Joe Crowley

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Lowey- Greenwood motion to strike section 587, relating to the global gag rule and limiting vital U.S. assistance for voluntary international family planning. I am a firm believer in voluntary international family planning. Let me make this clear. International family planning prevents abortions. I do not think anyone can dispute that. The global gag rule is dangerous because it prevents U.S. funds from reaching critical health care providers in developing nations and dictates how these NGOs can spend funds from other donors besides the U.S. government. We have every right to decide policy for U.S. funds, but not for other nations and private donors. In fact, no U.S. dollars can be used to perform abortions overseas. Mr. Chairman, I support this prohibition. It is up to the governments and citizens in these nations to decide their own policies. In Malawi, in sub-Saharan Africa, which I recently visited, I witnessed how villagers from miles around used one central health care facility for all of their needs. These people have no options. If the U.S. fails to fund them, they cannot use the hospital down the road. This is literally one-stop health care shopping with no alternatives. If it is not funded, women will have no access to contraception or any other health care and neither will their families. Mr. Chairman, I am also opposed to the global gag rule because it is patently undemocratic. If such restrictions were placed on NGOs here, they would be a clear violation of the first amendment. How can we claim to export democracy when we export limitations on free speech? Mr. Chairman, this is no compromise. This is legislation placed into an appropriations measure, despite the Republican leadership's claim that they would accept no controversial riders. Mr. Chairman, I think the number of Members on the floor today clearly demonstrates the controversy surrounding this issue. And to call it a compromise when it took holding vital U.N. funding hostage, placing U.S. national security at risk to get the administration to let it in is disingenuous, misleading and downright preposterous. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Lowey-Greenwood amendment.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I speak today in strong opposition to the Kucinich amendment which seeks to prohibit funds in the FY 2001 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill from being used to fund the Kosova Protection Corps (KPC). KPC plays a vital role in Kosova, filling the void that was left when the Kosova Liberation Army (KLA) surrendered its weapons. The KPC was formed by the UN Administration in Kosova (UNMIK) as a civilian organization responsible for disaster response, search and rescue, humanitarian assistance, demining, and infrastructure rebuilding. Security in Kosova is not provided by the KPC, but a separately trained civilian police and international police force serving under the direction of UNMIK. The KPC functions under the political authority of UNMIK and the day-to-day operational direction of KFOR. The KPC carries out important civilian work projects, such as building and repairing roads and bridges. In another instance, the KPC intervened on February 4 when French and Italian NATO peacekeepers were not able to disperse an angry crowd and succeeded in restoring order to the situation. The KPC has the support of the people in Kosova, the U.S. State Department and the United Nations. Despite the allegations made in support of the Kucinich amendment, UN officials have investigated the allegations leveled against members of the KPC and found no evidence to support them. International military and civilian leaders in the region have expressed their support and gratitude for the efforts of the KPC. NATO Secretary-General, Lord Robertson, has praised the Kosova Protection Corps for its work throughout Kosova, which has included repairing roads, bridges, and other reconstruction and relief projects. I urge my colleagues to oppose the Kucinich amendment.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the fiscal year 2001 foreign operations appropriations bill. I would like to associate myself with the remarks made by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). Although I understand and share the concerns of many of my Democratic colleagues, such as the level of debt relief or lack thereof, the global gag rule, the lack of funding for HIV-AIDS, and the funding shortfall in general, despite all that, I feel that it is important to keep this legislation moving forward and address these concerns in a House-Senate conference. There are a number of important initiatives in this legislation which I requested and that are critical to U.S. security. This legislation includes a $5.4 million increase for the International Fund for Ireland, and a recommendation that Project Children receive $250,000 to help support their good works. I would also like to thank the committee for including $10 million for microbicide research. Finally, I would like to thank the committee for working with me to include language urging Arab states to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel. I would like to extend my gratitude to the chairman, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan), the ranking member, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), and my good friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), for assisting me in including these initiatives. While I support this legislation, I would ask that the chairman address the concerns raised by my colleagues and myself when this legislation goes to conference. We will all be watching to see that additional funding is added. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the FY 2001 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill. Although I understand and share the concerns of many of my Democratic colleagues, I feel that it is important to keep this legislation moving forward and address these concerns in a House-Senate Conference. I, too, am concerned about the low level of funding for debt relief for the heavily indebted poor countries, the low level of funding for international infectious diseases, especially HIV/AIDS, and I am especially concerned about the low overall funding level of this legislation, which is about twelve percent less than the President's request. Like many of my colleagues, I am also unhappy that the so called compromise language from last year's Omnibus legislation placing a ``gag rule'' on international healthcare providers was included in this legislation. This language represents an unnecessary rider, which the Republican leadership stated should not be included in appropriations bills. I will speak more on this issue when it is debated later. However, there are a number of important initiatives in this legislation, which I requested, and that are critical to US security. I would like to thank Chairman Callahan, Ranking Member Nancy Pelosi, and Representative Lowey for assisting me in including these important initiatives. This legislation includes a $5.4 million increase for the International Fund for Ireland (IFI). The IFI was established as an independent, international organization 1986 and receives contributions from the United States, the European Union, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The objectives of the Fund are to promote economic and social advance and to encourage contact, dialogue and reconciliation between Unionists and Nationalists in the North of Ireland and the border counties of the Republic of Ireland. This funding is of critical importance at this juncture in the Northern Ireland Peace Process. Additionally, the Committee has included a recommendation that Project Children receive $250,000 to help support their work. Project Children brings Irish children from a range of ages to spend six weeks in the U.S. Sometimes a Protestant child joins a Catholic child in the same home with remarkably positive results. In addition, the program brings college students to the United States through its ``Young Leaders'' program and places them in internship positions in local organizations. A number of U.S. Representatives have taken Project Children Young Leader interns into their offices and homes. With these additional funds, the true benefits of a lasting peace in the North of Ireland, economic prosperity and equal opportunity, will receive a much-needed boost. I would also like to thank the Committee for including $10 million for microbicide research and instructing USAID to work in consultation with the National Institutes of Health to ensure microbicide research and development takes into consideration the special circumstances of drug delivery in developing nations. As many of you know, microbicides are user-controlled products that kill or inactivate the bacteria and viruses that cause STD's and HIV/ AIDS and would fill a gap in the range of prevention tools because they are woman-controlled and could protect against various STD's, not just HIV. Microbicide products, it is hoped, will provide women in developing countries with a cheap, effective alternative to prevent the spread of STD's. Issues such as a lack of refrigeration, cultural and educational barriers, and a lack of access to medical facilities need to be considered carefully if microbicides are used effectively in developing nations. This funding will help ensure the special needs of developing nations are met with respect to microbicide research. I would also like to thank the Committee for working with me to include language updating the Arab League Boycott language, urging Arab states to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel. Israel has existed for more than 50 years and has earned the right to be treated as a full member of the international community. Once again, I would like to extend my gratitude to Chairman Callahan, Ranking Member Pelosi and to my good friend Congresswoman Lowey for their assistance, as well as the rest of the Committee. While I will support this legislation, I ask that you address the concerns raised by my colleagues and myself when this legislation goes to Conference.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I speak today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 348, to express condemnation of the use of children as soldiers. In dozens of countries around the world, children have become direct participants in war. Denied a childhood and often subjected to horrific violence, some 300,00 children are serving as soldiers in current armed conflicts from Uganda to Colombia, from Sierra Leone to Lebanon. Hundreds of thousands more have been recruited into armed forces and could be sent into combat at any moment. Although most child soldiers are teenagers, some are as young as 7 years old. Physically vulnerable and easily intimidated, children typically make obedient soldiers. Many are abducted or recruited by force, and often compelled to follow orders under threat of death. The United States should support, and, where possible, lead efforts to establish and enforce international standards designed to end the use of child soldiers. On January 21, 2000 in Geneva, a United Nations working group of the Commission on Human Rights reached agreement on the UN protocol on child soldiers. I commend President Clinton for signing this protocol and want to express my hope that the Senate will ratify it as soon as possible. The House International Relations Committee approved H. Con. Res. 348 unanimously. As a cosponsor, I urge colleagues to give their full support to this important resolution.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend Representative Lazio, Representative Weiner, and the rest of the co-sponsors for their leadership on this important issue. The Syrian Jewish community experienced many years of persecution at the hands of the Syrian government. For decades, the Syrian Jewish community lived in fear of the secret police. They were barred from buying property, they had travel restrictions placed on them, and they could not work in government or at banks. Now, the U.S. Congress has the ability to ease the suffering of this community. In 1992, through the efforts of President Bush and the State Department, Hafez Al-Assad agreed to end harsh travel restrictions against the Jewish community of his country. However, he did not want them to come to America as refugees. Instead, this persecuted community came to the U.S. on tourist visas. Because they came on visas, they were effectively blocked from applying for permanent residency in the U.S. Several professions, such as the medical field, require this status in order to work. Like so many who come to the U.S., these people only wanted the opportunity to contribute to society and work in their chosen professions. I am glad that the U.S. Congress is finally correcting this unfair situation and putting these brave people on the road to citizenship and allowing them to realize their full potential as so many refugees and immigrants have before them. It is time that the Syrian Jews are granted full access the American dream. I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. This will not weaken the inspection standards for the importation of foreign-made drugs into the United States. I understand the Committee on Commerce held hearings last month in June to address the concerns that the FDA had only inspected 25 percent of foreign drug manufacturers who brought medications by import into the United States. My amendment will not weaken the FDA here at all, or even hamper their inspection services with regard to the foreign-made drugs being imported into the U.S. My amendment deals only with the reimportation, reimportation of American-made FDA-approved drugs back into the United States. In fact, by taking the FDA out of the business of harassing seniors, the FDA might be able to free up additional resources to make sure what is being firsthand imported into America from abroad is safe for human consumption. Additionally, by striking funding from the statute, we will not be opening up the borders for a free flow of non-FDA imported drugs to be brought into the United States. Section 21 of the U.S. Code states that it is illegal to bring non-FDA-approved drugs into the U.S. My amendment does not change that law in any way. In fact, I understand why Section 801(d)1 was added to the law. Unfortunately, as of late, its interpretation has not been used to protect American consumers, but rather, large drug manufacturers, instead.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, earlier this year, working with the House Committee on Government Reform's minority office and the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and myself conducted a study of the cost that seniors in our congressional districts pay for their prescription drugs versus the cost paid by their counterparts in Canada and Mexico for the exact same drugs. Both the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and I were startled by the results, to say the least. We found that seniors in our districts in New York pay, on average, 91 percent more than seniors in Canada and 89 percent more than seniors in Mexico for the exact same drugs; twice as much for the exact same drugs, same dosage, same in every way, expect price. We did not study arcane drugs not used in the real world to skew our data, but rather the 5 most popular prescription drugs sold to seniors in the U.S. today: Zocor, Prilosec, Procardia, Zoloft, and Norvasc. Let me put it in perspective. I have a constituent in Long Island City, New York who has to purchase 100 capsules of Prilosec every 3 months for his wife. He pays almost $400 for these drugs. I have a letter from the gentleman who writes, ``Isn't it an outrage for us to pay this price for medication my wife will have to take on a regular basis.'' Well, my answer to that gentleman is yes, it is an outrage, especially in light of the fact that this same drug that costs $400 in Queens, New York would have cost him $107 in Mexico and $184 in Canada. Similar results were borne out by a number of other studies conducted throughout the United States, studies which mirrored the results that the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and I saw in our respective districts. But if my constituent or any American went to Mexico or Canada to buy this drug and tried to bring them back over the border into the United States, he or she would be committing a Federal crime and could theoretically be punished for that crime. The only thing criminal I see are these extremely high prices that they are forced to pay for drugs in the United States. Mr. Chairman, $400 for Prilosec, a drug that was researched, patented and manufactured here in the United States. It begs the question, Mr. Chairman: why is Prilosec cheaper in Canada and Mexico than here in the United States where it was made and developed in the first place? It is because in the United States the major drug manufacturers practice price discrimination whereby they charge those least able to pay, such as seniors on a fixed income, more for their medications than they charge others such as HMOs and large hospitals, that enjoy sweetheart deals with the drug manufacturers. Price discrimination is illegal in Canada and in Mexico. That is why I am offering this amendment today, to highlight the practice of price discrimination by the pharmaceutical industry that is being used against millions of American seniors who need prescription drug medication. More simply put, Mr. Chairman, Americans are being gouged by the American pharmaceutical industry. I go about trying to stop this practice of price discrimination by prohibiting funding to enforce Section 801(d)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Currently, this section of Federal law restricts the rights of an individual to cross across international borders to purchase one's prescription drugs. This amendment will not only allow border residents to travel, but also force this Congress to confront and stop the practice of price discrimination in the pharmaceutical industry. Mr. Chairman, I hear from my constituents all the time about the high cost paid by them for medications. That further reinforces my determination for this Congress to pass legislation mandating the inclusion of a prescription drug benefit under the Medicare program. Unfortunately, the seniors of America did not get that before the recess, despite all of the rhetoric from the other side of the aisle. So I offer this amendment as a first step towards the assistance of America's seniors. Prescription drug medications are not a luxury, they are a necessity. Sometimes we forget that here as we enjoy our generous taxpayer-subsidized, top-of-the-line health insurance. Let me make clear what my amendment will and will not do so as not to confuse the debate. It will decriminalize seniors who must travel south of the border to purchase their prescription drugs. It will highlight the fact that seniors in America are the continued victims of price discrimination which this GOP-controlled Congress continues to ignore. It will continue to prohibit the importation in the United States of non FDA-approved drugs that could be dangerous. This amendment does not weaken inspection standards for the importation of foreign-made drugs into the U.S. At no time does this amendment change the existing Federal regulations regarding the importation of foreign manufactured drugs into the U.S. This amendment will not weaken the ability of our government to inspect and seize illegal narcotics being brought into the United States.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Minge).

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, as the sponsor of this amendment, let me say that I am somewhat surprised at the support that this amendment has received from the other side of the aisle. I am astounded, quite frankly. I appreciate the support of many of the individuals who have spoken to me, some of whom are friends of mine from the other side of the aisle. I appreciate their comments on the floor. In no way do I believe that they are not being sincere at this point in time. But just under 2 weeks ago, we stood here on this floor; and we passed a bill that I call to the floor a sham; and I continue to call that bill a sham. The amendment that my colleagues have before them today is really of very little consequence, and I am the sponsor of this amendment. It basically takes away the authority of the FDA to prosecute any individual who reimports drugs that were made in this country. But it really is an attempt to shine a light on price discrimination in the United States. But what this amendment does show, Mr. Chairman, in my opinion, is the hypocrisy of this House at times. In 1 week we can pass a sham of a bill, and a week and a half later, come back and pass an amendment that in and of itself will not go far enough to help most of the seniors in this country who are not insured, seniors who struggle on a weekly basis to pay rent, to pay their bills. My constituent from Jackson Heights, Ann Greenbaum, pays $300 for a particular drug that her son needs, the exact same drug, and pays $15 under his plan. I will not say how old Mrs. Greenbaum is. She is considerably older than her son. These are the individuals we are trying to help. My amendment, Mr. Chairman, will not help directly Ms. Greenbaum. What it does do, though, is highlight the hypocrisy of this House, how we can pass a bill that will not help the Mrs. Greenbaums of the world, will help some individuals, but certainly will not help enough. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, the one thing I would like to say, and the gentlewoman just made reference to it, I would like to put in people's minds the picture of Central Park. It is one of the treasures of not only New York City, New York State, but really of this country. It is probably one of the most famous parks in all the world. Imagine what it would look like without any hard wood trees. Unimaginable. But the threat does exist and it is there. I want to thank the gentlewoman and the gentleman for their work and I want to thank them in advance for their efforts very, very much.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support for the Weiner amendment to cut $15,510 from the Animal and Plant Inspection Service, APHIS. This symbolic cut represents the amount that has been spent over the last 10 years on the importation of Iranian goods. While only a small cut, this will help send a message to the Iranian government in protest of the sham trial of the 13 Iranian Jews. Numerous Members of this body and the international community have come forward to express their outrage at this travesty of justice. I join them in their anger. These 13 Jews have been wrongfully imprisoned, and some have been forced to confess to the imagined crime of spying for Israel. When the president of Iran was elected, it was on a platform of moderation and reform supported by the Iranian people. In response to his election, the United States made good will overtures towards Iran, including the lifting of restrictions on Iranian foodstuffs, like pistachios and carpets, as well as easing the travel restrictions on Iranians. Yet despite the rejection of hard-liners in the last election, the leaders of Iran are still on the wrong track. At a time when the U.S. has sought to improve relations with the Iranian people, the government of Iran must reciprocate and respect fundamental human rights and act as responsible member of the world community. When travesties such as this trial continue, it should concern all of us as to our policy towards Iran. While the State Department pursues its pistachio diplomacy, innocent people in Iran are suffering. The Iranian government must put an end to this sham trial, free the 13, and let them and their families live in peace. Unless they do this, our policy towards Iran will have to change. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and keep pressure on Iran. The Jewish community in Iran, especially the 13 Iranian Jews, must know that the United States Congress supports them in their time of need.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word for purposes of entering into a colloquy with the distinguished chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee, as well as the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Blagojevich). Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by praising the leadership and bipartisan spirit brought to this subcommittee by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen). His work in promoting the needs of agriculture, forestry, and domestic nutrition programs will be long hailed in this Chamber and throughout our Nation well into the future. As the Chairman and ranking member know, the Asian Longhorned Beetle has done tremendous damage to trees and parkland areas throughout both New York City and the Chicago metropolitan areas. In my congressional district, which is comprised of a diverse swath of middle- and working- class neighborhoods in Queens and the Bronx, New York, many of the few trees we do enjoy have either fallen victim to or remain seriously threatened by the Asian Longhorned Beetle. Specifically, the neighborhood of Ridgewood, Queens, in my congressional district has seen a virtual destruction of many of their trees, very treasured trees, from this unwelcome pest. Therefore, it is of great concern to my constituents that the adequate resources are allocated for the elimination of this invasive species before it strips our entire city bare of its trees and greenery. Last year, this subcommittee, under the leadership of the chairman, the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen), and ranking member, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), provided both a direct appropriation to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, otherwise known as APHIS, to combat the Asian Longhorned Beetle, as well as language granting the Secretary of Agriculture the authority to use Commodity Credit Corporation emergency funds and Emerging Plant Pest funds to address this issue. These funds serve as an important investment in my congressional district, and I am extremely grateful that the subcommittee has again included similar language in this bill regarding CCC and Emerging Plant Pest funds for New York City. Having stated that, I would like to request the assistance of the chairman and the ranking member in conference to work for an increase in direct funding for APHIS for its Asian Longhorned Beetle project so that they may continue their efforts in working to rid America of this destructive invasive species. Additionally, I have grave concerns about the pace at which the Office of Management and Budget is releasing these emergency CCC funds for invasive species emergencies throughout the United States when the Secretary has already requested them. I recognize and appreciate the fact that the House report accompanying this measure addresses this problem. I am hopeful that working with both the Senate and the administration we will be able to rectify the situation.

Mr. CROWLEY. I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, today, most American families receive their health coverage from managed care providers. In recent years, physician and patients have lost control over this market due to the rapid consolidation of managed care organizations. I am a proud co-sponsor of the Quality Health-Care Coalition Act, which would allow health care professionals to collectively bargain the terms of patient car with Health Care Organizations. Currently, physicians are forced to accept contracts, which often contain provisions that threaten the quality of patient care. In addition, many health plans impose gag rules on physicians that force them to accept arbitrary reimbursement rates with no thought to the quality of care being provided to the patient. These days, dominant health plans are not just managing costs, they are also determining the level, type, frequency and hoops patients most jump through in order to receive their health care. Being married to a nurse has helped me recognize the issues many health care professionals encounter each day. H.R. 1304 would help physicians and other health care professionals fight for better patient care by beginning to level the playing field between enormous, controlling managed care plans and individual physicians and other health care professionals. H.R. 1304 would provide physicians enough leverage to effectively negotiate the terms of patient care with Managed Care Organizations. In essence, this bill would restore a physician's ability to provide quality care to patients without any interference from an HMO. Additionally, H.R. 1304 would promote the fairness and balance the health care marketplace needs and lacks today. Those who oppose this legislation argue that patients would not be protected under this bill. However, that is a false satement. H.R. 1304 guarantees the protection of patients by requiring the U.S. General Accounting Office to study the impact of this bill over a three-year trial period before Congress would be allowed to reauthorize the bill. The Quality Health Care Coalition Act is an important piece of legislation that would ensure the provisions of optimal health care to all patients in New York City and the rest of the country. I urge you to support this bill because all patients and their health care providers should have the right to make informed decision about their health care needs--without being subjected to the rules of an HMO.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I speak today to express my strong opposition to the back room deal that resulted in the FY 2000 Supplemental package being attached to the FY 2001 Military Construction Appropriations bill. As with H.R. 3908, the original House version of the FY 2000 Supplemental Bill, a major concern of mine regarding this legislation is that no authorization language was passed to allow Members the opportunity to argue for funding for projects important to them. As a Member of the Committee on International Relations and the Representative of the largest Colombian-American community in the U.S., I wanted to be involved in the development of our policy on Colombia. We should have developed a bill that would strike a balance between the needs of international concerns, such as Colombia, human rights and Kosova, and domestic spending priorities. I would have supported such a bill. Unfortunately, despite the passage of much improved legislation in the Senate; this bill does not appear to do that. Mr. Speaker, I say appear because I have not had the opportunity to read the Conference Report on the FY 2000 Supplemental. The backroom deal that negotiated this legislation circumvented the normal appropriations process and brought it directly to the floor without providing Members the opportunity to read and digest the legislation. I find this very troubling. This legislation provides billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars without real Congressional oversight. Additionally, as with the original House Supplemental, this legislation may also lack the necessary human rights conditions on our assistance to Colombia. As with the first House Supplemental, the provisions in this legislation dealing with civil society programs are woefully under funded, especially when compared to the vast funding levels for counter-narcotics assistance. Now, I will say that I have had the opportunity to review the funding levels in this legislation and I am happy about the modest increase for human rights and justice programs in Colombia and the region. In fact, these programs are funded at $29 million more than the President requested for a total of $122 million. This is a positive step, but a relatively small one when compared to the high level of military assistance for Colombia and the region. Finally, on the Colombia portion, no money was included for domestic prevention and treatment. Interdiction plays a role, but it is next to useless without prevention and treatment programs. Demand will always find supply. I am sorry the Republican leadership will not acknowledge this simple truth. As I said during the debate on the previous supplemental, I have met with Colombian leaders in Washington, D.C., in my Congressional District and in Colombia. I have traveled to Colombia and seen the need for U.S. assistance. I know the problems of the Colombian people and I am especially supportive of judicial reform efforts, but this supplemental is not going to provide the right kind of assistance. Mr. Speaker, in addition to the Colombia portion of this Supplemental, I am also concerned that the President's request for Kosova was under funded by almost $334 million and that the Administration's request for debt relief funds for poor countries was not included at all. I find the failure to include funding for debt relief for the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) especially troubling because the international agreement on debt relief requires U.S. participation in order for other countries to contribute their pledges. At a time when many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa are facing an epidemic of biblical proportions with the AIDS crisis, failure to provide for debt relief is bad policy. Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the Supplemental retained important provisions for the Low Income Heating and Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). I am also glad that it included $35 million for the Social Security Administration to respond to the increased workload resulting from the recent repeal of the Social Security earnings limit and $2 million for Commission on International Religious Freedom. However, this Supplemental and the backroom deal that brought it to the floor without a review period troubles me greatly. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the supplemental and I request that the relevant committees be asked to deal with these funding increases through the normal budget process.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Kaptur amendment and would like to thank her for offering this language today. This language will increase funding for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) by $53 million. Congresswoman Kaptur was very eloquent in her remarks on our nation's need for these funds and the importance of designating them as an emergency appropriation. Time and time again, this Congress has sent billions of taxpayer dollars abroad and certifies it as emergency spending, requiring no offsets for these expenditures. But whenever we have a real crisis in America, Congress always demands the need to find offsets--this Congress can never seem to find the resources to help Americans when we need it. We have a crisis involving invasive species and it is a real emergency. The citrus canker is destroying the Florida orange and lime crop; the glassy-winged sharp-shooter is ruining our domestic wine stocks and the Asian Longhorned Beetle is downing thousands of hardwood trees throughout NYC, Chicago and threatening the maple syrup industry in Vermont. Let us help Americans today and provide these emergency funds to APHIS to eradicate these invasive species in our country. This is an emergency and this Congress should recognize it. I thank the Gentle Lady from Ohio for her steadfast dedication to the people of this country who are concerned about plant and pest diseases. You are a true leader and a representative for all of the people.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Kaptur amendment. This language will increase the funding for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, otherwise known as APHIS, by $53 million. I believe the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), the ranking member, has been extremely eloquent on why we need these funds and why they should be designated as emergency funds. This Congress repeatedly spends billions of taxpayer dollars overseas and abroad to foreign nations and certifies those expenditures as emergencies so that no offsets are needed to be found to fund those expenditures. But whenever we have a real crisis here in the U.S., we always need to find offsets. This Congress can never seem to find the resources we need to help Americans when Americans need that help. We have a crisis evolving with invasive species. These are real emergencies. The Citrus Canker is destroying the Florida orange crop. The Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter is ruining our domestic wine stocks. And the Asian longhorned beetle is downing thousands of hardwood trees throughout New York City, Chicago, and now in Vermont. Let us help Americans today and provide these emergency funds to APHIS to eradicate these invasive species in our country. This is an emergency, and this Congress should recognize it as such. I want to thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) for all her efforts on behalf of this emergency funding. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the so- called Medicare prescription drug bill of 2000. This legislation will not provide the necessary drug coverage for my constituents, like Don and Gertrude Schwartz of Long Island City. He is 89 and she is 84 years of age. Today they pay almost $400 for 100 tablets of Prilosec. Mr. Schwartz writes, ``Isn't that an outrageous price for a medication my wife will have to take on a regular basis?'' Yes, Mr. Schwartz, it is. Unfortunately, his concerns will not be addressed by this legislation today. This measure will do nothing to assist middle class seniors like the Schwartzes, but then again, our Republican colleagues have never been fans of the Medicare program. This legislation subsidizes insurance companies and threatens the stability provided to seniors by Medicare. I urge all Members to oppose this sham of a bill.