Vernon Ehlers

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise again today to discuss the abominable situation in Africa. We have had over two decades of killings, maimings, abductions, and the murder of approximately 1 million Africans. Our State Department has done virtually nothing. If we compare what has happened in Africa and what has happened in Kosovo and Bosnia, where we have sent troops, Bosnia and Kosovo do not begin to compare in deaths and human agony with what has happened in Africa. I am particularly concerned about Sierra Leone, where we now have a battle over diamonds. It is not a political battle, it is a battle for money, for diamonds, for power. Charles Taylor of Liberia undoubtedly is interfering. There is some evidence that Mr. Qaddafi from Libya is also interfering, and others from Guinea and other lands. And yet, we do nothing. We stand and watch it happen. Last week in a hearing chaired by the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) of the Subcommittee on Africa, we saw the maimed and injured, little children whose arms had been chopped off, a terrible, terrible sight, and our State Department and our country have done virtually nothing. It is time for us to rise up and help the citizens of that Nation. I ask that we do that.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, when I hear the name Goodling, I immediately think of four different words. The first pair is ``quality and accountability.'' We kept hearing that over and over in the committee. And those are very, very important words for us to hear. Will a proposal bring forth quality? Will it provide for accountability? The second pair of words is ``reading and literacy,'' obviously, very, very great needs in this country. I believe we should improve math and science education in this country, and but the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) is totally dedicated to improving reading and literacy; I totally agree with that as well, because we need to do both. It has been a pleasure to serve on the Committee on Education and the Workforce with Mr. Goodling. He is an experienced teacher, administrator, and a Congressman. As an educator myself for 22 years, I was delighted to have a person heading that committee who had experience in education too, because there are many people in this world who think they know exactly what is wrong with the schools and how to fix it, but they do not have any experience at it. Mr. Goodling has that experience, and I was delighted to have him as chairman.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss a very serious situation in Africa, the situation in Sierra Leone. Last week, under the leadership of the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), who serves as chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, we had a special meeting or hearing at which we heard from victims of the violence in Africa. Just as an example, there were two 4-year-old children, both of whom had had an arm chopped off, when they were 2 years old, by the rebels. We also saw a student who had said, please, don't chop off my right hand; I am a student and I have to write with it. They chopped off his right hand. Another gentleman had both arms chopped off. This is the type of violence taking place. But this is not a political revolution, this is a revolution of bandits who wanted to get control of the diamond mines, and in fact, they have achieved that. They are financing their war with the revenue from the mines. These so-called ``conflict diamonds,'' which I call bloody diamonds, are fueling the conflict over there, and many of those diamonds are being sold in the United States. We must stop the importation of those diamonds. Our State Department has to enforce international law, and bring pressure on Charles Taylor of Liberia and others to stop their meddling in the affairs of Sierra Leone, Above all, we must end the conflict.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the legislation that is before us which will combat unlawful use of citizen band radios. First of all, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bliley), the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) for their assistance in bringing this legislation to the floor. I also thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr) for his active efforts here. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time that they all have taken to address this problem and pass it through the Committee on Commerce. This legislation is not only important to my district, but to many other cities that are dealing with the same problems that this bill addresses. For several years, many of my constituents have been fighting a losing battle against illegal CB radio operators. Most CB radio operators use their equipment within the low-power levels prescribed by the FCC rules and regulations and do not cause any problems. However, some users illegally boost the range of their home- based CB equipment by using high-powered external linear amplifiers. Also, occasionally, they modify the frequencies illegally. When the CB level is amplified above legal levels, or the frequency is changed, it causes interference with television, radio and phone signals and damages other electronic equipment in the surrounding houses. The interference can be so bad that surrounding residents hear CB conversations over their televisions, radios, and phones. This can be extremely frustrating as telephone conversations can be cut off, television signals can be distorted, and other electronic equipment can suffer interference. Sometimes it is so bad that neighbors have to suffer through profane and abusive language that is being picked up by their own television sets, radios, or telephones. This is not an isolated problem. Most of the cosponsors of this legislation have exactly the same problems in their districts, and that is true of many other areas of the country as well. The Federal Communications Commission (the FCC), knows about the problem and has outlawed the sale and the use of these amplifiers. However, they are still on sale for other purposes and can be easily modified for use with CB radios. Even worse, the FCC does not have the personnel to enforce the law. Localities are powerless to help, because the FCC has a total preemption over enforcing regulations regarding CB radio use. The legislation before us will allow State and local authorities to enforce the FCC regulations regarding CB equipment and frequencies. This would be a narrow exemption from the total Federal preemption of CB radio regulation enforcement and would give residents recourse against an unlawful CB operator by capitalizing on the enforcement capabilities of local government and on the FCC's years of experience in setting rules governing CB use. In other words, the best of both worlds. The intent of this provision is to allow State and local governments to pass ordinances that will mimic Federal law and allow for its enforcement. Mr. Speaker, this legislation, let me emphasize, does not change what equipment is and is not legal. People who are operating CB equipment in accordance with the FCC rules will not be affected at all by this legislation. I have also worked with the ham radio operators (amateur radio operators) on this provision to ensure that their concerns about this legislation were addressed. Frankly, the ham radio operators in my district are very pleased with the bill. They were the ones who initiated it by asking me to address this particular problem, because it affected them as well. The bill also contains a provision that exempts anyone who possesses a ham radio license from this legislation. Lastly, the legislation contains a provision that specifically restates that local law enforcement officials must have just cause to investigate whether or not someone is operating an illegal amplifier before they take action against someone. Just to summarize in a nutshell, we have a real Catch-22 at the moment. The Federal Government has the power to enforce these laws. Not only that, we preempt the law from other communities so that they cannot enforce them. And yet the Federal Government, through the FCC, does not enforce them. So we tell people we will enforce it, but we cannot enforce it. This bill resolves that problem by allowing those on the scene, the local law enforcement agencies, to deal with the problem that the Federal Government has preempted but does not enforce. I believe that this will be beneficial to everyone. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I urge the House to approve this legislation. It is supported by the Committee on Commerce, the FCC, and local law enforcement officials. Again, I thank the leaders of the Committee on Commerce for bringing this bill to the floor.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Schaffer) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, there are very few subjects in this Congress on which I can speak as an expert, but this is one of them, since I was home schooled at a time when most people did not know what home schooling was. It was not by choice, but rather because of childhood asthma which prevented me from going to school. And so as an alternative, I simply did all of my schoolwork at home. My parents helped in whatever way possible, but as I say, it was not an organized program. It was a standard school curriculum which I did at home. I did not think this was too remarkable. During the late Depression years, it was not uncommon for people to suffer considerable hardship and I just assumed this was my lot in life. What I discovered when I went to the State Senate was that unbeknownst to me, I had become a hero to the home school movement, because not only was I home schooled, but I had obtained a Ph.D. in nuclear physics and had been elected to the State Senate. I do not credit my home schooling with having accomplished that, but it was very useful to the home schooling movement to have a living example because as some may recall in the 1980's when the home school movement started, there was an active attempt on the part of the established schools to legislatively repress home schools. In fact, I had people in my office, educators from various parts of the State coming to me in the Michigan Senate asking me to help sponsor bills to prohibit home schooling within the State. Their reason was all such dire predictions that students would not learn, that students would falter and eventually would have to go to the public schools and they would be 3 years behind and the public schools would have to deal with that problem. I rebutted their arguments with my personal example and I am pleased that in fact I was correct. Home schooling has proved to be a very positive alternative to traditional public and private schools, and I am very pleased that we are taking some time now to recognize that and to commend them. Studies have shown over the years that home schooled students excel academically. They are consistently higher on their ACT scores than students who go to standard schools. The number of students excelling in the National Spelling Bee, in the National Geography Bee are far out of proportion to the number of students who are home schooled. My colleagues may recall that in the last National Spelling Bee, the first, second, and third place students in that national bee were home schooled. And the second place student in the National Geographic Society's National Geography Bee scored second. That is very interesting, and I think it is a clear indication that home schooling does succeed. However, I can also verify that on the basis of a lot of personal contact and discussion with parents and with students who have been to the schools, in my experience with them, and many of them have visited me in my office, they are invariably polite, proper, well educated and I believe the home schoolers, and their parents particularly, in this Nation deserve commendation and gratitude for demonstrating that this is a good alternative method of education which does work. Therefore, I am pleased that the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Schaffer) has brought this before us, and I am pleased to join in commending the home schoolers of America, both the parents who do it and the children who receive it, and the fact that they work so well together to achieve their goals.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. So we have some initiatives before the Congress on this issue. I have sponsored three bills. There are similar bills in the Senate, and they are being worked on. There may or may not be enough time this year to get them through, but I hope we can continue to pursue that because it is badly needed. If I had my druthers, I would start at pre-school; but I am willing to start at least in first grade or kindergarten. An interesting result of doing it properly, and that relates to the chairman's emphasis on reading. If science is taught early and properly, it improves success with reading, because the learning of science and mathematics develops parts of the brain that otherwise lie fallow, and those parts of the brain are very important in developing the visual skills that are necessary to develop good reading skills. So it all goes together: Science, math, reading, that is what we need in the elementary schools. We have to develop programs that will do that. We have to develop teachers who will teach that well; and I hope with that we will be ready for the revolution in the next century, in fact the next decade, of where the jobs are actually going to be and we will produce Americans who will have those jobs and not have to import individuals from foreign nations to take those jobs.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Pennsylvania for yielding to me, and I saw the gentleman on C-SPAN and rushed straight down here because I think this is one of the more important, if not the most important, discussion we will have in Special Orders this week or, perhaps, this month. First of all, I want to commend the gentleman for what you have done. When we look at that list, it is the gentleman's initiative that developed it and carried it as far as it has come. And there are some outstanding things on there, and I will comment on a few of those later on. It is also with some regret that I looked at the list and realized that most of this should be passed into law; a good deal is, but not all of it. And the part that is not passed into law is primarily because of game playing or threatened game playing by the minorities to attach meaningless or killer amendments or other strange amendments to this in both the House and the Senate, and that has prevented further action on it. My experience, as the gentleman mentioned a moment ago, is in science; I received a doctorate in nuclear physics. I have taught for 22 years at the college and university level, but during that time I became heavily involved with elementary school science and to a certain extent the secondarily school science, including teaching some summer institutes sponsored by the National Science Foundation. I would just like to make a few comments on some of the issues. First of all, the nonscience areas, when the report ``A Nation At Risk'' first came out over a decade and a half ago, I was struck by one thing. A Nation At Risk they talked about everything that was going wrong and what should be done; and in my mind they left out the most important factor and that was the parents. Because in my experience and in working in schools at all levels, the most important single factor in the success of the student is an interested and involved parent. And if you do not have that, you have got a long ways to go to resolve it. And one thing I especially appreciate about the gentleman from Pennsylvania, about the list there, is the bill that we just passed in the House last week, which the gentleman has fought arduously for for some time, the Literacy Involves Family Together Act, or LIFT Act. I think that is extremely important, because it is not only trying to instill literacy in children, but it is saying if the parents are illiterate, the children are not likely to learn how to read; and, therefore, we have to teach the parents how to read and become literate if we want the children to become literate. I think that is a very important act. I hope it gets enacted and takes effect, because I think this is a real step towards improving literacy in this country. I have worked on literacy projects in my home district with adults, but the ideal is to have the children and the adults working together, and that is precisely what this act does, and I commend the gentleman for it. We have, as I said, many successes as the Republican Party, but let me comment on what is needed beyond an interested and involved parent, that is the most important. But the second and very, very close to it is a competent teacher. I think the teachers in this Nation have had unfair criticism. Everyone blames the teachers for the failings of the schools; and in my book, that is not the place to start. In my working with the schools, most of the teachers are very dedicated, very anxious to do a good job; but they are hampered by lack of money in some cases, lack of facilities in other cases, lack of support from administrators aboard and other cases, and above all, frequently a lack of training. As the gentleman mentioned earlier, frequently teachers are trained to teach well, but times have changed and they need more training. They need professional development. I am pleased that the Federal Government has been able to help in that score by providing some funds for professional development, but much more needs to be done; and I think the schools have to step up to bat on that one too and provide more funding for professional development, either through summers or through in-service. Secondly, in terms of training, we need better training in the colleges and universities. I think the biggest problem there in terms of my experience has been the fact that the academic departments which teach the academic subjects do not communicate well with the schools of education and vice versa. Not only that, much to my regret when I was at both Berkeley and at Calvin College, there was a considerable amount of disdain of the academicians of the school of education professors and vice versa; and with that atmosphere, it was impossible to develop good cooperation. I am pleased to see that being changed. For example, Arizona State University has done a tremendous job in the physics department to break down that barrier, and they have a superb program going. Just last week I met with a professor from the University of Washington, he has done the same with high school teachers and is training high school teachers working with educators on that. So the barriers are breaking down, but they have to break down much faster if we are going to meet the needs of our Nation. I hope that we can do all we can to help improve the initial training of teachers and also improve the professional development of teachers. In my experience, as I say, teachers are eager to do a good job. They are eager to be properly trained, and they are very frustrated if they do not get the support of their board, of their administration, and, in fact, of their Nation from the work that we do here. My final comments are about science and math education, which I have spent a lot of time in during my professional career and also here in the Congress. Most people do not realize that the economy of this Nation and, particularly the economic growth of this wonderful boom we are having now, is primarily due to advancement in science and technology; Alan Greenspan will be the first one to say that. The estimates are that at least a third of our economic development now comes from information technology developments, and very likely another third of the economic growth comes from other developments in science and technology. Yet we are not producing students out of our schools who can take advantage of that. That is where the jobs are, but we are not graduating students in enough science, math, technology, and engineering to take advantage of it. I visited Silicon Valley a few months ago. In that area alone, they have 100,000 job openings for scientific, engineering, technical people, unfilled jobs because they literally cannot find the people to take the jobs. We have every year before the Congress requests to grant H1-B visas, to grant visas to foreigners to come in and work as scientists, engineers, technologists, mathematicians, computer specialists; and we this current year are allowing 155,000 of them to come in as immigrants because we are not producing enough. The request for next year is 350,000; we may grant 200,000. Another indication of trouble in this Nation, if you go to graduate schools of science and engineering, over half of the graduate students are from other countries. Our students are not competing; they cannot compete with the students from other nations. They are not getting the grounding in math and science that they need. Another indication, the TIMMS Study and other studies comparing us to other developed countries, the United States is either at the bottom or near the bottom in every ranking of our high school graduates compared to those from other developed countries. We need to improve, and I think it is very, very important that we improve science and math education in our schools. Now this should not be at the expense of other subjects. I know that the chairman of the committee has spent a lot of time on improving reading in this Nation. That is absolutely essential. One has to be able to read. That is number one. But these days one has to be able to understand science and math as well. So it is reading, writing, arithmetic, the three R's, but do not forget that S on there, and that is science. The three Rs include science.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I just want to follow up with a postscript to that very fine statement. During the recent presidential campaign, I have become very annoyed reading in the papers time after time that George Bush has latched on to education; that it has never been a Republican issue, it is always a Democratic issue; he has latched on to it in trying to win. That is just utter nonsense. Look at the gentleman's record here in the Congress and what he has accomplished in his career here, and look at what the committee has done the last few years with the Republicans in charge of it. It has done so much better when we look at the funding and recognize that the Republicans have provided more funding from the Federal Government than the Democrats have during the time we have been in charge here. If we want to find out who is really for education and who has really done a better job and not just thrown money at it but required things such as accountability and quality, if we look at who has really contributed to the improvement of education in this country it is the Republicans. I hope the news media wakes up to that and stops saying George Bush is just doing this to win the election. That is the nonsense. Look at what he did in Texas. The Democrats ran that State for many years; and George Bush came along. In the short time that he has been there, he has raised the scores, especially of minority students, more than they have been raised in many years under Democratic control. So I just wanted to add that. I hate to be that partisan about it but that is the facts and we have to set the news media straight on it. We have to set the record straight, make sure people understand we are committed to education. We are committed to doing it right, but we are going to do it right. We are going to be accountable. We are going to have quality. We are going to have results. We are not just going to hand out money and say, here, do what you like.

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

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time. We have heard a great deal of discussion about the specifics of this bill. I simply wish to add some general comments about it. First of all, I want to congratulate the chairman of the Committee on Science for successfully, for the first time in almost a decade, getting a conference report on NASA authorization with the Senate's cooperation. I believe this is a good omen for the future, and I certainly congratulate the chairman for his hard work and his success. Over the past half century, America has led the world in science. Also during that half century, space science has captured the imagination of the American public to a greater extent than any other scientific work that we have performed. Taking a trip to the Moon was a momentous event, not only for our Nation, but for our entire planet; and we continue to bask in that accomplishment today. However, now we are down to the hard work of not only exploring space, but learning more about our universe through experimentation in space. This is grinding hard work, perhaps not as glorious as going to the Moon, but extremely important; and I am very pleased that this bill will increase our ability to perform space science as the United States, with the cooperation of other nations, during the next half century. It will be a long time before we engage in interplanetary travel, so we will not have that spectacular show for some time; but we will get a lot accomplished in space thanks to this bill, and it will provide a great deal of knowledge that will be very useful to our Nation and to the people of our planet in the future as we continue to expand the boundaries of our knowledge and find uses for the results that we find.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, last evening we had a chance, once again, to demonstrate that one of the top issues, if not the top issue, of the Republicans is education. We were in this Chamber debating an excellent bill proposed by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Goodling) of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. He served for many years as a teacher, then principal, then superintendent; and he has put his knowledge to good use in his work here as chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. This bill will improve reading training of children, but above all, through a stroke of genius, he has also included provisions that parents will receive training in reading if they are illiterate. Mr. Speaker, in my years of education, I discovered that the single greatest factor in the success of the student is an interested and involved parent. But if the parent cannot read, how do we expect the child to learn how to read? The bill of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) will ensure that both will happen, and it also builds into it accountability to make certain that the government's money is not wasted. This bill does much more than just that, but I wanted to highlight this issue. I encourage all of my colleagues to vote yes on this excellent piece of education legislation.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, in the Congress all of us depend on each other in dealing with a multitude of issues that are before us. But without doubt, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Goodling) has been Mr. Education to this Congress for many years. All of us have upon one occasion or another gone to him for advice on how to deal with issues regarding education. And I appreciate his efforts here. In regard to the bill, there are several points I wanted to mention that I think are outstanding. First of all, accountability. We have passed many, many different pieces of legislation dealing with education. Most of them have had very little accountability, most of them have not accomplished anything near what their potential was, and building accountability into this bill I think is essential. The gentleman's step toward helping parents and children learn together is a stroke of genius, something we need very badly. But, again, it has to be accountable to make sure that it happens; but it can be a wonderful experience for both parents and child. The emphasis on research standards is important. Much of the research done in education today is superb; much of it, unfortunately, is not very good. Particularly in the difficulties of reading, the study of dyslexia, there is a great deal of work that needs to be done. Many people, including one of my dear grandsons, suffer from that disease, and it is incredibly difficult. The final point I would make is that science also can be important in teaching reading, and I have introduced a bill that the committee will shortly consider on that.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to speak about Herb Bateman, although, there is little I can add to all that has been said already. I am a junior Member of this body and have not worked with him for long. But I have been with him on the Committee on Transportation and the Infrastructure and always appreciated his forthrightness, his capability, and the attitude with which he attacked the work, particularly that work dealing with the military. But, in addition to that, I do have to say that Herb was the consummate Virginia gentleman. I always found him to be extremely gentlemanly, very helpful, very thoughtful, very thorough. My best knowledge of him comes from the trips we have taken to Europe as part of the NATO parliamentary assembly that has been ably led by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter). Herb was a regular on those trips, along with his wife Laura; and he always had a major contribution to make. He was much more diplomatic than I am, because I tend to ask very direct questions and hope for direct answers; but Herb was at his best in dealing with individuals from foreign countries. He would ask those same questions and, hidden underneath the way he asked it, it was still a very direct question; but asked in a very diplomatic and very statesman-like way. In his behavior, in his actions, and particularly in his interaction and questioning with leaders from foreign countries. I will never forget the lessons that I have learned from him. I deeply appreciated Herb in all aspects of his life that I dealt with him. It is with great sorrow that I learned about his demise this past week. I certainly wish his family, and especially Laura, God's blessings and comfort at this sad time; and I can only say that Herb was a wonderful man and you can be proud of him as a husband, father, and grandfather.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 463 I stepped out of the Chamber for a discussion and did not return in time to record my vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Madam Speaker, when I was a young lad, I grew up successively in two different farming villages. One had 800 occupants. Another had 200. And I became acquainted with the work of the farmers. They work very, very hard. They struggle to build their farms. They reinvest in their farms. And when they die, they want to leave it to their children. But unfortunately, because of something called the death tax, established in order to finance World War I, they frequently are not able to leave that farm to their children. The death tax can be as high as 55 or 60 percent. They simply cannot afford to pay the tax in order to keep the farm. They do not have the cash. Their money is tied up in the land. We passed a bill in the House and the Senate to get rid of the death tax. The President vetoed that plan. He and the Democrats in this Chamber argue that this is a tax cut for the rich. They should go talk to some farmers. They will find out they are not rich. Their money is tied up in the land. It is not in their wallets. I urge that we override the President's veto and make things right for these people. The rich escape the estate tax. They have attorneys who show them all the ways to get rid of it. The farmers cannot afford to hire those attorneys. I urge an override of the veto.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Madam Speaker, I did not have the pleasure of working with Mr. Broomfield, but I do want to offer some testimonials based on the information I have as a fellow Michiganian. I think it is entirely appropriate that we name the post office in Royal Oak in honor of this gentleman. For years he carried the mail for the Republicans in the Congress and also for the Republicans in the White House. And even while he was carrying the mail for the President, very often he also had the courage, when he thought the mail was inappropriate or not addressed properly, to stand up to the Presidents and say, wait a minute, I think you are going down the wrong track; I think you have to rethink this and do it differently. Frequently, they were willing to listen. He is a man of honor, a man of good service, and a man of good political sense. My first acquaintance with him was when I first moved to Michigan in 1967. He had then been in office 11 years; he had taken office when I was just entering graduate school. But soon after I came to Michigan, I began reading about him in the papers; and I thought that this is a man who knows what he is doing and knows how to do it right, and my judgment was correct. I am sorry that I was not able to serve with him. I arrived in the Congress only 11 months after he left, but his legend has persisted; and I have appreciated him, particularly his excellence in foreign affairs, something in which I personally believe the Congress, both the House and the Senate, should play a much more active role, similar to what they did a number of years ago during and following World War II. He was a careful keeper of Congress' prerogatives in foreign policy, and he served well and honorably in so many ways, not only in the Committee on Foreign Relations, but in other ways and particularly in service to his constituents. I had no idea when I moved to Michigan in 1967 that I would some day be serving in this House. In fact, I had no intention of doing so, but I am pleased to be here to try to carry on the work and fulfill the legend that Mr. Broomfield established for Michigan, for his district and for this country. He is an honorable person who did an outstanding job for his country, and we are here today to show our appreciation for what he has done for us.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 402, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I will be brief. I do not expect to use the entire amount of time. But I simply want to, first of all, associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), who gave a very moving and stirring speech a few moments ago and pointed out that what we are talking about is providing an appropriate amount of relief for a cost of only a little over a dollar per citizen in the United States, something which I believe almost all of us can afford quite readily. In fact, I would be willing to pay quite a bit more than that in order to cover the payment for those who cannot do so. I would just also comment, I am aware that this issue is likely to be ruled out of order and, therefore, not to be voted on today. I would also add that I am a cosponsor of the authorizing bill which will deal with this issue. I believe it is very important that we address it. There are many issues to be raised regarding this as to how to handle it appropriately, how to ensure that the relief that is given will be used in a meaningful way to aid the people for whom it is intended and a whole host of other issues. But the key point is simply that we are dealing with nations that are struggling for breath, that are dealing with huge amounts not just of poverty but of illness, that are almost immobilized by AIDS and other diseases; and it is incumbent upon us, as the wealthiest Nation in the world, to share some of our abundance with them. I would also note, Mr. Chairman, that of the developed nations which are sharing their abundance with the poorer nations, the United States still, to the best of my knowledge, contributes the least per capita of any of the developed nations. This is not a record of which I am proud, and I hope we can improve that. The key, however, is to make certain that the aid we provide does in fact alleviate the situation, does help those in need, and does improve the situation in those nations which need help.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, America is a wonderful country. I am very proud of the U.S.A. We are the best country in so many different ways. And I believe we should be the best in everything. We have the resources, the knowledge, and the energy to achieve it. Today I want to mention one thing in which we are not the best. In fact, we are letting our kids down. The majority of jobs available today in our economy are jobs in science, math, engineering, technology, and, of course, computers. Yet, our science and math education in this country is among the worst of the developed countries, as demonstrated by test after test. Ninety-three percent of Americans are aware of this and say that they want better math and science education. I happen to be a nuclear physicist. I have also worked in elementary school science education. Because of this, and because of my concern about education in this country, I have sponsored three bills which will improve math and science education in this country. I urge my colleagues to join me by cosponsoring these bipartisan bills; I guarantee they will help to improve math and science education in this country, and should make us the international leader in this category, just as we are in so many others. I urge Members' support of these bills. Join with me and Governor George Bush in advocating improvement of math and science education in this country.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his reassurances. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the amendment, and I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest).

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, last year we passed the Water Resources Development Act of 1999, which included a provision directing the Corps of Engineers to inventory and report to Congress on the existing information base for the Great Lakes biohydrological system. The intent of this provision is that the Corps compile the information existing within the Federal Government, including other agencies, which is relevant to sustainable water use management. This information will be needed to make decisions about the appropriate sustainable use of Great Lakes waters. Building a comprehensive database, and identifying gaps in our knowledge, is especially critical at this time when the binational community in the Great Lakes Basin is taking a close look at water diversions and other consumptive use. And on that latter point, I also have legislation pending which would deal with the issue of diversions of water from the Great Lakes, not just within the 48 States, but also international diversions. I think everyone is aware that we had a situation last year where a ship was initially granted permission to load on water for transport to a faraway country to be used as fresh water supply there. In an effort to prevent those diversions, we need studies and the legislation I am preparing. This particular amendment would allocate $100,000, with an appropriate offset, to allow the Corps to begin what is authorized in the legislation we passed last year, that is, to provide an information base for the Great Lakes biohydrological system. This has been brought to the fore by an announcement just made yesterday that the Great Lakes governors have allocated from the Great Lakes Protection Fund $745,000 for the Great Lakes Commission to study and improve the amount and quality of information available to decision-makers and the general public regarding water resources of the Great Lakes. That program fits in directly with what we have asked the Corps to do. Now I do regret and apologize to the gentleman from California (Chairman Packard) for rushing to the floor at the last moment with this amendment, but it is because we have just received the information that the Great Lakes governors have released this funding. I would like to pursue the amendment; but out of consideration for the gentleman, I am quite willing to withdraw it if he can give me assurances that he will seek to address this funding matter in conference.

Mr. EHLERS. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, in response to that, let me just say I think the problem is not the unwillingness of the committee to increase funding. I suspect if the allocation were increased, they would do so. As the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) has pointed out eloquently, the allocation for this particular subcommittee is simply too low. I recognize that the subcommittee has struggled with this issue, that they have done the best they can within their allocation, and I respect that. At the same time, I encourage this body to vote for this amendment to indicate that our priority is to make certain that these patents are processed in due time, and that they are handled rapidly enough to help the economy continue to grow. I do this with the recognition that this will hurt other segments of the budget that also need funding; but I am confident that, as the process goes on, the Senate and the House will recognize the importance of both of these areas and that the funding will be increased to accommodate the needs in both areas. Mr. Chairman, we are not robbing Peter to pay Paul, as the gentleman from Maryland said earlier. We are in a sense robbing Peter to pay Paul in that we are taking the money out of the fees paid to the PTO and saving them for later use simply because using them now would cause the subcommittee allocation to be exceeded. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the Coble amendment so that we can in fact continue the rapid processing of the patents in the Patent Office.