Diana DeGette

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. McDermott). (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. Inslee). (Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say, if people want to donate their embryos to another couple for adoption, our bill allows that. But our bill also allows people who do not want to give their embryos for adoption to donate them for science, so the children who are alive today can be cured. I assume no one on the other side of this issue would want to force everybody to give up their embryos for adoption, because clearly that would be limiting the choice that people have. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton). (Mr. UPTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson- Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, first I would like to give my heartfelt thanks to my partner, the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), our bipartisan whip team, the 201 cosponsors of this bill, and so many others who spoke today from the bottom of their hearts. More than 100 years ago, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes recognized that we are living in an increasingly complex world and that ``the chief worth of civilization is just that it makes the means of living more complex.'' This world, he says, ``calls for great and combined intellectual efforts instead of simple, uncoordinated ones.'' The truth of Justice Holmes' words in today's complex world is best seen in the state of scientific research. We are on the verge of breakthroughs that will cure diseases that affect tens of millions of Americans. Yet some want to turn away from this potential, to refuse to even acknowledge its existence, simply because they do not understand the complexity of this issue. This refusal is slowing the process of ethical science and, worse, delaying advancements that could cure diseases that affect patients and families around the world. Our constituents want more from us. They want their elected officials to thoughtfully examine tough issues like embryonic stem cell research, and create policies that address both practical and ethical challenges. They also expect us to consider these issues not as Democrats or as Republicans, not as pro-life or pro-choice, but as people with family members and friends whose lives could be made better or even saved by our decisions. Passing H.R. 810 will allow the Federal Government to enable scientists, not politicians, to determine whether embryonic stem cell research will lead to cures for diseases that now plague us, and it will do so while establishing the clear and strict ethical guidelines that are absent today. In 2001, the President issued his executive order establishing the current embryonic stem cell research policy in an attempt to balance bioethics and science. In the last 4 years, it has become clear that the policy has failed on both counts. Research has been stymied in this country, going into private hands and offshore. Research moves ahead, but not with the resources and coordination of the National Institutes of Health and without clear ethical standards. I recognize that new science creates new moral dilemmas. That is why our bill sets explicit controls on how stem cell lines can be created. It gives another option for embryos created for in vitro fertilization, embryos created in petri dishes, that would otherwise be destroyed so that they can be used to potentially save or extend lives. It gives the patients for whom the embryos are created the decision on how they will be used: as now, freezing for possible future use; discarding them as medical waste or donating them to other couples for implantation; and if this bill passes, another option, donating them for critical research that could save millions of lives of people who are already born. Here is why we need to pass this bill. These are two young brothers from Denver, Colorado. Wyatt and Noah Forman. Both of these boys have Type 1 diabetes, and both of them have been diagnosed since they were 2. A couple of months ago, little Noah had convulsions in the middle of the night from low blood sugar. His parents thought they would lose him, and now they cannot sleep at night. Without a cure, Wyatt and Noah face possible complications ranging from a heart attack to kidney failure or even blindness as they grow up. How can we tell these boys, these two boys and millions of others, that we would rather throw the embryonic stem cells that could provide them a cure than to allow them to be donated for science? How can we tell our colleagues, the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), our mothers with Alzheimer's, our brothers with Lou Gehrig's disease, the millions of Americans who are praying for a cure and for whom embryonic stem cell research may hold the key, Sorry, the Federal Government is opting out? Let us not let 1 more year, 1 more month, or 1 more day go by without acting. Let us reclaim the Federal Government's role as the leader in ethical basic research. Let us give those whom we are sworn to represent hope. Let us pass H.R. 810.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this legislation. The bill before us is so ludicrous it would be laughable if it were not so dangerous. The bill is blatantly unconstitutional. It is unrealistic, and it is cruel. Not since the Fugitive Slave Act has there been a law designed to extend individual State laws beyond their boundaries to intrude into the jurisdiction of other States. The debate on this bill so far has centered on what young women should do, how families ought to be. And there is not any disagreement among us about how much we all love our kids. We all want the best for our kids, no matter what. And when it comes to making big decisions, I think we would all want our kids to come to us for advice. Certainly I would want my 15-year-old daughter to come to me first, and I think she would. And, in fact, the majority of young women do involve one or more parents when considering an abortion. But, sadly, this is not the case for all young people in this country. For myriad reasons, many adolescents and young adults cannot turn to their parents with a problem like this. And in many situations, they have a very good reason. For example, what about the victims of incest? Of course teenagers should seek out their parents' advice, but we also need to face reality. We need to do what will help these desperate kids from making a bad situation worse, even to take their own lives. The government cannot, my friends, mandate healthy, open family communication when it does not exist. The bill here will not make families stronger, and will put more young women at risk. Not everybody talks to their parents, because they cannot. And so it is these young people who most need the advice and assistance of a trusted family friend, a minister, or a sympathetic grandmother. When a young woman cannot involve her parents, public policies and medical professionals need to encourage her to involve a trusted adult. And if you look at this bill, it does just the opposite of that. If it is passed into law, these young women will have to face this life-altering decision themselves, alone and without any medical help. So why do so many major medical associations, including the AMA, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Physicians, and the American Public Health Association, all have longstanding policies against parental notification laws? Because they are dangerous to these young women and they take away the need for confidential access to physicians. And so I think the harm to adolescents alone, by denying access to appropriate medical care, is cruel, it is against family values, and it makes this legislation so dangerous, it so ill serves our youth. We need to vote against this bill to preserve our families.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the extraordinary life of an eminent citizen, Rodolfo ``Corky'' Gonzales. This remarkable man merits both our recognition and esteem as his impressive record of leadership, activism and invaluable service has moved our community forward and thereby, improved the lives of our people. Corky Gonzales lived life on the front lines of progress and is known as the father of the Chicano movement in the Southwest. He was born in Denver, Colorado, in 1928 and spent his early life as a professional boxer. He became a national boxing champion and was later inducted into the Colorado Sports Hall of Fame. But for Corky Gonzales, his boxing career proved to be a metaphor for a life of social and political activism. Corky Gonzales was a fighter and he became a true champion in the struggle for human dignity and cultural respect. He became a champion of La Raza. Corky Gonzales entered the political arena in the late 1950's serving as the first Mexican American district captain in the Denver Democratic Party. He proved to be a skilled organizer and headed up the 1960 Viva Kennedy campaign. He was recognized for his efforts to increase political participation among Latinos and for bringing the social and economic challenges facing the Latino community into mainstream awareness. But the slow pace of social change within the political system set Mr. Gonzales on a new path of activism. He established the La Raza Unida party in Colorado and in 1965, he founded La Crusada Por Justicia--The Crusade for Justice--to further the cause of equality and justice for Chicanos, Latinos and Mexican Americans as well deal with racial injustice and advance the causes of civil liberty and human rights. He led a contingent to the Poor People's March on Washington, DC and in 1969, he convened the First Annual Chicano Youth Conference in Denver. Mr. Gonzales worked with city leaders to establish a health clinic on the North side and served on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. He is credited for launching the Chicano literary movement and his writings and speeches have become an affirmation of pride in the Mexican American cultural heritage. One of Corky Gonzales' most enduring accomplishments was the founding of Escuela Tlatelolco Centro de Estudios in 1970. It was established to ensure that Latino and Indigenous youth are educated and empowered to continue their human development in higher education. But more importantly, in establishing Escuela Tlatelolco, Corky Gonzales established a tradition of learning that helps students and parents both cherish and preserve the ethnic and cultural diversity that gives individuals dignity and strength and thereby further empowers our communities and our nation. Corky Gonzales touched our community in many ways that will endure. He gave us courage and dignity in the face of discrimination and economic injustice. He inspired us with his devotion and willingness to fight for the right that should be afforded to all people and the cultural expression that dignifies all people. I am reminded of the wisdom of Cesar Chavez--``What is at stake is human dignity. If (we) are not accorded respect, (we) cannot respect ourselves and if (we) cannot respect (ourselves), (we) cannot demand it of others.'' I would submit that Corky Gonzales understood this simple truth and his life is a testament to the activism that is guided by a deep and abiding respect for the intrinsic value of each and every human being. Please join me in paying tribute to the life of Rodolfo ``Corky'' Gonzales, a prominent activist and civic leader. His service, accomplishments and leadership command our respect and serve to build a better future for all Americans.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, despite many reservations, I am supporting the bill before us today because I believe it is essential that this body unequivocally supports our troops in the field and their families here at home. By providing $2 billion more than the President's request for equipment and munitions, this bill will help to ensure that soldiers in the field finally have the body armor, night vision equipment, and vehicle armor they should have had since military operations began in Iraq. Additionally, by significantly increasing the Military Death Gratuity and the Subsidized Life Insurance benefit, this bill will help to guarantee that the families of deceased soldiers will have adequate financial resources in their time of need. While it is critical that this bill provides soldiers and their families with the protection and benefits they so rightfully deserve, I remain deeply concerned that it continues to leave the Administration and the Department of Defense unaccountable for the expenditures in Iraq. I am distressed by the alleged reports of waste, corruption and mismanagement of previous funds earmarked for the military operations and reconstruction in Iraq. Further, I am troubled to learn that, according to several studies, only a portion of every dollar spent on rebuilding Iraq has gone to improving the lives of Iraqis. Unfortunately, the efforts made by me and other members of Congress to insert accountability and transparency into the funding process, including the most recent bipartisan effort to establish a commission to investigate the costs of the reconstruction in Iraq, have been repeatedly rejected by the Majority in Congress. I am similarly disappointed that this Administration insists on funding the war in Iraq using the emergency appropriations process--a process that should be reserved for true emergencies, like tsunami relief. While the Bush Administration claims that it excludes these costs from the annual budget process because it cannot anticipate future war costs, the true reason for this exclusion is to make the already massive deficit look slightly, albeit artificially, lower. This Administration is therefore abusing the emergency appropriations process in order to help obscure and hide the extent of its fiscal recklessness from the American people. This is the same sort of fuzzy accounting that was employed by the likes of Enron and WorldCom, and yet, while those corporations were ultimately held accountable, this Administration continues not to be. While I have significant ideological problems with this bill, I cannot in good faith turn my back on the courageous men and women who have so valiantly served to preserve the peace in Iraq. They deserve to enter the battlefield with adequate armor and equipment and are similarly entitled to an increase in benefits for them and for their families. However, I vote in favor of this bill with the sincere hope that this is the last time the Administration abuses the emergency appropriations process and comes to this body with such a request.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, the American electoral system is the paragon of democracy for the world. Therefore, we must hold ourselves to the highest standards when we conduct elections. There can be no doubt about the outcomes, no questions about fairness or fraud. Where there is even a whiff of impropriety, we have an obligation to act, and in a bipartisan manner. The fundamental underpinning of our democracy is our guarantee that every citizen has the right to vote. Over the last 225 years we have worked slowly, but steadily, to expand this right. We have corrected grievous injustices that once prevented too many of our fellow citizens from having a voice in our democracy. Despite these efforts, sadly, we have had serious evidence of improprieties in both of the last Presidential elections. In 2000, the disenfranchisement of Florida voters took that election all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The 2004 Washington State gubernatorial election took over 6 weeks to resolve, and the Ohio voting process gives rises to grave concerns. In Ohio, and other states, voters in far too many precincts faced significant obstacles when they tried to vote. Ten-hour lines to vote, a lack of sufficient ballots, wrongly purged or inaccurate voter registration roles and miscalibrated voting machines are unacceptable. These actions not only call into question the integrity of our election results, they deprive individuals of the right to vote that too many people have fought and died to protect. We should have learned our lesson after the 2000 election. I supported and co-sponsored strong voting reform legislation, including the Help America Vote Act. This was the most comprehensive package of voting reforms passed by Congress since the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It marked a first step, but only a first step in modernizing our electoral process nationwide. While Congress did pass legislation, the 2004 election shows that we have not gone far enough to restore integrity to the process. We cannot continue to ignore this problem. We cannot allow Americans to be unjustly deprived of our fundamental right to vote or of anyone to doubt the outcome of our elections. Congress must develop a comprehensive and bipartisan solution to the problems that still plague our system. I commend the gentlewoman from Ohio for raising this issue, and commit to work with her and the rest of my colleagues in our continuing quest to assure that all Americans' votes are counted.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me this time. A lot of mischief can come from a bill that is a $388.4 billion bill, 14.75 inches thick, I measured it, which was filed sometime after midnight. I will guarantee my colleagues not one Member, including the gentleman from Florida, read this bill, even on the Internet. One of the worst pieces of mischief that is included in this bill that we know of so far, there is probably a lot more, is the so-called Weldon gag rule. This rule, far from constituting a simple conscience clause as proponents claim, will amount to a broad noncompliance permit for companies that want to refuse to abide by the law. The bill could restrict States' autonomy and their right to self-governance, undermine States' abilities to enforce their own constitutional protections, block States' abilities to set the parameters of their own Medicaid programs, override Federal title X guidelines that ensure women receive full medical information, interfere with State and local governments' responsibility to oversee hospital mergers, set health care licensing and certification standards, interfere with, and even possibly override, current Federal laws like the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, which ensure that women in life-threatening circumstances receive the medical care they need and, just as importantly, deny low-income women key information about and referrals to abortion services. This is wrong. It is the wrong way to do it. It is the wrong way to debate it; and as far as I know, given this massive spending bill that no one has read, as far as I am concerned, it is just the tip of the iceberg. Vote ``no'' on the rule, vote ``no'' on the bill.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today this body can greatly improve the lives of more than 1 million Americans who are affected by juvenile diabetes. The Pancreatic Islet Cell Transplantation Act addresses a significant problem by reducing the nonscientific barriers standing in the way of this promising treatment. Pancreatic islet cell transplantation is a procedure that infuses new insulin-producing cells into an individual with juvenile diabetes. This procedure has now been performed in over 300 people in this country. The results are nothing short of miraculous. A majority of those islet cell transplantation recipients no longer need to inject themselves with insulin. For a person with juvenile diabetes this change is life altering. It means no more needles and no more worry. It means the question of what to eat no longer requires calculation or cause for alarm. For those patients islet cell transplantation means freedom, and ultimately islet cell transplantation will be a cure for type 1 diabetes. As we know too well, Mr. Speaker, living with diabetes is challenging. Insulin is not a cure. It is only a means of managing the disease, and it is more complicated by the difficulties of monitoring glucose levels. Very serious complications like blindness and kidney disease are not uncommon. In fact, a staggering number of patients with juvenile, or type 1, diabetes suffer from some type of complication. Every year 82,000 individuals lose their foot or leg to diabetes. Heart disease is the leading cause of diabetes-related deaths. And diabetes is the leading cause of new blindness in people 20 to 74 years old. This bill, which I was proud to introduce with the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt), who, unfortunately, cannot be here with us today, takes us one step closer to preventing these devastating complications. H.R. 3858 will help increase the supply of pancreata for islet cell transplantation and better coordinate Federal Government efforts and information. These are narrow, yet essential, improvements to our health care system that may not only change the lives of people with juvenile diabetes but also will reduce costs in our health care system. The total annual cost of diabetes in 2002 was estimated to be $132 billion. Of that, $23 billion was due to the cost care for complications of diabetes. This is exactly why we need to use new procedures like islet cell transplantation to improve lives and reduce the cost of health care in the United States. We are at a time of extraordinary opportunity in the field of juvenile diabetes research, and pancreatic islet cell transplantation is just one of the new procedures that gives us great hope. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt) and I have been the co- chairs of the Congressional Diabetes Caucus for many years now, and we are pleased to say it is still the largest caucus in Congress. We have seen the technologies improve, and we have worked to improve the coordination and Federal support for diabetes programs. The Pancreatic Islet Cell Transplantation Act continues that work. Like so many of my colleagues, I support improved scientifically based efforts that will improve patients' lives and even eradicate this disease. Since the science in this area is developing at a rapid pace, additional efforts are needed to ensure that Federal policies and regulatory actions support the momentum. I want to add my thanks to the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) and for the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) as well as the Committee on Energy and Commerce staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work and diligence on this and all of the health bills being considered today. Their leadership provides exactly the kind of bipartisan cooperation that we need to address significant issues like improving our health care system, that Congress faces today. I also want to thank the volunteers of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and the American Diabetes Association. These two organizations have been tireless, and they are to be commended. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for all of your hard work in this area over the years. Pancreatic islet cell transplantation is an incredible innovation in medicine. I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, one of the most glaringly absurd aspects of this debate is that marriage has never been and should not be now a Federal issue. Marriage is quintessentially a State issue. States have always had the ability to determine what constitutes marriage and the protections that it affords the will of the citizens. Not only does this proposed amendment turn the notion of Federalism on its head, though. It is antithetical to the spirit of our Constitution. This amendment would enshrine discrimination in our Constitution and be the only amendment that actually takes away a group's rights. It would not only take away the right to marriage, but also the right to provide basic fundamental rights, such as the right to visit a partner or child in the hospital. And to those who say it will help children, I have this question: Why should we not instead ban divorce? Approximately 1 million children, the product of heterosexual marriages, are living in single-parent homes in this country. Fifty percent of heterosexual marriages will end in divorce. If a State allowed same-sex marriage, I do not think it would affect my own heterosexual marriage. We are proud of the fact that this body represents America. So I would ask those who are divorced or those who have committed adultery, search in your soul and ask yourself, are you really ready to stand here today, today in this body, and cast the first stone?

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the extraordinary life and notable accomplishments of Panagiotis Takis Dadiotis. This remarkable gentleman merits both our recognition and esteem as his community leadership and invaluable service have unproved the lives of our people. Taki Dadiotis was born in Greece in the town of Aegion where, in his early years, he worked with his father, a fruit vendor. His story is not unlike those of other Greek Americans who came to this country with little more than their optimism and a desire to build a better life. Taki arrived in the United States in 1966 and first lived in Pensacola, Florida, where he sold toothbrushes door-to-door to raise the fare to travel to Denver. When he arrived, he worked three jobs at the same time--at Samsonite making suitcases, at King Soopers bagging groceries and tending bar at the Picadilly Restaurant--to build the nest egg needed to open his first restaurant with his brothers Sam and Pete. He became a proud family man, and he and his wife Vasiliki, raised two wonderful children, Jim and Theoni. More restaurants followed including the well-known Greek Town Cafe on East Colfax. But Taki had a passion for politics and always found time to be involved in public life. His restaurant became a gathering place for elected officials and influential politicos as well as the site for countless State, local and national fundraising events. Taki had an irrepressible zest for life and no one was a stranger. He was open and genuine and possessed a refreshing lack of artifice. When people would try to put one over on him, he would simply mention that although he lacked a formal higher education, he did, in fact, graduate from the ``University of Colfax'' and they all got the drift. Taki was immensely proud of his Greek heritage and preserving the ideals and traditions of Hellenism had great meaning for him. He understood that his native Hellas and his adopted homeland shared common values and that the greatness of America flowed from our fidelity to the Hellenic precept that government derives its authority from the people. Becoming a citizen of the United States was one of the greatest honors of Taki's life. His son Jim recalled how he instilled in his children a sense of civic responsibility and the fundamental importance of voting. Taki once remarked that America stands for the fair treatment of all people, and that providing the opportunity to be successful makes our country better and stronger. Taki loved this country and he wanted to participate in the American experience. He wanted to help make our country better because it gave him the opportunity to live the American Dream. But Taki never forgot who he was or where he came from. And although he achieved financial success, he always wanted to help, not only Greek immigrants, but all those who were disadvantaged. He didn't want people that were somehow limited or didn't have access to civic leaders and community resources to be forgotten, left out or lost in the shuffle. Taki not only had a big heart, but he was well-grounded and possessed a clear sense of what mattered. Taki Dadiotis loved his family, his friends his country, his faith and lived a life that is rich in consequence. Truly, we are all diminished by the passing of this remarkable person. There is an old Greek saying that ``the passion for freedom never dies.'' And while Taki has left our ranks, his passion for the American ideal endures in us. Please join me in paying tribute to the life of Panagiotis Takis Dadiotis, a distinguished citizen. It is the values, leadership and commitment he exhibited during his life that serves to build a better future for all Americans.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the notable accomplishments and extraordinary service of Denver District Attorney William (Bill) Ritter, Jr. This eminent public servant merits both our recognition and esteem as his impressive record of leadership and invaluable service has done much to improve the lives of our residents. Bill Ritter's standing within our community is unrivaled. His tenure has been defined by not only the skills and faculties that distinguish district attorneys, but by a deep and abiding commitment to justice, high ethical standards and professionalism. Bill Ritter was born on a farm in Colorado and is one of twelve children. He worked construction and used work-study programs to put himself through Colorado State University where he graduated with honors. He subsequently earned his Juris Doctor from the University of Colorado School of Law and served as a former Assistant United States Attorney and Chief Deputy District Attorney. Bill married Jeannie Lewis Ritter and they have raised a family of four: August (William), Abraham, Samuel and Natalie. In 1987, Bill interrupted his legal career to manage a food distribution and nutrition center in Zambia for three years. Former Governor Roy Romer appointed Bill Ritter to serve as District Attorney for the Second Judicial District of Colorado in 1993 and he has since been reelected District Attorney three times by the people of Denver. Bill understands that he has a public trust of considerable magnitude and he has been resolute in his commitment to protect the safety and welfare of our citizens. He and his staff are responsible for the prosecution of more than 5,000 felony and 15,000 misdemeanor cases every year. But for Bill Ritter, protecting the integrity of the legal process matters and he has done much to bring greater transparency and innovation to the District Attorneys Office. Whether helping our senior citizens fight scams, cracking down on identity theft and check-fraud, advocating for reasonable gun laws, fighting for needed funding to place juvenile offenders in effective programs, or advocating for responsible domestic violence laws, Bill Ritter has provided serious and thoughtful leadership on issues of public consequence. He has created a number of forward-thinking programs including the Denver Drug Court, Victims Services, Community Prosecution, Juvenile Diversion and the Courtrooms to Classrooms program. Many of these programs serve as models for other judicial districts in the nation. Bill Ritter is nationally recognized on issues ranging from community justice, juvenile diversion and white-collar crime. He has served as faculty for the National Institute of Trial Advocacy, The National District Attorneys Advocacy Center and the National Conference on Juvenile Justice. He is past president of the Colorado District Attorneys Association, Chairman of the Board of Project P.A.V.E. (Promoting Alternatives to Violence Through Education), President of the American Prosecutors Research Institute and is a board member of the National District Attorneys Association, the National Association of Drug Court Professionals and the Mile High United Way. Bill Ritter has burnished a reputation as a powerful advocate for victims' rights and new approaches to both prevent and deter crime. But more importantly, he is a decent human being and his career has been defined by the courage to adopt new ideas and take the necessary risks to implement them. His efforts have made a real difference and under Bill Ritter's leadership, the Denver District Attorney's Office has made a positive impact on our justice system and improved the quality of life in our community. Bill Ritter's tenure as Denver District Attorney is quickly drawing to a close. His leadership has been exemplary and he has labored diligently to preserve and improve the administration of justice. His contributions are rich in consequence and on behalf of the citizens of the 1st Congressional District, I wish to express our gratitude and look forward to his continued involvement in our civic life. Please join me in commending William Ritter, Jr., a distinguished citizen and public servant. His character, leadership and accomplishments command our respect and serve to build a better future for all Americans.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I voted in strong support of the Motion to Recommit sponsored by Representative David Obey and in reluctant support for final passage of H.R. 5025, the Transportation and Treasury Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005. Politics and a deplorable abuse of the legislative process are holding critical transportation projects across this country hostage. This includes the T-REX project in my district--which has introduced light rail to metro Denver and expanded a vital corridor along I-25. Every federal highway and transit project in this country must be authorized to receive federal funds before the appropriators can release them. Unfortunately, the wheels have fallen off the authorization train this time around. We in Congress are facing an incredible situation where a Republican- controlled House, a Republican-controlled Senate and a Republican- controlled White House cannot reach an agreement on funding levels for our nation's transportation system. This showdown occurs against a background of ever increasing traffic congestion, as our transportation needs continue to outstrip our will to address them. As if there weren't enough to raise concern about the authorization process alone, the folly extended to the House's consideration of the transportation funding bill as well. My Republican colleagues from Colorado subjected the appropriations bill itself to numerous points of order that stripped the legislation of funding for transit projects, Amtrak, and even T-REX. My hometown paper, the Rocky Mountain News, recently described the situation we face today, ``Imagine a major transportation bill that pays for very few roads or transit programs.'' Well, that's what we're stuck with. Do you know why my colleagues decided to strip this much- needed money out of the bill? Because the authorization bill hasn't passed. Well, whose fault is that? So I support Mr. Obey's efforts to restore the transit funding to the transportation bill before us here today. I'll vote for final passage, because I hope that all of this absurdity will be remedied in the conference report because, frankly, my constituents don't care about this political wrangling. They care about the transportation crunch across our country, they care about congestion in Denver and they care about real solutions. I will continue to fight against this political posturing and for the real solutions that will get traffic flowing again in my district and across this nation.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the exceptional accomplishments and extraordinary life of the Reverend Jesse Langston Boyd. This remarkable gentleman merits both our recognition and esteem as his impressive record of leadership and his invaluable service has done much to improve the lives of our people. Reverend Boyd's standing within our community is rivaled by few others. He was a dynamic preacher whose counsel was infused with a spiritual fire that moved all of us to do what was right. He lived his life on the front lines of progress and proved to be a powerful champion of economic and social justice. His indomitable spirit carried him through many of life's challenges and molded a life of genuine accomplishment. Jesse Boyd began his life in St. Louis, Missouri and settled in Los Angeles during the height of the civil rights movement. He joined the Reverend Jesse Jackson's Operation Breadbasket and organized the city's Operation PUSH. In the early 1970's, he spent two years as a missionary in Zambia building schools and houses. He later studied at the Center for the Study of Religions in Jerusalem and earned a degree in divinity from Harvard University. Reverend Boyd came to our community in 1978 and was pastor of Shorter African Methodist Episcopal Church for over twenty-six years. As a spiritual leader, he advanced the social and educational development of our youth and burnished a reputation as a powerful advocate for civil liberties, inclusion and expanding opportunities for all people. Under Reverend Boyd's leadership, Shorter A.M.E. became a beacon of hope and remains a positive force in the spiritual and civic life of our community. He served as President of the Black Ministerial Alliance and in the mid-1980's, he helped create People Against Racism at Coors after William Coors, board chairman, was quoted in the Rocky Mountain News as saying that blacks lacked ``intellectual capacity.'' The newspaper later retracted the story and a suit filed by Coors against the newspaper was also retracted. His civic accomplishments included building a fifty-unit housing development and establishing a park near Shorter A.M.E. Church. Reverend Boyd was no stranger to political and community activism. He served as director of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and chaired the boards of directors of Denver Metro PUSH and the Rainbow Coalition. Former Governor Roy Romer appointed him to the Colorado Wildlife Commission and he co-chaired the state campaigns for the Reverend Jesse Jackson, Gary Hart and Michael Dukakis. It comes as no surprise that the Muscular Dystrophy Association honored Reverend Boyd with the 2004 Personal Achievement Award for his extensive religious, social and political contributions. Recently, Mayor John Hickenlooper proclaimed June 24th, 2004, as ``The Reverend Jesse Langston Boyd Day.'' We are indeed grateful for the life of Reverend Boyd and for his inestimable contribution to the spiritual life of our community and to the causes that elevate the human condition. He was a fervent defender of the civil liberties which have deep roots in our republic and we are all diminished by the passing of the remarkable gentleman. His contemporaries, including the Reverend James Peters, the Reverend Paul Martin and the Reverend Gil Caldwell recently noted that Reverend Boyd ``was a spiritual giant in our community'' who ``helped us blaze the trail'' and ``dared challenge America to become a land `with liberty and justice for all'.'' I would simply add that I believe Reverend Boyd's message to us would be that we must be ever vigilant and continue to affirm the values of equality, inclusion and tolerance--the values which define us as Americans. Please join me in paying tribute to the life of Reverend Jesse Langston Boyd, a distinguished spiritual and civic leader. His service, accomplishments and leadership command our respect and serve to build a better future for all Americans.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the notable accomplishments of a remarkable woman in the 1st Congressional District of Colorado. It is both fitting and proper that we recognize Keller Hayes for her impressive record of business and civic leadership as well as her invaluable service to our state and community. Keller Hayes has used her time, skill and energy to make Colorado a better place. She came to our community from a small ranch in rural Nebraska and graduated from the University of Nebraska at Lincoln with a degree in Journalism and Women's Studies. She worked for various publishing houses, including a trade publication in Minnesota and for Monterey Life in California before joining the Colorado Women's Chamber of Commerce. For Keller, the economic empowerment of women has meaning. Whether advocating for passage of a pay-equity resolution at the statehouse or developing a Women's Business Certification program to allow women- owned companies to gain greater access to corporate and government contracts, Keller has been a champion for social and economic empowerment. She believes in the mission of the Colorado Women's Chamber of Commerce and during her tenure as President, she gave its mission new life and helped build a dynamic organization. When Keller took up the job, she and a part-time person were the only staff the chamber had. Today, the organization has eight staff people, boasts 1,700 members and has become the largest women's chamber in the country. Under Keller's leadership, the Women's Chamber created a structure that promotes the economic advancement of its members and provides meaningful leadership for women in business. Keller has opened doors and garnered respect for the women's business community. She has brought other women along and helped get them a seat at the table. Keller has fought for recognition of both the immeasurable contribution of women to our economy and the full value of women's abilities. As a result of her leadership, business women have become a more powerful force in our city and our state. For her efforts, Keller was chosen the 2001 Outstanding Woman in Business Nonprofit by the Denver Business Journal and 2002 Women in Business Advocate of the Year in Region VIII for the Small Business Administration. But it takes a special person to reach a high level of professional accomplishment and still find the time and energy to give back to the community. Over the past six years, Keller has volunteered for the Rape/Spouse Abuse Crisis Center as an on-line counselor, volunteer trainer, speaker and public relations volunteer. Not only has Keller used her skills and talents to promote the economic empowerment of women, she has done much to advance the well-being of our people. While I believe many of us are saddened Keller has left the Women's Chamber, I am confident that her leadership, skill and experience will be of great benefit to all of us in her new venture and we look forward to her continued involvement in our civic life. Please join me commending Keller Hayes for her professional achievement, community service and active involvement in helping women attain professional excellence and a dynamic voice in public life. It is the strong leadership she exhibits on a daily basis that continually enhances our lives and builds a better future for all Americans.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3313, the so- called ``Marriage Protection Act.'' I was really tempted to offer an amendment mandating that every Member of Congress watch ``School House Rock'' before they are allowed to cast another vote. If you have kids, you are probably familiar with School House Rock. It is the old, ever-popular kids show that explains how American government works. It imparts information on basic civics in fun and easy to understand terms, for example, how there are three branches of government that provide the check and balances that are the bedrock of our country. But then I decided that, although more of my colleagues than I ever believed possible desperately need this sort of basic primer on government, it didn't seem fair to waste Members' time, like our time is being wasted today as we are forced to debate and vote on this utterly absurd piece of legislation. Our Founding Fathers established clear separation of powers between the three branches of government. Rep. Hostettler and the Republican leadership are trying to dictate to our formerly independent judiciary what cases it can or cannot consider. This is a court-stripping measure that could lead to Congress's removal of the courts' jurisdiction any time a controversial measure might come before the federal bench. The Hostettler bill would ban any federal court, including the Supreme Court, from having jurisdiction over challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act. This would mark a nearly unprecedented effort by one independent branch of the federal government, the Congress, to limit the jurisdiction of the judiciary branch. This is the Republican leadership's last ditch effort to get a vote on gay marriage in the House to effect the election this fall. We are considering legislation to pre-empt an action that has not taken place. The Defense of Marriage Act, which passed in 1996, is not being challenged. This is a cop out, not a compromise. They know they don't have the votes on the Federal Marriage Amendment so they are grasping at straws. In Federalist Paper 78, Alexander Hamilton defended the need for an independent judiciary. As the only branch of the federal government not swayed by campaigning, Hamilton asserted that it was the branch best able to protect the Constitution from political meddling by the Congress or the President. He also foresaw just the type of action being attempted by Republicans in Congress today, warning ``. . . there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers. If this bill, by some miracle were actually to be signed into law, and by an even bigger miracle, was not immediately overturned because of its blatant unconstitutionality, it would be a horrible precedent in preventing the most basic redress available to the American people. Imagine bill after bill being passed in Congress, with the same language tacked on at the end saying that once this law passes it can never be challenged in the federal courts, including the Supreme Court. Today the issue is gay marriage, but tomorrow the issue could be anything. This bill is incredibly short-sighted and it goes against the very principles that so many of its supporters purport to honor as public servants. It really would be laughable if it weren't so scary. I urge a ``no'' vote on this ridiculous, unconstitutional and frankly un-American bill.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I voted against H. Res. 713 because I believe the intent of this resolution had nothing to do with Israel's best interests, nor with promoting peace in the Middle East. The text was written by the Republican majority with the explicit intent of trying to be as politically divisive as possible. I strongly believe that Israel has the right to defend itself against terrorism. However, while the resolution expresses support for Israel's right to construct a security barrier, it is clear to me that this measure was a cynical attempt to divide people for political gain here in the United States. There are legitimate questions as to the propriety and wisdom of the action taken by the International Court of Justice, ICJ, in this matter, and in fact I personally disagree with their decision. However, this resolution goes too far and condemns the ICJ for politicizing an issue, when the very reason the Republican majority brought this issue to the floor is for political purposes. Over the past four years, the House of Representatives has passed, with my support, at least nine non-binding Resolutions in regards to Israel. I entreat the leadership to now expend the same effort and energy to craft meaningful legislation that actually takes substantive action to further the Middle East peace process rather than paying so much lip service, as we too often do on issues of importance. Over the years, the United States has been a vital player in facilitating peace negotiations in the Middle East. I have long said that the U.S. should be the first to support Israel's right to protect its citizens. I have also taken the position that Congress should not formally endorse the security fence, nor should we oppose it. To do so, I believe, meddles in internal Israeli affairs and compromises the U.S.'s ability to be a player in future peace negotiations. The future security of the Middle East depends on negotiating a just, permanent, and peaceful settlement between Israelis and Palestinians that both guarantees Israel's security and establishes a Palestinian state. I cannot support resolutions, such as H. Res. 713, that are detrimental to this process. I believe that it is the responsibility of those who are pro-Israel, like myself, to support measures that advance the security of Israel. This legislation does not do that. My efforts and advocacy over the years on behalf of Israel speaks for itself, and my support for Israel will continue throughout my tenure as a Member. I urge the Republican majority to get serious about promoting peace in the Middle East and the security of Israel rather than wasting Congress' time with non- binding resolutions intended to make political points in an election year.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the notable accomplishments of Paul Mendrick. This remarkable gentleman merits both our recognition and esteem as his impressive record of leadership and invaluable service have improved the lives of countless people. Paul Mendrick has devoted much of his time, skill and energy to making our State and our community a better place. Born to Joseph and Alice Mendrick in Pueblo, Colorado on October 23, 1948, he graduated from Pueblo South High School and attended classes at Southern Colorado State College. Paul enlisted in the United States Navy in 1970 and served as Yeoman to the Chaplin aboard ship until 1972. Paul has been a labor leader, political activist and has remained in the vanguard of those dedicated to economic and social justice. During his distinguished career with the United States Postal Service, Paul served in various capacities with the Denver Metro Area Local of the American Postal Workers Union (APWU). He served as President from 1976 to 1992 and again from 1995 until his retirement in 2003. Under Paul's leadership, the Denver local became one of the most progressive locals, and he worked diligently to ensure that Postal Workers were represented fairly and their voices were heard in the United States Congress. Those who know Paul know that fairness for the working people matters. He is well known for being forthright and a skilled leader not only within the APWU, but in the Labor Movement. For Paul, solidarity has meaning. In 1980, when the Air Traffic Controllers (PATCO) were on strike, Paul and other labor activists opted to travel to the APWU National Convention in Miami, Florida, by motor home rather than cross picket lines to travel by air. As a board member of the Denver Postal Credit Union, Paul was instrumental in lobbying Congress against a proposed tax levy on credit unions which still stands today. In 1986, he was among the delegates selected by the AFL-CIO to travel to South America to be part of a grassroots movement to build a worldwide Labor movement. Paul has also dedicated his life to his family and recently became a grandfather. But for all of life's demanding pressures, Paul has found the time to give back to the community, and he has supported numerous charitable causes. He has spent endless hours working on behalf of the Special Olympics in Colorado and for Muscular Dystrophy. The APWU in Denver has always been a yearly participant in the March of Dimes Walk and, under Paul's leadership, the APWU has continually raised money to feed the homeless and take care of those less fortunate. It comes as no surprise that Paul was recently elected Secretary- Treasurer of the Colorado AFL-CIO and continues to lobby for worker rights and a decent workplace. He has dedicated his life to working people and has brought both respect and dignity to the Labor Movement. He has used his inestimable skills and talents to advance the public good and the well-being of all our people. Please join me in commending Paul Mendrick, a distinguished citizen. It is the strong leadership he exhibits on a daily basis that continually enhances our lives and builds a better future for all Americans.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, while I voted against the resolution authorizing the war with Iraq and whole-heartedly disagree with the way this administration has handled the conflict in Iraq, I strongly support our troops. Congress has been unwavering in its support for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, passing resolutions and giving speeches praising their sacrifice and courage. However, such words are hollow if Congress does not proceed with real action. For that reason, I have supported legislation in the past and will support the bill in front of us today because it provides our tireless troops with the benefits they so rightfully deserve. This bill will make long-overdue changes to the current military pay and benefit rules for all members of the Armed Services. Among other things, this legislation will make permanent the increases in ``combat pay,'' the Family Separation Allowance and hardship duty pay that Congress passed on a temporary basis last year. More than any tax cut ever could, these increased benefits will provide substantive relief to the soldiers and their families in their time of need. This bill also recognizes the vital contribution that reservists have made to our country's military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Indeed, our country has not depended on the members of the Reserve forces and National Guard as much as we do now since the Korean war. This bill appropriately ensures that, after uprooting these men and women from their lives and putting them in the line of fire, they do not return home without adequate benefits. This bill extends healthcare coverage to National Guard members and reservists and their families who lack health insurance. It also provides pay parity to reservists, ensuring that reservists are paid the same bonuses and special pay as active duty members are. Not only does passing this bill keep our commitment to our troops, it also importantly keeps the promise we made to our country's veterans years ago. For years, the widows of veterans have unfairly seen their survivor benefit decrease after the age of 62, even though in many cases, retirees and survivors were never informed of the reduction when they signed up for the plan. This bill would rightly eliminate the reduction in the Survivor Benefit Plan annuities, thereby upholding our country's commitment and restoring the faith of our veterans who were unaware of the reduction. While I do not believe this bill is perfect, I cannot in good faith turn my back on the courageous men and women who have so valiantly served to preserve the peace in Iraq and Afghanistan and protect our safety at home. Also, I am pleased to vote for a bill that delivers on a promise that we made to veterans and their families years ago--to provide surviving spouses the full benefits they deserve and the benefits that were promised to them.