Vernon Ehlers

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Washington (Mr. Baird) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) for their work in bringing this resolution to the floor today. As I mentioned before, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird) has been most helpful in the Committee on Science. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) and I, as the two physicists in the Congress, have worked together closely on many issues, including this one. So I want to recognize both of them for their work and for their long history in recognizing the importance of not only physics but science in general. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for H. Con. Res. 301.

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

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 301) supporting the goals and ideals of the World Year of Physics.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut for her astute comments on the Manufacturing Extension Partnership and the role it plays. I have worked extensively on this issue, because it is under my jurisdiction as chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology and Standards of the Committee on Science. We have spent a considerable amount of time over this past year working on this issue and have developed a bill which will be on the floor tomorrow which will deal with this. Everything that the gentlewoman from Connecticut has observed about the program is absolutely true, and it has always puzzled me why there is some opposition to this program. Just to give an example of the benefits of this type of program, I think one of the finest programs we have had in the Agriculture Department for a number of years is the Cooperative Extension Program, which has been invaluable in getting research out of the laboratory and into the field. It has always amazed me that we have an amazing technology transfer rate in the agriculture arena, because of that program. A laboratory researcher at a university can discover something new one year and the farmers are actually using it in the field the next year, a tremendous accomplishment in terms of transferring technology from the lab to actual operations. We certainly do not do that well in most other fields. We do not do that well in manufacturing. I find it interesting that we, as a Federal Government, spend $441 million per year for the Agriculture Cooperative Extension Program, and yet we seem to fuss and muss a lot about $100 or $110 million for essentially the same program for manufacturers. At the same time, there are only about 1.5 percent of Americans employed in farming, and there are roughly 14 percent employed in manufacturing. So clearly our priorities are wrong if we think we are spending too much in assisting manufacturers. The MEP program, Manufacturing Extension Program, is designed to help small- and medium-sized businesses, and particularly provides technology transfer from the lab to the marketplace. In addition to that, it also provides business expertise, as the gentlewoman from Connecticut observed, to assist in exporting, and to assist in getting permits from other countries to export. The MEP program has been a very, very valuable program for small- and middle-sized businesses and, in many cases, has allowed them to increase and become large businesses. So it is an excellent program. I certainly want to support what the gentlewoman has said. This is a good program for us to do, and I hope that tomorrow we will have the support of a large number of Members as we consider the bill which will reauthorize the program. I certainly support what the chairman of this Appropriations subcommittee has done in allocating money for that program.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1856) to reauthorize the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1856, as amended, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is timely that we are considering this bill about harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. Just last week, beaches in the Chesapeake Bay were closed due to a harmful algal bloom. I introduced H.R. 1856 more than a year ago after learning about the nationwide problems caused by harmful algal blooms, also known as HABs, and also, the harmful effects from hypoxia. Harmful algal blooms are dense mats of toxic algae that can harm marine animals and humans. Hypoxia occurs when an algal bloom depletes oxygen in the water and leaves behind conditions that essentially choke all of the marine life in the affected area. Harmful algal blooms and hypoxia occur nationwide in areas including the Chesapeake Bay, California, the Pacific Northwest, the Great Lakes, and the Gulf of Mexico. In 1998, Congress passed a 3-year bill authorizing harmful algal bloom and hypoxia research programs with a focus on the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico and Pfiesteria in the Chesapeake Bay. Since the authorization of these important research programs expired, I decided to reexamine the issue at a hearing in the Committee on Science last year. At that hearing we learned that successful research supported by the 1998 authorization enabled scientists to move closer to being able to predict HAB outbreaks; and in some regions, they have learned enough about the phenomena to start developing mitigation and control methods. We also learned that the occurrence of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia is increasing in fresh-water locations such as the Great Lakes, and there is sometimes a disconnect between the research being performed and the local resource managers who should benefit from the science. In response, I developed H.R. 1856 to amend and update the 1998 act. Today, I offer a manager's amendment that reflects discussions with the Committee on Resources and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure who are also interested in this bill. I especially want to thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the chair of the Subcommittee on Water Resources, as well as the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest) from the Committee on Resources, chair of the Fisheries Subcommittee, for their help in guiding this bill through the process. Also I thank my colleagues on the Committee on Science, including the gentleman from New York (Chairman Boehlert) and my friend, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird), who have provided useful input. I appreciate all of their help in improving the bill. The manager's amendment maintains the current level of authorization for harmful algal blooms and hypoxia programs at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, better known as NOAA, and maintains that current level of authorization at $19 million annually over the next 3 fiscal years. It adds fresh-water regions such as the Great Lakes as an important focus area for harmful algal bloom and hypoxia research. The bill also increases participation of local resource managers to ensure that the research is prioritized to address the questions facing people managing these problems. Also, the bill requires that NOAA administer all research funding through a competitive, merit-based, peer-reviewed process. Finally, the bill reauthorizes funding for effective programs that evolved out of the 1998 act. For example, the MERHAB program, which stands for Monitoring and Event Response For Harmful Algal Blooms, partners State and local research managers with university researchers. Research from this program has resulted in innovations such as rapid test kits that beach managers can use directly in the field to test for harmful algal blooms. These kits eliminated the need to take samples back to a lab and wait days for confirmation of the presence of toxins, providing an early warning for the public about harmful algal blooms. H.R. 1856 does not mandate any specific regulatory actions. It is purely a research, development, and demonstration bill, with a goal of improving our understanding of these phenomena so that we can predict their occurrence and develop tools for improved detection and mitigation of these problems. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the manager's amendment and the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words for the Members who may not understand what harmful algal blooms are, and I also want to emphasize that this bill does not increase authorization or funding above the previous bill; it maintains the same level at $19 million per year, and we believe that will be sufficient to continue the project. Harmful algal blooms are sometimes referred to as a ``red tide.'' These are algae that for some reason proliferate very rapidly under certain conditions, and the net effect of that is that they consume so much oxygen and produce toxins that they basically create a dead zone. In the Gulf of Mexico, it is not unusual to have a dead zone equal in size to the State of New Jersey. Obviously, this is not only harmful to the Gulf of Mexico, but also harmful to the fishing industries who like to use that area because of the large number of fish that are killed by the lack of oxygen and the toxins. What is of special concern is that the harmful algal blooms now are appearing in fresh-water areas, particularly the Great Lakes, one of the greatest sources of fresh water not only in this Nation, but in the world. We want to head that off very early, and try to find out precisely what is happening in the Great Lakes that would allow these harmful algal blooms to develop there and create the same difficulties that we have observed in the Gulf of Mexico, as well as in the State of Washington in the bay area around Seattle and Puget Sound. Mr. Speaker, I think it is absolutely essential for us to address this. We reached the conclusion after our hearing that a great deal of good research has been done, that the emphasis now can switch from research, although not entirely; we must continue some research, but we also have to convert that into action now. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird) in particular has a problem in the Puget Sound area that has to be addressed immediately. We hope that, as a result of this bill, we will see greater action through demonstration projects, and more than demonstration projects as time goes on, so that we can deal with this problem, actually solve it, and get rid of the harmful algal blooms and the hypoxia which occurs and which kills other organisms. So, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that this bill has reached this point. I want to thank the gentleman from Washington. He is one of the most helpful committee members on the Committee on Science, but particularly on this bill because of his expertise and the situation they have in the State of Washington. He has been most helpful in our discussions; and I hope that, as a result of this action, we will be able to address the problems in the State of Washington as well as other areas of the Nation. Mr. Speaker, I want to also express my thanks to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest) for their work on moving this bill through the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, as well as the Committee on Resources. Finally, I thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman Boehlert) for his hard work bringing this bill to the floor today. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1856 will provide a timely update for these important programs that help our coastal communities deal with harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. I urge all of our colleagues to support H.R. 1856.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2507. I thank Chairman Boehner and Mr. Castle for work on this legislation. I particularly thank them for their willingness to retain direct certification of migrant children and policies promoting wellness during negotiations with the Senate. This legislation works to protect eligible children's access to the child nutrition programs by extending automatic eligibility to children who qualify for migrant educational services under Title 1, part C of the No Child Left Behind Act. It allows for direct certification of migrant children if they are identified by the district's migrant education coordinator. Such a change makes it easier for migrant children to receive school meals as soon as they enter a new school. In addition, this legislation promotes nutritional education and physical activity. I am very pleased that this legislation promotes such education and physical activity at the state and local levels to prevent childhood obesity. I am hopeful that the local school wellness policies, which will be established by schools participating in the school nutrition programs, will promote health and prevent childhood obesity throughout schools in Michigan and throughout the Nation. Finally, I support strengthening partnerships between local agriculture and schools. I cosponsored Representative Upton and Representative Kind's Farm-To-Cafeteria Projects Act, and I am pleased to see these provisions included. This legislation will promote partnerships between local Michigan farms and the child nutrition programs to ensure that children receive fresh and local produce. In closing, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased, along with my colleague from Maryland, Mr. Gilchrest, to introduce the President's bill to establish the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). As Chairmen of the House subcommittees with jurisdiction over NOAH, we are introducing this bill as a courtesy to the President. NOAA was created by Executive Order in 1970. Since that time Congress has not passed a comprehensive law describing the mission of the agency. On April 20, the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy released its long awaited Preliminary Report with recommendations for a coordinated national ocean policy. One of its key recommendations is that Congress should pass an organic act for NOAA. I have already introduced my bill creating such an organic act (H.R. 4546). This bill Mr. Gilchrest and I are introducing today is the Administration's response to the recommendation. I look forward to working with Mr. Gilchrest and the Members of the Science Committee and the Resources Committee as we consider comprehensive legislation for NOAA.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 232-242, I was detained by a meeting with Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans and his newly appointed Manufacturers Advisory Council, at which I spoke. The delay was compounded by an airline delay which prevented me from voting on the last three rollcall votes, on all of which I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: rollcall No. 232, ``yes''; rollcall No. 233, ``yes''; rollcall No. 234, ``yes''; rollcall No. 235, ``yes''; rollcall No. 236, ``yes''; rollcall No. 237, ``yes''; rollcall No. 238, ``yes''; rollcall No. 239, ``yes''; rollcall No. 240, ``no''; rollcall No. 241, ``no''; and rollcall No. 242, ``no'';

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce H.R. 4546, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act. Better known as NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was created by Executive Order in 1970. As Chairman of the Environment, Technology and Standards Subcommittee of the House Science Committee, I oversee much of NOAA. It is the Nation's lead civilian agency for oceans and atmosphere, yet Congress has never passed an overarching organic act describing the mission and functions of the agency. Instead, over the past 34 years Congress has defined the mission of the agency in a piecemeal manner with legislation focused on specific issues. The bill I am introducing today is a first step toward Congressional passage of comprehensive legislation for NOAA. On April 20, the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy released its long awaited Preliminary Report with recommendations for a coordinated national ocean policy. One of its key recommendations is that Congress should pass an organic act for NOAA. At a recent Science Committee hearing, the chairman of the Commission emphasized the importance of this recommendation and I strongly agree with him. The time is right for Congress to consider, and pass, this organic act for NOAA, an agency that provides vital services to the Nation that range from weather forecasts and warnings to cutting-edge marine research. My bill contains three major sections. Title I is an organic act for NOAA. It establishes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) within the Department of Commerce and defines the mission of NOAA. This mission is ``to understand and predict changes in the Earth's oceans and atmosphere and the effects of such changes on the land environment, to conserve and manage coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes ecosystems, and to educate the public about these topics.'' My bill maintains the current leadership structure at NOAA, but adds a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology to serve as the point person for the agency to coordinate the research and science activities of NOAA across the agency. Title I of my bill also describes the functions of NOAA, which are divided into three broad groups to improve cooperation among NOAA's programs, as recommended by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. First is the National Weather Service, which provides weather, water and climate forecasts and warnings to the Nation. The second group is operations and services, which includes all of NOAA's satellites services and its mapping and charting services. The third category of functions is research and education. The bill focuses on pieces of NOAA under Science Committee jurisdiction, and does not currently include any references to NOAA's fisheries or resource management, which are under the jurisdiction of the Resources Committee here in the House. I am hopeful that we can work with other committees in the House and our colleagues in the Senate to pass a truly comprehensive organic act for NOAA, but for now we must start with this piece of legislation. The second part of the bill is a three year general authorization for NOAA's line offices. The third part of my bill in Titles III-VII is a series of NOAA-related legislation from the 108th Congress that I believe are important programs to specifically authorize at this time. I believe it is critical for NOAA's mission to be clearly defined so it can better fulfill its role in observing, managing, and protecting our Nation's coastal, ocean and Great Lakes resources. I look forward to working with my colleagues in a bipartisan fashion to pass this bill into law this year. This will not be an easy task, but it is so important to our environment, our economy, and our children's and grandchildren's future, that we must succeed.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 115) authorizing the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the lying in state of the remains of the late Ronald Wilson Reagan, 40th President of the United States, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 444) authorizing the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the lying in state of the remains of the late Honorable Ronald Wilson Reagan, the fortieth President of the United States.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this may seem like a routine resolution because we must pass these resolutions to allow the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for certain events, but frankly, this is a very auspicious moment. By statute, we have defined how state funerals are to proceed in this Nation's Capital. We have very few of them. I believe the last one was at the time of the death of President Lyndon Johnson of Texas. It is a great honor to host an event such as this in the rotunda, and today I rise to present a resolution which will grant permission to have the body of President Ronald Reagan rest in state in the rotunda of the Capitol so that the Members of Congress and members of the public may join in honoring him by viewing the casket. This is, as I said, a very auspicious event, and fortunately, we do not have to do this often. But it inspires in us, again, respect for the ideals of our Nation and for the things that we do and that we believe in. When President Reagan's body will arrive, the casket will be placed on a caisson, according to tradition and law, and that horse-drawn procession will proceed from near the White House to the Capitol. It will be followed by a black, riderless horse, indicating a fallen leader. The boots on that horse will be placed in the stirrups backwards, indicating the fallen leader reviewing the troops behind him. When that arrives at the Capitol, with great pomp and circumstance, an honor guard will present the casket and the body and carry them inside the Capitol, displaying the casket in the rotunda. This evening we will have a memorial ceremony, restricted to the Members of Congress, in the Rotunda. Following that, the people of this Nation, anyone who wishes, may stand in line and view the casket and give their respects to our fallen President. It is my pleasure to be able to present this resolution honoring President Ronald Reagan and providing the opportunity for the Members of Congress and for the public to view the casket and to pay their respects to this great man. It is the least we can do, and I wish we could do more because he did a marvelous job of leading this Nation in a very troubled time. When we had a broken economy and a dispirited people, he restored their spirits with grace, charm and a twinkle in his eye and eventually helped us prevail over the Soviet Union, which had threatened us for decades with nuclear weapons. The world is a far better place because of Ronald Reagan, what he did, and the leadership he provided, and it is my pleasure to present this resolution and honor him in this way. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox), a representative of the home State of President Reagan to offer some comments on this resolution.

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

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to present this resolution. I have pointed out the historical significance of it, and I urge the entire Congress to cast a unanimous vote. It is the last time to win one for the Gipper, and it is appropriate for us to express our appreciation to a previous leader and President at the time of his death.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, for many years I have heard comments about the power of ideas. I learned as a youngster that the pen is mightier than the sword and that there is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come. President Ronald Reagan demonstrated that these and similar statements, are true. He was living proof that ideas win battles. He was not regarded as an intellectual, but yet he understood the importance of the basic, simple ideas that this country is founded upon, the ideas of peace and freedom, freedom to worship, freedom to speak, freedom of the press, but he also went beyond that. He recognized that these are not ends in themselves, but these are means to an end, and freedom to worship is meaningless unless you use it to worship. Freedom of the press is meaningless unless you use it to print ideas that are for the betterment of the Nation. Simple ideas, valiantly fought for. With grace, charm and a twinkle in his eye, he succeeded where others had failed. He inspired a troubled Nation. He brought us together. He conquered the symbolic Iron Curtain and brought it down, along with the very real Berlin Wall. He led to nuclear disarmament, the greatest threat to humanity during his tenure. I rise today to thank President Reagan for what he did for this country, for the ideas he fought for and the transformation he made in the culture and the attitudes of this Nation.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on House Concurrent Resolution 444.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to one of my staffers, Nancy Ostapowicz, who last month retired after serving the residents of West Michigan for 25 years. As most of us know, being a staff member in a Congressional district office is often a thankless and relatively anonymous job. They usually do not receive the credit they deserve for a job well-done, and all too often they must deal with concern, frustration or anger of constituents who are upset by government actions or have been ill-treated by the bureaucratic system. Nancy, who has directed my constituent services since I joined Congress in 1993, handled such situations with incredible aplomb, working tirelessly and compassionately with the people who contacted our Grand Rapids office in search of assistance. I was fortunate to have inherited Nancy, as she first started working for Congressman Hal Sawyer in 1979, then continued with Congressman Paul Henry when he took office in 1985. Over the past quarter-century, Nancy helped literally thousands of people with a wide variety of problems too numerous to list here today, although it is safe to say that she was especially gratified by her efforts helping immigrants and reuniting families so that they could come to the United States and pursue the American dream. Without a doubt, Nancy's biggest legacy is that those thousands of people would be willing to line up and thank her for the help she gave them. She has served so many people over the years that it is not unusual to see someone walk up to Nancy to thank her for assistance that she provided 10 or 20 years ago. And so, today, add me to the list of people who have said ``Thank you'' to Nancy Ostapowicz. Others will ably do her job, but no one can ever replace her. Congratulations, Nancy, on a fine career of public service, and best wishes to you and Dan in your retirement.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce legislation that will move our Nation forward with increased environmental protection and restoration of the Great Lakes--the Great Lakes Protection and Restoration Committee Act. The Great Lakes are a national treasure that we need to protect and restore. They contain 95 percent of our nation's surface freshwater, provide drinking water to millions of people and form the backbone for billions of dollars in shipping, trade, fishing and recreation. Progress has been made in improving environmental conditions in the Great Lakes Basin, but the lakes continue to face many threats, including pollution from contaminated sediments, stormwater and agricultural runoff, the introduction of invasive species, wetlands and coastal habitat loss, and pollutants washed into the lakes from the atmosphere. While several federal, state, provincial and local programs have been developed to address these problems, these strategies are not well coordinated. According to an April 2003 GAO Report, ``no one overarching strategy or plan unifies these strategies in the pursuit of a common goal. . . An overarching strategy for the basin is needed to establish restoration goals, outline how restoration will occur, identify the resources needed to achieve restoration, assign accountability for restoration, and provide a mechanism for measuring progress for achieving goals.'' This week, President Bush signed an Executive Order that establishes a task force to improve the coordination of federal agency efforts and to reach out to state, local, and private partners to develop consistent policies and strategies for Great Lakes restoration. I strongly support the action taken by President Bush, EPA Administrator Leavitt, and Council on Environmental Quality Chairman Connaughton because it will help bring collaboration among the broad collection of existing resources and programs in the region. Next we need comprehensive legislation to continue to move us forward. The Great Lakes Protection and Restoration Committee Act will provide a path forward by bringing together all of the stakeholders in the basin, led by the Great Lakes State governors with the aid of relevant federal agency officials, tribal representatives, scientific experts and environmental and industry stakeholders. The Committee created by the legislation will develop a specific and comprehensive strategy for the purpose of protecting, preserving and restoring the Great Lakes. Specifically, the task force will: Assess accomplishments from current programs over the past 10 years; Analyze the prospects for achieving restoration goals under current programs and authorities for the next 10 years; Prioritize restoration goals identified by the Great Lakes governors; Develop specific, measurable benchmarks for achieving those goals; Recommend legislative options for obtaining such additional authority and funding as are necessary to achieve those goals; Suggest methods to improve coordination among the existing federal, state, provincial, local, and non-governmental programs operating in the Great Lakes; and Report to Congress and the President in one year on its findings and recommendations. My goal is that the task force will develop a comprehensive, strategic protection and restoration program to bring together and coordinate the plethora of smaller programs that we have in place now. This serious and measured approach mirrors the steps taken in other large ecosystem restoration projects such as the Everglades and Chesapeake Bay. Due to the complexity of those restoration initiatives, which cross over many jurisdictional lines, environmental challenges and scientific disciplines, it was essential to have an overall strategic plan in place to guide activities and funding decisions over long periods of time. The Great Lakes Basin is significantly larger and the environmental challenges substantially more complex than in those ecosystems. We need an overarching strategy in place to accomplish our vision to protect and restore the lakes. A lack of adequate funding is certainly an impediment to successful cleanup efforts, but improved program coordination and operation under a comprehensive strategic plan is an essential first step. The Great Lakes Protection and Restoration Committee Act will move Great Lakes restoration forward to help protect and clean up this global treasure. I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 600, a resolution congratulating charter schools across the United States and their students, parents, teachers and administrators of such schools for their ongoing contributions to education. Charter schools represent a grand experiment which relies upon innovation and creativity found within American society. Since charter schools are often small and independent, they are able to focus on new approaches for teaching and preparing students for their place in our rapidly changing world. Charter schools often deliver high-quality education and challenge students to reach their potential. Charter schools can be vehicles for improving student achievement and for stimulating change in all educational settings including public schools. Almost 2,700 charter schools serve students across the Nation, and these schools are found in 41 States, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. In Michigan, there are over 210 operational charter schools and even more approved to open during the 2004-2005 school year. I would especially like to commend one innovative and entrepreneurial charter school pioneer in my district, Mr. J.C. Huizenga. He founded National Heritage Academies in 1995 with a vision to create a network of K-8 schools that offer a common-sense approach to education. The cornerstones of this approach include rigorous academics, a strong virtue-based character development program, active parental involvement, and a high degree of accountability. Mr. Huizenga and his National Heritage Academies operate 39 schools in 5 States and serve nearly 21,000 students. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting and congratulating charter schools. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to take a few moments to respond to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) regarding the extraneous comments he inserted in the debate on the previous measure. He commented that the legislature in Ohio and others there agree that No Child Left Behind is underfunded. Mr. Speaker, I served in the Michigan legislature for 11 years. During all that time, I never met any legislator who ever felt that the Federal Government was properly funding or overfunding anything. It is the character of State legislators and State legislatures to believe that the Federal Government should be sending them more money. That simple statement about the Ohio legislature is no indication whatsoever of the truth of the situation. The truth is that Federal funding for education has more than doubled over the past 8 years. The truth is that if we look at the charts of the funding under No Child Left Behind of this Congress and compare it with the funding under the previous program, we are doing extremely well. It is almost an exponential increase compared to the relatively flat funding prior to that. Similarly for IDEA funding; if we look at the history of that, IDEA funding was struggling along at a few billion dollars per year for a number of years. Since the Republicans took over, we have quadrupled the amount of funding for IDEA to $10 billion in fiscal year 2004. The facts are, the Republicans have been very generous with the funding of No Child Left Behind and IDEA, and attempts to say otherwise are simply falsifying the facts and I think are for political purposes and should not have been inserted in the discussion of the military schools debate.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, back in 1974 I ran for public office on an environmental platform. I have been an environmentalist for many years, and I have always tried to keep the environment in the forefront in discussions in this Congress. I am also, however, what you might call a common-sense environmentalist. I believe in environmental issues and environmental choices that make sense both for the environment and for the economy. And this bill is a sterling example of precisely what is involved in common-sense environmentalism. The chemical industry makes and uses a great many chemicals. Disposal of those chemicals often becomes disposal of hazardous waste, which is very costly, very toxic and dangerous to the environment. This bill will help develop green chemistry, chemistry that is in tune with the environment so that both the products and the by-products are safe, and we do not generate as much or any hazardous waste, and we do not have to worry about toxic waste polluting the groundwater. Much work is required in this area both to change the habits of the educational institutions and the habits of the chemical industry. They have to be made aware of the many opportunities for green chemistry. And this is true also of the businesses that use chemical products. For example, it appears now that liquid carbon dioxide at the critical point is an outstanding cleaning fluid, certainly nontoxic, and would solve the pollution problem that many launderers and cleaners face in this country. I strongly support this bill. It supports research to develop more green chemistry processes and includes provisions to expand green chemistry education. This will enable the next generation of chemical professionals to bring innovative practices to traditional chemical manufacturing. I am most pleased to support the Green Chemistry Research and Development Act. Again, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) for their hard work on this important piece of legislation. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3970, a bill that will truly clean up the environment and at the same time aid the economy.