Eliot Engel

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 16th anniversary of the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Since the inception of this landmark legislation in 1990, the ADA has afforded broad anti-discrimination protection for disabled Americans. The ADA ensures that people with disabilities can access employment, public services, and transportation. By making sure that disabled citizens are hired on the basis of their abilities rather than their disabilities, this law has given millions of Americans the chance to be treated equally in the workplace. Disabled Americans can no longer be denied access to public places solely on the basis of their handicap. In addition, those who feel that they have been discriminated against have legal recourse to address potential discrimination. These opportunities have established a sense of empowerment where such a sense did not exist before. Though this legislation has helped countless people, there is surely more work to be done. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 70 percent of working-age Americans with significant disabilities are unemployed. This is the highest unemployment rate of any group of Americans, regardless of their education or qualifications. Many employers are wary of hiring disabled employees for fear of having to make expensive accommodations. Even worse, there still exists a prejudice against those with disabilities simply because of their disabilities. We must educate employees about the enormous potential they are missing or ignoring. The Americans with Disabilities Act is one of the most comprehensive civil rights laws to have ever been enacted. On this the 6th anniversary, we should acknowledge the noble goal of equality that the ADA aims to achieve. I urge Congress to continue to support this legislation and fight against discrimination throughout our society.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. Again, I urge our colleagues to support the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to our Democratic whip, my friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with mixed emotions. Almost three years ago, I joined Representative Stupak and Representative Fossella in offering legislation to create an interoperability trust fund. Mr. Stupak is a former state trooper in Michigan. Mr. Fossella and I are from the one place in the United States that has twice been a victim of terrorism. Furthermore, as members of the Telecommunications subcommittee we are well aware of the needs of our first responders for radio equipment that works seamlessly for police, fire, and medical personnel as well as for local, state, and federal officials. So I am disheartened that this legislation has not followed regular procedure in that the Energy and Commerce Committee did not hold hearings or a markup on this bill. We are three Members of Congress that have spent a great deal of time working on this very issue and yet today we have a bill that we cannot try to improve. We can only vote Yes or No. I will vote ``yes.'' There are good things in this legislation. It has an emphasis on high level personnel at the Department of Homeland Security to do outreach, provide technical assistance and coordinate a national response capability that can provide backup services for lost local and regional services. But I believe that with any legislation, if proper procedure were followed, this could be a better bill. I see the most glaring omission is that there is no new money to aid our states and localities. In the digital television transition provisions of the Budget Resolution, we included $1 billion for Interoperability equipment grants to states and localities. We knew at the time that $1 billion is a drop in the bucket. The estimates are more in the $15 to $20 billion range. And before someone stands up and complains that I am just a Democrat looking to spend more money without having a way to pay for it, let me be clear--the Bush tax cuts are why the federal government doesn't have the resources it needs to fully fund programs like this. Reverse the tax cuts for the wealthiest among us so that we can secure our country. So I rise in support of the bill, but believe that it could be better and urge my Chairman to convene hearings on this vital matter.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am going to try to speak from the heart, and that is what I want to do, because Tom Manton was my friend. You know, you get to an age where when you hear eulogies and you think that it is someone who lived in the distant past and not one of your colleagues or not one of your contemporaries. And even though Tom was several years older than me, he was certainly one of my contemporaries, because when I came to Congress in 1988, there was no one who was warmer and friendlier and opened his door more to me than Tom Manton. I didn't really know Tom before I came to Congress. I had heard about him. He served on the New York City Council while I was serving in the New York State assembly, and he had a reputation of being this tough guy, maybe a bit gruff, and I didn't really know what to expect. But when I got to know Tom, and I got to know him very, very well, I learned that under this gruffness was this soft underbelly; that he was a very thoughtful and soft-spoken man; a very good person, who really cared about people, really cared about his country; a great life smart, intelligent man who came out of an ordinary working class family in New York City, the way so many of us did, and who worked hard. I am sure he was the first person in his family to go to college. He went to law school and became a good lawyer. He was a very smart intelligent man and he really lived the American dream. That is what so many of us have done, children of immigrants and grandchildren of immigrants. Well, that is really what Tom Manton did. Tom and I became very, very good friends. We were very close. We would go out to dinner and talk a lot. I still have a picture hanging in my office of Tom and myself taken, I think I was just elected but not yet sworn in. I had won the election and Tom signed it and said, ``The New York delegation is richer with your election.'' And that was just the kind of nice thing that he would do, would write it with his own handwriting. It was Tom who encouraged me to go on the Energy and Commerce Committee, which is a great committee but difficult to get on to, and Tom encouraged me. He was a member of the committee and encouraged me to try for the committee, which I did with his help and support, and eventually was made a part of that committee. Tom cared about people. He cared about working people and was very close to labor. He always had very, very close friends because he worked very, very hard for the average person. My colleagues have already talked about what a difference he made in people's lives from the Irish peace process to just caring about every day people, ordinary people back home. After he left Congress, he kept in touch and came down several times doing some lobbying, doing some work. And whenever you needed him to help you, with a campaign contribution or just a good friendly smile or some good friendly advice, Tom was always there. That is why he was such an effective Democratic county leader of Queens County and why his influence really extended beyond his borough, because when people wanted to aspire to leadership positions in the New York City council, be it speaker or whatever, if you got Tom Manton's blessing, you really had a leg up on everybody else in order to achieve that position. And Tom really was very effective in doing that. When you are a political leader, you make tough decisions. You make friends and you make enemies. But everyone knew that Tom Manton was always fair and above board. He told you where you stood, and he was very, very honest with it. A very, very soft-spoken person who really cared about his country, about his state, about his city and, indeed, his friends as well. I would say to Diane and the rest of the family that our lives are all richer because we knew Tom Manton. His memory will live because the benefits he provided to his city and his State and his country will continue to go on and on. I last saw Tom a few years ago during the presidential campaign when there was a rally in his borough for John Kerry. And although I have spoken with Tom since then, that was actually the last time I had physically seen him. And I remember thinking that he didn't look quite as good as I had remembered, and from that point on, with his long illness, which of course culminated in his death. Let me just speak for me, but I think all of us aspire to be the kind of person that Tom Manton was, an honest person coming from working class roots, a working class family, who understood that by helping people, you helped the country and you make a difference in people's lives. Tom, I know, is looking down at us, and I want him and his family to know that he has made a difference in all of our lives, those of us who were fortunate to call him our friend and fortunate enough to call him our colleague. But even those people that never met Tom, that only knew his name, are better because Tom Manton served in the United States Congress and made a difference in their lives as well, a difference in everybody's lives in the United States of America. I am going to miss my good friend. We are all going to miss him. But we are all going to remember him. He is going to live on in our hearts and our minds and with the good work he did to make our country a better place. God bless you, Tom. We will all miss you, but we will never forget you.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to report that Money Magazine has just named the town of Ramapo, in Rockland County in my district, as one of the 100 best places to live in the United States, ranking Ramapo as 49. I congratulate Ramapo and its town supervisor, Christopher St. Lawrence, who has done a wonderful job in leading that town. Ramapo, with a population of 110,000 residents, is the largest town in Rockland County, with a third of Rockland's inhabitants. It combines such densely populated places as Spring Valley, Muncie, New Square with the country settings of Chestnut Ridge, Suffern, and Wesley Hills. Half of Ramapo is designated park land. Businesses have invested more than $1 billion in the past 4 years. The town has the highest bond rating in the country. A new state-of-the-art cardiac care unit has opened at Good Samaritan Hospital in Suffern. They have great schools, and $125 million has been invested in a water treatment plant. Three years ago, Money Magazine named Ramapo as the second best place to live in the Northeast. This year the ranking was done on a nationwide basis. I am proud to represent Rockland and Ramapo in the U.S. Congress, and I congratulate the people of Ramapo on achieving this great honor.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Today President Bush has cast the first veto of his Presidency on legislation approved overwhelmingly by the House and Senate: the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Frankly, to veto a bill that has the support of 72 percent of the American public is simply unconscionable and indefensible. The President speaks about ethics. I think it is totally unethical not to save lives. Despite what the critics may say, H.R. 810 does not end life. It honors life. As anyone who suffers from diabetes, Parkinson's disease, ALS, or a whole host of other debilitating health conditions knows, scientists believe embryonic stems cells provide a real opportunity for devising unique treatments for these serious diseases. Let me be absolutely clear. This is not about cloning. I oppose cloning of human beings. This is about the use of stem cells which would have been discarded anyway. It has been estimated that there are currently 400,000 frozen embryos created during fertility treatments which would be destroyed if they are not donated for research. I would never condone the donation of embryos to science without the informed written consent of donors and strict regulations prohibiting financial compensation for potential donors. Our Nation's scientific research must adhere to the highest critical and ethical standards, and H.R. 810 protects this. The National Institutes of Health has admitted that U.S. scientists have fallen behind Europe and Asia in stem cell research because of President Bush's policy. While five States have committed significant funding, NIH Director Zerhouni has noted that a patchwork collection of different stem cell policies in States could inhibit critical collaborations. We need a national commitment, and the current stem cells that the President alludes to have been contaminated and are no longer useful. We must not allow those standing in the way of health and science to compromise the future well-being of our families and loved ones. Simply put, that would not be ethical. Over 200 patient groups, universities, and scientific societies have urged the President to expand the Federal policy on stem cell research. We must honor life by overriding President Bush's veto.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague for giving me this time. And I rise, of course, in strong support of this resolution. The United States and India are strong allies and friends, and our friendship will deepen in the years ahead. Being a New Yorker, and having lived through the catastrophe of the World Trade Center bombings and here in Washington in the Pentagon, we certainly understand the feelings of the people of India because of this horrific terrorist attack killing innocent civilians on the trains. Mr. Speaker, it makes no difference if terrorists attack Haifa in Israel or blow up children on buses in Tel Aviv in Jerusalem or blow up innocent civilians in Spain, in England, and in India. Terrorism is terrorism. And just as we support Israel and other democracies in the war on terror, we support India in its war on terror as well. And that is why the United States, as the oldest democracy in the world, and India, as the biggest democracy in the world, share so many things in common. And I am delighted that we are working very, very closely with the Indian Government. And our hearts go out to the people of India, but it is not just sympathy. There has to be a resolve on the part of India and the United States, other democracies and freedom-loving people in the world, to stamp out the scourge of terrorism. It is very important that we understand what happened. It is very important that we don't mince our words. It is very important that we stand together with the people of India. So I am delighted that this has strong bipartisan support. I think it is important that the Congress act as one. And I think that in the future, India and the United States will continue to work closely together. Again, we share a common vision. In the United States, when political campaigns are fought and the opposition party wins, we turn over the reins of government because we are a Nation of laws. The same thing happens in India. When the party in power loses control, they turn over the reins. And since 1947 when India became independent they have done that time and time and time again, unlike some neighboring states. And again, when we look at the vision of the future, the United States and India have the same adversaries. One of them, of course, is terrorism. But when we look at the geopolitical scene in Asia, the United States and India see things very, very closely. So I am honored to add my voice to all my colleagues who have spoken on behalf of this resolution, to strengthen the U.S.-India relationship, to tell the people of India that we stand with them, we mourn their loss, and we are more resolved than ever with them to fight the war on terror.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I rise in strong support of his bipartisan resolution and strong support of the people of Israel in their fight against terrorism. It makes no difference where terrorism rears its ugly head, whether its planes going into the World Trade Center or the Pentagon, or innocent people being blown up on trains in India, England or Spain, or the bombs falling on Haifa or the innocent children being blown up on a bus in Tel Aviv. The fight against terrorism is our fight. Israel's fight is our fight. Iran and Syria are fighting a proxy war against Israel using Hezbollah and Hamas. It has been pointed out that Israel withdrew from Lebanon 6 years ago, so the myth of any kind of occupation is not there. Simply speaking, Hezbollah and Hamas, as well as Iran and Syria, want to, as Iran's President has said, wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. We should let Israel finish the job. There should be no precipitous calls to a cease-fire before Israel could rid itself of a terrorist threat. We should fully implement my bill, and I was happy that our Democratic leader mentioned it, the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, and President Bush should implement those sanctions which are available to him against Syria. I care very much about Lebanon. Our bill was called Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act. The people of Lebanon are suffering. When this is over, we should do everything we can to help them rebuild their country. But the people of Lebanon have suffered by having this terrorist group, this poison, in its midst, this poison, this militia that is a lawless militia, and that Security Council Resolution 1559, which called for the Syrians to leave Lebanon. I thank my colleague who is my partner in the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act. She knows that when the Syrians finally left Lebanon, the world community failed to implement the other part of Resolution 1559, which called for all militias to give up their arms. Hezbollah continued and, shamefully, even won some seats in the Government of Lebanon. My friend and colleague, Mr. Ackerman, spoke before and reminded us that Israel was born out of the ashes of the Holocaust. The leader of Iran, while denying the Holocaust, threatens to unleash a new one on Israel. There is only one country that constantly stands with Israel, and that is the United States of America. We ought to be proud of the bipartisan support that we have shown for Israel through the years. Israel's fight against terrorism is our fight. We need to support the brave people of Israel in their struggle. Terrorism over there and terrorism over here is the same thing. Support the resolution.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Energy and Commerce Committee for yielding to me and want to commend her on the outstanding job she is doing in fighting for embryonic stem cell research, which the American people want. The American people across ideological lines understand that this is something that will help people in their battles against illness; and why there is such rigid ideology on the other side, I just really do not understand. The Fetus Farming Prohibition Act of 2006 is fine the way it is. None of us oppose it. None of us would take issue with it, but it does not really do what the American people want us to do. The American people know that the United States has always led the way with medical research. We have always led the way in finding cures for diseases. We have always led the way in terms of our health care. And what is happening is obviously because there has been a prohibition on stem cell research, that we have fallen behind, and so other countries are eclipsing us, other countries which I believe cannot do it as well as we could do it if we were allowed to do it. And so as a result, people are dying and being injured with no help every day when, if we were permitted to have stem cell research, we could have the help that we need. This is an undertaking that really the Federal Government needs to put itself behind and which cannot work if it is left to the private sector. It cannot work if it is only going to be certain kinds of cells or certain limited amounts of cells. This has to be something that we have to do. I am very sensitive to people who care about this issue; but this, to me, has nothing to do with the issue of abortion or any of those issues. This is about saving people's lives and making it easier for people who have loved ones, who are ill and who would rely on this kind of research to get better soon. So I would hope that my colleagues would support stem cell research and vote for this bill; but again, this bill is only a scratch. We need to do much more.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. I thank my friend from New York. All of us in New York that are distinguished gentlemen think that everybody else is a distinguished gentleman. So I thank the distinguished gentleman from New York, and I commend him and my good friend from Florida (Ms. Ros- Lehtinen) for this very important and very, very timely resolution. For many, many years, everyone you have heard speak, Mr. Speaker, has played an important part in finally getting Magen David Adom recognized. One of the problems that we have seen in international bodies is that Israel has been systematically excluded and vilified by majorities that have nothing to do with what's right and nothing to do with reality, but just simply trying to ostracize Israel and make it difficult for them, whether it is in the United Nations or anything else. This was the case with the International Society of the Red Cross. This happened for many, many years, and then the United States Society of the Red Cross really got involved at the behest of many of us. We have been very, very helpful in finally paving the way for this compromise that so many of my colleagues have spoken about. I had the good fortune to be in Geneva when this was agreed to and this was done. It was very good for me to personally be there to see it, because, again, this has been 10 years or more that many of us in Congress have worked together to try to see this. At the last minute, it nearly got derailed again because Syria was playing its old games, up to its old games, and then tried to make it very, very difficult. When people are in need, politics should not be involved. It doesn't matter whether it is the Red Cross or Red Crescent or Magen David Adom. Whatever society the people who are helping want to help, politics should not play a role. Those of us who are New Yorkers and lived through the World Trade Center, we know how important it is to have the first responders there to help us. It is fair, it is equitable and I commend my colleagues.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, today I was proud to be one of the speakers outside the United Nations in New York at a huge rally in support of Israel. It was attended by tens of thousands of people and showed strong support for the people of Israel as they struggle against terrorism. I would hope that later on this week there will be a resolution on the House floor to once again show Congress' bipartisan support for Israel. Mr. Speaker, Israel's fight against terrorism is our fight. The war on terrorism is our war. It is everybody's war. We need to support Israel in this time of struggle. It makes no difference whether terrorists drop bombs on Haifa or send planes into the World Trade Center or blow up innocent commuters on their way to work in India or London or Madrid, or blow up people in hotels in Bali and other places. Terrorism is terrorism, and those of us who think that terrorism is only over there are certainly kidding themselves. Terrorism is everywhere, and the only way to stomp out terrorism is to show a resolve and to get the job done by defeating terrorists. That is precisely what Israel is trying to do. Let us remember who started this war. Israel pulled out of Lebanon 6 years ago, so there is no pretext of any occupation. There is no pretext of anything other than the fact that terrorists would like to destroy democratic societies such as Israel, and Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East. These terrorists want to destroy the democratic way of life, not only in Israel, but in America and all other democracies of the world. That is why Israel's fight is the fight of all decent nations, including the United States of America. These terrorists want to destroy life. Israel is standing up to them and saying enough is enough. We should let Israel finish the job. Israel wants to knock out the terrorist group Hezbollah for good, so they can never return to south Lebanon and threaten Israel's communities from the south of Lebanon on the northern border with Israel. We should let them do that because the status quo is not acceptable. We have already heard words from the naysayers telling Israel to use restraint. Mr. Speaker, I don't believe that we can use restraint, or that Israel can use restraint, or that any country can use restraint towards terrorists that are out to kill them and us. We should let Israel finish the job. Let us remember how this started. The terrorists came down from Lebanon, raided Israel, went on Israeli territory, killed Israeli soldiers, captured a couple of them, took them across the border. That is how it started. Imagine if this had happened to us, if someone came from the Mexican border or the Canadian border, attacked U.S. soldiers on U.S. soil, killed some of them and then took them back over the border. Mr. Speaker, we would be just as outraged, and we would have every right to go after those terrorists. That is what Israel is going to do. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. It is fighting a proxy war for Iran and Syria. Iran and Syria lurk behind this. Iran and Syria are the biggest supporters of terrorism. A couple of years ago, this Congress passed and the President signed the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act. I wrote that act. I was the lead sponsor of that act, along with my good friend, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. That act slapped sanctions on Syria for the first time in history. President Bush has only implemented some of the sanctions in that act, and I call on the President to now implement all of the sanctions on the act. Now is the time. Now we have to show Syria and other countries that support terrorists that we are resolved to defeat terrorism. I was very happy when the United States vetoed the one-sided resolution at the United Nations, once again condemning Israel, once again discrediting the United Nations. The United States needs to be steadfast in support, and this Congress needs to do so as well. So in conclusion, let me say I look forward to a resolution later on in this week. The United States needs to stand by its friend, Israel, and Israel needs to stand by its friend, the United States, and all peace-loving and democratic nations in the world ought to stand shoulder to shoulder firmly against terrorism. Because if terrorism is not contained in one area of the world, it surely will come to every other area of the world.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to join with my colleagues Kay Granger, Tammy Baldwin, and Randy Kuhl in introducing the Medicare Home Infusion Therapy Consolidated Coverage Act of 2006. This bill would correct long-standing gaps in Medicare coverage for home infusion therapy, and will enable thousands of beneficiaries to obtain these often life-saving therapies in the most convenient and cost-effective setting--their homes. Under current Medicare coverage rules, beneficiaries who have severe infections, cancer, or congestive heart disease and many other diagnoses, are needlessly admitted into hospitals or nursing homes to receive the care they need. This is most unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, because in many cases, infusion therapy administered in the patient's home is clearly the preferred alternative. Commercial health plans have long recognized the clinical value and cost-effectiveness of home infusion therapy, and full and proper coverage of home infusion therapy is commonplace among these payers. Medicare stands virtually alone in its antiquated coverage policies that discourage the use of a therapy that in actuality should be promoted for its cost savings, safety, clinical effectiveness, and convenience. At a time when there is a growing awareness of the need to prevent or limit inpatient hospital stays for our Nation's elderly, we believe this legislation is extremely timely. Our bill is very simple in its approach. Currently, whatever coverage exists for home infusion therapy is divided between part B and part D. Part B coverage is based on the durable medical equipment benefit, because an item of DME--the infusion pump--is sometimes needed to administer home infusion therapy. That coverage, however, is limited to about 23 drugs. Part D, the outpatient prescription drug benefit, covers more infusion drugs than part B, but does not cover the services, supplies and equipment necessary to safely and appropriately administer these therapies in the home. As a result, both part B and part D coverage of home infusion are very limited. Under part B, Medicare beneficiaries do not have access to many of the most common infusion drugs covered by commercial health plans. Under part D, many beneficiaries have to pay for the infusion services, supplies, and equipment with out-of-pocket funds. The clear result is that access to home infusion therapy, despite its potential for cost savings and good clinical outcomes, is needlessly limited. Our bill would consolidate coverage for home infusion therapy under part B, so that coverage would be centered in one benefit and coverage would be designed to appropriately and accurately reflect what is involved in the safe and effective provision of home infusion therapy. The Secretary of HHS would apply quality standards that are consistent with prevailing community standard of care commonly utilized by commercial health plans. Both beneficiaries and the Medicare program itself would reap the benefits of broader access to these important medical treatments in the home. I introduced a similar bill in 2001 that would have established a home infusion therapy benefit under part B. Since then Congress enacted the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 which created the part D prescription drug benefit. While I appreciate the efforts to broaden coverage of the drug portion of home infusion therapy, the problems I have described still persist because CMS believes it does not have the authority to cover anything beyond the drugs. Thus, effective coverage of home infusion therapy has remained elusive. We can fix this now. Along with my colleagues, I urge early consideration of this long- overdue bill.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 9, the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act reauthorization. Since the law's inception in 1965, this landmark legislation has protected the right to vote for millions of United States citizens. There has been great progress made since the Voting Rights Act was signed into law by President Johnson on August 6, 1965. But, so much more must be done. There are still many places in our country where Americans experience discrimination when they go to the polls. In order for the United States to truly be the greatest nation ever known, we must ensure that when citizens choose to go to the polls, they do not face obstacles created to disenfranchise them. Our Nation's history is replete with examples of people's right to vote being impeded. Furthermore, unconscionable violence and discriminatory obstacles such as poll taxes, literacy tests and grandfather clauses were used to deny African American citizens the right to vote. The Voting Rights Act provided extensive protection to minority communities by prohibiting any voting practice that would abridge the right to vote on the basis of race. In 1975, the Voting Rights Act was expanded to protect the voting rights of other minority voters--such as Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans and Alaskan Natives--by requiring language assistance at the polls. From California to Texas to my home State of New York, minority voters have a greater voice in elections due to the Voting Rights Act. In fact, my home State of New York is directly affected by two important sections of the Voting Rights Act. Voters in the majority of districts in New York State are provided with important language materials to assist them in the voting process if English is not their native language. In addition, voters are also protected by having any new State voting rules and regulations approved by the Federal Government before they can be enacted. Extending the Voting Rights Act is essential to protecting the voting rights of New Yorkers as well as voters throughout the country. The Voting Rights Act is one of the most effective civil rights laws ever enacted. Reauthorizing the Act is vital to ensure that the progress made, is preserved.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay honor to June Allyson, an actress and spokeswoman who represented America's image of the ideal sweetheart during her film career in the 1940's and 50's. In addition to her work as an entertainer, Allyson vocally advocated the importance of research concerning various senior health issues. Born Eleanor Geisman in 1917, she was raised in the Bronx by her mother, who worked two jobs to support her family. At age 8, a tree branch fell on Geisman while she was bicycling, breaking several bones. She was confined to a wheelchair and doctors said she would never walk again. Defying the odds, she fought to regain her health through months of therapy and eventually achieved a full recovery. Finding her inspiration in Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire, Geisman auditioned for the Broadway show ``Sing out the News.'' The director not only offered her a part, but gave her a stage name as well: June Allyson. Allyson went on to dance in several musicals, including ``Very Warm for May'' and ``Higher and Higher.'' Her performance in the 1941's ``Best Foot Forward'' led to her feature film debut by reprising her role in the MGM musical, which starred Lucille Ball. Allyson's film career consisted mainly of playing the wife of many of Hollywood's leading men, including James Stewart and Van Johnson. Her sunny disposition and youthful optimism particularly resonated with U.S. servicemen overseas, making her an icon for the ``ideal girl'' to bring home to Mom. Later in life Allyson worked to raise awareness concerning urological and gynecological diseases in seniors. In appreciation of her efforts, the June Allyson Foundation was formed in partnership with the American Urogynecologic Society as a non-profit research and education foundation. Allyson was also recognized in 1988 when President Reagan appointed her to the Federal Council on Aging, a position she remained extremely proud of for the rest of her life. June Allyson is a wonderful example of an icon that could both entertain and educate the American people. Her contribution to the film industry will not soon be forgotten, and her devotion to the cause of senior health issues will sorely be missed.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, a couple of weeks ago, this House passed a bill cutting off aid to the terrorist group Hamas. Now we see Hamas, with their terrorism, once again capturing an Israeli soldier. Hamas and Syria are in complicity. As the author of the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, I call on President Bush to implement the rest of the sanctions in the act, which was signed into law, by Syria. Syria is harboring the head of Hamas, Khaled Meshal, who, it is reported, gave the orders for the capture of the Israeli soldier. Hamas is a terrorist group that is shunned by the rest of the world, and should be shunned by the rest of the world, and all monies cut off until it does three things: renounce terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist, and abide by all previously signed documents and signed agreements with Israel. Mr. Speaker, terrorism can never be allowed to rear its ugly head. This shows again the terrorist conspiracy between Hamas and Syria. We ought to take action. It ought to stop.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I will be brief. I am offering the same amendment that I have offered to almost all the other appropriations bills which have all been accepted, because I think it is so important for the Federal Government to put its money where its mouth is. We are all running around talking about alternative energy and alternative fuel vehicles. All the while, our Federal agencies are failing to fully implement the 1992 Energy Policy Act which the Congress passed and which the President signed into law. Seventy-five percent of new vehicles purchased for the Federal fleet should be alternative fuel by now, but it is only about 26 percent. For the major agencies in this bill, the numbers are disheartening. The Department of Commerce has only 32 percent of alternative fuel vehicles, the Department of Justice came in at a paltry 6 percent, and the Department of State was just 9 percent. We have not only the opportunity to end our addiction to oil, we have the need to do so. Our national security continues to be threatened because we are reliant on undemocratic sheikdoms in the Middle East that funnel money to the terrorists who would do us harm. Our energy policy and our national security policy are intertwined, and we can start right here by mandating that our Federal agencies look for alternative fuel vehicles, which they have to do by a law that we passed more than a decade ago. So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and provide the leadership that is so desperately needed. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my colleague, Mr. Murphy, and his amendment. It is appropriate for our colleague from Pennsylvania to be offering this amendment because he is himself a victim of this insidiousness. I also want to thank Chairman Barton, who with me, introduced the Truth in Caller ID Act that passed the House not long ago. I also want to thank and recognize Mr. Upton, Mr. Dingell and Mr. Markey for their significant contributions to that bill. I commend our colleague from Pennsylvania for offering this amendment. It will highlight to the FCC that the House of Representatives takes this problem very seriously. We have swiftly passed legislation that is now pending in the Senate. And so we expect the FCC to do whatever it can now--and to move expeditiously once the Truth in Caller ID Act is signed into law. Not long ago, I was like most Americans--completely unaware that is was so easy for someone to alter their caller ID. Caller ID spoofing is not your grandfather's prank call. This technology has limited uses that I find legitimate, such as for law enforcement and protecting battered women. This technology has unlimited uses that I find completely unacceptable. This technology enables people to pretend to be a bank, a doctor's office, a court house, or even a member of Congress. Nefarious people are . . . I say are using this technology to get a hold of private information and engage in identity theft. The Telecommunications and Internet Subcommittee of Energy and Commerce held a hearing on this matter. We heard stories of people receiving phone calls from their local court houses saying they had missed jury duty and that to confirm a make up the caller needed the person's social security number. Well who wouldn't be flustered when seeing a local court house phone number on the caller ID and being told you had missed jury duty. So these innocent people gave out their social security numbers. We heard of people make fake calls to police departments claiming to be victims of home intrusion and being held at gun point. The Newark Star Ledger reported on July 12, 2005 that Mr. Wadu Jackson plead guilty to placing ``a fake 911 call that drew dozens of police sharpshooters to a New Brunswick home in March in a mistake belief that a teenage girl was being held hostage. I know of three of our colleagues in the House who have been victims of caller ID spoofing. Not in the personal lives, but in their professional lives as Members of Congress. They have had people call and leave obnoxious messages that indicate the call is coming from the member's district office. I can only believe that this was an early effort at testing this technology to interfere with the electoral process of our nation. I think we do a service to our constituents today by highlighting and alerting them to this problem. I urge the adoption of this amendment.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, more and more information is emerging that this week's kidnapping of an Israeli soldier and the killing of two others was a Hamas plot from day one. Several newspapers are reporting that the attack and kidnapping were carried out by Ahmed Jaabari, the commander of the Hamas military wing who takes his orders from Khaled Mashal, the senior Hamas leader based in Damascus, Syria. According to the Associated Press, two senior aids to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said that Mashal gave the green light for the operation. This is a stinging indictment of the Syrian regime's participation in global terror and a brutal reminder about Hamas. I and others have called the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority a terrorist organization. Congress recently passed a bill banning any assistance to the Palestinian Authority until it ends terror, recognizes Israel, and abides by all agreements signed by the Palestinian Authority. But most of all, with this terrorist attack, Hamas has once again shown its true stripes. It remains the murderous terrorist group which carried out scores of suicide bombings in the 1990s. Our U.S. Ambassador Jones said yesterday, ``The problem is in Damascus and that is where we should focus the world's attention.'' This is the key point. The Syrian Government continues to play host to a range of terrorist groups, including Hamas. And now, one of the outlaws in Damascus has kidnapped an Israeli soldier. As the author of the Syria Accountability Act and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, I demand that the government of Syria close the terrorist bases in its country and bring the murderer Khaled Mashal to justice. And I ask President Bush to impose the remaining sanctions of the Syria Accountability Act which it has not yet imposed.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, as Ronald Reagan used to say--there you go again! Our Republican friends are again taking care of the wealthy and ignoring the needs of the middle class. If they cared about middle class Americans, their priority would be to permanently fix the AMT that affects millions of Americans, not the estate tax that affects 1 percent of rich families. The Republicans in Congress are making sure the rich get richer instead of lifting all Americans up economically. The Republicans would like us to believe that they are fiscal conservatives, but they are borrowing and spending like drunken sailors, abandoning all fiscal discipline. As a result, we are leaving our children and grandchildren with mountains of debt for years to come. Of the millions of American families, this bill will allow 830 super rich families get a $16 million tax break--what a disgrace! History will not refer to us as the baby boomer generation but as the credit card generation, and we can trace it all back to the Republican mantra of cut taxes, borrow and spend!

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding to me, and I rise in strong support of the Health Centers Renewal Act of 2006. Community health centers ensure that over 15 million low-income Americans, including 1 million New Yorkers, get access to affordable primary care and preventive services regardless of insurance status or ability to pay. In my own district, I am very proud of the good work that the Mount Vernon Neighborhood Health Center, Refuah Health Center, the Community Medical and Dental Care Center in Monsey, and the Bronx Community Health Network do. I am proud of them. Patients who use community health centers are some of our Nation's most vulnerable, with unique and complex health care needs. It has been estimated that nearly 70 percent of community health center patients have family incomes at or below the Federal poverty level. These patients, therefore, benefit from the special services that community health centers provide, such as transportation and translation assistance, which truly opens access to health care. Community health centers improve health outcomes through their cost- effective, high-quality care. It is estimated that the health centers save the Federal Medicaid 30 percent in annual spending through innovative care. Both the Institute of Medicine and General Accountability Office have praised health centers for their effective management of chronic illnesses and have said they are a model in screening and diagnosing conditions like asthma, cardiovascular disease, depression, cancer, and HIV/AIDS. In addition, community health centers are estimated to be responsible for cutting infant mortality rates in the communities they serve by as much as 10 percent. Considering these facts, we should support the community health centers with additional funding. Less than 25 percent of applications for new health center sites were funded last year, despite being qualified. It is also worth noting that when we do consider health information technology on the floor, we must ensure appropriate Federal investment in grants and loans to ensure community health centers get access to the technology. While the unanimously passed Senate bill included Federal funding for low-income providers, the Energy and Commerce bill, unfortunately, did not. Health IT has the potential to even further improve the quality of care at the community health centers, but the centers simply cannot afford the technology without extra help. I should note that New York City appropriated $27 million to help provide 1,000 New York City doctors treating underserved patients with electronic health record systems by 2008. The city's contribution is being matched by an additional $13 million contributed by the community health centers participating in the program. The end result is that 30 community health centers, which include 150 sites, will be linked throughout New York City. This worthy initiative would certainly benefit from Federal assistance as well. Mr. Chairman, thank you again for calling for the reauthorization of the health centers program. Millions of people will be better for it.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, as an original co-sponsor of H. Con. Res. 71 and Ranking Member of the House International Relations Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, I rise to pay tribute to the designation of June as National Caribbean-American Heritage Month. I also congratulate Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) for her successful leadership in ensuring unanimous passage of H. Con. Res. 71 in both the House and Senate, and extend my thanks to the numerous bipartisan cosponsors who helped make passage possible. Caribbean-American Heritage month honors the tremendous contributions of Caribbean-Americans to our Nation's fabric, and recognizes that our nations are bound together by cultural ties, social and economic links, and common values. People of Caribbean heritage are found in every State of the Union, including large populations, in New York, and have been contributing to our Nation's success since the American colonies. My constituents of Caribbean heritage have contributed to our great country in the fields of education, fine arts, business, literature, journalism, sports, fashion, politics, government, the military, music, science, technology, and other areas, and help illustrate the ongoing contribution of immigrants and their descendants to our Nation's fabric and success. Caribbean-Americans enrich and strengthen our society. I encourage all citizens to participate in the celebration of Caribbean-American Heritage month and to learn more about the contributions of Caribbean-Americans and our strong ties to Caribbean nations. I also congratulate and join Caribbean-Americans in their celebration of their rich heritage.