Lois Capps

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant support of the resolution to reject the recommendations of the Base Closure and Realignment Commission. I support the BRAC process and believe that over the years it has led to the orderly reorganization of our Nation's defense infrastructure. I believe the Pentagon and the BRAC Commission made a good-faith effort to carefully examine every base. Nonetheless, I continue to believe the Commission made a terribly shortsighted decision when it voted to uphold some of the Pentagon's recommendations for Naval Base Ventura County. I am particularly disappointed the Commission voted to move some of the RDT&E missions away from the base. In my view, the Commission ignored a number of important factors. First, the Commission's vote went against the recommendation of its professional staff. The staff correctly recognized that Naval Base Ventura County has significant military value, and its missions contribute to the readiness of our war fighter. Second, relocating the vital functions performed by the personnel at the base will have lasting consequences for our national security. The activities conducted at this site for the Navy, Air Force, Missile Defense Agency, and others cannot be replicated anywhere else in the Nation. Moreover, the base's sea range is linked with other inland ranges in California--providing an unmatched capability to the Defense Department. The realignment will diminish these existing operational capabilities and efficiencies and negatively impact the ability of our fighting men and women to get their jobs done. The effect of this would be immediately felt in Iraq and Afghanistan. Finally, realigning the base's missions will waste, not save, taxpayer dollars. We cannot afford to spend a lot of money to move missions and personnel when there's no long-term savings involved. Especially now that we're looking at spending more than $200 billion to help rebuild the Gulf Coast areas devastated by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Mr. Chairman, the BRAC process must be logical and fair. I do not believe this round of closures met those criteria. I continue to strongly believe the missions at Naval Base Ventura County are a critical element of our national security system and an important asset to our local community. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the resolution of disapproval.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize and honor 50 years of reference publishing and involvement with local community schools and libraries by the Santa Barbara publisher, ABC-CLIO. ABC-CLIO is a privately held company founded by the Boehm family and is now in its second generation of ownership. The company's corporate headquarters is located in Santa Barbara, California, with additional offices in Denver, Colorado, and Oxford, England. Committed to serving the history profession and its teachers, as well as students and scholars of history, ABC-CLIO annually publishes approximately 80 encyclopedias, guides, and handbooks. Since 1991, this acclaimed reference book-line has won over 60 best-reference awards from the American Library Association and Library Journal. The best-known publications by ABC-CLIO are the abstracting and indexing services, Historical Abstracts and America: History and Life, which together represent the largest bibliographic history database in the world. Its award-winning social studies databases reach students in thousands of schools nationally. I commend Eric H. Boehm, Inge P. Boehm, Fritz Fellner, and John A.S. Grenville for founding Historical Abstracts 50 years ago. This pioneering publication connects the international community of historians, making writings of the international history community known and accessible to historians and history students worldwide. ABC-CLIO is also committed to serving our local community by actively participating in Partners in Education, United Way, and numerous other local programs. ABC-CLIO and CEO Ron Boehm have supported the nationally recognized Computers for Families, which is the flagship program for Partners in Education, since its inception eight years ago. I commend ABC-CLIO on its 50th Anniversary and recognize them for the important role they play in our community and our world by ensuring that historical scholarship is accessible to historians and students across the globe.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I was not able to be present for the following rollcall vote and would like the Record to reflect that I would have voted as follows: Rollcall No. 520--``yea.''

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this ill- conceived legislation. This bill is a shameless attempt to use the tragedy of Katrina as an engine to drive bad policies into law. The purported reason behind the bill is the high cost of gas caused by Katrina, and this is the bill that is supposed to meet that challenge. But gas prices were at record highs before Katrina hit. Katrina merely ramped them up and provided an excuse to push more failed Republican energy ideas. I guess the best thing we can say about the bill is what is not in it, namely, the repeal of the longstanding, bipartisan moratorium on new offshore drilling. But the bill, however, does gut public health and environmental laws. It does strip States and localities of the authority to protect their own citizens. And, bottom line, it fails to protect consumers from price gouging at the pump, which we have seen going on on a regular basis. Mr. Speaker, the problem of high gas prices is a serious one. It affects businesses and families on a daily basis, and I should know because my gas prices in my district are usually among the highest in the Nation. Right now they hover around $3.50 a gallon. But this bill is not about trying to do something about that. It is about trying to distract the American people from a failed Republican energy strategy, a strategy that fails to realize that we have 3 percent of the world's oil reserves while we account for 25 percent of the world demand. This is a strategy that relies on increasing our supplies at all costs while conservation efforts are ridiculed by our Vice President as ``signs of personal virtue.'' This is a strategy that says if laws that protect public health or environment get in the way, we should just waive them. It is a strategy that dooms America to never-ending energy crises that consistently enrich energy companies at the expense of hard-working American families and businesses. Over the past several years, we have had repeated chances to craft commonsense, efficient, and effective energy legislation that would set America on a more stable future; but this Republican Congress has failed to do that and this, failure is once again realized in this bill. So I urge my colleagues to vote for the alternative and to vote down this awful legislation.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Grover Barnes on the occasion of his 98th birthday. Grover Barnes is the oldest living African American Man in Santa Barbara, and a most esteemed citizen of our fair city. He truly is a rare gem and a community treasure. Grover Barnes, a Texas native, came to Santa Barbara over 62 years ago. In 1942 he was hired by the Miramar Hotel as a porter and one year later was the first African American promoted to Bell Captain where he served for thirty-five years. It has been said that Grover Barnes is an inimitable part of history of the city of Montecito. His level of service is remembered by generations of guests. He was known for his warm hospitality to the young and old, the rich and famous, and the not so rich and famous. In 2001, Grover Barnes was voted as a Local Hero of Santa Barbara and affectionately called ``The Ambassador of Hospitality.'' The generosity of spirit that marked Mr. Barnes' professional life is many times amplified in his lifelong dedication to his friends and family, to community service and to his church. It is his deep devotion to his community, his concern for those who have been left behind, his commitment to making sure the right thing is done for someone in need, that makes him a true community treasure. He has worked tirelessly to advance just causes and has always stayed focused on the right issues. To this day, Mr. Barnes contributes to our community life by writing letters to the Santa Barbara News Press editor which are thought provoking and historically significant. Grover Barnes has received numerous honors for his greatest joy: a lifelong devotion to serving others and for making sure justice is done. He has been intensely involved in many community organizations including: the NAACP Santa Barbara Chapter, the Brotherhood of Santa Barbara, the Mason Lodge, the Eastside Study Group and the George Washington Carver Scholarship Society. As a man who has devoted his life to helping others, I today recognize Grover Barnes as a role model of the very best kind, a man who has been a friend to many and a teacher to all, a shining example of what makes this country and community great.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize suicide as a public health problem, and suicide prevention as a community responsibility. The State of California has recognized September as ``Suicide Prevention Month.'' This is in support and recognition of the National and International Suicide Prevention Week. It remains essential to remember that suicide is the 11th leading cause of all deaths in the United States and the 3rd leading cause of death among people from the ages of 15 to 24. It is also the 10th leading cause of all deaths and the number one cause of all injury deaths in the State of California. Moreover, suicide remains the 9th leading cause of all deaths and the 2nd leading cause of all injury deaths in Santa Barbara County. Within the United States, one person completes suicide every 17 minutes; and it is estimated that 4.47 million people in the United States are survivors of suicide (those who have lost a loved one to suicide). In addition, guns stored in the house are used for suicide 40 times more often than for self-protection and 54 percent of people who die by suicide use a firearm. Regarding mental illness, the stigma associated with mental illness works against suicide prevention by discouraging persons at risk for suicide from seeking life-saving help and further traumatizes survivors of suicide. Finally, we must remember that a great many suicides are preventable, and can be reduced through awareness, education and treatment. I therefore commend The Glendon Association, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization based in Santa Barbara, California whose mission is to save lives and help people create more meaningful lives by addressing the social problems of suicide, violence, child abuse and troubled interpersonal relationships. The Glendon Association accomplishes this through community outreach, research, education and training within the local community, the State of California, nationally and internationally. I recognize the important work they do through their Annual Suicide Prevention Forums which in this, their 11th year, include three free community programs, open to the public, held in Santa Barbara, Santa Maria and San Luis Obispo, California.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, Hurricane Katrina highlights the need for disaster preparedness. Across the country, everyone is asking: Are we prepared? Every level of government is reexamining how we can make our communities more disaster resistant. In James Lee Witt's FEMA, we had a tool to make that happen: Project Impact. This proven program brought together local leaders, citizens, and businesses to prepare for and protect themselves against the worst that nature could throw at them; and at the Federal level funding worked to leverage support from private sources, multiplying their effectiveness. Unfortunately, this administration unwisely tossed aside Project Impact and broke a model that had worked so well. Today, I will introduce legislation to bring Project Impact back to life. The Disaster Plan Act will reauthorize FEMA's predisaster mitigation grant program. None of us can stop natural disasters from happening, but we can and we must be prepared for what happens when a disaster occurs. Project Impact was a program that worked in a FEMA that worked, and now we need to bring it back.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize a great organization, Counterpart International, and a tireless advocate, Eva Haller. For 40 years Counterpart International has done extraordinary work, first helping South Pacific countries move from colonialism to independence, and then expanding their efforts to assist the growth of democracy in Africa, Latin America, Eurasia, and around the Caribbean. This global organization's strategy is to engage people in their own communities through education and exchange programs that teach the skills necessary for citizens to strengthen their homeland's independence from within. Counterpart also brings together and draws upon the support of governments, corporations, and individuals to accomplish this goal. Their approach relies on ``smart partnerships'' which engage all sectors and benefit all participants. These two principles increase the likelihood of success where other development programs fail. Another key element in Counterpart's success is my dear friend and constituent Eva Haller. As a board member of Counterpart she has emphasized a focus on women, the environment, and preservation of cultures. She is a passionate and tenacious advocate for all people who need help, be they children, poverty stricken families, or the populations of far off land struggling to become free. With her international outlook she knows that those of us who live in the United States, the wealthiest country in the world, have a special duty to be generous with our time, money, and cares. Eva is a tremendous example for us all to live up to and I am proud to recognize the incredible work that she does on her own and with Counterpart International. It is no accident that the organization will honor Eva, among others, at its 40th anniversary benefit reception in New York on September 21. In these trying times there is more and more need for the leadership that Eva and Counterpart International exemplify.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Hyman Bookbinder, one of our nation's leading advocates for human rights and equality. The terrible stories and photographs coming out of Louisiana and Mississippi remind us that, among other things, there still is a race divide in America. This is not to say that the response to the disaster was dictated by racial considerations. But it is to say that sadly no accident that the segment of the population that bore much of the brunt of the suffering was predominantly poor and black. At the same time, we can say with some pride that our country has made significant progress toward a more just society. It's far from enough but giant strides have been made, particularly in the area of social equality. An article in Sunday's Washington Post reminded us that these advances did not just happen. They happened because heroes among us made them happen. I have attached a copy of the article for my colleagues. The article tells the story about the successful 1960 effort to integrate Glen Echo Park, an amusement park in Montgomery County, Maryland, just outside the District line. Glen Echo was a fabulous place of swimming pools, dance halls, carousels, a roller coaster and other summer time amusements. It was so popular that a DC trolley from the Capitol Hill area--and neighborhoods east--was constantly full with kids heading northwest and up MacArthur Boulevard to this delightful recreation spot. But not African American kids. They were allowed on the trolleys but banned from the park. And the ban was enforced by the Montgomery County police. In 1960, a group of courageous Howard University students--Dion Diamond, Michael Proctor, and Gwendolyn Britt (now a Maryland state senator)--decided to test the race policy by riding the merry-go-round. They were abused and kicked out. So they turned to ask for help from the prosperous white Bannockbum community living near the park. And, almost immediately, a movement erupted. Hyman Bookbinder, an AFL-CIO official, and long-time lobbyist for civil rights and Jewish causes, used his organizing and public relations skills to force the owners of Glen Echo Park to back down. Bookie, as everyone calls him, was later an aide to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. Esther Delaplaine organized the mothers and Ida Leivick, a teacher at the local school, worked with her colleagues. Finally the Supreme Court stepped in and forced Glen Echo either to open up or shut down. The Howard/Bannockbum coalition had prevailed. This past Saturday, the people who made it happen gathered at Glen Echo to commemorate a moment in time when all things seemed possible in America. They still are. We just need more people who are willing to stick their necks out the way these Howard University students and suburbanites did in 1960. I particularly want to salute Hyman Bookbinder. He is now 89 and over the past sixty-five years, he has been at the forefront of the struggle for human rights, not just down the street in Montgomery County but throughout the world. I've been in the House of Representatives for eight years but I have heard about Bookie's years as a civil rights lobbyist when he was known as the 101st Senator. When people were suffering, he was here fighting, pushing, and cajoling to make things better. He has helped change this country. To put it simply, we need more people like Bookie. Thankfully he is still here, always fighting the good fight and living the Biblical injunction: ``Justice, justice, you shall pursue.'' [From washingtonpost.com, Sept. 11, 2005] Marking a Park's Social Revolution (by Ann E. Marimow) The last time Dion Diamond walked through the gates of Glen Echo Amusement Park, he was ushered out after two minutes. The last time Michael Proctor tried to ride the merry-go- round there, he was arrested. That was in 1960, when blacks were not allowed to swim in the park's famed Crystal Pool, with its slide and fountain, and also could not ride on the roller coaster. On Saturday, the two civil rights activists returned for the first time to mark the anniversary of the picket lines that led to the desegregation of the park and ultimately to a U.S. Supreme Court case. ``I was never in here for more than a couple minutes,'' said Diamond, 64, laughing and shaking his head in disbelief as he looked out at the same carousel, with its ornate woodcarved horses and cheerful organ music. Even though the park's private owners quietly opened the gates to all in 1961, Proctor had never returned. ``I told my kids about it,'' the Hughesville doctor said. ``But way down deep, there were some negative feelings.'' The effort to integrate Glen Echo Park, in the summer of 1960, came after the first sit-ins at segregated lunch counters in North Carolina and during student protests throughout the region. But Glen Echo Park was notable because of the support the protesters, black Howard University students, received from white residents of the nearby Bannockburn neighborhood, some of whom were experienced labor leaders. They walked side by side for five weeks that summer--and they came together again yesterday. Browsing a collage of black-and-white photos and yellowed newspaper clippings, they recalled some of the most dramatic moments when Proctor and four other members of the D.C. Non- Violent Action Group were arrested for refusing to get off the merry-go-round. In 1964, the Supreme Court ruled that the Montgomery County deputies had improperly enforced private segregation. Outside the park gates in 1960, the students brought a sense of fearlessness and enthusiasm. Stay-at-home mothers from Bannockburn were the reliable foot soldiers on the picket line, and the labor leaders brought political connections and organizing strategies. Esther Delaplaine, who lived five blocks from the park, mobilized fellow mothers. She recalled the intense pain and frustration of the time. ``We could ride the merry-go-round, but [black students] got arrested,'' said Delaplaine, 81. Her daughter Rocky led yesterday's gathering of 300 people in an emotional rendition of ``O Freedom,'' a song that was sung on the picket line, Hyman Bookbinder, then an AFL-CIO lobbyist for civil rights, was joined yesterday by his daughter and granddaughter. ``The movement wasn't only for us old-timers. It was for our families,'' said Bookbinder, 89. ``This event is a reminder.'' For some involved in the sit-ins and picket lines, it was too painful to return. Those who attended said it was as if they were transported in time. Seeing the trolley car parked in front of the gates, Tina Clarke said she felt like a teenager again, as she was when she protested with the county chapter of the NAACP. She said she still could feel the spit on her cheek from a white male heckler that stained the white collar of her blouse. ``There is no time frame on when pain and suffering should end,'' said Clarke, 67, African American liaison for Montgomery County Executive Douglas M. Duncan (D). Clarke said she had to explain to friends and relatives who questioned her decision to return to the park that it is now an arts and cultural center operated by a nonprofit partnership with lands managed by the National Park Service. ``It's not just my history; it's our history,'' she said. ``It's part of what helped us get to where we are today. If none of these things happened, where would we be?'' But the park is a troubling memory for some who were children at the time. When Vernon Ricks drives past the park from his home in Potomac, he remembers riding the trolley car to the entrance on Sundays. From the windows, he could see the neon lights, the merry-go-round and the wooden roller coaster, but he could not enter. He attended the gathering because his wife, Janet, wanted to ``start the healing of a scar,'' she said. ``To me, it is still a symbol of segregation,'' said Ricks, 66. ``I'm still not happy to be here.'' Later, he added, ``Don't say I'm coming back.'' Taking her husband's hand, Janet Ricks said, ``Yes, you are. Yes, you are.''

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I was not able to be present for the following rollcall vote and would like the Record to reflect that I would have voted as follows: Rollcall No. 453--``yea.''

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, no one disputes that rising medical malpractice premiums are a major, major problem. Unfortunately this bill before us will do nothing to solve that problem. It would limit consumers' ability to hold negligent doctors, profit-driven HMOs, insurance companies, and prescription drug companies accountable. The claim is made that excessive or frivolous lawsuits are the cause of rising premiums. The problem is that lawsuits affected by the bill are by definition not frivolous. Where large damages are awarded, it is a jury that has found that the patient has been severely harmed, and, in fact, over the last 5 years, malpractice insurance payments to patients have actually gone down, and that while premiums continue to go up. Now, something is wrong with that ratio. There is no evidence that capping the damages to an injured person because of malpractice is the way to solve this problem. It will not lower premiums. It will not even stabilize them. All this bill will do is to make very sure that as the malpractice insurers collect outrageous premiums, they will be able to continue to pay out even less to the patients who have actually been harmed. This will penalize innocent victims of medical negligence. Furthermore, the bill goes far beyond lawsuits against doctors. It would also protect drug companies and HMOs from lawsuits filed by people injured because of their policies. In 3 years of considering this issue, the majority has not presented a shred of evidence that drug companies need these protections. They are making billions of dollars in profits. If this bill becomes law, the ability of injured patients to hold negligent drug companies accountable would be dramatically limited. We have all seen the recent stories about Cox-2 inhibitors, other medications. So many have tragic outcomes. They highlight the fact that drugs may harm patients. Those studies expose how dangerous this bill can be. We should be helping doctors with malpractice insurance premiums. But this bill is not going to help doctors, and it will hurt patients. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill. Let us look for real solutions to rising medical malpractice premiums.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. With great respect to our leaders, the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) and the gentleman from Michigan (Ranking Member Dingell), Mr. Speaker, I do rise in opposition to the bill. This bill is a missed opportunity to provide a secure energy future for America. It is a bill packed with taxpayer-subsidized goodies for energy companies. It is a bill that will not reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased about one part of the bill: it no longer contains the liability waiver to the MTBE industry. Now, perhaps, communities with MTBE-polluted groundwater will have a fighting chance to get it cleaned up by the people who made the mess. I call on the MTBE industry to do the right thing now, stop fighting in court and in Congress, own up to your responsibility by sitting down and working out cleanup plans with these affected communities. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the rest of the bill is mostly bad news. At a time of record-high energy prices, the bill hands out tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies for the oil and gas, coal and nuclear power industries already making record profits. The bill also cuts States out of LNG siting decisions, giving power to the Federal Government, which, of course, always knows what is best. In addition, the bill does precious little to make America more energy efficient or to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. There is no effort to make our cars more energy efficient. Seventy-five percent of the oil we use every day goes right into our gas tanks. This bill acts like it is okay that mileage on our autos has gone down in recent years, there is no connection between that and today's record gas prices. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this bill calls for new offshore drilling under the guise of conducting a so-called inventory. My friends on the other side will argue that this is just a study so we know what is out there. MMS already conducts surveys every 5 years on offshore resources. We already know where the offshore oil and gas is: in the central and western gulf where drilling is currently allowed and is under way, so why the inventory? Putting it simply, this is just a first step in opening up offshore areas now off limits to new drilling. This means new drilling off States like Florida, North Carolina, and California. Make no mistake: this inventory is the oil companies' attempt to begin dismantling the long-standing, bipartisan moratorium on new drilling in these areas. Voting for this bill means you support drilling off Florida, California, North Carolina, and other States. I urge my colleagues to vote down this bill.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding. Mr. Speaker, there are many reasons to oppose the CAFTA-DR deal. But I want to talk about one reason that has not gotten much attention, the inclusion of tobacco products. Mr. Speaker, tobacco is a unique commodity, killing millions of people around the globe each year. Trade agreements are supposed to benefit consumers by spurring competition and reducing prices for beneficial products such as wheat, computers, and auto ports. While increased trade may offer a range of benefits for exporters and importers alike, these benefits do not apply to tobacco products. Reducing tariffs on cigarettes, other tobacco products, or removing public health measures that may run afoul of trade agreement's rules on non-tariff barriers is going to result in increased smoking rates, needless preventable deaths, and disease. That is a fact. Tobacco products were excluded from the tariff schedules in the U.S.- Jordan and U.S.-Vietnam free trade agreements negotiated under the Clinton administration. This administration has done an about-face including tobacco products in the U.S.-Chile agreement at the behest of Philip Morris. This unfortunate turn of events should not be repeated. I urge my colleagues to reject the CAFTA-DR trade agreement. It is bad for workers, it is bad for the environment, and with the inclusion of tobacco products, it is bad for health.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge this is a very strong bipartisan effort on behalf of the Congress, the Women's Caucus and the Iraqi Women's Military Caucus as well. We acknowledge their presence here.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. I want to associate myself with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) who spoke so eloquently in opposition on the Floor. At this particular moment, it is clearly in our national interests to strengthen the democratically elected Abbas government. This is especially true in the face of the imminent Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and because the Palestinian Authority is up against a strong challenge from Hamas in the upcoming parliamentary elections. The amendment states that the United States should promote the emergence of a Palestinian government that combats terrorism. We all agree with that. But at the same time, we must continue to urge the Israeli government to stop settlement activity and ease the conditions of occupation. Both sides have obligations under the Road Map. And more than anything, the U.S. government must use this opportunity to work with both parties to ensure that the turnover of Gaza from Israel to the Palestinians is carefully coordinated and that the myriad of security, economic, and infrastructure issues are dealt with fairly and quickly. Mr. Chairman, not only must the Berkley amendment be defeated, but I wish the underlying bill would not have included such onerous conditions and limitations on Palestinian aid. I support the efforts of President Bush who has twice used his waiver authority to grant funding directly to the Palestinian Authority and who opposes the inflexible language in this bill. Instead of passing one-sided and punitive amendments like this one, it is incumbent upon the United States Congress to try to help both Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas confront the extremists on each side who seek to derail the peace process. Fragile as it may be, a flicker of hope and optimism has been kindled in the Middle East. But it may truly be our last hope. And what a great tragedy it would be--for Israel, for the Palestinians, and for America--if we didn't do everything in our power to bring an end to this terrible conflict. Defeat the Berkley amendment.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I also speak today in tribute to the 157th anniversary of the historic Seneca Falls convention, which paved the way for women's equality in the political world. Without the principles set forward by those courageous women and men at that convention, neither I nor the other 68 Members of the House currently here would ever have dreamed of being where we are today. American women everywhere would never have dreamed of being able to contribute what they have over the last century and a half. They have excelled as leaders of political movements and pioneers of important policies. The women at Seneca Falls set forth an agenda that would guide the women's rights movement for centuries. Their efforts paved the way for the ratification of the 19th amendment, without which women could not cast votes on issues that directly affect them. Despite strong opposition, they knew then that extending equal rights to women would lead to a more successful society. And 157 years later, we know they were right, and we continue their dream of a United States with full and active participation of all women in politics.

Mrs. CAPPS

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I was not able to be present for the following rollcall votes and would like the Record to reflect that I would have voted as follows: rollcall No. 373--``yea''; rollcall No. 374--``yea''; rollcall No. 375--``yea''; rollcall No. 376--``nay''; rollcall No. 377--``yea''; rollcall No. 378--``yea''; and rollcall No. 379--``yea.''

Mrs. CAPPS

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

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis).

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I do not have any further speakers, just closing comments of my own. (Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my esteemed colleague, who is in opposition to this amendment and, indeed, he, the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, is my friend and friends of all of us who have spoken today who are members of his committee. But I wish to comment on some of the remarks he made in his speech. First, regarding the list funds which he spoke about as being a place for managing this pollution. Stopping the leaks from the tanks stops additional MTBE contamination, Mr. Chairman, but it does nothing about existing contamination, and that is the contamination that has polluted over 2,300 water districts across this country in 36 different States. Second, the chairman referred to the very minute amounts of MTBE that have polluted all of this groundwater that we have been discussing. And it is true that the groundwater is rendered unusable because of the strong smell and taste of kerosene, even in a very small amount of MTBE which is in the groundwater. But I would argue, respectfully, that the American people deserve to know that the Environmental Protection Agency has a report, even though it is a draft report, because it identifies the state of a likely carcinogen that MTBE contains. Even if it is nothing more than a small amount, I do not believe, as a public health nurse, that we want to contaminate our drinking water with even a small amount of a likely carcinogen. Third, I want to get back to the point about the liability of manufacturers of MTBE who knew when they created this product in the 1970s as an additive to gasoline that it was toxic and that it would pollute groundwater. Here is a statement from the deposition of Curt Stanley, a Shell Oil remediation expert, which is part of the testimony for the South Lake Tahoe water district when it was presented with a huge lawsuit against the Shell Company. The question was asked: ``So is it fair to say,'' and this is taken from testimony, ``that by 1981, the Shell Oil Company knew that MTBE in its gasoline could contaminate public drinking water supplies?'' The answer is: ``Yes.'' Question: ``And is it also fair to say that they knew by that time that it created taste and odor problems in public drinking water supplies?'' The answer: ``Yes.'' And the final question: ``And did you report those facts to the Shell management?'' And the answer is: ``Yes.'' Since at least that time, 1981, the oil companies, the MTBE manufacturers knew that they were making a defective product and knowingly they continued to manufacture it. Now, the chairman described the compromise that has been worked out on the underlying bill, and in doing so, interestingly, acknowledges fault on the part of the MTBE manufacturers, because they are liable if they are going to be part of the deal in coming to a conclusion. ``They should pay,'' he says. I say, ``they must pay.'' They must be held accountable. And the deal that is struck is one in which they will pay only a portion of the damages and the taxpayers will pay the remainder. The House Republican energy bill fails to address this Nation's record gas prices. And according to the Bush administration's own Energy Department would actually cause gas prices to increase, and that at a time when they are increasing. This energy bill we are now going to be considering in conference will do nothing to cause containment of that increase in gas prices. Instead of giving real relief to consumers, this Republican bill gives loads of new tax breaks and loopholes to special interests. And the worst example of these special interest giveaways is the complete liability shield for MTBE manufacturers, a shield that will shift billions of dollars in cleanup costs from MTBE manufacturers to the American taxpayer. MTBE is responsible for polluting groundwater in so many communities across this country. Cleanup costs are estimated in the billions, $28 billion to maybe as high as over $50 billion. MTBE manufacturers are now being held accountable in court, but this provision would end that accountability. I would remind Members that it was the special protections granted to MTBE manufacturers that brought this bill down in the last Congress. Senate leaders have made it clear they are not including this grossly unwanted get-out-of-jail-free card for the MTBE this year either. So I know many Members of the House have school boards, have water districts or towns with lawsuits against MTBE manufacturers, and those lawsuits are going to be voided. Null. They are not going to be able to proceed under this energy bill. Your constituents would lose their right to hold these manufacturers of MTBE accountable for the pollution in their groundwater. And the billions in MTBE cleanup that your communities face will be shifted from the oil companies, who have record profits and who caused the problem, to your constituents, who have to live with the problem. Make no mistake, that is what this vote is all about. By voting for the motion to instruct conferees, you will be saying that it is not okay to make your constituents pay for pollution that they did not cause, but that was caused by MTBE manufacturers. The special protection in this bill for MTBE manufacturers is completely unwarranted and it will cost your constituents a fortune. So I urge you to vote for the motion to instruct conferees. Vote for the Capps motion.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, this motion would do one thing: it urges conferees to reject a provision granting MTBE manufacturers a waiver from liability for the damage their products have caused to groundwater supplies throughout this country. This broad liability waiver for MTBE manufacturers should be rejected for a number of reasons. First, and most recent, a new draft risk assessment on MTBE written by the Environmental Protection Agency has concluded that MTBE is a likely, and I quote ``likely,'' human carcinogen. According to the publication ``Inside EPA,'' the study pinpoints kidney and lymph node tumors as a result of MTBE exposure. Up until now, most of the concern about MTBE contamination has been that a tiny bit of it makes water smell and taste like kerosene, rendering the water unusable. But now EPA has released information that says MTBE in water may mean more than an unpleasant taste or smell: it may threaten your health. MTBE contamination is a huge problem, and it is not going away. To date, this contamination has been found in over 2,300 water systems serving 36 States. Two recent studies have reconfirmed that the cost of removing MTBE from drinking water is substantial. The new studies put MTBE cleanup costs in the range of $25 billion to $33 billion and could be as high as $85 billion or more, and that is the cost for existing pollution. Third, documents unearthed in court cases show that MTBE manufacturers knew as early as the mid-1980s about the damage their products caused to groundwater sources; and yet they continued to add it to gasoline. That is why juries have found that MTBE is a defective product. They also found that oil companies acted with malice because they knew what could happen with MTBE, and they did not do anything to stop it. That is why these oil companies have settled their cases. They did not pay millions of dollars to Tahoe, Santa Monica, and other communities out of good citizenship. They did it because they knew that juries would lower the boom on them for their actions. That is why this bill voids defective product lawsuits, because that is the way oil companies are being held accountable for their actions. Fourth, CBO has found that the liability waiver in this House bill is an unfunded mandate. This protection for MTBE manufacturers is a huge unfunded liability that would shift the cost of the cleanup, literally billions of dollars, on to towns, cities, and water districts, on to your constituents, I say to my colleagues; and that is just plain wrong. Mr. Speaker, 2 months ago, the House narrowly voted down my amendment to strike the MTBE liability waiver from our bill. Many Members voted ``no'' because of some impending deal to address the cleanup issue once and for all. Well, reports of this deal have leaked out. They are not pretty, and they will not address the MTBE contamination that your constituents face today or may face in the future. The deal would provide full liability protection to MTBE producers and establish a $4 billion to $8 billion trust fund to address the contamination crisis. One big problem: remember, the cleanup of MTBE contamination is going to cost between $25 billion and $33 billion and could be as high as $85 billion, dwarfing this deal's cleanup fund. Another problem: at least half of this fund comes from taxpayers. Mr. Speaker, why should taxpayers pay to clean up MTBE contamination? MTBE manufacturers caused this problem, and they knew it when they did it. They should clean it up. This is a deal written by the industry for the industry. And it is no surprise that no one from the water industry, no cities, no counties, the people who will have to deal with the contamination, none of these people support this bill. Finally, these are the controversial MTBE provisions that killed the energy bill in the last Congress. The Senate bill did not include MTBE provisions in their bill, and for good reason. They knew that giving these manufacturers protection from liability would end the chances of the bill becoming law. With the country continuing to experience record energy prices, the need for comprehensive energy legislation is clear, and MTBE provisions once again threaten the passage of this bill. Mr. Speaker, the MTBE industry knowingly caused widespread groundwater pollution, and now it is trying to shirk its responsibility to the communities living with this huge problem. So I urge my colleagues to support the Capps motion to instruct conferees and to reject this ridiculous bailout for the MTBE industry. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.