Floor Statements

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

Mr. Chairman, I support the Nanotechnology Research and Development Act and applaud the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), and the committee for bringing this up.

This bill goes a long way with its scholarship programs, with its multidepartmental authorization, with an increase in the authorized amount to promote this really very important area of research and development.

Now, it is curious that the floor schedule here has tomorrow and Friday reserved for discussion of the economic stimulus plan. Let me suggest that they are off by at least a day. The real piece of economic stimulus legislation that will be considered this week, that will really stimulate the economy, is right here before us today.

Now, make no mistake, that investment in research and development is the single most effective way to provide for economic growth. Now, economists will argue about the amount of return on investment in research and development. They will say maybe it is 40 percent; maybe it is 60 percent. Whatever it is, it is very good. We have

all heard the figures, that half of the U.S. economic growth over the past 5 decades has been due to advances in technology. Nearly two- thirds of the papers cited in recent patents were published by researchers at organizations supported by Federal funds, and that makes the point that there really is a Federal role here; and that is why we should be doing legislation such as the nanotechnology act.

Investment in R&D has proved to be one of the very best returns that we can get on taxpayers' money. And although it is difficult to quantify the returns, we know it is good. A small investment, in this case in small technology, will lead to very big payoffs.

And nanotechnology cuts across traditional academic disciplines. That is one of the great appeals of this kind of research. Providing for a next generation of imaging devices, for sensors, for biological and chemical work, including biological and chemicals weapons work, to detect pathogens, to detect weapons that might be used against us; and smart materials that will be used in everything from the Space Shuttle to the bicycle.

In New Jersey we have recognized this, and the State and industry are making a significant investment in our nanotechnology centers which have been associated with Lucent and Bell Labs. And this bill before us today in Congress will help train the next generation of skilled workers to keep the U.S. in the forefront of technology and help stem the flow of research and development centers to overseas locations.

So as we debate this week the best way to have a strong economy, let me say this will go a lot farther than any of the tax cuts that have been proposed. This will provide real growth, growth in productivity, growth in education. This is where we should be putting our money, and I am pleased to see the committee give its support to this important technology. I think the nanotechnology bill will lead to innovation, to education, and to economic growth. We should all get behind it.

Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the Jewish Federation of Greater Middlesex County whose members will demonstrate their support for the U.S.-Israel relationship on May 4, 2003 with a Middlesex County community wide ``Walk for Israel'' in Johnson Park, Highland Park, New Jersey. I applaud the members of the Jewish Federation not only for their commitment to Israel, but for the service they provide to the less fortunate members of our Central New Jersey community. Their heartfelt work to improve the lives of others regardless of race, religion, or ethnicity is a testament to their humanity and we are proud to have them here in New Jersey.

I also rise today to recognize the strong U.S.-Israel relationship and to celebrate the 55th year of Israeli Statehood. Since it was founded in 1948 and with prompt U.S. recognition, Israel has stood firm as an ally of the United States and its interests in the Middle East. Our citizens maintain a deeply rooted friendship based upon common interests, a shared commitment to democracy, individual freedoms, and a rejection of extremism and terrorism.

New Jerseyans have a special relationship with Israel. We have a special sister state relationship with the State of Israel through the New Jersey-Israel Commission. Israel, as a valued partner in trade and cultural exchange, receives the continued support of our citizens.

Since 1948, the State of Israel has committed itself to living in harmony and mutual respect with its neighbors and to arriving at a peaceful solution to the conflict with the Palestinians. For most of the last three years, however, Israelis and Palestinians have found themselves in a violent and crippling deterioration of relations. Thousands have died in horrible violence that has torn through the hearts of both the Israeli and Palestinian communities.

With the introduction of the so-called ``Roadmap'' yesterday by President Bush, I hope we are at a renewed moment of hope. The people of New Jersey believe that the future security of Israel depends upon bringing end to terrorism, bloodshed, and human suffering and to establishing a just, permanent peace with the Palestinians.

I rise today in recognition of the Jewish Federation of Greater Middlesex County, the special U.S.-Israel relationship, and to celebrate 55 years of Israeli independence. Let us commit ourselves to work together with Israel so that she will enjoy her next 55 years at peace with her neighbors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank Megan Boyle for her volunteer service. She has been chosen by CORE of the ARC, a coalition of local social service agencies, law enforcement officials, educators and community activists, that seeks out and honors youth who have voluntarily given outstanding service to those with disabilities in the school community. She is a senior at East Brunswick High School and she has worked actively as a volunteer for the Sayerville Association for Brain Injured Children for three and one half years.

Megan's aunt introduced her to the Association for Brain Injured Children and after participating in the Saturday program two or three times, she was committed. She volunteers each Saturday helping with art, board games, exercise, sports and other activities. Her commitment expanded to summer camp with the Association over the past three summers.

Megan has displayed a variety of talents working with both autistic children and children with Down's syndrome. She has helped the children progress in the areas of learning skills and socialization skills. Her success and confidence gained her a promotion at the summer camp. Her new responsibility put her in the leadership position of being in charge of seven counselors and twenty children for six weeks.

It is only through the generosity of time and spirit of individuals like Megan that our community can meet the needs of those with disabilities. It is not often that someone as young as Megan is so willing to share of her time and expertise. She tells us she is richer for this dedication to improving the lives of others. Clearly the individuals she has befriended and served are also better off.

I ask that all the members join me in congratulating Megan Boyle as a recipient of the CORE of the ARC's Annual Distinguished Citizen Award.

Mr. Chairman, none of the goals of IDEA can be achieved without full funding. Today, the majority is refusing even to allow amendments to improve the funding level in the bill.

Congress authorized full funding of IDEA 28 years ago and still has failed to deliver. In 1975, Congress authorized funding to cover 40 percent of the excess cost of educating a child with a disability.

President Bush has requested $1 billion increases for IDEA in each of his last 2 budgets. But according to the U.S. Department of Education, providing $1 billion increases each year will never allow IDEA to reach full funding.

When it comes to IDEA funding, Republicans are dwelling on the past, rather than focusing on the future. The majority consistently points to increases in IDEA funding in past years and this is true. However, this doesn't respond to the needs of school districts now. That is why we need to ensure full funding of IDEA over the next six years.

During debate on the No Child Left Behind Act, the majority claimed we had to reform IDEA before providing full funding. The bill before us supplies the Majority's reforms, yet reneges on full funding. What is the excuse now? Since 1977, 22 separate bills and resolutions have passed in the House and Senate calling for fund funding of IDEA with support of a majority of Republicans. It is time for Congress to make good on this promise.

In recent years, the Republican majority have said that there is not enough money to appropriate full funding, however they seem to be able to find enough money to give a large tax cut to those who don't need it.

I offered an amendment in the Education and the Workforce Committee with Representative Andrews to remove the funding cap from the bill. I did so because today seven states stand to lose IDEA funding under this cap, and another seven may soon be affected. While the Chairman did agree to move the cap to 13.5 percent--and I thank him for working with us--I still believe that a cap is fundamentally unfair. Not just unfair to the 50 states but also to the American children.

Even with this cap on funding, states and schools are still required to educate students that are identified as having special need even when the population exceeds the cap. So, why not allow the funding?

While I recognize that the cap reflects an attempt to reduce inappropriate identification of students as disabled, I believe that a cap does not get at the problem. Simply setting a cap does not address the issue of how students are being identified.

I believe that states and localities should be allowed to improve this inappropriate identification through professional development.

I applaud the chairman for including increased funding for professional development and research funding to reduce inappropriate identification of children with disabilities, including disproportionate assignment of minority children. We should allow these funds to work.

Let me point out a good point of today's bill. I am glad to see that section 674(c) recognizes the continued importance of funding an organization that ``provides free educational materials, including textbooks, in accessible media for visually impaired and print-disabled students in elementary, secondary, postsecondary, and graduate schools.'' As you may know, Mr. Speaker, Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic, located in New Jersey in my district, has received federal funding for nearly thirty years to produce, distribute and promote the use of accessible-format versions of printed textbooks free to students. During this time,

they have helped hundreds of thousands of students who would have otherwise not had access to the textbooks they need to receive the kind of ``free and appropriate'' education that is outlined under IDEA. I commend RFB&D and want to bring to the attention of my colleagues in the Congress the oustanding work of this organization.

I would to thank Chairman Boehner and Subcommittee Chairman Castle for maintaining this important program in the law. I would like to express my concern, however, that funding for this activity is no longer a requirement for the Secretary of Education, as is the case under current law. I believe this must be changed and this requirement should be restored, and I look forward to working with the Chairman and my colleagues to resolve this issue during conference with the Senate.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for introducing this resolution (H. Con. Res. 149) and I applaud Congress for supporting the annual celebration of Patriots' Day.

Every year the states of Maine and Massachusetts celebrate the events of April 19th, 1775, when the first American patriots stood up to British troops, leading to the beginning of the Revolutionary War and the birth of our nation.

We need to do more to bring national recognition to this celebration of the brave men and women who sacrificed so much on the battlefield to help our nation achieve independence. It is important that we honor all of our first patriots and we should help many more Americans learn as much as possible about the birth of our nation and the hard-fought struggle that accompanied it.

That is why Congress should do more to preserve our precious heritage and to celebrate not just the events and battles that started the Revolutionary War, but all of the major battles that shaped the outcome of this historic conflict with has changed the ensuring course of human history.

We should certainly celebrate Paul Revere's midnight ride and the Battles of Lexington and Concord as the crucial opening salvos in our national struggle for independence. At the same time, we should also recognize that the Revolutionary War spanned six years and claimed the lives of nearly 4500 Americans, demonstrating not only the cost of liberty but also the willingness of colonial patriots to make the ultimate sacrifice to secure our freedom.

In particular, I want my colleagues to know that New Jersey was of critical importance during the American Revolution due to its strategic location between the British armies headquarters in New York City and the Continental Congress sitting in the City of Philadelphia. General George Washington spent almost half of the period of the American Revolution personally commanding troops of the Continential Army in New Jersey, including two severe winter encampments at Morristown.

The early turning point in the war played out across multiple battlefields in and around my congressional district in Central New Jersey. It was during ten fateful days of the American Revolution between December 25, 1776 and January 3, 1777 that General Washington recrossed the Delaware River and won crucial battles at Trenton and Princeton, after having retreated from New York City to Pennsylvania at the risk of near total defeat.

New Jersey's critical role in America's fight for independence is part of our national story and thus should be preserved for all Americans. This is why Congressman Frelinghuysen and I have introduced the Crossroads of the American Revolution National Historical Heritage Act of 2003 (H.R. 524). Our bill would establish a national heritage area to preserve, promote, and connect central New Jersey's extraordinary Revolutionary War battlefield sites through a greenway and interpretive programs for all Americans to enjoy. We hope this much-needed, bipartisan legislation can be enacted during the 108th Congress to protect these hallowed grounds and educate future generations about the struggle to create this great nation.

I wholeheartedly support the resolution before us and hope for an ever-widening celebration of Patriots' Day all across America, not just in Massachusetts and Maine. In the same spirit, I urge our bipartisan leadership and all of my colleagues to support prompt and favorable legislative action to create the Crossroads of the American Revolution National Heritage Area.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute the Dean and Betty Gallo Prostate Cancer Center's new education initiative.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer among men--about 220,900 new cases will be diagnosed this year. Approximately 28,900 men will be stricken down by this disease--one that devastates so many families by killing so many fathers, brothers, and sons.

I am proud to say that the Dean and Betty Gallo Prostate Cancer Center in central New Jersey is working hard to improve these statistics. On April 12, the Gallo Center will kick off

its prostate cancer education initiative with a statewide health event held at 13 separate sites. At these sites, individuals and families will be able to get information and talk to representatives of the Gallo Center, local health departments, and other officials.

In the fight against prostate cancer, it is vitally important that we concentrate on education and screening. Catching the disease early drastically improves the chances of surviving, and lowers the need for the expensive treatments used during later stages of the cancer.

For those who are diagnosed with prostate cancer, the Gallo Center is New Jersey's only specialized prostate health resource at a National Cancer Institute--the Cancer Institute of New Jersey. The Center is also an advanced research facility that transforms laboratory discoveries into clinical practice.

While I am glad that New Jersey can rely on such a world-class facility for prostate cancer research and treatment, I am even more pleased to learn of the Gallo Center's educational and outreach efforts. Prostate cancer is a disease that disproportionately affects elderly men and African-Americans, and it is vital that health care professionals reach out to these populations to inform them of the warning signs of the disease.

Again, let me applaud the Gallo Center's efforts to inform and educate New Jersey's citizens about this devastating disease.

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

I rise to address this amendment, which seems to me to be a harmless amendment. It may result in applying some more money for LIHEAP. In fact, the word ``may'' is the key word in the amendment. So that is not a bad thing, except for the damage that might be done in the process.

There has been quite a bit of discussion today and there will be quite a bit more about how much petroleum would come from the Arctic Wildlife Refuge. It is not a lot. And also, though, a lot will be said about the damage that would be done in getting that oil.

We have heard some discussion about the footprint and just how small it will be. Let me just mention one thing that is often not considered that will explain how the footprint really is larger. Take, for example, the ice roads that would be built every winter to allow trucks to drive to and from the rigs. Their environmental impact is not only the effects on the ground, which I would say is considerable, but in the fresh water drawn from nearby lakes. In fact, there is not enough fresh water. The effect of drawing this water from the lakes in order to build the ice roads allegedly, purportedly, so as not to damage the environment, will leave these lakes in such a depleted situation that they will freeze all the way through and die.

So there is, indeed, this kind of footprint that extends beyond just the poured concrete area. So we may through this amendment get a little more money for LIHEAP, but it could be at great cost.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California for yielding to me, and I rise in support of H. Res. 165 to draw this Chamber's attention to this opportunity that is not yet lost in Cyprus.

Cyprus has suffered from ethnic strife among the people of Cyprus, and I thank my colleague, the gentlewoman from New York, for using that phrasing, among the people of Cyprus for decades and has been physically divided since Turkish armed forces invaded and occupied the northern third of the island in 1974 after a Greek-led coup.

There have been efforts by the Greek Cypriots over the last year. There have been encouraging words from Turkey. Turkey's new ruling party suggested a change in Turkish policy toward Cyprus, but no agreement has been reached. Tens of thousands of Cypriots have taken to the streets in recent months, particularly in the Turkish areas, in support of this settlement, but Denktash ultimately imperiled the recent round of talks by refusing to take the plan directly to the Turkish Cypriot people for a referendum. As a result, Secretary General Annan has ended official U.N. efforts to broker a settlement.

This is a severe disappointment to me, to my Greek and my Turkish American constituents in New Jersey, and to all the people of Cyprus, but we must not accept the end of this latest round of talks as the end of the road. Peace rarely comes easily.

Peace in Cyprus is still possible, and as Cyprus prepares to enter the European Union, let us do our part to get the peace process back on track.

I commend the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter). His resolution would help. Let us pass it promptly.

Madam Speaker, as our nation is at war in the Persian Gulf, many men and women who serve in our nation's armed forces have been called up to active duty, including many college and university students.

Many of these students participate in federal financial aid programs, and in order to ensure the utmost flexibility during the time that they are engaged in military service, it is essential that the Department of Education be given extended waiver authority to accommodate the needs of our troops.

This is why I support H.R. 1412 Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students (HEROES) Act of 2003.

The bill will extend the waive authority granted to the Secretary of Education to allow him to provide the appropriate assistance and flexibility to our men and women in uniform as they transfer in and out of postsecondary education during a time of war.

The extended waiver authority provided for in the HEROES bill addresses the need to assist students who are being asked to disrupt their lives in the defense of the freedoms we all hold so precious.

It will also allow the Secretary to address events now unforeseen. It also urges all postsecondary institutions to provide a full refund of tuition, fees and other charges to students who are members of the Armed Forces or are serving on active duty, including the Reserves and National Guard.

What a positive message it would send to the hundreds of thousands of American men and women in uniform currently risking their lives to help them with their student loans. Recall the fine, positive effect of the GI education bills.

Our men and women deserve our help. As the brave men and women of the United States are engaged in this difficult and dangerous war we should limit the negative impacts on them and their families here at home.

I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 1412 Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act.

Madam Speaker, the leadership of the House of Representatives narrowly passed a budget resolution on March 20 that would severely cut veterans benefits, including health care, disability compensation, pensions, and other benefits.

Now, 211 of my colleagues and I opposed this budget resolution and many of us voted instead for an alternative budget resolution preferred by the American Legion and other veterans groups that would have increased veterans benefits. I am sad to say it did not pass.

Now today, the majority party voted for a motion to instruct conferees presented by the Democrats. I must question the seriousness of this vote. Maybe it is April Fool's Day, but cutting veterans benefits does not seem very funny to me.

How can Congress even consider cutting veterans benefits during a time of war?

I must question the seriousness of it because only a week ago when my Republican friend and colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, expressed his own outrage at the leadership's budget proposal, he was severely rebuked by his own party. Now, no American should be rebuked for standing up for veterans.

The promise that the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) got and this motion to instruct today should not have been necessary. It should have been in the original budget resolution that the veterans were looked after, that their disability payments would be taken care of. Certainly at a time of war and great sacrifice by our Nation's armed services, we cannot let these cuts stand.

Mr. Speaker, on September 11, 2001, as thousands fled over lower Manhattan during the terrorist strikes, many ran towards the burning buildings.

These brave men and women were first responders--the police, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel who risk their lives every day to protect their fellow citizens.

It would seem like the least we could do for them would be to not only applaud their efforts, but also provide them with support they need so they can do their jobs even better.

Unfortunately, this Congress has found it appropriate not to support, but to shortchange these everyday heroes.

A month and a half ago, we finally managed to pass the FY03 spending bill. Many of us here in this body sought to add vital funding for first responders, but we were denied. Our first responders were denied.

Today, apparently, this body is poised to again deny our first responders--in this case, the men and women who will first respond to the unthinkable: a smallpox attack.

The need for the president's smallpox vaccination program is questionable, but now that the program exists, there is no doubt that we need to address compensation for those who volunteer for and are injured by the vaccine. In terms of negative side effects, this vaccine--essentially the same as the original developed in 1796--is perhaps the most dangerous one we currently have. In this most initial wave of vaccinations, we have already seen several serious injuries and even a few deaths possibly attributable to the vaccine.

That is why adequate compensation for vaccine injury is so crucial. Our first responders want to know that if they take the brave step of volunteering for the vaccination and get sick or die, they and their family will be taken care of.

The absence of a good compensation program has doubtless contributed to the snail's pace that the president's vaccination program has taken. Only 25,000 of the 500,000 in the ``initial wave'' of healthcare workers have actually been vaccinated.

The bill before us will not assure these workers that they will be adequately compensated. The lifetime cap of $262,100 is small change for someone who is permanently disabled.

This bill also only covers workers vaccinated during a specific short time period after implementation. What kind of an incentive is this for new healthcare providers to get vaccinated in the future?

As the American Nurses Association has written, ``the bill does not provide adequate education, prescreening, surveillance, and compensation.''

Mr. Speaker, I have been working in this Congress to show my strong support for our first responders. Today I will continue to show this support by voting ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank Mr. Anthony Meyer for his volunteer service to the Center of Outreach and Services for the Autism Community and congratulate him for his receipt of the NFL Community Quarterback Award.

Twice a week for the past five years Mr. Meyers has volunteered at the office of the Center of Outreach and Services for the Autism Community, COSAC, in Central New Jersey. His primary responsibility has been to create, then send autism information packets to the approximately 6,000 individuals who contact the Center annually. Many who call are parents who have just received the devastating news that their child has autism. Through Tony's efforts, parents receive valuable information in a timely manner that shortcuts their delay in seeking necessary services for a son or daughter.

An addition, on a regular basis, Tony donates an evening for group work with autistic adults. He provides support for their job crises, he coaches them on searching for employment and he provides a social outlet for people who are sometimes branded as different. He also serves on the Board of Trustees for COSAC where he provides advice on all issues pertaining to autism, particularly on the needs of the adults with whom he has recently worked.

What makes this effort particularly remarkable is that Tony Meyer is himself autistic. He did fairly well in school, but never made friends. He held several jobs, but most were minimum wage positions that did not take advantage of his intellect or potential. It was not until Tony decided to turn his efforts toward volunteer work at COSAC that he discovered a place that appreciated his skill, needed his work and valued his perspective. As a result of their appreciation and respect, they nominated Anthony Myers for the prestigious NFL award.

I ask that all the Members join me in congratulating Tony as one of the ten recipients of the NY Giants Community Quarterback Award for making a significant volunteer contribution to a non-profit organization.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my serious reservations with the Child Abduction Prevention Act. Although these reservations were not sufficient enough to compel me to vote against it, I want to make it clear that I am not pleased with the tactics employed by the House leadership that brought this bill to the Floor.

By introducing the Child Abduction Prevention Act today and passing a rule to prevent the clean Frost-Dunn AMBER Alert Network Act from coming to a vote, this House Leadership has imperiled chances for the AMBER Alert to become law in the near-term. In fact, AMBER Alert could have become law this week if the leadership so willed it. The House Leadership, however, has chosen repeatedly to undermine all heartfelt attempts by me and many of my colleagues to make the AMBER Alert national law right now. Today's vote is only another indication of the Leadership's willful intransigence. This bill was supposed to be about protecting our nation's children. It was supposed to be about supporting a National AMBER Alert Network. Sadly, this bill was really about politics.

I ran for Congress more than four years ago because I wanted to restore the trust of the American people in our system of self- government. I wanted to break through the cynicism that had poisoned the people's faith in our democracy and in our elected representatives. The cynical tactics employed by the House Leadership today on the AMBER Alert are exactly what I came here to Congress to fight.

Last October, this same House Leadership had the opportunity to make the AMBER Alert national law. The Senate had passed an AMBER Alert bill. The House had an opportunity to pass it quickly into law, but the Leadership decided to play politics with the bill and added a list of other provisions. At the time I took a stand against the Leadership and opposed their political games, and I took on the nay-sayers back home who said I should have backed down. The facts are the same today as they were then: these tactics are designed to prevent AMBER Alert from becoming law. As a result, six months have passed and we still don't have AMBER Alert.

I wanted to bring a clean AMBER Alert bill to the House floor identical to the one passed twice now by the Senate. I am an original cosponsor of the Frost-Dunn National AMBER Alert bill and I have tried to convince the Leadership to bring it to the Floor for a vote.

I voted for this version of the Child Abduction Act today because I support AMBER Alert, but it was not an easy vote. I voted for this bill despite the fact that I know there is a better way to turn AMBER Alert into national Law. I voted for this bill, despite the fact that I have serious reservations about provisions that would impose the death penalty for certain crimes where it does not now apply, increase mandatory sentences for certain offenses, and expand the wiretapping authority of the federal government.

In the end, however, I voted for this bill because I am now convinced after months of struggle that neither the principle of my protest nor the strength of my argument will change the collectively obstinate mind of the House Leadership. If even the personal pleas of Elizabeth Smart and her family cannot influence the House Leadership to bring a clean AMBER Alert bill to a vote, then I must conclude that neither can mine. I am now convinced that the only way AMBER will become law is by the overwhelming force of conscience--from the public, from Congress, and from me personally--to communicate in no uncertain terms that AMBER Alert will not be stopped by cynical political games. The only true loser today are America's children who will now have to wait even longer for Congress and the President to strengthen our national AMBER Alert system.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of title IX. Title IX of the educational amendments of 1972 have really been instrumental in prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex by mandating gender equality and educational programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance.

Before the passage of title IX, when I and most of our colleagues were in college, many schools saw no problem in maintaining strict limits on admission of women or in simply refusing to admit them, or in denying them access to much of the opportunities within colleges and universities.

This has changed dramatically since the passage of Title IX. The effects of the legislation are evident in the success of women in the classroom, on the campus, and in our society at large.

In 1972, women received only 9 percent of medical degrees, 7 percent of law degrees, a quarter of doctoral degrees. By 2000, women received 45 percent of medical degrees, 44 percent of law degrees, and 44 percent of doctoral degrees. There is a connection.

Thanks to Patsy Mink and others who fought to get Title IX into the legislation, women now have opportunities on the athletic field, throughout the campus, and throughout their lives. By participating in sports, young women realize significant benefits that often correlate to achievement in the classroom and, ultimately, success in college and in the work force.

Women who participate in athletics have higher graduation rates and develop important skills like teamwork, leadership, discipline, that stay with them throughout their lives.

Attacks on Title IX have taken on really ludicrous dimensions. I have heard some teams, male teams, blame their losing seasons on Title IX. I am sorry, it just does not wash. Title IX is a success. It is a great boon to our society, to our economy, to the education of our people.

Unfortunately, the administration is considering proposals that would dramatically weaken the important provisions of Title IX. Female athletes stand to lose scholarships, they stand to lose chances for athletic participation, they stand to lose much of what we have gained since Patsy Mink fought to get Title IX into law.

We may not allow, we cannot allow this to happen. We cannot allow the administration to diminish the opportunities afforded to American women or to undo the progress we have made over the past 30 years. Title IX has enabled millions of young women to pursue goals which their grandmothers and mothers could have only dreamed of.

Mr. Speaker, I hope all my colleagues will join me as we work to preserve the integrity of this landmark law.

Mr. Speaker, I call on the House to immediately turn to what we know as the Frost-Dunn National AMBER Alert Network Act. This legislation would make $25 million available to State and local entities for highway signage, for education, for training programs. It would make AMBER Alert a national program. AMBER Alert works. It should be a national program.

This legislation has 220 cosponsors. We are all influenced by the evidence that this works with more than 52 abducted children recovered through AMBER Alert-like processes, five here in the month of March alone.

As my colleague from Texas said, anyone who is watching this debate must wonder what in the world is going on. We have the opportunity to pass a clean bill for AMBER Alert to become law. We had this opportunity last fall. At the time I got in some political trouble in my home State for saying this bill is designed to prevent AMBER Alert from becoming law, and it is not very constructive to say I told you so, but in fact 6 months have passed and when AMBER Alert could have been law on a national scale last fall, it still is not.

The reason is, the other side here insists on putting other things into the bill. These might be controversial. At least they are complicated and serious issues that deserve to be aired and debated, such things as expanding the death penalty, increasing mandatory sentences, criminalizing traveling with a criminal intent or a perceived intent, two strikes and you're out for certain kinds of legislation, expanding wiretap authority, eliminating the statute of limitations in some circumstances, eliminating pretrial release in some circumstances.

I think any Member of the House, if they would speak objectively, would have to say that some or all of these provisions deserve thorough airing. They are serious matters. They should not just be stuck into another bill, and they certainly should not be put into this bill that is urgent that we pass now.

We all celebrated with the Smart family, Edward and Lois Smart, when their daughter Elizabeth was returned to them. Just a few days ago, the Smart family wrote to Members of Congress and said:

``As you know, we can't express enough how our children can't wait another day for the national AMBER Alert to be signed into law. Please, please, please, please, pass the stand-alone AMBER Alert legislation now.''

I could not agree more with the Smart family, Edward, Lois and Elizabeth. We have the opportunity to do it. We can do it today. The President will sign it in a matter of days, I am certain.