Michael Bilirakis

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. I thank the gentleman. He is a rookie, I guess we would call him, a freshman here, but he has already made his presence known in many ways and particularly on this issue. Mr. Speaker, the Republic of Cyprus needs active United States support to attain its goal of membership in the European community. This membership would promote stability by permanently linking Cyprus to Europe both economically and strategically. Indeed the European Parliament has indicated its desire for peace on the island. Cyprus has earned its place in the European Union. Now the international community must take steps to move the peace process forward. In addition, Mr. Speaker, Cyprus is ready to become an important trading partner with the United States. The Greek Cypriot community is a democratic society known for its open and efficient economic system. Despite the violent blow dealt by the invasion, the Cypriot economy has strongly rebounded to become one of the strongest economies in the region. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Payne].

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Maloney]. I dare say that there are not many people, within or without Congress, who have put more time into this issue on behalf of those great people, and I thank her so very much. It is such a pleasure and honor to work with her on this issue and so many others. Continuing with my remarks, Mr. Speaker, last year some of the worst human rights abuses occurred on the island since the Turkish invasion. Four unarmed Greek Cypriots and one unarmed Turkish Cypriot were shot and killed while protesting the division of the island. Nearly 100 protesters and 14 U.N. peacekeepers were injured throughout the year, as well. We ask ourselves sometimes, why is an end to the division of Cyprus in America's best interest? International stability is a key factor to our increasingly global economy. A divided Cyprus only continues to serve as a fuse between, lit fuse I might say, between two of our NATO allies, Greece and Turkey. Twice since the 1974 invasion Greece and Turkey have almost gone to war. The most recent incident was in 1996 concerning the Imia Islet crisis. The Aegean Sea is home to the world's busiest shipping lanes. Indeed, Cyprus is in a key strategic position relative to the Mediterranean region and the Suez Canal, which is instrumental in supplying oil and other materials vital to the stability of the entire region. In this map here to my left, we see actually the country of Greece here and Turkey here, and then the Republic Island of Cyprus in this particular area. And I think it is just very easy to be able to determine the tremendously strategic position of that island. So it is just imperative that the problems be solved. As such, any conflict between Greece and Turkey could disrupt trade in the region and have extremely serious consequences for many nations, including the United States. If the situation in Cyprus continues to deteriorate, there could be serious repercussions among other NATO nations and these nations could be forced to choose between two allies, Greece or Turkey. In order for a lasting peace to be forged, the Turkish militarization of the island and of the region must end. Currently there are over 35,000 Turkish troops stationed on Cyprus, and in addition Turkey has a large amphibious assault force located within 100 miles of the island. The proximity of such a significant Turkish presence has led NATO to estimate that the island of Cyprus could fall to Turkish troops within 24 hours should Turkey ever decide to attack. U.N. reports cited Turkey's lack of motivation as the reason for the stalled peace process. The Turkish Government has stated that it will take all necessary steps including military actions to defend Turkey's interest on the island. Without U.S. leadership, it is unlikely that a lasting peace settlement can be negotiated. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pappas].

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, once again, it is my sad privilege to address the House to remind all of America of the invasion of the Republic of Cyprus. As we know, 1997 is the 23d year of divided rule on the island; 1997 has also been hailed as the year of Cyprus. Although I am greatly saddened that the northern portion of the island remains occupied by Turkish troops, on this map here, actually, this is called the green line, and in actuality, in order to see it better, we have it colored in blue here and you can see that the northern part of the island is separated from the southern portion. I do remain hopeful and optimistic that we are 1 year closer to a just solution. It is imperative, Mr. Speaker, that we continue to build upon the progress that was made during 1996, referred to in some quarters as the year of the big push. The divided island of Cyprus is certainly ready for peace. There are families who are certainly ready for answers as well. They want answers to what happened to their loved ones who disappeared 23 years ago during the Turkish invasion. To this day, there are still five American citizens among the 1,619 people still missing from the invasion. These families want to end sleepless nights of wondering whether or not their loved ones are still alive. Hopefully, these questions will be answered and these families will finally be given peace of mind. Our ultimate goal should be peace for all citizens of Cyprus. However, peace will not come without the strong and active leadership of the United States. The United Nations has unsuccessfully attempted to resolve the differences between the two Cypriot communities. Since 1974, the United Nations has stationed over 1,000 troops on the island to prevent violence from spreading throughout Cyprus. Yet the violence has not abated. I strongly support U.N. Resolution 939, which calls for a bizonal, bicommunal single state of Cyprus. However, I submit we will not achieve this goal by maintaining the status quo. I yield at this time to my colleague, the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Maloney].

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Richard Silver's 55 years of service to our Nation and its veterans. Mr. Silver is currently the director of the James Haley VA Medical Center in Tampa, FL. Since 1979, he has guided what is, in my opinion, one of the best VA medical facilities in the country. The Center serves veterans from around my home State of Florida and provides them with the quality care they deserve. He has used an active teaching role and close professional relationship with the University of South Florida College of Medicine. Before coming to Tampa, Richard served in the same position at the Brockton and Northampton VA Medical Centers in Massachusetts. He has also served as the assistant hospital director at East Orange, NJ, and was director of personnel service in the Department of Medicine and Surgery at the VA Central Office. In total, he has over 55 years of service to our country. In addition to devoting his life to the care of our Nation's veterans, Mr. Silver also served in the U.S. Army as a captain while he was assigned to the Combat Engineers in the South Pacific. Richard has devoted his life to protecting our Nation and those who answered the call in its time of need. He has an exemplary career of service that is worthy of recognition. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate Richard Silver and wish him continued success in his work at the Tampa VA.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Almost 2 weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Commerce forwarded to the House a budget reconciliation bill which reflects the hard work of many Members. I want to stress that all Members were given the opportunity to share their suggestions on improving this legislation, and many of their interests were incorporated into the bill and the chairman's mark or by the amendment process. The Democratic process was allowed to work. Regarding Medicare, as a Member from a district that has a large number of seniors, I set as a major personal goal the protection of Medicare beneficiaries. And make no mistake about it, Medicare beneficiaries will be protected. In fact, our legislation contains many consumer protections that were not even considered by any of the prior Congresses. It addresses fraud and abuse within the Medicare program and ensures that the Medicare Trust Fund will remain solvent until the year 2008. The legislation contains many worthwhile policy changes which would greatly benefit the elderly. All Medicare beneficiaries will be given a choice of coverage through a new Medicare Plus program. Medicare Plus would allow beneficiaries to decide whether they want to receive their Medicare coverage through traditional Medicare fee-for-service, or through a newly-created Medicare Plus plan, with the option, I repeat, with the option to return to traditional Medicare. Regarding Medicaid, this legislation eliminates some of the lengthy waiver processes so States will obtain relief from burdensome Federal regulations. As a result, a State will have more time and more money to improve the quality of health care. Our committee was required by the budget agreement, if you will, to find savings in the States' disproportionate share programs. Our legislation accomplishes this task in as equitable a manner as is possible considering the parameters placed upon us. Finally, our package establishes a new child health assistance program which provides grants to States in order to expand health access for currently uninsured children, a plan which received an 18 to 3, an 18 to 3 approval vote from the Democrats on the committee. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I truly believe that this bill must be judged through the prism of our shared responsibility to our constituents and the Nation as a whole, and when our common interests are considered, it is important to bear in mind our ultimate goal: To deliver a balanced budget to the President's desk while at the same time reforming and saving Medicare and Medicaid without in any way hurting the beneficiaries. Finally, I want to personally thank the majority and minority staff for their hard work. They have put in many hours over the past month, and I want them to know how much we all appreciate their efforts. I especially want to recognize Howard Cohen, Eric Berger, Kay Holcombe, Bridgett Taylor, and Ed Grossman.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my support for a provision in H.R. 1757, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, which addresses my concerns about the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Instanbul--Constantinople, Turkey. I want to thank Chairman Ben Gilman for his assistance on this important matter. The Ecumenical Patriarchate, founded in 38 AD, is the locale where the New Testament was codified and where the Nicene Creed was first written. Today, the Ecumenical Patriarchate is the spiritual center for more than 300 million orthodox Christians worldwide but it is not given the right to function properly as the headquarters of the Orthodox Church. In recent years, there have been successive terrorist attempts to desecrate and destroy the premises of the Patriarchate. On September 30, 1996, a hand grenade was thrown into the headquarters of the Patriarchate. The explosion damaged the Patriarchal Cathedral and blew out the windows of the sleeping quarters. On May 28, 1994, three powerful bombs were found and diffused by Turkish security forces, only minutes before they were set to detonate. On March 30, 1994, two firebombs were hurled into the Patriarchate. This is an issue of religious freedom which is taken very seriously by all orthodox Christians, including more than 5 million living in the United States. Specifically, H.R. 1757 encourages the United States to use its influence as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council to suggest that the Turkish Government should: One, recognize the Ecumenical Patriarchate and its nonpolitical, religious mission; two, encourage the continued maintenance of the institution's physical security needs, as provided for under Turkish law and international law, including but not limited to, the Treaty of Lausanne, the 1968 Protocol, the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, and the Charter of Paris; three, encourage the proper protection and safety of the Ecumenical Patriarchate personnel; and four, reopen the Ecumenical Patriarchate's Halki Patriarchal School of Theology. The language in H.R. 1757 closely parallels House Concurrent Resolution 6, legislation that I have introduced in the House. My bill directs the United States to use its influence with the Turkish Government to provide for the proper protection and continued livelihood of the Patriarchate and all othodox faithful residing in Turkey. My legislation also requires the administration to report annually to Congress on the progress of these efforts. In addition, it calls upon the Turkish Government to do everything possible to find and punish the perpetrators of any provocative and terrorist acts against the Patriarchate. I am pleased that language regarding the protection and continued livelihood of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, as well as language calling for the reopening of the Halki Patriarchal School of Theology, has been included in the bill. It is imperative that people everywhere have the ability to freely and without fear of threat or intimidation practice and express their religious convictions. As a free and compassionate people, we cannot allow acts of violence against the Orthodox Church. The provisions in H.R. 1757 are an important first step in achieving the proper protection of the Patriarchate. Again, I want to commend Chairman Gilman for his efforts to protect the Patriarchate. I will continue to work with him on this important issue as this legislation is considered by the Congress.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 408, a bill that many of my constituents have termed the Dolphin Death Act. Let me begin by saying that I do not impugn the intentions of the bill's sponsors. We all support the goals of a strong economy and the protection of animals. Let us be clear about what this bill does. It changes the definition of dolphin-safe tuna. H.R. 408 changes the definition of dolphin-safe tuna to allow tuna to be sold under the dolphin-safe label even if dolphins were chased, harassed, or seriously injured by encirclement nets during the tuna catch. Proponents argue that the bill maintains the validity of the dolphin- safe label because it requires vessel captains to certify that no dolphins were observed dead in the nets. Aside from the obvious imperfections in human judgments, dolphin-safe means more than just no dolphins died during the catch. There is a mounting body of scientific evidence that suggests that chasing and encircling dolphins with purse seine nets leads to delayed mortality and decreased reproductive potential. Both essentially weaken dolphin stocks; hardly, I suggest to my colleagues, dolphin-safe. Several years ago Congress passed laws to embargo the import of tuna caught by setting nets on dolphins. We took this action because it was bad for dolphins then. Nothing has changed, chasing dolphins down with helicopters and speed boats and encircling them with nets is inhumane. It not only causes distress and physical injury, it can also lead to dead dolphins in the future, long after the traumatic chases have ended. Now we are being asked to change our laws because of pressure from other countries and then, to add insult to injury, compound the mistake by selling dolphin deadly tuna under the dolphin-safe label. This is simply wrong. Mr. Chairman, when someone goes to the supermarket, picks up a can of tuna and sees the dolphin-safe label, he or she expects it to mean what it says. This bill removes, I think, that certainty. I urge my colleagues to oppose passage of this bill. It sets a dangerous precedent that we should soundly reject. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 408--a bill many of my constituents have termed ``The Dolphin Death Act.'' Let me begin by saying that I do not impugn the intentions of the bill's sponsors. We all support the goals of a strong economy and the protection of animals. Unfortunately, this bill falls short on the second count. In fact, not only does it fail to adequately protect dolphins, it will contribute to confusion and may mislead consumers about what ``dolphin safe'' tuna actually means. Let us be clear about what this bill does: it changes the definition of dolphin safe tuna. H.R. 408 changes the definition of dolphin safe tuna to allow tuna to be sold under the dolphin safe label even if dolphins were chased, harassed, or seriously injured by encirclement nets during the tuna catch. Proponents of H.R. 408 argue that the bill maintains the validity of the dolphin safe label because it requires vessel captains to certify that no dolphins were ``observed'' dead in the nets. Aside from the obvious imperfections in human judgments, dolphin safe means more than just no dolphins died during the catch. There is a mounting body of scientific evidence that suggests that chasing and encircling dolphins with purse seine nets leads to delayed mortality and decreased reproductive potential. Both essentially weaken dolphin stocks. Hardly dolphin safe. Several years ago, Congress passed laws to embargo the import of tuna caught by setting nets on dolphins. We took this action because it was bad for dolphins then. Nothing has changed--chasing dolphins down with helicopters and speed boats and encircling them with nets is inhumane. It not only causes distress and physical injury--it can also lead to dead dolphins in the future, long after the traumatic chases have ended. Now, we are being asked to change our laws because of pressure from other countries and then, to add insult to injury, compound the mistake by selling dolphin deadly tuna under the dolphin safe label. This is simply wrong. Mr. Chairman, when someone goes to the supermarket, picks up a can of tuna and sees the dolphin safe label, he or she expects it to mean what it says. This bill removes that certainty. I would urge my colleagues to oppose passage of this bill. It sets a dangerous precedent that we should soundly reject.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, on May 13, 1997, I held a special order on the dangers of drunk driving. At the time, I submitted a factsheet to the Congressional Record on alcohol-impaired driving from the Center for Disease Control. However, the fact sheet was inadvertently left out of the Record. The factsheet is added here as an extension of remarks. Alcohol-Related Crash Deaths: General Population Motor vehicle crashes are a leading cause of death in the United States for persons from one to 34 years of age. 41.3 percent of the 41,693 traffic fatalities in 1995 were alcohol-related (i.e., either the driver or nonoccupant (e.g., pedestrian) had a Blood Alcohol Content equal to or greater than 0.01 g/dL in a police-reported crash). A driver with an alcohol concentration of point one-zero (0.10) (the legal limit in many States) or greater is seven times more likely to be involved in a fatal motor vehicle crash than is a driver who has not consumed alcoholic beverages. A driver with an alcohol concentration of 0.15 or greater is about 25 times more likely to be involved in a fatal motor crash. From 1982 through 1995, the number of alcohol-related traffic fatalities decreased 31 percent, from 25,165 to 17,217. Fatal crashes that occur at night, on weekends, and that involve only one vehicle have the highest percentage of alcohol involvement. Men who die in motor vehicle crashes are almost two times more likely than women to be legally intoxicated. Among drivers killed in motor vehicle crashes in 1995, the highest rates of alcohol intoxication were recorded for drivers 25 to 34-years of age (45.9 percent), followed by drivers aged 21 to 24 years (41.7 percent) and drivers 35 to 44 years of age (41.3 percent). Alcohol-Related Crash Deaths: Youth and Young Adults In 1994, 29 percent of the 2,610 traffic fatalities involving 15- to 17-year olds and 44 percent of the 3,616 traffic fatalities involving 18- to 20-year olds were alcohol-related. Among young persons who drive after drinking alcohol, the relative risk of being involved in a crash is greater for young persons at all blood alcohol concentrations than it is for older persons. Role of Other Drugs in Crash Deaths Drugs other than alcohol (e.g., marijuana and cocaine) have been identified in 18 percent of driver deaths. These drugs are generally used in combination with alcohol. Most fatally injured drivers who have used drugs other than alcohol are males between the ages of 25 to 54. Alcohol-Related Crashes: Frequency and Cost Approximately 40 percent of persons will be involved in an alcohol-related crash during their lifetime. In 1990, alcohol-related crashes cost $46.1 billion, including $5.1 billion in medical expenses. Drinking and Driving: Frequency and Characteristics of Drinking Drivers In 1993, there were approximately 1.5 million arrests for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics in the United States. Teenage and young adult drivers aged 16-29 years of age who have been arrested for driving while impaired are over four times more likely to die in future crashes involving alcohol than those who have not been arrested for drunk driving. Adult drivers age 30 and older, who have been arrested for drunk driving, are over 11 times more likely to die in future crashes involving alcohol than those who have not been arrested. Over 70 percent of drivers convicted of driving while impaired have serious drinking problems. National Objectives By the year 2000, the U.S. Public Health Service wants to reduce alcohol-related motor vehicle crash deaths to no more than 5.5 per 100,000 population. (In 1994, the rate of deaths from these crashes was 6.4 per 100,000 population.) By 2005, the U.S. Department of Transportation wants to reduce alcohol-related traffic fatalities to 11,000. Programs and policies to prevent alcohol-impaired driving States lowering the legal BAC to 0.08 percent have experienced a 16 percent decline in the proportion of fatal crashes involving fatally injured drivers whose blood alcohol levels were 0.08 percent or higher and an 18 percent decline in the proportion of fatal crashes involving fatally injured drivers whose blood alcohol levels were 0.15 percent or higher, relative to other states who had not adopted these laws. Raising the minimum drinking age to 21 years has been shown to reduce alcohol consumption among youth and significantly reduce crash deaths in the under-21 age group. In one State, raising the minimum drinking age from 19 to 21 years resulted in a 38 percent decline in motor vehicle death rates among 19 and 20 year olds. States lowering the legal BAC for drivers under age 21 years have experienced a 22 percent decline in deaths in single-vehicle crashes involving drivers 15-20 years of age compared to an only 2 percent decline in States that did not establish lower blood alcohol content for these drivers. States that require the prompt suspension of the driver's license of persons who drive while intoxicated (i.e., administrative license revocation) have typically experienced a 6 percent decline in single-vehicle nighttime fatal crashes, crashes that typically involve alcohol. Substance abuse treatment for DWI offenders has generally resulted in a 7- to 9-percent reduction in DWI recidivism.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support our Nation's future by calling for full funding for the WIC nutrition program. All too often the debate in this great House of democracy focuses on estimates, projections, baselines, adjustments, or some other technical term that we hear every day. We are asked to ponder piles of paper filled with facts and figures and then make a judgment about how those numbers or how changing those numbers will affect the everyday lives of millions of Americans. Today I ask that instead we take a moment and focus on the foundation of our Nation, indeed, its future, our children. I think it is more important to focus on the valuable benefits and help services WIC provides to its participants rather than haggling over census numbers and terms like full participation. When discussing the WIC Program, we must remind ourselves that it has a 22-year track record of providing valuable and, in fact, critical services to some of our Nation's most vulnerable citizens. The WIC Program provides specific nutritious foods to at-risk, income-eligible, pregnant, postpartum and breast feeding women, infants and children up to five years of age. WIC gives women and young children the means to obtain highly nutritious food like iron-fortified infant formula, calcium rich milk, eggs, juice, cereal and other staple foods necessary for healthy development. More than food, WIC is designed to influence a lifetime of good nutrition and healthy behavior by providing valuable nutrition education for its participants as well as referrals to other local health and social service organizations. During pregnancy, Mr. Speaker, one of the most fragile periods in a woman's life, WIC enhances dietary intake, which improves weight gain and the likelihood of a successful pregnancy. After birth, WIC continues to promote the health of infants and is responsible for reducing low birth rate and infant mortality. Children who participate in WIC receive immunizations against childhood diseases at a higher rate than children who are not WIC participants, and WIC also helps to reduce anemia among children. As we know, children receiving nutritious meals are in a better position to focus on their daily studies. I recently visited an elementary school in my district and spoke with the very people providing meals to students. They, along with many others, told me that proper nutrition is an integral part of our children's educational experience. In this regard WIC has been linked to improve cognitive development among children. Stated plainly, WIC children are more prepared to learn compared to those children who lack proper nutritionally balanced diets. In short, Mr. Speaker, WIC serves as a safety net for this country's most vulnerable citizens. However, the greatest testament to WIC comes from not from politicians or bureaucrats, but from those who actually participate in the program. Allow me to share some comments from a few of the dozens of letters one of the WIC directors in my district received over the past few days. Each of these women felt compelled to write and to urge careful consideration of full funding for WIC. Erica Miner said that WIC ``helped provide my son a better life than what I could before I started the program.'' Laura Tadoun praised WIC for ``showing me how to eat and drink properly so I could have a healthy baby.'' She continues, ``I don't know how we could have made it without you.'' Julia Bruno commented that ``thanks to this program, my children are physically and nutritionally well. It is my sincere hope that WIC continues so that in the future we will have healthy, happy children and save money on medical costs.'' Tina Donaldo wrote, ``If it weren't for the WIC program I wouldn't be able to get by at all.'' Finally, Nicole LeBaron pleaded, ``Please take this service and the funding that they need into serious consideration before cutting it and cutting the families like myself that depend on it to help their children grow healthy.'' These WIC success stories from my Florida district, Mr. Speaker, are representative of the performance of the program as a whole across the country. However, in this era of budgetary constraints and fiscal conservatism, everything boils down to dollars. And yet on this count, WIC has indeed withstood fiscal scrutiny and, without question, actually increases the return, increases the return on our investment in the program. Studies have shown that WIC provides a 350 percent return on the tax dollars spent on the program. For example, for every dollar that WIC spends, $3.50 is saved in expensive neonatal and disability programs. Money spent on pregnant women in WIC produces similar Medicaid savings for newborns and their mothers. At a time, Mr. Speaker, when we are reducing welfare rolls and stressing personal responsibility, I can think of no better way to encourage fiscal stability and certainty than by supporting and appropriating full funding for the WIC program. Let me share with my colleagues the words of my good friend, Clara Lawhead. Clara is the Director of Nutrition of WIC Services in Pasco County, FL, in my Ninth Congressional District. She succinctly explains the problem in my district, in terms we all can understand: In Florida, we have faced the problem that this year's funding cannot support our current caseload and we have already been forced to initiate a reduction in benefits to our WIC participants. This effort was necessary to maintain some level of service to our clients that have already been identified with a medical or nutritional risk. We began in February to carefully evaluate the diet prescription (food package) in milk and fruit juice for low risk clients. The next step is to reduce caseload. Friends and colleagues, WIC is too important to the future of this Nation to leave to political games. In short, WIC is supported by many people and continues to be a popular program. It yields tremendous returns on our investments and has been proven, time and time again, to improve the health and well being of pregnant women, infants, and children. Mr. Speaker, if the greatest sin we commit is erring on the side of caution--on the side of children--I will be proud to make that mistake. I believe many of my colleagues feel the same and will support me in calling for the full $76 million in supplemental funding for the WIC program. Let me close with the simple yet eloquent words of Dawn Stamper, who lives in New Port Richey in my congressional district: Our children are our future and need to be given the best chance and first steps needed to lead a healthy and nutritious life. Our children are the future. This investment in WIC is one that, at the end of the day, we can all point to with pride, because we did what was right and we did it for the people who sent us here in the first place.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the subject of my special order.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for sharing his own personal story with us. I am not sure that there are too many Members of Congress who do not have similar stories to tell either about close friends or family members. Mr. Speaker, Mothers Against Drunk Driving should also be commended for the Youth in Action Campaign, which is dedicated to educating students about the dangers of drinking and driving. I mentioned a statistic earlier that more than 17,000 individuals died in 1995 from alcohol-related crashes. It is all too easy for us to forget that this number is not just a statistic. These were 17,000 people who also had stories. They had families and friends who cared for them and loved them dearly. One of those stories happened in Spring Hill, FL. On December 22, 1995, Monica Nicola and her 2 daughters Danielle, 9 years old, and Stephanie, 8 years old, went to the mall to have their pictures taken with Santa Claus. After having their pictures taken, Monica was driving her daughters home when a van in front of her car suddenly swerved. By the time Monica realized that the van was swerving, it was too late to react. A car had crossed the centerline, missed the van and hit Monica's car head on. When she regained consciousness, Monica realized that she had a broken leg. She could see Danielle, who suffered a broken arm and bruises, but she could not see 8-year-old Stephanie. Stephanie was pinned down, out of sight, and died immediately at the scene. Stephanie was not the only one who tragically lost her life in a terrible accident. A passenger who was riding with the drunk driver also died. Monica and the man who caused the accident were airlifted to the hospital together. The man's breath smelled so strongly of alcohol that it was overpowering. It turns out that the driver had a number of accidents since 1982, several DUI's, no license, and no insurance. But none of that stopped him from driving that night. In January of 1997, the driver was sentenced to 40 years, 40 years in prison, but not before the Nicola family had to endure an entire year without justice. Today the Nicola family, John, Monica, and Danielle, reside in Pinellas County, FL, my county. The Nicolas are not alone in their suffering, but their story is so very important for all of us to hear. It awakens us to the fact that there are real people behind the statistics we hear so often. Drunk driving knows no social or economic boundaries. Indeed, I am sure that we all know, as I said earlier, of a relative, friend, or celebrity who at one time or another got behind the wheel of a car after one too many drinks. Many Floridians may recall the story of Olympic diver Bruce Kimball and the night he killed two teenagers in Brandon, FL. Ironically, Bruce Kimball has experienced both sides of a drunk driving collision, first as the victim and then as the offender. For those of you who are not familiar with this story, let me take a few minutes to review this tragic story. Bruce Kimball won a silver medal in diving at the 1984 Summer Olympics. Just prior to the 1988 Olympics, he had a few drinks and got in his car to drive. The Houston Chronicle wrote an article on Bruce in October of 1994 which recounts his story. To paraphrase the Chronicle, his father Dick was, and still is, the diving coach at Michigan, and so Bruce Kimball gravitated naturally to that sport. Bruce blossomed quickly, eventually winning 14 Junior Olympic national titles, and at 17 stamped himself as one of this country's top prospects with a fifth-place finish at the 1980 Olympic trials. The following October, as he was driving friends home, his van was hit head on by a drunk driver and suddenly Bruce was fighting not only for his future, but for his life as well. His skull was cracked. Every bone in his face was broken. His spleen was ruptured. His liver was lacerated. His left leg was broken. His bleeding was torrential, and 14 hours of reconstructive surgery was needed to put him back together. Yet, a mere 9 months later, he returned to diving. He was often referred to as ``the Comeback Kid.'' And when he won a silver medal in platform diving at the 1984 Games of Los Angeles, he stood as a true profile in courage. As he trained in Florida for the 1988 Olympic trials, he was still considered the second best diver in the world. Those trials were less than 3 weeks away on the night of August 1, when Bruce Kimball roared down a dark and narrow street in Brandon behind the wheel of a speeding sports car. About 30 teenagers were gathered at the end of that dead-end street in a place they called the spot, and in an instant Kimball plowed into them, killing 2 of them and injuring 4 others. His blood alcohol level, a prosecutor later claimed, was .2, which was twice the legal limit under Florida law. His speed at impact was estimated at 75 miles per hour. Kimball was sentenced to 17 years in prison, but in November 1993, after undergoing extensive drug and alcohol rehabilitation at four different Florida institutions, he was released after serving 5 years. After being released, Bruce started a part-time job in a Chicago high school coaching diving. Two times Bruce Kimball has had the opportunity to rebuild his life. Unfortunately, the victims of this tragedy will never have that chance. Mr. Speaker, the stories about Stephanie Nicola and Bruce Kimball remind us that drunk driving can affect anyone's life. Yet, what is most unfortunate is that these terrible events did not have to occur. They could have been avoided had the drivers taken responsibility for themselves and not driven their cars while impaired. These drunk drivers are not evil people, Mr. Speaker. They are just irresponsible. They go out on the town to have fun. They have a few too many drinks and, believing that they are okay to drive, turn the ignition on and zoom off. If they are lucky, they make it home. But all too often something terrible happens, someone gets hurt or, even worse, someone gets killed. Last week a North Carolina jury held a drunk driver Thomas Jones to the highest level of accountability for killing two Wake Forest University students. The jury sentenced Mr. Jones to life in prison for his actions. I believe that this verdict, Mr. Speaker, is evidence that Americans are no longer willing to tolerate this type of irresponsible behavior. Much of this change in attitude is in large part due to the grassroots organizations throughout the United States which have taken the lead in educating students and parents about the dangers of drinking and driving. Groups like MADD, CADD, SADD, and RID have made tremendous progress in promoting responsibility and raising awareness about the dangers of drunk driving. These grassroots organizations have pushed for legislative changes regarding drunk driving. In my home State of Florida, they played an integral role in lowering the legal blood alcohol content from .10 to .08. According to the Centers for Disease Control, States that have lowered the legal blood alcohol content to .08 have experienced a significant decline in the proportion of fatal crashes relative to other States which have not adopted these laws. Other examples of success by grassroots campaigns in Florida during the past 10 years include raising the legal drinking limit to 21 years of age and instituting mandatory license revocation for anyone caught drinking and driving. However, Mr. Speaker, I am convinced that the most significant accomplishment by drunk driving opponents has been, as mentioned earlier, the nationwide awareness and acceptance that drinking and driving is a serious problem. I want to commend all of those who have given their time and energy to make this cause very worthwhile. Mr. Speaker, we must continue our fight to end this terrible problem which affects so very many of us. We in Congress have a moral obligation to join together with grassroots organizations in raising the awareness about the dangers of drunk driving. I thank my colleagues for joining me in this special order to strengthen our commitment and resolve to keep our Nation's roads safe from drunk drivers. I have a number of facts here. I call it the Fact Sheet on Alcohol- Impaired Driving. This is from the Centers for Disease Control, dated May 13, 1997. I am going to submit that as a part of the Record in the interest of time here this evening. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Strickland].

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for reminding us that these drugs, if you will, and alcohol are certainly very interrelated. And our wars, in terms of trying to protect our young people, must include both drugs as well as alcohol and other ills that are really out there, so many of them. I thank the gentleman for his great work on this subject.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for sharing in this very important special order and for all of her work and research and the study on this subject. We oftentimes ask ourselves, what is the proper role of Government? Certainly, we on this level have not really done enough on this subject, and we need to continue to look at it and do more. Mr. Speaker, I recognize the gentleman from California [Mr. Capps].

Mr. BILIRAKIS. I thank the gentleman for his great work on this issue, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Tom Carey, who is a resident of my district in Florida and a co-founder of Remove Intoxicated Drivers, RID, is with us tonight. Tom lost his wife to a drunk driver, and has been an inspiration to those who have lost their loved ones to drunk driving. Over the past 4 days MADD held its National Youth Summit on Underaged Drinking right here in Washington, DC. The event included high school students from each of the 435 congressional districts across the country. These students joined together to develop creative approaches to fight drunk driving. This afternoon the students who attended the summit met with Members of Congress and their staffs to share their suggestions. I am particularly proud to see students involved in such a noble cause, and I am convinced that their efforts this past weekend will go a long way towards saving lives. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey].

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her involvement in this and in so many other issues. She has just been so stellar on my Subcommittee on Health on all issues, particularly preventive health care. That is basically what we are talking about here, preventive, the education that goes along with us. I thank the gentlewoman for joining us. Mr. Speaker, in 1995, more than 17,000 people were killed in alcohol- related traffic crashes, including 2,206 youths. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, MADD, and many other important organizations, such as ``Remove Intoxicated Drivers,'' RID, Students Against Driving Drunk, SADD, and Campaign Against Drunk Driving, CADD, have been working to protect people from being injured or killed in drunk driving-related crashes. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Ramstad].

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio, who is a very busy and active member of my Committee on Commerce. And I also thank the gentleman for reminding us that this is prom season. We have talked about MADD and SADD and RID and CADD, et cetera. There are other organizations out there that have helped. But one of the things that has really pleased me is for instance Busch Gardens down in Tampa, FL, and so many other private entities, if you will, have gotten really involved and have invited the young people into their facilities during this period of time so that they can have a good time and not have to travel long distances and go from one location to another for their proms. All of that is helping. Of course what we do here is going to be of great help, too. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Souder].

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that two in every five Americans, 40 percent, will be involved in an alcohol-related crash at some time in their lives. I rise today to reflect on the tragedy that drunk driving has brought to victims and their families around the United States. I was encouraged to learn that from 1990 to 1994, there was a 20-percent decline in alcohol-related deaths on our Nation's roads. However, in 1995, alcohol-related traffic deaths increased for the first time in a decade. These statistics deeply trouble me, especially since our Nation has made a commitment to educate the public on the dangers of driving while under the influence of alcohol. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Oregon [Ms. Furse].

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, today marks National Teacher Day, and I rise to recognize the important contributions and the hard work of our Nation's educators. Our teachers will inspire our children's path to their futures, whether it is through teaching history, mathematics, English, or science. They will provide children with the framework for independent thought and innovation. We in Congress are fighting to improve our education system. In order to be successful, we must shift power away from Washington and back into the hands of parents, teachers, and local officials, those who know our children the best. I recently visited the Sunset Hills Elementary School in Tarpon Springs, FL, in my congressional district. While I was there, I met with teachers, students, and administrators. This school was built in 1958 and has approximately 500 students. Sunset Hills is often characterized as being a true neighborhood school, something which fosters a special pride within the community it serves. The school has a motto, Mr. Speaker, which is indicative of the character of its teachers and students. The motto is, ``Where the future meets every day.'' During my visit, I met the promising young boys and girls who are tomorrow's leaders. As soon as I entered the school, I was struck by the pride and dedication of the students, teachers, and school administrators. At this point, Mr. Speaker, I would like to take some time to talk about some of the special people I met while visiting there. I want to commend Mrs. Kathy Davis on her hard work and dedication to the students of Sunset Hills. To my left here is a photograph which I took with Mrs. Davis and her students. She teaches the first grade and has done so for 20 years. During her tenure, Mrs. Davis has shaped the minds of hundreds of young people. I applaud her commitment to guide our children during their formative years in school. Her efforts help lay the foundation for her students' future years. I would also like to thank her students for welcoming me into her classroom. What a fine group of first graders. Behind me, as I said earlier, is a picture of Mrs. Davis and her students which the class sent to me shortly after my visit to the school. During my visit, I also met Sally Wakefield, who teaches English and language arts to fourth graders. She has taught at Sunset Hills for 19 years and is a wonderful and inspiring educator. Not only does she encourage her students to better communicate their ideas, she also oversees the student council, a body elected by the students. It was a privilege to meet her and I commend her commitment to excellence. While at Sunset Hills, I took the time to speak with school administrators who shared with me the importance of school breakfast and lunch programs. I want to especially thank Dolores Ford, Joe Hornberger, Susan Honey, Betty Muzio, Stella Makryllos, Kathy Protus, and Gray Miller for their time. While teachers provide the basic tools for learning, these individuals help the Sunset students focus on learning by ensuring that they have adequate and nutritious meals every day. School meals, as we know, are an integral part of our children's educational experience. In addition these programs enhance a child's physical and mental development. Finally, I want to commend William Brewer, the principal of Sunset Hills Elementary. He is responsible for overseeing the day-to-day operations of the school. Let me say how impressed I was by the school's organization. Mr. Brewer is responsible for this success. His leadership serves as an inspiration to all of those at Sunset Hills. Mr. Speaker, the teachers and administrators at Sunset Hills Elementary are meeting the rewarding challenges of educating their students. As we search for ways to improve our Nation's education system, I want my colleagues, teachers, parents, students, administrators, and local officials to know that I am dedicated--I think all of us are--to improving our Nation's education programs. Why? Just look at the faces of the Sunset Hills Elementary first grade class. They are responsible for our Nation's future.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share my thoughts on one of the most appalling events in human history--the genocide of the Armenian people. I would like to thank Mr. Porter of Illinois and Mr. Pallone of New Jersey, the cochairs of the congressional caucus on Armenian issues, for holding this special order. It shames and saddens me to say that the human race is no stranger to genocide--the great purges in Russia, during which Stalin methodically killed millions of Russians; the Holocaust, in which 6 million Jews were systemtically slaughtered by the Nazis; and less well known, but certainly just as significant, the Armenian genocide in which 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated by the Ottoman Turks. The number of people who died during this tradegy was almost equal to the entire population of Nevada. I feel a special kinship to the Armenian people. As many of you know, I am a Greek-American, and my ancestors, too, suffered at the hands of the Ottoman Turks. In fact, every March, I conduct a special order in this Chamber to commemorate Greek Independence Day. On that day, 176 years ago, the Greeks mounted a revolution which eventually freed them from the tyranny of the Ottoman Empire. Unfortunately, the Armenians were not as fortunate as their Greek brothers and sisters. Between 1915 and 1923, 1\1/2\ million Armenians were murdered and hundreds of thousands were driven from their homes by the Ottoman Turks. They were people like you and me. People with families and friends, hopes and dreams and they were all destroyed by the Ottoman Turks. Today, I want to acknowledge this dark moment in history and remember the Armenian people who tragically lost their lives. We in Congress must always remember tumultuous moments in history where people suffered because they were different. Of course, we all want to forget these horrific tragedies in our history and bury them in the past. However, it is only through the painful process of acknowledging and remembering that we can keep similar dark moments from happening in the future. In closing, I want to share a passage inscribed in the stone of Israel's National Holocaust Museum. ``Forgetfulness leads to exile, while remembrance is the secret of redemption.'' We must never forget these words. Mr. Speaker, this Sunday is Easter for the Christian orthodox faiths. It is a time for us to reflect on and to celebrate the glory of redemption. Hopefully, tonight many will hear our speeches and will take the time to remember those who lost their lives during the Armenian tragedy. By reflecting tonight on this sad event in history. I am hopeful that we are preventing similar tradegies from occurring in the future.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise reluctantly today to highlight problems within the Department of Veterans Affairs. Over the past several months, incidents of sexual harassment by several VA senior career managers have come to my attention and, I might add, probably to all of our attention. This greatly disturbs me because Secretary Brown has repeatedly stated his support for a policy of zero tolerance toward sexual abuse. Recently one former VA medical center director who was found to have sexually harassed a female staff member and who also engaged in abusive, threatening, and inappropriate behavior toward other female staffers was transferred to the Bay Pines VA Medical Center in St. Petersburg, FL. This center serves many of the veterans in my Ninth Congressional District. He was also permitted to retain his salary in excess of $100,000 in a position that was created specifically for him. I am greatly concerned, Mr. Speaker, that the VA's policy of zero tolerance has, at best, not been implemented uniformly and, at worst, has been ignored. More disturbing have been revelations of mismanagement within the VA health care system itself. Our veterans, Mr. Speaker, have made tremendous sacrifices in defense of our freedoms and way of life. These sacrifices cannot be imagined by most people. Our veterans are entitled to the best and most timely health care services available. And overall, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the majority of our veterans receive high-quality care in VA facilities around the country; and yet, these allegations of mismanagement do raise serious questions: Can resources be allocated more efficiently? Is the VA fulfilling its obligation in meeting its commitment to our Nation's veterans? Mr. Speaker, these questions must be answered. I am pleased that Veterans' Affairs chairman, the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Stump], and Oversight Investigation Subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Everett], have agreed to my request to hold hearings on these important matters. Tomorrow we will begin this process. Our Nation's veterans deserve to know, Mr. Speaker, that the money we appropriated to their health care will not be misspent on $26,000 fish tanks and $500 faucets but, rather, will be spent to meet their health care needs. Mr. Speaker, since coming to Congress, most of us have committed to fighting for our veterans. That commitment has never diminished. And so, we are anxious to hear from the VA about how they intend to continue to provide high-quality care to our Nation's veterans and how they will rectify any problems detrimental to that pursuit. Our veterans deserve no less.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of a former colleague and friend, Congressman Don Ritter. He recently lost his mother and asked that I share the eulogy he delivered in her honor. Please bear with my reading these remarks. I'm not accustomed to reading speeches but * * * it's easier for me to get to the finish. I guess Mom was emotional, too. Listen to this if you can hear us Mom, Holden came all the way from Germany, Christopher from Los Angeles, Kristina from San Francisco, Edie and Jordan from Pennsylvania, Melody came from right here in Seffner but she would have come from around the world. It is a truly wonderful thing that we gather here today to say good-bye to our beloved mother, grandmother, guardian, role model and friend. But it is not a final adieu that we bid, for she will be with us in spirit; she will be in our hearts for as long as we live, perhaps forever. I believe I speak for everyone here and for all who knew her who could not be here today. When we think about what defined Ruth P. Ritter during her marvelous, exciting, rich and full lifetime, here's what rings out like a bell. She was Nurturing: Ruth P. Ritter was the most nurturing person I have ever known. She nurtured us, constantly, over the decades--our education/families/our security after she was gone. She had Dignity: She had great dignity. She was a grand lady--her principles did not shift and change with time. She was consistent, judging people by their deeds, not their words. She was an Optimist: She always looked to the brighter side. Never did she give up hope. She had suffered greatly but never lost her cheery spirit. When her health deteriorated, she still focused on her children and her grandchildren. And she worked at making her hopes come true. She was Modest: She was so modest about her own achievements, the way she lived was so modest. She clipped coupons until the very end--while the stocks and bonds of the trusts she established for family grew large. And she was Talented: First, she was a great mathematician and a great teacher. She was an award winning teacher of children. She taught us. And she did all this in spite of a handicap. She had difficulty hearing and that went way back. I remember her fear, after working so hard to become an Assistant Principal, at taking the Principal's exam based on her hearing. And that was long ago. It was a constant difficulty as she was so keen on engaging in discussions with people. Yet, she would always be a natural teacher, almost up to the end. She used to work late at night preparing her lessons. I remember helping her with the art work, posters, presentations, teaching materials. We worked together. We enjoyed each other. Second, she was a great investor of her capital. She took Dad's limited investments and a never ending influx of a part of her pension and invested wisely, continuously, relentlessly. She put it together for us. She barely touched it. She told me this would be her gift to her children and grandchildren. It meant more to her than spending it on herself. And that's the way she lived. She Sacrificed: She was born sacrificer for her family. That was her greatest gift throughout our lives. Gifts of love, friendship, concern and wealth live on. She got enormous pleasure from giving to us and thereby helping us to build our own lives. Generosity was Ruth Ritter's middle name. She helped me at every important stage of my life. She Persevered: Perseverance was her stock in trade. When she made up her mind, something had to be, she would make it happen. She, paraphrasing Sir Winston Churchill, would ``never give up.'' Sometimes it could be called stubbornness . . . but whatever you call it, her perseverance made her strong in life and kept her going through grievous times . . . I can remember the times, the sound and the fury over things we both believed were true . . . oppositely! Edie and I and Jason and Kristina will never forget the Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday visits--the magnificent presents, the turkey dinners, the love--first with Dan and Mom and then with Mom alone. And although we've lost both and Steve in less than a year, Mom, we will not despair. We will take a page from your book and go on in the very best way we can. When her firstborn son and my brother, Stephen, with whom there was a truly wonderful reconciliation in the latter years, died prematurely last year, it was an enormous blow to Mom. Stephen and Melody were her great friends and near neighbors in the Tampa area and were the reason Mom came back east for what she knew were her final years. Steve's death brought unimaginable sadness to Mom, but she never lost her optimism about life and her family. And last, dear mother of mine and of all of us, how you would have gotten pleasure to see us gathered together--your loved ones, your family hopefully getting to know one another after so many years. The really good part of today, the sunrise part, is that we are, at last, our blood line, our family and those who joined it, ready to go forward, smartly and confidently, into the future. We will build on the love, the nurturing spirit, the dignity, the hope, the modesty, the optimism, the perseverance, and the skills of life that we received and we learned from you. Until we meet again, Mom, we shall love, cherish and remember you.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I am an original cosponsor of this bill. I strongly support it and supported it certainly when it was considered by my committee, as it was approved by the committee resoundingly. Let me state emphatically that most Americans do not want their tax dollars to pay for assisted suicide. This legislation was written to respond to the desires of the American people, something that we should be emphasizing, because something like 85 to 90 percent of the American people are very much against assisted suicide. The bill anticipates a troublesome issue which could result from the legal battles across the Nation on this matter. The question we should be raising is, what is the purpose of the legislation? Well, that is the purpose, because there are legal battles out there. Currently, courts in the State of Florida and Oregon and a couple of other States are considering this issue, and, in addition, the U.S. Supreme Court is deliberating cases arising from lawsuits brought in New York and Washington State on assisted suicides. If any of these court cases result in a ruling legalizing assisted suicide, Federal funding may be used to pay for this procedure. Federal dollars appropriated for programs such as Medicaid and Medicare could be used to promote death instead of what we should be concentrating on, preserving life. I might add also, in the State of Oregon, that their Medicaid director, I am not sure what his full title is, has indicated he feels Medicaid Federal funds are available to use for assisted suicide in Oregon. Another reason why we have to have this legislation. The bill would address this important issue by clarifying that Federal funds cannot be used for assisted suicide. It also prohibits federally owned facilities from providing or encouraging assisted suicide. I want to make it clear, the bill does not ban or restrict assisted suicide nor does it prevent the use of State or private dollars to pay for assisted suicide. It also does not affect a patient's right to reject or restrict assisted suicide. Finally, the bill does not interfere in any way with the doctor- patient relationship. Instead, the bill achieves only one objective, but it is a very important objective, and that is the assurance that Federal tax dollars will not be used to assist in a suicide of any American. During our subcommittee hearing, Mr. Speaker, a number of organizations expressed their support for this legislation. The groups included almost every organized religion in America; a wide range of provider groups, including the AMA, experts on pain management, depression, and medical ethics; and, most importantly, older Americans and those with disabilities, including chronic and terminal illnesses. I want to commend my colleague in closing, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas, Ralph Hall, for his efforts in bringing this legislation to the House floor. It is a measure which I believe protects the interests of the American people and what the people have already said they really want, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support H.R. 15, the Medicare Preventive Benefits Improvement Act. This legislation will ensure that important, sometimes even lifesaving, preventive benefits will be covered by the Medicare program. The debate over the future of health care is one of the most critical issues we face as we approach the next century. H.R. 15 helps to address this important matter by providing preventive health benefits to seniors. It guarantees Medicare coverage for some of the most critical preventive screening tests available. These tests include mammographies for women 50 and over, pap smears, colon cancer screening, prostate screening and diabetes self-management supplies. As we move forward with budget negotiations we need to realize that there are issues that have bipartisan support. Many are included in H.R. 15, which currently has 79 cosponsors both Democrat and Republican. Mr. Speaker, we must act now and pass this preventive health bill. It is good legislative policy and, most importantly, it will save lives.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for again joining in this special order, this remembrance and this celebration. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say at this time that the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Maloney], my cochairman of the Hellenic caucus, was on the floor, but she took ill and had to leave and asked me to insert her remarks in the Record, and I do miss her attendance here today and her participation. But Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California [Mr. Filner] is with us today and I would recognize him at this time.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to honor the spirit of freedom by commemorating 176 years of Greek independence. March 25 is Greek Independence Day, and every year I speak on the House floor to recognize this important historical event. The significance of Greek Independence Day can never be overstated. Like the Fourth of July, it continues to remind all of us to honor freedom regardless of the price. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, my very good friend and colleague [Mr. Gekas], at this point.