Floor Statements

Under clause 2 of rule XII, bills and reports were delivered to the Clerk for printing, and bills referred as follows:

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia: Committee on Government Reform.

H.R. 4341. A bill to reform the postal laws of the United

States; referred to the Committee on the Judiciary for a

period ending not later than September 28, 2004, for

consideration of such provisions of the bill as fall within

the jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(k),

rule X (Rept. 108-672, Pt. 1). Ordered to be printed.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding me this time.

Over the past decade, the District of Columbia, which previously had faced a fiscal crisis of Shakespearean proportions, has embarked on an impressive road to financial recovery. With the help of the now-dormant Control Board and the 1997 Revitalization Act, the District has taken care of its financial house. It has balanced its budget for 7 consecutive years without tricks or gimmicks, and it has a cash reserve that is the envy of almost every municipality in the Nation.

The Federal assistance provided in our annual appropriation bills promotes and advances the rebirth of our Nation's Capital.

This year's bill funds a wide range of programs that will enhance the quality of life for D.C. residents and those who visit and work in the Nation's Capital. The increase in funding for emergency planning and security will help ensure that we are ready for the worst. I am pleased to see that the Child and Family Services Agency will continue to receive adequate funding to help protect the District's most vulnerable residents and that the D.C. court will have additional funds to continue its much-needed renovation project.

I am particularly pleased the D.C. College Access Program will receive enhanced funding. The increase reflects the program's indisputable positive impact on the District. The College Access Program has been a key component of the District's revitalization efforts, and I am heartened that the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Frelinghuysen) agrees that Congress needs to continue its partnership with the District in providing access to higher education, resources, and opportunities.

Since the inception of this legislation, the number of high school seniors in the District going on to college has increased by 28 percent. That is a remarkable achievement. The impact is undeniable. The national average over the same period, while it was 28 percent in the District of Columbia, was 5 percent nationally.

Finally, I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Frelinghuysen) for fully funding the D.C. School Choice initiative. The bill before us maintains the careful balance that was struck last year. Of the $40 million for education, there is $13 million for the District's public schools for teacher training, recruitment, and improving student achievement. These funds are in addition to the large increases already guaranteed to D.C. public schools through Federal programs. There is another $13 million for D.C. charter schools to support and expand their capacity, and there is $13 million for the School Choice Scholarship program, along with an additional $1 million for administrative expenses.

The fact is, the District of Columbia is one of the most troubled public school systems in the United States; and working with the local government, working with the school system, working with the Mayor, we are trying to reverse that.

Again, I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Frelinghuysen) for the time and the energy he and his staff have devoted in reviewing the D.C. budget and bringing this bill to the floor. I also thank the ranking member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), for his work and, of course, my colleague, the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), for our continued partnership.

Mr. Chairman, as we consider the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill today, it is important to reaffirm our commitment to our counternarcotics efforts in Colombia, to the people of Colombia, and to American citizens. I led three congressional delegations to Colombia last year and can say first hand that our significant investment, after years of effort, is beginning to see returns on the time, money, and resources spent in Colombia. Together with the strong commitment of President Alvaro Uribe and historic levels of support from the Colombian people, U.S. involvement is beginning to hit narcoterrorists where it hurts.

This year, the Administration is seeking a modest increase in the number of U.S. support personnel in Colombia. The existing caps on the number of U.S. civilian and military personnel contractors allowed in Colombia at any given time are proving too restrictive and in some cases, the ceilings, have prevented full implementation of already funded programs and hurt management efficiency.

An increase in the military and civilian contractor support provided to the Government of Colombia during the next two years is essential to maintain the current progress being

made by our programs in Colombia. There are also new programs developed since the ceilings were established, such as the anti-kidnapping initiative and the training of prosecutors and judicial police in preparation for the constitutionally-mandated transition to an accusatorial criminal justice system with oral trials, as well as the re-started Air Bridge Denial program that need to be fully supported by personnel.

Last month, several senior Administration officials, including Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Roger Noriega, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low- Intensity Conflict, Thomas O'Connell, Commander of U.S. Southern Command, General James Hill, and Assistant Secretary of State for Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, Robert Charles testified before the Government Reform Committee and conveyed the need to reexamine military and civilian personnel caps if we are to continue in the right direction.

Accordingly, there is draft language included in the 2005 Defense Authorization bill that raises the number of military personnel permitted to 800 and the number of permitted civilian contractors to 600. The Administration's request to increase the number of troops and contractors deployable is critical to the continued success of U.S. policy in Colombia and to help President Uribe prosecute a unified campaign against terrorism and drug traffickers. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this request and urge all of my colleagues to continue their support of our unified campaign with Colombia to fight narcotics trafficking and terrorist activities.

Mr. Chairman, this appropriations bill includes an authorizing provision that would allow the inspector general from the Coalition Provisional Authority to continue to oversee the rebuilding effort in Iraq. This provision is within the jurisdiction of the Committee on International Relations and the Committee on Government Reform, and I want to thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for his interest in this issue.

The Committee on Government Reform will hold its fourth hearing overseeing the rebuilding of Iraq next Thursday. My committee has made this oversight a priority. As part of the overall oversight of the $18.6 billion of the supplemental funds, we created the CPA Inspector General. I have met with the CPA IG. I believe with his help, we can expect the thorough oversight we need from his office.

My committee has jurisdiction over inspectors general, and because of our

staff expertise we work closely with other committees and the executive branch to make sure that the various IGs have the tools to conduct the mission that the public expects of them. The inspectors general for DOD, USAID, the Department of State and the CPA, with the help of the Office of Management and Budget and my committee's oversight, have negotiated a memorandum of agreement to maintain appropriate oversight over the rebuilding efforts in Iraq. There is also a similar provision in the Senate Defense authorization bill that addresses the continuing oversight of the Iraqi rebuilding effort.

I will work with all involved to address the issue from the authorization side. I would ask the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) if he would work with the Committee on Government Reform, the Committee on International Relations, and the Committee on Armed Services to ensure that our efforts are coordinated and built constructively on the existing agreement.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 15, the Project Bioshield Act of 2004. The bill provides the government with the necessary tools to develop and purchase vaccines and other drugs to protect Americans in the event of a bioterrorist attack. The President first announced this proposal during his 2003 State of the Union address, and it serves as the cornerstone of the administration's strategy to prepare our Nation against the possibility of bioterrorism.

A few minutes ago, we were privileged to hear from the chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox); and I will include for the Record an editorial written by the gentleman from California that appeared in the Washington Times and published July 12, 2004.

[From the Washington Times, July 12, 2004]

Intercepting Bioterrorism

(By Christopher Cox)

America is at a very dangerous crossroads. Not only al

Qaeda but also terrorist groups such as Jemaah Islamiah are

working on acquiring or developing new terrorism

capabilities, including bioweapons. Will we be prepared?

Evidence in an Egyptian terrorism trial two years ago

indicated Osama bin Laden may already have access to

dangerous biological agents. Meanwhile, the risk of

proliferation to terrorists continues growing, with at least

eight nations running bioweapons programs, including genetic

engineering of pathogens and developmental programs for new

production and delivery methods.

Winning the war on terrorism will require our nation not

only to defeat attacks with explosives and military-style

weapons, but also to be prepared to overcome potential

assaults with weaponized anthrax, ricin, smallpox, plague,

tularemia, botulism toxin and viral hemmorhagic fevers (such

as the Ebola virus).

Just how vulnerable are we to such attacks today? The

United States now can fully meet only a handful of the 57

``top echelon'' bioterror threats. That's not an acceptable

level of preparedness for the greatest power on Earth. We can

launch a Tomahawk cruise missile and thread it down the

smokestack of a munitions factory from 1,000 miles away--once

thought to be a million-to-one shot at best--yet we aren't

prepared to deal with the frightening prospect of an anthrax

or sarin gas attack against our civilian population.

It's vital that we put our best minds to work round-the-

clock on new ways to prepare for a biological or chemical

attack here at home. But according to a study published in

the May 2004 issue of the journal Clinical Infectious

Diseases, only six of 506 drugs currently in development are

antibioltics--even though drug-resistant bacteria are a

growing threat.

This is only because the proper incentives and funding

aren't there, not because the scientific challenge is too

great. Indeed, the germs that cause anthrax and plague are

not nearly as difficult to analyze as a virus such as HIV.

Vaccines and treatments for biological weapons such as these

can be developed.

Certainly, America has made some progress in preparing for

possible germ warfare on our own soil, but we're not ready to

combat a major bioterror assault at this time and our enemies

know it. Worse, they're looking for ways to exploit our

weaknesses.

We are now on the threshold of changing that. Project

Bioshield, expected to receive final legislative approval

tomorrow and then be sent to the president for his signature,

will shortly unleash the greatest force in world history:

American ingenuity.

By guaranteeing a market for successful vaccines and

antidotes, Project BioShield will provide incentives for

private-sector scientists, physicians, and researchers to

develop lifesaving treatments. Congress has made available

$5.6 billion over 10 years to purchase and stockpile a

national supply of drugs and vaccines for use if a biological

weapon is set loose by terrorists on an unsuspecting American

public.

BioShield will speed research and development on new drugs

and antidotes at the National Institutes of Health and in our

national laboratories. And it will allow, if germ warfare

breaks out, distribution of developmental lifesaving drugs on

a fast-track approval basis to save innocent lives, so long

as the benefits outweigh potential risks.

President Bush asked Congress to move immediately on his

plans for Project BioShields in the 2003 State of the Union

address. The House quickly responded. Last July, the

Homeland Security Committee, which I chair, worked closely

with other House committees to turn the president's vision

into legislation. Unfortunately, after our bipartisan bill

passed the House by a wide margin, it languished in the

Senate nearly a year before being rescued by Majority

Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican.

But now that both chambers have worked out their

differences, America finally is ready to prepare in earnest

for a potential terrorist attack that won't yield to bullets

or bombs. Now, we'll be using the very best weapon in our

defensive arsenal--our brainpower.

By approving Project BioShield, Congress is saying: ``Let

the race to find lifesaving countermeasures begin.''

America's leaders have heeded the advice of experts who have

estimated that without BioShield it could take 10 years, and

cost up to $800 million or more, to bring a single new

vaccine from development through clinical trials to market.

The war won't wait that long, of course: Terrorists could

strike us at any minute. And once a bioweapon is released,

every second will count.

In many ways, the war on terrorism is like a chess game. We

must anticipate our enemy's moves, and mount an impenetrable

defense. In their pursuit of bioweapons, the terrorists have

revealed some of their game plan. Project BioShield will

ensure we stay one move ahead of them.

Someday soon, when it comes to bioterrorism, Americans will

be able to say: Checkmate.

Mr. Speaker, the bipartisan bill we are considering today is similar to H.R. 2122, which was passed by the House on July 16, 2003. S. 15 is a good bill that serves a compelling national interest.

Over the past few decades, we have seen rapid progress in the development of treatments for many serious, naturally occurring diseases. Pharmaceutical and biotech companies are highly capable of producing diagnostics and therapeutics when consumer demand exists. However, there has been little progress in treatments for deadly diseases like smallpox, anthrax, ebola, and plague that affect today few Americans. There is little manufacturer interest in developing treatments for these diseases since there is no significant market, other than the government.

Drug companies have little incentive for the substantial investment required to bring treatments to these deadly diseases to market. Moreover, the potential liability for an adverse reaction by a patient far outweighs any potential financial benefit in some of these cases.

Should the United States be attacked with these deadly pathogens, however, the need for vaccines, tests and treatments would be great and immediate. S. 15 is designed to ensure that our country is prepared.

The bill provides the Secretary of Health and Human Services with a number of flexible acquisition tools based on existing streamlined procedures to promote research and development and procure necessary drugs and vaccines. These tools are instrumental to the success of the Bioshield program.

S. 15 gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services streamlined authorities to promote the research and development of drugs and other products needed to protect Americans in the event of a public health emergency affecting national security. The Secretary will be armed with flexible acquisition tools for research and development projects and would also have expedited authorities to award research grants and to hire technical experts and consultants. It would not be burdened with the existing procurement processes that could take months.

The bill authorizes the procurement of biomedical countermeasures for the Nation's stockpile, using a special reserve fund. The Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security would be required to work together to recommend the countermeasures that are needed for the stockpile. Acquisition of countermeasures

using the special reserve fund could only be made with the approval of the President of the United States.

This bill would permit the use of simplified acquisition procedures only when the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that the mission of the Bioshield program would be seriously impaired without the use of such special procedures.

Finally, during national emergencies, the bill would permit the government to make available new and promising treatments prior to approval by the Food and Drug Administration.

I especially want to thank my ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), and his staff for working with us on this important legislation. I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas and others who have been involved in getting this legislation before us.

Let me just say I share the frustration that many Members of this body feel at the time it has taken to get this measure to this floor, in a conference report form, and then send it on to the President's desk for signature. We passed this legislation with bipartisan support a year ago, and it languished over in the other body until it was rescued by Senator Frist.

The time is late, but the time is now. I urge my colleagues to adopt and support this legislation.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1587, which requires the administration to carefully monitor the status of human rights in Vietnam.

Under this measure, if Vietnam fails to meet basic standards for universally recognized human rights, the President will have the authority to cap U.S. non-humanitarian aid to Vietnam.

The truth is that many of my colleagues may not be aware of the extensive struggle which the Vietnamese people have endured for many years in their ongoing fight for basic human rights and freedom.

Ten years ago, the United States ended its trade embargo with Vietnam and normalized relations with Hanoi. While the U.S. continues to open diplomatic relations with Vietnam, we must remember that many issues remain unresolved, including human rights violations, lack of religious freedom, and government corruption.

In 2001, the House passed a similar bill overwhelmingly by 410-1 to send a clear message to the communist leadership in Vietnam that U.S. trading with Vietnam does not mean approval of its repressive policies.

Unfortunately, this bill died in the Senate.

Since then, despite having the benefits of trade with the U.S., the Vietnamese government has escalated its abuses of human rights and crackdown on religious freedom.

I traveled to Vietnam in 1998 to learn about these issues first-hand, as well as to raise these concerns with high-level officials. In addition, the large Vietnamese-American community in the 11th district, which I represent, continues to update me on continuing concerns.

As a member of the Vietnam Caucus, I am dedicated to promoting awareness and policy debates among the U.S. Congress, the American public, and the international community about the greater need for fundamental human rights in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

While many have chosen to take part in a non-violent struggle for basic freedom and human rights, the Vietnamese communist government has chosen to arrest and imprison the vast majority of them.

The gratuitous arrests of these men and women demonstrate the ongoing human rights abuses and lack of religious freedom in Vietnam. We must continue to bring attention to these issues, generate pressure on Vietnamese officials, and hold the Vietnamese government accountable.

It is only through the hard work of these courageous individuals and the support of the international community in which we can work to bring an end to human rights abuses and religious persecution in Vietnam.

I am hopeful H.R. 1587 will serve as a small stepping stone towards the ultimate liberation and freedom of the Vietnamese people.

However, at the least, I believe it will bring much needed additional awareness to the atrocities committed by the Socialist Republic of Vietnam every day, on its own citizens.

I commend my good friend from New Jersey and the other sponsors for bringing this bill to the floor, and I urge my colleagues to join me in the passage of this important resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in support of H.R. 1914, the Jamestown 400th Anniversary Commemorative Coin Act of 2003. In 2007, the world will observe the 400th anniversary of the landing at Jamestown--a place and time where the cultures of North America, Europe and Africa converged, initiating and testing the unique values that ultimately created our nation. The success of the Jamestown settlement set in motion the establishment of a democratic form of government, private land ownership, free enterprise, entrepreneurship--all of which continue to evolve into our uniquely American society. The stories at Jamestown offer Americans a timely and timeless lesson in patriotism.

Historic Jamestown is America's birthplace. Ongoing research is rewriting our understanding of this significant opening chapter in American history. Moreover, studies reveal vast new knowledge about the interactions between peoples, their genealogy, their struggles and their survival to create a new society.

In short, I believe this coin will help to ensure the cultural preservation and educational programs based on the legacies of Jamestown will be sustained and expanded well into the future. I commend the sponsors and leadership for bringing this to the floor and urge the passage of this resolution.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill--H.R. 4012--to amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to permanently authorize the public school and private school tuition assistance programs established under the Act, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which 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.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4012, legislation to reauthorize the District of Columbia College Access Act for 5 additional years.

The College Access Program has been a key component of the District's revitalization efforts in recent years. It is critical that Congress continue to support its partnership with the District in providing access to higher education resources.

Madam Speaker, Congress chose to establish the D.C. College Access Program in 1999 for two primary reasons. First, the program addresses the fact that the District of Columbia does not have a State university system for its high school graduates. The program essentially leveled the playing field for high school graduates in the Nation's Capital by enabling them to attend colleges and universities around the country at in-State tuition rates, which makes college education affordable for students coming out of the District of Columbia, something that really was not available to them prior to this.

The program's second purpose was to deter tax-paying families in the District from moving to surrounding States in order to take advantage of in-State higher education options available to residents in other States, thus depriving the District of much-needed stability and tax revenue.

I cannot tell my colleagues how many mothers and fathers have approached me to say thank you for not having to leave the District so our child could go to college, but thanks to this program, we can stay.

At a Committee on Government Reform hearing on the program last March, it was clear that the program has been more than a mere anecdotal success over the last 5 years. D.C. Mayor Tony Williams testified that since the creation of the program the number of high school graduates in the District continuing on to college has increased 28 percent. The national average over the same time period was 5 percent.

It was not too long ago we had high schools in the District sending more kids out to Lorton Prison than to college. College was not an affordable option for many of these kids in the District. What we see happening now is, as it becomes more affordable, we see kids getting in the spirit and we see a significant increase of District kids going on to higher education. With that, crime decreases, the economy is improving, the District is achieving financial stability.

The impact of the College Access Program is undeniable. According to a survey of high school graduates in the District, 75 percent of the students who have received assistance through the program have indicated that the existence of these grants makes the difference in their decision to attend college and was a key factor in deciding which college to attend. H.R. 4012 represents a shot at a better education and, in turn, a better life for countless D.C. students.

The District is not a State, and D.C. residents do not have access to the network of in-State universities like residents of other States. As I said before, this legislation also provides an incentive to families to stay in the District. This program operates hand-in-hand with the D.C. College Access Program, which is the private sector's College Access Program, providing college counseling to D.C. high school students and last dollar financial assistance to college-bound D.C. high school graduates. This is a double punch provided by the public and the private sectors and it has made a tremendous impact on the educational opportunities available to D.C. high school students.

It is equally clear that the students are becoming more aware and choosing to take advantage of these opportunities.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4012 and to continue to support a level playing field for high school graduates in the District of Columbia.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the second provision under the heading ``Office of the Chief Financial Officer,'' beginning with the colon on page 3, line 25, throughout on page 4, line 6. This provision violates clause 2(b) of House rule XXI.

Parliamentary Inquiry

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

This is the second time this has happened. Right off the floor I was assured that this would come up after a vote on the gentlewoman from Ohio's (Ms. Kaptur) amendment. I stood here seeking recognition as I came on to the floor as the Clerk was reading other sections. I was not recognized. This is the second time I have been let down by the Committee on Appropriations when they knew I had a point of order and tried to give me time periods.

In fact, I, in talking to the staff this morning, said maybe I should just stay on the floor. No. The last time this occurred, the minority was generous enough to allow us to go back and raise that provision. I would ask for the same courtesy here, or I will stand up today and object to every single unanimous consent.

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I just want to say that I was off the floor. I walked on the floor, was seeking recognition. The Clerk continued to read as I got up here. I continued to request recognition.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that we be able to return to this section.

Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman is incorrect. It was my time. I was on the floor.

Mr. Chairman, I just asked in comity if she would allow me to make the point of order that we are entitled to do under the rules.

It is in order at any point to raise it, and I will continue to raise it.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I think it is interesting, as we heard from the other side last week about tactics on this side that were overbearing and the like, to see that given the opportunity in this case to reciprocate and show some openness that they have declined to do so. Nothing is surprising. But all I can say is that I will object to their unanimous consent request and sit here.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, let me ask the distinguished chairman, will he, in light of what has transpired here, and I know that he was not up to this previously, work with me to amend this provision and make it appropriate in the conference or to ``X'' it out altogether?

Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman knows, we are willing to work with some reporting requirements that our committee be included as part of the reporting as well as the appropriations because we have jurisdiction. But we will work to get it out altogether now because of their inability to compromise.

Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Baca

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I object.

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against section 717. This provision violates clause 2(b) of House rule XXI. It

proposes to change existing law and therefore constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill in violation of House rules.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mark F. Grady for his years of dedicated service to the George Mason University School of Law.

Dean Grady has been a pivotal member of the George Mason community for six years. Not only has Mr. Grady acted as dean, but also professor. Students enjoy his wisdom and expertise in the area of law.

As the dean of the School of Law, Mr. Grady has played an important role in the success of the school and its students. Through his guidance, George Mason has become the youngest law school ranked in U.S. News and World Report's top tier.

Under Dean Grady's direction, the School of Law has become a national leader not only of law but also economics and technology. In 1999, The National Center for Technology and Law was established. This center examines the causality of the existing legal structure and the society's evolving economy. Through this relationship, new fields of course work were created that allow the student to gain the necessary skills to succeed in both technology and communications.

George Mason School of Law is one of the most innovative schools in the country. Due to its emphasis on intellectual property, technology law and the legal application of economic methods, George Mason was also ranked in the top 10 in the nation for an outstanding faculty in law and economics in University of Texas Professor Brian Lieter's Ranking of Law Faculty Quality for 2003.

Mr. Grady should be honored and commended for his dedication to not only the School of Law but also the surrounding community. With his instruction and guidance, he has enabled Mason Law graduates to pursue careers in numerous fields and become successful attorneys who practice law with great distinction and honor.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to Dean Grady for his years of service and dedication to George Mason University. His contributions and efforts are noted and greatly appreciated. I wish him the best of luck in all future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise here today to honor Cox Communications for hosting Movies Under the Moon, a series of nine free movies shown at George Mason University's Robinson football field during the summer of 2003.

Movies Under the Moon drew over 75,000 Fairfax County residents. Through proceeds derived from on-site food vendors, the event raised $23,500 in proceeds for Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children and Special Love Camp Fantastic, a support group for families coping with cancer. This year's lineup of movies promises to be as popular.

Mr. Speaker, Cox Communications developed a unique and rewarding program to provide entertainment to the people of Fairfax County while simultaneously assisting Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children and Special Love Camp Fantastic. The efforts made by Cox Communications to serve the Fairfax community are much appreciated and greatly admired. I call upon my colleagues to join me in honoring Cox Communications for a job well done.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Father John O'Neill for joining us as guest chaplain and offering this morning's prayer.

Father O'Neill is the outgoing pastor of Our Lady of Good Counsel Catholic church in Vienna, Virginia, where he has served for the past 12 years. Father O'Neill received his undergraduate degree and master's degree in psychology from Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. He completed his theological studies at de Sales School of Theology in Washington, D.C., and was ordained in June of 1973. Father O'Neill served as a guidance director/teacher at Bishop Ireton High School for 10 years and then served as the academic dean and teacher at Paul VI High School in Fairfax, Virginia, for 2 years.

Under his guidance as associate pastor and pastor, Our Lady of Good Counsel Catholic Church enriched the spiritual lives of its parishioners and the community around it.

Father O'Neill's contributions both in northern Virginia and throughout the Commonwealth have made him an invaluable spiritual leader for my constituents. As he moves on to his sabbatical in Rome, he will be dearly missed by all of us.

We thank him for offering today's prayer.

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

Mr. Chairman, there were several parts of this legislation on which the Committee on Government Reform could raise points of order. I have had discussions with the chairman on these issues, and I just want to go through them and through the agreements that I think the chairman and I have on these items.

In section 108, the Personnel Management Demonstration Project through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. It permits bonus and incentive pay for more than 200 ATF forensic experts. We think this has merit. We wish that they had gone through the committee of jurisdiction on this instead of just writing this into the law, but we will not raise a point of order on that section.

The section pertaining to the National Technology and Information Administration, Spectrum Management, this provision allows the NTIA to collect fees from Federal agencies for providing spectrum allocation services for those agencies. These fees provide approximately 80 percent of NTIA's budget. As was true last year, the Parliamentarians ruled those are within our committee's jurisdiction. We ask that in the future, as the appropriators look at these areas, they consult with us; but we will not raise a point of order on this issue.

Section 201 permits the Department of Commerce to make advance payments on contracts without regard to the general prohibition on such advance payments and the narrow exceptions to provisions set out under title 31. Again, this is within the purview of the Committee on Government Reform. I understand this has been in the legislation in previous years. We ask in the future they work with us in crafting language so it is consistent with what we are seeing in other Federal agencies.

Section 603 requires contracts for consulting services to be a matter of public record. We believe they already are and is redundant. We will not raise a point of order on that section.

Finally, section 605 under the bill before us requires a 15-day notification to the Committee on Appropriations before any of the CJS agencies can engage in certain acts that would require their reprogramming of appropriated funds, including contracting out or privatizing. We believe this is within the purview of the Committee on Government Reform and would ask the chairman that as this goes to conference, if this provision remains in and we do not raise our point of order, if we include notification to the Committee on Government Reform as well. We think it is important we work in tandem and in partnership with the appropriators, both the authorizers and appropriators together. The chairman, I think, wants to do this. We have had some miscommunication at the staff level. I just want to clarify that as this moves forward they can include us in this language should we, as I intend, not raise a point of order on that.

I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

I thank the chairman.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, we did work closely with the gentleman, as he noted, on a number of other improvements to civil service which I think will make the FBI and some other agencies more effective in recruiting and retaining the best and brightest.

Just for the chairman's notice, we do intend to raise a point of order on section 607 regarding the Buy America Act, as we have on every other appropriations bill.

I thank the chairman for his courtesies and compliment him on what I think is otherwise an excellent bill.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the Paul amendment. This amendment would kill funding for the American Community Survey, which is one of the most exciting and innovative improvements to the Census in decades.

The American Community Survey is a new approach for collecting accurate, timely information needed for critical government functions such as funding highway planning, school lunch programs, and community block grants.

The decennial census used to have two parts: (1) it counted the population for reapportionment and redistricting purposes; and (2) it obtained demographic, housing, social, and economic information by asking one out of every six households to fill out a ``long form.''

This data has been used for the administration of Federal programs and the distribution of billions of Federal dollars funding.

Planners and other data user had to rely on long form information that was only gathered every ten years to make decisions that were expensive and affected the quality of life for thousands of people.

In a nation changing as rapidly and profoundly as ours, using eight, nine or even ten-year-old data was simply unacceptable.

Starting in 1996 the Bureau began developing the American Community Survey to replace the long form. It had three main purposes:

1. To provide Federal, state, and local governments an accurate information base for the administration and evaluation of government programs.

2. To improve the 2010 Census by allowing everyone to only be required to fill out the short form, and

3. To provide data users with timely demographic, housing, social, and economic data updated every year that can be compared across states, communities, and population groups.

In order to insure that the data are available for use in time for the 2010 Census we must fund as completely as possible the ACS for this next fiscal year.

It is also important to point out that Congress mandates every question asked by this survey.

If this amendment were to pass, every one of these questions would still be asked, but the Census would have to use the old-fashioned, less effective long form method.

Finally, I want to take notice of the fact that there have been several amendments offered today which reduce or zero out funding for various aspects of the 2010 Census development. Members need to understand that funding cut today cannot just be added in three or four years from now. It takes time to develop an excellent Census and Congress should give the Bureau the time it needs to create that Census.

I urge my Colleagues to stand up for our communities and states and oppose the amendment to kill the American Community Survey.