Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), one of the senior members of the Ways and Means Committee and one of the most active on trade issues. (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to Shoshana Shoubin Cardin, a remarkable woman and Baltimorean who will celebrate her 80th birthday on October 10. Shoshana Cardin is known to many in this Chamber, and to many presidents and prime ministers throughout the world. She has been a tireless worker for human rights, women's rights, education, Jewish spirituality and culture, and the State of Israel. As Chairwoman of the Maryland Commission for Women, Shoshana worked with Citicorp to help women understand their economic rights and to initiate the first women's credit ``hotline.'' She also worked with the Maryland Senate to revise rape legislation, and convened the first state conference on battered women, leading to the opening of the House of Ruth, a safe haven for victims of domestic violence. She promoted volunteerism and helped to form and then chaired the Maryland Volunteer Network. Shoshana was the first woman to become the Chair of the Board of the Associated Jewish Community of Baltimore, the first female President of the Council of Jewish Federations, the first woman Chair of the National Council of Soviet Jewry, NCSJ, the first female Chair of the Council of President of Major American Jewish Organizations, the first female President of the National Center for Learning and Leadership, CLAL, and the first woman to Chair the United Israel Appeal. Using her position of leadership in the Jewish community, Shoshana brought her courage and wisdom to bear on many major national issues. As Chair of the NCSJ, she succeeded in convincing Soviet President Gorbachev to denounce anti-Semitism as negative antisocial behavior. She met with Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, Secretary of State James Baker, Prime Ministers of Israel Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin, Yitzhak Shamir and Ariel Sharon. She served as a Public Member of the U.S. delegation to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Conference, as well as an NGO representative in numerous world conferences promoting human rights. Currently, Shoshana serves as co-founder and chair of the Shoshana S. Cardin School, Baltimore's first trans-denominational Jewish high school. I urge my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in honoring Shoshana Cardin, a woman who has made a difference as a wife, mother, grandmother, volunteer, professional, activist, philanthropist and humanitarian. I hope you will join me in wishing Shoshana Shoubin Cardin the happiest of birthdays and wishes for many more.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring to your attention the achievements of the Patterson Park Community Development Corporation (PPCDC), which is celebrating its 10th Anniversary. The Patterson Park area was originally known as Hampstead Hill and played an important role in the defense of Baltimore during the War of 1812. The property was also home to the wealthy Patterson family whose beautiful daughter, Betsy, was the wife of Jerome Bonaparte. The surrounding rowhouse community offered housing for a diverse population, including immigrants from Eastern Europe. Following World War II, many families moved to the suburbs, leaving older residents behind. The community became ripe for absentee landlords and investors. In 1996, the PPCDC was founded by residents to combat the neighborhood's decline. PPCDC concentrated on an area of 3,000 rowhouses north of Patterson Park, and 2,500 houses on the park's eastern periphery. Its goal was to recreate a stable, desirable, diverse community around Patterson Park. PPCDC embarked on strategies to improve the neighborhood and Park image, strengthen the neighborhood's social fabric and political strength, and dramatically increase investment through control of the neighborhood's real estate. Since 1996, PPCDC has spent more than $60 million in the community, attracting tens of millions of dollars in other investment. PPCDC also maintains more than 100 affordable rental units that provide decent housing to immigrants, refugees, and other families with modest incomes. PPCDC has accomplished all this while maintaining the ethnic, racial and economic diversity of the Patterson Park community. Investment north of Patterson Park has allowed neighborhoods to the south to gather momentum and become an engine for revitalization in all of Southeast Baltimore. Friends of Patterson Park was formed to revitalize the Park, restore the boat lake and the Pagoda, which serves as the centerpiece for summer concerts, and build a new playground for the growing number of children who live in the community. In 2002, the Patterson Park Charter School was formed by residents to entice young families to stay in the neighborhood. I urge my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in saluting the accomplishments of the PPCDC and its partners and in commending them for their work in East Baltimore. Their efforts to revitalize Patterson Park have become a model for other communities around the Nation.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to welcome visitors from around the country to Maryland for the Third Annual Prince George's Classic Weekend. Hosted by the Prince George's Black Chamber of Commerce (PGBCC), this weekend celebrates black college football, educational achievement, tradition, community pride, and unity. On Saturday, September 30, 2006 at Bulldog Stadium, the Bowie State University Bulldogs will face the North Carolina Central University Eagles. These are two of the top teams in the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association (CIAA), the Nation's oldest black athletic conference, and the game promises to be a first-rate contest. Mr. Speaker, the Classic comprises much more than one football game, as an entire weekend of events throughout Prince George's County is planned, beginning tomorrow evening--including a Welcome Reception, services at Ebenezer AME Church in Fort Washington, a Black College Showcase, a Battle of the Bands, the Harlem Renaissance Golf Classic, a Fashion Show featuring the work of local and national couture designers, and a Comedy Show. This exciting weekend would not be possible without the support of numerous individuals and organizations, and I especially want to acknowledge the new President of Bowie State University, Dr. Mickey Burnim; Dr. Calvin Lowe, BSU President emeritus, BSU Coach Mike Lynn, Jr., PCBCC President Hubert ``Petey'' Green, and Mike Little, President of the Prince George's Classic. I want to welcome all participants to our state for the Third Annual Prince George's Classic weekend, and I urge my colleagues to join me in wishing them a wonderful celebration.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I was unavoidably detained and missed two rollcall votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall vote 487 and ``nay'' on rollcall vote 488.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, Congress has an obligation under the Constitution to enact legislation that creates fair trials for accused terrorists that will be upheld by the courts. We also have an obligation to protect our troops that fall into enemy hands, and to uphold American values and the rule of law. Finally, even during wartime, the President must work with Congress and the courts to uphold our Constitution. In June, the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld struck down the President's military commissions, since they violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Conventions. The Court noted that Congress, not the president, has the authority under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to ``define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations.'' I strongly support our government's efforts to isolate, track down, and ultimately kill or capture suspected terrorists who are planning terrorist attacks against the United States. We must bring these terrorists to justice swiftly. We must also strengthen our efforts to protect the homeland by providing additional resources to law enforcement and emergency services personnel who are charged with disrupting and responding to a terrorist attack in the United States. As a former member of the Homeland Security Committee, I have fought hard to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and to distribute our homeland security funds on the basis of actual threats and vulnerabilities. I am therefore extremely disappointed, Mr. Speaker, that the House leadership failed to reach out to members on both sides of the aisle in crafting this legislation. We should heed the warning given by our former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who states that ``the world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism.'' The 9/11 Commission recommended that ``the United States should engage its friends to develop a common coalition approach toward the detention and humane treatment of captured terrorists. New principles might draw upon Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions . . . Allegations that the United States abused prisoners in its custody make it harder to build the diplomatic, political, and military alliances the [U.S.] government will need.'' This legislation today undermines the protections of the Geneva Convention, and by weakening our moral authority makes it harder for us to work with allies to win the war on terrorism and protect Americans. I share the concerns of the many current and former military officers that testified to Congress that any weakening of these protections will place American soldiers at risk if they are captured overseas. I am pleased that last December Congress adopted Senator McCain's legislation and outlawed the use of torture, and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment by U.S. personnel, which would endanger the treatment of our American soldiers overseas. I am disappointed, therefore, that this legislation allows the use of statements obtained by some this prohibited behavior to be admissible in court. Finally, this legislation eliminates the fundamental legal right of habeas corpus, which would permit our government to hold detainees indefinitely without charge, trial, or the right to an independent hearing to weigh the evidence against the accused terrorist. We must join with our allies to win the war on terrorism and bring terrorists to justice. Our Constitution contains the very values we hold dear and that makes us proud to be Americans, and which motivate our soldiers to lay down their lives in defense of this country. I have sworn to uphold and defend our Constitution and to protect our democracy. This legislation takes a step backward, is inconsistent with the rule of law, and will make it harder to work with our allies to build an effective coalition to defeat terrorism. I therefore will vote against this legislation. Five years after the 9/11 attacks, it is inexcusable that not a single one of the terrorists who planned the 9/11 attacks has been brought to trial. I am hopeful that the Senate will improve this legislation as Congress continues to discharge its constitutional duty to create military commissions that are consistent with the rule of law and that will result in convictions of terrorists that will be upheld by our courts.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to St. Leo the Great's Church on its 125th anniversary of service to Baltimore City's Little Italy neighborhood. Located at Stiles and Exeter Streets, the heart of Baltimore's Italian-American community, St. Leo's served as the first worship and community center for Italian immigrants arriving in Baltimore. One of the many immigrant families to worship at St. Leo's was the D'Alesandro family, whose members would serve as mayors, members of Congress and as the first woman Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Over the years, St. Leo's provided spiritual renewal as well as community social activities and education. During the Great Baltimore Fire in 1904, the congregation at St. Leo's prayed for the fire to spare their homes and their church. Their prayers to St. Anthony were answered when, after raging for 31 hours and destroying most of downtown Baltimore, the fire stopped just short of Little Italy. Each year, the St. Anthony Society holds a festival to celebrate their good fortune and the power of faith. After World War II, as many Italian-American families of Little Italy moved to the suburbs, St. Leo's was forced to close its school and fell on hard times, as did many of the City's older neighborhoods. But the congregation at St. Leo's was loyal and inventive and today St. Leo's and the surrounding neighborhood have been rejuvenated. In Italy, the church was the locus of the village. St. Leo the Great's Church in Little Italy has enabled the Baltimore Italian- American community to continue that tradition. Today, St. Leo's primary school has been transformed into the The Rev. Oreste Pandola Cultural Learning Center. Thanks to the efforts of congregant Rosalie Ranieri, the Center offers classes and clubs to neighbors and former residents now scattered across the region. I hope my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives will join me in saluting the contributions of St. Leo the Great's Church to the Italian-American community of Baltimore as well as to our Nation. I also ask that they join me in sending best wishes for many more years of service to the community. Congratulazioni.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Ms. Donna Paoletti Phillips, my constituent, and one of three recipients of the first annual American Civic Education Teacher Award. This award honors teachers who have demonstrated a special expertise in teaching about the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Congress, and public policy at the state and local levels. It is one of the activities of the Alliance for Representative Democracy, which is funded by the U.S. Department of Education by an act of Congress. Now in her eleventh year as an educator, Donna, a resident of Columbia, Maryland, teaches eighth grade at Robert Frost Middle Schools in Rockville. She has worked to make her classroom an incubator of democracy, believing that ``the essence of civic education lies in the people the students become while in the care of our classrooms.'' She describes her teaching style as experiential, noting that civic education cannot be a ``from the neck up'' activity. For 6 years, Donna has coordinated We the People, the Citizen and the Constitution, a simulated congressional hearing held annually at the Robert Frost Middle School. In that time, she has witnessed a profound change in the participating teachers as they moved from direct instruction to a more facilitative role in the students' education process. She has also observed the students' progress to more self- directed research and collaboration with their peers. For these reasons, Donna sees this program as a life-changing activity for those involved. Throughout the school year, Donna's students are able to witness her collaboration with fellow faculty and her volunteer efforts in the community. She initiates discussions on global, national, local, and school-based events, and frequently questions the causes of injustices, inspiring her students to do the same. Donna says that she is proud to have ``the best kids in the country'' in her class, and she considers it a wonderful opportunity to teach in the Washington Metropolitan Area, where Capitol Hill can be so easily accessed. I am very pleased that she is visiting my office today, and I call upon my colleagues to join me in honoring Donna Paoletti Phillips' accomplishments and congratulating her on receiving this award.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4844, the Federal Election Integrity Act. This legislation would require individuals voting in federal elections to provide photo identification that also shows proof of citizenship in order to vote. I am extremely concerned that this legislation would disenfranchise many eligible voters and depress voter turnout. Congress and the states should pass measures to increase, not decrease, voter turnout, and to encourage eligible voters to go to the polls. Studies indicate that illegal voting or voter fraud is extremely rare, and such behavior is already punishable by law. However, we have numerous documented instances of actual problems in our electoral systems which are not addressed by this legislation, such as improper purging of voters from the rolls and distributing false information about when and where to vote. In my own state of Maryland in last Tuesday's primary election, we experienced numerous problems with voters being turned away because of malfunctioning computer voting machines, a lack of provisional paper ballots, and poorly trained or absent poll workers. This legislation would have a disproportionate impact on economically disadvantaged persons--such as the homeless, the elderly, persons with disabilities, frequent movers, and other minority groups and persons of color--who are far less likely to have current state-issued identification. Requiring voters to bring identification to the polls will serve as a poll tax for some eligible voters, who can afford neither the cost nor time to obtain a new or duplicate drivers' license, passport, or birth certificate. The bill contains weak provisions to reimburse states that cover the cost of issuing identifications to indigent individuals. Indeed, Congress has yet to fully fund implementation of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, passed after the 2000 presidential election which disenfranchised many eligible voters. Finally, proof of citizenship requirements will severely hamper the ability of nonpartisan organizations to conduct voter registration campaigns within minority communities, by limiting what documents can be accepted as valid identification for the purpose of registration. I note that several leading voting rights groups have opposed this legislation, including the NAACP, League of Women Voters, and the U.S. Public Research Interest Group. The AARP has also opposed this legislation, which may disenfranchise older Americans. The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) and the National Association of Counties (NACO) also oppose this legislation. NCSL wrote that this ``ill-advised bill . . . places a potentially huge unfunded mandate on states . . . and would preempt current states' voter identification requirements.'' Just a few months ago I was pleased to co-sponsor and vote for legislation to reauthorize the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965 for another 25 years. Discrimination and prejudice still exist against minority voters, in addition to disenfranchisement at the polls caused by faulty equipment or poorly trained poll workers. We must redouble our efforts to make sure that every eligible vote is counted, and that this democracy does not continue to shamefully turn away eligible voters at the polls.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed today that the House is once again refusing to take up substantive, comprehensive border security and immigration reform legislation which could actually be enacted into law before we adjourn for the year. Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely critical that Congress pass meaningful and effective border security and immigration reform. Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Congress has taken significant steps to secure our border and prevent another terrorist attack on our soil. Congress created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and a strong Director of National Intelligence, which constituted the largest reorganization of our law enforcement and intelligence services since World War II. As a former member of the House Homeland Security Committee, I know that the United States must move rapidly to: establish operational control of all borders and ports; end our ``catch and release'' practice of aliens apprehended crossing the border illegally; effectively organize the border security agencies within the Department of Homeland Security; and promote international policies to deter illegal immigration. I support the Motion to Recommit to this legislation, which would: create 3,000 new U.S. Border Patrol agent positions; create 2,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent positions; improve recruitment and retention of border security personnel; create 25,000 new detention beds annually, for a total of 100,000 new detention beds; and develop a comprehensive border surveillance system. I agree with the former 9/11 Commissioners, who recently issued a report which concluded that Congress and the Administration have much more work to do to make America safer, and gave our government fair to poor grades for our current level of border security. This legislation does nothing to provide the significant new resources called for by the 9/11 Commission report. I am disappointed, therefore, that the leadership of the House of Representatives has failed to allow the House to take up a comprehensive homeland security and immigration reform bill that addresses the pressing vulnerabilities in our border security. The House has already passed legislation in December which authorizes the creation of new fencing, and the Senate has passed a much broader border security and immigration reform measure. The House leadership should immediately proceed to a conference with the Senate to reconcile these differences. Border security is too important and should be included in legislation that can be quickly enacted into law.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I was unavoidably detained and missed one rollcall vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall vote No. 438.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I was unavoidably detained and missed one rollcall vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote No. 430.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer congratulations to one of Maryland's premier institutions of higher learning--the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC)--as it celebrates its 40th anniversary. Located on what was once a cow pasture, the university has risen to astonishing heights in a very short time. When UMBC first opened in 1966, it had only 750 students and three buildings. Today, the university offers first-rate education and research opportunities to more than 11,000 students, while retaining the personal contact typically found at a small liberal arts college. In recent years, the guidance of President Freeman Hrabowski has led the university to new heights. UMBC's unique combination of undergraduate focus and graduate research reflects the dedication to balance that has led UMBC to become one of the top public universities in the nation. The nationally recognized Meyerhoff Scholars Program, which Dr. Hrabowski co-founded, is among the most successful undergraduate diversity programs in the nation. UMBC has one of the highest rates of minority students pursuing advanced degrees in medicine and science of any school in the United States. UMBC also has been ranked first nationally in the total number of undergraduate chemistry degrees given to African-Americans. In 40 years UMBC has become one of the nation's top independent public research universities. The numerous accomplishments of the university are all the more impressive because they have come so rapidly. In fact, UMBC is one of the youngest universities ever to be honored with a chapter of Phi Beta Kappa, and in recent years UMBC has led every university in the nation in undergraduates receiving Merck Undergraduate Science Research Scholarships. Mr. Speaker, I call upon my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in honoring the achievements and success of UMBC, one of the bright stars in American higher education.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my friend for yielding. Let me speak for an interest group that has not been heard tonight, and that is our children and grandchildren, because they are going to be asked to pick up the tab of this legislation. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I am for raising the minimum wage. It is a fair thing to do, and it is in the economic interests of this country. But the price to vote ``yes'' is just too high, $267 billion of additional debt on the estate tax changes. And where are we going to get the money to pay for that? I hear from my friends that we have to be fiscally conservative, and I agree with that on every dollar of new spending. But tonight it is okay for $267 billion of additional debt. And where is that money going to come from? We borrow it. We borrow it from foreign governments that own banks. And it jeopardizes trade exchange with the United States. It costs us jobs. It is in our national interest to balance our budget, we all understand that; and tonight, by passing this bill, we are moving in the wrong direction.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I am really conflicted on this bill because there are good provisions in it. The provisions which I had the opportunity to work with our former colleague, Mr. Portman, provisions that would make permanent the changes in the tax law in 2001, makes it easier for people to save for their retirement, employers to provide pension plans; provisions for automatic enrollment so that employees have a better chance of having a retirement savings. The permanency and indexing of the saver's credit, I think, is a very important provision. The split tax refund, I can go on and on and on. But I must tell you, I was listening to Mr. Andrews and I think that he raises a very valid point on the process. You have to, at times, understand that process is important so we do the right thing here. I heard reference to approving a conference report, but this is not a conference report. We have a letter from the Senate Members of the conference report urging the House Members of the conference committee to join them in a product that is different than what we have before us today. There are concerns in this legislation that I do not know if they have been addressed, including the airline industry, including the way we treat employers who have well-funded plans today as to whether they will continue those plans. So, Mr. Speaker, this bill is coming up with no notice, no opportunity for us to review it, and without an opportunity for our conferees to present their report. So I do not know what to tell the Members to do here. I doubt if we will have time to review all the provisions that are in this bill. I doubt whether we will know exactly what is involved, and we do not have the comfort of knowing that it is the product of a conference committee. It is a new bill that is before us. So I just urge my colleagues to be very careful in consideration of this legislation. It is very important legislation. It does some very good things, but I am concerned there may be some unintended consequences.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor that I rise today to commemorate the Rukert Terminals Corporation's 85th Anniversary. Located in Baltimore, Maryland, Rukert Terminals Corporation, which specializes in salts, metals, ores, and fertilizers, is one of the city's premier privately owned marine terminal operators. Since its foundation in 1921 by William G. Norman or ``Cap'' Rukert, Rukert Terminals has been a hard-working, family owned business that has thrived due to its strong commitment to quality service. Due to the leadership of Norman Rukert and his son, Rukert Terminals has developed over the years from a single truck and stable business to occupying more than one million square feet of storage space. Through the use of the most modern techniques, Rukert Terminals handles the nation's dry and break-bulk cargoes to ensure transfer and storage of the highest caliber. For several decades, the company has continuously provided quality jobs to the citizens of Baltimore. The city of Baltimore is an excellent place to live, filled with hard-working, dedicated citizens. The Port of Baltimore's economic contributions have been tremendous, generating $2 billion in revenue annually, and employing 19,000 Marylanders in direct jobs, and another 87,000 in indirect and maritime-related occupations. Rukert Terminals is part of the success of this port city, supplying superior warehousing, stevedoring, and vessel transfer services for the region. I urge my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me today in honoring this third generation family business, which for eighty-five years has provided quality marine services to one of America's premier cities while maintaining a standard for excellence that is a model for the rest.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this bill. I am disappointed that the House has missed an opportunity to promote in a meaningful way our health care system's transition from a paper-based medical records system to an electronic one. Congress is in nearly unanimous agreement that this move is necessary, and that it is in the best interest of patients, providers, and health care quality over all. But it appears that we have before us legislation that will do little to move the Nation toward that goal, and that in some respects, may be harmful. As a member of the Ways and Means Committee, which considered this bill earlier this year, I had the opportunity to vote on several amendments that would have strengthened this bill, that would have enabled our Committee to bring this bill to the floor with bipartisan support. Those amendments would have added funding so that doctors could afford to transition to electronic medical records; removed provisions that expand fraud and abuse, set a date certain for the implementation of interoperability standards, and guaranteed the confidentiality of personal health information. Unfortunately, each was defeated on a party-line vote. So the bill before us today still contains several fundamental problems. The first is the lack of strong privacy protections. Mr. Chairman, I wonder how many breaches of supposedly secure electronic medical records must occur before we get serious about enacting strong privacy protections into law. In two weeks, we will mark the 10th anniversary of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Privacy regulations stemming from that law were finally issued in 2001. Ten years ago, Americans' familiarity with electronic communication and electronic transfer of information was quite limited. HIPAA does not protect individuals. The second is a lack of funding. My colleagues, Mr. Wynn, Mr. Engel, and Ms. Schakowsky and I offered an amendment that would have provided grants for community health centers and hospitals with high numbers of low-income patients. These are the facilities that already face severe financial strains. They include many community health centers in Baltimore and larger facilities such as Prince George's Hospital Center in my home state of Maryland. They do not have extra money to implement expensive health information technology systems. Our amendment would have given them needed help to take advantage of health information technology for their patients, many of whom face significant health challenges due to chronic illnesses. If adopted, our amendment would have helped these facilities leap the financial hurdles that will otherwise prevent the spread of health information technology. Unfortunately, the Rules Committee refused to allow our amendment to be made in order. Mr. Chairman, many of my colleagues have made this point, but it bears repeating: The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that enacting this bill in its present form ``would not significantly affect either the rate at which the use of health technology will grow or how well that technology will be designed and implemented.'' The lack of funding is one of the primary reasons why. I am also very concerned about the exceptions to the Stark anti-self- referral and anti-kickback laws contained in the underlying bill. These provisions would serve to seriously weaken these important consumer protection laws. In H.R. 4157 as it is being considered today, physicians could be offered free or discounted technology in exchange for referring their patients to a facility or for a particular service. According to the Congressional Budget Office, these exceptions would raise health care costs. Mr. Chairman, I will vote for the motion to recommit, which will protect medical privacy. It will ensure that patients can keep their medical records out of electronic databases unless they first give their permission. It will require patient notification if their health information is misused, lost, or stolen. It requires the use of encryption and other safeguards against theft. Importantly, it would permit patients to limit access to particularly sensitive information, such as mental health data. Finally it would protect state privacy laws that may be more protective of patient confidentiality. I support the provisions of the bipartisan bill passed by the Senate, and I would hope that, for the sake of improved patient care, for better access to health information technology, for better privacy standards, that is the bill that emerges from conference. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposition to H.R. 4157.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5682, the U.S. and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act. India is the largest democracy in the world today, and is rightly viewed as an emerging global power in the 21st century. I was pleased to listen to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh address a Joint Session of Congress in July 2005 and describe his vision of future cooperation between India and the United States. I will continue to encourage our government to strengthen our ties to India, in areas such as high-technology, immigration, trade, space, and the military. Today the United States and India can take an important step to lay the foundation for our countries to greatly expand nuclear research, nuclear power, and nonproliferation cooperation with each other. India is facing enormous challenges in providing sufficient energy to its growing population. India has more people living in abject poverty than do Latin America and Africa combined. This legislation establishes a two-step process under which the United States may enter into a nuclear cooperation agreement with India. I am pleased that the Committee on International Relations has significantly amended this legislation, as compared to the version initially proposed by the Administration. The legislation today preserves the important oversight role of Congress. Under this legislation, the President must make a number of determinations before India can be exempted from restrictions contained in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA). Most notably, the President must determine that India has provided the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with a credible plan to separate civilian and military nuclear programs, and that India and the IAEA have concluded an agreement requiring the permanent application of IAEA safeguards to India's civil nuclear facilities. Once the President has made the determinations required by this legislation, Congress must approve a joint resolution to ratify the final negotiated text of a nuclear cooperation agreement with India. I also support the provision in the bill that requires additional consultation between the Administration and Congress, including regular detailed reports on nonproliferation matters and the implementation of this agreement. I look forward to working with the Administration to implement this nuclear cooperation program between the United States and India, consistent with this legislation and the intent of Congress.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleagues today in support of H. Con. Res. 384, recognizing and honoring the 100th anniversary of the founding of Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Incorporated. I also want to thank Mr. Hinchey for introducing this resolution, which I am proud to cosponsor. Mr. Speaker, what a legacy. Founded at Cornell University in 1906, Alpha Phi Alpha is the first black fraternity in the United States. Alpha Phi Alpha has an illustrious history of service and leadership that is evident through its list of members over the past century. This list includes those who are no longer with us, such as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Justice Thurgood Marshall, and those with whom we are fortunate to serve today, such as our distinguished colleagues in the House--Congressmen Charlie Rangel, Danny Davis, Bobby Scott, David Scott, Chaka Fattah, Gregory Meeks, and Emanuel Cleaver. The work of Alpha Phi Alpha is as strong as ever. The progress toward creating a national memorial here in Washington to Dr. King would not have been made without the initiative and dedication of Alpha Phi Alpha, and our Nation owes them a debt of gratitude. The fraternity has established the Alpha Disaster Relief Fund to aid the families affected by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and they were in the forefront of efforts to secure passage of the Voting Rights Act Reauthorization. Mr. Speaker, today's resolution is especially important to me because A Phi A is headquartered in my hometown of Baltimore, Maryland, and the fraternity's presence is felt not just on St. Paul Street, but throughout our city. This week, Alphas around the world will celebrate 100 years of leadership and commitment to humanity. The 2006 Centennial Celebration will be held here in the Nation's Capital, and I am pleased to join my colleagues in welcoming them. I urge my colleagues to unanimously adopt this resolution and to join me in wishing General President Darryl Matthews, Sr., Executive Director Willard Hall, Jr., and all the brothers of Alpha Phi Alpha an outstanding 100th Anniversary.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed today that we are about to consider a free trade agreement with Oman that I would have hoped we would have worked out so we could have had strong bipartisan support. Unfortunately, the agreement comes up short on international labor standards, and I believe we could have achieved those international labor standards to make sure that Oman complies with ILO standards. But, unfortunately, there was an unwillingness on the part of the negotiators to complete the agreement in a way that could have gotten more support. The second issue that I take, particularly with this rule, because I am going to support the gentlewoman's position of opposing the previous question, is to deal with a very sensitive issue of port security. So let me try to explain the port security issue, because I think there have been some misstatements on the floor of the House. This agreement permits Oman to operate landside aspects of port activities, including operation and maintenance of docks, loading and unloading of vessels directly to and from land, marine cargo handling, operation and maintenance of piers, ship cleaning, stevedoring, transfer of cargo between vessels and trucks, trains, pipelines and wharves and waterfront terminal operations. That is exactly what Dubai Ports World tried to do in ports in this country, including my own Port of Baltimore. We spoke up and the American people spoke up against allowing a foreign company to operate port facilities here in the United States, and we blocked that transaction. It was the right thing to do for the security of America and the security of our ports. Under this agreement, if Dubai Ports World had an operation within Oman, they would be permitted to apply to do those same operations here in the United States and they would be permitted to do that under the free trade agreement. I have heard my colleagues suggest that we can just invoke the essential security exception to an agreement, and you are correct, we can invoke the essential security exception and block the transaction. But then we are subject to dispute settlement procedures. We never give up our sovereignty in trade agreements, but we changed our tax laws because of international pressure when we thought we didn't have to, because otherwise we would have been subjected to tariffs against U.S. products. The same thing is true here. If the dispute panel rules against us, then we are subjecting ourselves to sanctions. Our USTR says this is absolute, they can't do that. But let me remind you, we have lost 83 percent of our cases in dispute settlement procedures where sanctions have been imposed against our country. So we haven't been that successful in these international tribunals. Let me also point out that by including this language in this bill, there will be continued pressure on this administration to allow foreign government companies to operate ports here in the United States. We have an administration that is friendly towards that. We have the responsibility in Congress to protect our ports and protect our Nation. It is our responsibility. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we can protect the ports here in America and make it clear, by simply taking out that one provision that would allow the operation of port facilities potentially by companies owned by countries that are not friendly to the United States. This is an important issue, and I urge all my colleagues to pay attention to this. This is our vote and our opportunity, and I urge the defeat of the previous question.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, before I yield the balance of our time to our distinguished leader, let me just make it clear that the Sultan has not, by decree, answered the issues that were raised in letters that were sent by our staff. In fact, they dealt with primarily one issue, and six or seven are yet to be dealt with; and that is why they are setting an October date for changing their law. And let me also make it clear that unlike Bahrain, the Omanis have not, on the ground, changed their labor practices to meet ILO standards. So they fall far short of Bahrain. And lastly, on the security issue, I have heard our colleagues put a lot of confidence in our ability to unilaterally use the essential security provision to prevent action on our ports. And I just wonder what attitude we would have if one of our insurance companies, for example, wanted to do business in Oman, and Oman said, oh, no, not because of essential security we will let you in our country. And then we say we don't have the right to challenge that? We clearly have the right to challenge that, as Oman would have the right to challenge our decision to invoke this exception if a company wanted to take over a port operation in the United States. And we are going to be subject to the second-guessing of independent tribunals. And our record has been terrible in the decisions of the tribunal as to how many we have lost against statements made in this body that said that what we would do would stand international muster, and it did not. So why are we putting this threat out there? Why are we making ourselves vulnerable? Why didn't we take it out of the agreement? Why do we want to subject America to that risk? Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield the balance of our time to our distinguished leader who has put forward an agenda for America that truly will make this Nation a safer Nation, Ms. Pelosi.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, can I inquire of my friend from Florida, his continuing to reserve, does that mean he has one speaker remaining?

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) who has been one of the leading spokespersons about international human rights and worker rights.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez) who has been one of our leaders on fair trade.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds just to point out to my friend that under this agreement, we now give third-party tribunals the opportunity to second-guess us on national security, and that was not there before this agreement. I offered an amendment to eliminate that. It should have been made in order. Then regards labor standards in Bahrain, they had on the ground operating ILO standards. We do not have that in Oman. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to my good friend from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner), a senior member of the Ways and Means Committee, one of our real leaders on trade issues.