Vernon Ehlers

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. I would just like to add a little comment to that because I speak to a lot of high school students. Of course, as you know, they look down on nerds. And so I start out by asking them, What type of person is the richest man in the world? That comes out. I say, He's a nerd. I say, And I'm a nerd. Isn't there a message here? Nerds can succeed in this world. And then I tell these high school kids, look, it is very important to think about the courses that you are taking in high school, because that is going to determine your life. And then the coup de grace, and, of course, I am partial to this. I used to always tell them, If you aren't a nerd, you're going to end up working for a nerd. So I tell them to get busy, study their math and their science, and they will be successful in this life, too, in many ways. Thank you very much.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Senior Independence Act. I commend Congressman Tiberi and Chairman McKeon for their work on this bill. I especially thank Chairman McKeon, Congressman Danny Davis, and their staff members Kate Houston and Jill Hunter-Williams for their work on adding mental health provisions to the bill. Last winter I had the pleasure of meeting with Suzanne Ogland-Hand, the director of the Center For Senior Care at Pine Rest Christian Mental Health Services, a very large faith-based psychiatric hospital located in my district. Ms. Ogland-Hand had served as my delegate to the White House Conference on Aging, and provided valuable input to both the conference and to me regarding the need for a focus on seniors' mental health at the Administration on Aging. Throughout my life and career, I have met many people, including seniors, who are affected by mental health problems. Certainly the stigma related to mental health issues for seniors is significant. I know this personally because my mother suffered from mental health problems and was very ashamed of it. I have observed the devastating impact untreated mental health conditions have on individuals and their family members' lives. This bill makes positive steps towards encouraging awareness and coordination of mental health service for seniors. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and vote in favor of it.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, today I want to commend Chairman McKeon of the Energy and Workforce Committee and Congressman Tiberi, who chairs the relevant subcommittee of that committee. Today, we are going to discuss on suspension a bill that they have created, the Senior Independence Act, which is the reauthorization of the Older Americans Act. They have done excellent work, and I also want to thank Congressman Danny Davis, who has worked with me and I have worked with him to make certain that we also address mental health issues in this bill. Last winter, I had the pleasure of meeting Suzann Ogland-Hand, who is one of my constituents, and whom I nominated for the White House Conference on Aging. She is a mental health expert, and she helps large numbers of elderly people deal with their mental health problems. Clearly, this is an issue whose time has come, and I am very pleased that the bill we will be taking up today under suspension includes provisions that will take care of the mental health needs of so many Americans, large and small, and deal with all the different issues that the elderly face. I commend, again, Mr. McKeon for bringing this bill to the floor.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 290 I was involved in a meeting and did not return to the floor in time for the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, on this day of debate while we discuss the merits and perils of our involvement in the war on terror, there is one sentiment that is shared by every Member of Congress: our admiration for our Armed Forces who risk their lives each day in defense of our freedom. Within these Halls of democracy where we passionately represent our constituents, it is important to recommend that the democratic way of life that is at the heart of what we do would not be possible without the men and women of our Armed Forces. The brave men and women of our military are often called upon to travel great distances away from their families and loved ones to fight for the freedom that all Americans hold dear. Each time one of them enters into battle, it is with the knowledge that they may be asked to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country, giving their lives to secure our great Nation. In recognition of these heroes, we have placed a memorial display in the Rayburn horseshoe foyer featuring the name of each and every member of our forces who has fallen as a result of the current conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is my hope that the many Members, staff, visitors, students, and constituent groups who visit the House office buildings each day will take a moment to stop by the memorial and reflect on the gift of freedom given selflessly by these honored individuals to every American.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to comment positively on H. Con. Res. 421, but also to express some concerns about it. I commend Representative Tom Price for his interest in supporting Greater Opportunities for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math-- collectively, STEM--programs and I thank him for including a change in the manager's amendment. STEM education is extremely important to our Nation, because our economic and national security rely on technical and innovative expertise in these fields. However, I am concerned that this resolution, despite the change in the manager's amendment, still gives premature support to the Academic Competitiveness Council's-- ACC--recommendations, which are not due until February 2007. The impetus for the ACC sprang from a 2005 Government Accountability Office study on Federal STEM programs. It is my understanding that Federal agencies with STEM programs have a seat at the ACC table. However, I am concerned that not all agencies have an equal appreciation or understanding of the importance of STEM education in improving our national competitiveness and security. The National Science Foundation--NSF--has a proven track record of expertise and experience in STEM programs. We all know that NSF grants have led to truly revolutionary discoveries and technical advances. NSF-funded researchers have won more than 160 Nobel Prizes, and these pioneers have included the scientists or teams that discovered many of the fundamental particles of matter and decoded the genetics of viruses. But many do not know that another essential element in NSF's mission is support for science and engineering education, from pre-K through graduate school and beyond. The research that the NSF funds is thoroughly integrated with education to help ensure that there will always be plenty of skilled people available to work in new and emerging scientific, engineering and technological fields, and plenty of capable teachers to educate the next generation. Since the NSF has been a leader in STEM education for more than 50 years and has established excellent evaluations for all of its programs, the ACC should give very strong recognition to the role NSF and its education programs play in promoting our economic competitiveness and national security, and they should build upon the strengths of the NSF. The treasure trove of knowledge the foundation represents should not be overlooked, but, in fact, should be used as a base for the ACC recommendations. Specifically, I am concerned that the GO-STEM resolution calls for ``minimal duplication among [STEM] programs'' without defining what this means and also goes further than the established goals for the ACC that are set out in the Deficit Reduction Act. For years, I have been promoting the Math and Science Partnership programs at the Department of Education--ED--and the National Science Foundation. Unfortunately, because both agency's programs have the same name, some have mistakenly thought of these programs as equivalent, even though they are in name only, and duplicative, even though they most definitely are not. I am working on legislation to change the name of the NSF program to help avoid future confusion. Among other differences, the NSF program is designed to provide rigorous, scientifically based research on what works in STEM teacher professional development whereas ED's program is designed to implement these ideas on the State level. A wide array of teachers, scientists and education researchers agree that there is much research needed in the areas addressed by the NSF Math and Science Partnership program, yet the President's budget has called for eliminating new research in the NSF program. Since there has been significant confusion about different STEM programs, I am pleased that the ACC will focus on coordination and strengthening the Federal STEM endeavor. There is a plethora of STEM education programs across many different Federal agencies. The goal of the GO-STEM resolution--to better coordinate Federal STEM education efforts--is needed and is very admirable. However, I do not want to put the cart before the horse, and prefer that Congress carefully consider whatever recommendations the ACC puts forth before adopting them. Additionally, the GO-STEM resolution calls for ``consistent standards of evaluation.'' While this is a laudable goal, apples cannot be compared to oranges. In particular, I am concerned that new programs could receive failing grades since they have not had time to demonstrate results. Will the new SMART grants, a tremendous tool for bolstering the STEM education pipeline, receive a ``results not demonstrated'' designation as other new programs do in PART reviews? Furthermore, we should expect very different outcomes from programs that focus on student learning compared to programs that focus on graduate-level research in the physical sciences. The tools used to define ``effective'' are extremely critical. I am uncertain what evaluative methodology the ACC will adopt to define ``effective,'' and, therefore, am very reluctant to give premature support to the ACC's recommendations. I urge that Members pay very close attention to the ACC's recommendations. But please, think critically about the evaluative methodology the ACC uses in developing its recommendations, and recognize and build upon the existing expertise of agencies such as the National Science Foundation. Also, think very hard about how our actions will affect our economic competitiveness and national security before considering eliminating any StEM-related programs.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, my vote for rollcall No. 168 on the amendment offered by Representative Chabot to H.R. 5386, was recorded as a ``no.'' This vote does not reflect my intent to have my vote recorded as an ``aye.''

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to William ``Bill'' Allen. Bill is leaving the House of Representatives after nearly 4 years of distinguished service to this institution as an attorney with the Office of House Employment Counsel. As an Associate Counsel in the Office of House Employment Counsel, Bill has provided legal advice and counsel on employment issues to at least 124 current Members of Congress, 18 House Committees, the House Officers, and the United States Capitol Police Board. Bill's clients can attest to his tremendous intelligence, legal prowess, creativity, and wit. In addition to his many other contributions, in November 2005, Bill presented oral arguments on the scope of the Speech or Debate Clause before a rare en banc panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. A Connecticut native and son of Frederick E. Allen and the late Evelyn M. Allen, Bill was raised in Ridgefield, Connecticut. Following his junior year of high school, Bill spent a week as part of a fellowship program sponsored by the Connecticut Congressional delegation. As a true New Englander, Bill grew to be a diehard Boston Red Sox fan and his faith was finally rewarded in October 2004 when the Red Sox won their first World Series in 86 years. A rare ``Triple Hoo'', Bill earned his Bachelor of Science, Masters in Business Administration, and Juris Doctor from the University of Virginia. While at the University of Virginia, Bill represented the Engineering School, the Darden School, and the Law School on the University's renowned student-run Honor Committee. Bill also served as an officer in the Raven Society and the Virginia Alpha Chapter of Tau Beta Pi, the national engineering honor society. Bill is returning to private practice as a Senior Counsel at the law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, L.L.P, where he worked from 1996 to 2002 on various class actions involving Title VII and the Fair Labor Standards Act. In private practice, Bill intends to resume his pro bono activity in the field of immigration law. While at the firm, Bill averaged over 100 hours of pro bono work per year and, in 2001, was named Akin Gump's Pro Bono Lawyer of the Year for the firm's D.C. office. Bill's pro bono representations included obtaining political asylum for a Sudanese national who had been repeatedly kidnapped and tortured by the Sudanese government and obtaining United States citizenship for an Ethiopian national. The U.S. House of Representatives would like to express its deepest gratitude to Bill Allen for his invaluable service to this institution. Bill has worked tirelessly to provide House Employing offices with excellent legal advice and support. We wish Bill tremendous success in all of his future endeavors.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the achievements of the members of the 2006 United States Physics Olympiad Team. These 24 individuals have shown tremendous aptitude in physics and leadership amongst their peers. It is very challenging to earn a spot on this prestigious team. After being nominated by their high school teachers and taking a preliminary exam, 200 students qualified to take the second and final screening exam for the U.S. Physics Team. The 24 survivors of that group represent the top physics students in the U.S., and they are now at a nine-day training camp of intense study, examination and problem solving. Five of these exceptional students will advance and represent the United States in a tremendous international competition in July at the International Physics Olympiad in Singapore. Members of the 2006 team include: Sophie Cai, ZeNan Chang, David Chen, Otis Chodosh, Kenan Diab, Jiashuo Feng, Yingyu Gao, Sherry Gong, Timothy Hsieh, Rui Hu, Ariella Kirsch, Jason LaRue, Men Young Lee, David Lo, Benjamin Michel, Hetul Patel, Veronica Pillar, Nimish Ramanlal, Ingmar Saberi, William Throwe, Arnav Tripathy, Henry Tung, Philip Tynan and Haofei Wei. Mr. Speaker, as a nuclear physicist and former physics professor, I have worked to promote math and science education and to recognize the pivotal role these fields play in our nation's economic competitiveness and national security. Educating our K-12 students in math and science is very important. It is encouraging to see so many young, outstanding physics students enthusiastic about science, and I note that many of them chose to pursue science as a result of a teacher or family member who encouraged them along the way. Making sure our teachers are well- equipped to teach science and math is very important in fostering the interest of future generations in these subjects. I hope the composite enthusiasm of these students and the other semifinalists will allow them to consider future careers in science, technology, engineering and math. Furthermore, I hope some of them consider running for public office and add their expertise to the policy world! I am very thankful for these future leaders and ask that you please join me in congratulating them on their wonderful achievements and wishing the top five the best of luck as they represent the United States in Singapore.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the ``We the People'' program. From April 29 to May 1, 2006, approximately 1,200 students from across the country participated in the national finals competition of We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution, the most extensive educational program in the country developed specifically to educate young people about the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. I am pleased to announce that East Kentwood High School from Kentwood, Michigan, received the Unit 3 Award in the competition. The ``We the People'' program is administered by the Center for Civic Education and funded by the U.S. Department of Education by act of Congress. The ``We the People'' national finals is a 3-day academic competition that simulates a congressional hearing in which the students ``testify'' before a panel of judges on constitutional topics. Students demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of constitutional principles as they evaluate, take, and defend positions on relevant historical and contemporary issues. Among the questions students responded to in this year's competition were: ``How would you distinguish a federal system from a unitary government and from a confederation?'' and ``What did the Framers hope to achieve by establishing a federal system of government?'' The following outstanding students represented East Kentwood High School: Mark Alonso, Sefik Arapovic, Tyler Boyd, Michelle Burns, Aaron Dame, Karl DeVries, Kelsey Duinkerken, Branden Graf, Jessica Hoag, Jessica Hulbert, J.J. Jang, Jamie Overbeek, Alexa Schlosser, Paige Stevens, Peter Vu Tran, and Laura Vlieg. I also wish to commend the teacher of the class, Deborah Snow, who was responsible for preparing the students for the national finals competition. Also worthy of special recognition are Linda Start and Jim Troost, the state coordinators, and Susan Laninga, the district coordinator, who are among those responsible for implementing the ``We the People'' program in my district. Mr. Speaker and my colleagues in the House, please join me in congratulating these young constitutional experts for their outstanding achievement.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I rise to engage the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee in a colloquy, along with Mr. Kirk from Illinois. Chairman Taylor, let me first thank you and the committee for the funding you provided to the Science and Technology Account of the EPA. This important funding will be used to address a wide range of environmental and health concerns, including both long-term basic research and near-term applied research in order to discover knowledge and develop technologies necessary to protect our environmental resources and prevent future harm. I recognize that the apparently dramatic increases are primarily due to transfers of funds from other accounts, and for that reason I would strongly discourage any Member from offering an amendment to reduce this account. Nevertheless, the minor increases in basic science research funding are much appreciated, and I wanted to convey my appreciation. But I rise today to discuss an issue of pressing national importance: the cleanup and protection of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes comprise the largest source of freshwater in the world, 20 percent of the Earth's total and 95 percent of surface freshwater in the U.S., and they provide drinking water, transportation, and recreation to millions of people in the U.S. and Canada. However, the Great Lakes are plagued by contaminants from years of industrial pollution that have settled into the sediments of tributaries to the lakes. These pollutants degrade the health of both humans and wildlife and disrupt the beneficial uses of those waters. The longer we take to clean up these areas, the greater likelihood that the sediment will be transported into the open waters of the Great Lakes where cleanup is virtually impossible. The Great Lakes Legacy Act, which was enacted in 2002 in response to slow cleanup progress, authorizes the EPA to clean up contaminated sediments in the Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes. This Legacy Act has an added advantage in that 35 percent of the funding comes from the local communities and the States. The Legacy Act program was funded at about $29 million last year, and the authorization is $50 million. The bill your committee drafted provides a small increase to $29.6 million. Frankly, I considered offering an amendment to boost this total to that recommended by the President, to near full funding of $49 million. I am also disappointed by the $500,000 cut to the Great Lakes National Program Office, which operates the Legacy Act program, directs other EPA cleanup and protection actions in the lakes, and helps to coordinate the activities of other Federal agencies within the region. But I decided against offering an amendment because I recognize that limited resources are available to you in this bill because of your small allocation. I can assure you that I am not the only one concerned about these funding levels. Last year over 1,500 Federal, State, and local government officials, scientists, engineers, and other stakeholders participated in the President's groundbreaking Great Lakes Regional Collaboration. This diverse group of experts and advocates developed a strategic action plan for restoring the Great Lakes. Among the recommendations was $150 million in annual funding for the Legacy Act. This funding level is justified because of the success of the six projects that are completed or underway or in the pipeline and nine other potential projects being considered by the EPA. In fact, Federal and State officials involved in cleaning up contaminated sediment have recently estimated that 75 million cubic yards of sediment need to be remediated at a total cost range of $1.6 billion to $4.4 billion. The comparatively small amounts in the Legacy Act will help leverage State, local, and private dollars and get some of these ready-to-go projects off the ground. Chairman Taylor, I urge you to work with me and my Great Lakes colleagues on increasing funding for this important, oversubscribed program, and help to jump-start restoration efforts for this national treasure. We simply cannot wait. I yield now to my friend from Illinois, a stalwart champion of Great Lakes restoration and my Cochair of the Great Lakes Task Force, Mr. Kirk.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for his assurance. I thank him for his consideration. And I also wish to thank the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House for being generous with his time and also for his outstanding work over the years in working for the Great Lakes.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, on the occasion of her retirement in June 2006, I rise to thank Mrs. Estelle Jones for 29 years of outstanding service to the U.S. House of Representatives. Throughout the years Estelle has made significant contributions managing the employee benefit programs for the U.S. House of Representatives and providing oversight to the processing of staff employee benefits for the U.S. House of Representatives. She began her career at the House on June 15, 1977, as an Employee Benefits Clerk in the Office of Personnel and Benefits, Office of Finance, under the Office of the Clerk. In January 1980, she assumed the title of Personnel Control Clerk, supervising the paperwork flow of the Employee Benefits Clerk. Estelle later accepted the position of Benefits Counselor, remaining with the Office of Personnel and Benefits. On December 1, 1987, she was promoted to Assistant Supervisor for the Office of Personnel and Benefits until November 12, 1995, when she accepted the appointment as Director of the Office of Personnel and Benefits, Human Resources for the Chief Administrative Officer. As Director of Personnel and Benefits, Estelle also served as the House Benefits Officer for both Health Benefits and Retirement with the Office of Personnel Management. She had the overall responsibility for the quality, accuracy and timeliness of submissions of all benefits records to OPM. She has provided many years of employee benefit support and guidance to the countless House staff members who have worked in this great institution throughout the last 29 years. On behalf of the entire House community, I extend congratulations to Estelle for her many years of dedication and outstanding contributions to the U.S. House of Representatives. We wish Estelle many wonderful years in fulfilling her retirement dreams with her husband, Jack, and her children, Justin and Stephanie.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, on the occasion of his retirement at the end of May 2006, I rise to thank Mr. James S. (Jim) Murphy for his 29 years of outstanding service to the United States House of Representatives. Jim began his career with the House on October 11, 1977, and served in positions within the Office of the Clerk and the Finance office of the Chief Administrative Officer. As a Team Leader within the Office of Financial Counseling, he provided financial assistance and guidance to all Member and Committee offices including monitoring and projecting available fund balances and ensuring expenditures comply with both House and Committee rules and regulations. Jim has provided financial guidance to every entity of the House, assuring that House staff and vendors are paid accurately. His passionate customer service and tireless commitment to the countless House staff members who have worked with him will be deeply missed. On behalf of the entire House community, I extend congratulations to Jim for his many years of dedication and contributions to the financial management of the House. We wish Jim many wonderful years enjoying his retirement.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to rise and defend the bill that is before us. I am astounded at some of the debate I have heard here, including rising gas prices, which has nothing to do with this bill. We hear a lot about a culture of corruption. That is utter nonsense. I am proud of my colleagues in this body, by and large, very hardworking, good people trying to do the people's business honestly and well. The point is, we have to put in place some restrictions, some rules to deal with those few who stray and do something that shouldn't be done. That is what this bill is about. It is fair. It is reasonable. It will provide penalties for those who violate the rules of the House or the laws of this land, and that is precisely what we need, and it is important to pass that bill today. We cannot dilly dally with amendments that weaken it or with recommittals that change the intent of it. We want a bill that will work. We want a bill that the Senate will look at and say, this is wonderful, let us pass it, too. We have to accommodate the principles of this body. We have to work and put in place all of the components of this bill which have been carefully worked out on both sides of the aisle, so that we will have a good bill, a fair bill. And I urge that we adopt this bill.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I, for years, have always said we must ensure proper behavior of the Members of this body or the members of any State legislature I have been in. And I particularly want to thank the gentleman for this amendment because I was not aware that this prohibition did not apply to leadership PACs. Current law does prohibit conversion of campaign funds to personal use, but, unfortunately, we have never had occasion to say that it should also apply to leadership PACs because I am not aware of any instance where that has occurred. Nevertheless, I totally agree with the gentleman from Georgia that we should close this loophole, and that we should not permit any Member under any circumstances to convert leadership PAC funds to personal use. And I, therefore, very strongly support his amendment and thank him for bringing this to our attention.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman from Washington for his eloquent comments. He stated it extremely well. And I would like to point out that our basic research programs in the United States have led to incredible discoveries and developments, but also have made incredible contributions to the economy of this Nation. Just to pick one example, something that happened when I was a graduate student, which is obviously many years ago, about roughly 50 years ago, the development of the laser by a good friend of mine, Charlie Towns. And I did not work with Dr. Towns, but I knew of the experiments, I knew what was going to emerge, I knew that he would discover the laser. And even though I am a scientist, I am in the field, I never envisioned the results of that. We were all extremely excited at the development of the laser, because it enabled us to do scientific experiments we had only dreamed about doing before. What we didn't realize, or what I didn't realize, is that we would have a world where lasers are ubiquitous; where you would not think of putting in a ceiling tile without having a laser to level the tiles and make it all look good; we would not think of putting in sewer or water mains without lasers to help us align them so that they are in the proper location. Today, you can go into novelty stores and buy lasers for $15. Children play with them, cat lovers use them to have cats chase the little red dot around. They are ubiquitous. And out of that small investment from the United States Government in that research, which I would estimate was roughly $10 million or less, today we have a multibillion dollar industry in the United States. The problem this Nation faces is that that research is not being supported by this Nation the way it was in the past and we are in danger of losing our leadership because of that. I deeply, deeply appreciate the leadership of President George Bush in announcing in his State of the Union speech the American Competitiveness Initiative, which will help restore our lead in research in this world. It will help provide the education our children need so that they can be leaders in the world. I strongly urge this Congress to provide the funding that the President has requested so that we can not only maintain, but increase, our leadership in the world and maintain our economic competitiveness and continue to be the giant in the world that we have been so that our people will have jobs and we won't be shipping them abroad.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am very pleased that we are considering this resolution honoring the winners of the 2005 Nobel Prizes in chemistry and physics. This is especially a pleasurable experience for me because I know two of them personally and have worked with one of them rather closely for a period of over a year. Our Nation has a long, proud history of pushing forward the boundaries of human knowledge, and few awards bestow more recognition and honor on those who devote their lives to this quest than does the Nobel Prize. As a fellow scientist, I offer to each of the laureates my congratulations and heartfelt appreciation for your outstanding contributions to your fields. I am particularly honored to offer congratulations to Dr. John Hall for his commendable contributions to the field of laser-based precision spectroscopy. His careful and dedicated work has resulted, among other things, in improved accuracy in vital navigation systems such as the GPS. John's long and noteworthy career includes a founding role as a fellow of JILA, formerly known as the Joint Institute of Laboratory Astrophysics, which is a joint research institute of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the University of Colorado in Boulder. It was at that institution where I worked with him doing research in atomic physics, a little nuclear physics and also in science education. I am proud to say that Dr. Hall is a wonderful scientist, and I was delighted to work with him. I am most pleased as the chairman of the Science Committee Subcommittee on Environment, Technology and Standards, where I oversee NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, to offer John congratulations and wishes for many more years of exciting discovery. I would also like to point out that this is the third Nobel Prize awarded to scientists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which is basically a standard-setting organization, which includes a lot of research on standards; but in spite of the restriction on the research, three individuals from that outstanding organization have now been awarded Nobel Prizes. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This resolution recognizes and honors Drs. Roy J. Glauber, John L. Hall and Theodor W. Hansch for being awarded the Nobel Prize in physics for 2005, and Drs. Yves Chauvin, Robert H. Grubbs and Richard R. Schrock for being awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry for 2005. As I mentioned earlier, John Hall is a personal friend of mine, and I have worked with him. Theodor Hansch was also a colleague of mine for some time many years ago, even though we did not work together, and we were not addressing the same issue. Additionally, the resolution acknowledges the importance of the National Institute of Standards and Technology research and its contributions to U.S. industry, academia and government. On October 10, 2005, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences awarded the Nobel Prize in physics for 2005 to Drs. Roy J. Glauber, John L. Hall and Theodor W. Hansch for their pioneering discoveries in the field of optics. Their contributions to the quantum theory of optical coherence and development of laser-based precision spectroscopy, including the optical frequency comb technique, has led to improvements in the accuracy of precision instruments such as GPS locators, atomic clocks, and navigation systems. I would love to spend another 10, 15 minutes explaining exactly what that means, but I risk boring you, Mr. Speaker, and the rest of the audience, but let me say it is a fascinating field of research. It has led to great improvements, and people who ask me how can this possibly be of value should simply look at their TV set and remind themselves of years ago when they turned on the TV set and spent 5 minutes adjusting the hue and the color to get everything correct. The type of work done by these individuals created such accurate time standards that everything went automatically now on their TV set. That was one minor trivial example of all the benefits that arise from basic research. Continuing, John L. Hall recently retired from a long career with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, better known as NIST, in the Quantum Physics Division, and was one of the founding fellows of JILA, a joint Federal lab/university cooperative effort supporting research and post-graduate training. NIST was founded in 1901, and its laboratories and collaborations with academia have contributed to the achievement of present and past Nobel Prize winners by supporting research that strengthens the global economic competitiveness of the United States through the development of technologies, measurement methods and standards. Indeed, NIST used to be known as the National Bureau of Standards and received its more modern name somewhat recently. John L. Hall is one of three NIST researchers that have received the Nobel Prize. On October 10, 2005, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry for 2005 to Drs. Yves Chauvin, Robert H. Grubbs and Richard R. Schrock for their pioneering discoveries in the field of organic chemistry. Their research on metathesis reactions and the development of the metathesis method in organic synthesis has resulted in a major advance for ``green chemistry'' and the development of pharmaceuticals that can be made through methods that are more efficient and generate less hazardous waste. This is an outstanding advancement, and we must concentrate greater efforts on green chemistry, in other words, chemistry that provides results in fewer residuals that endanger the environment. The Science Committee, I might add, has developed a new bill on this topic, and I am very eager to see that passed into law. This resolution recognizes and honors Drs. Roy J. Glauber, John L. Hall, and Theodor W. Hansch, Yves Chauvin, Robert H. Grubbs and Richard R. Schrock, and acknowledges the importance of National Institute of Standards and Technology research and its contributions to United States industry, academia and government. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. I just have to say, I am a little disappointed in this debate. In fact, I am greatly disappointed in this debate. I am just a simple person who grew up in a small town, and I grew up in an area where we said what we meant, and we meant what we said. I have heard so much diversionary discussion on this topic from the minority today, it is very disappointing to me. The proposition of the bill is very simple: unlimited spending of soft money was intended to be banned under BCRA. A diversionary tactic has developed which allows the expenditures of huge amounts of money, unregulated soft money, and this bill today is an attempt to stop that practice which is being carried out by people who are violating the intent of a law we passed a few years ago. That plain and simple is the issue here. I urge the body to adopt the bill and stop the abominable practice of huge amounts of unregulated, unreported money influencing elections. Let's get back to the original intent of BCRA and put it in place and enforce it. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the material I previously referred to. [From the New York Times, Dec. 29, 2004] The Soft Money Boomerang It's encouraging to see signs of life in Washington, particularly on the Republican side of the aisle, over the obvious need to plug the newest subterranean pipe for unregulated campaign funds from big labor, big corporations and just plain big money. Of all the subplots in the presidential election, none were as sorry as the Democrats' pioneering ``527'' groups--named for the section of the tax code that governs them. The 527's were intended to circumvent the law's strictures against having unlimited soft money flood into political races. The Democrats built these new shadow-party advocacy groups to attack the president early in the campaign season and build voter-turnout machines. Then they watched Bush partisans adapt the same financing device to float the campaign's most notorious and devastating attack ads, the Swift boat assaults on John Kerry's heroic war record and his antiwar activities after he returned from Vietnam. Dollar-wise, the Democrats proved better at milking the 527 strategy, spending more than three times as much as the Republicans in stealth-party ads favoring their presidential ticket. But the Republicans wielded their ads like a rapier once the Federal Election Commission, true to its track record, shirked its responsibility by deciding that the new breed of advocacy groups should not be controlled under the campaign finance reform laws. A commission majority endorsed the fiction that the 527's are independent. The truth is that they were strategically linked to the candidates and perfect targets for aggressive F.E.C. regulation and spending limits. The 527 fund-raisers were the V.I.P. toast of the party conventions last summer, raising money in luxury suites with a wink and a grin. After this year's election drubbings, you would think the Democrats would now see the folly of the 527 committees. But, no, ranking Democrats are determined to make them a permanent campaign weapon, with no dollar caps on the corporations, labor unions and fat-cat partisans who spent more than $550 million on such committees in this year's races. President Bush condemned the 527's and promised a crackdown when the Democrats first exploited them and caught the G.O.P. short. But later in the campaign, he failed to condemn the Swift boat ads when Senator John McCain did so and pointedly asked for the president's support. Now Mr. Bush has another chance to put his considerable political weight behind Mr. McCain, who is determined to use the coming Congressional session to pass legislation that would force this blowzy lucre-genie back into the bottle. Senator McCain overcame whatever past bad feeling there was between himself and the president and became a dogged Bush campaigner this year. We hope the president repays him by explicitly backing the McCain fight to stop the 527 gamesmanship as an abuse of fair elections. And it's equally important for the president to enlist in the senator's campaign to overhaul the election commission. The F.E.C. is a transparent extension of hack party politics, beholden to members of Congress who are more concerned with their own incumbency than the public interest.

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

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), the other sponsor of the bill from the minority side.