Anna Eshoo

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mary Regan Simonson, a dedicated community leader who is being honored as an inductee into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame as a Young Woman of Excellence. Since 1992, Mary Regan Simonson has contributed over 900 hours of community service to the Ronald McDonald House for terminally ill children and their parents. Working at the Ronald McDonald House, she recruits, trains, and manages a Teen Volunteer Program serving 200 children. She also has donated hundreds of volunteer hours at the Stanford Children's Hospital. As a senior at Sacred Heart Preparatory School, Mary Regan Simonson maintains a 3.68 grade point average and is the editor of the yearbook, as well as an active member of the student council. She is also a nationally competitive vaulter in gymnastics on horseback and spends time teaching younger children how to vault. Mr. Speaker, Mary Regan Simonson is an outstanding citizen and I salute her for her contributions and commitment to serving our community. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Mary Regan Simonson and congratulate her on being inducted into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame as a Young Woman of Excellence.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Jane Baker, a dedicated community leader who is being honored as an inductee into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame. Jane Baker has dedicated much of her life to serving the people of San Mateo County. For more than 20 years, she served on the San Mateo City Council, with six terms as mayor. As a dedicated local elected official, Jane Baker has worked with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, the National League of Cities Advisory Council and Board of Directors, the State Job Training Coordinating Council, the City/County Task Force on Transportation, the Association of Bay Area Governments, and the Council of Mayors of San Mateo County. Jane Baker is also a founding member and past director of the California Elected Women for Research and Education, and has been actively involved with the American Association for University Women, the League of Women Voters, the Women's Association of the First Presbyterian Church, the Coyote Point Museum Auxiliary, and the Commonwealth Club. Mr. Speaker, Jane Baker is an outstanding citizen and I salute her for all her work on behalf of and commitment to our community. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Jane Baker and congratulate her on being inducted into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Marjorie ``Midge'' Bolton, a dedicated community leader who is being honored as an inductee into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame. Marjorie ``Midge'' Bolton served as the head of the Volunteer Center of San Mateo County for 20 years. During that time, she started an innovative volunteer program to help mental health patients who were leaving institutional care. From 1983 to 1993, Marjorie ``Midge'' Bolton worked as a member of the Board of the Peninsula Community Foundation, helping to guide the agency during a period of important growth and development. She was one of the founding members of the Mission Hospice and served as its board president from 1982-1984. Marjorie ``Midge'' Bolton is also actively involved in the Mills College Board of Trustees and Alumnae Association, the San Mateo County unit of the United Way of the Bay Area, the Peninsula YMCA, the Burlingame Library Foundation Board, and the KCSM Advisory Board. Mr. Speaker, Marjorie ``Midge'' Bolton is an outstanding citizen and I salute her for her contributions and commitment to serving our community. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Marjorie ``Midge'' Bolton and congratulate her on being inducted into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame.

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Dorian Moten Brown, a dedicated community leader who is being honored as an inductee into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame. Dorian Moten Brown is a remarkable community activist who works as a trainer in conflict resolution and serves as the director of a Community Mediation Program in East Palo Alto. She has opened an in- house alternative program for children suspended from elementary schools and runs programs of gang mediation in East Palo Alto, Palo Alto, and San Mateo. She is a mentor for parolees from the California Youth Authority, a group home counselor, and an executive producer of youth television for Emerald City magazine. Dorian Moten Brown has received numerous recognitions for her dedicated community service, including the World of Well Being Award from the Santa Clara Girl Scouts, the Positive Image Award from the East Palo Alto Teen Home, the Community Leader Fellowship Award from the California Wellness Foundation, and the Larry Sleizer Memorial Award for professional mediation. Mr. Speaker, Dorian Moten Brown is an outstanding citizen and I salute her for her contributions and commitment to serving our community. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Dorian Moten Brown and congratulate her on being inducted into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Roberta Jane Bessette, a dedicated community leader who is being honored as an inductee into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame. Roberta Jane Bessette has been involved in public health services for more than 30 years. As the visiting nurse director in San Mateo County, she has worked to support equal access to home health-care for everyone, regardless of race, religion, place of residence, or ability to pay. She promotes cultural diversity in hiring and has expanded the Visiting Nurse Association's home care program to rural and high crime areas where other agencies do not serve. With her vision and leadership skills, Roberta Jane Bessette started the much-needed home pediatric and psychiatric programs for the Visiting Nurse Association. She is also actively involved with the United Way County Leadership Board, the Foster City Friends of the Library, and the Health Plan Committee of San Mateo. Mr. Speaker, Roberta Jane Bessette is outstanding citizen and I salute her for her contributions and commitment to serving our community. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Roberta Jane Bessette and congratulate her on being inducted into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Jackie Speier, Assemblywoman of the 19th District of California, an extraordinary, history-making public servant who has protected the rights of many, with special attention to women, children, and consumers. Jackie Speier has brought a new meaning to the word ``courage'' as she has overcome tragedy in her own life and dedicated herself to public service. In November 1978, as legal counsel for the late Congressman, Leo J. Ryan, she accompanied the Congressman to Jonestown, Guyana to investigate charges that people were being held hostage by cult leader Rev. Jim Jones. On November 18, cult followers shot and killed Congressman Ryan while Jackie Speier was struck by five bullets. Later that day 911 cult members died. Two years later, Jackie Speier became the youngest elected member of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors. She served a second term and was chair of the board in 1985. In 1986, she became the first women elected to the 19th Assembly District of California, continuing to break new ground legislatively. As the chair of the Assembly Committee on Consumer Protection, Governmental Efficiency, and Economic Development, she led the fight to uncover numerous acts of inefficiency, waste, and abuse of public resources by State bureaucrats who subsequently resigned from office. She also led investigations into unfair and illegal practices of auto manufacturers and dealers, and championed many proconsumer laws. Jackie Speier's record of having bills signed into law is unprecedented. Among her accomplishments, she has ensured the advancement of women's rights and the protection of children. Some of her legislative achievements include the requirement of insurers to allow women to use their obstetrician-gynecologists as their primary care physicians, creating a voluntary California income tax check-off fund to support breast cancer research, creating the Women's Business Ownership Act and Council, and legislation which would deny professional and drivers licenses to those who fail to pay child support. Along with her extraordinary work in the legislature, she is the devoted and proud mother of two children. Jackie Speier made legislative history in 1988 when she became the first member of the California Legislature to give birth while in office. For her accomplishments, she has received a plethora of awards including Legislator of the Year by the California State Bar Association, Women Construction Owners and Executives, Leadership California, National Mobilization Against AIDS, California Women Lawyers, the National Organization for Women, and the Family Service Council. Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege of Jackie Speier's friendship and have had the honor of working with her as a colleague on the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors. Few legislators are as effective, as respected, and as historymaking as Jackie Speier. She is truly one of California's most distinguished women and I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring her today.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Byron D. Sher, assemblyman of the 21st District of California, a scholar, a dedicated public servant, and an ardent protector of the environment. After receiving his juris doctor degree from Harvard Law School in 1952, Byron Sher has held various academic teaching positions in law at Southern Methodist University, the University of Southern California, and Harvard Law School. He became a Stanford University professor of law specializing in consumer credit, consumer protection, contract and commercial law. Colleagues and students have held Byron Sher in their highest regard for his intellect compassion, and dedication to education. A resident of Palo Alto since 1957, Byron Sher felt a call to public service and has been an active participant in local and regional government. He served on the Palo Alto City Council for 9 years, two terms as mayor. He was also a commissioner of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, a member of the Committee on Environmental Quality for the National League of Cities and the League of California Cities, and a member of the policy advisory board of the League of California Cities' Solar Energy Program. In November 1980, Byron Sher was elected to the California State Assembly and has served eight terms. His outstanding leadership has been greatly valued in the State legislature where he has served as chairman of the assembly natural resources committee of 10 years. He currently serves on the committees of budget, natural resources, and public safety. He is also a member of the energy committee of the National Conference of State Legislatures [NCSL], and serves on the California Commission on Uniform State Laws. Colleagues from both sides of the aisle applaud his effective and compassionate service to the people of California. Dearest to his interests has been the environment, which he has continuously protected as a legislator. Byron Sher has authored landmark legislation, including the California Clean Air Act, the Integrated Waste Management Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Nation's first law to prevent toxic contamination from leaking underground storage tanks. He has authored laws to strengthen the State's timber regulations and the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act, and has added new rivers to California's Wild and Scenic River System. He is consistently rated among the top legislators in Sacramento by environmental groups. Mr. Speaker, Byron Sher is a most distinguished individual and one of the most respected elected officials in the State of California. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring him.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, the time has come for this Congress to face up to its responsibilities by passing a clean debt ceiling extension bill and not allow this great Nation for the first time in 220 years to default. Just last week Moody's Investors Service announced that it might lower the credit rating for U.S. Treasury bonds--the first time in our Nation's history. This should not be a source of pride to any Member of Congress. America cannot afford to have its full faith, its good word and its credit sacrificed on the altar of partisan posturing. Imagine Social Security checks and veterans' checks not being sent to recipients or honored when deposited by individuals who earned these benefits and rely on them. The American people cannot afford the higher interest rates that would result from default. We rail against ``dead beat'' dads * * * no one should be part of a ``dead beat'' Government. Mr. Speaker, only you and your colleagues have the power to keep America from the disgrace and disaster of default. Let us together pass a bill now to avoid default and international discredit.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report for this telecommunications act. I would like to start out, Mr. Speaker, by paying tribute to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Bliley], chairman of our committee, to the distinguished gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields], chairman of our subcommittee, who really worked tirelessly; to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell], ranking member; to David Leach of our staff and Lance Scott of mine, thank you for all the hard work that you have put in. Mr. Speaker, as the Representative of Silicon Valley, CA it is clear to me that making the phone industry more like the computer industry would be a great boost to our Nation's economy. That is why nearly 9 months ago today I stood with my commerce committee colleagues to announce my original cosponsorship of this historic legislation and rise today as a member of the conference committee. This legislation sets down a clear framework, or checklist, for deregulating the telephone industry and has put in place detailed rules to protect consumers from certain monopolies. In addition, the bill ensures rapid development and implementation of new technologies. Of particular interest to me is its mechanism to connect our Nation's children to the Internet and its requirement for a V Chip which parents can use to block television shows harmful to their children. I am also very proud to report that a provision I authored to limit the role of the Federal Communications Commission in setting standards for the computer and software industry has been included without change in the final bill. With this language, consumers will be free to use their computers to coordinate the functions of their futuristic homes, as opposed to being forced to use foreign-made television sets because of an FCC mandate. I say let the market decide. Mr. Speaker, as with most legislation, I am not totally satisfied with this bill. I am concerned about provisions in it that may dangerously decrease the number of voices on our public airwaves. I also strongly object to the bill's provision to hold businesses and Internet users liable from transmitting loosely defined material over computer networks. The Internet is not a U.S. Government network, and giving Federal officials indiscriminate censorship authority in this area mocks constitutional protections of free speech. I urge expeditious judicial review of this provision to ensure that free speech protections are not undermined. Despite these reservations which are serious ones, I believe our Nation must embrace the promise of the 21st century, an American century, marked by a new era of telecommunications. I encourage my colleagues to support the conference report. Mr. Speaker, there is one provision of the act that has been of particular interest to me as well as a wide range of companies and trade groups associated with the computer and information processing industries. Section 301(f) of the act is a provision that I authored and originally introduced during the Commerce Committee markup as an amendment to H.R. 1555. It limits the role of the Federal Communications Commission [FCC] in setting standards that may affect the computer and home automation industries. It directs the FCC to set only minimal standards for cable equipment compatibility, maximize marketplace competition for all features and protocols unrelated to descrambling of cable programming, and ensure that the FCC's cable compatibility regulations do not affect computer network services, home automation, or other types of telecommunications equipment. In short, this section keeps the Government out of high-technology standards and prevents the FCC from setting standards for the computer and communications services of tomorrow. Section 301(f) of the Telecommunications Act is a small but key ingredient for achieving the purpose of this historic bill: To embrace the future by allowing new technologies to flourish with minimum Government interference. Just as the act helps to open markets by eliminating Government barriers to long-distance and equipment manufacturing competition, section 301(f) ensures that our vital computer and high-technology markets remain open and competitive by ensuring that Government technical standards are kept to a minimum. Almost all standards in the communications and computer industries are voluntary, private standards--not Government mandates--and they should remain that way. The principle of keeping Government out of technical standards is taking on increasing importance as we observe the accelerating convergence of the computer and communications industries. Companies throughout America, and all over the world, are feverishly working on the communications applications of tomorrow. These include the smarthouse--a home where lighting, entertainment, security, and other consumer needs are controlled and programmed automatically for users. Computers and communications are at the very center of this automation revolution. But like most revolutions, this one would wither and die if the Government were to set the rules and stifle change. Section 301(f) modifies the FCC's authority in order to reign in the Commission's ongoing rulemaking on cable equipment compatibility. The problem Congress faces is that the agency has taken our 1992 Cable Act--the source of the Commission's power to assure compatibility between televisions, VCR's, and cable systems--and gone far beyond what appropriate public policy requires or its statutory authority permits. The Commission's 1994 proposal for a decoder interface would make the television set the gateway to the burgeoning information superhighway, relegating the computer, and all other home appliances, to second-tier status. It also would include one specific home automation protocol--called CEBus, or Consumer Electronic Bus--as the mechanism by which all cable-ready TV's and set-top boxes would communicate. My amendment prevents these consequences by precluding the Commission from standardizing any features or protocols that are not necessary for descrambling, preventing the selection of CEBus or any other home automation protocol as a part of the FCC's cable compatibility regulations, and precluding the Commission from affecting products in the computer or home automation marketplaces in any way. Section 301(f) leaves these standards to be set, as they should be, by competition in the marketplace. It makes clear that the Commission does not have the authority to prefer one home automation technology over another or permit its cable compatibility rules to affect the unrelated computer or home automation markets. Some have questioned whether section 301(f) was intended to prevent the Commission from achieving cable compatibility. To that I say simply: No. The provision does not change the agency's power to ensure that cable set-top boxes no longer interfere with the advanced features of consumer TV's--like picture-in-picture. And as the conference report makes clear, Congress intends that the FCC should now promptly complete its long-delayed cable compatibility rulemaking. What the Commission cannot do, however, is use the 1992 Cable Act as a justification or excuse for broad Government standards on home automation communications or audio-visual equipment. Under section 301(f), the FCC is required to maximize marketplace competition and private standards, not the role of Government regulations. It is required to let the market resolve standards issues for emerging technologies and services--like satellite broadcasting, video-on-demand and home automation--and to keep its cable compatibility standards narrowly tailored to solve only the specific problems the 1992 act asked the FCC to handle. The decoder interface, with its artificial bottleneck for the television and its unnecessary impact on home automation, is far from the only approach to solving those limited problems. The Commission must rework its compatibility proposal. It should also seek input from the computer, home automation, video dial tone and other potentially affected industries, not just the cable television and consumer electronics industries. Some have also questioned why the prohibition in section 301(f)--that the Commission may not affect the computer or home automation markets-- is so broad. To that I answer that the language is broad in order to effectively implement the principle that FCC regulations should not interfere in competitive markets. Because there is no reason to affect home automation or computers, and because even inadvertent or relatively small effects on competitive markets can easily displace technological innovation, section 301(f) is weighted toward protecting competition and open markets. As the conference report states, any ``material influence'' on unrelated markets is prohibited. Because it is impossible for agencies or courts to judge whether the impact of technical standards in emerging markets would be harmful or substantial, section 301(f) draws a bright line to avoid any regulatory impact whatsoever. There is an important policy at work here. The risk associated with wide administrative powers over technology issues in an era of rapid technical change is that premature or overbroad Government standards may interfere in the market-driven process of standardization or impede technological innovation itself. American industry has solved compatibility problems, and created workable standards, in the VCR, personal computer, compact disk, and other industries without any Government involvement. Markets drive interoperability much better, and far faster, than regulatory agencies could ever achieve. Where would we be today if the FCC had stepped in to set compatibility standards for personal computers in the early 1980's? We'd be without Windows '95, or the Mac, or even DOS, because all of these operating systems arose as the result of marketplace forces. My amendment, which I am proud to report is included verbatim in the final text of the Telecommunications Act of 1995, prevents us from overregulating in the new computer and communications markets of the 1990's. We may yet be a few decades away from the totally automated home of the ``Jetsons'' cartoon, but with the help of section 301(f) we're one step closer to the smarthouse of tomorrow. Mr. Speaker, a number of Members, on both sides of the aisle, played important roles in supporting my amendment at the Commerce Committee level and during the conference committee negotiations. I very much appreciate this bipartisan support, and thank my colleagues for insisting that the final conference report include the full text of the provision as originally introduced by me and as passed by the House last August. I urge the House to pass the Telecommunications Act of 1995 and to apply its basic principles of open markets and competition to the important area of compatibility standards.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. ESHOO. Of course there are. They have to be negotiated.

Ms. ESHOO. But 20 votes would stop that recess, and we could open up the Government, and we could move on.

Ms. ESHOO. I thank the gentleman for yielding. The point that I want to raise, the gentleman understands the dilemma that we are in. You just said that this is a national disgrace. Putting any fault or blame aside, can you work to find 20 votes in your caucus to open up the Government, Republican votes? We have 198 on our side and I think that you, being as reasonable and moderate as you are, that there would be 19 others?

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. I would like to thank my colleague, the gentleman from California [Mr. Farr], for organizing this small but very important tribute to Anne Fazio. As my colleague has just stated, Anne was a star. All of her doctors, anyone that knew her, her friends, her extended family of friends knew what a fighter she was. She fought leukemia, and she was a real champion. There were many times where she felt, as Vic said, her father, that she had been dealt a bad deck of cards, and her father, being the fighter that he is, reminded her time and time again to look at what she had done with what was dealt to her. She excelled at everything that she did, and we know most of all, as parents, the most difficult thing, the most unbearable thing, the most unthinkable is for a parent to have to bury their own child. So today in this Chamber, we gather as the friends and colleagues of the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio]. It makes no difference whether one is a Republican or a Democrat. We reach out, and we say, as parents and as friends, we grieve with you. You have our prayers. We know that the angels have welcomed Anne to heaven, but it is up to us to do God's work and to continue on and to take care of one another as friends and extend ourselves in sympathy. I would like to just close on this note: I cannot help but think of the writings of Milton at this time, and he wrote that, ``And so she passed on, and all the trumpets sounded on the other side.'' God rest her gentle young soul, and we send you our best, Vic, and when you get back here we will surround you with our friendship, with our love and our prayers.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support this morning of this measure to override the President's veto of the securities litigation conference report. I think that it is highly regrettable that the President chose to send up a veto message to us. With all due respect to that veto message, I think that it is an excuse slip. On every point that is mentioned in the veto, in a bipartisan effort all of this year we have worked to satisfy the concerns of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the administration, and the Senate in the key areas, certainly on pleadings and second circuit language, certainly on safe harbor, and that is also mentioned in the veto message, and certainly on statute of limitations. This bill is a strong bipartisan bill. It is good for investors, and it is good for our economy. In my view, the price of not passing this conference report this year is simply too high. As the Representative from Silicon Valley, I know that businesses in my region cannot wait for an answer. The legislation provides companies with relief, but not a blank check. The right of investors to sue in cases of actual fraud is protected by this bill. In fact, the bill's safe harbor provision meets the demands set down by CALPERS, the Nation's largest pension fund, representing nearly 1 million shareholders. Members who supported the conference report are now being asked to change their vote to satisfy its concerns about report language. I do not remember when report language was reason for a veto, and that is why I call it an excuse slip and not a true veto message. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to override the President's veto. I think it is regrettable, but I think that this bill needs to become law.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to support the Hamilton resolution on American troops in Bosnia. My decision on what is the proper course of action for the United States to take in this Balkan conflict is the most difficult one I have faced since coming to Congress. I have searched my conscience to do what is best for my country, understanding that many of my constituents do not support American troops in the Balkans. I have been horrified by the violations of human rights that have taken place in Bosnia--the ethnic cleansing, the concentration camps, the rapes, the mass murders, the wanton military attacks against unarmed civilians. At the same time, I could not support the provision of American arms for the Bosnian Moslems or Croats, because I feared it would lead to more killings, more disregard for human rights and human life. This is a crisis that has defied easy answers. If there were a simple solution to bringing this bloodshed to an end, our European allies would have accomplished it. They were not able to bring an end to this war and, are a result, the United States has lead the effort for peace, bringing the parties in conflict, at their request, to the negotiating table. The President, in his capacity as Commander in Chief has exercised his constitutional authority. The Congress will now decide whether or not we will support American Troops, already being deployed on the Ground. American troops deserve the unequivocal support of the Congress in this effort for peace, for peace, not war. I recognize fully that there are risks attendant to this peace mission, but the United States of America must be on the side of peace and lead--demonstrate to the world that we can and will live up to our great heritage and place a moral force for peace on the blood-stained soil of the Balkans. The pursuit of peace must rise above the pursuit of reelection. Two of the resolutions before us tonight do not provide complete support for American troops. The Dornan resolution purports to back our peacekeepers, but refuses to give them funds to do their job. The Buyer/Skelton resolution expresses confidence in our forces but undercuts the justification for their deployment. Anything less than our total commitment to backing the women and men of the United States Armed Forces at a time when they are trying to bring peace to Bosnia injects politics, not statesmanship. While the United States of America cannot be a policeman of the world, we cannot be bystanders either. The exhortation ``Blessed are the peacemakers'' moves me to support this effort. Only the Hamilton resolution expresses our support clearly and without reservation and I support it.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference report on securities litigation reform and as a member of the conference committee, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this revised and improved bipartisan legislation. Anyone looking at the growing number of strike suits being brought against American companies today can only conclude that our legal system needs repair. This conference report provides the necessary reforms to address and remedy these problems. As the Representative from Silicon Valley, I know that businesses in my region place themselves in of two categories: those that have been sued for securities fraud and those that will be. The vast majority have already been sued--resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in needless expenses. This legislation provides companies with relief, but not a blank check. The right of investors to sue in cases of actual fraud is protected by this bill. It does this by eliminating fishing expedition lawsuits, ending the use of professional plaintiffs, stopping the practice of offering bounties to plaintiffs for signing their names to documents, and allowing companies to make forward-looking statements without liability as long as these statements are accompanied by specific warnings that their predictions may not come true. Further, this legislation has evolved greatly since we considered this issue last March. On nearly every point of contention, it has been modified to meet the concerns of the Senate, the SEC, and the administration to protect the consumers from actual fraud. Mr. Speaker, the securities litigation reform conference report is good for investors and businesses alike. I urge all my colleagues to support this important bipartisan legislation.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, as we talk about budgets, we are not just talking about numbers. No matter how wide and how large the Federal budget is, and one can go through the thousands of pages, at the end of the day it is a statement of our values as a people. I voted for a balanced 7-year budget. I do not think that is the issue, but I think the issue truly today is how we bring balance to our Nation. What kind of America do we want to see? Do we want to bind the generations together? Do we want to apply some morality to these figures, to these numbers? Do we speak to those who are in the autumn of their lives and say, yes, you count, and we are not going to count you out? Do we say to our Nation's children that we bring morality to them? Why would any Member of Congress rob two out of five children of this great Nation of ours of their own means of health insurance? Why would we rob our future by cutting student loans? So today, America, what kind of a budget do we want, one that binds us together or tears us apart?

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the underlying bill and urge Members to support that and vote in opposition to the Burton substitute. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to reject the Burton substitute and support a complete ban on gifts. Since arriving in Congress, I've made it my office policy not to accept any gifts from lobbyists or allow any of my staff to do so. Earlier this year, I was one of 32 Members who signed a Common Cause pledge saying that lobbyists gifts are forbidden in my office. Now is the time to turn this voluntary pledge into the mandatory House rules for all of us. It's important because we need to restore pubic trust in Congress and its Members. And there can be no better way to begin this process than by giving up lobbyist-provided meals, tickets, vacations, food baskets, and golf outings that have come to symbolize what's wrong with Washington and the way it operates. These gifts should be flat out eliminated. Mr. Speaker, the Burton substitute is weak tea when what we need is strong medicine. It's time for Congress to give up gifts from lobbyists and get back to work for those who pay our salaries--the American people. I urge my colleagues to place a complete ban on lobbyist gifts.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my sorrow at the passing of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Few leaders in our lifetime have come to exemplify the spirit of a nation in the way that Yitzhak Rabin symbolized the State of Israel. Father, soldier, politician, statesman, architect of peace; Prime Minister Rabin was all of these things and more. He never shied away from taking up arms for Israel when necessary, nor did he hesitate to put an end to hostilities when the opportunity arose. Having had the privilege of visiting Israel before the current peace process began, I appreciate the obstacles he faced throughout his career, as well as the courage he needed to confront them. One of my most vivid memories since coming to Congress is being seated on the White House lawn watching Prime Minister Rabin and Yasser Arafat sign the historic accord marking a new chapter in Israeli- Palestinian relations. The sense of joy and hope that Yitzhak Rabin helped create at that moment was repeated again when King Hussein of Jordan and he appeared before a joint session of Congress and talked about the promise of peace between their two nations. I will cherish these memories for the rest of my life. At the same time, I will never forget the shock I felt when I first learned that Yitzhak Rabin had been assassinated. But my sorrow at the passing of this great leader was tinged with outrage at the senseless violence that brought his life to an untimely end. It is not enough to condemn the man who fired the shots that killed Prime Minister Rabin. We must also condemn the extremism that provided encouragement to Rabin's assassin and caution those who traffic in inflammatory rhetoric that their words can have consequences, sometimes terrible consequences, in Israel and elsewhere. Mr. Speaker, like Anwar Sadat before him, Yitzhak Rabin has become a martyr for peace. The best way we can honor his legacy and memory is by aiding Israel in its pursuit of the cause for which he gave his life. Only when peace reigns in the Middle East will the vision of Yitzhak Rabin be fulfilled.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge all my colleagues to support a complete ban on gifts from special interest lobbyists. Since arriving in Congress, I've made it my office policy not to accept any gifts from lobbyists or allow any of my staff to do so. Earlier this year, I was one of 32 Members who signed a Common Cause pledge saying that lobbyist gifts were forbidden in my office. Every Member should take this pledge. It's important because the American people continue to lose faith in Congress. In addition to the intense partisan bickering and gridlock that have become the hallmarks of this institution, Americans are appalled by the cozy relationship that exists between lobbyists and Members of Congress. They perceive--often correctly--that Members ignore the needs of the average person while bending over backwards to meet the needs of monied special interests. They feel shut out, ignored, and disengaged from the democratic process. [[Page E 2148]] We need to rebuild and restore public trust in Congress and its Members. And there can be no better way to begin this process than by giving up lobbyist-provided meals, tickets, vacations, food baskets, and golf outings that have come to symbolize what's wrong with Washington and the way it operates. These gifts should be flat out eliminated. Every Member of Congress earns a generous salary. It's more than enough to live on and serve the interests of the people who are paying it--the taxpayers. So, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in taking the pledge to do away with gifts from lobbyists. Support the gift ban and get back to work for the people who sent us here.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Representative Orton's substitute budget, offered on behalf of the Democrats. It is a positive alternative. It is critical that we balance our budget--particularly for future generations. This plan does that without gutting Medicare, without eliminating Medicaid, without cutting student loans and without adding provisions that threaten our environment. This budget creates solid footing for this Nation's economy. It doesn't ask our children and elderly to go without medical care so that wealthy individuals can receive a $245 billion tax cut. Unlike the Republican budget plan, this substitute protects health insurance for the poor and the elderly. First, it increases preventive benefits for the elderly. At the same time, it ensures that the monthly Medicare premium paid by beneficiaries does not increase. The Republicans, under their budget, ask seniors to pay more in monthly premiums. The Orton substitute continues paying premiums and deductibles for low-income Medicare recipients. The Republican plan does not. This substitute budget maintains Medicaid as an entitlement program so that children and pregnant women are guaranteed access to health care coverage. The Republicans abolish Medicaid as an entitlement, tearing away guaranteed health insurance for two out of every five of our Nation's children. Restricting Medicaid benefits will add to the already high number of uninsured individuals. The Republican budget cuts student loans. Education programs, particularly, student loans would be preserved under this budget. Education is the essential foundation on which we continue to build the future of our Nation. Finally, this substitute plan protects and tightens the earned income tax credit [EITC]. Under the Republican budget, childless couples and senior citizens who work would no longer receive this credit. It seems ironic that [[Page E 2105]] Republicans want to eliminate and limit a credit that rewards working individuals. The EITC has been supported by Republican and Democratic Presidents and previous Congresses. This substitute balances the budget in 7 years without attacking families, children, students or senior citizens. It protects health care, preserve educational assistance and continues economic help to the needy. Most important, this plan does not include a huge tax break--that most individuals don't want or need. This substitute disciplines spending and that discipline will ultimately add to America's competitiveness in a global economy and keep faith with our citizens now and into our future.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon in opposition to the rule. Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the work that was done on a bipartisan basis many, many weeks ago. It was the very late evening of June 29. I believe it was an all-night session. I remember speaking on the floor, and I think it was about 2:30 in the morning when we debated this, and I think that it was one of the prouder moments for Members of this House as they recognized that Azerbaijan should not be rewarded for blockading Armenia. That blockade has imposed enormous, enormous human suffering on the Armenian people, and so together, from both sides of the aisle, we underscored that suffering, and we said that the House of Representatives was going to take the necessary, and important, and critical steps not to reward Azerbaijan for that, and so we went forward, and the language went forward, and it was unanimous. It was a voice vote of this House. Now in another late night, when the conference met, it was misrepresented that what we had sent to the conference had somehow changed. It has not changed, and so that is why I rise in opposition to the rule and all of the Members of this House should vote against this rule, so that we can bring back the language that we so in unified fashion passed that late night, and we thought then that we were victorious for human rights, decency. The right thing to do is that that language would be appropriately restored. I want to commend my colleagues that have worked so hard on this from both sides of the aisle, and this correction really does need to be made. We were misrepresented. The other body did not even speak on this; they saw that what we had done in the House that night, the night of June 29, should be retained, and for that reason I rise in opposition to the rule and ask Members to join me in voting against it.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Brown].

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Deutsch].