Shelley Berkley

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining?

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth).

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud).

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) for his help and his work on this; the ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), as always; and subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), for their continued efforts to ensure the value of veterans benefits does not erode as the cost of living increases. H.R. 1220, the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2005 will help our service-disabled veterans and their survivors maintain the purchasing power of their benefits in 2006. Although we do not know at this time the amount of the increase until the consumer price index is calculated in October, I believe this bill will help VA beneficiaries keep the value of their benefits. No amount of money can adequately compensate our veterans for the loss of their health and families for the loss of loved ones. It is important that the benefits which our Nation provides to partially compensate for such losses do not lose their value over time. In 2004, over 28,000 veterans in Nevada received disability benefits compensation or pension payments from the VA, and thousands of Nevada family members and survivors received VA cash benefits. The actions we are taking here today will help Nevada veterans and families who depends on these VA benefits. I am particularly pleased that the bill contains an amendment that I was pleased to offer to include the transitional DIC benefit in the COLA. Without the amendment, the value of the $250 transitional benefit paid to surviving spouses with minor children for their first 2 years of eligibility would have eroded in value by 2006. Mr. Speaker, this is the least we can do for our Gold Star wives and their children. I am also pleased to note that the bill contains authority for six VA Parkinson's disease centers. I believe that the research conducted at those centers will improve the lives not only of the veterans with Parkinson's, but of many thousands of other Americans. Veterans in Las Vegas are already reaping the benefits of the local VA's affiliation with the Southwest Center in West Los Angeles. I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) in particular for bringing this to our attention and making sure that it was a top priority for the VA committee. The bill also contains provisions for a demonstration project to improve VA's procedure for collecting money owed by third parties such as insurance companies when VA provides medical care for veterans with nonservice-connected conditions. H.R. 1220 will receive my full support. It deserves the full support of all Members of this House. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), the ranking member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I came down to the floor to speak about Social Security and the President's plan to privatize, but after hearing the comments of the gentleman from Virginia regarding the gaming industry, I felt it is my responsibility as the Congresswoman from Las Vegas to speak on behalf of the gaming industry. I grew up in Las Vegas. I know the people well. I know the community well. And I know the industry well. My father has a ninth-grade education. He was a waiter when I was growing up. On a waiter's salary in a Las Vegas casino, he made enough money to put a roof over our heads, food on the table, clothes on our backs and two daughters through college and law school. That is not so bad on a waiter's salary. The reason he was able to do that was because of a strong economy fueled by the gaming industry. For anybody that thinks that the social ills of this country are caused by gaming, I invite them to come to my beautiful city of Las Vegas and see for themselves firsthand the strong economy based on the gaming industry that is run by some of the most reputable people that I have ever met. Come to Las Vegas and see for yourself the wonders of that amazing community.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I was appalled to learn that a VA Undersecretary stated that the highest priority of the VA was to display a picture of the VA Secretary in every VA facility. I was appalled, because that very day I also learned that the VA Secretary admitted that there was a $1 billion shortfall in the veterans health care budget and that the administration knew this in April but presented their budget to Congress anyway, knowing that it was shamefully inaccurate and inadequate to meet the health care needs of our veterans. They lied to Congress. As a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I saw firsthand the administration mock the veterans service organizations when they testified that the VA needed an additional $1.2 billion to provide health care to our veterans. They defended their numbers, knowing that they were $1 billion short. One VA official said, upon learning that the highest priority was putting the VA Secretary's photo in every VA facility, ``And here we are trying to figure out where our next patient meal is coming from and what furniture to sell to buy drugs next year.'' Talk about misguided priorities.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to discuss foreign aid, American tax dollars that are going to the Palestinian Authority. The problem the Palestinians have has nothing to do with money. The problem is a complete failure of their leadership. The United States has provided an average of $85 million a year per year since 1993. Not counting inflation, this comes to over a billion dollars. We have provided direct aid to the Palestinian Authority on three occasions, $36 million in 1994, $20 million in 2003, and another $20 million again in 2005. Since 1975 we have given over $1.2 billion of assistance for the West Bank and the Gaza. Between 1994 and 1998 American taxpayers gave $65 million to expand economic opportunity in the Palestinian controlled areas and $85 million to help the Palestinian people establish their own government. Before Congress decides to spend another $150 million, I would just like to know exactly what the Palestinian Authority has done with all of this money. With all of the money the United States has spent, with all of the international aid, the Palestinian people still live in squalor. After decades of aid and billions of dollars, it boggles the mind that there is no economic self-sufficiency and no improvement to the quality of life. How is that possible? Because it is not about the money. It is about the Palestinian Authority failing to do what any responsible government would have done with several billion dollars, build infrastructure, improve health care, provide economic opportunities, improve education, and move the Palestinian people into the 21st century. The money is not going into housing. Palestinians continue to live in wretched conditions in refugee camps with corrugated tin roofs and dilapidated ramshackle huts. The money is not going to schools. If it was, Palestinian children would not be rioting in the streets. They would be sitting in classrooms being trained as the next generation of doctors and engineers who will lead their people in the 21st century instead of being trained as terrorists and suicide bombers. Palestinian education is little more than anti-Israel, anti-Semitic and anti-American rhetoric. The Palestinian Authority continues to be financially corrupt and morally bankrupt and that is why the Palestinian people turn to Hamas, the most dangerous terrorist organization on the planet, to get their basic needs met. The problem is not a lack of money. The Palestinian leadership is either unable or unwilling to provide for basic needs of its people. It is either unwilling or unable to lift them out of poverty. It is either unwilling or unable to prepare them for statehood and self-sufficiency. Until they disarm the terrorists and dismantle the terrorist organizations, Abu Mazen and the Palestinian leadership are sentencing their people to continued misery, continued hopelessness, continued anger and continued self-loathing. Year after year, generation after generation. The problem is a lack of Palestinian leadership, a lack of vision, a lack of hope for the future, not a lack of money. Mr. Chairman, if our money has not been doing any good, why are we giving more? Until we get some answers we should not give another penny to the Palestinian Authority. As a matter of fact, we should be asking for a refund.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman, and I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner) for introducing this amendment yet again, which I have supported year after year. I rise in strong support of this amendment. No one is born knowing how to hate; it needs to be taught. The Saudi Kingdom, our purported partner in peace, have turned teaching hatred into a perverted art form. Saudi textbooks, official publications of the Education Ministry, paint a hate-filled, distorted portrait of a world in which Israel does not exist, the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by a worldwide Zionist conspiracy, and the protocols of the Elders of Zion is taught as history. Saudi Arabia's religious beliefs have banned Barbie dolls, calling them Jewish toys that are offensive to Islam. Last year, Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah was quoted as telling Saudi television that ``Zionists'' were behind the attack at the oil facility at Yanbu. The Crown Prince was also quoted as saying, ``Our country is targeted, you know who is behind all of this. It is Zionism.'' Fifteen of the 19 9/11 attackers were Saudi nationals; we all know that. Knowing this, did the Saudi government express one word of remorse or regret to the families of the victims? No, not one word. The Saudis and President Bush are constantly declaring to the United States that they are our partners in the War on Terrorism. We are talking about the same Saudis that support, encourage, and finance terrorism, the same Saudis that exude racist and anti-Semitic hatred, the same Saudis that have the worst record on the planet when it comes to religious intolerance, racial intolerance, and discrimination against women. Our world will never be safe when children are taught hatred and disdain, when the terrorist mission of death and destruction is being funded by the Saudis. It is unbelievable to me that we continue to pretend that they are our allies, and it is completely inexplicable that one penny of American taxpayer money is going to Saudi Arabia. I do not want my taxpayer dollars going to the Saudis, and I do not want anyone else's. Let us pass this and send a strong message to our so-called partner in peace that either they are with us or they are against us. They cannot have it both ways, and neither can our administration.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Hayworth amendment. Tribal Nations have established commercial gaming enterprises because of the economic boom it brings to their community. My hometown of Las Vegas looked to gaming many years ago, and now it has the one of the most vibrant economies in the country. One of the keys to Las Vegas' success has been a strong relationship between labor and management. Because of this relationship, workers have good-paying jobs and benefits and safe working conditions, and can take care of their families. We should give the workers at the tribal gaming facilities the same chance. Last year the National Labor Relations Board correctly ruled that it had jurisdiction over on-reservation commercial tribal enterprises such as casinos. Make no mistake about it, Indian gaming is a big business. And the people working in Indian gaming on the reservations have the right and are entitled to the protections of the NLRB. I encourage the Indian tribes and the tribal workers and the labor unions to work together to protect workers like they have done in Las Vegas. I urge my colleagues to vote against this ridiculous amendment.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment, and I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for their work on this issue, and my good friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor), for cosponsoring this amendment with me. This amendment would take a strong stand against Iranian nuclear proliferation and would help to ensure that Iran ceases its weapons program. The amendment directs the permanent representative to the IAEA to use his influence to ensure that Iran does not receive any nuclear material or technological assistance from other IAEA member states. This restriction will remain in place until Iran allows full access to its nuclear-related facilities by IAEA inspectors, has fully implemented IAEA's additional protocol, and has completely ended all nuclear enrichment programs. Tehran has relentlessly pursued a large-scale, covert nuclear weapons program for almost 2 decades. This program represents the great proliferation challenge to the United States. Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism. It has provided Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic jihad, and the Popular Front For the Liberation of Palestine with funding, training, and weapons to continue their terrorist attacks throughout the world. Unless the world community intervenes, Iran will become the first active state sponsor of terrorism to acquire the greatest instrument of terror and destruction, nuclear weapons. A nuclear-armed Iran will terrorize and destabilize the entire Middle East and pose a serious threat to Europe, Asia, Africa, as well as the United States. Iran has already tested the Shahab-3 missile, with a range of over 1,250 miles. This not only puts Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, in danger, but can be used to attack U.S. bases in the region. There is strong evidence that Iran would be willing to sell nuclear material to the highest bidder. Worse yet, Iran might be willing to simply give the nuclear material away. Faced with the reality of a radical Iran with nuclear weapons, other countries in the region might feel compelled to develop their own nuclear capability to maintain an awful balance of power. Iran continues to deceive the international community and hide its actions from international observers. Iran did not acknowledge the existence of the Natanz fuel enrichment plant until after its existence was discovered. This facility can manufacture enough uranium to produce 25 to 30 nuclear weapons per year. In 2003, Iran admitted that it had a laser uranium enrichment program not previously disclosed. We know of two facilities that manufacture and refine nuclear materials, including an enrichment facility designed for 1,000 centrifuges, and a large buried facility intended to house up to 50,000 centrifuges. Today, a report was delivered to the IAEA's Board of Governors by the Deputy Director General of the UN. In it Iran admits to experimenting with and producing plutonium. Recently, Moscow entered into an agreement to provide nuclear fuel for Iran's controversial Bushehr reactor. Under the agreement, Russia would control the fissile material. But there is nothing to prevent Iran from withdrawing from the agreement. If Iran did that, the Bushehr reactor could produce enough plutonium annually for 30 nuclear weapons. The Ayatollahs of Terror must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons under any circumstances. A nuclear Iran threatens the entire planet. I urge adoption of this amendment.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I feel like the skunk at the office party, but I rise to oppose the funding for the Yucca Mountain project contained in this bill. This bill shortchanges water projects and energy technology research and development, research into technologies to harness the sun and wind and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Yet there is 15 percent more funding for Yucca Mountain than there was in last year's bill despite the fact that this project is unsafe and riddled with problems and, in my estimation, can and never will be built. I want to update my colleagues on the recent developments regarding Yucca Mountain, and I sincerely hope that they listen. Last month, the Department of Energy revealed that scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey who were working on the water infiltration and climate studies at Yucca Mountain actually falsified documentation. Water infiltration and climate are two of the most fundamental factors involved in establishing whether or not the proposed repository can safely isolate radioactive waste and prevent groundwater contamination. In all my years fighting this project, I knew Yucca Mountain was not scientifically sound, but I never dreamed and never thought that Federal employees would purposely falsify documents to cover up the lack of basic science. In 90 pages of e-mails, the USGS employees fabricated dates and names of programs used in modeling for quality assurance audits and deleted information that did not fit favorable and hoped-for conclusions. The employees made it clear that quality assurance was not a priority of this project, but rather, an obstacle. Let me share with my colleagues some of the comments made by these employees, and I quote: ``Don't look at the last four lines. Those lines are a mystery. I've deleted the lines from the official QA version of the files. In the end, I keep track of two sets of files, the ones that will keep the QA happy and the ones that were actually used.'' Another e-mail says, ``Like you said all along, the Yucca Mountain project has now reached a point where they need to have certain items work no matter what, and the infiltration maps are on that list. If USGS can't find a way to make it work, someone else will.'' And finally, ``I don't have a clue when these programs were installed. So I've made up the dates and names. This is as good as it's going to get. If they need proof, I will be happy to make up more stuff.'' No one better dare say to me on this floor that Yucca Mountain is based on sound science. It is not. Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the radiation standards for the proposed repository did not follow recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences and would not protect the health and safety of our Nation. The difference between the findings and the radiation standards set by the EPA, a mere 290,000 years. Mr. Chairman, the DOE has known for some time that this project was fatally flawed, that corners were cut, that the science did not support the conclusions and that the data were doctored. That the DOE continues to move forward with the complicity of this Congress is nothing short of insanity, dangerous and insane. Employees who have raised concerns have been intimidated into silence, and the workers were purposely exposed to hazardous conditions by contractors eager to win hefty cash bonuses. Science has been manipulated to fit predrawn conclusions, and public safety and the environment have been sacrificed upon the altar of political expediency and greed. Yucca Mountain is a disaster waiting to happen. When you build a weak foundation, your building collapses, and that is why Yucca Mountain is collapsing before our eyes. DOE is building Yucca on a weak foundation based on lies, fraud, intimidation, deception and nonexistent science. We should be pouring our resources into renewable energy, harnessing the sun, harnessing the moon, not sticking our valuable resources into a hole in the Nevada desert. If my colleagues think that nuclear waste is so safe, let them keep it in their own States, let them keep it in their districts, by their children, by their children's schools, by homes and hospitals, synagogues and churches; and do not travel across this country in order to stick it in a hole in the middle of the Nevada desert. I urge us to reconsider this. Let us change our direction before we go into something that is so disastrous and dangerous that we will never forgive ourselves and never be able to be forgiven by future generations of Americans.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Mr. Markey's amendment. As a Member from Nevada, I am vehemently opposed to the Yucca Mountain Project for numerous reasons. The transportation of thousands of tons of nuclear waste, which will pass within miles of our homes, schools and hospitals, is one of the primary reasons I object to this plan. Nuclear waste transportation, whether destined for Yucca Mountain or an interim site, is an invitation to terrorists looking to wreak havoc and cause devastation in the United States. The Chairman of the Subcommittee has made clear that interim storage will not divert him from avidly pursuing completion of the Yucca Mountain Repository. With my ``yes'' vote, I am standing firmly against transporting nuclear waste through our communities and against interim storage in Nevada or anywhere else. The only workable solution we have at this time is to leave the waste on-site where it will be safe for the next 100 years.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, our Founding Fathers envisioned Congress would deliberate, collaborate, and then judiciously compromise on the key issues of the day. Here in the House, the Republican majority refuses to collaborate, deliberate, or compromise. The House leadership consistently abuses its power by preventing the minority from offering its ideas on the floor. Fortunately, in the Senate, the Republican majority cannot force its will on the minority so easily. One of the tools of the Senate for more than 200 years is the filibuster, a rule that protects the rights of the minority and prevents the majority from having absolute power. It is a critical tool in the checks and balances that exist between the branches of government. Today, Senate Republicans are preparing to do something that has never been done before: abolish the rights of the minority to filibuster judicial appointments. This extreme power grab would seriously undermine our Nation's checks and balances. Like their colleagues in the House, Senate Republicans want absolute power, even though Americans know that our country works best when no political power is in absolute control. As a Nevadan, I want to personally thank Nevada Senator Harry Reid for leading the fight in the Senate to protect and preserve the constitutional form of government that we enjoy in this country.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Madam Speaker, the city of Las Vegas is celebrating its centennial this year. This past weekend marked the anniversary of the land auction that founded Las Vegas, and the city highlighted this momentous day with special events such as the return of the Helldorado Days Parade, baking and serving the world's largest birthday cake, and a reenactment of the land auction of 1905. Las Vegas has grown from the western railroad stop of May 15, 1905 to the entertainment capital of the world that welcomed a record-setting 40 million tourists last year. I remember as a girl with my family driving out west in search of the American Dream and finding it in Las Vegas, Nevada. Over the years, I have watched Las Vegas become the quintessential American city. Economic opportunity and the optimistic attitude of our citizens welcome thousands of new residents and millions of tourists every month. I am proud to be a part of the Las Vegas community; and I wish my city, Las Vegas, a happy 100th anniversary. The best is yet to come.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, May is National Osteoporosis Awareness and Prevention Month. Osteoporosis and low bone density affect 44 million Americans over the age of 50, many of whom were unaware of the fact that they have osteoporosis and, therefore, were unable to take steps to prevent it. Like many Americans, I had no idea I was at risk for developing osteoporosis. I thought I simply had bad posture, and it never occurred to me to be screened for osteoporosis. Yet when I was running for Congress in 1998, I was diagnosed with this disease. Fortunately, within 10 months of the diagnose with proper treatment I was able to stop my bone density loss and my bones actually began to strengthen again. Because of my personal experience with osteoporosis, I am committed to ensuring that my fellow Americans are aware of the importance of early detection and prevention. Men and women can reduce their chances of developing this disease. I encourage everyone to see your doctor, get screened for osteoporosis. It is a very silent, but very deadly, disease.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, today we are going to vote on a resolution that will do nothing to help small businesses in Nevada and throughout this country. My friends on the other side of the aisle call this resolution the Small Business Bill of Rights; yet in my opinion this is another case where their rhetoric does not match the reality. Small business is very important to me. Half of the businesses in Nevada are small businesses. We are all concerned about the cost of health care to small businesses. We are all concerned about the amount of paperwork that small businesses are deluged by, and we are all concerned about the skyrocketing costs of energy for all business, including small business. But the bill before us does a disservice to small business. It fails to recognize the importance of women-owned small businesses. This is especially important in Nevada which has over 50,000 women-owned small businesses and has the fastest growing number of women-owned small businesses in the country. The number one issue for the women in Nevada that own small businesses is access to capital. It is the number one issue for women. It is the number one issue for women-owned businesses. Gutting the 7(a) loan program and microloans is a disaster for these businesses. House Resolution 22 also fails to condemn the illegal practice of Federal Government contract bundling. When small business owners come to see me, one of the first issues they bring up is lack of access to Federal contracting opportunities. Contract bundling shuts small businesses out of the marketplace and should certainly be included in any genuine Small Business Bill of Rights. Nevada has been rated among the best States for entrepreneurs to start a small business. These businesses must have opportunities in the Federal marketplace. Increasing small business participation in Federal contracts will result in lower cost to taxpayers and give small businesses more opportunities in the Federal marketplace. Small businesses make up 97 percent of all business in the United States; yet the Federal Government does more than 77 percent of its business with only 3 percent of our Nation's companies. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on House Resolution 22 and ``yes'' on the Velazquez motion to recommit.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina for yielding. I so enjoyed the gentleman in Las Vegas and so did all of my constituents, because he was able to bring home to them and articulate to them exactly what the issues are when it comes to the budget and how it is going to affect them in a very adverse way. I am here tonight to talk about why I am going to be voting against this Republican budget that is going to be on the floor probably tomorrow. But before I do, I have to comment on the last hour, because I had the opportunity since I was sitting here to hear some of the rhetoric from the other side when they were talking about Social Security and a bipartisan meeting with AARP that the Democrats were supposedly boycotting. I think it is very important for people that are listening to know, at least from this Democratic Member of Congress, that until I heard that, I had never heard of such a meeting. I am married to a Republican. We practice bipartisanship in our home every single day. And I think if the Republicans were truly serious about working in a bipartisan fashion with the Democrats to craft solutions to the very serious problems that we have, we not only would sit down and talk about Social Security, not the privatization of Social Security, which we all know will do absolutely nothing to make this system solvent, but talk about the more immediate and pressing crises of Medicare and the health care system in this country. If you have tried to access the health care system in this country, you would know without me having to tell you that we do have a crisis. So instead of creating a crisis and screaming about the partisan nature of the House of Representatives, maybe if they truly wanted to solve some of the solutions to make life easier for average American people, we would be sitting down at a table now, instead of the gentleman and I sitting here talking to each other. But we can talk about that some other time. I was just so taken aback by the attack that I felt I had to respond to it. Mr. Speaker, I am going to be voting against this budget proposal that the Republicans have set forth, and it is very important that my constituents know why. This is a very fiscally irresponsible budget. It is going to devastate numerous programs that many low and middle-income Americans depend on. I know they do in my congressional district. Day after day we hear the President and congressional Republicans talking about fiscal responsibility and providing opportunities for lower and middle-income families in this country. But the priorities outlined in this budget tell an entirely different story. This is the perfect example of Republican rhetoric not matching the reality on the ground. The Republican budget hides costs. We all know that. The gentleman spoke of some of the hidden costs. It threatens to put key programs like veterans health care, education funding and Medicaid on the chopping block. The Republicans talk about keeping our promises to our veterans. I sit on the Committee on Veterans Affairs, and I have the fastest growing veterans population in the United States of America in Southern Nevada. The issues that affect our veterans are very important to me, and particularly health care, because my veterans do not get the health care that they deserve. The Republican budget does not include enough money for veterans programs to keep pace with inflation over the next 5 years. To me this is an outrage. It is never acceptable to cut veterans benefits at any time, but it is especially not appropriate at a time when our country is depending more and more on the strength and morale of our Armed Forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo and South Korea. We are stretched very thin. These soldiers are going to be coming home to this country. They are going to be veterans and they are going to be expect the health care that this Nation has promised our soldiers when they become veterans, and I am afraid this budget is way short of providing the needs of our veterans, particularly not only health care needs, but mental health care, and that is going to be a major problem with our troops coming home from Iraq, a serious, serious problem. I am not going to vote for any budget that threatens key programs, including health care benefits for the more than 160,000 veterans that live in my community. These men and women have served our country with dignity and valor, and I refuse to support a budget that shortchanges programs that are vitally important to them. The Republican budget also fails students and their families in Nevada and across the country. It not only will not support current education programs and services over the next 5 years, but, again, since I have got the fastest growing student population in the United States, a budget that is even neutral and does not cut programs, although this one does, hurts my district disproportionately, because while our student population is growing, if education funding is going down, we take the biggest hit in the country. Education should be one of the highest priorities in any budget. Our schools and our teachers and our students already feel the squeeze by budget cuts. To further cut funding is unfathomable to me. The Republican budget cuts child nutrition programs. If you are a kid and you are not getting breakfast at home and you are going to school on an empty stomach, how are you going to learn? How are you going to concentrate on your studies when your tummy is growling? This cuts student nutrition programs. It cuts student loans. I come from a family where my dad was a waiter when I was growing up. I depended on those student loans to get an education. That is how I went through college and how I went through law school. It took me many years to pay back those students loans, but without them I guarantee you I would not be standing here on the floor of the House tonight. Vocational grants, so important for those students that do not go to college, who would rather go get a vocational education, which is also important for our economy in this country, those programs are getting decimated. Also disability and pension programs. What type of Nation that prides itself on caring for its fellow citizens is going to cut pension and disability programs? But this Republican budget does exactly that. Student loans. Let me get back to that, because I know firsthand how important they are. They are vitally important to families in southern Nevada and across this country. Low and middle-income families in my district are not going to be able to send their kids to college without student loans. People think of Las Vegas and they see the fancy hotels and the wild night life, and we do have the glitz and the glamour in Las Vegas, but Las Vegas is populated by middle income people that are working in those hotels and trying to put a roof over their family's heads, food on their tables, clothes on their backs, and their children through college. They are entitled to have these student loans so that they can make sure that their children enjoy the American dream. I am astounded that that is an area that this administration and this Republican budget is cutting. Straining student loan programs will reverse the progress this country has achieved by sending millions of students just like me to college who otherwise could not afford it. This is unacceptable, must be stopped, and the American public should be rising up and complaining to the Republican Members of this House, telling them that this is unacceptable to them, because it hurts, and it is very painful. The Senate restored funding for medicaid in its budget and, last night, the House the Representatives voted to instruct budget conferees to protect medicaid funding from the drastic cuts outlined in the President's budget. I hope that the House and Senate conferees do the right thing and leave the medicaid funding alone. Medicaid provides crucial health services to approximately 159,000 people in my home State of Nevada. Any cuts to medicaid funding will make it much harder for low-income pregnant women, seniors, children, disabled, and families in Nevada and throughout the United States to get the health care they need. I cannot stress enough how important medicaid is to the State of Nevada. Nevada's hospitals, nursing homes, community health centers depend on this funding. Medicaid pays for 65 percent of Nevada's certified nursing home residents. What are these seniors going to do if we lose this funding? It is going to be devastating for them. Are they going to be thrown out on the streets where they are going to die in the gutter? This medicaid funding must be restored, and it must be restored to the appropriate levels to take care of the people of this country. I am going to vote against this conference report, because it fails to prioritize veterans, students, low-income and middle-income families. I want to remind my colleagues and the chairman that not too long ago, the Democrats offered a budget alternative that every Republican in the House voted against. And in light of the attacks that I just heard before we got up to speak about the partisan nature of the Democratic Party, I mean I find it a little shocking that not one Republican would cross the aisle and support the democratic budget proposal, because in that proposal, the Democrats not only talked the talk, but we walked the walk. Democrats provided an alternative that was fiscally responsible, would balance the budget by 2012, would reduce the deficit, and provide opportunities to all Americans that the Republicans only talk about. But if their budget is any indication of what they care about and what they are going to act upon, well, I am afraid it is a little light on helping their fellow man and taking care of the fiscal health of this country. So I thank the gentleman very much for his leadership on this. There is nobody that presents our side of the argument better than the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), and I thank the gentleman for letting me be a part of this discussion tonight.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Madam Speaker, now is the time to create an energy plan to wean this country from its reliance on foreign oil and to harness renewable energy sources. It is not the time to line the pockets of the special interests. This Congress should be developing a long-term energy policy that will make this Nation energy independent by utilizing 21st-century technology, not propping up obsolete energy sources guaranteed to continue this Nation's reliance on the oil, gas, and nuclear industries. We should be putting our resources into the research and development of renewable energy, harness the sun, wind, geothermal. At a time when oil companies are reaping record profits, the Republican energy bill will give 93 percent of the subsidies in this bill to the oil, gas, and nuclear industries and chump change for research and development of renewable energy. It boggles my mind that at a time of record prices for gasoline, we are doing absolutely nothing in this bill to reduce gas prices. This debacle of a Republican bill will actually increase gas prices by 3 cents on the gallon. I am appalled that we would spend one cent more on nuclear energy when we have no solution to the nuclear waste problem. We continue to lavish billions of dollars on the nuclear industry when we have no safe way to store the waste. I hope that we defeat this ridiculous piece of legislation.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) for yielding his time. I rise in support of this amendment which would strike the provision in the bill to expand the number of Assistant Secretaries at the Department of Energy, one of which being an Assistant Secretary for improved management of nuclear energy issues. Why are we creating a new position for nuclear power? There is no Assistant Secretary for gas or oil or coal. Nuclear energy should not be elevated above all the others. This administration continues to push for expanded nuclear power, despite having no solution for the issue of radioactive nuclear waste disposal. Recently, the Department of Energy revealed that Federal employees working on the Yucca Mountain project deliberately falsified scientific documentation regarding water infiltration and climate studies. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the second highest court in the land, struck down the EPA's radiation standards, which they said were inadequate for a mere 290,000 years. Yet the DOE continues to move forward with its license application for a dump that will never be built and continues to spend billions of dollars of taxpayers' money while they are doing it. Before creating an Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Issues and increasing our reliance on nuclear power, we must find a safe and scientifically sound solution to the problem of disposing of tens of thousands of tons of radioactive, toxic nuclear waste. Mr. Chairman, Yucca Mountain is not a solution to our current problem, nor will it address the issue of storing newly created nuclear waste. Creating yet another layer of bureaucracy is not the answer to this Nation's energy problem, and certainly the Department of Energy has done nothing, nothing in its history to warrant additional funding and additional support.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and the underlying bill because, despite Republican claims, this energy bill really does not help American families with the cost of power or the skyrocketing gas prices. This bill does, however, help the administration's special interest friends. It is riddled with billions of dollars of taxpayer giveaways to the nuclear, oil and gas industries. I am appalled that we are doing nothing to reduce gas prices at a time when oil companies are reaping obscene profits. Current prices of oil are lingering at $50 a barrel and are expected to continue to skyrocket. We should be focusing on reducing our dependence on foreign oil by diversifying our energy sources, not by encouraging more oil and gas production. This bill does little to promote renewable energy, the energy of our future. Given the latest revelations about the wanton falsification of scientific studies of the proposed Yucca Mountain Repository, Congress should not funnel one more penny of taxpayer dollars into the Yucca Mountain Project. Additional problems continued to plague the site. The courts have ruled that the EPA radiation standards will not protect the health and safety of the American people. Instead of making the United States safer, the proposed Yucca Mountain Project provides a terrorist target that could cause massive economic and civilian casualties. In the Committee on Rules, my colleague, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Porter) and I offered a simple amendment that would have included Yucca Mountain in the Nuclear Site Threat Assessment Study, already a part of the energy bill. Despite the findings of the GAO and the National Academy of Sciences that there are security vulnerabilities present at reactor sites during high-level radioactive waste, there has been no threat assessment conducted at the mother of all radioactive waste sites, Yucca Mountain. Regardless of how any of us feels about Yucca Mountain, the Federal Government has a duty to assess the risks, not just to protect Nevada and our neighbors in the West, but for the well-being of our Nation. Unfortunately, the Committee on Rules did not put that amendment in order. Now is the time to create an energy plan that will wean our country off of foreign oil. It is not the time to line the pockets of the special interests. I urge my colleagues to oppose this very backward, very foolish, very good piece of legislation if you are in the energy business.

Ms. BERKLEY

Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, on March 28, 2005, my community of southern Nevada lost one of its most outstanding citizens. Polly Ann Gonzalez was taken from us in a highway accident, a tragic event that shocked the community. Southern Nevadans by the thousands have expressed their sense of loss and their loving memories of Polly through their e-mails of condolence, their attendance at memorial services, and their contributions in support of Polly's daughters, Sabrina and Gabriella. The passing of Polly Gonzalez is a heart-rending instance of the good dying young, far too young. In her mere 43 years, Polly attained the highest levels of accomplishment, both as a newswoman and as an advocate for people in need. Polly first earned the reputation as a top-notch television investigative reporter in northern California, exposing the social and economic injustices faced by agricultural workers and by revealing the growing threat of gang violence, among other important stories she brought to light. Honored with an Emmy Award, Polly moved on to Las Vegas, where she quickly established herself as one of the area's most popular, admired, and energetic television news anchors. Polly's passion for bringing truth to the public through her reporting was matched by her commitment to public service. She established herself as a most effective advocate for the advancement of the Latino community and for the less advantaged. She went beyond the call of duty to be involved in community organizations and events, accepting myriad requests for her time, her talent, and her energy to support the people of the Las Vegas area. As was stated on KLAS-TV8, where Polly worked for 10 years, she ``always was . . . standing up for people whose voices might not have carried as much weight as hers.'' She was a preeminent role model for young women, whom she showed, ``if they put their mind to it they could accomplish anything.'' Polly's passing has brought an overwhelming and nearly unprecedented outpouring of emotion from those who knew her personally or knew her only through her newscasts. I join all southern Nevadans in mourning the loss of a great friend, a great newswoman, and a great contributor to the building of a community with opportunity for all. I miss you, Polly, and I thank you, my friend, for the treasured moments I shared with you, for your soaring spirit, and for the marvelous work you accomplished.