Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this Child Nutrition Act and I ask permission to revise and extend my remarks. This bill is a step in the right direction of important reforms in federal child nutrition programs. I would like to thank Chairman Boehner, Mr. Castle and Ranking Member Mr. Miller and Ms. Woolsey for their hard work on the bill. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Chairman for taking my amendment eliminating the cost-accounting requirement for severe need breakfast programs in the manager amendment in the committee markup.

This paperwork problem was brought to my attention by the director of the New Jersey Child Nutrition Programs, Kathy Kuser. Many States, including New Jersey as well as Wisconsin and Illinois, are making significant efforts to improve their school breakfast participation rate, and reducing the paperwork requirements would help these efforts.

Under current law, schools in which at least 40 percent of the lunches served during the second preceding school year were free or reduced price qualify for severe need breakfast assistance. They have to calculate their costs per breakfast by prorating their labor costs, and figuring out their food, supplies and other costs associated with the school breakfast program. They have to save their receipts and calculations and submit them in order to get the severe need reimbursement. Removing the cost-accounting requirement would be a significant paperwork reduction for the schools without significantly increasing cost for the government.

I also want to commend the committee for including direct certification for children from food stamp households for free school meals. Many schools are not aware of this method to determine eligibility for free meals. Direct certification improves access to eligible children for free school lunch meals and improves program integrity according to a study done by Mathematica.

I am also pleased to see the bill authorizes grants for ``farm-to- cafeteria'' projects that include nutrition education activities that incorporate the participation of school children in farm and agricultural education projects and that procure local foods from small- and medium-sized farms for school meals.

Finally, the expansion of eligibility for Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) for children in shelters from age 13 to 18 who live in domestic violence shelters and homeless shelters is a wonderful improvement to the previous child nutrition legislation. My constituents who participate in Mercer Street Friends, Anchor House, Triad House, Family Preservation Center (Homefront) and the Family Preservation House would benefit from this change to CACFP eligibility. These organizations depend on food donations to feed their clients who are nutritionally at risk and should be eligible for this important nutrition support program.

I do want to point out two provisions of the bill I wish had been improved. While there are federal dietary guidelines for meals served that are reimbursed through the Federal meals program, Federal nutrition standards for foods that are not offered through the Federal meals program are lacking. As a result, children are faced with numerous food choices during the school day with little nutritional value. Our colleague, Representative Tim Ryan (D-OH) offered an amendment in Committee that would have resulted in enormous improvements in the school nutrition environment for children for foods sold on campus.

We also should have eliminated the reduced price school meals category. Such action would make the school meal programs more accessible to low-income families; better prepare students to learn; and make the programs easier to administer.

Mr. Speaker, once again I want to thank my colleagues and their staffs for their hard work and I ask my colleague to support this bill that will eliminate barriers to participation for low-income children and families and ensure greater access to these critical nutrition programs.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 189.

The first International Geophysical was held from July 1957 to December 1958. It was modeled after the successful International Polar Year of 1882 and its 50th anniversary in 1932. The International Geophysical Year allowed over 60,000 scientists from 67 countries around the world to take part in a series of coordinated observations of various geophysical phenomena.

I remember it well because I was reading about the IGY that sparked my interest in science and set me toward a career in physics that I pursued before coming to Congress.

The scientific activities spanned the globe from the North to the South Poles. In particular, the research in the Antarctic yielded new estimates of the Earth's total ice content--a number of extreme importance given today's melting of major glaciers due to global warming. In addition, instruments to record cosmic rays, spectroscopes to analyze the signals, and balloons were put to use to explore the upper reaches of the atmosphere. Finally, post-World War II developments in rocketry made possible the exploration of space employing what was then the exciting new technology of artificial scientific satellites with the launching of Sputnik and Vanguard.

Because 2007 will be the 50th anniversary of this most exciting worldwide scientific undertaking, I wholeheartedly support H. Con. Res 189 for celebrating 2007 as the International Geophysical Year--2 and recommend that Congress, as in 1957, promote world-wide cooperation in the commemoration of the International Geophysical Year--2 with scientific activities so that we humans can better understand our environment and our place in the universe.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the Organ Donation and Recovery Improvement Act.

The need for human organs for donation has long been a silent crisis, one that rarely hits the headlines but can have a tremendous impact on thousands of patients and their families. Medical advances and the generosity of organ and tissue donors enable more than 22,000 Americans per year to receive organ transplants that save or enhance their lives. But despite the self-sacrifice and charity of so many donors, more than 84,000 Americans are currently on a waiting list, hoping to prolong their lives by finding a matching donor.

Tragically, the number of patients waiting for organ transplants rose more than five times as fast as the number of transplant operations in the 1990s, according to an annual report by the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS). As a result, about 5,500 people die in the United States each year (or 15 patients each day) while waiting for a donated heart, liver, kidney, or other organ. Every 16 minutes, a new name is added to this growing waiting list.

These numbers are indeed concerning, and they should merit greater attention. Each number represents a person--a human being with a family, friends, and a future, and I have met with several of them who live in central New Jersey. We need to do everything we can to ensure that they get access to the organs that could very well save their lives.

As one who carries an organ donor card and has discussed organ donation with his family, I urge all of my colleagues to consider taking similar steps. This action can mean the difference between life and death for someone in need of an organ transplant.

I am glad to see that the House is considering the Organ Donation and Recovery Improvement Act, which would help improve access to organs by implementing a public awareness campaign, reimbursing expenses for organ donors, and authorizing grants to help hospitals coordinate their efforts with organ procurement organizations.

While this legislation deserves our wholehearted support, it is also important to remember that the need for sustained investments in biomedical research and development at the NIH and in the basic science research, at agencies like the NSF, that creates the knowledge base needed to move ahead with medical research. Investing in R&D is about more than just giving jobs to scientists--it's about saving lives and improving the quality of life for countless Americans.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Organ Donation and Recovery Improvement Act and to remember the importance of supporting biomedical and basic science research.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution commends the men and women of the United States Armed Forces and the Coalition forces for their valiant service. It is appropriate to do that. They have made huge sacrifices, their families have. In many cases, the soldiers have made the ultimate sacrifice in their response to the call of their country.

As a member of the committee that oversees the Intelligence Community, let me also add my gratitude to the incredibly hardworking men and women of the Intelligence Community whose role in Iraq is less public but no less vital and in many cases is every bit as dangerous. These dedicated public servants should have all the tools they need to accomplish their mission. So rather than simply commending the Iraqi people for their courage and their accomplishments, rather than simply thanking these brave men and women in the U.S. armed services and Intelligence Community with words, we should see that they have what they need to do their jobs.

This resolution today, I believe, has different motivation than simply to honor our troops. It really is more about the House of Representatives patting themselves on the back than it is to honor our troops.

It perpetuates a simplistic thinking that took us into the war with unexamined intelligence, and clearly there were deficiencies in the intelligence that took us up to and into that war. It perpetuates the simplistic thinking that left our troops unprepared for the postwar occupation, and it perpetuates a kind of divisive thinking. I mean, what can be more divisive than a closed rule that allows no amendments, no substitutes, really nothing to make this a better resolution?

It is not enough to say thanks in words to 550 families who have lost someone in Iraq. They want more than thanks and words. Same for the more than 3,000 families of the wounded. If we only give them what they need, this resolution would be more meaningful: more armored Humvees, more language speakers, more support.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the distinguished Shuji Maruyama Sensei and honor his contributions to the martial arts in the United States and throughout the world as well as the contributions to his many students in New Jersey, the United States and the world.

Mr. Maruyama is the founder of Kokikai Aikido International, based on Aikido, a Japanese martial art developed in the 20th century by Morihei Ueshiba. Aikido combined elements from other martial disciplines to develop an effective defense against multiple attackers. Shuji Maruyama further developed this art and founded his own school, Kokikai Aikido. Used only defensively, this art is characterized by startling grace and power. This martial art presumes it is necessary to be centered, relaxed, to have correct posture and a positive mind. These principals are not only helpful in defending oneself, but are effective tools for enhancing productivity and enjoyment of life.

The dual emphasis of this martial art on self-defense and peaceful resolution of conflict has enriched the lives of many of his students in the United States and abroad. Maruyama Sensei has played a key role in introducing this martial art to the United States and supporting its growth and vibrancy. He is a teacher of exceptional skill.

Now in his 60s, Maruyama Sensei is acknowledged as one of the world's greatest living martial artists, a model of grace and power, and an extraordinary teacher. He constantly challenges himself calling his students to do the same and encouraging them to continue to grow and improve.

As an individual who has touched the lives of countless individuals, nationally and internationally, Shuji Maruyama Sensei has enhanced the health and well being of each. He has earned our heartfelt appreciation for his efforts. I ask my colleagues to join me in giving him this recognition.

Mr. Speaker, starting on May 1st, 2004, students from across the United States will arrive in Washington, D.C. in order to participate in the national finals of We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution, which is an extraordinary civic education program developed to educate American youth about the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. By act of Congress, We the People is funded by the U.S. Department of Education, and administered by the Center for Civic Education.

It is with great pleasure that I announce that the class from East Brunswick High School will represent the State of New Jersey in this prestigious national event. These bright and dedicated students, through their extensive knowledge of the U.S. Constitution and superb reasoning and speaking skills, won their statewide competition and earned the chance to come to our Nation's capital and compete at the national level. I congratulate them, and I am confident that the students of East Brunswick High School will do a fine job of showing the Nation the very best that New Jersey has to offer.

Mr. Speaker, over a 3-day period, the We the People national Final Competition will test the abilities of the students in hearings, which are modeled after those actually held in the U.S. Congress. Through the We the People program, students are given an opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge before a panel of constitutional scholars, judges, lawyers, and journalists, while they evaluate, and defend positions on relevant historical and contemporary issues. Testimony will be followed by questions designed to examine the students' knowledge and implementation of constitutional concepts, as well as their ability to apply that knowledge. This is an opportunity of a lifetime for these students to receive proper recognition for their hard work.

We the People has been shown to be a very effective measure in combating the important problems of apathy and cynicism in our Nation's youth. I can think of no better way of stimulating interest in government than total immersion in it. Nowhere else can these students learn more about their government than here in our Nation's capital. Many independent evaluations have validated the effectiveness of the program's ability to impress a positive attitude upon students about civic matters.

I ask my colleagues to join me in sending best wishes to all the participants at the We the People national finals, as well as in all their future endeavors, and applaud their achievement. Programs like We the People keep the thirst for knowledge alive in our youth. Our democracy is only as effective as

those who choose to take part in it, and We the People will ensure that generations to come will make that choice. Our Nation should be proud that they are dedicated to learning and advocating the fundamental ideals and principles that define us as Americans and bind us together as a Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate one of this years Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic (RFB&D) Mary P. Oenslager Scholastic Achievement Award winners, Sarah Swords, who I am proud to say attended Princeton University in my district. The award is presented annually to college seniors who are blind and who have demonstrated leadership, scholarship, enterprise, and service to others.

Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic is a non-profit organization based in Princeton, which has as its sole mission opening the pages of books to all people who cannot read standard print because of visual, perceptual or other physical disability.

Mr. Speaker, over the years RFB&D has worked hard to live up to the philosophy of its founder, Anne T. Macdonald, who believed strongly that ``education is a right, not a privilege.'' Currently Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic has almost 240,000 titles available to its members worldwide. I commend Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic on the wonderful work they do, and I am so honored that they are located within my district.

Mr. Speaker, it is my great privilege today to congratulate Sarah Swords one of the 2003 Mary P. Oenslager Scholastic Achievement Award winners. Having lost her sight when she was in the sixth grade due to a serious illness, Sara was fortunate enough to join Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic.

With the audiotapes RFB&D provided to her, Sarah was finally able to enjoy reading for the first time. ``At last, I could read all the books I had always wanted to read'' she recalls. ``All the classics, novels, poetry and even magazines. I ordered a plethora of literature and have kept right on reading countless books.'' Sarah entered Princeton University in 1999 after finishing first in her class at Stoneman Douglas High School. During her time at Princeton University, Sarah was a member of student government, served as vice president of Delta Delta Delta Sorority, volunteered at the University Crisis Ministry, and helped out at the Trenton Animal Shelter. Sarah also worked as an advocate and speaker for disability rights for the Nassau Club, Princeton Alumni Organization.

Mr. Speaker, Sarah is a wonderful person whose talents and leadership have blossomed despite her disability. She is a role model for others in her community and a gifted scholar. I am so glad that through the good work of Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic Sarah Swords will continue to be able to make significant contributions to our country and to the world. She is a wonderful example of why RFB&D motto, that ``education is a right, not a privilege,'' is an essential truth.

Again Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Sarah Swords upon being selected as one of the 2003 Mary P. Oenslager Scholastic Achievement Award winners and I wish her the best in all that the future holds for her.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my sincere sadness at the extreme loss of life suffered today by the people of Spain after the worst terrorist attack in that nation's history. The people of central New Jersey know what it feels like to lose loved ones to an act of terrorism. We lost so many of our neighbors on the attacks of September 11, 2001. On behalf of my constituents, I stand now in solidarity with the people of Spain.

We are reminded by today's carnage that senseless acts of terror continue to afflict innocent people around the world whether they live in Madrid, Istanbul, New York, or Baghdad. We are reminded today that no nation is immune to the threat of terrorism.

I hope that today's attack will send a signal to all of us that we must remain vigilant in the face of terrorism and that we must continue to work closely with all nations around the world

to destroy Al-Qaeda and its terrorist allies. We cannot avoid the thought that this attack happened because Spain offered assistance to the U.S. in fighting terrorists around the world.

I'm sure the U.S. Government will offer whatever assistance it can to help the Spanish people who are suffering and to find and arrest the savage culprits of this crime.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the people of India on their 55th celebration of Republic Day. It was on this day in 1950 that India adopted its Constitution and became a modern sovereign state. Enshrined in that constitution are the same ideals of equality for all citizens, universal suffrage for those over 18, and the freedoms of speech, association and religion that we hold dear in the United States.

I am pleased to represent central New Jersey's Indian Americans in the U.S. House of Representatives and to be a member of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans. It is with pleasure today that I express my praise for India's commitment to democracy.

India's struggle for independence cost many lives, but also united Indians of many peoples. We honor those, especially Mohandas Mahatma Ghandi, who struggled for India's independence. Ghandi's non-violent form of resistance has set an example to all of us around the world. Freedom can be achieved through peaceful protest. India's leaders are currently working to broker peace with Pakistan and I commend them for their efforts to end this horrible conflict through peaceful negotiations.

India adopted its Constitution and swore in its first president, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, only 894 days after the withdrawal of the British Empire's forces. Today, India can be proud to hold the title of the world's largest democracy as it prepares for upcoming elections in April.

When I made my first trip to India in 1977, it was just after the lifting of the Emergency. At the time, India was facing a challenge to its democratic institutions. As the Indian people proved later that year by voting out Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, who had temporarily suspended the Indian Constitution during the Emergency period, they were resilient democrats.

I am always impressed with India for the remarkable dexterity with which its people make democracy work in a country of such incomparable diversity and size. The United States may be the world's oldest democracy, but India is by far the world's largest. I believe that the rest of the world, including the United States, has something to learn from India and its democratic accomplishments.

I am pleased to see India and the U.S. working so closely together. Each year for the past several years, U.S.-India relations have advanced to higher and higher plateaus. India has been an outspoken supporter of our Nation's war on terror. India and her people have endured terrorist attacks and, like the American people, they are resolute in fighting against future threats.

In New Jersey, I have never felt too far away from India because I have the good fortune to have so many wonderful Indian-American neighbors. I look forward to continuing to represent the Indian American community of central New Jersey and to seeing India's democracy continue to flourish in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, Clean Ocean Action, an organization dedicated to the protection of the coast of New Jersey and Long Island, celebrated its 20th anniversary on February 26th.

When COA was formed, there were eight ocean dumping sites off the coast of New Jersey and Long Island where all kinds of pollutants were dumped--sewage, dredge spoils, industrial waste, even toxic waste.

COA made it their primary goals to close these sites and find environmentally-friendly alternatives to ocean dumping. This was the time when New Jerseyans were first becoming aware of the serious consequences of ocean dumping--the impacts on marine life, the fishing industry, tourism, and the health and safety of the countless residents and visitors who enjoy the Jersey shore every summer.

Thirteen years later, COA achieved these goals when then-Vice- President Gore announced an agreement closing the dumping sites and creating the Historic Area Remediation Site to remediate the effects of the dumping.

COA, under the noteworthy leadership of Cindy Zipf, has not rested on its laurels, however. Today, they continue to take steps to protect the shore from leading beach cleanup efforts to lobbying Congress. I worked closely with them to fight against provisions slipped into the energy bill that would reverse the progress made towards keeping our shores clean.

COA marked its 20th anniversary by announcing an effort to create a Clean Ocean Zone off the coasts of New Jersey and Long Island, permanently protecting the ocean that is so valuable to New Jersey residents.

I salute COA for 20 years of hard work and effective work, and I would like to take this opportunity to bring to the attention of my colleagues this success towards cleaning up our shore areas. Now is not the time to reverse the progress of the last two decades.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday this body passed the United States Patent and Trademark Fee Modernization Act (H.R. 1561).

H.R. 1561 will begin outsourcing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's patent search function and it will increase the fees for inventors to obtain a patent or trademark. Yesterday's passage of H.R. 1561 will also lead to decreased efficiency and accountability in the process of granting patents and trademarks.

Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants the federal government the responsibility to ``promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.'' H.R. 1561 increasingly shifts this function out of the hands of the federal government and delegates more of it to private commercial entities. What's more, due to the ambiguous language of the bill, these jobs could end up overseas. Congress should defend the integrity of the U.S. Constitution and the employment prospects of American workers.

As my colleagues may know, I hold a patent for a system to generate solar energy. That experience sensitized me to the reality that many of the most ground-breaking ideas and products that need patent or trademark protection come from small inventors or college or university laboratories. Therefore, it is vital that the financial hurdles for application and receipt of patents do not exceed the means of these inventors. H.R. 1561 would increase the fees that small entities must pay in order to obtain a patent or trademark, and the impending outsourcing will force the fees up again in the future. That burden will slow innovation. I recognize the need to pass meaningful legislation that will help the USPTO to alleviate their backlog of pending patent and trademark applications, in order to efficiently serve the innovators that keep this nation moving forward. Rather than achieving this worthy goal, this bill will make it more difficult for American inventors to obtain the legal protection that they and their products deserve. As much as I would like to see the work of the USPTO improved, I could not support H.R. 1561.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize that yesterday was the 132nd anniversary of the founding of Yellowstone National Park, the world's first national park and the crown jewel in America's national park system and the model of parks for the world.

The most remarkable thing about Yellowstone is that it offers modern- day visitors a chance to experience the same sense of wonder and disbelief that the first European American explorers did back in the late 1860s.

Although Yellowstone has been a model for parks around the world, no other country has the splendor that Yellowstone has. These explorers came upon such astonishing sights that they were skeptical that anyone would actually believe their descriptions of the area we now know as Yellowstone National Park. They though that their tales of gushing geysers, bubbling mud pots, towering waterfalls, and dramatic canyons would be dismissed as the fantastical delusions of people who had spent too much time out in the wilderness.

Thankfully, their stories did eventually capture the nation's imagination, and on March 1, 1872, President Ulysses S. Grant signed into law a bill establishing Yellowstone as our first national park, comprising an area of approximately two million acres near the headwaters of the Yellowstone River. Yellowstone, which preceded the founding of the National Park Service by 44 years, has become the image of national parks across the country and throughout the world.

I have visited Yellowstone myself from time to time during different seasons and am always astounded by its spectacular beauty. Old Faithful, the reliable geyser that represents the park for most Americans, is but one of the 300 geysers there, which account for two- thirds of the world's geysers. Yellowstone boasts a total of over 10,000 thermal features, including bubbling mudpots, steaming fumaroles, and brightly colored hot springs.

These thermal features are fueled by a giant volcanic caldera, the remains of a tremendous eruption of tens of thousands of years ago. Surrounding this caldera are majestic peaks rising over 11,000 feet. Within the caldera is Yellowstone Lake, the largest freshwater lake above 7000 feet in North America.

Nearby, the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone astounds visitors to nearly the same degree as the canyon that shares its name further south in Arizona. In the canyon and across the backcountry are Yellowstone's famous waterfalls, numbering around 290 and in some cases towering over 300 feet.

Yellowstone is also home to large populations of some of the animal species that best represent the United States. The only remaining wild American bison herd makes its home in the park, accompanied by countless elk. Bald eagles nest throughout the park, and the endangered gray wolf has been reintroduced, becoming a real treat for wildlife watchers.

In short, Yellowstone is a place where fantasy becomes reality, where some of the most majestic lands in the world have become the embodiment of America's natural splendor. It's no accident that the park gets around three million visitors every year, coming from just about every one of our districts.

I urge all of my colleagues to visit this park if they have not already had the chance, and to remember the legacy and value of this spectacular parcel of land. It will be a reminder of why Congress has designated Yellowstone and other natural parks for future generations to enjoy.

Mr. Speaker, protecting Yellowstone and all of our natural parks is a noble and patriotic duty. These parks are repositories of our national heritage and preserve our most precious natural and cultural resources. Too often, unfortunately, the Park Service has found itself lacking the funds it needs to protect and ensure visitor access to everything from Revolutionary and Civil War sites to the most majestic public lands across the country. NPS is currently facing a $600 million shortfall in operations alone, to say nothing of a continuing maintenance backlog that is approaching $5 billion.

As we move through this legislative session and begin the process of determining our funding priorities, I hope my colleagues will remember our national parks and see fit to support them and the men and women who work there.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my opposition to this rule and to H.R. 1997, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. This bill unnecessarily redefines a crime. Why? Not to deter or prevent violence. It does not do that. Not to ameliorate the effect of violence. It does not do that. Not to help the victims of violence. It does not do that. There clearly is an ulterior motive here, a different agenda that the supporters have.

There is no question that the loss or harm to a woman and her fetus is absolutely devastating, and those who injure or kill a pregnant woman or her fetus should be punished, and families should have appropriate redress for their loss, but this bill would not accomplish that. This bill seeks to create a unique Federal criminal offense for acts that cause injury or death to an unborn fetus. Tellingly, it does not create any comparable offense for killing or injuring the woman bearing the fetus. I think that makes it clear that the real purpose here is not to protect the victims of violence, not to prevent violence, but to give the fetus equal legal status to the mother and thus to undermine the legal foundation of Roe v. Wade.

I challenge the supporters of this bill to be logically consistent and support the substitute permitted under this rule, the Motherhood Protection Act, which would severely punish crimes against pregnant women without unnecessarily engaging in the abortion debate. I would also remind my colleagues that protecting pregnant women is just one part of combating all forms of violence that threaten women across this Nation. We must renew our commitment to this issue and focus our efforts on passing measures that are aimed at protecting all women from violence, and here I challenge the supporters again to fully fund programs such as the Violence Against Women Act that actually provide lifesaving services to battered women.

I strongly urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 1997.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 743, the Social Security Protection Act. This bill will protect the integrity of the Social Security program for the nearly eight million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) beneficiaries who are unable to manage their own financial affairs and must have a ``representative payee'' designated to receive and manage their benefits on their behalf.

I would, however, like to take this opportunity to discuss an important Social Security issue that this bill fails to address, the Government Pension Offset (GPO). This unjust, arcane law prevents government retirees from collecting a government pension and the Social Security benefits entitled to them through their spouse's history of employment.

The GPO current affects 335,000 people, a number that is growing by 15,000 each year. The people hit hardest by the GPO are State and municipal workers. Public employees like educators, police officers, and firefighters should not suffer a penalty for dedicating their lives to public service.

Take, for example, a teacher who has worked for 30 years and with her husband has managed to raise a family. After her husband passes away, the law prevents her from receiving most, if not all, of the Social Security benefits that her husband earned and rightfully belong to her. She would lose the benefits simply because she worked for the government making a modest salary.

Mr. Speaker, Congressman Buck McKeon has introduced H.R. 594, which would address the Government Pension Offset issue. Even though the bill currently has 285 cosponsors,

the House leadership has failed to bring it up for a vote.

Mr. Speaker, I have heard countless people say that teachers, police officers and firefighters deserve to be paid better for their public service. Fixing the GPO is our chance to say thanks to these selfless individuals whose work has helped make this country what it is today. I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to urge the leadership to bring this issue to the floor during this session of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, the discovery of ricin in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, and the resulting closure of all three Senate office buildings, is an unfortunate and disturbing reminder of our mail system's vulnerability to terrorism. As the Representative of the 12th District of New Jersey, my concern on this matter is heightened because of our area's direct experience with the anthrax attacks of 2001. At least one of the anthrax-tainted letters mailed to Capitol Hill was sent from a postal drop box in Princeton, New Jersey and processed at a sorting facility in Hamilton, New Jersey. Anthrax spores were also discovered in my Washington, D.C. office, which resulted in my congressional office--and several others--being relocated for three months.

I rise today to express my profound disappointment that our federal government seems to have learned very little from these incidents. I am concerned that the United States Postal Service (USPS) has not received adequate funding to protect postal employees and the general public from the risk of bio-terrorism in the Fiscal Year 2005 budget that President Bush delivered to Congress two days ago. Specifically, I am troubled that the USPS was denied emergency preparedness funding in Fiscal Year 2004, and would be denied again in the President's Fiscal Year 2005 budget request. This continued lack of funding leaves the United States Postal Service ill-equipped to defend against bioterrorism.

A safe postal delivery system is critical not only for our homeland security, but also for our economic security. Only sustained, significant investment in our postal system will ensure that we are prepared to prevent, detect, and respond to bio-terrorism through the mail. I will be writing to President Bush to reconsider this oversight and provide the USPS with funding for this important initiative.