32nd, the 229th, the 652nd, the 829th Engineering Guard units who were called up, gone through their training, deployed and served admirably over in Iraq.

Again, when they come home they face periods of transition, some difficult, some not so difficult, but the one thing that they should not have to worry about is knowing that there is a job for them remaining, that they gave up in order to serve our country. That is why I think this resolution commending their employers is very important today.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

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

Mr. Speaker, I am sure my colleagues are aware that back in 1994 we did pass the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, which is to protect the National Guard and Reservists and others called up to serve their country. It requires that employers hold jobs for employees when serving abroad, as well as retain some basic benefits for them.

I am also sure my colleagues are aware that many companies have stepped up and gone above and beyond the call of duty. In fact, a recently released GAO report acknowledged that many of the employers exceed the minimum requirements set forth in law. For example, more than 26 percent of the selected Reservists are receiving their salaries or differential pay, 32 percent get medical benefits not required by the law, and 30 percent get some other benefit above and beyond the legal requirements. I commend those companies that see the necessity to step up and make that extra effort to alleviate a lot of the concern that our Guard and Reserve units have.

I have two companies in my congressional district in western Wisconsin in particular that I would like to recognize: Ashley Furniture, which is a large furniture manufacturing company that has many Guard and Reservists employed. They have stepped up by offering the differential pay to those Guard and Reservists, as well as Mathy Construction, who is doing the same exact thing.

Our good friend and colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), has offered H.R. 838 that I would

like to recognize on the floor today. This is a differential pay legislation that would require the Federal Government to pick up the pay difference that the Guard and Reservists are receiving as active military compared to what they would have normally received, and it offers tax incentives to reimburse the companies who are doing this on their own. I think it is worthy legislation, worthy of our support.

Finally, I would like to point out there is one segment of employment that has been particularly hard hit by the call-up of our Guard and Reserves, and that is the first responder units in our congressional districts. Many of the Guard and Reserve units are coming from first responders, whether it is the police or sheriff departments, fire departments, in short, our civilian warriors. They seem to be particularly hard-pressed during these trying times by allowing their workers to go and serve our country.

That has had an impact on the services they are able to provide, because they are giving up some of the most qualified and hard-working employees to do these services for us back in our congressional districts. So I just want to point that out during the resolution discussion today.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, I want to again thank my colleagues from California and the gentleman on our committee from Texas for offering this resolution. I encourage our colleagues to adopt it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Eminent Domain Property Act offered by my colleague from Wisconsin, Chairman Sensenbrenner. This bipartisan-supported bill was introduced in response to the Supreme

Court's 5-4 decision in Kelo vs. City of New London, which condoned the use of eminent domain to take private property and transfer it to another private entity for the stated purpose of economic development.

Mr. Chairman, the Kelo decision put homeowners, small business owners, and farmers all across the country at risk of losing their property to this expansion of the government's eminent domain powers.

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution allows local government to use eminent domain powers to condemn private property. The only requirement is that owners are given ``just compensation'' and that the land in question goes to a ``public use.'' Traditionally, the ``public use'' requirement in eminent domain cases allowed the local government to condemn property to build railroads, or bridges, or highways. But in a 1954 case, Berman v. Parker, the Supreme Court found that ``public use'' could include condemning blighted neighborhoods to build better ones as a means to raise more tax revenue. But, whereas the Berman case was predicated on the property being `blighted,' the Kelo decision goes further down the slippery slope and rests solely on whether the condemnation would improve tax revenues.

I would assert, as Justice Scalia did in the Kelo case, that any conceivable commercial development that replaces a church, house, or farm will produce more tax revenue, and that once condemned land is passed off to private developers, it is no longer going to ``public use.'' That is why I strongly believe Congress must act to limit States' eminent domain actions if the only requirement is that the proposed project improves the tax base.

The Eminent Domain Property Act of 2005 will prohibit the Federal Government from using eminent domain for private economic development and also prohibits States from using eminent domain for private economic development if the State receives any Federal economic development funding. A violation by any State will result with the State being ineligible for a Federal economic development for two years. By denying municipalities all Federal development funds when they abuse their eminent domain authority, H.R. 4128 provides a strong economic disincentive to prevent municipalities and local governments from taking private property for the purpose of private economic development.

Lastly, Mr. Chairman, my district in western Wisconsin is largely rural and dependent on the agricultural economy of its many small family farmers. As the sense of Congress portion of this legislation points out, the unfortunate truth is that agricultural lands are particularly vulnerable to the abuse of eminent domain power. Agricultural lands tend to have a lower fair market value than surrounding commercial and residential properties, making them a prime target for growing communities.

It is hard enough, for our struggling farmers who are facing softening commodity prices and weather related disasters, to also have to contend with losing their way of life so that others can have yet another shopping mall.

Mr. Chairman, I commend my colleague, Chairman Sensenbrenner on crafting this bipartisan legislation and I urge it's adoption and support.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me this time and for the leadership that he has shown on the issue. I also commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) for the important issues that he has raised in regards to this important legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I think we can all concede or stipulate that no one is in favor of frivolous lawsuits in this country. As a former special prosecutor, State prosecutor in Wisconsin, and as a young lawyer who used to handle corporate litigation in a large law firm, I saw firsthand some of the abuses that take place in the judicial process. But I believe that there is a right and a wrong way of moving forward in dealing with the frivolous lawsuit situation in the country.

Unfortunately, the majority base bill today, I think, is the wrong approach, whereas the substitute that we are offering here cures a lot of defects that the majority is offering and would put some substance behind cracking down on the filing of frivolous lawsuits. But first let us correct some of the facts.

There has been a lot of rhetoric from some of our colleagues here claiming that the real bane of the judicial system today are a bunch of trial attorneys running around chasing ambulances, filing needless personal injury cases, clogging the court system, driving up litigation costs, increasing the expenses of corporations, and that is what is to be blamed in regards to dealing with frivolous lawsuits, when, in fact, the facts indicate just the opposite.

A recent comprehensive study by Public Citizen has shown that the explosion in the filing of lawsuits has really rested with the corporations of this country, who have been filing four to five times more claims and lawsuits than individual plaintiffs in this country. Furthermore, when Rule 11 sanctions have been applied, they have been applied in 69 percent of the cases against corporations that are abusing the discovery process or filing needless lawsuits. So it is not these money-grubbing trial attorneys that so many want to believe that exist out there that are causing a lot of the problem in the judicial system; it is rather corporations that are increasing it. It is those who are most eager to support the majority base bill who are most likely to take advantages of the opportunities of filing lawsuits in our country. I find that a bit ironic.

But we are also today, and both of us, the majority and the substitute, is really usurping the Rules Enabling Act. When Congress passed that, it was a recognition that we here really do not have a lot of good expertise, and we are not in the trenches dealing with these rules every day. That is why the Judicial Conference looks at rules changes. They submit it to the Supreme Court for approval, who then finally submits it to Congress for our consideration to adopt or to revise at the end of the day. That whole process is being usurped.

Finally, and as the gentleman from California indicated, we have a short-term memory problem in this Congress. This has been tried between 1983 and 1993, and the rules were changed because it was not working, because we were taking away too much discretion from the judges in the application of Rule 11. It had a disproportionate impact on the filing of civil rights actions in this country. Our substitute bill

cures that by exempting the filing of civil rights under this legislation.

This is significant, because as the gentleman from California pointed out that when there were attempts to stifle meritorious claims from going forward or increasing the litigation costs in lawsuits, it was usually in the civil rights actions that were taken during this period which led to the change and the reform of mandatory sanctions back to a discretionary system, allowing the judges to decide the application of the appropriate penalties based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

What is this debate about today? I would commend a recently released movie called ``North Country'' to all of my colleagues before they consider the final passage of this legislation. It is about a young mother of two who took a job in the Taconite Mining Company in northern Minnesota and entered an atmosphere and environment of pervasive sexual harassment that not only applied to her, but all the women that were working in that company. She was the first to file a class action suit on behalf of herself and the other women in the country and the Nation. Because she was meritorious, she prevailed in that lawsuit that lead to incredible changes in regards to the treatment of women in the modern workplace.

That is what is at stake in allowing the civil rights actions to at least go through. We allow that in the substitute, and I ask adoption of the substitute.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and

also thank him for the leadership that he has provided on the Budget Committee and highlighting this very important issue.

I know people back home hear a lot of these numbers and figures about debt ceiling and the growth of the Federal budget deficit every year. But what is different this time I think is the most disconcerting aspect of what you are talking about this evening, and that is this new debt that is being created is not owned by ourselves any more. We are dependent on foreign entities; namely, China and Japan, as the number one and number two purchasers of this government debt that we are racking up.

These are IOUs that are going to those countries rather than to our own citizens or to our own investors in this country, and we are becoming more and more beholden to those interests, especially China, in order to help us finance these deficits.

From my perspective, I think it is incredibly dangerous and not in our best long-term economic or security interests to be so dependent on China to be financing the deficits of this magnitude, which have been taking place in recent years.

Madam Speaker, what is equally troubling and if not more so is that the gentleman is talking about the prime retirement years of the baby boom generation. We all know we have an aging population in this country and that is when that demographic time bomb is about to go off. Unless or until this Congress, working with the administration, can turn this fiscal scenario around, it will be virtually impossible for our children and grandchildren to meet the burdens that are piling up on them today because of the demographics in this country. That is why it is important that we have this discussion tonight so hopefully we can bring some fiscal sanity back into the economic decision of this body before it is too late.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for Georgia for raising this issue. I am a member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce along with the Committee on the Budget, and we are looking at under the majority party's budget reconciliation proposal of having to come up with close to $15 billion worth of cuts out of the education and workforce authorization budget at a time when, as the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) has just indicated, we need to be ramping up our investment in the workforce development of this century with our students and with the youth so that they have the skills and the tools that they need to compete successfully in what is a rapidly shrinking world and an incredibly competitive global marketplace.

The reports are coming out almost daily in regards to how we are underfunding or not supporting programs to encourage more math and science and engineering students in this country.

Earlier this year I spent 2 weeks in China doing a higher education tour there. They are investing heavily in their education infrastructure. They are graduating more English speaking engineers from their own Chinese schools than we are here in the United States. And if this trend continues, if we continue to sleepwalk through all this, there will be serious consequences that we will be paying in short order as we move forward, and this is where fiscal mismanagement and the misplacement of priorities come back to haunt the future prosperity but also the security of our country.

We know what works. It worked in the 1990s with basic budget rules such as pay as you go, and the Democratic Party has been united in reinstituting those budget disciplinary rules. It did work in the nineties. That gave us 4 years of balanced budgets and surpluses and an opportunity to download our debt, so we were not dependent on countries like China to be financing the deficit. So we were in a better position to be dealing with a 9/11 catastrophe or a Katrina catastrophe or making the important investments for the future of our country.

Because of the economic policies pursued by the majority in recent years, those options have been taken away, and they will continue to diminish our opportunities in the future unless we bring back some sense of responsibility to this Chamber again, and that is why I think special orders like this this

evening are very important times to discuss the various choices that we face today.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise with a heavy heart. I mourn with the citizens of western Wisconsin as we remember the lives of five people killed in a tragic school bus crash in Osseo, Wisconsin.

On Sunday, October 16, teachers, chaperons and members of the Chippewa Falls High School Marching Band were returning from a marching band championship when their bus struck an overturned tractor-trailer on Interstate 94 outside the city of Eau Claire. The band director, his wife and granddaughter, the bus driver, and a student teacher all were killed in the collision. Additionally, 29 other people were injured in this terrible accident.

Sunday should have been a day of celebration for the Chippewa Falls Community. The Cardinals' routine, ``Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves,'' earned the school third place in its division at the Wisconsin School Music Association State Marching Band Championships in Whitewater. Instead of excitement over a job well done, the night would end in tragedy. At 2 a.m., the first of four buses carrying more than 200 students and 40 adults struck the overturned trailer on the dark road.

That day Wisconsin lost dedicated secondary education teachers and valued members of our community. The band director, Morgan Greenhalgh, affectionately called ``G'' by his students, was more than a teacher to them; he was a friend. His pupils said of him that he was able to bring out the best in his students, creating an extended family of those he taught. His peers said he was a wonderful teacher and a role model who will be impossible to replace.

Sadly, Therese Greenhalgh and their granddaughter, Morgan, also were lost in the crash. As was Brandon Atherton, a student teacher. Only 24 years old, Brandon attended the university of Wisconsin Eau Claire. Even at such a young age, he was committed to giving back to the community. And finally, Paul Rasmus, the bus driver was killed. At 78 years old, he was in the golden years of life. Instead of living a simple life of retirement, he spent his last years in service to the students at Chippewa Falls High School.

There were 29 students and adults who suffered serious injuries as a result of the collision. My heart goes out to all those who were involved in this terrible accident, as well as the families, students, and the community that were effected that terrible morning. On behalf of all the residents of western Wisconsin, each of us shares in your loss, and our thoughts and prayers are with you and your loved ones.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise before you today to honor this year's Outstanding Older Worker for the State of Wisconsin, Norman Gudmundson. Continuing to work at age 78, Norm clearly deserves this recognition.

Norm began violin lessons at the age of eight, and like his father before him, dreamt of being a great violinist one day. Norm had 16 years of private training, and by the time he graduated high school, he was considered one of the most accomplished violinists in the State of Illinois after winning the state competition.

Upon his graduation from high school in 1945, Norm joined the U.S. Army Infantry in the last days of World War II. Upon war's end, he was sent to Germany and served for 2 years rebuilding the war-torn country. After his military service, Norm received a full scholarship to play violin for the University of Miami, Florida's Orchestra. After college, Norm continued his career in music, playing with orchestras in Chicago, Denver, and Milwaukee.

Norm retired from the orchestra but did not give up working. Norm is a dead-on Santa Claus, so it only seemed natural to donate his time to play St. Nick at local department stores around Christmas-time.

Refusing to retire, Norm has recently worked for his own excavating business, repairing telephone lines in Colorado, inspecting cranberries for Ocean Spray, and manufacturing lawn equipment with Toro. Norm now works for Cardinal IG in Tomah, WI.

And so I stand today to honor Wisconsin's Outstanding Older Worker for this year, Norman Gudmundson, who truly is a Renaissance man. For his contribution to the arts, his love of children, and his dedication to his community and America's workforce, I commend Norm for his generous spirit and remarkable commitment to service.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the approach that the committee is taking in trying to revamp and revise the Endangered Species Act. This has been a vitally important and successful act throughout recent decades. And while there is wide agreement here on the House floor that it should be amended and tweaked and improved on in light of past experience and modern times, we need to do it responsibly; and I believe that responsible approach is better reflected in the substitute that is being offered here today.

Unlike some in this Chamber who believe that the Endangered Species Act has been an unmitigated failure, there are countless success stories around the country. In my home State of Wisconsin, an example of how well it has worked, working with local officials and the stakeholders involved, the Higgins eye mussel has come back in the Mississippi River, which acts as a great filtration system in the river basin. The Karner blue butterfly, on the verge of extinction in Wisconsin, due to the Endangered Species Act and the recovery plan that was in place, is making a healthy comeback.

The whooping crane is making a strong comeback in the Necedah Wildlife Refuge, as has the granddaddy of them all, which has been referenced here today, the American bald eagle. If Members would like to see some bald eagles, come to western Wisconsin along the Mississippi during the spring and fall ice flows, and you will see literally thousands of them. There are new nests that are going up in habitat where they had never been found before. They are on the verge of being delisted because of their success story. EPA identified the adverse effects of DDT, Congress took action, and the bald eagle is resurging today.

And the grizzly bear that is about to be delisted in Yellowstone and portions of Montana from the threatened species list, I can personally attest to the strength of their comeback, having just been in Glacier Park in August and coming within 20 yards of a big grizzly bear and her two cubs. Fortunately, I was able to retreat, or I would have been a threatened or endangered species during that time.

The act has worked, and the point is there is a responsible approach that recognizes the bureaucratic red tape that we streamline, working with private property owners and also putting in place a strong recovery plan for species that makes more sense. That is the substitute. I encourage my colleagues to support the substitute.

Mr. Chairman, the Endangered Species Act remains an enduring testament to the importance the American people place on preserving plant and animal species for future generations. That sentiment was reflected in President Richard Nixon's words during his signing of the Act on December 28, 1973 when he said, ``Nothing is more priceless and more worthy of preservation than the rich array of animal life with which our country has been blessed. It is a many-faceted treasure, of value to scholars, scientists, and nature lovers alike, and it forms a vital part of the heritage we all share as Americans.''

I am also reminded of the wisdom of my recently passed friend and hero, Senator Gaylord Nelson, who said, ``We must recognize that we're all part of a web of life around the world. Anytime you extinguish a species, the consequences are serious.'' Thankfully today, citizens can see firsthand in every State the progress being made in bringing wildlife back from the brink of extinction.

For example, In Wisconsin, for the first time since its 1991 listing as an endangered species, the winged mapleleaf mussel, a species found only in a small area of the St. Croix River, have been found to be slowly rebuilding their numbers. Another success of the ESA is the Karner blue butterfly. Although 99 percent or more of the Karner blue butterfly's range has been destroyed, Wisconsin helped bring the species back using a conservation plan that takes into account the butterfly's entire life cycle. The State's project, which involves 38 public and private partners, began after the butterfly was listed as endangered in 1992. Lastly, perhaps best known, is that bald eagles are increasing in Wisconsin, where 645 pairs occupied territories in 1997, up from 358 in 1990. In fact, since eagles are relatively numerous in Wisconsin, the State has donated them to other areas from which they have vanished, including to the Nation's Capital--Washington, DC.

I mention these successes because many of the comments made on the floor today cast ESA as an unmitigated failure. I don't believe that is the case at all; and the scientific journal, Ecology Letters, recently published a study of the status of threatened and endangered species that showed more than half on the list for 5 years or more have either stabilized or are improving.

That said, I agree with my friend and colleague, Congressman John Dingell, author of the original ESA in 1973, that this landmark bill could use an update--that it could be and should be strengthened in ways that cuts bureaucratic red tape, broadens stakeholder participation, and most importantly better facilitates the revival of more threatened and endangered species.

Mr. Chairman, the bipartisan substitute does a substantially better job in these areas. For instance, it is widely agreed the ESA has done a good job in preventing the extinction of many species but it has been less successful in bringing about ``the recovery of listed species to levels where protection under the Act is no longer necessary.'' I believe it is crucial the legislation provides for the development of strong, comprehensive recovery plans within a short period of time after a species is listed as threatened or endangered.

The Boehlert substitute, like the base bill, would repeal the current requirement that the Secretary designate ``critical habitat'' for endangered fish, wildlife, and plants before formulating a plan for species recovery. But it adds crucial language requiring the Secretary to identify--during a 3-year recovery planning process--lands that are necessary for the conservation of the species--first on public lands and then, if necessary, on private lands.

I also agree that private landowners have been required by ESA to individually shoulder too much of the burden. More than two-thirds of threatened and endangered species reside on private lands where the Endangered Species Act is least effective. It is imperative landowners be regarded as part of the solution and given the tools and incentives necessary to engender their help and support. I believe we should have at least considered expanding the Habitat Conservation Plan Land Acquisition Program in H.R. 3824 which has proven itself effective in reducing conflicts between the conservation of threatened and endangered species and land development and use. That, unfortunately, is not in the base bill.

Instead, H.R. 3824 provides a new, uncapped entitlement program in Section 13 that will only plunge our Nation's finances deeper in the red, and then prohibits common-sense steps that could at least provide some protection to the taxpayer. For example, under H.R. 3824 the government can be forced to pay out repeated claims for different proposals to use the exact same piece of property. These claims don't even need to be backed up by proof of compliance with State or local land use laws. And instead of lessening the number of ESA related lawsuits, even CBO has stated this provision is likely to increase the amount of litigation.

In contrast, the Boehlert substitute would establish a land owner incentive program that would operate much like a Farm Bill conservation program, with 70 percent cost sharing. From EQIP it adds language that would require the Secretary to maximize the conservation benefit for every dollar expended, put Federal money where it will do the most good. A technical assistance program would be established, and the safe harbor regulations would be codified.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the responsible, bipartisan Boehlert substitute that answers the concerns of landowners, States, and sportsmen, while improving the ability to achieve timely recovery of endangered and threatened fish, wildlife, and plants. Let's mend it in light of past experience and the demands of modern times, but let's do it responsibly--support the substitute.

Mr. Chairman, the evidence of financial mismanagement is real, and I believe the committee has taken steps in this bill to try to address that, and this authorization bill goes a long way to do that. But as a member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, I have had the chance to visit all of my Head Start centers in western Wisconsin. You cannot help but walk away from that with an overwhelming feeling of pride and sense of security that those kids are receiving very professional, caring treatment in those Head Start centers.

Head Start has been one of the most successful anti-poverty programs ever created. It is also the most poked, prodded, picked, analyzed, and surveyed program in the Federal Government; and for the last 40 years it has withstood the test of time. It consistently ranks at the top of participant satisfaction surveys compared to any other Federal program.

I commend the leadership of the committee, the chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner); and the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle); and the ranking members, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), for putting together a good bipartisan bill that we were able to report out 48 to zero in committee, because there is a right and a wrong way to reauthorize this important program.

The right way is to enhance integrated services, increase accountability, tighten up the financial oversight, and require highly qualified teachers. A wrong way is to continue to leave behind over 400,000 students who currently qualify, but cannot go to Head Start because of inadequate resources. A wrong way is to allow the legal discrimination against an individual based on religion.

Later this afternoon, I will be offering my own amendment that would allow the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to establish proper standards and assessments so we can properly measure the progress of these kids. The current national reporting system is not working well, and we need to make sure that we get the measurements and the testing of these children done correctly at this very early age so we do not do any harm. I will ask my colleagues to support my amendment when it comes up later.

Mr. Chairman, I join educators, parents, and Head Start staff from Wisconsin as well as many of my colleagues here today in support. of reauthorizing Head Start. This program has helped millions of high-risk children from impoverished families achieve academic success.

Since the creation of Head Start 40 years ago, there has always been bipartisan consensus to continue this program that serves more than 13,000 children in Wisconsin and 2,000 in the Third Congressional District. As a member of the House Education and Workforce Committee, I am pleased to have had the opportunity to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to produce the best possible bill. I would like to thank Chairman Boehner, Representative Castle, Ranking Member Miller, and Representative Woolsey for their leadership and commitment to our children in crafting this legislation.

I also would like to thank those people in western Wisconsin who have advised me throughout reauthorization. They include: Lori Dilley, director of Southwest Wisconsin Head Start; Dan Stickler, director of Western Dairyland, Paula Wainscott, director of Head Start in Eau Claire Area School District; Tim Hathaway, director of Renewal Unlited, Sue Schultz, and Barbara Wehman at CESA 11; and James Vermeul, director of Child & Family Development Centers.

Since the reauthorization process began in the spring of 2003, we have made tremendous progress to reach consensus on the bill before us. However, I remain concerned with the implementation of the National Reporting System for Head Start children. The NRS is an assessment instrument developed under HHS's guidance in 2003 and used to test half a million children in Head Start twice yearly.

Unfortunately, HHS implemented NRS--at the cost of $25 million so far--despite protests by early child education experts who question the validity, reliability, and appropriateness of the assessment. While we support ongoing assessments of Head Start children to help ensure their school readiness, these specific tests were developed behind closed doors and with very little input from child development experts, Congress, or Head Start centers.

The GAG validates many of these concerns. In May, they released a report stating: ``If the test is to be used as a measure of program performance or to assess changes in child outcomes, it is important to ensure that it is sensitive to the range of development typically demonstrated in Head Start. Based on our analysis and that of the Technical Working Group and independent experts, we continue to believe that further study is necessary to ensure that the NRS results are reliable and valid and the results are appropriate for the intended purposes.''

I authored language in H.R. 2123 to commission a study by the National Academy of Sciences to report on appropriate standards and benchmarks for school readiness and valid measures of assessment. Today, I will offer an amendment to suspend the National Reporting System until the National Academy of Sciences completes its review, and I urge all my colleagues to support my amendment.

Reauthorization provides Congress with an opportunity to evaluate appropriate standards and benchmarks for school readiness, as well

as valid measures of assessments for Head Start students. Until child development and early education experts can agree about the appropriateness of the NRS, we should not be spending millions of dollars on its implementation and subjecting 500,000 children to it every year.

In addition to promoting development of the mind, I also believe that we must promote good physical development for all children. I am pleased that an amendment I offered in committee to promote physical development, including outdoor activity to support children's motor development and overall health and nutrition, was accepted.

The requirement for physical activity and nutrition for pre-schoolers is increasingly important as childhood obesity rates have doubled for young children in the past 20 years. Studies show that healthy eating habits help to prevent childhood obesity and other nutrition-related diseases. Given the epidemic rate of child obesity, dramatic changes need to take place in school nutrition environment.

The Society for Nutrition Education, SNE, reports that child nutrition programs present opportunities for positive role modeling of healthy and nutritious meals, from the formative years of early childhood through the teen years. Additionally, implementation of educational programs that guide and motivate parents and children to improve the nutritional quality of their dietary choices and to increase their physical activity levels is extremely important. Physical activity, particularly for youth, help to improve school performance, establish positive health habits, and possibly prevent the onset of adult diseases.

Mr. Chairman, again, I am pleased to have worked on this bipartisan bill to reauthorize the Head Start Act. The consensus we have reached on H.R. 2123 reflects positively on how well Head Start is working. Numerous studies indicate that every dollar spent on Head Start saves taxpayers $4 to $7 in the future due to savings in education and welfare expenses. Therefore, it is my belief that the bill before us today will continue to provide the best Head Start program for all of our children.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple and straightforward. It would suspend the use and implementation of the National Reporting Service until the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences has an opportunity to conduct their study to determine what would be the proper measurements, standards, and assessments to be used with children at this age with different developmental stages in their life.

Mr. Chairman, I believe this is a very important issue because there has been a lot of outside expertise devoted to early childhood learning, and we are going to be taking measurements that they are done appropriately so we do not do any harm to them; and that is why I believe that what is in the bill right now calling for a National Academy study to be conducted so that the National Reporting System can use those recommendations for measurements and standards as we move forward will improve the quality of Head Start.

It was not so long ago, Mr. Chairman, when the National Research Council of the academy published a book called ``Eager to Learn, Educating Our Preschoolers.'' And in that publication they indicated why it is important for us to take the time and the energy to make sure that we get the measurements done correctly rather than wrongly.

In that book I quote their summary: ``All assessments, and particularly assessments for accountability, must be used carefully and appropriately if they are to resolve and not create educational problems. Assessments of young children pose greater challenges than people generally realize. The first five years of life are a time of incredible growth and learning. But the course of development is uneven and sporadic. The status of a child's development, as of any given day, can change very rapidly. Consequently, assessment results, in particular, standardized test scores that reflect a given point in time, can easily misrepresent children's learning.''

Now, when the National Reporting System was created, it was done internally. I do not believe that there was any consultation with us members of the committee, nor were any outside experts brought in for advice or consent or what standards and assessments should be used.

Shortly after the National Reporting System was implemented, the President then appointed his technical working group for the NRS. This was a group of outside experts. Even the technical working group trying to work with the National Reporting System has highlighted a lot of problems and deficiencies with the current system and is recommending changes to it.

That advice from the technical working group was recently backed up and supported by a May GAO report which found, among other things: ``If the test is to be used as a measure of program performance or assess changes in child outcomes, it is important to ensure that it is sensitive to the range of development typically demonstrated in Head Start. Based on our analysis and that of the technical working group and independent experts, we continue to believe that further study is necessary to ensure that the NRS results are reliable and valid and the results are appropriate for intended purposes.''

Mr. Chairman, we have had a lot of discussions in this committee. We have had a discussion during the hearings and markup of this bill. I have enjoyed working with the chairman of the committee and the ranking members of the appropriate committees in trying to resolve this issue. I think we can resolve it. I think it is the right direction to go with the amendment that I am offering. I hope my colleagues will support it.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman of the committee for his support of the amendment and for working with us in order to get this accomplished. I also want to thank the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy), my good friend, for helping to elevate this issue and educate other Members in this place about the importance of the measurements and the assessments that are being used, especially for these children at this early age.

Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), the ranking member of the subcommittee, and thank her for her support.

(Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to pay tribute and honor a great American patriot, Roger Nickerson, my uncle, who passed away last Monday. Roger Nickerson embodied all that is good and decent about America. He loved our country, and he served it with honor and distinction for 30 years in the United States Navy, both in Active and Reserve status. He retired as a Master Chief, with many medals and accomplishments.

The Chief, as many of us liked to call him, then worked for the INS for 7 years before retiring with his wife Rosemary to Stoddard, Wisconsin, where he converted an old one-room schoolhouse into their beautiful home.

He was truly a Renaissance man, capable of doing anything with his hands, and with a high standard for perfection. If anyone can be described as the strong silent type, it was the Chief. He had the looks of Robert Redford and the coolness of Clint Eastwood. In short, he was a great role model for those of us who knew him.

But as much as he loved his country and was proud of his service, he loved his family even more. He was a terrific husband, father, grandfather, brother, uncle, and friend. There was nothing he would not do for family and friends. And if there is such a thing, as I believe there is, as a lifelong soul mate, the Chief found her in his wife Rosemary. They met at an early age and their commitment blossomed into a lifelong adventure, taking them and their kids to new destinations every few years due to his military service.

His greatest source of pride was his children, Randy, Robin, Rhonda, Robbie, and his many grandchildren. I know the good Lord does not produce too many Roger Nickersons in this world. All of us who knew him feel blessed and fortunate to have had him in our lives. Now he has found his peace and comfort by rejoining his youngest son, Robert, in the presence of our Lord, where they will wait for the rest of us to join them. May God bless them and keep them in his care.

Roger Nickerson, the Chief, was loved by many and will be missed. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted the rest of our Nation to know a little bit about this great American patriot here tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate Sesquicentennial celebration of Arcadia, one of Wisconsin's many treasures. Named after the Arkadhia Mountains in Greece, Arcadia boasts an historic downtown in the midst of some of the most beautiful farmland and countryside in western Wisconsin.

It is fitting that I join with the 2,400 residents of Arcadia to celebrate the town's founding, because this truly is a town that has not forgotten where it came from. Perhaps Arcadia's most storied attraction is its Memorial Park. The park's 54 acres display monuments and tributes to the town's history, our nation's wars and conflicts, and those men and women who fought and died in them. The walkway through the park is measured so that each meter represents one year, so visitors complete their own guided tour of history. Joining the statues, plaques, and monuments are some of the real instruments of war: a tank, a Howitzer artillery gun, and an F-16 fighter jet. The dedication shown in procuring these artifacts and the endless care that go into maintaining the grounds demonstrate that the spirit of America runs through Arcadia.

Apart from Memorial Park, Arcadia exemplifies the quality of life available to those who call rural America home. The Trempeleau River, which flows to the Mississippi, offers opportunities for fishing and canoeing, eagle-watching is popular year-round, and stock car races are held every Friday in the warmer months at the Fox Ridge Speedway. The town also hosts the Arcadia Broiler Dairy Days celebration over Memorial Day Weekend, which includes the 62-mile Memorial Bike Tour. This vibrant community truly is a model for rural areas across the state of Wisconsin and America, proving that a city doesn't have to be big to be creative, exciting, and fun.

A giant corn maze in town already announces the sesquicentennial celebration, which will be held this Saturday, September 10, 2005. Arcadia will mark its first 150 years with such events as the dedication of a local firefighters memorial, a classic car rally, and the entombing of a time capsule to remind future generations of this great milestone. I congratulate the residents of Arcadia on their sesquicentennial, and I thank them for all they have contributed to the character and economy of western Wisconsin. I wish them continued happiness and prosperity in the next 150 years.

Mr. Speaker, the destruction of Hurricane Katrina and the massive flooding of the city of New Orleans and surrounding areas have created a national tragedy that is unprecedented in U.S. history. The resulting humanitarian crisis and the horror that has developed in the streets of New Orleans are both appalling and unacceptable. Our national response must be equal to the need of the victims, and although emergency responders and relief workers on the frontlines are working around the clock to do everything they can, immediate Federal efforts were inadequate.

However, despite this grave tragedy, I am confident that together we will overcome the challenges ahead to help our brothers and sisters of the city of New Orleans and the impacted Gulf region. For the victims and their families, know that your country grieves with you, and we stand with you in this time of need. Be assured that help is on the way.

President Bush has told the Nation that the government will commit all the necessary resources, and we in Congress are working hard to make sure Federal aid is delivered and victims are helped. In the last few days thousands of National Guard troops, including 475 Wisconsin soldiers, have been deployed to the Gulf States to provide assistance and security to the region. Today, Congress will pass what is likely a first installment of emergency aid for the ravaged areas.

The national community is rallying in other ways as many local communities and volunteers are organizing fundraising drives and other relief projects. I have heard from many constituents who want to know how they can help and who are already assisting in local efforts. The people of western Wisconsin have consistently demonstrated their generosity in times of crisis and once again they are answering the call of compassion.

There is a lot of work to do in the days, weeks and months ahead, but we will not stop until we have found a safe haven for every citizen, provided the necessary medical care to the weak and ailing, and attended to the needs of all victims of this awful tragedy. May our hearts, thoughts, aid, and support continue to be with the victims and their loved ones over the Labor Day weekend and throughout the relief and reconstruction process.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report for H.R. 3, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005. I want to acknowledge the work of the Transportation Committee on this complex bill and especially thank my friend and colleague from Wisconsin, Mr. Petri, for his leadership on the legislation; the Wisconsin delegation is lucky to have such a strong advocate for our citizens.

H.R. 3 is a significant economic development and job creation bill, and now is certainly the time that we need more jobs throughout the country. I consistently hear from constituents who are searching for work; who have sent out dozens of resumes and updated their skills but remain unemployed. Each billion dollars spent on highway funding creates not only safer and better roads, but it also creates an estimated 47,500 news jobs. An investment in highway funding is an investment for steady work for those in Wisconsin and around the nation.

In addition, I am pleased that the bill recognizes the importance of funding crucial highways and bridges in Wisconsin's Third Congressional District. Specifically, the inclusion of funding for the Stillwater Bridge, which connects Houlton, Wisconsin, and Stillwater, Minnesota, is great news for those of us who have been working on this project for years. The bridge is only one example of an important project that will provide our citizens with safer roads, shorter commutes, and better jobs.

Furthermore, I would like to recognize the important conservation provisions that are included in H.R. 3. As a hunter and fisherman, I am particularly pleased with a provision which recaptures the final 4.8 cents of the 18.3 cents per gallon tax on motorboat fuel and directs it back into the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act's Aquatic Resources Trust Fund (ARTF). This full recovery of the motorboat fuel excise tax will provide about $110 million a year for recreational trails, new funding for signage identifying access for anglers and hunters, and vital safety programs dealing with wildlife-vehicle collisions. These important provisions make H.R. 3 the most comprehensive transportation bill for sportsmen ever created.

I am proud to have served on the conference committee to help reconcile this bill so it could reach the House and Senate for a final vote. Moreover, I would like to thank Senators Kohl and Feingold for all the work they have done with this bill to make sure that it benefits the citizens of Wisconsin. The long-awaited passage of this bill is great news for western Wisconsin. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.