Michael Castle

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to pay tribute to and honor the heroism of a brave civil servant, Mr. Johnny Sherrill of New Castle, Delaware. His bravery and heroic actions resulted in a life being saved. Mr. Sherrill, a mail carrier with the United States Postal Service, deserves a hero's recognition for his actions that save the life of 95- year-old Elsmere resident Almira Francisco. While on his delivery route, Mr. Sherrill heard a smoke detector alarm and noticed smoke coming from Mrs. Francisco's residence. Mr. Sherrill alertly checked on the residence, escorted Mrs. Francisco safely outside, and called the Elsmere Fire Department. After waiting for emergency personnel to arrive, Mr. Sherrill simply continued on with his delivery route. Mr. Sherrill displayed a quality that all Delawareans should look for in a role model--selfless concern for fellow citizens. We should all hope to emulate Mr. Sherrill's actions. In times like these, America needs everyday heroes who display courage and bravery when called upon to help their fellow citizens. I am proud to say that Mr. Sherrill exemplified these qualities with his actions, and his recognition, Mr. Speaker, is duly deserved. Ordinary people, like Johnny Sherrill from my great State of Delaware, are the true heroes in today's world, and are the true role models for the next generation of leaders, both inside and outside of Delaware's borders.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and pay tribute to a praiseworthy group of women from my home state of Delaware, the Sussex County Republican Women's Club. Fifty years ago, in 1952, the Sussex County Republican Women's Club began its many years of service to the community on the Federal, State, and local level. Today, I join the club in celebrating their 50th anniversary, and applaud the impact their organization has had on our State. Revered and respected by their peers, these women have spent the last 50 years working to promote a diverse base of political activism in Sussex County. From the beginning, they focused on promoting the tradition of a two party system, encouraging civic participation in the county and throughout the state and educating voters about the Republican message of low taxes and individual empowerment. They have been instrumental in electing Republican candidates in Delaware and maintaining a unified base for party activity in the state's most rural county. Through work on various campaigns, fundraisers and get-out-the-vote efforts, the Women's Club has always remained a strong advocate for both the needs of Sussex County citizens and the goals of the Republican Party. I would like to acknowledge the dedication and resolve that the Sussex County Republican Women's Club has maintained over the last fifty years. Their continuous efforts to uphold the standards and integrity of the Republican Party are an asset to all Delawareans. I would like to join my colleagues in congratulating the Sussex County Republican Women's Club on their 50th anniversary and to thank them for their immeasurable support and dedication.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Delaware Foster Parents of the Year, Lawrence and Norisa Jacobs of Georgetown, Delaware. Through their commitment to caring for children, they have welcomed eleven foster children into their home since 1997. Along with their two birth children and six current foster children, their home is a welcome, and active, atmosphere for the challenges of a family of ten. Foster parents add stability to a child's life which leads to fewer emotional, behavioral and social problems for children that may not have otherwise had the necessary family love and direction. These children deserve the best chance we can give them, and the Jacobs have proven their dedication to giving all of their children the optimal chance to develop into emotionally healthy adults. Mr. Speaker, through the years, the Jacobs have lovingly and unselfishly contributed every day to the lives of their children. It is appropriate that we take a moment to honor them. The contributions of Mr. and Mrs. Jacobs are undeniably worthy of recognition and cannot be commended enough. I am proud to stand here today recognizing them as not only Delaware's Foster Parents of the Year, but also as nominees for National Foster Parents of the Year.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman very much for this opportunity to speak to this bill. Actually, this legislation did not begin in 1996; it began in Washington in 1988 with a piece of legislation called the Family Support Act of 1988. In reality, for those who were in State legislatures or in the executive branch of the States, as some of us were, it started earlier than that. It started in 1985, when the States really began to look at welfare reform, with governors like Bill Clinton, for example, and Tommy Thompson, who came along and got involved in this. Decisions were made there. They were not made in Washington, D.C. It was set up in such a way that people would have the opportunity to be able to be educated and go to work, and eventually Washington went along with it in 1988, and obviously we really encompassed it in 1996. The arguments were the same then as they are now. It is sort of like the Star Wars business that was talked about last night. It is a rerun, to a degree; and the same people were saying it will work and others were saying it will not work. Yet, each and every time, this program has worked. It is the best social program in terms of improving people's lives that we have ever had, probably in the history of the Congress of the United States, or even this country. Because indeed, if we go out and talk to that 50 percent of the people who in recent years have gone off of welfare and we get their story as to their opportunity to become self-sufficient and to become independent, to be able to live their own lives and stand up for their families, we are going to find out how supportive they are of welfare reform. In this particular legislation there is a lot of concern about where we are going and what we are doing. There are concerns about the 70 percent requirement, can we meet that. I believe that we can. We have always met them before. Can the 40-hour work week with 26 hours of work and 14 hours of other activities be met? I believe that we can do that as well. One of the areas is child care. I introduced an amendment in the committee, and we were able to get it done, to add $200 million. Later it was worked out that we would have $2 billion more for child care. About 62 percent of all children in this country who are not in school yet are in child care. How do we take care of that? If one looks at this chart, we get some idea of where we are going and why we are adding $2 billion to the $4.8 billion of the direct child care here. We are going to find that when we look at all of the discretionary funds, the transfers from the TANF block grant, a lot of which goes to child care now, what the States do, and then add in Head Start at the bottom, we get to a point of $18.272 billion that goes into child care in the United States today. That is a large number, and it will be a large increase over what was there before; and my judgment is it is something we are going to be able to live with. So I totally support this legislation. I believe it will work. I believe perhaps some things need to be addressed, and I think they will be in the Senate and perhaps in conference; and one of those is the transitional medical assistance, a program that provides health coverage for welfare recipients. I would like to see that authorized for 5 years, because if you go off of welfare you are going to need that Medicaid assistance. We did not quite complete that task, but we can resolve that at a later time. I believe that the State flexibility provisions, frankly, were better before the changes were made recently; and I think there should be State flexibility if we can possibly have it. Mr. Speaker, I hope that as all of this is looked at in terms of jurisdictional aspects of what Congress is doing versus what they are doing in the States, we can give them the flexibility to carry out what they have to do. I am somewhat concerned about some of the programs that we have with respect to dealing with unplanned pregnancies and achieving independence for working men and women. Abstinence education I think is a very important part of this effort. Yet the language in H.R. 4737 provides a simple solution to a very complex problem and I think probably needs some reworking. Mr. Speaker, these are relatively minor concerns. Overall, this is legislation which, in my view, each of us, and I would appeal to those who, perhaps because of procedural concerns are opposing it, but that each of us would come forward in support. My colleagues will be proud of the fact that they supported it and proudest yet when they go out and meet individuals who have gotten off the rolls of welfare. I support this bill. This is the beginning of the efforts to empower the next generation of welfare-leavers, and I hope this entire Congress can get behind it and make sure we continue this opportunity for those who live in our districts around the country.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Joint Resolution 84, disapproving of the President's actions to impose higher tariffs on imported steel products than those recommended by the International Trade Commission, and against the accompanying rule. First, Madam Speaker, let me state in regards to the rule, I feel it is important that this chamber have a full and vigorous debate on the impact of the steel tariffs imposed by the President. This rule is creatively slanted in favor of protectionism and against free and fair trade. The tariffs, implemented by President Bush on March 5, are a well intentioned, but misguided effort to help the domestic steel industry. Although I agree the steel industry needs to be supported and reformed, protecting it from global competition, which is the essence of free trade, is not the answer. The industries that transport steel and those industries that need steel to make their products in the U.S. have begun to feel the brunt of these protectionist measures. Recent estimates reveal that the restrictions could cost as many as 74,500 jobs in steel consuming industries in order to protect 8,900 steel jobs. In addition, protecting these steel jobs will do nothing to address the needs of the thousands of retired steel workers concerned about their retirement security. Ironically, tax revenue from the jobs in steel transportation and those industries which purchase steel could have been used to provide a solution to these other problems. The Port of Wilmington, in the State of Delaware, imported 57 percent less steel in 2001 than in 2000 due to federal government steel safeguards--which caused a decrease of 53,000 work hours at the Port. The economic benefits provided by the steel consuming industries and our nation's ports cannot be forgotten in this debate. For example, the Delaware River region generated $70 million in total tax dollars for the State and Federal government in 2001. It is evident that the ITC's tariff recommendations would cost far fewer American jobs in the manufacturing, shipping and port industries. Furthermore, since the President's decision, our trade partners have begun to retaliate, which could further hurt the U.S. economy. Immediately following the decision, the Russian Government instituted a ban on the importation of U.S. poultry, which adversely affected the poultry industry in Delaware and throughout the nation. Other nations are also announcing retaliatory actions and filing complaints with the World Trade Organization. For example, the European Union has announced a broad range of possible tariffs on U.S. products, some as high as 100 percent, that would affect countless U.S. industries, including citrus and textiles. I recognize the need to support our domestic steel workers, but these measures must be done in a fair and balanced manner that generates U.S. jobs and spurs the national economy--not in a manner that adversely impacts these two fundamental principles and favors protectionism. Today, I rise in strong support of free and fair trade and the role of the United States in the global economy. At a minimum, I encourage my colleagues to vote against the rule in order to allow a full and fair debate on this legislation to overturn the President's decision. And I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting H.J. Res. 84.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and pay tribute to an exemplary group of women from my home state of Delaware, the Kent County Republican Women's Organization. This year, the Kent County Republican Women's Organization will celebrate 50 years of service to the community on the Federal, State, and local level. Revered and respected by their peers, these women formed the first organization of its kind in Kent County. From the beginning, they focused on promoting the tradition of a two party system, encouraging civic participation in the county and throughout the State and educating voters about the Republican message of low taxes and individual empowerment. They have been instrumental in electing Republican candidates in Delaware through working on various campaigns and fundraisers, sponsoring events such as ``Meet Our Candidates Night,'' congregating in Washington to advocate Republican issues and attending various Republican conventions to learn how they can better the party and improve their efforts. I would like to acknowledge the dedication and resolve that the Kent County Republican Women's Organization has maintained over the last fifty years. Their continuous efforts to uphold the standards and integrity of the Republican Party is to be commended. I would like to join my colleagues in congratulating the Kent County Republican Women's Organization on their 50th anniversary and to thank them for their unmeasurable support and direction.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri)

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 386) supporting a National Charter Schools Week, and for other purposes

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Con. Res. 386.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller), who is the author of this legislation.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of H. Con. Res. 386, recognizing the charter school movement for its contribution to improving our Nation's public schools. Charter schools are independent public schools that are created by parents and teachers and operated with exemptions from most State laws and regulations. In just 10 years, the charter school movement has grown to over 2,400 schools enrolling 580,000 students in 34 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. These schools provide new choices for parents of public schoolchildren and they serve as laboratories for innovative educational practices that improve student achievement. In my State of Delaware, the first charter school located in Wilmington opened in 1996. Unlike other schools, Wilmington Charter School focused its curriculum on math and science and it has achieved top scores in the Delaware assessments in math, reading, writing and science. Like many charter schools, Wilmington Charter School boasts high parental involvement, excellent student behavior, and state-of- the-art technology in every classroom. Unlike many traditional public schools, however, charter schools are subject to an unprecedented level of accountability. They have detailed written performance contracts, and where they are unable to meet the terms of the contracts, the schools are closed. Recently citing financial instability, the Delaware Department of Education took a first step toward the revocation of the charter of a charter school in my State. Many parents and students waged a heroic battle to keep the school doors open, attempting to fund the school with bake sales and auctions, and many are still reeling from the decision. Despite this setback, many Delaware charter schools continue to have more applications for admissions than they can currently accommodate. In my mind, this reinforces the need for alternative public education in Delaware. Combined with high parent satisfaction and improved academic achievement, the strong support for Delaware charter schools has caused many school officials to acknowledge some of the failures of our traditional public schools, and they tell me it compels them to improve. With this week being National Charter Schools Week, April 29 to May 3, it is therefore fitting that we recognize our Nation's charter schools as another way to improve student achievement and increase parental involvement. In conclusion, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller) for his leadership on this issue, and I urge an ``aye'' vote. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Isakson).

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller) for his sponsorship of this, and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer). Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill, H.R. 3801, the Clerk be authorized to make technical corrections and conforming changes to the bill.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous information on H.R. 3801.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3801, the Education Science Reform Act Legislation, which transforms the Office of Education Research into a streamlined, more independent Academy of Education Sciences. Earlier this year President Bush signed landmark education reforms into law, demanding new and more challenging standards of accountability from our States and improved student achievement from our schools. Recognizing that any successful education reform effort requires the best information on how children learn, the words ``scientifically-based research'' appear more than 100 times in the new law. The reason for the focus on scientific research is simple: Educators need to know what works if they are to improve student achievement and narrow the gap between our lowest and highest performing students. Unfortunately, too much of what we recognize as education research is simply opinion buttressed by anecdotes. Consider the following examples: Recently Congress established a national panel to evaluate existing research on the most effective way to teach children to read. They examined more than 100,000 federally-funded studies on reading, some written as far back as 1966, and concluded only 10,000 met their standards for scientific rigor. From 1967 to 1976, the Federal Government managed the largest education research project ever conducted in the United States, comparing more than 20 different teaching programs on more than 70,000 students in 180 schools. Yet at the end of the study, all of the programs, those that were successful and those that failed, were recommended for distribution to schools. Today schools invest untold time and resources in one education fad after another. Without sound science to back program claims, teachers and school administrators are forced to use guesswork to determine the best classroom practices in students and students' achievement often suffers. Even when scientific research is conducted, news of the findings seldom reaches teachers in the classrooms. When it does, it is often not relevant to the needs or it is not translated into understandable classroom applications. Two years ago I introduced legislation to improve the rigor and relevance of education research and to provide educators and policy-makers access to unbiased and reliable information. The legislation before us today, H.R. 3801, picks up where that bill left off. It ensures that tried and true scientific information, not fads or fiction, form the basis for setting education policy and improving education practice. Specifically, H.R. 3801 attempts to address what I have come to know as serious shortcomings in the fields of education research, including the creeping influence of short-lived partisan or political operatives, the funding and dissemination of questionable studies, programs, and practices, and an overly bureaucratic office with no real sense of mission, mired by duplicative programs and competing interests. Among other things, H.R. 3801 replaces the current Office of Education Research and Improvement with the new streamlined Academy of Education Science; insulates the new academy from inappropriate partisan or political influences; ensures that high quality standards put an end to education fads that masquerade as sound science; and creates a culture of science by allowing the new director to attract and retain the best researchers, evaluators and statisticians to the academy. It ensures that the research activities of the academy are driven by the needs of parents, teachers and school administrators, not ivory tower researchers; and ensures that technical assistance, including help in implementing the No Child Left Behind Act, is accountable to States and schools. For more than 30 years, we have heard excuses on why education could not be held to the same standards as other professions, and for 30 years Federal research conducted by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement has been, to a large extent, a disappointment. If we are to lift those who are struggling to achieve proficiency in reading, math and science, we must give our educators the information they need to help their students learn. For that to happen, we must expect more from our Federal investment in education research. We must expect scientific rigor and we must ensure that what works in education informs classroom practice. To that end, H.R. 3801 makes long overdue changes to the Office of Education Research and Improvement. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan common sense legislation and send a strong message to the other body that the successful implementation of No Child Left Behind Act requires a Federal office that can deliver a high quality education research product. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers and I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me just return the compliment to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee). Disagreeing with the gentleman is better than agreeing with most people I have learned. He is a great pleasure to work with. We have worked together on a number of issues now, and these are contentious issues I might add, and have been able to work them out, greatly to his credit, and I appreciate that. I would also like to take this time to extend my heartfelt thanks to the many Members, staff and administration officials that made this bipartisan reform effort possible. Although education research is not an area that commands the attention of many Americans, or even many Members of Congress for all that matter, I was fortunate to work with a group of dedicated professionals who wanted to make education research better. They include obviously the Subcommittee on Education Reform ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee); but also the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Schaffer), the vice-chairman; the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), full committee ranking member; as well as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Isakson), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott); the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo), and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens). I thank all of them for their important contributions. I also want to extend my gratitude to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the chairman of the Education and Workforce Committee. Without his leadership and thoughtful counsel, we would not be on the floor today. I would also be remiss if I did not thank President Bush, Secretary Paige and Under Secretary Hickock and Assistant Secretary Russ Whitehurst and Becky Campoverde. I am indebted to them all for raising the profile of this issue and for their year-long counsel and unwaivering support of the principles embodied in this bill. Last but certainly not least, I want to thank the staff for their hard work and abiding interest in education reform. Often vacations were sacrificed and family dinners were put on hold to get us to the floor of the House of Representatives. I think one has to be a Member of the House to understand how important staffs are to us and the extraordinary work they did. Although many offered a helping hand, I want to especially thank Sally Lovejoy, the boss in all this; Doug Mesecar, who is to my left; Bob Sweet, Patrick Lyden, Jo-Marie St. Martin; on the other side, Alex Nock, Denise Forte and Charlie Barone, all of whom did a superb job. This team really went above and beyond the call of duty, and I am grateful to them for their efforts. I would particularly like to thank Kara Haas of my staff who has dedicated all the recent years to education issues and has done a wonderful job of pulling all of this together.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3801) to provide for improvement of Federal education research, statistics, evaluation, information, and dissemination, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner, Subcommittee Chairman Gekas and the House Leadership for bringing up this legislation today to improve and revamp the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and I am pleased to see that President Bush is behind the measure. The United States must do a better job of protecting America's borders, tracking foreign students and visitors, dealing with illegal aliens and serving those who are served daily by the INS. Over seven months have passed since the attacks of September 11, and many of the loopholes that the terrorists utilized to harm our nation, have not been addressed. I am hopeful the President will have the opportunity to sign enhanced border security legislation regarding student visa reforms, smart card technology, reform of the visa waiver program, shared databases and integrated entry-exit data systems. These are good reforms but the reforms and technology are only as good as the people who administer the various programs and utilize the technology. The INS has been a maligned agency that has had major difficulties implementing visa tracking programs and integrated entry-exit systems. A recent review by the Department of Justice Inspector General found that INS officials mismanaged $31 million aimed at automating a visa tracking system. To this day we are unable to seriously determine who is in this country at any given time. At the same time it is trying to address its enforcement procedures, the INS is not properly serving those who rely on the INS to process their various immigration documents. The INS has long backlogs of Visa and other petitions. 4.9 million petitions were pending before the INS at the end of September 2001--this is a sevenfold increase since 1993. The INS on several occasions has attempted to reform itself, but in the light of the immigration problems associated with the September 11 attacks, internal organizational changes will not work. Long time supervisors who have resisted change in the past are today not in a better position to internally reform the INS. While I believe Commissioner Ziglar is working hard to address the organizational and morale problems that have plagued the agency, legislation is the only way to turn the INS in the right direction. Only legislative restructuring like H.R. 3231 can create two separate agencies that concentrate on different missions--administering immigration benefits and enforcing immigration laws. The two new organizations will have their own budgets and dedicated employees who will be focused on their own distinct mission. I applaud this legislation because it will also create a new Ombudsman to monitor and improve the services side of the agency, create clear chains of commands at the INS, and eliminate mission overload that is crippling the agency. We owe it to the American people to improve our border security, track who is entering and exiting our country and expedite the process of timely immigration petitions. H.R. 3231 passed the House Judiciary Committee with great bipartisan support and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3231 today.