Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to extend my sincere congratulations to the members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 90 of New Haven, Connecticut as they celebrate their 100th Anniversary. Chartered January 1, 1900, fifteen electrical tradesmen established what has since become one of the most respected union organizations across the State of Connecticut. Historically, union members have been challenged by communities to prove that, as tradesman, they deserved respect and a better quality of life for their labor and skills. Throughout its century of history, Local 90 has expanded its jurisdiction--reaching out to other communities, protecting the interests of electrical tradesman through much of Central and Southern Connecticut. I have often said that we are fortunate to live in a country that allows its workers to engage in efforts to better employee standards and benefits. Local 90 has fought hard for better wages, more comprehensive health benefits for their members and their families, and safer working environments--ensuring that corporations throughout Connecticut listen to their employees and afford them these basic rights. Local 90 has been a true leader for our working families, giving them a voice during the hardest of economic times. In addition to their professional contributions, the members of Local 90 are dedicated to our community. For the past several years, Local 90 members have used their expertise to create what has become a highlight of the Christmas season--the Fantasy of Lights exhibition at Lighthouse Point in New Haven. The exhibition and their work benefits the New Haven Rehabilitation Center. The tremendous work that goes into this project is truly remarkable--bringing the spirit and joy of the holiday season for all of our children and families to enjoy. For the many contributions they have made to the working families of Southern and Central Connecticut, I am proud to stand today to pay tribute to former and present members of Local 90--they have made a real difference in the lives of many. I am honored to extend my sincere congratulations to them as they celebrate their 100th Anniversary and my best wishes for another century of success.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 266, recognizing the benefits of music education. This is an important expression of our Nation's support for the arts and the tangible benefits the arts, and particularly music, provide for our children and for all Americans. Music education not only opens a door for a new way of self- expression for young students, but it also trains the brain to organize information in a way that improves abilities in math and science. In fact, studies show that students with music training perform an average of almost 100 points higher on the SAT college entrance examination. According to the National Association for Music Education, skills learned through the discipline of music transfer to study skills, communication skills, and cognitive skills useful in every part of the curriculum. Students who play in a band or orchestra more effectively learn to work with their teachers and classmates in the school environment without resorting to violent or inappropriate behavior. I've heard from the music teachers in my district and my State--they are experiencing a teacher shortage that is serious. In some cases, they are forced to conduct the high school band in an old locker room or teach the violin in a broom closet. These are talented and dedicated professionals who just want to share the joy of music with their students, and we must show them that Congress supports them in their goal. I am pleased that today we can stand united in our recognition and commendation of music education, the benefits it provides students-- from their knowledge of other subject areas and to their overall self- esteem, and to the talented music teachers who often work without the resources their curriculum deserves. Let's continue this spirit of support. When it comes time to put our money and our laws where our priorities are, let's make sure music education--and all arts education--remains an essential part of our public education system.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).

Ms. DeLAURO. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I think that we understand that the rules of the House restrain us on this matter, and it is unfortunate. If there had been a vote on this issue, I believe we would have prevailed. I concede the point of order.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, let me just continue where my colleague left off on the $38 million for a nursing home initiative that would provide quality nursing home care, because we do know the horror stories. Today's New York Daily News, ``Nursing Home Horror, Queens facility abused elderly residents, Feds say.'' ``Elderly face mental and physical abuse.'' Line after line of the most vulnerable citizens in a place in which they are unprotected, and their rights and their dignity are taken away from them. We have an opportunity with this amendment, with this bill, which focuses in on the lives of people in this country to take $38 million and provide additional nursing home care, quality care so that, in fact, we do not have to read stories like this in the newspapers. Cut back the tax cut to 20 percent. Give us the $2.5 billion for these amendments that are going to make a difference in the lives of the American people. Point of Order

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Chairman, I am surprised that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) does not know this, because the gentleman is a student of these matters. The fact of the matter is, on page 324 of this document: ``However, funding for the President's initiative does not require final passage of the authorization of the Older Americans Act. States can provide services to family caregivers under existing provisions of title III (Part D) of the Older Americans Act.'' So, in fact, this has been authorized under an existing authority already. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time is remaining.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, I want to just reiterate what I said earlier, that the President of the United States is not offering this amendment. I am offering this amendment, and we, in fact, have 3 coequal branches of government. The President may have made a request, but I believe that we need to increase the dollar amount for several of these programs. Secondly, the constraints that have been put on the budget are irresponsible restraints because they reflect the priority of the Republican leadership. They reflect truly the values and the priorities of the Republican leadership, which says let us provide a tax cut to the 1 percent of the wealthiest people in this country, and when one places that constraint on the budget as an albatross, then all of those programs are held captive that, in fact, would benefit working families, seniors and the most precious commodity, our children. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 10 by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), as his designee.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank our ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), for his tireless efforts on behalf of hard-working, middle-class families. He has been an important voice for common sense in this debate. The Obey amendment is an attempt to bring some of his common sense to this legislation, to help it to be able to reflect the priorities of the American people. It says, very simply, let us provide a prescription drug benefit for all of America's seniors, before, in fact, we enact a tax cut for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. Sixty percent of our seniors on Medicare lack good, affordable coverage. The nearly 12 million seniors who have no prescription drug coverage need our help. If all of senior citizens are covered, then we will see the prices drop on prescription drugs. More than one in eight seniors are faced with an awful choice of paying for food and shelter or buying the prescription drugs that they simply cannot live without. In a time of unprecedented prosperity, the Republican leadership is telling these seniors that providing a tax cut to that wealthiest 1 percent of Americans is a higher priority than helping seniors afford prescription drugs. They have given a lot of lip service to the need for a Medicare prescription drug benefit, but the fact is, Republicans still do not have a plan to provide a voluntary prescription drug benefit that covers all of America's seniors, no matter where they live. They want to do this through private insurance companies who quite frankly have said their plan is absurd. This amendment says that the Republican leadership needs to get back in touch with the values of the American people and provide prescription drug coverage to all of America's seniors before we pass those tax breaks for that wealthiest 1 percent. Those are the priorities of the American people. They should be our priorities. I urge my colleagues to support the Obey amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, let me just say to the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Porter), that he does this House honor though we have disagreements and we disagree on this piece of legislation. It is an honor to serve with him in this body. Mr. Chairman, this amendment addresses glaring insufficiencies in this bill in protecting the health and the welfare of America's seniors. It increases funding for the HCFA nursing home initiative, the Medicare integrity program, family caregivers, Meals on Wheels, the Social Security Administration, community health centers and health care for uninsured workers. It provides $661 million in needed funding for seniors and for middle-class families. These needs will go unaddressed in this bill because of misplaced priorities of the Republican leadership. There was a lot of talk today about the need for offsets in order to pay for the vital needs for seniors, our schools, and health research. I have the offset right here, the one we ought to focus on, and that, in fact, is to scale back that massive tax cut that is wanted and that benefits the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans, and then we can meet the need of seniors and still be able to provide tax relief for working middle-class families. Provide those tax breaks for working families. Scale back the enormity of the tax cut, and we will have the offsets that we need to be able to do something for the families in this country. Unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have rejected this type of a balanced approach, and just let me say who will not be served because of this misplaced leadership. Family caregivers, today over 5 million Americans, 3 to 4 million of whom are seniors, are able to remain in their homes during an illness because of the services provided to them by family caregivers. These family members face the stress of caring for a frail and ill senior while still struggling to look after the rest of their families. Many still work full time while providing care that allows their parent to maintain their dignity. This bill cuts $125 million from this program. Second, Meals on Wheels, we have all been the witness of the benefit of the Meals on Wheels program. It provides vital nutrition to low- income seniors, helps them again to stay in their homes and in their communities. We could have provided an additional 75,000 low-income seniors with this important help if this amendment would pass, if we could add $50 million to the program. Rejecting the amendment means that these seniors will go without. Many of them will not be able to maintain their independence and remain in their homes because they will not receive the service of Meals on Wheels. Nursing home initiative, with a helping hand many seniors can maintain their independence. Too many people my age have to face the awful choice of finding a nursing home that will provide around-the- clock care for a parent who can no longer live on their own. We have all seen the horror stories about homes that fail our seniors. Most recently in today's papers, in New York, have talked about the inadequate care and actually the violation of seniors' human rights in some of these institutions. One in every four nursing homes puts their patients at an unnecessary risk for death or injury. It is simply unacceptable that the greatest generation is being put at risk by the generation that followed them. We could have protected these seniors by funding a $38 million nursing home initiative that would have insured quality nursing home care for 1.6 million seniors. Funds for Medicare fraud and Social Security, the amendment funds efforts to protect Medicare, ensure that Social Security serves our seniors. By funding the Medicare integrity program, we can fight waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicare system and return dollars that are so needed for the program. Every dollar invested in this fraud-fighting initiative means that we can return $17 to Medicare that would be lost to fraud and abuse. Support of this program would save Medicare $850 million. The Social Security Administration, the amendment would also ensure that the Social Security Administration could improve their services for seniors and reduce the waiting time for claims and requests. Supporting the amendment would have made a real difference for seniors. Unfortunately, we will not be able to properly fund these critical needs or many of the other initiatives that are grossly underfunded in this bill today, because the Republican leadership has insisted on providing tax breaks for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. We can keep the tax relief for middle-class families. They need it. Scale back the tax break for the top 1 percent, the wealthiest of the wealthy, and we can invest in these important initiatives. I think that most Americans would make this trade-off. If we cannot find the funds for these vital needs, we should resoundingly reject this legislation. It betrays American seniors, fails to live up to the values that they have passed on to all of us. I heard the chairman of the Committee on Rules refer to this bill as progress. If this is progress, then the future Republicans envision is not one that respects the contribution of America's seniors and that maintains their values. Oppose this misguided bill.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I concede the point of order because the House of Representatives rules dictate that, unfortunately, the budget priorities of the majority will shortchange our youngsters and, in fact, tax cuts ought to go to working middle-class families.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, we mentioned Nate from Minnesota. When he entered the first grade, his parents told him he had severe mental retardation. School officials, using testing funded by IDEA, found Nate actually had an extremely high IQ but had serious learning disabilities. They made accommodations for his needs. He graduated from high school and went on to college. With support from his family and school and services through IDEA, he has a very bright future. All we are asking our colleagues to do is to scale back the tax cuts for those in the top 1 percent of all earners. All they need to do to pay for this $1.5 billion is to cut back the size of that tax cut for the wealthy by 20 percent. In that case, we can in fact meet the needs of youngsters with serious disabilities. We are in an era of surplus. It is one thing if we are in an era of deficit, but we have no excuse not to move to fully funding the IDEA program, as we said on the floor of this House on May 3, 2000. Let us put our money and our resolve where our mouths are.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds. What is before the House this year is not what has been done in the past but, in fact, what it is we are going to do in this year. The majority party may have been on the right side of the issue in the past; this year they are on the wrong side. We need to deal with the surplus that we have and take care of children's needs today. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens), a champion of education. (Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds to just say to my colleague who spoke, that the President of the United States is not offering this amendment. This is my amendment. This is our amendment. It was just several weeks ago when the Republicans offered a resolution on this floor to fully fund IDEA, and we are just trying to get there from here. That is what this amendment is about. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am offering an amendment today that would increase special education funding in this bill by $1.5 billion. This amendment calls attention to the fact that this bill grossly underfunds the Individuals with Disabilities Act. It fails to put us on the road to full funding by the year 2010. That is the goal this House set with its recent vote of 421 to 3 in support of the IDEA full funding act. That was just a few short weeks ago. We should be living up to the commitment that we made with that vote and the commitment that this Congress made to help local schools meet the needs of educational needs of children with disabilities when it passed IDEA in 1975. A number of Members have come to the floor today bemoaning the lack of IDEA funding in this bill. There is a simple reason why we cannot provide additional funding for IDEA, and it is because the Republican leadership proposed a tax cut that benefits the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans, ahead of the special education needs of our children. If my colleagues supported the Republican budget resolution, they set these priorities in place. Do not now come to the floor of this House and lament the lack of IDEA funding. Because of these misplaced priorities, the needs of special education youngsters will not be met in this bill. We will not be on track to fully fund IDEA by the year 2010. For so many years, back before IDEA became law, hundreds of thousands of disabled children received no formal education. Those were dark days. We should never go back to a time when the potential of so many bright youngsters with so much to offer was squandered due to a lack of understanding. We finally opened our eyes to what these children have to offer. The passage of IDEA authorized several programs to support and improve early intervention and special education for infants, toddlers, children, and youths with disabilities. It, in fact, has made a world of difference, but we are not doing enough. I offered this amendment in the Committee on Appropriations that would have started us on the road to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act by adding $1.5 billion to the bill, bringing the increase in funding for this year up to $2 billion. That increase would put us on target for fully funding IDEA by 2010 as we said we would in this body. Without a $1.5 billion increase this year, we will miss the mark. While it is estimated that it would require $15.8 billion to fully fund IDEA, the most the Congress has ever spent on the program is one-third of that amount. Mayors, school superintendents, and teachers from across my district tell me again and again that they are struggling to provide these youngsters with the education they deserve. I might add that we mandate government, the States and local government to provide an education for these youngsters. In fact, what we do is impose an unfunded mandate on them. But this Congress has not made good on its commitment to provide the 40 percent of the cost that schools pay for special education. These school districts and the children are being shortchanged by a shortsighted policy. And we are shortchanging ourselves by not ensuring that these children receive every opportunity available to learn and to thrive because they can thrive. They have so much to offer us. We just need to give them the chance. We can do that by fully funding IDEA. I thought we could all agree that IDEA was grossly underfunded. This Congress voted almost unanimously by a vote of 421 to 3 in favor of a resolution that said that we would fully fund this program by 2010. When it came time to put their money where their mouth is, the Republican leadership balked. They rejected moving us forward to fully funding this program and opposed the amendment. Unfortunately, this House will not have an opportunity to repair this error because the rules of the House require that we must rob from school modernization, Head Start, America's workers, and our seniors if we were to increase funding for IDEA today. The rules set in place by the Republican leadership would force us to rob from the poor to help the poor, and that is wrong. These needs will go unaddressed in this bill because the Republican leadership refused to scale back the massive tax cut that benefits the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. If we reduce that tax break by only 20 percent, we could add this funding for IDEA and still provide tax relief for working middle-class families, the families who need it the most. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. We will not sit quietly while IDEA receives only lip service while crumbling schools are ignored and while the health care needs of seniors and the uninsured are disregarded in exchange for a tax break for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans in this country. Support this amendment and oppose the bill.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 16 by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), and I am offering the amendment as his designee.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi). I support a strong national investment in biomedical research. The reason being is that I am alive today due to the advancements in biomedical research. I am a 15 year survivor of ovarian cancer. I know how it feels to be the person behind the statistics. We are on the brink of tremendous breakthroughs in cancer and many other areas. We have committed ourselves as a Congress to doubling the funding for the NIH over the next 5 years. Why then would we want to fall short of that goal this year? All the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) is asking for is the $1.7 billion that will allow us to get to meeting that goal this year, and the trade-off is, the trade-off is, a tax cut that is going to only benefit the most wealthy people in this country. The lives, the health, the safety of American people all over this country is not to be traded away, not to be traded away, because of a tax cut that will only benefit the wealthiest.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time is remaining?

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. Special education is not, nor should it be, a partisan issue or a partisan program. The fact of the matter is that the introduction of the tax proposal was by the Republican leadership. It seriously underfunds special education only because the Republicans want to provide a tax cut to the richest 1 percent of the people in this country. It was also a Republican resolution to fully fund IDEA over the next several years, a 421 to 3 vote, one which, I might add, demonstrates a sham to the reality of what this budget is about. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), who sits on the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to introduce the ``WISEWOMAN (Well-Integrated Screening and Evaluation for Women Across the Nation) Expansion Act of 2000'' with my colleague, Congressman James Leach, the Co-Chair of the Congressional Prevention Coalition. This legislation would allow the highly successful WISEWOMAN demonstration project, currently operating in four states, to expand to other states that qualify. The ``WISEWOMAN Expansion Act'' would authorize the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to make competitive grants to states to carry out further preventive health services, in addition to the breast and cervical cancer screenings that the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Programs (NBCCEDP) currently provide. Examples of these additional vital services include screenings for blood pressure, cholesterol, and osteoporosis; health education and counseling; lifestyle interventions to change behavioral risk factors such as smoking, lack of exercise, poor nutrition, and sedentary lifestyle; and appropriate referrals for medical treatment and follow-up services. The need for this program is clear. Each year, nearly half a million women lose their lives as a result of heart disease and stroke. Many of us associate cardiovascular disease with men, but the American Heart Association estimates that nearly one in two women will die of heart disease or stroke. In fact, cardiovascular diseases kills nearly 50,000 more women each year than men. Sadly, many of these deaths could have been prevented. Had these women known they were at risk for cardiovascular disease, they could have taken preventive measures to lower their risk factors and perhaps prevent heart disease and stroke. Osteoporosis, affecting half of all women over the age of 50, is also a preventable disease. Fortunately, some of the preventive measures women can take to reduce their risk for cardiovascular diseases, such as eating more nutritious foods and exercising, can also reduce their risk for osteoporosis. The bill would also add flexibility to the program language that would allow screenings and other preventive measures for diseases in addition to cardiovascular diseases, such as osteoporosis, as more preventive technology becomes available. It would allow flexibility for the WISEWOMAN program to grow and adapt with the needs of individual states and would ensure full collaboration of the WISEWOMAN program with the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP). States would be eligible for this program only if they already participate in the NBCCEDP and agree to operate their WISEWOMAN program in strong collaboration with the NBCCEDP. The bill would authorize funding to carry out this program at a level of $20 million for fiscal year 2001, $25 million for fiscal year 2002, for $30 million for fiscal year 2003, and ``such sums'' as necessary for each subsequent year. Early prevention of cardiovascular disease stroke and osteoporosis would result in a substantial cost-savings for our health care system, but more importantly, it would improve the quality of life for our mothers, our sisters, our daughters and our friends. If we can reach women who are at high risk early in their lives, assist them in altering their behavior to live healthier lifestyles, we could prevent countless diseases and injuries and ultimately, we would save lives. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the House began debate on a Republican education bill that fails our Nation's schoolchildren. Today, the Republican leadership is giving an irresponsible tax cut to the 2,400 wealthiest Americans. Some 2,400 people today will benefit from the cut and the repeal of the estate tax, and $50 billion will be taken out of the revenue stream of this country over a 10-year period to benefit 2,400 people. My friends should do the mathematics. And because of this effort, what we will see is our youngsters shortchanged on their educational opportunities. Our first priority has to be to ensure that our Nation's children learn to their fullest potential and that their teachers have the tools necessary to be able to teach them. The Republican bill does nothing to reduce class size, address the modernization of our schools, and it significantly cuts after-school programs because of a tax cut to the 2,400 wealthiest people in this country.