Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 507) to establish a grant program to provide vision care to children, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 507, the Vision Care for Kids Act of 2007.

A small but significant portion of children have visual impairments. It is estimated that vision impairment affects approximately 1.2 out of every 1,000 8-year-olds. When detected early, many childhood vision abnormalities are treatable, but the potential for correction and normal visual development diminishes with age. Vision problems can occur at any point during a lifetime, but tend to be particularly damaging to school-age children.

Impaired vision can result in adverse physical, emotional, and social consequences. For instance, a child may miss learning opportunities by failing to explore his or her environment. Additionally, if a child is visually impaired, he or she may be unable to imitate social behavior or understand nonverbal cues.

Early recognition of eye disease results in more effective treatment and that can be sight saving and sometimes even life saving. Yet, many children under the age of five do not receive any vision screening at all.

The Vision Care for Kids Act of 2007 would authorize a grant program to provide comprehensive eye exams for uninsured children with vision disorders, with priority for children under the age of 9. Funds would be used for treatment and services to correct vision disorders identified through eye exams and to increase public awareness of visual impairment in children. H.R. 507 would require States receiving funds to contribute a 25 percent match of funds for each Federal dollar obtained through the program.

The bill before us today makes great strides in providing access to an array of vision-related services, including vision screening services that can help uninsured children in low- to moderate-income families.

I want to thank my colleagues for their commitment and strong support of this legislation, and particularly commend my dear friend and colleague, Representative Gene Green, for his unwavering dedication to this issue.

I urge my colleagues to support this vital and important legislation.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am delighted to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), a passionate advocate of this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the lead author of this bill, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).

Madam Speaker, in closing, visual impairments can have lifelong consequences for children. As we have heard, this bill will help identify these impairments early so that our kids can live up to their full potential. This bill and the others that preceded it are prime examples of bipartisan cooperation.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill and those that have preceded it. And I also thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella) for his assistance in expeditiously, yet comprehensively, managing the nine vital important and bipartisan health bills that were before us this afternoon.

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

Madam Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the founding of an organization that has influenced the advancement of cultural opportunities for the people of Beloit, Wisconsin. Originally envisioned as a showcase of local talents, today the Beloit Civic Theatre has grown into a remarkable attraction stimulating growth and support of the arts within the community and surrounding area.

Initially named the Beloit Little Theatre Guild upon its founding in 1932, the organization began its tradition of service with the production of the Whole Town's Talking. The group concluded its first season with another performance and 250 dedicated members. Word of the outstanding organization spread quickly, and the guild membership grew to 1,300 by the following year, the largest of any community theater in the State. In 1948, the name was changed to the Beloit Civic Theatre, as it stands today.

Although the Beloit Civic Theatre was not incorporated as a non- profit organization until 1952, they have given back to the community since their very first season. Today their profits support a scholarship fund to cultivate the talents of graduating high school students pursuing a field within the arts.

Throughout the past 75 years, the Beloit Civic Theatre has undoubtedly gone above and beyond their mission to bring the people of Beloit unique and distinctive performances. Enjoyed at the Elizabeth Reinholz Theater by a variety of audiences, the presentation of timeless classics, modern masterpieces, and original works has advanced more than the amazing talents of aspiring actors, but developed a desire and love for theater within the Beloit community.

On this 75th anniversary of the Beloit Civic Theatre's founding, I applaud its devoted staff, faithful volunteers, and talented and dedicated performers who have nurtured and supported this indispensable organization of cultural growth and entertainment for the past 75 years. We look forward to 75 more.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and celebrate the 25th anniversary of Cream City Foundation. Founded in 1982, Cream City Foundation serves as the leading foundation to mobilize philanthropic resources, build allied coalitions, effect positive change, and advance the dignity, worth, and health of every LGBT person in Southeastern Wisconsin.

This vision is realized through the organization's mission of building a strong foundation and infrastructure in the Southeastern Wisconsin LGBT community by distributing funds to emerging groups and programs that enhance the quality of life for LGBT people.

On the evening of September 22, the community will gather at the beautiful Milwaukee City Hall to note the incredible work of this vibrant foundation. The programs and interests that make up the work of Cream City Foundation are driven by a belief that philanthropy has an immense influence on creating long-lasting social change in our communities. Leadership from the LGBT community and our allies has been essential in bringing about that social change. We've come a long way, but our work is far from over. Despite all of our accomplishments over the years, homophobia is still all too pervasive.

Yet, with the continued help of Cream City Foundation, and the partnership of so many groups and individuals working in the community, there is no limit to what can be achieved in the years to come. These are historic times for the LGBT community. As we work together to build a community of acceptance and inclusion, Cream City Foundation will continue to lead the way.

It is fitting and appropriate that in the same year as the State of Wisconsin celebrates the 25th anniversary of the Nation's first Gay and Lesbian Civil Rights Act we take time to congratulate Cream City Foundation on the occasion of its 25th anniversary. Your efforts are truly changing the world. I'm delighted to join with all of Wisconsin's citizens in saluting Cream City Foundation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the New Direction for Energy Independence Act.

Earlier this year, Speaker Nancy Pelosi challenged this Congress to address energy independence and global warming. That charge was long overdue, drastically needed, and vital to our national security, our economy, and our environment.

Crafting this legislation represented our opportunity to chart a new direction. And we have, by reducing our energy use, investing in our future, and preparing for a post-petroleum economy; and, while there is much work that lies ahead, this bill takes necessary first steps that sets us on the right course.

The legislation will improve our Nation's energy efficiency, increase the availability of renewable fuels, and enhance research efforts on biofuels. Additionally, it will address smart grid technology and ensure production of plug-in hybrid vehicles.

The provisions we've crafted will remove from the atmosphere carbon dioxide emissions equivalent to those emitted from all of the cars currently on the road. This bill truly will set a New Direction for Energy Independence and I urge my colleagues to support its passage.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the City of Middleton as the ``Best Place to Live 2007,'' a title presented by Money Magazine that mirrors the thriving civic, commercial, residential, and natural centers of the community.

Middleton, Wisconsin, the ``Good Neighbor City,'' is deserving of this honor as a reflection of the vibrant community it has become since its founding in 1856. The furtrading post that was opened in 1832 by the area's first carpenter, Michael St. Cyr, along with the arrival of the railroad in 1856 and the train depot, Middleton Station, that followed, served as town hubs that encouraged neighborhood growth and subsequent business prosperity.

Today, as a testament of this award, Middleton is flourishing. While Middleton residents still treasure the historic structures of the past, such as the Old Stamm House, a former station on The Underground Railroad, they also are looking forward. At present Middleton is the corporate headquarters for American Girl, Capital Brewery, Electronic Theatre Controls, ETC, and Springs Window Fashions, LLC.

There exist numerous elements that are keys to the community's success, including the Middleton-Cross Plains area school district and its high level of academic and cocurricular achievements; an outstanding performing arts center; 25 percent of land mass designated as ``green space;'' the home of Middleton Hills, the first ``new urbanism'' subdivision of the Midwest; a regional employment center; and superb public amenities, including a nationally recognized library, a nationally-accredited senior center, a historical museum, and abundant parks, to name a few.

As the ``Best Place to Live 2007,'' the City of Middleton has much for which it should be proud. I look forward to watching the community as it continues to grow and builds upon the strong foundation that its residents, businesses, and employees have created for themselves.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the CHAMP Act, and our chairmen who have worked so hard to craft this bill deserve great credit. It is a very strong measure.

There are many reasons to support this bill, but chief among them is the fact that this bill will provide health care coverage for an additional 5 million low income children, bringing the total to 11 million insured infants and children covered under SCHIP. This represents real progress at reducing America's 46.6 million uninsured people, and I am proud to support this progress.

Mr. Speaker, I am also proud to note that the CHAMP Act does not pit children against seniors, as has been suggested by many of the Republicans, but instead works to improve health care for both children and seniors.

The bill includes many investments in Medicare that will directly benefit the health of our seniors. The bill includes a physician fix so that our doctors will not be subjected to the harsh 10 percent scheduled cut in reimbursement, and, providing this fix will ensure that beneficiaries have continued access to their physicians.

In addition, this bill provides many more protections to Medicare beneficiaries by expanding and improving the programs which ensure that Medicare remains affordable to those with lower income. The CHAMP Act also expands access to preventative benefits and mental health benefits for all Medicare seniors.

But back to my first point. If this Congress stands for anything, it should stand for children, for providing them with comprehensive health care, for giving them the support and care they need for a healthy life.

I am reminded of the first day of this session when Speaker Pelosi invited all the children to join her at the podium. This Congress should be judged based on how we protect our Nation's children. That is this vote.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to extend my congratulations to the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association, which is celebrating 100 years of excellence. This outstanding achievement is marked by the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association's commitment to providing safe, efficient, and effective police services.

The Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association's standards of excellence were first instituted in 1907 with the mission of supplying a public voice on social and professional issues for law enforcement. It has grown as a resource for its members by making training available in state-of-the-art concepts in policing, acting as a legislative advocate for law enforcement, providing representation for the general good of law enforcement at the local, state and federal levels, and providing open communications with the public. Its most important objective has been to ensure that Wisconsin law enforcement embodies the highest level of integrity and honesty and embraces moral and ethical behavior based on the principles found in the law enforcement code of ethics.

Today, the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association's membership spans Wisconsin and includes committees covering cutting-edge issues ranging from Homeland Security to Information Technology. And while the issues of the day may seem a far cry from those the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association dealt with 100 years ago, the call to tirelessly safeguard the lives and property of area citizens remains the same for the members of the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association. Now, more than ever, our state is comforted by the knowledge that such citizens are prepared to lead in protecting our communities.

I wholeheartedly congratulate the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association for 100 years of protecting our communities and recognize its continuing commitment to excellence.

Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman for his courtesy in yielding me time.

In lieu of offering an amendment this evening, I appreciate the opportunity to briefly share with Members a concern regarding the education title of this bill. I have learned that taxpayer dollars in this bill, combined with taxpayer dollars at the State and local level, are used to purchase textbooks printed and manufactured in countries that censor these teaching materials.

Madam Chairman, one of the consequences of outsourcing to cheaper labor sources overseas is that an increasingly large number of American textbooks and educational materials are printed overseas, especially in China, a country which the State Department's 2006 Country Report on Human Rights concludes actively censors all publications.

The State Department's Human Rights report reads, ``By law, only government-approved publishing houses are permitted to print books. The State Press and Publications Administration controls all licenses to publish. The Chinese Communist Party exerts control over the publishing industry by preemptively classifying certain topics as off limits.''

In addition, ``the government does not respect academic freedom and increases controls on political and social discourses at colleges, universities, and research institutes.''

Madam Chairman, the Chinese Government is forcing the same censorship on American students and teachers, and let me just explain how this happens.

An American publishing company develops a textbook or any educational material and decides to print it overseas because they can save on printing costs by doing so. But the material content will be censored by the government-sanctioned publishing houses to conform to Chinese requirements. The Dalai Lama, Tiananmen Square, and balanced discussions of Tibet, political freedoms and descriptions of democratic participation and public protest will intentionally be left on the cutting room floor.

And then a well-meaning, well-prepared unsuspecting teacher or school district buys this textbook for their classroom, a textbook which contains no mention of the Dalai Lama and a decidedly altered discussion of politics and culture, even American politics and culture because Chinese censorship laws do not discriminate between Chinese and American texts and contexts.

And ultimately public funds meant to educate our children are simultaneously suppressing human rights and freedoms, and limiting exposure and curriculums on important topics of history, politics and culture.

The same situation exists, with far more harmful consequences, for teacher manuals because if a lesson does not exist in the teacher's curriculum, chances are that the students won't be taught that lesson.

Madam Chairman, the lesson that our students truly need to learn, and which must not be censored, is that State-sponsored censorship should not be supported with public dollars. I hope that my colleagues will join me in future efforts to teach our schoolchildren that ethics and morals and their education are more important, and more valuable, than cheap labor and production costs.

Again, I thank Chairman Obey for the courtesy of yielding this time.

Madam Speaker, as the State of Wisconsin celebrates the 25th anniversary of the Nation's first Gay and Lesbian Civil Rights Act, I rise today to honor the courageous individual who authored this historic legislation, David Clarenbach.

David Clarenbach is a seasoned veteran of local, state, and national politics. He won his first term as a Dane County Supervisor at the age of 18, and was elected to the Madison Common Council in 1974. He served in the Wisconsin State Assembly from 1975 to 1993, and was Speaker pro tem from 1983 to 1993. In 1992 David was a Democratic Congressional candidate from Wisconsin's Second District.

Throughout his career, David Clarenbach has been intimately involved in the growth and development of the LGBT civil rights movement. During his tenure in the Wisconsin Legislature he wrote the Gay and Lesbian Civil Rights Act of 1982, the first in the Nation to include gay and lesbian people in statewide anti-discrimination laws. He authored Wisconsin's Hate Crimes Act, which was upheld unanimously by the U.S. Supreme Court. He sponsored a Bill of Rights for people with AIDS and HIV infection. And, in 1983, he authored the Consenting Adults Act, legalizing all sexual activity between consenting adults in private, thus repealing the state's sodomy prohibitions. He has served as a consultant and mentor to openly gay and lesbian candidates throughout the country.

Bringing together his vast experience in policy development, legislative relations, and grassroots organizing, on February 3, 1981, then Wisconsin State Representative David Clarenbach introduced Assembly Bill 70 to include discrimination based on sexual orientation in the state's prohibition on discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations. At the time only 41 municipalities and 8 counties in the United States offered limited protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation. In explaining the bill, Representative Clarenbach stated that ``the right of private sexual preference among adults should be considered inherent . . . he or she should be guaranteed the basic human right to live without harassment or discrimination.'' The bill was endorsed by a broad coalition of clergy, religious denominations, and medical and professional groups.

In October 1981, Assembly Bill 70 was approved by the Wisconsin State Assembly by a vote of 50 to 46, and in February 1982, the Wisconsin State Senate approved the proposal by a vote of 19 to 13. Later that month, Republican Governor Lee Sherman Dreyfus signed Assembly Bill 70 into law, making Wisconsin the first in the Nation to enact a civil rights statute covering sexual orientation.

For his tenacity, his skills, and most of all, his courage, I join with all of Wisconsin in saluting David Clarenbach.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 431) recognizing the 40th anniversary of Loving v. Virginia legalizing interracial marriage within the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 431, a resolution I introduced along with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), commemorating the 40th anniversary of Loving v. Virginia, the landmark Supreme Court decision legalizing interracial marriages within the United States.

I thank Chairman Conyers for expedition consideration of this resolution so it could be brought to the floor before the actual date of the anniversary which is tomorrow, June 12.

In June of 1958, two residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, a black Native American woman, and Richard Perry Loving, a Caucasian man, were married in Washington, D.C. Upon their return to Virginia, Richard Perry Loving and Mildred Jeter Loving were charged with violating Virginia's anti-miscegenation statutes, which made their marriage a felony.

They challenged their convictions, culminating in the June 12, 1967, U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Loving v. Virginia, striking down the remaining anti-miscegenation laws that were still in effect in 16 States.

In the unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court rejected bigotry against interracial relations, recognizing an individual's right to marry under the 14th amendment. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote: ``Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very existence and survival . . . To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the 14th amendment, is surely to deprive all the States' citizens of liberty without due process of law.''

The opinion also stated that ``the 14th amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.''

The Loving decision marked a critical step forward in our Nation's struggle toward equal rights for all, particularly full marriage equality. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, from 1970 to the year 2000 the percentage of interracial marriages has increased from 1 percent of all marriages to more than 5 percent. The number of children living in interracial families has quadrupled between 1970 and 2000, going from 900,000 to more than 3 million. Because of the decision's profound impact in our society, numerous cities and towns across this country have already proclaimed June 12 Loving Day in commemoration of this decision.

Indeed, the Supreme Court's opinion forcefully rejected the argument employed by Leon Bazile, the trial judge of the case, who defended his decision convicting the Lovings as part of God's plan. Unfortunately, after 40 years, similar types of arguments are still being employed by a few to deny full marriage equality to everyone.

In commemorating the legacy of Loving v. Virginia in ending the ban on interracial marriage in the United States, H. Res. 431 reaffirms the Loving court's recognition that marriage is one of the ``basic civil rights of man'' at the heart of the 14th amendment protections.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support this timely resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Loving v. Virginia decision was a milestone in our continuing efforts to fulfill the original promises of our Constitution, fulfilling the blessings of liberty for all Americans. It is highly fitting that we remember and honor the decision on its 40th anniversary. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2356) to amend title 4, United States Code, to encourage the display of the flag of the United States on Father's Day.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2356 and include extraneous materials in the Record.

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

As part of our Nation's bicentennial celebration in 1976, Congress passed a joint resolution re-emphasizing existing rules and customs pertaining to the display and use of the flag, especially recommending its display on a number of different holidays, including Mother's Day, the second Sunday in May.

Omitted from the list was Father's Day. H.R. 2356 would amend the Federal flag code to include Father's Day, the third Sunday in June, among important holidays on which to fly the American flag.

The law now provides that, in addition to the important occasions listed in the flag code, ``the flag should be displayed on all days.'' I know that this is the custom in every community in the United States.

Still, I think that it is important for the flag code to recognize both mothers and fathers, who raise the next generation, inculcate them with the values they need to be good citizens and good neighbors.

I want to thank our colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) for his efforts to enact this worthwhile legislation.

And I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to honor fathers in the flag code, just as we now honor mothers.

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

Mr. Speaker, I now yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott), the sponsor of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to join the gentleman from Iowa in giving special recognition to our colleague, Mr. Tiahrt of Kansas, who has also worked on this issue and is sponsoring similar legislation. This really is a remarkable bipartisan effort.

Mr. Speaker, this is simple, yet sensible legislation to accord equal honor to fathers as to mothers in the statutory guidance on flying our Nation's flag on special days of the year. I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to C. Dixon Osburn, who, as co-founder and Executive Director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN), led the national movement to repeal ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' for the past fourteen years. Under his leadership, SLDN has moved our nation many miles closer to its goal of freedom to serve in our Nation's Armed Forces without regard to sexual orientation.

It has been my honor to work with Dixon for many years to improve the lives of lesbian, gay and bisexual service members. Our work is not done, but one day ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' will take its place among the relics of history and be replaced by a fairer, better policy that truly honors the patriotism of all Americans. And we will remember Dixon and the foundation he built with Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

I wish Dixon all the best in his future endeavors, and I thank him for his significant contribution to improving our Nation's Armed Forces.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the work of a remarkable activist from Wisconsin--Bob Hudek of Citizen Action of Wisconsin.

Bob Hudek is retiring from Citizen Action of Wisconsin after serving 12 years at the helm of an organization that has become a national model for how to engage people in progressive politics. During that time he displayed the strong leadership skills necessary to build Citizen Action of Wisconsin into an effective, statewide organization. It is known throughout the State for its fabulous issue work and serves as one of the best organizing models in Milwaukee.

Bob Hudek's passion for fairness and compassionate public policy spans a broad range of serious issues facing the people of Wisconsin. From education to health care to consumer protection, Bob's commitment to the community and promoting the principles of social justice is truly unbounded.

Bob Hudek served to continue Wisconsin's long history of progressive politics. He worked undauntedly to elect progressive legislators who shared his commitment to the Wisconsin ideal. His leadership furthered the progressive movement at the State and national levels and will have an impact that will reverberate for years to come.

With an unmatched generosity of spirit, Bob Hudek is able to bring together people and organizations with an array of viewpoints and help them to find common ground. This dedication to the issues he holds dear fostered the development of not only Citizen Action of Wisconsin but other organizations as well.

Thank you, Bob, for the years of service you have provided Citizen Action of Wisconsin, the progressive movement, and the people of Wisconsin.

Mr. Speaker, the House today has a historic opportunity to expand upon the principles of equal rights and equal protection embodied in our Constitution by passing the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

This Act would offer Federal protections for victims of hate crimes targeted because of their race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. These characteristics are included in this hate crimes legislation, not because they deserve any special protection as opponents of this legislation claim, but because of the history of particularly heinous and violent crimes committed against individuals based on such characteristics. That's what warrants this inclusion.

I wanted to share several stories about why this legislation is so important. I only have time for one. Let us never forget the story of Matthew Shepard, who was brutally attacked by his hateful, homophobic assailants and left to die on a fence in a remote area of Wyoming.

Matthew's death generated international outrage by exposing the violent nature of hate crimes and its horrific effect on the entire targeted commune. The sponsors of the Senate hate crimes legislation have renamed the bill the Matthew Shepard Act. Today we have been joined by Matthew's mother, Judy Shepard and a lead investigator in this case, David O'Malley, who are still courageously advocating for the passage of this legislation more than 8 years after Matthew's death.

The passage of hate crimes legislation is long overdue. This will be critical for both symbolic and substantive reasons. The legal protections are essential to our system of ordered justice and essential for ensuring that those who commit heinous crimes are punished. But on a symbolic basis, it is important for Congress to enunciate clearly that hate-based violence targeting women, gays, lesbians, transgender individuals and people with disabilities will no longer be tolerated.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Conyers, Chairman Scott, and the staff of the Judiciary Committee for their diligent work in bringing the bill to the floor.

Hate crimes are different than other violent crimes because they seek to instill fear into a whole community--be it burning a cross in someone's yard, the burning of a synagogue, or a rash of aggravated batteries of people outside a gay community center. These are crimes motivated by prejudice and meant to send a message to society and others who

belong to the same category. This sort of domestic terrorism demands a strong, federal response because this country was founded on the premise that persons should be free to be who they are--without fear of violence.

I want to share with you a few reasons why the passage of this legislation is so urgent and necessary. Last week in Committee, we heard from a very young man, Mr. David Ritcheson, who was brutally beaten last year by two individuals due to his ethnicity as a Mexican- American. Mr. Ritcheson spent the next 3 months and 8 days in the hospital, recovering from severe internal injuries. Yet because the attack took place in a private yard rather than an area of public access, the FBI had no grounds to investigate the attack under existing hate crimes laws.

The story of Brandon Teena also demonstrates the need for this legislation. Dramatized in the movie ``Boys Don't Cry,'' Brandon was raped and later killed after the discovery of his biological gender by two acquaintances. Five days before his murder, Brandon reported his rape and beating by the same perpetrators, but the Richardson County Nebraska Sheriff would not pursue the case against Brandon's attackers.

Let us never forget the story of Matthew Shepard, who was brutally attacked by his hateful homophobic assailants and left to die on a fence in a remote area of Wyoming. Matthew's death generated international outrage by exposing the violent nature of hate crimes and its horrific effect on the targeted community. I remember the impact locally in Wyoming. I was in the midst of my first campaign for Congress in October 1998. Many gay and lesbian youths roughly Matthew's age were working on my campaign. I remember the impact of the crime on them. They were afraid for their safety, and that is precisely the effect these crimes have. The sponsors of the Senate hate crimes legislation have renamed the bill the Matthew Shepard Act, and today we are joined by Matthew's mother Judy Shepard and the lead investigator in his case David O'Malley, who are still courageously advocating for the passage of this legislation more than 8 years after Matthew's tragic death. Mr. Speaker, the passage of hate crimes legislation is long overdue.

The passage of H.R. 1592 today will be critical for both substantive and symbolic reasons. The legal protections are essential to our system of ordered justice and essential for ensuring that those who commit these heinous crimes are punished . . . but on a symbolic basis, it is important for Congress to enunciate clearly that hate-based violence targeting women, gays and lesbians, transgender individuals, and people with disabilities will no longer be tolerated.

The opponents of this legislation will disseminate a lot of misinformation today in order to derail this bill. But make no mistake, the legislation we are considering today has been carefully crafted to protect an individual's First Amendment right to speech, expression, and association. It also provides much needed federal resources to local law enforcement authorities without usurping local authority. Finally, the bill is fully consistent with Supreme Court precedence on both First Amendment and interstate commerce cases.

Our society is not perfect; the passage of the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act will not make all hate crimes go away. H.R. 1592 is about giving state, local, and federal law enforcement authorities the necessary resources and tools to combat violent crimes based on prejudice and intended to terrorize a group of people or an entire community. Such hate crimes are in desperate need of a federal response, and I strongly urge my colleagues to vote in support of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight during Cover the Uninsured Week to draw attention to a national crisis.

According to the Census Bureau, 46.6 million Americans are without health insurance. Millions more encounter a health care system that is inadequate in meeting their basic medical needs because they are underinsured.

According to a recent Commonwealth Fund study, there are 16 million Americans who are underinsured, meaning that their insurance did not adequately protect them against catastrophic health care expenses. That means, in total, 61 million Americans have either no health insurance or only sporadic coverage, or have insurance coverage that leaves them exposed to high health care costs. Sixty-one million Americans is nearly 21 percent of all Americans, one in five.

The lack of affordable, comprehensive health care affects every congressional district in this Nation. To highlight the issue and the real impact that being uninsured has on the lives of Americans, I have selected some letters that I have received from my constituents who have had difficulty in obtaining and affording comprehensive health care coverage. Too often here in Congress we speak of health care issues in antiseptic jargon of policymakers and lawyers. But people across America are hurting, and these letters tell their stories in their own words.

I represent a district in south central Wisconsin, and while the letters I read may be from the State of Wisconsin, they speak to the difficulties of people all over the United States, difficulties people face every day. I am going to start with a few letters about the ever- increasing price of health care.

Eva from Madison, Wisconsin writes: ``I am contacting you in regards to my desperate need for public health care. I am a grad student. I recently sprained my ankle playing soccer and had to go to the emergency room for x-rays. My bill came out to $1,242.50 because I can only afford measly insurance that only has catastrophic coverage. This is a ridiculous amount of money for such a visit, and it causes me to consider those less fortunate than me who have even more serious injuries and less familial support. This cost can truly make waves in the lives of people.''

Suzanne from Stoughton, Wisconsin writes: ``It is time, time to have the government deal with health care. We are covered under COBRA, which will run out in March. The cost is going from $500 per month to $900 per month. We checked with Blue Cross, and they refused us coverage because of a preexisting condition. They will not even offer a waiver for this preexisting condition. We checked with the Wisconsin State Insurance Program, which will cover us for $1,200 per month. Please, let people over 60 buy into Medicare. It is impossible to find a job that offers health insurance.''

And then there is the story of Sylvia from Fitchburg, Wisconsin. Sylvia was uninsured when she was hospitalized with a need for an appendectomy. Even after the hospital charity program reduced her bill, she still owed over $11,000 to the hospital. Sometimes the bill collectors call her at home five times a day. Sylvia chips away at this bill sending in the most she can, $20 to $50 a month.

Roberta from Janesville, Wisconsin writes: ``I think insurance bills for both medical and dental care are horrendous. Both my husband and I work full time, with two small children, living pay check to pay check. My insurance costs have caused us many heartaches, with us owing more money than what needs to be paid. As a result, I will not get a needed medical procedure done. Something drastically needs to change in the United States of America where hardworking individuals and families can get the treatment they need without going broke.''

Roberta brings up an important point in her letter, because people without health insurance are often not getting the care that they desperately need. A recent study released by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found that cost prevented 41.1 percent of uninsured adults from seeking a doctor when they needed to seek care.

But getting needed care is also difficult for Americans who have health insurance because of the financial strain relating to high premiums, high health care costs, increasing copays, deductibles. These place an incredible strain on American families, often forcing them to choose between needed health care and basic necessities like food.

It is no wonder that illness, injury and medical debt is responsible for nearly 50 percent of all personal bankruptcies in the United States. Only about 40 percent of businesses who employ low-wage or part-time workers offer health benefits. And at $11,480 a year, the average family's health insurance premiums now cost more than a minimum wage worker makes in a year. And as we all know, the costs of health care are rising faster than inflation. Between 2000 and 2006, health premiums for employer-sponsored insurance jumped 87 percent, far outpacing inflation's 18 percent overall increase over the same period of time.

Patricia, from Madison, Wisconsin writes: We need to fix health care. I have to choose between heat and food and medications. I have lost 80 pounds because of this. Please help.

Heather, from Waterloo, Wisconsin writes: I am married and together with my husband I own a home. We live a modest, middle-class life, managing to always have what we need except for health care coverage. My husband has excellent health care at his job, but for me to also be covered by his plan, we would need to pay nearly $400 per month. That is two-thirds as much as our home mortgage. Through school, I have worked less and less in order to maintain health coverage, and I have only been able to afford short-term, major medical coverage. I am grateful that we can afford this, and it does make a difference. However, even now, I have a sore throat and I will wait for a few days to see how I feel. And I will wait because if I don't need to go, I will certainly save the money. This is disturbing to me, as a nursing student, because I know about the importance of early treatment and prevention. And it is upsetting to me as a person because I value my health. It is unacceptable to me as a citizen, because I know there are other people just like me who wait and get sicker or can't take the medications they need.

Mr. Speaker, simply put, our health care system is failing, and America knows this. Among the thousands of letters regarding health care that I receive, there is a common thread, a common theme that brings them together, and that common theme is an overwhelming frustration with the system, a system they know is just not working, and a call for us in Congress to take action, bold action.

Brad, from Mount Horeb, Wisconsin writes: I write to you today to urge you to take action on a growing crisis in America: health care. I strongly believe that we need a national health care plan to insure all Americans. My major concern with the current system is that when people attempt to obtain insurance, insurance companies refuse them because of past health history. Let's face it. Insurance companies are in business to make a profit. The best way to make a profit is to insure the healthy so you can minimize the claims you pay out, and not insure those who need medical care or may potentially need medical care.

Brad goes on to write: I am 38 years old, with a family of four. I currently participate in a health savings account. For all practical purposes, I pay all of my own medical needs, including the recent birth of our daughter. I recently attempted to switch insurance providers. The insurance companies will insure me, but they will not insure my daughter for any type of treatment for her asthma for 3 years, along with no drug coverage for life. The policy I was requesting had a $10,000 deductible, yet they still refused the coverage.

Lisa, from Madison, Wisconsin writes: I am a very healthy person, and my husband and children are very healthy. We cannot get insurance. I think everyone should attempt to gain an individual health policy just to see how impossible it is. I am not a risk. Really, I am not. I am terrified right now because we are uninsured.

Carol, from Madison, Wisconsin writes: As someone who has had no health insurance at all for 3 years, I can tell you that it was pretty miserable being one of the millions of people in this country without health insurance. Not long ago, my best friend died

at age 42 because of ovarian cancer because she did not have health insurance and waited too long to see what was causing all of her symptoms. Yes, people in America actually die from not having health insurance.

Darla from Fitchburg, writes me. She says, ``I lost my job because of unpredictable attendance due to my health issues. Upon losing my job I signed up for COBRA. Last week I received a letter indicating that my COBRA eligibility ends soon. In order for me to get health coverage, I would have to work at least 20 hours per week, but my physicians believe that it would do me more harm than good relating to my health issues. If I don't get some sort of health insurance, I will need to stop all treatments, as I have no money to pay for doctors' services. My prescription drugs will have to stop, as I will not be able to pay for them either. What can I do?'' Darla asks.

Kimberly, from Madison, Wisconsin writes to me, ``I am writing today because of my family's frustration and anxiety over health care. Although we hear a lot of rhetoric about making health care more affordable and/or more available for Americans, nothing is happening, at least not soon enough.

``Let me briefly share our story,'' Kimberly proceeds. ``My husband recently started his own business. Obviously, it will take some time for his new company to see any profits, much less income. In the meantime, we are without health insurance. I am 5 months pregnant, and we have a 2-year-old son. Because of my preexisting condition, we cannot buy affordable health coverage. COBRA would cost us $1,200 per month. I am currently applying for Medicaid and other forms of public assistance as a last resort. This is ridiculous.

``As someone with no insurance, I wonder what could possibly be the problem with implementing a public health care system. Oh, I have heard the horrible stories about having fewer choices in doctors or longer waiting lists for procedures and less incentive among doctors and researchers to develop new technologies. But what is most frightening to me is the chance that my son might get sick, or my baby might be born with expensive complications while we are uninsured.

``I am not naive. I know that funding public health care is an issue. But is it wise to sacrifice the health and well-being of American citizens to avoid the challenge of implementing a change? I, for one, would be satisfied to pay more for goods and services if I could rest assured that my family's basic health care needs were being met.''

David, from Cross Plains, Wisconsin writes, ``My wife and I have been self-employed for over 18 years, and have paid thousands of dollars for health insurance premiums. As of a few months ago, we had to drop out and are now without health insurance. The cost is completely out of reach. In fact, it is nuts. Now that I am 50 years old, it is not a matter of if I will have health problems, it is a matter of when. Tammy, we will lose everything we have ever worked for. So much for the American dream. Now we look forward to dying broke and possibly homeless.''

Victor, from Stoughton, Wisconsin, writes, ``My wife can only work part time because of her health. Her employer offers a generic policy that costs only $3.97 per week and requires no background check. This policy covers basically nothing. Medical supplies, check-ups, doctors' visits necessary on a routine basis for my wife to survive are now not covered. My wife is uninsurable because of her health, and we have been turned down for health insurance that we have applied for. We cannot believe that this is happening.''

Ronald, from Deerfield, Wisconsin writes, ``I was on COBRA insurance for 3 years, which ended this past fall. I spent from March until September trying to get private insurance, but could not because of my neck injury. I was, in effect, looked at and dismissed by 33 private insurance companies because of my preexisting condition with my neck injury. Imagine how you would feel, after being dismissed by this many companies. I was finally insured through disability and Medicare. The sad reality of it is that if I want to try to work full-time again, I cannot, because in doing so it would cost me the only insurance options that I have left.

``The truth is that many other countries can and do provide equitable health insurance to all of their citizens, no matter what preexisting conditions they have, or their ability to pay, or what income level they have. I believe this country does have top-notch medical facilities, but not decent or equitable insurance for the poor and middle-income families.

Susan, from Baraboo, Wisconsin writes me, ``I am writing you today regarding health insurance coverage for single people with no children. As of this time, I feel that I am left out of the loop in regards to this topic. I am 42, and last September I was diagnosed with breast cancer. In January of this year, the company that I worked for informed us that they would be closing down. I was laid off in December while I was out due to my cancer treatment. I have been searching for health care coverage everywhere because my COBRA will be going up, and I am on unemployment and barely able to pay the $244.76 for the coverage now. I cannot get insurance because of the breast cancer.

``The High Risk State Insurance Program, which is the Wisconsin program, is too expensive for me to get coverage, since they want 4 months of premiums up front, and as they only cover some things. What are single people supposed to do,'' Susan asks? ``We don't qualify for any government assistance because we are single. We cannot go without insurance. There are no programs to help us out. So when you are working on health care in the House of Representatives, please remember that there are other single people out there also in my shoes. I am at a crossroads because I have no avenue for assistance when it comes to health care. Come November, I will be unable to get coverage when I need it at this point in my life:

Janet from Portage, Wisconsin writes, ``I have a 53-year-old brother who has psoriasis all over his body and arthritis that is caused by this. Three weeks ago he fell and needs surgery on his shoulder to repair it. He has no job, no money, and no insurance. We started looking for a program to help him. There are none that we can find. There is nothing to get him help to get his shoulder fixed. But after it heals wrong and he is disabled because of it, then there are programs to help him. They won't help him get it fixed so he can find a good job. Instead, they would rather support him for the rest of his life instead of trying to help him now:

Gail, from Janesville, Wisconsin writes, ``My husband recently lost his job. He applied for over 100 positions, only to be told that he lacked a college degree, or he is overqualified, or that they can only pay $8 an hour. I was diagnosed with breast cancer in June of 1998, and again in 2003. I have gone through breast cancer twice, and have undergone a mastectomy and reconstructive surgery. COBRA has run out, and without a stable income, we cannot afford to pay the premiums for our own health care policy. My husband is 59 and I am 58, and we have no medical coverage. I have looked into every insurance company and get turned down because of my medical history. All our lives we have paid into these insurance companies, only to be turned away when we need the coverage the most.''

Lastly, I want to relay a story that was shared with me by Laurie. Laurie is a fourth grade teacher in the Madison, Wisconsin, public school system. Laurie recently had a student fall during recess and break his foot. Laurie wrote: ``As he was waiting, in extreme pain and cold, for the school nurse to get to him, he cried to an assistant waiting with him, 'I can't go to the doctor. We don't have insurance.'''

That a 9- or 10-year-old boy should think even something like this is an atrocity.

Mr. Speaker, I hope that as Cover the Uninsured Week continues, my colleagues will join me in recognizing that obtaining comprehensive, affordable health care presents a very real challenge for millions upon millions of Americans. We cannot turn a deaf ear to our constituents' pleas for help. I invite my colleagues to join me in working on this most pressing domestic priority to provide affordable health care for all Americans.