Anna Eshoo

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, it is a privilege for me to pay tribute to Google, Inc., of Mountain View, CA, for being recognized with the prestigious National Design Award given by the Smithsonian's Cooper- Hewitt National Design Museum. The National Design Awards were created in 2000 by the Smithsonian's Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum to educate the public about design. They honor and celebrate the best in American design with recipients being selected from a pool of over 800 talented designers, educators, journalists, cultural figures and corporate leaders. The National Design Awards program presents awards in ten different categories and this year they recognized Google for their leadership and talents with an award in Corporate Design. Today. Google is recognized as one of the world's most important innovators and they achieved this in a remarkably short 10-year period. Under the superb leadership of Dr. Eric Schmidt, chairman and chief executive officer, and the two founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Google has consistently demonstrated the finest in cutting-edge technology and has gained the confidence of their clients and investors alike. I'm proud to represent Google as a constituent company in the distinguished 14th Congressional District. Madam Speaker, I ask our colleagues to join us in honoring Google, Inc., for being recognized with the prestigious National Design Award given by the Smithsonian's Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum, for the leadership they provide in Silicon Valley and around the world, and for always looking ahead to capture the imagination of the next generation with their commitment to innovation.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker; first I want to commend the Chairman and the Majority leader for the work they've done to bring this legislation to the floor of the House. It has been a challenge for all of us on the Intelligence Committee and in the Congress. This legislation is a vast improvement over the previous law, and indeed over the Protect America Act passed by the House last August which I opposed. The bill very importantly establishes a process for electronic surveillance that includes prior approval by the independent courts, and in some respects, this legislation goes even further than the existing FISA statute or the House-passed RESTORE Act in protecting the civil liberties of U.S. persons. Under this bill the Administration would have to seek a court order before conducting surveillance on U.S. persons abroad. Until now and under the Protect America Act, the executive branch could conduct electronic surveillance of U.S. persons without prior judicial approval. This legislation also allows the lawsuits against the telecommunications companies to go forward in a limited fashion, which would not have occurred at all under current law. Having said this I must oppose this bill. Under the original structure of FISA, telecommunications carriers served an important gate-keeping function. They were not permitted to provide access to private communications in the United States unless the government made a lawful request to conduct surveillance, pursuant to a FISA order. For decades, the government has sought and obtained thousands of FISA warrants prior to beginning surveillance, or in urgent cases shortly thereafter. We all remember the shocking news when the President had to acknowledge that his Administration created an illegal, warrantless electronic surveillance program outside of the FISA legal framework. This legislation would essentially grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications carriers who relied on statements made by this Administration that the program was lawful. However, as we've seen in numerous instances, this Administration pushed new and aggressive interpretations of the law, including in this area. We all recall vividly the days following \9/11\, and the urgency that prevailed, but suspending our laws and allowing the Attorney General to unilaterally issue a ``get out of jail free card'' is not appropriate under any circumstances. There should be at least some minimal inquiry into whether the telecommunications carriers reliance on the statements made by this Administration was reasonable. If so, the they would be able to assert their existing statutory immunity defenses. Throughout our Nation's history, the judiciary has been the most important check on an overzealous executive, and it is often through the judicial process that we uncover and remedy some of the most egregious executive misconduct. This legislation undermines and effectively nullifies the courts' ability to hold the Administration accountable for its actions, which likely violated the Constitution. Our Nation was founded on the principle of separation of powers. The executive branch should be subject to independent oversight by the judicial branch. This legislation does not go far enough to allow the judicial branch to conduct an independent, reasoned inquiry into this critical issue. Therefore, I must oppose this legislation.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, it's with great honor that I congratulate my constituent, Dan Meyer, a teacher with the San Lorenzo Valley Unified School District who has been selected to receive the Cable's Leaders in Learning Award for creating and implementing innovative ways to educate students. He is one of 14 national winners selected from a pool of 44 finalist applications. As the sole winner in the ``Pushing the Envelope with Cable Technology and Programming'' category, he is being recognized for improving algebra instruction by creating and posting a video lesson for teachers online. Mr. Meyer found a way to improve algebra instruction and share it with math teachers worldwide. After spending three weeks helping students to understand a single algebra equation, he came to the conclusion that using video as a teaching tool was the answer. He produced 10 short videos to accompany his lesson plan, and was shocked at the pace his students learned the once confusing algebraic equations after viewing the videos. Mr. Meyer decided to post the video and lesson plan on his blog and its viewings jumped from 30 visitors a day to 6,000 downloads in two weeks. His teaching technique has now been shared with teachers all over the country and our Nation's students are better for his efforts. Our Nation depends on teachers like Dan Meyer who use technology and innovation to help students learn and grow. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Dan Meyer for his extraordinary leadership and distinguishing himself as a Cable's Leaders in Learning Award recipient.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act (H.R. 6063). This bill authorizes $20.2 billion for NASA for the 2009 fiscal year which represents a 14 percent increase over the President's request of $17.6 billion. The President's vision of new manned space missions without requesting adequate funding for the agency has resulted in cuts to other NASA programs, including important earth sciences research. The bill we're considering today addresses the needs of NASA's entire mission and all four of its directorates which encompass space exploration, aeronautics, and other research and technology development programs. NASA's Ames Research Center is a key component of the vibrant research and innovation community in my Congressional District. With special expertise in supercomputing, networking and intelligent systems, Ames develops technologies critical to NASA's missions. Ames and the other NASA research facilities around the country rely on the funding within the Science Mission Directorate (SMD). The House of Representatives has consistently exceeded the President's budget request and I'm pleased to see this pattern continue today. We have exceeded the Administration's request for all four of the divisions within SMD to ensure that NASA scientists at Ames and across the country have the resources they need. While this is a good bill, I hope future reauthorizations will revisit the restrictions imposed on NASA's ability to engage in Enhanced Use Lease (EUL) agreements. Just last week Ames Research Center announced it had signed an EUL with Google in a strategic partnership to develop new ideas, technologies, and applications. I hope we can expand this program in the future to provide further opportunities for NASA to develop these fruitful relationships which leverage private sector expertise to use our tax dollars effectively and efficiently. NASA is a critical component of our nation's research and development infrastructure and I thank the Committee on Science and Technology for their hard work on this bill. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, most Americans are not overjoyed to watch television commercials, but they are willing to tolerate them to sustain free over-the-air television. What annoys all of us is the sudden increase of volume when commercials are aired. While the FCC does not specifically regulate the volume of TV programs or TV commercials, broadcasters are required to have equipment that limits the peak power they can use to send out their audio and video signals. This means the loudest TV commercial can never be louder than the loudest part of any TV program. A TV program has a mix of audio levels. There are loud parts and soft parts. Nuance is used to build the dramatic effect. Most advertisers don't want nuance. They want to grab our attention, and to do this, they record every part of it as loud as possible. The peak levels of commercials are no higher than the peak levels of program content, but those peaks are sustained for longer periods in commercials. I've introduced the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act, CALM Act, to address the volume of commercials. The bill would mandate that the FCC within one year enact rules requiring that advertisements not be excessively noisy and that they must be at the same volume as the television programming they accompany. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this sensible bill.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Sheila Mary Sullivan Peterson who passed away on May 22, 2008 in her home in Menlo Park, California. She leaves behind her beloved husband Ronald C. Peterson and her children, Molly, Kathleen, and Michael. The eldest daughter of justice Raymond L. Sullivan and Winifred Carreras Sullivan of San Francisco, Shelia dedicated her life to education and the improvement of the lives of others. A former trustee of Sacred Heart Schools in Atherton and a recipient of the St. Madeleine Sophie Award for service to the schools, she was a blue- ribbon graduate of the Convent of the Sacred Heart in Atherton and a graduate of Lone Mountain, the San Francisco College for Women. She taught at Winfield Scott and Alamo schools in San Francisco and was a member of the Catholic Community at Stanford. In addition to all those who loved her in the community and in the classrooms, she was the beloved sister of R. Lawrence Sullivan, Jr., Philip Sullivan, Mary Ward, and Mother Agnes of the Cross O.C.D. (Patricia Sullivan), a wonderful sister-in-law and aunt to numerous Peters, Sullivans, and Wards; a close cousin to members of the Wade, Carreras, and Sullivan families. Madam Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in honoring the life of Sheila Mary Sullivan Peterson and extend our sympathy to her family. Through her many contributions to her family, friends, students, and community she has left a lasting legacy of love, faith, and mentorship which will never be forgotten and which will live forever in all of us blessed to have known her. She graced our lives and our community, made our country better and now enhances the heavens with her presence.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of my good friend Stuart G. Moldaw who passed away at the age of 81 on Saturday, May 24, 2008. Stuart is survived by his beloved wife, Phyllis, daughters Carol and Susan Moldaw, and four grandchildren. A native of Boston and the son of a Russian immigrant, Stuart enlisted in the Navy in 1944 before using the G.I. Rill to attend Syracuse University where he met his future wife, Phyllis lsraelson of Portland, Maine. After graduating in 1949 with a Bachelor's Degree in Marketing and Economics, Stuart began his retail career at Le Bon Marche, a department store in Lowell, Massachusetts, and married Phyllis in 1950. He then moved to California to work for another retailer, Lerner Shops, where he became a district manager and oversaw the opening of more than 20 Lerner stores, including ones in Oakland and the Stanford Shopping Center. In 1958, Stuart opened his first retail business, Country Casuals, in Palo Alto. He also started Pic-a-Dilly, one of the country's earliest off-price apparel chains in 1973, and co-founded Athletic Shoe Factory in 1979, which featured national brands at discounted prices. Both chains were later sold. He also co-founded V.S. Venture Partners, a Mendo Park- based venture capital firm. Stuart was a longtime Bay Area resident, pioneer entrepreneur and philanthropist who helped transform a small chain of local department stores into the Pleasanton-based retail giant Ross Dress for Less. Ross Stores Inc., acquired by Stuart in 1982, is a Fortune 500 company with $6.1 billion in sales over the last 12 months, more than 900 stores in 27 states and more than 40,000 employees. The original investors in the Ross venture included another Bay Area retail pioneer, Mervin G. Morris, the founder of Mervyns, who had recently retired before becoming one of the Ross investors. In a career that spanned more than a half-century, Stuart, a resident of Atherton, also helped launch several other retail ventures, including Sail Francisco-based Gymboree, a children's clothing retail chain launched in 1986. At the time of his death, Stuart was chairman emeritus of both Ross Stores and San Francisco-based Gymboree Corp. Stuart Moldaw cared deeply about people and directed himself to make the world a better place. He was well-respected for his passion and commitment to improving the lives of those around him and was appointed by President Bill Clinton as a Public Delegate to the U.S. Mission at the United Nations in 1993 and as Chairman of the White House Commission on Presidential Scholars in 1996. In 2000, Governor Gray Davis appointed him to chair California's World Trade Commission, and 2 years later he was appointed to California's Little Hoover Commission. He also served on the boards of many Bay Area non-profits, including the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula, the Palo Alto Medical Foundation, the Jewish Community Endowment Fund and the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. He gave tirelessly of himself to his family, friends, colleagues and community and set the highest standard for others to follow. Madam Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in honoring the life and accomplishments of Stuart G. Moldaw. His decades of contributions to his community and his country stand as lasting legacies of a life lived well. How privileged I am to have known him, represented him and to have had him as my friend. America is better because of him.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to honor Greg Nelson, a resident of your Congressional District who retires today, June 4, 2008, from the teaching of history for over 40 years. Greg earned his BA in political science and history at San Francisco State in 1967, and soon after began his career at Arcata High School teaching government and geography. He also worked as a volunteer for Vista, a grassroots organization that worked for school and community relations in his hometown of Detroit, Michigan, before earning a master's degree in secondary education from the University of San Francisco in 1972. It was that autumn that Greg began teaching history at Lick-Wilmerding High School in San Francisco. During his 35 years in the history department at Lick, Greg has built his reputation as an accomplished scholar of history and government, and a devoted mentor and advisor to students. His senior seminar in constitutional law remains one of the most popular offerings and helped spawn Constitution Day, which includes competitions and games for the entire student body to celebrate that glorious document. Greg possesses encyclopedic knowledge of U.S. history, to be sure, but always will be best known for his passion for teaching this history to his students year after year. During his tenure at Lick-Wilmerding, he has inspired over 2,500 students to become civically engaged and to take action in order to preserve the best in our democracy. How fitting, then, that the last student project that Greg led was an 8-day immersion in the workings of city government at San Francisco City Hall, which included opportunities for current students to work with many of his former students who now work in public service. What a gift! Over the years, Greg also has been a beloved student advisor, a happy and willing chaperone, and retreat leader. He has served as Department Chair, and has been a caring mentor to new faculty. His contributions to the school and the larger community truly are legendary. And most of all, his gentle nature and generous nature will be missed. Madam Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Greg Nelson for an extraordinary teaching career and thank him for honoring our Constitution, for enhancing our democracy, and for strengthening our community and our country.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, SVLG, and its contributions to Silicon Valley and the State of California with you. On July 18, 1977, the exceptional innovator and pioneer, David Packard, gathered thirty of his CEO peers with a simple yet provocative idea. To build an organization that would create a proactive voice for Silicon Valley businesses to ensure the economic health and a high quality of life in Silicon Valley. The organization would be an advocate for affordable housing, comprehensive regional transportation, reliable energy, a quality K-12 and higher education system, a prepared workforce, a sustainable environment, and business and tax policies that would keep California and Silicon Valley competitive. The idea led to the founding of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, now know as the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, in 1978 with 33 founding members. The first Chair of the Board was Bob Wilson of Memorex and the first Working Chair was Bob Kirkwood of Hewlett Packard. David Packard accepted a seat on the Board and the position of Board Vice Chair. The first president was Bill June and Peter Giles was then hired as CEO. Over the course of the last thirty year's David Packard's vision became a reality and there are many examples of success to highlight, including but not limited to the following: In 1981, SVLG published its first housing study, emphasizing the need for a jobs-housing balance, and urges public officials to rezone land from industrial and commercial to residential. The report also called for more compact development to help lower housing costs and make better use of the Valley's limited land resources, and to place housing more closely to jobs. Several cities agreed, and thousands of acres are re-zoned for residential development. In 1982, the Board of Directors helped lead the effort to establish Santa Clara County's first carpool, or ``high occupancy vehicle'' lane on the San Tomas Expressway. Measure A becomes a statewide model of efficiency, with all three projects completed on time and on budget during the measure's 10-year life. Following the lead of Santa Clara County, 19 counties representing nearly 85 percent of all Californians have since passed similar measures. These measures now fund $1 of every $2 invested in the state's transportation system. 1988--Model Toxic Gas Ordinance--The ordinance was aimed at any gas user, private and public sector, to respond to increased concern about the potential release of toxic gases. 1989--Board Endorses Gas Tax Increase--The Board of Directors voted to support Proposition 111--a nine-cent increase in the state gas tax to fund transportation improvements. 1990--Chlorofluorocarbon Reduction--The Board of Directors voted to play a leadership role in reducing CFC's. Silicon Valley high-tech firms became the national leaders in reducing this form of pollution. 1990--Open Space Initiative--Founder David Packard agrees to serve as Honorary Chair of the county's first Open Space Initiative. The measure receives a strong 64 percent support at the polls, but fails under the two-thirds vote requirement. However, it set the stage for the successful measure 4 years later. 1993--Housing Action Coalition Formed--The purpose of the coalition was to advocate for homes that are ``well built, relatively affordable, and appropriately located'' so that Valley cities could service them. With a mission to ``advocate, educate, and legislate,'' the coalition has had a tremendous impact. Today, the coalition consists of more than 200 organizations and individuals. 1993--Board Endorses County's ``Technology Bond'' Proposal--In partnership with the county member companies purchased approximately $12 million in ``technology bonds'' to help the county improve and install technology systems throughout its departments. 1995--Vehicle Buy-Back Coalition Scraps Old Polluting Cars--This innovative demonstration project raises nearly half a million dollars to purchase and permanently retire more than 400 ``gross polluters,'' with a reduction in pollution of more than 400 tons. The demonstration project was so successful that it becomes a model for the Air District's own Buy-Back program. 1997--Eco Pass Partnership Initiated--SVLG is principal business voice in encouraging employers to consider the ``Eco Pass'' Program. The Eco Pass is a transit pass that employers can purchase for their Silicon Valley employees, allowing them the use of buses, express buses, and light rail for the entire year. The first year demonstration program produced a doubling of transit use by employees at participating companies. SVLG also launched the Bay Area Clean Air Partnership--Partnership to engage employers and employees in voluntary programs to reduce pollution on hot, smoggy ``Spare the Air'' days. In its first year of operation, thousands of vehicle trips were avoided and the region did not violate a single day of the federal Clean Air Standards. 1998--Housing Trust Fund Business Plan Approved--The Board endorses the business plan officially launching the County's first Housing Trust Fund. With a goal of raising up to $20 million over the next 24 months, the funds will leverage approximately $200 million worth of housing, with funds equally divided into three categories. They include first- time homebuyers assistance, affordable rental housing, and homeless shelter and assistance. These funds will assist nearly 5,000 Silicon Valley families. 1999--San Jose Teacher Housing Initiative--SVMG partnered with San Jose to launch San Jose's Teacher Housing Initiative, a proposal to assist San Jose teachers to become homebuyers, as well as enhancing recruitment and retention of educators in the community. SVLG also began the Summer Fellowships for Teachers--SVMG partnered with the Industry Institute for Science and Math Education (IISME) on a Summer Fellowship for Teachers program. By partnering with SVMG, the number of teacher fellowships was increased 40 percent from the highest numbers achieved in IISME's 17-year history. 1999--Creating Quality Neighborhoods--SVMG completed a 21-month study to identify every vacant (and underutilized) parcel of land that is zoned commercial, industrial, or residential. The effort will now shift to working with cities to consider the report's findings to ensure there are enough homes for Silicon Valley workers. By following the report's recommendations, the Valley could meet 99 percent of home demand during the next 10 years, rather than the current 50 percent projected if current land use patterns are followed. 2000--Statewide Transportation Plan--More than $1 billion is directed to improvements that benefit the Valley, even though Santa Clara County accounts for only 5 percent of the state population. 2002--Hetch Hetchy Legislation Passes--SVMG, in coordination with BAWUA, successfully advocated for three critical pieces of state legislation to ensure the Hetch Hetchy water system would be updated to withstand earthquakes. This vital system serves the water needs of 2.4 million Bay Area residents and employers. 2005--The Leadership Group's first Annual CEO Washington, D.C. Advocacy Trip, led by Solectron CEO Mike Cannon with 25 executive colleagues, met with 70 key members of Congress in the nation's Capitol. A new ``Middle School Math Initiative'' was reviewed by the Working Council with strong recommendation of the Education Committee. Also, the Leadership Group organized the first ``Applied Materials Silicon Valley Turkey Trot,'' with 1,900 participants; 240 volunteers and more than $132,000 raised for three local non-profits. 2006--The Board approved a 12-point ``Clean and Green'' Alternative Energy Action Plan to curb greenhouse gas emissions and impact climate change in the region. 2007--SolarTech Begins--Recognizing the growing importance of alternative energy the Leadership Group developed SolarTech. The purpose is to identify, prioritize, and resolve the technical and adoption barriers to solar technology by addressing issues of performance, standards, and workforce readiness. Today, under the exceptional leadership of Carl Guardino, SVLG has more than 200 member companies and its members contribute more than $1 trillion to the global economy, an amount equal to the gross national product of Italy. Members of the SVLG employ more than 250,000 people in the Valley who constitute one-fourth of the entire private sector workforce in the region. They generate more than $1 trillion worth of business which is approximately eight times as large as California's entire state budget, and represents a significant contribution to the state and the national government treasuries, along with hefty property taxes for local governments. Madam Speaker, I ask our colleagues to join us in honoring the Silicon Valley Leadership Group as it celebrates its 30 year anniversary marking its extraordinary contributions to the economic health and quality of life to the residents and businesses of Silicon Valley. We salute Carl Guardino, President and CEO, his staff and every member of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and accomplishments of an extraordinary neurosurgeon, professor, mentor and hope-giver, Dr. Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa. The New York Times, May 13, 2008, carried a story which described Dr. Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa's incredible journey from Mexicali, Mexico, to the world-renowned halls of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. His story is the story of America and what immigrants in every chapter of our history contribute to our Nation. Below is the full text of the article: A Conversation With Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa: A Surgeon's Path From Migrant Fields to Operating Room (By Claudia Dreifus) At the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Alfredo Quinones- Hinojosa has four positions. He is a neurosurgeon who teaches oncology and neurosurgery, directs a neurosurgery clinic and heads a laboratory studying brain tumors. He also performs nearly 250 brain operations a year. Twenty years ago, Dr. Quinones-Hinojosa, now 40, was an illegal immigrant working in the vegetable fields of the Central Valley in California. He became a citizen in 1997 while at Harvard. Q. Where did you grow up? A. Mexicali. My father had a small gas station. The family's stability vanished when there was a devaluation of the Mexican peso in the 1980s. My father lost the gas station, and we bad no money for food. For a while, I sold hot dogs on the corner to help. As the economic crisis deepened, there seemed no possibility for any future in Mexico. I had big dreams and I wanted more education. So in 1987, when I was 19, I went up to the border between Mexicali and the United States and hopped the fence. Some years later, I was sitting at a lunch table with colleagues at Harvard Medical School. Someone asked how I'd come to Harvard. ``I hopped the fence,'' I said. Everyone laughed. They thought I was joking. Q. After you crossed the border, what kind of work did you find? A. I was a farm laborer in the San Joaquin Valley, seven days a week, sunup to sundown. I lived in this little trailer I paid $300 a month for. It didn't take long to see that farm work was a dead end. After a year of it, I moved to Stockton, where I found a job loading sulfur and fish lard onto railroad freight cars. My eyes burned from the sulfur, and my clothes smelled from fish lard, but it paid me enough so that I was able to go to night classes at San Joaquin Delta Community College. There, I met this wonderful human being, Norm Nichols, the speech and debate coach. He took me into his family and mentored me. Norm helped me apply for and get accepted to the University of California, Berkeley. Once at Berkeley, I took a lot of math and science classes to up my G.P.A. Science and math are their own language. You didn't need to write in perfect English to do well in them. I pulled straight A's in science. In my senior year, someone told me to go see this guy, Hugo Mora, who helped Hispanics with science talent. I brought him my transcript and he said: ``Wow! With grades like these, you should be at Harvard Medical School.'' That's how I got to Harvard. All along, I had much luck with mentors. Q. Did you find Harvard tough? A. Not really. Compared to working in the fields, it was easy. The question was what kind of doctor should I become? For a while, I thought I'd be a pediatric oncologist, because I wanted to help children. But then I thought, I'm good with my hands. Maybe I should do surgery. One day, I was waltzing through Brigham and Women's Hospital and I saw Dr. Peter Black, the chairman of neurosurgery. I introduced myself, and he invited me that day to come to watch him do an operation. As it happened, he was doing an ``awake'' surgery, where the patient's brain is exposed and the patient is awake so that the surgeon can ask questions. As I watched that, I fell in love with brain surgery. Q. What about it spoke to you? A. Imagine, the most beautiful organ of our body, the one that we know least about, the one that makes us who we are, and it was in Dr. Black's hand. It was in front of me. It was pulsating! I realized I could work with my hands and touch this incredible organ, which is what I do now. I cannot conceive of a much more intimate relationship than that. A patient grants you the gift of trusting you with their lives, and there is no room for mistakes. Dr. Peter Black, he was a very humble person. And he took me under his wing. So here again, I was very fortunate with mentorship. Q. I'm told that you do something that not all surgeons do: you spend a lot of time with patients before an operation. Why? A. I meet them several times, and their families. They don't know if they are going to wake up after the operation. Not all the time am I successful. I do about 230 to 240 brain tumor operations a year. The majority make it. Some have complications. And some--2 to 3 percent--it takes a while for the patients to wake up. I need to meet everyone so that they know the risks. But getting to know these patients, it's the most painful part. I was at a funeral yesterday. This was a 21-year-old man with a young wife, pregnant. Three surgeries, and the tumor kept growing and growing. And he told me, ``There's no possible way I'll give up.'' He fought so hard. He trusted me with his life. Not once, several times. I owed him my presence. Q. How do you handle such losses? A. One of the ways I work it out is through research, the laboratory. I'm trying to learn about the causes of these recurring tumors. The patients, they can donate tissue, which we will examine. My hypothesis is--and there are quite a few scientists who believe this--there are within these brain tumors a small subset of cells that can keep growing, even when you think you've taken them all out. We call them brain stem cells. They can keep making themselves, and they can make ``daughter cells'' that can become anything else in the brain. They have the ability to go to sleep for a little bit and then wake up and do it again. So we're trying to identify this small subset of cells we may be leaving behind when we make these beautiful surgeries. Q. Have you actually found them? A. Yes, but only in the laboratory. When we've found them, they may be a product of the experimental conditions of the laboratory. We haven't found them yet in live patients. The next challenge is to see if they truly exist in the human brain while the patient is alive. Q. When you hear anti-immigrant expressions on talk radio and cable television, how do you feel? A. It bothers me. Because I know what it was that drove me to jump the fence. It was poverty and frustration with a system that would have never allowed me to be who I am today. As long as there is poverty in the rest of the world and we export our culture through movies and television, people who are hungry are going to come here. There's no way to stop it.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to continued war funding for Iraq. I voted against the war and have never wavered in my opposition to the Administration's misguided policies in Iraq. It has been a long and painful 5 year journey for the people of our country since the Administration acted preemptively and unilaterally to invade and occupy Iraq. Military leaders, the best minds in foreign and economic policy, and the vast majority of the American people have been resoundingly clear: The Administration's war-without-end policy is not a strategy for success. As retired General William Odom, former Director of the National Security Agency under President Reagan and member of the National Security Council under President Carter stated, ``Getting out of Iraq is the pre-condition for creating new strategic options.'' I cannot support war funding without a clear exit strategy in sight. It is bad for our troops, our country, and our standing in the world. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of today's second amendment that includes a clear path out of Iraq, a plan that my constituents and the vast majority of Americans are demanding. More than 5 years ago the President proclaimed ``Mission Accomplished'' in Iraq. Paradoxically, he insists on a permanent U.S. presence there. And what exactly has this Administration ``accomplished'' in Iraq? More than 4,000 U.S. soldiers have been killed and almost 30,000 injured; tens of thousands Iraqi civilian deaths; an emboldened Iran and new threats from Al Qaeda in the region; $519 billion taxpayer dollars spent and a future expenditure of some $3 trillion; a hobbled Iraqi government unable to provide clean water, medical care, jobs for its people, or pass critical oil sharing legislation; a U.S. military on the verge of collapse and unable to press vigorously the critical fight in Afghanistan or respond to other crises in the world; and still no exit strategy. With no end game in sight, the Administration and its supporters in Congress are complicit in a continuation of a failed policy which they insist on extending with a blank check policy to accompany it. The President owes it to our brave men and women in Iraq and their families, he owes it to the American people, and he owes it to the citizens of Iraq not to leave this mess for the next President to finish. This bill establishes a clear path out of Iraq. The language requires the Administration to begin redeployment 30 days after enactment and requires Secretary Gates to submit to Congress within 90 days a report detailing plans to reduce and redeploy troops from Iraq. It prohibits sending troops to Iraq that are not assessed as ``fully mission capable'' of performing their assigned mission, and outlaws the presence of a permanent U.S. base there. Additionally, this provision requires the Iraqi government to match every U.S. dollar spent for training and infrastructure construction and repair. Finally, it prohibits the intelligence community from subjecting detainees to interrogation techniques not authorized by the U.S. Army Field Manual. This will essentially abolish the use of water torture and begin to restore America's standing in the world community. As a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence it is vital that we extend the ban on torture to the Intelligence agencies. The President has said he will veto any ban on torture, clearly demonstrating his desire to reserve for himself the right to subject detainees to these horrendous techniques. Congress has an obligation to make it clear that the American people do not believe in torture and will not allow it to continue. This amendment sets a decisive course out of Iraq and begins to shift responsibilities to the Iraqi government. I urge my colleagues to heed the demands of the American people and support this strategy. Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased that the Appropriations Committee included two important provisions in today's third amendment. First, it includes critical funding for Iraqi Christians and second, it modernizes and improves the G.I. bill. I'm pleased that the amendment contains $10 million for vulnerable Iraqi minorities, including Christians. The needs of Assyrians in Iraq could not be greater. A report produced by the Department of State on U.S. assistance to the Nineveh Plains in Iraq concluded that Christian minorities have experienced serious human rights abuses in the Nineveh Plains. The report also states that the region has absorbed a significant number of Christian internally displaced persons (IDPs) moving from the south, placing an economic burden in the area. They are fleeing because they are being threatened and murdered in their home communities. Their priests are being executed, their churches burned, and their nuns threatened. In February of this year, Archbishop Paulos Rahho was abducted and murdered in Mosul. While Assyrians only represented 5 percent of the total Iraqi population before the war, according to the United Nations today they comprise as much as 40 percent of the growing Iraqi refugees who have fled for their lives to Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey. These families desperately need security, housing, jobs, schools and the chance to live in a sustainable community where they can openly practice their faith. This funding is essential to their survival. Also included in this amendment is a modernization of the G.I. bill. The G.I. bill has been heralded as one of the most successful government programs in the history of our Nation. It gave millions of G.I.s the chance to go to college, many of whom were the first to receive a college education in their families. But the G.I. bill is over 54 years old and has not kept up with rising tuition costs. According to a recent Department of Veterans Affairs (V.A.) survey, 18 percent of the veterans recently back from tours of duty are unemployed. Of those employed since leaving the military, 25 percent earn less than $21,840 a year. The survey also demonstrated that only 48.4 percent of the respondents took advantage of the G.I. bill and concluded that receiving the benefits of the current G.I. bill was not a strong predictor of successful employment outcomes. This survey clearly demonstrates the need for this new G.I. bill. The amendment provides veterans with a maximum educational benefit equal to the highest tuition rate of a public college or university in their State, as well as a monthly stipend for housing. It also establishes a new program in which private educational institutions would make financial contributions toward veterans' tuition, and the federal government would match those contributions. When our veterans return from the battlefield, they should have every opportunity to enter the classroom and ultimately the civilian workforce. Our Nation needs these brave men and women to contribute to the growth and health of our economy and this new G.I. bill accomplishes this. From development funding for Iraqi Christians to the creation of a new G.I. bill, this amendment addresses specific urgent needs for our Nation and world. The amendment is well crafted and I urge my colleagues to support its passage.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the San Mateo County Building & Construction Trades Council and its contributions to San Mateo County with my friend Congresswoman Jackie Speier. On April 10, 1908, the San Mateo County Building & Construction Trades Council received its first charter from the California State Building Trades Council. Today it is comprised of 24 local construction unions and has a membership of over 16,000 of the highest skilled crafts women and men in the construction industry. They are plumbers, pipefitters, electricians, carpenters, roofers, ironworkers, cement masons, elevator constructors, heavy equipment operators (Operating Engineers), painters, truck drivers (Teamsters), lathers, sheet metal workers, plasterers, brick and tile layers, boilermakers, pile drivers, glaziers, carpet and soft tile layers, fIre sprinklerfitters, insulation and asbestos workers, laborers, hod carriers, sign painters, millwright workers, laborers, cabinetmakers, steamfitters, and hardwood floor layers. While their jobs may be different, what links them together is their dedication to perform with high skill and great pride. In 1908, San Mateo County was young and growing, and through the hard work of another generation, the county was shaped into what it is today. The single biggest accomplishment was the construction of San Francisco International Airport and more recently, a new terminal at the airport. The mission of the San Mateo County Building & Construction Trades Council has always been to improve the quality of life for all construction workers, promote the value of highly skilled union crafts women and men, and to increase the union market share in the construction industry. The San Mateo County Building & Construction Trades Council has also understood the importance of not only developing a strong foundation of skilled crafts persons through apprenticeship programs, but also the need to reach out to developers, public agencies, and elected officials to explain why it makes good business sense to use union contractors and union workers. The San Mateo County Building & Construction Trades Council's active approach in voicing the need for construction workers to be paid decent wages with pension and health benefIts so they and their families can afford to live in the community illustrates its commitment to every single worker. Madam Speaker, we ask our colleagues to join us in honoring the San Mateo County Building & Construction Trades Council as it celebrates a century of building and serving San Mateo County. We salute Bill Nack, the council's business manager and every single member of the council. The work of generations has shaped and built San Mateo County as we know it today, and contributed to the building of our country as well. May the next century be marked by the excellence and achievements of the first 100 years of the Building and Construction Trades Council of San Mateo County.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. I want to first begin by saluting our colleague, Louise Slaughter, and Mrs. Biggert, who has worked so hard on this. This is really all about the future, except we had to struggle for 13 years in order to recognize it. But today, we do. And it is a singular extraordinary achievement, not only on the watch of Chairwoman Slaughter, but today for the full House to pass this legislation. We know that in the makeup of our humanity is a genetic profile. Researchers and scientists have demonstrated what the potential is if in fact, not only through the human genome project, the sequencing, and the discovery of all that is hidden in it, what that portends for humanity. But there's another side of this, and that is a darker side. The darker side is entitled: Discrimination. That if that information, our genetic makeup is used by insurers to discriminate against people. So today what we are doing is eliminating that block, that discrimination that stands in the way of the fullness of the potential of our genetic profile and how it can be not only accumulated but used to the benefit of humanity. That is what this legislation represents. When we pass it and the President signs it into law, this legislation will not only end the discrimination and all that is attendant to it, but that from this day forward the principles of preventive medicine, the reduction of health care costs, the advancement of research, and the saving of lives will be the order of the day. I salute you, my colleague. Well done. You have earned your keep in the Congress.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to be a cosponsor of the Protecting the Medicaid Safety Net Act of 2008 and very pleased that a bipartisan agreement was reached to bring the bill up under suspension of the rules because it's essential for the House of Representatives to pass this legislation as soon as possible. Over 2,100 organizations across the country have told Congress that we have to stop the seven regulations issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, over the last year because they threaten the loss of $50 billion in Federal funding for key healthcare services. California's Governor Schwarzenegger has estimated that the regulatory changes will place an additional $12.5 billion burden on California alone. CMS has claimed these cuts are being imposed to eliminate waste from the Medicaid program. Far from addressing ``inappropriate'' payments, the seven regulations that CMS adopted will cut legitimate and necessary care for the most vulnerable in our society. Rather than using the power it already has to address waste, fraud, and abuse, CMS has taken the wrong turn by simply declaring that it will not pay for services. CMS is saying ``no'' to rehabilitation services to help people with profound disabilities and medical conditions maintain or gain function. CMS is saying ``no'' to case management services that help people get the medical care they need and are entitled to; this includes services for individuals with disabilities who are trying to move out of institutions and into the community. CMS is saying ``no'' to specialized transportation to help children with disabilities get to and from school. CMS is saying ``no'' to compensating safety-net hospitals for their critical services to the communities. By adopting this bill, we will stop the implementation of these draconian regulations. The bill will require an HHS study and report on the regulations and their impacts on states, something CMS failed to do. For those concerned about waste, the bill provides additional funding for the Secretary to root out true fraud within the system. Finally, the costs of the bill are fully paid for by requiring electronic verification of assets for individuals applying for Medicaid. With many of these regulations due to take effect very soon, it's critical that the House pass this bill today with a margin that will convince the President that a veto will not be sustained. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this important bill.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Trudy Cattermole, who was a loving wife, a great mother, an adored grandmother, tireless and faith-filled community leader and devoted and treasured friend to me and countless others. ``Trudy'' Leone McShane Cattermole was born April 12, 1927 and she passed away peacefully two days after her birthday on April 14th in Atherton, California surrounded by her loving family. She is survived by John, her husband of 54 years; her children, Gregory, Jay, and Theresa (Nani); her niece, Joanne McShane Costa; ten grandchildren, Kyle, Drew, and Michael Cattermole, Emily and Abigail Cattermole, Christina, Chase, Taylor, Tovac and Cael Daniels; and her great niece and nephew, Claire and John Costa. Above all else, Trudy cherished her family. She was totally devoted to her husband and to her children and grandchildren. She was graceful, generous and had a terrific sense of humor. As Trudy's family attests, she shared her trust in God with all her children, from the grace said at each meal, to her attendance at every baptism and first communion and to her devotion to the Sisters at Oakwood. She taught all of them about faith in action and she lived her faith by being a friend and to giving back to her community. Trudy served as chairperson of the Flower Ball. She gave to her children's schools serving in many capacities, including chairman of the Bellarmine Fashion Show, board member of the Bellarmine Woman's Mother's Guild. She served as president and board member of the Oakwood Auxiliary, and board member and officer of the Serra Club, volunteered at the St. Francis Center, St. Anthony's Dining Hall and helped found Sandwiches on Sundays at St. Pius Church. She was a Eucharistic minister at St. Pius Church where she was married and attended services for over 60 years. She was recognized as a member of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre. She was a second generation San Franciscan. She attended Sacred Heart High School in Menlo Park, and Lone Mountain College in San Francisco. Madam Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in honoring Gertrude ``Trudy'' Leone McShane Cattermole. Through her many contributions to her family, friends, church, and community she has left a lasting legacy of love, faith and social consciousness which will never be forgotten and for which will live forever with all of us blessed to have had her in our lives.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 5819, the SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act. The Small Business Innovation Research, SBIR, and Small Business Technology Transfer, STTR, programs are important sources of Federal support to facilitate the commercialization of research. Updating these programs will ensure the continuation of the central role they play in maintaining the preeminence of the U.S. research enterprise. The importance of fostering public-private partnerships cannot be underestimated. I see firsthand all the aspects of the innovation process, because my Congressional district contains basic research institutions, hundreds of current and former SBIR- and STTR-awarded companies, and venture capital firms. The SBIR and STTR programs facilitate the transition of technologies to the market. The important changes made by this reauthorization include increasing the award guideline levels, establishing advisory boards to improve program effectiveness and outcomes, and emphasizing the importance of energy- related research proposals. A key aspect of the debate surrounding this reauthorization has been whether or not venture capital-backed companies should be eligible to participate in the SBIR program. Small businesses with a proven ability to attract venture funding should not be excluded. The original legislation which created the program stated that no federal funds could be used for the Phase 3 commercialization state of an SBIR award, requiring award recipients to seek venture capital and other private sector funding. Preventing those companies from returning to the program for a different project undermines its very objective of bringing more technologies to the market. A small business that wins an SBIR and then attracts VC funds has a proven ability to succeed, yet may have insufficient resources to pursue new research projects. These companies should be eligible to continue to participate in the program and I'm pleased to see that the reauthorization before us today maintains this position. Let me remind my colleagues that Congress did not authorize a policy change to prohibit venture-backed companies from participating in the program. A ruling by an SBA administrative law judge made this interpretation and seriously damaged the program by disqualifying many good companies. Today we clarify the language and get the SBIR program back on the right track, without excluding small businesses which have successfully obtained venture capital funding for other technologies. I know there are concerns that this bill's increase in the percentage of research funds that are directed to the SBIR and STTR programs will detract from the core research missions of the agencies. This is a particular concern for the NIH which has been working under a constrained budget over the last several years. We need to continue to increase funding at the NIH and other research agencies, and we should consider the impact of increasing the SBIR and STTR set-aside as the bill moves forward in the legislative process. I hope the House will demonstrate strong bipartisan support for this bill to ensure that the innovators and entrepreneurs of our country continue to have Federal assistance to transition their research and ideas out of the labs and into the marketplace. I urge the entire House to support this important legislation.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, today Rep. Christopher Cannon and I introduced the Wireless Internet Nationwide for Families Act of 2008 (WIN) which, if enacted, would foster the deployment of a new nation- wide wireless broadband network. By every measure, the U.S. is losing the international broadband race and our competitiveness as a nation is at stake. More than 100 million Americans do not have broadband at home. Seventy-one percent of Latinos do not have broadband at home. Sixty-nine percent of Americans living in rural areas do not have broadband. Sixty percent of African Americans do not have broadband at home. The high cost of internet access is a barrier for too many families who want broadband. In just the last year, the average cost of a broadband connection has risen $2 per month, or nearly five percent. These troubling figures must change and that's why I've introduced the WIN Act. This legislation mandates that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) auction certain spectrum that is currently lying fallow. The winner of the auction would be required to build and complete a network within 10 years which must provide coverage to at least 95 percent of our country. The licensee would be required to provide service for free to consumers and public safety users. The WIN Act also requires the licensee to deny access to obscene and indecent material on the free service tier. The results of the 700 MHz auction disappointed many of us who hoped that a new entrant would emerge. Seventy percent of the auctioned spectrum went to only two carriers. While the auction required under this legislation is open to anyone, it is my hope that the bold conditions of requiring free, family friendly service will encourage the entry of a new national broadband service provider. The public airwaves are a national resource that should he utilized to benefit the public. For far too long our nation's carriers have stockpiled spectrum, gamed building-out requirements, and provided poor service to consumers. This bill attempts to remind licensees that they do not own the public waves in fee simple. As licensees, they hold spectrum in a public trust. This is an agreement that obligates them to utilize this spectrum in the public interest in exchange for their exclusive control. The Innovation Agenda made a commitment to spur affordable access to broadband and this bill will go a long way to providing universal broadband access. I encourage my colleagues to join me and Rep. Cannon in support of this legislation.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, we've read and seen on the news the accounting of numerous deaths following the anti-government protests in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa. The proindependence protests were initiated by ethnic Tibetans commemorating the 49th anniversary of the failed 1959 uprising that sent the Dalai Lama into exile. China is now facing mounting international pressure, including the U.S., to demonstrate restraint in dealing with the dissent. I support the aspirations of the Tibetan people to peacefully protest for independence and safeguard their distinct identity by promoting the elimination of all forms of racial, religious, and linguistic discrimination against them. The People's Republic of China, PRC, has failed miserably to guarantee the preservation of these rights for the Tibetan people and as a result, Tibetans remain plagued by poverty, illiteracy, and a limited infrastructure. I was privileged to participate in the Speaker's congressional delegation to India last month when we visited the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala. During our visit we discussed the tragic violence that has been taking place in Tibet with the Dalai Lama and we agreed that an open dialogue with the PRC and international pressure are the most effective methods at our disposal for ending the crisis. This resolution was born out of those discussions with the Dalai Lama. It condemns the government of the PRC for its bloody suppression of the Tibetan people and calls on the government of the PRC to invite the Dalai Lama to China for the purpose of dialogue to resolve the root causes of unrest in the Tibetan areas of China. Free expression and the right to dissent are defining elements of a democracy. That's why it is essential for us to speak out in condemnation of China's repression of religion, its complicity in the Sudanese atrocities in Darfur and its oppression of Tibet. I urge my colleagues to pass this important resolution.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of particle physicist, presidential advisor and arms control advocate, Dr. Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky, who died on September 27, 2007 in his home in Los Altos, California. He is survived by his wife Adele; two daughters, Margaret and Carol; three sons, Edward, Richard and Steven; nine grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren. ``Pief,'' as he was more affectionately known, was born in 1919 in Berlin. At the age of 15, Dr. Panofsky immigrated with his family to the United States where he received degrees from Princeton and the California Institute of Technology. In 1951, he accepted a professorship at Stanford University and, from 1961 to 1984, served as the founding director of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC). Under his leadership, SLAC became one of the most productive research facilities ever constructed. Its research in high-energy physics and subatomic particles would yield three Nobel Prizes and the discovery of new forms of matter. The wide-reaching moral and ethical repercussions of his work, particularly his earlier contributions to the Manhattan Project, were not lost on Dr. Panofsky. He carried his zest for discovery into impassioned advocacy, working with our Nation's highest offices and across borders and seas to prevent nuclear catastrophe. Dr. Panofsky served as an adviser on arms control in the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations, helping to secure the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty in 1963 and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972. In 1983, as the Cold War marked an increasingly divided world, Dr. Panofsky dismissed the Reagan Administration's ``Star Wars'' weapons initiative, and advocated instead for collaboration between SLAC and Chinese and Russian scientists as a deterrent to nuclear war. Madam Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in honoring Dr. Wolfgang K. H. ``Pief'' Panofsky. Through his many contributions to particle physics and arms control policy, he has left a legacy of brilliance and social consciousness which will never be forgotten.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. I thank the distinguished chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3773. Today's debate really goes to the heart of the two highest responsibilities of Members of Congress, to preserve our Constitution and to secure our Nation. Front and center, that's what this bill does, it accomplishes both. It gives the intelligence community the most flexible tools for our professionals for their surveillance of terrorists and other necessary targets overseas. It accomplishes that. It safeguards our constitutional rights by requiring the FISA Court to approve targeting and minimization standards at the front end, when no emergency exists and to assure that Americans are not targeted. It protects the private sector by providing prospective liability protection for telecommunications companies that provide lawful assistance to the government, and it provides those companies a way to present their defenses in secure proceedings, in district court, without the administration using state secrets to block those defenses. These are the most critical tools and safeguards, and that's why Members of Congress can be assured that they will be taking all the right steps by supporting this bill. The bill is one that we should all support, and I am proud to support it.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, the field of biotechnology is the future of medicine. Scientists and doctors are just beginning to scratch the surface of the potential to harness the extraordinary power of biology and the astounding natural processes which occur in the human body, in animals, and in other living organisms to advance breakthrough medical discoveries and treatments. While ordinary pharmaceuticals primarily treat the symptoms of a disease or illness, biotechnology products-- ``biologics''--can be manipulated to target the underlying mechanisms and pathways of a disease. Through the study of biotechnology, we will develop effective treatments for cancer and AIDS, many of which are already saving lives. We will cure diabetes. We will prevent the onset of deadly and debilitating diseases such as Alzheimer's, heart disease, Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis and arthritis. We will save millions of lives and improve countless more. The development of biologics is expensive and extremely risky. Bringing a biologic to market can require hundreds of millions of dollars in research and development costs and can take several years. For every successful biologic, there are another 10 or 20 that do not pan out, making the incentives for investment in this field extremely sensitive to any changes in the regulatory structure for biologics. In the relatively young industry of biotechnology, many of the original patents on biologics are beginning to expire and it's appropriate for Congress to consider how ``follow-on'' biologics or ``biosimilars'' are considered and approved by the FDA, and the impact these products will have on patient health and safety, health care costs, and incentives for innovation. As a primary matter, it's important to recognize that traditional ``small-molecule'' pharmaceuticals and biologics are fundamentally different in their development, their manufacture and their chemical makeup. A traditional small-molecule drug is manufactured through synthesis of chemical ingredients in an ordered process, and the resulting product can be easily identified through laboratory analysis. A biologic is a large, complex molecule, which is ``grown'' in living systems such as a microorganism, a plant or animal cell. The resulting protein is unique to the cell lines and specific process used to produce it, and even slight differences in the manufacturing of a biologic can alter its nature. As a result, biologics are difficult, sometimes impossible to characterize, and laboratory analysis of the finished product is insufficient to ensure its safety and efficacy. The pharmaceutical drug production process is easily replicated and a ``generic'' drug product is virtually identical to the original innovative product, so generic drug manufacturers are permitted to reference the original testing data submitted by the innovator companies when the original drug is submitted to the FDA for approval. With biologics, the manufacturing process is unique to each biologic and is not generally disclosed as part of the published patent. A biosimilar manufacturer would have to have intimate knowledge of these proprietary processes in order to ``duplicate'' the biologic product, and even then it is extremely difficult--no two living cell lines are identical, so no two biologics manufacturing processes have identical starting materials or proceed in the same way. It's also important to note that because biologics are produced with cells from living organisms, many of them can cause an immune reaction which is normally benign and does not affect safety. However, some of these reactions can negate the effectiveness of the biologic or even cause side effects that are more dangerous. Most of these reactions can only be observed through clinical trials with real patients. Any expedited regulatory pathway for biosimilars must account for all these factors and I'm proud to join with the Ranking Member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Joe Barton, to introduce the Pathway for Biologics Act. Our bill builds on the significant progress the Senate, led by Senators Kennedy and Enzi, has already made, as well as the significant level of consensus we have heard on our Committee about this issue. The Pathway for Biologics Act will establish a new statutory pathway for biosimilars guided by three principles: 1. Legislation to facilitate the development of biosimilars should promote competition and lower prices, but patient safety, efficacy and sound science must be paramount. 2. We must preserve incentives for innovation and ensure that patients will continue to benefit from the groundbreaking treatments biotechnology alone can bring. 3. We must strive to protect the rights of all parties and resolve disputes over patents in a timely and efficient manner that does not delay market entry and provides certainty to all parties. The regulatory pathway set forth in the Pathway for Biologics Act embodies each of these principles and sets forth a sensible, scientifically sound process for approval of biosimilars. The legislation allows for input from all interested parties and provides FDA appropriate flexibility to protect patient health by requesting analytical, animal and clinical studies to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of a biosimilar. The FDA will be empowered to require the tests and data it deems necessary, but the results of clinical testing for immunogenicity will always be required as part of this data unless the FDA has published final guidance documents advising that such a determination is feasible in the current state of science absent clinical data and explaining the data that will be required to support such a determination. Since biologics are derived from human and animal products, immune reactions are a major concern for any new biologic product and are now impossible to detect without actual human testing. Our legislation also addresses the important issue of interchangeability of biosimilars for the reference product. Some legislative proposals would allow the FDA to permit pharmacists and insurers to substitute a biosimilar for a physician's prescription for an innovator biologic product even when they cannot be demonstrated to be identical in their composition or effectiveness. Interchangeability of generic pharmaceuticals for brand name drugs is entirely appropriate since traditional generic drugs are chemically identical to the reference product. However, if the state of science is such that a complex molecule cannot be fully characterized and a precursor biologic cannot be adequately compared to a proposed biosimilar, then the biosimilar should not be fully substitutable for the precursor product without a physician's direction. The Pathway for Biologics Act makes it clear that the FDA cannot make a determination that a biosimilar is interchangeable with a reference product until it has published final guidance documents advising that it is feasible in the current state of scientific knowledge to make such determinations with respect to the relevant product class and explaining the data that will be required to support such a determination. This requirement is consistent with the recommendations of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. An essential element of any new regulatory scheme for the biotech industry is a careful balancing of incentives for innovation and opportunities for new entry by competitors. To preserve incentives for innovation, the Pathway for Biologics Act provides 12 years of data exclusivity for new biologic products, which ensures that biosimilar applications that rely on the safety and efficacy record of existing biologic products will not be permitted to enter the market for 12 years following the approval of the innovator product. The 12-year exclusivity period is meant to preserve existing protections biotech companies receive from patents. The Congressional Budget Office has found that the effective patent life for pharmaceuticals is about 11.5 years, so a data exclusivity period of 12 years is consistent with that finding. Data exclusivity is necessary to provide additional protections and incentives for biologics because biosimilars--unlike generic drugs--will not be chemically identical to the reference product and will be less likely to infringe the patents of the innovator. The legislation also includes incentives for additional indications and pediatric testing. New indications are critical for biologics and are often more significant than the indications for which approval was granted. Incentives for continued testing on new indications must be included to promote access to new treatments and cures, and this bill provides an additional 2 years exclusivity for new indications. I also believe it's important to provide incentives similar to those given traditional pharmaceuticals under the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act to biologics, so the legislation provides an additional 6 months of data exclusivity for testing for use in pediatric groups. In order to protect the rights of all parties and ensure that all patent disputes involving a biosimilar are resolved before the expiration of the data exclusivity period, the Pathway for Biosimilars Act establishes a simple, streamlined patent resolution process. This process would take place within a short window of time--roughly 6-8 months after the biosimilar application has been filed with the FDA. It will help ensure that litigation surrounding relevant patents will be resolved expeditiously and prior to the launch of the biosimilar product, providing certainty to the applicant, the reference product manufacturer, and the public at large. The legislation also preserves the ability of third-party patent holders such as universities and medical centers to defend their patents. Once a biosimilar application is accepted by the FDA, the agency will publish a notice identifying the reference product and a designated agent for the biosimilar applicant. After an exchange of information to identify the relevant patents at issue, the applicant can decide to challenge any patent's validity or applicability. All information exchanged as part of this procedure must be maintained in strict confidence and used solely for the purpose of identifying patents relevant to the biosimilar product. The patent owner will then have two months to decide whether to enforce the patent. If the patent owner's case is successful in court, the final approval of the application will be deferred until the patent expires. Madam Speaker. I believe the Pathway for Biosimilars Act sets forth a straightforward, scientifically based process for expedited approval of new biologics based on innovative products already on the market. This new biosimilars approval pathway will promote competition and lower prices, but also ensure that patients are given safe and effective treatments that have been subjected to thorough scrutiny and testing by the FDA. The Pathways for Biosimilars Act will also protect the rights of patent holders and preserve incentives for innovation in the biotechnology sector to develop the next generation of life-saving, life-changing therapies. I strongly urge my colleagues to support the Pathway for Biosimilars Act.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I thank our very distinguished, wonderful chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. We are here this evening for one reason and one reason only: it is to override the President's veto of the House authorization for the intelligence community. And the reason, the stated reason, and the President said so, the reason he vetoed the bill is because he is for torture. T-o-r-t-u-r-e. It's what the President said. This is a very sad, dark moment for our country that a President of the United States would remove all of the tools that we've provided for the intelligence community in a post-9/11 world and say, Because you don't allow torture, I'm not for the bill. Now, the President's position is entirely inconsistent with our Nation's history. The United States of America has long accepted that torture is beneath the standard of a civil nation. In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer for carrying out a form of water torture on a U.S. civilian. The military has frequently prosecuted American military personnel for subjecting prisoners to torture since the Spanish-American War. Our Nation was able to win two world wars and defeat a rising tide of communism with a torture prohibition in place. And I think that we can defeat America's enemies today without lowering ourselves, without allowing ourselves to become the organizers against us. That's what we have done. And we have not only degraded ourselves but helped to chip away at the magnificent credibility of our great Nation that people before us provided, and now we stand on their shoulders. And a President of the United States vetoes a bill because he stands for torture. We should slam that door shut. And the way we do it is by overriding this President's veto. There isn't any room in our country for this. And for anyone to describe these things as being sissies because you stand against torture, that is really shameful. That's really shameful, with all due respect. This is a tough position. It's the right position. So I urge my colleagues to vote to override the President's veto because that veto was about torture.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I'm proud to have sponsored this Resolution to establish a National 9-1-1 Education Month. Forty years ago President Johnson's Commission on Law Enforcement and Justice recommended that a single, nationwide telephone number be established for reporting emergencies--9-1-1. Since then, 9-1-1 has been used by millions of people across the country to quickly and efficiently contact their local fire and police departments, as well as report emergencies in their communities. Over 200 million emergency calls are made each year through the 6,000 9-1-1 public safety answering points serving more than 3,000 counties. As the connection between the eyes and ears of the public and the emergency response system in the U.S., 9-1-1 answering points are often the first to know of emergencies caused by natural disasters, to national security threats, making 9-1-1 a vital homeland security asset. Educating people of all ages and backgrounds about 9-1-1 is crucial to the effectiveness of our emergency response system. It is especially important for vulnerable populations like children, the deaf and the hard of hearing, and those with limited English skills to understand and use. A National 9-1-1 Education Month will encourage the development of public awareness events, advertising to the public, targeted outreach to schools, and training activities for parents and teachers. The deaf and hard of hearing are increasingly using text, video and instant messaging to access 9-1-1 operators. With such an effective and comprehensive emergency network, everyone benefits from learning. As co-chairs of the E9-1-1 Caucus, Mr. Shimkus and I understand the importance of the 9-1-1 emergency network to the public safety and security of our country and this resolution will help to ensure that all Americans can access these critical services in an emergency. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting a National 9-1-1 Education Month.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. I thank the gentleman, who is our wonderful chairman of the Health Subcommittee in the House, for yielding. I want to begin by paying tribute to our colleagues, Jim Ramstad and Patrick Kennedy. They came to my congressional district for a hearing, and there was an outpouring. But, in addition, there was an outpouring across the country and I believe that they carried a candle across the country and that candle has lit the way. They lit the way with their integrity, with their courage, with their patience to listen, and their legislative craft of the bill that is brought before the House today. So to both of you, I salute you and the country thanks you. America is best when we see where we have not done right, where there is a wrong, and we correct it. Congressman Kennedy said today that this is civil rights legislation, and it is. Every Member of the House should recognize that, today, we have the opportunity to break down a barrier, one of the last barriers in our country where those that have mental illness are indeed discriminated against in the insurance system of our country. Now there are some in my congressional district that have led the way. Tony and Fran Hoffman helped to found the National Association of Mental Health. Eve Oliphant has worked for that. And I am really proud that David Wellstone, the late Senator Wellstone's son, is a constituent as well. There are some very important points that have been made about the bill. There are also many things that have been thrown at it. For those that say that jet lag is going to be paid for by insurance companies, don't insult people that have mental health illnesses in our country. That will not happen. So, my colleagues, let's pass the civil rights legislation today. We will do the country good by doing so.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I rise today with great sadness to pay tribute to my colleague, my neighbor, and my friend, Congressman Tom Lantos. For three decades, Tom Lantos has been an eloquent voice for the voiceless here and around the world. With his passing, our country has lost a great champion for human rights. His dedication to his fellow human beings was rooted in having survived the Holocaust. His story of survival and escape from Nazi forced labor camps in Hungary during the Second World War is inspirational, but it was the memory of those, including his mother, whom he lost, that motivated him in his extraordinary career of public service. Tom Lantos' story was also the story of an immigrant. He said he was an American by choice. Coming to the United States through an academic scholarship, he worked hard and made the most of the opportunities that only America can offer. He earned degrees from the University of Washington and the University of California, Berkeley, and taught economics for 30 years before running for Congress in 1980, winning against a Republican incumbent in a Republican year. As a Member of Congress, Tom Lantos raised the profile of human rights in every corner of the world from China to Tibet and from Sudan to Burma. One of the first things he did when he came to Congress was to found the Congressional Human Rights Caucus in 1983. As the only Armenian-American serving in the House, I'm especially grateful for Tom's leadership as chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee last year when he worked to secure the passage of legislation recognizing, at long last, the Armenian Genocide of 1915. His voice in the face of strong opposition from many fronts helped secure the passage of this resolution through the committee. Although Congressman Lantos' expertise was in world affairs, he took care of his constituents in California's 12th Congressional District. For 15 years I've had the privilege to serve with him, representing one of the most remarkable areas of our country. We worked together on efforts to preserve our local environment and improve transportation. Congressman Lantos' efforts are clearly visible throughout his congressional district. He worked to expand BART service at San Francisco International Airport and to create a water ferry service from San Mateo County to San Francisco. He led the effort to acquire Rancho Corral de Tierra for the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, and we worked together to fund a visitor's center for the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary at the Fitzgerald Marine Center. More important than the legacy of his work is the legacy of his family, especially the love of his life, his wife Annette; his daughters Annette and Katrina; and his 18 grandchildren and 2 great- grandchildren. They always represented the greatest achievements of his great life. America was blessed by the life of Congressman Tom Lantos. May he rest in the peace that he worked so hard to bring to others during his entire life.