Vernon Ehlers

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the Congress about a matter of great importance, and that is our future economic well-being. We are blessed with an excellent economy today, and when we ask why that is and look at the statistics we find out that approximately one- third of all the economic growth today in our Nation arises from information technology; computers, Internet and so forth. And if we look at how much is caused by scientific developments in technology and engineering, overall it is greater than one-half of our economic expansion. Clearly, the economic health of our Nation depends very strongly upon good scientists, good engineers, good mathematicians and good research. The reason I rise to speak here today, my colleagues, is that there is a danger that we are not recognizing the importance of these issues. We have not funded scientific research as well as we should have the past half decade. We do very well with health issues in the National Institutes of Health, but we have not done as well with some of our other enterprises, such as NASA, the Department of Energy, National Science Foundation and other very important endeavors. But perhaps the greatest problem lies in the deficiencies of our educational system in producing scientists and engineers and educating our citizens. Particularly in our elementary and secondary schools, we are falling short not only of what we should achieve, but even more importantly we are falling short compared to the other nations of the world. In international comparisons, such as the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, we came in near the bottom of the developed nations in our high school science programs. We came in at the bottom in our high school physics programs. And overall we had a dismal record. Now, how do we address this? There are various things we must do. First of all, we have to find good teachers; we have to train good teachers; we have to recruit good teachers; and, above all, we have to keep good teachers. When we talk about training teachers, it is not just a matter of training the new ones. We have to have good professional development programs to help teachers in the classrooms now because the science that should be taught today is not the science that they learned when they were in colleges and universities. The field changes too dramatically, too rapidly. We also need better curricula, curricula that recognize the nature and substance of science today and also that recognize the needs of the teachers in the classrooms so that they can effectively teach science. I am not here to cast aspersions upon any group or any individuals, I think we are all trying very hard. But the simple point is we are not succeeding, and so we have to do better. If we look at our graduate schools today, across our Nation in science and engineering we have more graduate students from other nations than we do from our own Nation. This tells us that our students competing on a level playing field in our own universities cannot make the grade and other nations' students are filling in. We have to change that. And I believe we have to change our math and science educational system from preschool through grad school to ensure three things. First of all, that we have an adequate number of good scientists, engineers, and mathematicians. Secondly, that our graduates of our schools are ready for the workplace of tomorrow. Because the workplace of tomorrow is going to require considerable knowledge of mathematics, science, and technology. Finally, we have to improve our educational system so that we will have better consumers and better voters in this Nation. We need better consumers because today increasingly in the marketplace technical information is needed and is often provided but many in the public are not able to interpret it, whether it relates to health foods, whether it relates to medicine or other areas of life. So I think, for those three reasons, producing better scientists and engineers, making our students ready for the workplace of tomorrow, and educating good consumers and good voters for the future, we must improve our math and science educational system. I am dedicating myself to helping the Congress and the Nation to improve our math and science educational programs.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the numerous contributions made by Mr. Paul Dreher during his 39 years of dedicated service to the Civic Theatre in Grand Rapids, Michigan and to the arts community of West Michigan. Paul is retiring from his position as Managing Director of the Grand Rapids Civic Theatre and will be recognized by his friends and peers on June 27 on what has been proclaimed by our mayor as ``Paul Dreher Day'' in Grand Rapids. A native of South Carolina. Paul began his professional career by serving as a radio announcer in New York. From there he moved on to Manistee, Michigan where he began his professional acting career and also served as a lighting designer for the Manistee Summer Theater. From there it was on to Grand Rapids to serve as a guest director at the Civic Theatre in 1959. A year later he was offered the full-time directorship of the theatre with a staff of three and a budget of under $8,000. Now nearly 40 years later, Paul has over 225 Civic Theatre directing credits on his resume. in addition, the theatre is the second largest community theatre in the United States and the operational budget has increased significantly to well over a million dollars, thanks to the vision and leadership of Paul Dreher. When you mention the Civic Theatre and the theatre arts in Grand Rapids, the name ``Paul Dreher'' automatically comes up. During his tenure, Paul has worn many hats. While directing over 90 percent of the plays on the Civic stage over the past 39 years and handling the business affairs of the theatre, Paul has also put in time as a last- minute substitute actor by filling in for others who became ill and were unable to perform. Paul is responsible for bringing a diverse selection of theatre offerings to our community. There have been Shakespeare plans such as Othello and Henry IV; the classics have included Our Town and Death of a Salesman; musicals have included Annie and South Pacific, and dramas have brought to the stage Miracle Worker and A Streetcar Named Desire. He has also provided the youth of our community with an outlet through the Young People's Theatre program. As managing Director, Paul also made sure productions were accessible to everyone by adding hearing- impaired sections and wheelchair-accessible viewing areas. With Paul in charge no stone was left unturned. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me today in honoring Paul for his dedication to the Civic Theatre and the arts in Grand Rapids. I also want to thank him personally for dedicating so much of his life to providing quality entertainment to audiences both young and old over the past four decades. He has touched the lives of many, and his talent, wisdom, and leadership will be missed. Thank you, Paul, for making a difference!

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in favor of this resolution, just as I supported charitable choice when it was a matter of discussion some years ago. Mr. Speaker, when my wife and I moved to Grand Rapids, Michigan, in 1966, we decided that we wanted to join a church that would make a difference, a church that would make a difference in the community. In particular, we joined the Eastern Avenue Christian Reform Church, a member of a small but strong and wonderful denomination. We have made a difference through that church, and that church has been a strong voice in the community. It is the type of faith-based effort that this country needs. Through this small church, small but very active, we managed to start a food program which has fed many, many people through a cooperative effort. We were instrumental in starting a community center which has sprung off and become a multimillion dollar operation providing tremendous service to the community. We were also instrumental in helping start a housing program which is now developed into an independent organization which has rehabilitated close to 100 houses at this point for low-income individuals, and they now are enjoying home ownership. This, incidentally, happened before Habitat For Humanity was founded. Let me describe just a little bit the food program that we have established which operates in the church basement every Saturday morning. Members of the church and other volunteers go to suppliers throughout the community. We acquire, through donation, produce, bread, many other vital essentials; and we bring them to our church basement. We run a small supermarket there every Saturday morning. Individuals coming through can buy supplies that they need for their daily existence for roughly 10 cents on the dollar. A poverty stricken family can come in and for $10 buy a couple of weeks worth of groceries and other essentials. It has worked very well. It has served young and old, able and disabled, Hispanic and Vietnamese, black and white. It has served everyone. It has been a real boon to the community. Many of the volunteers have come from the community themselves, and many of them have worked for many, many years on this effort. These are examples of activities carried on by faith-based organizations, and they have proven to be far more effective per dollar expended than any government program I have ever seen. I think it is simple common sense that the Federal Government encourage these faith-based organizations and, in fact, make use of them in trying to solve the problems of our Nation, particularly those dealing with poverty. Two cautions I want to offer. First of all, we have to make sure that the churches do not proselytize, in other words, do not violate the separation of church and State in that sense, even though they are working in the name of God to serve the people around them. Secondly, the government should take care not to try to govern the faith-based organizations. I strongly support this resolution, and I hope many churches across this country will follow this example.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 212, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' Amendment No. 31 Offered by Mr. Hyde

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) for yielding me this time. I commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) for his activities in this area and for the work he has done on Sierra Leone. I sponsored a similar resolution last year, although not as detailed as this one, because issues had not developed to this point. The gentleman from California has been extremely helpful and very interested in the Sierra Leone issue and has done all that can be done in the Congress to address this issue. I also wish to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) for sponsoring this resolution and bringing it to our attention. I appreciate his interest and his support in this effort. It is very troubling when one examines the situation in Sierra Leone. It is particularly troubling when one compares our Nation's response to this situation to the response we mounted in in Kosovo and Yugoslavia. It is dangerous to make comparisons, of course, because they are far different parts of the world. But I do find it troubling that, even though Sierra Leone had more deaths and more people displaced than Kosovo at the time the bombing began in Kosovo and Yugoslavia, we did not chose to take action in Sierra Leone. Furthermore, this is a clear case, I believe, showing aggression or at least involvement from other nations outside of Sierra Leone, particularly Liberia. There is clear evidence of that, but there is also substantial evidence that Libya has been involved in stirring the pot and creating great difficulties there. My interest in this goes back almost 20 years. I was involved in a task force on world hunger appointed by my denomination, the Christian Reformed Church of North America. I am results-oriented, and I insisted that we develop recommendations that would be meaningful and that our small denomination could handle with its 350,000 members. We came up with the suggestion for our denomination to adopt Sierra Leone and help them in every way possible. Our church has been active there for some time but has been forced by events of the last year to withdraw. We had substantial success in Sierra Leone in helping with development, particularly in the bush region, and helping them drill wells, provide water, start farming, and develop economically as well as agriculturally. In addition, we have tried to help in other areas, in cooperation with the government. It is a great disappointment to see the situation deteriorate in Sierra Leone. In fact, one of the national workers in our church's effort there was killed recently while innocently walking down the street. When the RUF gunman was asked why he shot this person, his response was, ``Well, I have not shot anyone for a week; I thought it was about time.'' This is the type of terror that is taking place there. But in some ways, it is even worse than in Kosovo, because not only are people being shot and killed, but they are also being tortured. The gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) mentioned the amputations. It is very common there to chop off hands or feet, and sometimes both, and then turn people loose. Many of them, of course, die from loss of blood before they can get medical help. But regardless of whether they die or survive, it is a terrible act. Those survivors not only suffer, but are hampered from earning a living for the rest of their life. What has troubled me most is that the United States Government has not responded as forcefully as I believe it could. I say to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) I particularly appreciate that part of his resolution that calls on us to offer whatever assistance we can. It would take a minimal amount of assistance to deal with this situation and help the forces of ECOMOG, which are from the other neighboring nations, overthrow the rebels and provide peace and stability to that country; and, yet, we have provided very little assistance. I hope that this resolution will be one means of addressing that situation and stabilizing the nation. Once again, I want to emphasize to the Congress the importance of this issue and how destabilizing it is, not only in Sierra Leone, not only in this region; but in fact, in all of West Africa. If our Nation does not indicate a willingness to aid peace and stability in that region, we will likely to have very serious problems to contend with there in the future.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, it is essential to recognize that the aviation industry is extremely important to the future of this Nation, and is growing very rapidly. Our duty as legislators is to be aware of this, and also to move rapidly to deal with the problems of aviation. I urge that the House pass this bill, and that we resolve the issues quickly. Just to give an example of the problems, my local airport, Kent County International Airport in Grand Rapids, Michigan, needs to replace one runway, to totally renovate it. They are anxious to get started on that project soon, before the runway deteriorates so much that it can not be safely used. Airport authorities have worked out a letter of intent with the FAA, but the FAA is not signing any new letters of intent until this legislation is passed, because they do not have the legal authority to do so. If we do not pass this bill soon and get the President's signature on it we in the north will lose another construction season, thereby endangering passengers. This is just one example of the situations local airports face, and shows that we have to make our decisions very quickly here. I also urge that we adopt this bill because I believe it is going to provide a fair method of allocating resources that we raise through special aviation taxes, so that we can ensure that these taxes are used appropriately for the purposes for which they were raised.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I suspect I am one of the few individuals in this House who has worked at a nuclear weapons laboratory. I did this for one summer while I was a graduate student at Berkeley at the University of California. And I found it to be a very good experience to work at a nuclear weapons laboratory, even though my work was primarily on unclassified science. What impressed me is that the individuals that worked at that laboratory were extremely security conscious and they were very concerned about any leaks of information about nuclear weapons. We seem to have lost that. We have lost that culture ever since the Berlin Wall fell. But what is dismaying to me is the reaction of the White House to the discovery that the Chinese have managed to obtain information about our nuclear weapons. The spin doctors have gone to work full-time. The President's men seem to be more concerned with blaming the Bush and Reagan administration than with taking responsibility and trying to correct the problem as they should be doing. It is the mark of strong individuals to take responsibility for the mistakes that they have made and to correct them, and I expect no less of the President and his aides. We do have leaks, we have to cure them, and it is absolutely essential that those individuals who are responsible take responsibility, correct the problem, and solve it.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for yielding me this time. I would like to discuss two aspects of the science that is covered under this bill. The first my colleagues have already heard discussed by other speakers and that involves the National Weather Service and its importance. I certainly share that view, particularly since I live in a part of the country that frequently has tornadoes and have personally been in the basement a few times as tornadoes have passed overhead. A little sideline on that, I depend heavily on the Weather Channel for my weather information, particularly when I travel, and I was struck recently by someone who commented that he did not really see the need for the National Weather Service because he got all of his weather from the TV. I enlightened him about the fact that although I love the Weather Channel and other TV that reports the weather, all that information comes from the National Weather Service, and the other services that are provided by the Weather Channel and so forth are simply massaging, computing and varying the data received from the National Weather Service. Indeed, the Weather Service performs a valuable service for our country in many, many ways. The main point I would like to make this afternoon is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is doing a great deal of good science, often in somewhat obscure areas. All of us know how important it was 150 years ago to explore this Nation so that we could learn the details of its geography and, above all, the amount of its national resources. As we have explored our entire earth surface in terms of lands and found all the natural resources or nearly all the natural resources of the various landed areas of our planet, we realize that in another century we are going to have to get many of our natural resources from the oceans. I wanted to point out and bring to light an important service performed by NOAA last year, and this was published in Science Magazine on September 26 of last year by Dr. Smith of NOAA, Dr. Walter H.F. Smith, and Dr. David Sandwell of the Scripps Institute. Before their work was done, we only had rough ideas of the topography underneath the oceans, and that was obtained by echo sounding data from ships. But there are many areas that were unexplored, areas as large as the State of Oklahoma which had never been explored. The two scientists I mentioned developed a method by watching the motion of the satellites and measuring their positions very carefully and calculating the gravitational attraction of the various parts of the Earth upon the satellites and calculating backwards, finding the topographic structure underneath the oceans. It is not extremely accurate, but when we have areas the size of Oklahoma with no data, then any data is worthwhile, and they have done a remarkable job. They found an entire mountain range underneath the ocean which was not known about before. Now, why is this important? First of all, as my colleagues can see, there are many rifts in the ocean bed. Most of those areas provide a lot of warm water which, in turn, provides for a great deal of activity by various organisms which forms the bottom of the food chain for the fishing industry. By plotting this more carefully, we have been able to aid the fishing industry throughout the world. But even more importantly, those rifts produce tremendous amounts of natural resources of metals which we are running out of on our landed areas and, in the future, we are likely to be mining ocean module and picking up these nodules of material which are quite abundant on the ocean floor. It will be very difficult to operate in that situation, but certainly this is something that has been pursued to a certain extent already, and once the prices of minerals rise this will provide a major source of resources for the next century and beyond. I personally thank these scientists and others who have worked on this issue and the many other issues they deal with, and I think it is very important for the Congress and for the people of this Nation to realize that this important work is being done and is being done so well by the scientific community of our Nation.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. I am very pleased to rise to speak in favor of the bill as presented to the House. The Committee on Science has done a very careful job of analyzing the needs of the NASA program and has come up with a workable allocation of funds. There are two areas in particular I want to mention. One relates to the work that I put into the science policy study (Unlocking Our Future: Toward a New Science Policy; published by GPO) last year under the auspices of the Science Committee and which has been adopted by the committee and by the House of Representatives. In that study, we emphasized the importance of basic research to the future of this Nation. And I am pleased to say that NASA continues, under this bill, to maintain a strong basic research program. There has been some criticism that the Space Station has decimated the basic research program at NASA. That is not true. They are continuing with their basic research efforts and they continue to make important discoveries both in space and on this planet. One of the important parts of this issue, of course, is to make sure that the results of basic research are available to the public, to companies who may make use of it and, that this may benefit the general public in many ways. The second point I want to make is that I believe NASA has done an excellent job of adding to the education of our students in this Nation regarding math and science. That is an area of great need. We must improve our math and science programs in elementary and secondary schools. It has to be done in a coordinated, thoughtful, careful way as we work toward that goal. But in the meantime NASA, through its supplementary programs, has aided greatly in the education of students of this Nation. In particular, they have developed experiments that students can do at home or in their schoolroom by accessing NASA data on the Internet and using the results of NASA's satellite research, or data from their Mars Rover, to use in their experiments. This has provided a meaningful, lifetime experience for kids in the elementary and secondary schools. They learn from the Internet what has happened, and they can then use this directly to come to the same scientific conclusion that the NASA scientists operating the experiment have reached. I rise today in support of H.R. 1654, the NASA Authorization Act. I believe it is a good bill that will continue to support NASA in its science and exploration endeavors while maintaining balance and cost- effectiveness within its priorities. This morning, I would specifically like to address the opportunity provided through this bill to continue NASA's strong and vital emphasis on education initiatives. As we have discussed earlier this year, our Nation is at a critical juncture in its efforts to provide our children with the quality education that they will require to succeed in the technology-driven economy and culture of tomorrow. To do this, we must find innovative ways to excite and encourage young students about the possibilities open to them through an understanding of mathematics and the sciences. I am not talking strictly about career opportunities, but as consumers, parents and citizens. NASA has clearly demonstrated their dedication to this responsibility through the multitude of individual programs which they offer to students from grade school to grad school and, importantly, to their teachers. In FY 1998 alone, NASA reached over two million students and over a hundred thousand teachers. Of those, all but a fraction of these students and teachers were at the K-12 level. It is at this level that it is so critical to engage our young people, and it is also at this point that our education system is in need of the most assistance. NASA is offering their help, and they are doing so through the use of inquiry-based methods and real-life applications. I would also like to highlight that, in developing their educational programs, NASA has shown insight into the complexity of their subject material and the need to balance it with state and regional agendas. To best serve its ``customers'', NASA collaborators with external organizations such as the National Science Foundation and the Department of Education, discipline-specific professional associations, and State education coalitions to develop materials for local use ``when and where appropriate''. As another indication of their commitment to providing relevant and useful information, NASA solicits evaluations of their programs from its users, the teachers in the classroom. In closing, it is my hope that other Federal agencies would follow the example set by NASA in its education goals. As Dan Goldin, the NASA administrator, testified at a recent Science Committee hearing on this issue, ``It is our education system that will prepare our future workforce to design and use [the tools for our future]''. By supporting this bill, you will enable the continued development and support of these crucial programs.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I have been in the Congress just a bit over 5 years now, and what has impressed me is the breadth of issues we deal with and the number of troubles that we constantly are called to address, whether in this Nation or abroad. Some of them are heartbreaking. Right now of course we have the situation in Kosovo, with over half a million and perhaps as many as a million refugees within Kosovo and outside its borders. It is heartbreaking to watch these people, to meet them, to talk to them. We have had similar situations in Bosnia, where approximately 300,000 were killed in ethnic cleansing; in Haiti with the difficulties there; currently in the Sudan, with approximately 2 million people dead from either warfare or starvation and the situation getting worse. Even in our Nation we have problems, whether it is the shooting in Littleton or a tornado in Oklahoma. Sometimes it is easy to get discouraged. But one thing that heartens me is this Nation and its faith in this country and its faith in God. We see evidences of that over and over again as we unite together to face adversity. We do not engage in ethnic cleansing in this country. We try to learn about each other, to accommodate to each other, to help each other. We do not argue about our religions; we discuss them. We try to express our faith in the manner we best know how. I believe that we set an example for many others, and I do thank every day the founders of this Nation and the God who guided them in the founding and forming of this Nation.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, as the Members well know, I am a scientist. In fact, I am the first physicist ever elected to the Congress. That is not a particular badge of merit, but it does give me a different perspective. I just want to elaborate a bit on some of the issues surrounding basic research, or fundamental research as it is sometimes called. I am frequently asked by my colleagues, and by the citizens of this land, why should we spend money for all this esoteric research? What good can it possibly do? What can come of it? I want to just give my colleagues one little example that I think is interesting and important. When I was a graduate student at the University of California (Berkeley) in the 1950s, some of my fellow graduate students and some professors down the hall from my laboratory were working on nuclear magnetic resonance. This was a method that they expected would allow them to measure the magnetic moments of nuclei very accurately. The immediate question that a layman might ask, ``Who cares?'' The nucleus is so tiny, we cannot see it. In fact if one magnified it 10,000 times, one could barely see it with the world's best microscope. Why do we want to know what the magnetic moment of the nucleus is? The answer at that time was simply, ``It is there, and we would like to measure it and see what we can find out.'' My colleagues succeeded. Just a bit earlier, Felix Bloch at Stanford and Ed Purcell at Harvard also succeeded, and they won Nobel Prizes for their discovery of nuclear magnetic resonance. It was used to measure the magnetic moments of a number of nuclei, and we learned a great deal more about the nucleus and its structure as a result of that. But that was not the end, as I will get to in just a few moments. Also while I was at Berkeley, they had the world's largest particle accelerator there, the Bevatron, which succeeded in accelerating protons to very, very high speeds, very close to the speed of light, thus giving them a great deal of energy. Then they would use these protons to smash into other particles, other protons or other nuclear particles. This generated many subnuclear particles, and detectors were built to observe all the different particles generated, and to measure their charge, mass and velocity. The bubble chamber was invented, and was very useful for this purpose. Its inventer also won a Nobel Prize. Then the spark chamber was developed, and was also useful for observing nuclear reactions. But then a new problem developed. There was so much data flowing in, it was hard to collect it all and analyze it. So the physicists developed very sophisticated, computerized methods of collecting and analyzing the data. They were successful, and we learned a lot about nuclear and subnuclear physics. But so what? Well, I will tell my colleagues what is ``so what.'' We have scientists who took those two very esoteric results of basic science, which had no conceivable everyday use and combined them. By using nuclear magnetic resonance and very rapid computerized data gathering and analysis techniques, we developed the MRI, magnetic resonance imaging, which is the greatest breakthrough in diagnostic medicine in a century, likely the greatest step forward in diagnostic medicine since the discovery of X rays, which incidentally also were discovered by a physicist doing basic research. So the next time someone asks about the importance of basic research, why should we do it, and why should we spend all this money on it, just ask them if they know someone who has had an x-ray or someone who has had an MRI, and ask them if they think this would have occurred if we had not invested money in basic research. Basic research drives the engine of medicine, it drives the engine of our economy, and it is high time we recognize that investing in basic science is a good investment for the future, with a very good rate of return. Indeed is a very long-term investment, but, nevertheless, has a very good rate of return. And it is something that is very beneficial to our Nation, to our people, and to the peoples throughout the entire world.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize National Hospital Week during the week of May 9-15. This year's theme, ``People Care. Miracles Happen,'' recognizes the health care workers, volunteers and other health professionals who are there 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, curing and caring for their neighbors who need them. An example of this dedication is the Universal Infant Hearing Screening program of Spectrum Health's Downtown Campus in my hometown of Grand Rapids, Michigan. The program won the American Hospital Association's prestigious Hospital Award for Volunteer Excellence, which highlights special contributions of hospital volunteers. The Universal Infant Hearing Screen program identifies potential hearing loss in all babies at or transferred to Spectrum Health's Downtown Campus. Early identification and intervention can prevent a hearing problem from being a handicap. Volunteers undergo extensive training to prepare for this program. After volunteers administer the screening, audiologists review the test results to identify infants with potential problems. Those with abnormal results are referred for re-screening or diagnostic testing. Without the work of volunteers, it would be impossible to provide this vital service to the thousands of babies at Spectrum Health every year. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the staff at Spectrum Health for their dedication and their award-winning program.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) for yielding time for purposes of this colloquy; and I commend him for all the hard work he has done to address the Y2K litigation issue in this bill. As the gentleman knows, I have expressed a deep concern to him and others about the bill's failure to distinguish between Y2K defects that originated before the issue was widely recognized as a problem and the Y2K defects that originated after the issue was commonly known. I believe this is a critical distinction to make if we are going to responsibly modify the laws governing liability in Y2K-related matters. Further, I am concerned about the absence in the bill of affirmative incentives for manufacturers to fix defective consumer products in an expeditious manner should they fail because of a Y2K problem. It is especially important to explicitly address the liability and damages issues raised by the extensive use of embedded chips or microprocessors. These are widely used in consumer products, and Y2K defects in these chips can greatly inconvenience and perhaps damage the businesses and property of the owners of common consumer products. It was my desire to address what I see as a deficiency in the bill with an amendment to exempt from the bill those products manufactured after the beginning of 1995. While I was prohibited by the Committee on Rules from offering my amendment on the floor today, I am pleased that the gentleman from Virginia and I have made some progress in arriving at a mutually agreeable solution to these issues. I am encouraged by the gentleman's pledge, as well as the assurances from other bill sponsors, to attempt to specifically address these matters as work on the bill continues in conference.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor 13 young women from my home city of Grand Rapids, Michigan for achieving the highest honor in United States Girl Scouting, the Girl Scout Gold Award. The Girl Scout Gold Award symbolizes outstanding accomplishments in the areas of leadership, community service, career planning, and personal development. Obtaining the Girl Scout Gold Award is no easy task and involves a total commitment. Over the last two years, these young women have dedicated themselves to obtaining this goal. In order to receive this award, recipients must earn four interest project patches: the Career Exploration Pin, the Senior Girl Scout Leadership Award, and the Senior Girl Scout Challenge, as well as designing and implementing a Girl Scout Gold Award project in cooperation with an adult Girl Scout volunteer. This is all in addition to their school work and extracurricular activities. Recipients must and should be very proud to join this elite group of Girl Scouts. The young women who will receive the Girl Scout's highest honor are: Carissa Becker, Jessica Gorman, Melissa Grossman, Shannon Kobs, Laura LaPorte, Liz Nieboer, Jennifer O'Conner, Laura Olney, Tracy Peters, Erin Potter, Nicole Rittersdorf, Sarah Roberts, and Kristin Steelman. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to take this time to recognize the accomplishments of this distinguished group of young women. I applaud their dedication and desire to be among the best Girl Scouts. The lessons they have learned in obtaining this award and the teamwork they have experienced will be beneficial as they enter adulthood. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in congratulating each of these young ladies on this remarkable achievement. I wish each of them continued success in the future.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me this time. I have a personal interest in this. The previous speaker wondered why Republicans are supporting this bill, and I can certainly tell him why this Republican is. When I wanted to go to college, my parents, who were low-income, regretfully told me that they simply did not have the money to support me. They would do what they could, but it was not much, and I would have to earn my own way. I was not sure I would go to college but, fortunately, I was able to get summer employment in high school and save up enough money for the first year, and so I went off to college. I worked my way through, every cent, every inch of the way. I worked over 25 hours a week during the school year. I worked over 60 hours a week during the summers in order to put myself through college. I am not saying this to brag, but I simply point out that students cannot do that today, even if they worked 40 hours a week. The costs have gone up too much. I paid $188 a semester for tuition. Today, it is many, many times that. I am very intimately aware of the concerns and the problems that students have, and I have a special acquaintance with these problems because after going to college I went to graduate school, got a doctorate, and I taught at the University of California for some time and at Calvin College. So I have had experience in both the public and the private sector. Higher education is expensive, and I am very thankful that the Federal Government has established student loan programs and Pell grants which allows every student today to achieve a college education. We have fallen behind in the amount of money available, particularly for lower income students. I strongly support this resolution, and I ask this House to support it so that our students, no matter what the income level of the family, are able to go to colleges and universities, achieve a higher education and thereby improve their earning potential throughout their lives, as well as their appreciation of life and all that comes with education.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. First of all, I believe this is an excellent resolution. We, as my colleagues know, had some problems the last few years on this particular issue, but it is in much better shape now than it has been in the past, both in terms of a fair distribution and allocation among the committees as well as a modest overall increase which will better allow the committees to do their work. The remainder of my comments will deal with the issues raised by the previous speaker, which I believe are outlined the ideal that we are striving for. I have Several comments: First, I have a chart here which reviews the historical development of relative staff allocation between the majority and minority on the various committees. My colleagues will note, as they look at the blue line which denotes, on this chart, the staff levels for the minority that designates the number of minority staff slots that are assigned for the various committees. The minority party resources are shown as a percentage, plotted on the left side, and the red lines indicate resources allocated to the minority. My colleagues can notice here a great jump as one goes from the Democratic-controlled House to the Republican-controlled House. This jump is something that those of us in mathematics refer to as a step function. There is a discontinuity here. If any of my colleagues understand electronics, they will also recognize this as a diagram of the current flow through a transistor as a function of voltage. We can make a computer out of things like this! But that is not what we are doing here. We are simply pointing out a tremendous dislocation of resources allocated to the minority, comparing the Democratic leadership to the Republican leadership. I think we deserve a great deal of credit for the improvement the Republicans made immediately upon assuming the majority, and for the continuous improvement we are making now, trying to reach the ultimate goal of 33 percent. We are actually getting fairly close. The other factor I note is that in doing some research on this, I discovered a Roll Call newspaper article from 1989. I discovered somewhat to my surprise that the Committee on House Administration at that time had set a 20 percent ratio for the minority, which is of course off the bottom of my chart here and does not even begin to compare with what the Republicans have done for the minority in this Congress. But what is really interesting in this article is a quote from the then-chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Brooks, who made the comment that he did not see why we even needed the 20 percent figure for the minority because, after all, the Democrats had no say in the staffing of the Republican-controlled executive branch. Following that argument, we of course should be below the 20 percent level now because we now have a Democrat President running the country, and why should we allow the Democrats more than 20 percent? Mr. Speaker, I think that reasoning is faulty, but it is indicative of some of the attitude some Democrats had at that point. The point is simply that the Republicans have made a very good effort to achieve the goal of a two-thirds majority, one-third minority allocation of resources and staff slots. We are making good progress. Frankly, I hope we get there very soon, and we may be able to do that in the next funding cycle. But certainly no one can fault us for our efforts to achieve that goal. I am proud of what we have achieved, and we will continue to work in that direction.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest) for yielding time. First of all, I want to support the comments of the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) regarding the Mackinaw and a number of the other issues he raised. The Mackinaw indeed is a worthy ship, but it is also an old ship and will not be able to operate much longer. And the Great Lakes depend mightily upon the efforts of that ship, particularly in the colder months. I would also point out in relation to the comments from the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) that the Great Lakes are really misnamed. They should be called the ``great seas'' because in fact they are seas. And that is why the Coast Guard plays such an important role in these bodies of water. It is very important to recognize their magnitude. And not only are they 20 percent of the world's fresh water supply, they are 95 percent of the United States' surface fresh water, and that is a very important factor in our country's future. I also thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, for working with a number of us in resolving a major problem on Lake Michigan, an important component again of the Great Lakes. The administration, in submitting their budget proposal this year, eliminated helicopter service for the Coast Guard in the middle section of Lake Michigan. Now, recognize that Michigan has more boats per capita, in fact more boats total, than any other State of the Union. Furthermore, recognize that Michigan has more lake shore mileage than any State of the Union except Alaska. A tremendous amount of boating activity on Lake Michigan. And the administration is proposing to remove the Coast Guard helicopter station at Muskegon, Michigan. I appreciate the efforts of the subcommittee. That includes both minority and majority. We have been able to work this out and come up with a proposal within this that will maintain the Coast Guard station at Muskegon. That is extremely important. And not only that, but to look very carefully or perhaps reestablish the helicopter Coast Guard station in the Chicago area, which was shut down some years ago. Both are very important in terms of achieving what is one of the key missions of the Coast Guard, as outlined by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest), and that is ensuring the life and safety of individuals at sea, whether on the oceans or on the Great Lakes. Finally, let me register a concern about the general overall direction of the Coast Guard funding. The Coast Guard, as we just said, is responsible for the life and safety of individuals at sea. But yet the funding relative to other activities of the Coast Guard has steadily diminished, and the reason is very simple. The drug problem of this Nation and the drug interdiction responsibilities of the Coast Guard continues to drain resources away from the search and rescue operations of the United States Coast Guard. And even though the drug interdiction is a very important part of their responsibility and very important to this Nation, all of us must recognize that we cannot continue to give more responsibility to the Coast Guard in this area, we cannot continue to require more drug interdiction from them and not give them the money to do that, because by doing that we are pulling men away from their search-and-rescue activities. So if indeed we want to have the Coast Guard pursue their drug interdiction activities, fine, then good, but let's recognize that we have to provide the funding and not cut and chip away at the life and safety operation of the Coast Guard at the same time.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I want to respond to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), who is proposing to amend my amendment. I rise to oppose the amendment to the amendment, although with some reluctance because I am certainly in agreement with the objective of the gentleman from New Jersey in offering this amendment. However, his amendment violates precisely what I tried to avoid in the wording of my amendments both in committee and here. I wanted to avoid adding to the complexity of the application process and avoid creating additional paperwork for those submitting the applications, and I am afraid that his amendment to my amendment ruins that by requiring that every application which involves anything having to do with section 226 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 includes a description of how professional development needs of its teachers in the area of mathematics and science will be or are being met. As I say, I am in agreement with the intent of that, but once again that destroys some of the flexibility that this bill is trying to achieve, and that destroys trying to simplify the application process and make it operate as smoothly as possible. I would have to add, too, that in the States that have had the ed flex capability for a few years, they by and large to the best of my knowledge have maintained their math and science programs; their scores in math and science have improved even as they have integrated other programs with math and science such as reading programs, and I do not perceive that as a tremendous problem. Even without the restrictive language that was placed in this bill, the States are eager to improve math and science education and are proceeding to do so. The language I got in the bill is a safeguard to ensure that they are required to continue their effort, subject to the approval of the secretary of education and now to the state department of education dealing with that. Mr. Chairman, I do not believe that the amendment to my amendment adds a great deal, but it does increase the complexity of the application process and reduces the flexibility, so I urge that we not approve that amendment to the amendment.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I am extremely concerned about improving math-science education in the United States and I am very pleased that we have one good program which has done that for a number of years; that is the Eisenhower program. In fact, I would like to see that program strengthened and expanded. In regard to that program's inclusion in this bill, my concern from the beginning was to make sure that we still achieve our objectives in improving math and science education as we provide the increased flexibility included in this bill. At the same time, I am extremely reluctant to alter the basic intent of the bill, which is to provide maximum flexibility to state and local education agencies. As the committee considered this matter, I offered two amendments which were adopted. One of those amendments was in the findings, and provided that: Expansion of waiver authority will allow for the waiver of statutory and regulatory requirements that impede implementation of State and local educational improvement plans, or that unnecessarily burden program administration, while maintaining the intent and purposes of affected programs, such as the important focus on improving math and science performance under Title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Dwight D. Eisenhower Professional Development Program) . . . In addition to that, we also put in a restriction in the bill, another amendment of mine, requiring that the Secretary of Education do as follows: The Secretary may not waive any statutory or regulatory requirement of the programs or Acts authorized to be waived under subsection, (a)(1)(A)-- . . . unless the underlying purposes of the statutory requirements of each program or Act for which a waiver is granted continue to be met to the satisfaction of the Secretary. I believe that those amendments which were adopted in committee are excellent amendments which emphasize the importance of the Eisenhower program, emphasize the importance of continuing high quality math and science education, and improvement of math and science education, and yet maintain the flexibility which the bill is intended to provide. It has been brought to my attention since then that we could strengthen it even more by offering the amendment that we have before us at the moment. That amendment would, in addition, provide that the State educational agency which provides waivers for the local school districts would have the following responsibility, that ``the State educational agency is satisfied that the underlying purposes of the statutory requirements of each program or Act for which a waiver is granted continue to be met.'' In addition to that, we have also included language in the committee report which states very clearly the intent of the committee and, therefore, the intent of the Congress, is to continue to insist that the intent of the Eisenhower program be met as we go through this process of providing flexibility in granting waivers. In other words, I think we have the best of both worlds. We will continue to try and improve math and science education and at the same time provide the needed flexibility that we need in that area and other areas so that local schools and State departments of education can provide additional flexibility and make them into more workable programs. This amendment will strengthen what I have done before. I urge that the body adopt this amendment. I do want to say that I will continue in these efforts in the future. Once the bill is passed, I intend to send a letter, perhaps over the signatures of other Members of Congress as well, to the Secretary of Education indicating precisely why these amendments were offered, stating that we intend to watch the results of this very closely, and encouraging the Secretary to follow the strict intent of what we offered here. I think it is also important in the future as we consider Elementary and Secondary Education Act reauthorization that we completely review the Eisenhower program. I believe we can strengthen it, I believe we should expand it, and I believe by doing that in conjunction with what we are doing here today, we can actually come up with a much better system of offering mathematics and science education within these United States. Amendment Offered by Mr. Holt to Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Ehlers

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

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Just a few closing observations. The ranking member of the Committee on Science, the gentleman from California (Mr. Brown) commented that we should be deliriously happy to hear this much discussion about math and science on the Floor of the House. I have never been delirious, but I have to say I am extremely happy and share his joy at hearing this debate. I am very pleased at all this interest. Another comment regarding his statement. He is absolutely right, we need much more than just the Eisenhower Program. Developing good math and science programs is far more than just professional development. We need better curricula, better training of teachers in their higher educational institutions, we need better certification methods, et cetera. I am willing to engage in that battle and continue to work on that effort. The final point is, as I said at the start, I agree with the intent of the secondary amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt). My concern is the increased paperwork and the lack of flexibility which would arise from his amendment. I feel strongly about that simply because I have worked in local government. I have had local superintendents tell me about their problems. In fact, a number of them said that when a new Federal program comes out they evaluate how much it is going to cost them to write the application. If it is more than a certain amount, they just forget about it. It is not worth the money they receive from us. The intent of this bill overall is to try to increase flexibility, reduce the amount of paperwork needed, and therefore we have to honor that intent. Therefore, I oppose the Holt amendment.

Mr. EHLERS

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on House Administration be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 705) to make technical corrections with respect to the monthly reports submitted by the Postmaster General on official mail of the House of Representatives, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from Maryland would continue to yield, that is my understanding, and I believe it is a good action that we should take at this point.