Susan Davis

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to address for a moment the issue of accountability within the special education system. I know when I was a board member in San Diego, I would hear repeatedly about how difficult it was in many cases to keep up without accountability. Yet we know that it is important. I am pleased that during our discussion on this bill, that we talked about the need to reduce the paperwork and to find ways that we would be accountable, and yet we would make it reasonable and easier for our schools to respond and to address the needs of our children. I commend the chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), for that work within the committee. But please, we need to be careful that we not give up accountability when we suggest that any school would be able to deal with those issues. The people who work with special education in our communities and in our public school systems, they have been doing this for a long time. They understand the importance of it and they make sure that it works for our children. I cannot imagine what it would be like to throw that open to a tuition system or a voucher system that really had little understanding of that.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, today Ms. Woolsey, as my designee, offered a very simple amendment to H.R. 1350, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. It does not change the law or the educational or related services that have long been provided in this act to each child with a disability--a free appropriate public education. The language is simply designed to assure that when parents and teachers sit down at the table to craft an educational program appropriate for an individual child with a disability, everyone is on the same page about the goal. The 18 words added to the definition are taken directly from an existing Supreme Court decision, Rowley, which provided controlling language on this issue. However, since most of us do not spend our time reading Supreme Court opinions, this places the language into the definition within the law, where it will be easily found. They are words that all of us can understand. I want to share them with you. The phrase now reads that a ``free appropriate public education means special education and related services that'' are: Free--provided at public expense, under public supervision and without charge; meet the standards of the State education agency; and include an appropriate preschool, elementary, or secondary school education in the State involved. This amendment adds to that sentence the definition ``reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit to enable the child with a disability to access the general curriculum.'' Educators of special-needs children who requested placement of these words in the law believe it will help them work with parents as part of the child's Individual Education Program teams to be able to test their proposals against a clear standard. It gives parents a tool to assure that school districts are not dumbing down the goals of education for their children as happened too often in the past. It enables all parties to look at the promise and make sure the child''s needs are served. In response to questions from some Members, I would point out that this does not in any way change the results of that individual program as to whether the child is mainstreamed or not--only that the goal of the child's education is to access the curriculum content offered to all students. During the long period of time during which the Education Committee members have been struggling with making this reauthorization of IDEA a better bill, there have been some key themes. Funding is, of course, one, including helping local school districts recover costs for non- educational expenses. Some of these issues need continued work as this bill moves ultimately to conference. However, another theme has been reducing conflict which leads to expensive litigation over choosing the program that will best help the special needs student. I believe that this simple placement of existing language into the context of the definition will help achieve this goal of reducing conflict in providing an appropriate education to each child. I urge your support of this amendment.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to just make one or two brief points again. What we are talking about here is parent choice, and we know that parent choice is critically important within the public school system. I applaud my colleague from the District of Columbia, because she knows her district well and she knows that the parents have come forward and said that we have some good ideas about what will benefit our children and we want to work with the experts; we want to work with people from our community who are willing to come together and define and build on an idea that we have about how children succeed in school. I applaud that, and I applaud the fact that there are so many charter schools within her district. I hope that my colleagues will have an opportunity to visit, and I hope to do that very soon. I know there is a charter school today that was celebrating its civic education program. They have young people there who are really learning what we hope all children throughout this country will learn, their responsibility as citizens. They are learning that, and they are learning that to a degree that probably is not seen in many of our schools throughout the country, and that occurs in a charter school. Mr. Speaker, I applaud my colleagues today. I thank them for bringing this resolution forward, for congratulating charter schools within our public school system. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of this resolution. I want to thank the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Porter) for introducing House Resolution 204. We all know that parent choice is important. It is important within the public school systems of our country, and I have long supported, and my children attended, magnet schools that resulted as a part from the integration decisions of the 1970's. We have many successful examples, and from my home district of San Diego, Gompers Secondary School of Science and Math, and the School of Creative and Performing Arts are examples of standout schools and special interest schools. The magnet school movement has led to the charter school movement, and the difference that we see, however, is in governance and in meeting numerous guidelines. In 1992, California was the second State to adopt provisions that allowed school districts to authorize charter schools. San Diego Unified School District has been a strong supporter of these developing schools. Some 14 have been approved with varied missions. Important to the success of these charter schools are a number of factors. High among them is parent involvement, a clear philosophy of education that seeks to meet the State and local standards. A committed core of well- qualified teachers and above all also community support from a board of directors, the expertise of retired educators, health professionals, financial experts. All of them have been involved in many of our charter schools. What we also find as so important is that those charter schools feed back to other schools the most successful innovations that they have begun. One unique charter school that I would like to share today is that of the Preuss School in San Diego. It was established in the fall of 1999 on the campus of the University of California San Diego. Its mission, to provide an intensive college preparatory curriculum to low-income student populations and to improve educational practices, grade 6 through 12. Its goal of which they are meeting and beginning to really show very, very strong record, is to graduate students competitively eligible to enter the University of California and other selective institutions. They will have their first graduating class in 2004 and 2005, and we look forward to that. I wanted to share a little bit about the student body and how the students come together for that program. All the students come from low-income families. None who enter may have had a parent or guardian who graduated from a 4-year college. Race in this school is certainly not a factor in admissions. It is true only 13 percent are Caucasian, and the Hispanic student population is about 54 percent. One of the obstacles often in charter schools is traveling to the campus. All the students who go there must find their way there, and for some it is a very long distance. The student body president who travels from Imperial Beach takes the trolly to San Diego and transfers to a school bus; it takes him about an hour and a half to travel each way, a route ordinarily that would take about 25 minutes. The results are quite astounding. Students rank number one in the county for their pass rate on the language arts section of the High School Exit Exam in 2001 and 2002. 100 percent of the students at this school have passed a language arts exam, and 91 percent are in the math portion. The academic performance index of ten out of ten in 2000 and 2001 ranks the highest possible. Over 112 students passed the Golden State exam in Spanish as second-year students. Awards in the science fair, robotics, essays, and scholastic competitions abound. So how did all this happen? It happened from the dedication of the principal and the staff. It happened from a group of extraordinarily hard-working students that found that sometimes when they separate from their own communities that they find a community of students who care, as they do, about receiving a high-quality education. They have supportive parents, obviously because these students have worked hard to get to the school, who value the education that perhaps they did not have; and university support, the support of student mentors and professors who assist with courses and projects, and an administration that provides the circumstances for success. It also has community financial support. University Regent Peter Preuss and others enabled a wonderful school that would be built on the UCSD campus because they believed that being on a university campus such as UCSD would enable all the students who participate and help out in that school to have easy access to it. We all know, as I mentioned, that transportation is a necessity for all these low-income students, and they are working hard to assure that in the future. The challenges for most charters are providing appropriate school buildings, and we know that that is appropriate to a well-rounded education. When they have easier transportation, perhaps the charter would be a true choice for many of the families. They work to maintain the parent and community support and also to have the support of the district administrations because we know that school districts and school district boards must nurture these alternatives and help them address them when they run into difficulties and even work to disband them when they fail. But above all they need to be engaged and they are engaged in sharing their successes. Mr. Speaker, we, in fact, are a diverse people, and our children learn in diverse and different styles. Parents value the opportunity to focus the kind of education that will help their child grow. Public school charters offer the kind of choice that will enrich our children's educational growth, and we may be able to learn a lot from them about how children succeed. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Guard and Reserve Selective Reenlistment Bonus Equity Act of 2003. Joining me today are my colleagues Rep. Mark Kirk, himself a Navy reservist, and Reps. Steve Buyer and Gene Taylor, Co-chairs of the House Guard and Reserve Caucus. This bill would correct an unfortunate situation affecting guard members and reservists across the country that were mobilized for service to their country. Many have found that they can no longer receive payments on their reenlistment bonuses because of their mobilization status. The primary purpose of the reenlistment bonus has been to maintain an adequate level of experienced and qualified enlisted personnel in the peacetime forces of the military services. In fact, legislative authority for a reenlistment bonus of one form or another has existed continuously since shortly after the Revolutionary War under a number of different names. However, our experience with Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom has highlighted the fact that payments to mobilized guard members and reservists are suspended while they serve on active duty. For many, this creates a financial hardship and for others, a significant speed bump in their financial plans. This legislation would enable them to receive the payments due to them. Currently, for U.S. operations pertaining to Homeland Security, and deployments in Afghanistan, and Iraq, 275,000 reserve troops and National Guardsman have been mobilized. The activated troops serve along side active duty men and women. It surprises me that inequities still exist between reservists and active-duty service members serving side by side to protect the interests of the United States and I am pleased to work with my colleagues in correcting one of them. Knowing that the Senate has already acted on a similar measure, I am confident that this bill will enjoy swift approval by the House and will soon be at the President's desk for enactment into law.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, our nation's veterans have fought to protect our freedoms and the way of life we cherish. Unfortunately, when their service is done and they retire, our military personnel are too often excluded from the American Dream they fought to preserve. We all know that military pay does not compare to private sector wages. After retirement, thousands of veterans cannot afford to purchase a home because their military pensions do not cover the cost of a mortgage payment. Because of this inequity, the Veterans Administration instituted a home loan program to assist veterans achieve the dream of home ownership. While this is a commendable program, the maximum loan amount is often not enough to purchase a home--particularly in regions with high real-estate markets. My legislation would increase this amount from $60,000 to $81,000 to make it comparable to the maximum loan amount available to the public. After giving so much to their nation, veterans deserve the same opportunities for home ownership given to every American.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to offer a bill today designed to assure that literacy training is available to those who work with some of our youngest and most vulnerable children, those who are part of the Even Start program. These children's families qualify for Even Start because they are low socioeconomic families who may also be English learners. Program liaisons work with the families from the children's infancy until they are in school. Even Start funds approximately 1,400 programs and serves approximately 50,000 families across the Nation. Without this existing William F. Goodling Even Start Family Literacy Program, these children would arrive for their first day of school without the literacy skills to compete at that starting line. They are unlikely ever to catch up, even if they are able to be served in the Head Start program before actually entering school, unless the adults who work with them in these critical early years learn literacy teaching skills and learn to value the role of education. Over 86 percent of parents in the Even Start program have not completed high school upon entering the program (compared with about 27 percent of Head Start parents). Eighty percent of participants have a family income below $15,000 and over 40 percent have income below $6,000. This is clearly a high-needs population. What the program offers is both literacy-training classes for the children and family literacy programs for the parents. Children participating in Even Start are provided with age-appropriate educational services to ensure that they will achieve at a level similar to that of their age peers who come from socio-economically enriched backgrounds. Liaison advisors work with each family to promote strong literacy support experiences, to help parents learn ways they can develop their own English literacy skills, and to provide support groups for parents to share the challenges and skills of parenting. In developing their own literacy, adults in these family literacy programs tend to participate longer than those in regular adult education programs because they can link their literacy growth to that of their children. They not only see benefits in improved literacy skills but also reduced dependency on federal/state assistance programs and enhanced employment opportunities. Most importantly, they are empowered to be successful as their child's first and most important teacher. This bill will set aside funding to establish nationwide programs to assist in the training of program directors and facilitators in recently developed, research-based literacy training skills. President Bush has declared his support for helping parents, day-care centers, and preschools teach more learning skills to children before they get to kindergarten. Even Start provides just such a program for parents to develop the literacy skills that enable them to perform this task. Because of new legislation, particularly the new qualifications for personnel, performance objectives, and ``scientifically-based reading research'' requirements for instructional programs, local Even Start programs also need to benefit from this type of high-quality training. I have requested an evaluation to provide a longitudinal look at the achievement of children assisted by the program because I believe that evaluation must be embedded in all such programs. It is overwhelming to bear heart-felt expressions of appreciation for the program and its leaders when I have visited Even Start programs. Adults marveled at the change in their children's feeling about reading and learning when they were able to make reading together a daily activity. One mother told me how she thought she couldn't help her 5 year old with reading, but, thanks to the program, she realized that reading together enabled them to help each other with the words each didn't know. All children deserve an even start. This bill will assure that Even Start facilitators will be well-trained to help parents learn the skills that enable their children to be competitive at the starting line.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, today, I am reintroducing the Women's Obstetrician and Gynecologist Medical Access Now Act, the WOMAN Act. This bill will ensure that every woman has direct access to her ob-gyn. I believe women should not need a permission slip to receive ob-gyn care. Unfortunately, that is the reality faced by many women when they need to see their doctor. Numerous managed care plans require women to visit their primary care physicians before seeking the health care services they need from the providers they want. Denying direct access, or forcing women to jump through numerous bureaucratic hoops to see their ob-gyn is not acceptable treatment. The WOMAN Act recognizes that women have different medical needs than men and that ob-gyns, in many cases, have the most appropriate medical background to address these needs. My legislation removes the barriers complicating women's access to their doctors. Women will no longer have to contend with the gatekeeper system that can prevent or delay appropriate care. It is easy to understand what a difference direct ob-gyn access makes in women's health care. Imagine, for a moment, a woman in San Diego who works 45 hours a week and has limited sick and vacation time. Now, imagine she has an urgent medical problem requiring an ob-gyn visit. On Monday, she calls from work to make an appointment with her primary care physician. If she is lucky, she gets an appointment for the following morning. She takes time off Tuesday to go see her doctor. Her primary care doctor agrees she should be seen by her ob-gyn and gives her a referral. Tuesday afternoon she returns to work and calls her ob- gyn for an appointment. The doctor is in surgery on Wednesday, but they offer her an appointment on Friday morning. On Friday she takes another morning off from work and finally, after almost a week, gets the care she needs. The unnecessary referral process resulted in her taking an extra morning off work and delayed her proper medical care by 5 days. The patient, employer, primary care physician, and health plan provider would have saved money and time if the patient had been able to go directly to her ob-gyn. An American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists/Princeton survey of obgyns showed that 60 percent of all ob-gyns in managed care reported that their patients are either limited or barred from seeing their ob-gyns without first getting permission from another physician. Nearly 75 percent also reported that their patients have to return to their primary care physician for permission before they can see their ob-gyn for necessary follow-up care. Equally astounding is that 28 percent of the ob-gyns surveyed reported that even pregnant women must first receive another physician's permission before seeing an ob-gyn. The public overwhelmingly supports direct access to ob-gyn care. A survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University found that 82 percent support direct access legislation and 63 percent would support it even if their health insurance costs increased. When asked about a range of health policy issues another Kaiser survey discovered that women rate direct access to ob-gyns as their second priority. While serving in the California State Assembly, I heard from many women who experienced the same problems I have outlined today. After meeting with women, obstetricians and gynecologists, health plan representatives, and providers in the State of California, I wrote the state law allowing women direct access to their ob-gyn. That law was a good first step; however, it still does not cover the almost 5 million Californians enrolled in self-insured, federally regulated health plans. This means that if a woman lives in a state with direct access protections, like California, she may not be able to see her ob-gyn without a referral if she is covered by a federally regulated ERISA health plan. This also means that one in four insured families are not protected by state direct access to ob-gyn laws. I believe the time has come to make direct access to an ob-gyn a national standard. I urge you, Mr. Speaker, and all of my colleagues to pass this critical legislation quickly into law. Women's Ob/Gyn Medical Access Now Act (WOMAN Act) Bill Summary Grants Direct Access: Gives women direct access to an OB/ GYN or a participating family practice physician or surgeon designated by the plan or issuer as providing OB/GYN services. Prohibits plans or issuers from requiring a referral or prior approval. Plan Considerations: Plan can set reasonable communication requirements between OB/GYNs and primary care physician. Plan can set reasonable utilization protocols, as long as those protocols are the same for OB/GYNs as they are for other physicians, such as primary care providers. (cannot be more restrictive for OB/GYNs) Nodfication for ERISA plans: Requires group health plans to comply with the notice requirements for ERISA when they modify their plan to comply with the rule.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask this Congress to seriously consider the harmful impact the budget resolution could have on veterans health care and other VA services. Already, thousands of veterans face waiting lists 6 months or longer to see a physician in a VA medical facility. All too often, veterans must seek treatment elsewhere simply because the VA does not have the resources to meet the need. With so many veterans living in San Diego, I see firsthand the difficulties they encounter. Just today, Petty Officer Al Kovach, a paralyzed veteran from Coronado, called my office to share his story. He was bedridden for more than a year due to a service-related injury. Once doctors realized he required surgery, it took 6 months for an operating room to become available. I have heard from hundreds of others who have experienced similar delays in the VA health care system. I do not see how, after the great sacrifices they have made, we can support a budget that cuts more than $25 billion in VA funding over the next several years. This astonishing amount will greatly reduce services and undoubtedly cause these waiting lists for health care to become even longer. Madam Speaker, we are in a time of war. Last week we stood before the Nation and passed a resolution in support of our military personnel fighting in Iraq. On the same day, this body approved a budget outline that communicated a very different message to the men and women in the battlefield, that when the fighting is done and you return home, do not expect us to care for your needs. I call on my colleagues to correct this contradiction, to prove that we support the men and women in harm's way and to prove to our veterans that we appreciate their sacrifices. We must restore appropriate levels of funding to the health care system and other VA services. Like the young men and women fighting today in Iraq, our veterans were there when we called upon them. Now we must be there when they call upon us.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the National Board-Certified Teacher in Low-Performing Schools Act of 2003 to place these highly skilled teachers as facilitators in low-income low-performing schools. A huge challenge for our schools is to help low-achieving students improve their academic performance. How do we make this happen? Many studies have shown that the single most critical component for a child's success is the quality of each teacher. Districts across the country are struggling with ways to comply with The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, H.R. 1, known as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. It requires that every classroom will have a highly-qualified teacher, but the definition of ``highly- qualified'' is not clear. The road to creating more highly skilled teachers is also unclear. However, we do know that teachers who have successfully completed the rigorous, standards-based teaching evaluation and testing program run by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards are `highly qualified.' What we need to do is to encourage more of these highly accomplished teachers to seek positions in the most needy schools. Low- income, low-performing schools typically have newly hired teachers, many of whom are not fully credentialed or trained in teaching skills. In California, I authored legislation to reward successful National Board candidates with a $10,000 merit award. One result of this recognition has been that this year the number of successful candidates was ten times the number in 1998, when the legislation was passed. In addition, the state gives an annual $5000 pay incentive for four years to each National Board Certified Teacher who seeks assignment to a low- performing school. I propose to build on this method of providing incentives to urge these highly accomplished teachers to provide not only their fine teaching skills but also their availability as peers for the many new teachers assigned to these schools. Both beginning teachers and experienced teachers can grow in their teaching skills and can be inspired to accept the challenge of the certification process to demonstrate this growth if they have the opportunity to work as a peer with a National Board Certified Teacher. Many teachers who have become certified report that the process itself improves their skills, as they must prepare standards-based, self- reflective portfolios of their teaching practices to submit for evaluation. Therefore, I propose a pilot program for five years to pay up to 100 National Board Certified Teachers, each of whom is teaching in a low- income, low-performing school, $5000 per year to act as a resident facilitator to introduce the members of the faculty to the National Board evaluation progress. As a teacher must have taught for three years before applying for Board certification, the five-year period is needed to allow time for new teachers to be exposed to the process through the outreach program initiated by the facilitator. The responsibilities of the facilitator would be to promote peer teacher participation and to work with the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards to recommend ways to encourage teachers to aspire to Board certification. The facilitator would also receive a $1000 bonus stipend for each teacher who completes the process for becoming Board--certified at the school for which the recipient is the resident facilitator. I believe that this pilot program can be a triple winner. The children of the low-performing school have another teacher who is clearly a highly qualified teacher. The faculty of that school has a peer teacher with identifiable teaching skills as a resource. And the school may grow its own crop of National Board Certified Teachers thus changing the image of being a low-performing school to the image of being a school with a highly-accomplished faculty.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, 50,000 marines and sailors who call San Diego home are officially at war, and I respect their courage and the skills they bring in defending our freedom. I have met with many of these families and with those who advocate on behalf of them, the ombudspeople who volunteer every day to ensure that parents and spouses and children get the support they need in times of peace and in times of war. I supported the resolution 2 weeks ago, and I will support it again tonight, because my support overrides honest differences that I and many of my constituents have in the course that we have taken. Jessica, whose fiance is a marine in the Gulf, sent in an article from San Diego today: ``Nobody wants war, but the troops need our support. They have the toughest job. I get to sleep in my bed tonight.''

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss an opportunity to strengthen national security, promote bi-national commerce, and provide assistance to our dedicated agents at the border. My district touches the U.S.-Mexico border. Because of this proximity, ports of entry play a vital role in our area's economic and social life. Thousands of San Diego and Tijuana residents cross the border every day as commuters, shoppers, or visitors, illustrating the growing global connection between our neighboring countries. Unfortunately, our border infrastructure has not kept pace with the booming traffic volume, and travelers frequently encounter delays and congestion at the border. The tragic events of September 11 further intensified these challenges along the border. Increased security measures severely over- extended inspection resources and waits lasting up to several hours became commonplace. Ports of entry in other states that had not previously encountered significant delays realized that they were not well equipped to handle future volume growth. This climate raised the need for innovative methods that meld security measures with more efficient practices. For some of my constituents, the answer came in the form of a dedicated commuter lane program called SENTRI. SENTRI, which stands for Secure Electronic Network for Travelers' Rapid Inspection, accepts only low-risk travelers who pass both an extensive background check to verify their eligibility and a thorough inspection of their vehicle. After passing through these steps, travelers receive the privilege of using an exclusive lane to cross the border into the United States. Since its introduction, SENTRI has quickly demonstrated its ability to reduce wait times without compromising border security. Border waits often lasted an hour or more before SENTRI, but now average only 5 to 15 minutes for enrollees. Travelers in other lanes also benefit because the prescreened SENTRI crossers move swiftly through the border, reducing the number of motorists using general commuter lanes. Expediting inspections through SENTRI is actually helping to improve border security, as Customs and Border Patrol agents can focus more attention on non-screened drivers and passengers. Additionally, those travelers in SENTRI lanes have a 50 percent greater probability of being referred to secondary inspection than those in regular lanes due to built in random selection. As a result of embedded security measures, statistics show an extremely low rate of fraud among renewal participants. Simply put, SENTRI lanes are more efficient and better inspected than regular commuter lanes. Unfortunately, SENTRI has become a victim of its own success. SENTRI needs a greater investment of resources to keep up with the current and future demand. Enrollment increased by more than 100 percent after September 11 and, currently, prospective applicants must wait approximately 8 months. I believe that if we want innovative programs like SENTRI to work, we must provide them with the tools and resources they need to succeed. This is why I am re-introducing the Secure and Fast Entry at the Border Act or SAFE Border Act. The SAFE Border Act recognizes the contribution of SENTRI to border security and the agents who administer the program. My bill ensures the continuity of SENTRI as the Immigration and Naturalization Service and Customs Department transition into the Department of Homeland Security, and reinforces recent agency action by permanently extending the SENTRI renewal period from 1 to 2 years--enabling border agents to process new applicants and reduce the current enrollment wait. SAFE Border also recommends the appointment of dedicated SENTRI staff to expedite application processing, encourages the creation of a dedicated commuter lane for prescreened, low-risk pedestrian crossers, and promotes the integration of technology at SENTRI sites for increased access at participating ports of entry. Our agents at the border shoulder an enormous responsibility every day. I believe we owe them the appropriate resources and support they need to carry out their duties. The SAFE Border Act, as a result, increases security by enabling more people to be prescreened and allowing border agents to focus more attention on other border crossers. Our nation's economic and overall security is heavily linked to smooth and secure border crossings. The SAFE Border Act provides a way for trusted travelers to cross the border securely and quickly. I urge my colleagues in Congress to act quickly in passing the SAFE Border Act into law.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am here today because I am deeply concerned about the devastating impact the President's budget could have on working families across this country, particularly at a time when our Nation stands at the very brink of war. The cuts that are proposed in this budget stand to hurt the very families whose loved ones are overseas preparing to fight this war. Last weekend I had an opportunity to meet with a number of military families whose husbands, whose brothers, sisters and wives are courageously serving our Nation in Afghanistan and the Middle East. They shared with me their thoughts and fears while their loved ones were deployed so many miles away from home. In addition to expressing the uncertainties that they face, they are also concerned about their children's future. That is why education is a major concern to them. They know that the quality of their children's education is dependent upon some significant Federal support. Mr. Speaker, the President's budget proposal seeks to cut education funding by more than $10 billion in the next year alone. In my home State of California, where the State budget deficit is expected to exceed $25 billion in 2004, as many as 30,000 teachers, counselors, nurses and administrators are already receiving notices to leave their posts in our children's schools. School districts are slashing a number of positions, and the President's budget provides no direct Federal aid to States to help with this great concern that we have. At a time when we are sending more servicemen and women to Iraq each day, the very least we can do for them is to ensure that their children are receiving the very best services we can offer, but this budget is failing to meet this promise. While these same families are expressing their concerns as their loved ones are being sent abroad indefinitely to potentially face the perils of war, the very least of their concerns are costly tax cuts. Mr. Speaker, we have larger priorities at hand. While we are still attempting to assess the costs of the war, our focus should remain on providing for our Nation's military, their families and our national security. It is simply irresponsible to neglect these priorities in favor of sweeping tax cuts, tax cuts that largely fail to benefit the brave men and women we are sending overseas at this very moment. We understand that at a time of war we may, in fact, face large deficits, but we should not make them greater by supporting a tax package that has at its very heart helping those that at this time need it the least. This is simply the wrong message to be sending not only to working families, but to military families carrying out their commitment to America.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing the Second Opinion Coverage Act of 2003--legislation that will ensure the accessibility and coverage of medical second opinions. Imagine that your doctor tells you that you must undergo radical surgery that may threaten the use of a limb or leave you with a serious chronic condition. Understandably, you would request a second opinion from another physician. Most health care groups see the value in such requests and provide patients with a second opinion. Besides giving patients much needed peace of mind, second opinions can benefit health plans by reducing the number of invasive procedures and result in better patient care through increased dialogue about treatment options. However, when I was a member of the California State Assembly, I heard from a number of patients who experienced a glitch in their health care coverage. They noticed the absence of a clear process for obtaining medical second opinions. These patients, many struggling with challenging health conditions, had difficulties obtaining second opinions through their health plans. After meeting with patients, physicians and health groups, I authored a law in California that guarantees coverage of second opinions. Patients, meeting any one of several qualifying conditions, are entitled to a timely second opinion by a ``qualified health care professional,'' within 72 hours in cases of serious or imminent health threat. When another expert is not available within the provider group or network, the organization will pay for an appropriately qualified doctor outside of the plan. Patients are responsible for the costs of applicable co-payments. The law in California was a good first step. Unfortunately, this legislation does not cover the almost 5 million Californians enrolled in self-insured, federally regulated health plans. Nationwide, this translates into 67 million persons without guaranteed access to second opinions. This means that one in four insured families are not protected by California's own second opinion law! I believe the time has come to make access to second opinions a national standard. I urge you, Mr. Speaker, and all of my colleagues to pass this critical legislation quickly into law.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to strongly oppose the President's proposal to drastically cut Impact Aid to schools. The need has been clear for over half a century. Begun in 1950, Impact Aid compensates districts for the loss of taxes that support schools. Military land and the military homes located on that land do not pay property taxes. But the administration would cut funding for children living off base, even though the compensation rate is much lower. Yet taxes are also lost from these families. Over three-quarters of servicemembers living in my district claim residence in other States and do not pay State income or car registration taxes. Sales at commissaries or exchanges on bases are exempt from State sales taxes. Property, income, and sales taxes are all needed to pay for education. Today, Mr. Speaker, as members of our armed services are deploying in large numbers to prepare for a possible war, it is critical for them to know that their children's schools are being supported by the very country for whom they are prepared to give their lives.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution that I cosponsor, and I want to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for it as well. Those in military service to our Nation deserve our strong support in a time of such great uncertainty. But I would also add that their families deserve our support. Mr. Speaker, each of us has said good-bye to a loved one headed to an airport for a business trip. Now imagine if that trip was halfway around the world and involved great risk. Imagine not knowing when they would be home. Today, more than 20,000 of our neighbors are in the Middle East. In San Diego and in communities all across the country, spouses and children will eat dinner tonight with an empty chair at the table. They will watch the news and wonder. When we talk to them, they will appear strong, and they are strong; but they need us. I recently met with a group of Navy ombudsmen, women serving the families of those in their unit. They told me that their husbands have spent their entire careers preparing for what they face today; but they said the families must also prepare for the uncertainty for what they face, and let me tell Members, they are prepared. As we all wait and wonder, let us remember the important role of military families and reach out to them.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, As an initial co-sponsor, I offer my support of H.R. 1716, a bill to make sure that Impact Aid to school districts to provide educational support, is assured as an entitlement. Today, as members of our military are being shipped abroad in large numbers to prepare for a possible war, it is critical for them to know that their children's schools are being supported by their government. The need for Impact Aid has been clear for over half a century. Begun in 1950, Impact Aid recompenses districts for the loss of a variety of taxes which form the basis of school support. Military land and the military homes located on that land do not contribute to property taxes. Over three-quarters of the military members in my district claim residency in other states and do not pay state income or car registration taxes. In addition, all sales on military installations are exempt from state sales taxes. Property, income, and sales taxes are the money which pays for education. Because the frequent transfer of military members results in increased transiency in schools, districts which serve large numbers of military children have increased costs. The school districts located in my congressional district are also known for offering a variety of services to special needs children. When military families have children with a high level of needs, the service provides compassionate assignment flexibility to enable them to stay in the area. This further increases costs for these districts. After more than half a century of support, it is time to stop making annual judgments about the value of Impact Aid. It is time to openly declare to every member of our armed services that we assure them that support for their children's education is not negotiable. Our commitment must not waiver.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Greenwood substitute. We know that the people who have come before us today have said, and they have said this very clearly, that none of us supports cloning as a means of human reproduction. But we also know that drug discoveries often have narrow targets. I believe that my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood), mentioned the number of organizations that are supporting this. Those who suffer from unusual illnesses that kill the young seldom have sufficient numbers to stimulate drug research; but it is this basic research we are talking about, this basic research into cell reproduction that, if successful, could benefit large numbers of such diseases, each of which affects a small number of people. None of us here would want to look a constituent in the eye and say that we rejected the possibility of pursuing 21st century science which might have saved the life of their loved one.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, today I am re-introducing two bills that address an important public health issue: the safety of dietary supplements. Walk into any neighborhood drug store or discount store and you will find yourself surrounded by a variety of dietary supplements. Their labels tout promises ranging from ``safe and easy'' weight loss to increased muscle gain to lower cholesterol. However, dietary supplements are not subject to rigorous safety or efficacy standards and face only limited regulatory oversight under federal law. My bills will protect consumers and increase the flow of information to the public. They will give the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority it needs to make informative and scientific decisions about the safety of dietary supplements. The Dietary Supplement Information Act requires manufacturers, producers and distributors of dietary supplements to register with the FDA. They would be required to submit all serious adverse event reports to the FDA within 15 days. Supplement manufacturers and the FDA will work as partners to investigate and analyze these reports. To make sure that consumers know how to report an incident to the FDA directly, my legislation will require the FDA's MedWatch phone number and website to be printed on all dietary supplement product labels. If the FDA determines that a specific supplement may have serious health consequences, it can require the manufacturer to do a postmarket surveillance study to ensure that the product is safe. Many of these dietary supplements contain ephedra, also commonly listed as ma-huang or ephedrine alkaloids. Sadly, a number of consumers, including some of my own constituents, have experienced adverse reactions after using ephedra-based supplements. Lured in by product claims of more energy, quick weight loss or improved athletic performance, consumers experienced depression, agitation, heart attacks, and strokes. In some cases, people have died after taking ephedra supplements. These severe effects demand increased public awareness, especially since the average customer profile includes young people. The Ephedrine Alkaloid Consumer Protection Act gives consumers information about the potentially lethal side effects and drug interactions of ephedrine alkaloid products. First, it will require a standardized warning to be printed on the label. The bill will also make sure that consumers know how to report any concerns or adverse reactions by requiring the FDA's MedWatch phone number and website to be printed on the product label. Finally, the bill will protect our kids by prohibiting the sale of ephedrine to minors. No person under the age of 18 years old will be able to buy ephedrine products. To ensure that this provision is enforced, products will be kept ``behind the counter'' so that sales personnel are more aware of the age restriction. Putting the product behind the counter will also make adults more aware of the risks associated with ephedra. If they have to ask for assistance to get the product, they will be more likely to read the warning label and talk to the pharmacist about possible side effects. Since I first introduced these bills two years ago, momentum has clearly grown for improving consumer safety regarding ephedra. I have seen a growing number of organizations that are addressing the issue on their own. The American Medical Association and its Canadian counterpart recommend banning ephedra. The National Football League recently joined the ranks of the International Olympic Committee, and the National Collegiate Athletic Association in prohibiting ephedra use among their athletes. Collaborating developments in the science community and courtrooms support these actions. A recent study conducted by the University of California at San Francisco reported that dietary supplements containing ephedra accounted for 64 percent of all adverse event reports related to dietary supplements. The emergence of ``ephedra- free'' products indicates conflict within the industry, possibly a sign that the supplement industry is also slowly realizing the negative effects of ephedra. Allegations against ephedra supplement manufacturers include sloppy research practices, the omission or destruction of negative research data, study design violations, unreported adverse events, along with deception and fraud. In fact, last year a jury in Alabama awarded $4.1 million to four people who suffered strokes or heart attacks after taking ephedra diet pills. Despite the growing list of allies and evidence, there is still much work left to do within our own communities. Earlier this year, I received a compelling letter from a young woman in San Diego. She said, ``Being a 23-year-old woman, I am exposed to hundreds of diet pills and the need to be thin. One of my dear friends had a stroke from taking an over-the-counter diet pill. She went from a coma, to a vegetable, graduated to a wheelchair and now walks with a cane one year later. She is unable to go to school or work and cannot function as a normal 23-year-old.'' ``These dietary supplements are dangerous and harmful. People do not realize the consequences of these magical pills. They are given the notion that they are going to become this ``model-type image'' from taking supplements, but the adverse effects of them outweigh any benefits.'' It is heartbreaking to think of how an innocent purchase irrevocably changed this young woman's life. Ephedra has opened eyes about the need for regulation of the entire dietary supplement industry. Ephedra is a symptom, a deadly symptom, of a larger issue, which is the lack of regulatory control over a multibillion dollar industry. A change in the current law is critically needed. The FDA must be allowed to collect and distribute accurate information about dietary supplements. At present, its hands are tied. I want to make it very clear that my legislation will not ban dietary supplements. Rather, they offer a common-sense approach to giving the FDA the authority to regulate the industry while maintaining freemarket access. Consumers have a right to know what they are putting into their bodies. We cannot continue to stand on the sidelines and watch them suffer serious medical consequences from these products. Our young people and loved ones are at risk. I urge my colleagues in Congress to join me in swiftly passing these two bills into law.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute the San Diego State University Institute of World Affairs on occasion of their 60th anniversary and in recognition of their continuing exemplary work. Rather than speak at great length about this fine organization, I'd like to submit for the Record the text of a resolution that I had the honor of presenting. Whereas the San Diego State Institute on World Affairs is celebrating its 60th Anniversary; and Whereas the Institute has gained the respect of the international community through its educational achievements and has greatly impacted its campus and community through its outstanding presentation and analysis of important world issues; and Whereas the Institute has promoted international involvement and has been an active and prominent advocate of international awareness by bringing to California numerous highly respected ambassadors, Nobel Laureates, United Nations delegates, military and government officials, academics, journalists, scientists, business executives, and other noted experts on international issues; and Whereas international issues have become increasingly important, and the knowledge of world affairs is vital to the success and security of our nation and of the international community; and Whereas the successful efforts of the San Diego State University Institute on World Affairs have significantly and positively increased the growth of education, awareness, and information about international issues and world affairs; now therefore be it Resolved, That Congresswoman Susan A. Davis of the 49th District of California congratulates the San Diego University Institute on World Affairs for sixty years of successfully educating the students, faculty, campus and community of San Diego State University about international issues, world affairs, and their importance to our nation and for its diplomatic achievements as it continues to present highly respected individuals to the university.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to join the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) in support of House Resolution 25, which recognizes the critical role of mentors in our children's lives. On the day following our Nation's 37th Super Bowl, I can think of no better way to commemorate the very spirit of this bill than by sharing the inspirational story of Mr. Lincoln Kennedy, who plays right tackle for the Oakland Raiders. Lincoln grew up and attended Morris High School in my hometown of San Diego, California. And just as it is today, the student body at Morris was largely diverse and comprised of children from mostly working-class backgrounds. The school football field doubled as the team's practice field, and ongoing electrical problems allowed for day games only. High school football coach John Schacklett spotted the 6 foot 6 inch freshman and immediately recognized his potential. He urged him to try out for the school's football team, and Lincoln agreed. Although forced to play in tennis shoes because the school was unable to acquire the size 17 \1/2\ cleats that he required, it did not take long for Lincoln to develop under the constant guidance and encouragement of a coach who not only believed in him, but took the time to invest in him. And what a difference it made. Lincoln returned to his hometown on January 26, 2003, to play in Super Bowl XXXVII. Reflecting back on the achievements of his life, Lincoln wondered what he would have done had Coach Schacklett not approached him that fateful day, recognized that he possessed something special, and pushed him to recognize it, too. ``I wonder how I ever would have gotten to college and gotten a college education or what type of job I would be doing right now,'' he said. Fortunately, as a result of the mentoring of Coach John Schacklett, Lincoln will never need to worry about the answer to that question. The significance of this story should not be underestimated. Lincoln Kennedy represents the millions of youth in this country who stand to benefit immensely from the support of a positive role model. And Coach Schacklett represents the millions of mentors who also benefit from the rewarding and enriching experience of investing in a young person's life and later watching that person grow and succeed. This case illustrates what we have known for years, and what my colleague just spoke about, that mentoring makes a difference. It provides children and young adults with a stronger sense of self-esteem and optimism for the future. It fuels their ambitions and pushes them to realize their own potential. It helps them to visualize a future other than what they might have aspired to. We know that this learning experience is a two-way street. Mentoring often brings together people of various ethnic, religious, or socioeconomic backgrounds. It is easy to turn to those with whom we share obvious similarities. The mentoring relationship, however, often forces us outside of our own comfort zone, allowing us to view the world from different perspectives and appreciate one another's experiences and life circumstances. In today's world, particularly, this level of understanding has never been more important; and we must do all that we can to foster these relationships. Mr. Speaker, President Bush's declaration of January 2003 as National Mentoring Month marked a significant stride in this direction. With the passage of this resolution, I hope to reinforce the positive impact that mentoring can have on so many of our children's lives. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by sharing some of the lessons I learned while serving as the executive director of the Aaron Price Fellows Program in my own community. The first is that simply giving of yourself, be it your time, your advice, and even your interest, makes a difference. For a young person, the security and the confidence that comes from knowing that someone, someone outside of his or her own family believes in them and cares about them is immeasurable. The second is that there is just no telling how far a young person who receives the sort of personal attention and one-on-one mentoring will go. I am proud to have two individuals on my staff who I personally mentored many years ago, and I cannot tell Members how meaningful it is for me to see how successful they have become today. Finally, it is impossible to predict how involved or enthusiastic a mentor will become in a child's life. In my experience with the Fellows program, I have seen countless individuals become so invested in a young person's development that they surpassed any and all expectations of the job. I had the opportunity to demonstrate this myself as a mentor; and I can personally attest to the fact that the greater one's commitment, the richer the reward. One of San Diego's outstanding leaders, who overcame a lifetime of adversity and built a successful life for himself despite the odds, once told me that the single most influential factor in his life was a childhood mentor. I believe that his story, and so many others, prove that mentoring can and does make a pivotal difference in a young person's life. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to join with my colleagues and thank the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) for bringing this resolution forward, and urge passage of House Resolution 25. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mrs. DAVIS of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the settling of California as part of the California Council for the Humanities literature project. It is a pleasure to join fellow Californians in reading a common work, John Steinbeck's ``The Grapes of Wrath.'' It is a project rich not only as a piece of literature that explores the history of a specific group of immigrants to California but also the common immigrant experience. So many of us are only a generation or two away from that immigrant experience. My grandparents came to this country from Lithuania--also migrating to a land of hoped-for prosperity. I have selected some passages from Chapter 17 detailing that heart- breaking period of traveling to the unknown new land and also the wonderful experience of developing community that came from sharing that challenge. The cars of the migrant people crawled out of the side roads onto the great cross-country highway, and they took the migrant way to the West. In the daylight they scuttled like bugs to the westward; and as the dark caught them, they clustered like bugs near to shelter and to water. And because they were lonely and perplexed, because they had all come from a place of sadness and worry and defeat, and because they were all going to a new mysterious place, they huddled together; they talked together; they shared their lives, their food, and the things they hoped for in the new country. Thus it might be that one family camped near a spring, and another camped for the spring and for company, and a third because two families had pioneered the place and found it good. And when the sun went down, perhaps twenty families and twenty cars were there. In the evening a strange thing happened: the twenty families became one family, the children were the children of all. The loss of home became one loss, and the golden time in the West was one dream And it might be that a sick child threw despair into the hearts of twenty families, of a hundred people; that a birth there in a tent kept a hundred people quiet and awe-struck through the night and filled a hundred people with the birth-joy in the morning. A family which the night before had been lost and fearful might search its goods to find a present for a new baby. In the evening, sitting about the fires, the twenty were one. They grew to be units of the camps, units of the evenings and the nights. A guitar unwrapped from a blanket and tuned-and the songs, which were all of the people, were sung in the nights. Men sang the words, and women hummed the tunes. Every night a world created, complete with furniture--- friends made and enemies established; a world complete with braggarts and with cowards, with quiet men, with humble men, with kindly men. Every night relationships that make a world, established; and every morning the world torn down like a circus. At first the families were timid in the building and tumbling worlds, but gradually the technique of building worlds became their technique. Then leaders emerged, then laws were made, then codes came into being. And as the worlds moved westward they were more complete and better furnished, for their builders were more experienced in building them. The families learned what rights must be observed--the right of privacy in the tent; . . . the right to talk and to listen; the right to refuse help or to accept, to offer help or to decline it; the right of son to court and daughter to be courted; the right of the hungry to be fed; the rights of the pregnant and the sick to transcend all other rights. And the families learned, although no one told them, what rights are monstrous and must be destroyed. . . . And as the worlds moved westward, rules became laws, although no one told the families. It is unlawful to foul near the camp; it is unlawful to eat good rich food near one who is hungry, unless he is asked to share. And with the laws, the punishments. . . The families moved westward, and the technique of building the worlds improved so that the people could be safe in their worlds; and the form was so fixed that a family acting in the rules knew it was safe in the rules. There grew up government in the worlds, with leaders, with elders. A man who was wise found that his wisdom was needed in every camp; a man who was a fool could not change his folly with his world. And a kind of insurance developed in these nights. A man with food fed a hungry man, and thus insured himself against hunger. And when a baby died a pile of silver coins grew at the door flap, for a baby must be well buried, since it has had nothing, else of life. An old man may be left in a potter's field, but not a baby.