Bob Etheridge

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in reluctant support of H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2005. While this bill still contains provisions that I oppose, it is a far better bill than the one's that I have voted against in the past. Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed that this bill contains a provision that will allow the Interior Department to conduct an inventory of oil and natural gas resources off the east coast of the United States, including my State of North Carolina, and other areas currently under a drilling moratorium. I do not think that this is a wise use of taxpayer dollars, considering the Administration's continued promise that these areas will never be drilled for oil. Let me state clearly that I continue my strong opposition to any effort to drill for oil off of the North Carolina coast. This bill also repeals the 1935 Public Utility Holding Company Act, which was passed in the wake of the Depression to ensure that the public would not be taken advantage of by utility companies. We know this is still being done, we have heard with the stories such as Enron. This law has protected the rural rate payers in States like North Carolina, and I oppose its repeal. Even in light of the negative aspects of this bill, I am voting for it because of the positive changes that have been included that will help put our country back on to the right track. This bill doubles the requirement for renewable fuels, and extends the tax credit for biodiesel. This will help our farmers and help us reduce our dependency on foreign oil. This bill also remove any legal waivers for companies that have poisoned our waters with MTBEs, and excludes the provision to allow drilling and development of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), to preserve this national treasure for future generations. I would also add that I am pleased about the increases in tax incentives for renewable energy such as wind and solar power. Mr. Speaker while this is not a perfect bill, it is a step in the right direction. And it deserves our support.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 5, the Republican medical malpractice bill, and the process by which it is being debated in this House. Today, the House will vote on H.R. 5, a bill to impose caps on damages that may be awarded for medical malpractice, defective products, and other health related wrongdoings. Like many Members of this House, I am concerned about the rising cost of medical malpractice insurance and its impact on physicians and their patients, but H.R 5 is the wrong medicine for this national problem. I oppose H.R. 5 because it will not reduce medical malpractice premiums. What's more, it protects manufacturers of faulty pharmaceutical devices and medical equipment from product liability actions, and overturns North Carolina State law. H.R. 5 also limits the ability of injured persons to bring suits against pharmaceutical companies, HMOs, and nursing homes, thus setting a dangerous precedent allowing these entities to escape the law in even the most severe cases of neglect and abuse. Finally, H.R. 5 undermines North Carolina's patient protection statutes, which are some of the strongest in the Nation. My colleagues, Mr. Dingell and Mr. Conyers, have drafted an alternative amendment to H.R 5. This alternative will help courts weed out frivolous lawsuits without restricting the rights of legitimate claims, repeal the Federal anti-trust exemption for medical malpractice insurance companies, thereby increasing competition and lowering premiums, and provide targeted assistance directly to physicians, hospitals, and communities in medical malpractice crisis areas. Finally, the alternative establishes an independent advisory commission to examine and recommend long-term solutions to this important issue. Unfortunately the Republican Leadership has denied Representatives Dingell and Conyers the opportunity to offer this alternative. Mr. Speaker, the issue of medical malpractice insurance is an important one. H.R. 5 will without a doubt harm America's patients. I urge all of my colleagues to vote against H.R. 5 and to support the motion to recommit the bill.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant support of this conference report. I am very reluctant to support this bill because it contains provisions I strongly oppose. Specifically, this bill contains harmful cuts to important interior and environmental priorities. It cuts $800 million from last year's funding level for natural resources and the Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental and management and science and technology accounts are severely cut in this bill. The bill cuts $107 million for water and sewer construction STAG grants, cuts $200 million from SRF clean water funds, and cuts $30 million from stateside grants to states for conservation and recreation. Mr. Speaker, this Congress has a solemn obligation to protect our Nation's water, air and land resources for public health and safety. We must practice responsible stewardship of our natural resources and pass on to future generations a physical environment as bountiful as the one we have enjoyed. This bill fails this test miserably. I will vote for this bill because it contains desperately needed funding for veterans health care. Specifically, the conference report on H.R. 2631 contains $1.5 billion in veterans health care funds to make up for the Administration's bogus budget proposals. Democrats in this House have been arguing for months that the Administration is shortchanging VA health care, and we should restore that funding in the proper legislation under regular order. A nation at war must take care of its veterans, and I will vote for this bill to provide this critical funding for veterans health care.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I have supported trade agreements that have come through this body since I have been here, but this one falls short. I stand in opposition to the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in reluctant opposition to the implementation legislation for the Free Trade Agreement with the Dominican Republic and Central America, known as DR-CAFTA. Throughout my service in the U.S. House, I have supported policies that encourage export promotion because exports can play an important role in strengthening our economy. But our economic policies must work to build the American middle class by investing in education, training and health care for working families as well as expanding access to new markets for our products. Our trade policies must lift living standards in other countries whose workers will compete for American jobs. If American workers are forced to compete with workers from countries without a growing standard of living, the race to the bottom will lower the economic opportunities and quality of life for everyone. I firmly believe that America must exert our global economic leadership to promote democracy and economic growth, but that engagement must be matched with a commitment to empower middle class Americans to compete and win in the global economy. We can do better than this DR-CAFTA, and we must. First, as a member of the House New Democrats Coalition, I have worked with administrations of both political parties, including the Bush administration, to promote policy for sound economic growth and a growing middle class. I have met with business leaders and officials from each of the DR-CAFTA countries, and I recently traveled to visit Honduras and El Salvador to see for myself the conditions of these trading partners. Although I want to help the peoples of the DR-CAFTA countries to secure their democracies and build economic opportunities, this free trade agreement fails to erect the conditions necessary for those goals. For example, in Honduras, I saw oxen pulling carts as a primary means of industrial production and impoverished workers struggling to eke out a meager living. Without strict, enforceable labor standards, these workers will suffer exploitation of market forces without enjoying any upward mobility. I also want to see our trading partners make the kind of commitment to education and infrastructure that we have in the U.S. that has provided us the foundation for our economic growth and rising living standards for our people. Unfortunately, this DR-CAFTA represents a step backwards in strengthening labor standards, and thereby standards of living, abroad. Specifically, DR-CAFTA is a step back from the progress made in the Jordan Free Trade Agreement and even the rules under the Generalized System of Preferences, GSP, and the Caribbean Basin Initiative, CBI. America must maintain our global economic leadership and be a force for rising living standards with all of our trading partners so that broad- based economic growth creates sustainable markets for American goods and services. The countries of the DR-CAFTA accord possess some of the world's worst records for workers' rights, and this DR-CAFTA not only fails to correct this glaring problem but reverses progress made in previous trade agreements to raise labor standards abroad. It is also important to note DR-CAFTA's weak environmental enforcement provisions. Although the agreement contains important protections for intellectual property that are subject to dispute resolution, it fails to include adequate enforcement of environmental protection, which will put American companies at a competitive disadvantage with companies in the DR-CAFTA countries. In fact, what language DR-CAFTA does contain on environmental protection and improvement of standards is explicitly excluded from dispute settlement under the agreement, rendering it meaningless. Previous trade pacts, such as the Jordan Free Trade Agreement, contain strong labor and environment provisions, and DR-CAFTA should as well. Finally, the vote on DR-CAFTA comes at a time when the Bush administration economic program has reversed years of progress in building a thriving middle class. Instead of making critical investments in education, training and health care so working families can compete and prosper in the global economy, the administration is cutting these vital initiatives. Specifically, this administration and Congress have shortchanged our schools $39 billion they were promised in order to comply with the No Child Left Behind education reform law. And last month, the House passed an appropriations bill with devastating cuts in needed efforts for education, Trade Adjustment Assistance and other job training, and rural health care. In the global economy of the 21st century, working Americans can compete and win only if they are equipped with the tools to make the most of their God-given abilities. We need an economic policy that helps middle class families, those striving to get into the middle class and those struggling to stay in the middle class. In conclusion, I will vote against DR-CAFTA because it is a missed opportunity to help our neighbors in the Dominican Republic and Central America and put America back on the path to a growing middle class.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to express my opposition to the recent Republican proposals to privatize Social Security. Privatizing Social Security is like tearing down the barn to fix the roof. It adds trillions of dollars to the national debt and does nothing to fix the long-term challenges facing Social Security. The Republican privatization proposal hands future generations a triple burden: a reduction in guaranteed benefits, a hefty transition cost, and a Social Security system that is no closer to solvency. This is a classic bait-and-switch maneuver, and American workers will not be fooled by trickery, political schemes to line the pockets of Wall Street bankers with their retirement savings. This country has made a commitment to seniors and to current workers alike that Social Security will be available upon retirement. We cannot go back on our word. Rural America in particular is counting on Social Security to be there when they need it. As we prepare to celebrate the 70th anniversary of Social Security, I urge the President to take privatization off the table so that we might achieve a bipartisan agreement to strengthen Social Security for the long term and enhance the retirement security for all Americans.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, due to inclement weather, my original flight tonight was cancelled, and I was forced to miss the rollcall votes on House Resolution 328, House Concurrent Resolution 175, and House Resolution 364. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on each of these measures.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special recognition to the students of Four Oaks Middle School, in North Carolina's Second District. These students put together 532 packages for the Tsunami victims as part of a Beta Club Relief Fund service project. When I met with the students in January, they told me at the time that their goal was to complete 300 packages. I challenged them to complete 500 packages, one for each student in the school. They not only met my challenge, but they exceeded it by completing 532 packages, each with a hand towel, soap, a washcloth, a toothbrush, toothpaste, a comb, six adhesive bandage, and a nail file. The selflessness of the students at Four Oaks Middle School should make all of us proud. They came up with their own initiative, made all the plans and collected the packages by themselves. This project is an indication that they recognize that they are a part of the world. They worked to help relieve the suffering of boys and girls halfway around the world that they don't know and won't ever see. This is what America is truly all about. I also would like to recognize the teachers and administrators at Four Oaks Middle School. They are a shining example of the role teachers and administrators play in teaching values to the next generation. Mr. Speaker, I salute the boys and girls of Four Oaks Middle School.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, earlier today I joined local community leaders from my district on behalf of Fort Bragg, Pope Air Force Base, going to the BRAC hearing in Charlotte and thereby missed a number of rollcall votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall votes 322, 323, and 324, and would have voted ``no'' on rollcall votes 325, 326, 327, and 328.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3010, the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Fiscal Year 2006 Appropriations Act. H.R. 3010 severely under funds education, health care, and job training efforts that are crucial to North Carolina and to the country. As the only former state schools chief serving in Congress, I know firsthand the devastating effects that these education cuts will have. At a time when we are asking our schools to do more than ever, these education cuts will destroy the morale of our teachers, parents and students. Not only does this appropriations bill continue to under fund No Child Left Behind, but it also shortchanges special education for 6.9 million children, fails to raise the maximum Pell Grant and eliminates successful education initiatives like drop out prevention. These education cuts will make it impossible for our schools to meet high standards of accountability. Unfortunately, H.R. 3010 also fails to provide adequate funds for key health care programs. In rural communities it is often hard to find a doctor, and emergency rooms can be dangerously far away. This appropriations bill slashes funding for rural and preventative health. Activities that would be terminated include initiatives designed to encourage new medical and dental school graduates to choose primary care specialties and to practice in rural and urban under-served areas. I am also concerned about the inadequate funding for Preventative Health Block Grants and Community Health Centers, both of which provide much needed services to the people of North Carolina's 2nd District. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bad bill.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about the President's Social Security plan. Social Security represents the values of hardworking communities that Americans in small towns across this country hold dear. It is the fulfillment of our Nation's promise that if you work hard and follow the rules, you will be rewarded for your lifetime of work with a secure retirement. Today, Social Security keeps 50 percent of seniors out of poverty. No politicians should be allowed to take away the retirement benefits that workers in rural America have earned through Social Security. As a part-time farmer myself, I know how much rural families rely on Social Security. Farm families have tight budgets, even in good years, and most do not have access to employer retirement accounts such as 401(k) plans. Instead of standing up for our rural communities and values, the President's Social Security plan cuts benefits and jeopardizes the most important safety net in rural areas for retirees, survivors and the disabled. All of rural America needs to read the fine print on President Bush's plan to privatize Social Security. Protecting the promise of Social Security is important to every worker, to every generation and to every family, especially to rural America.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to House Joint Resolution 27. Withdrawing from the World Trade Organization (WTO) would be an abandonment of America's leadership in trade and an economic disaster for our nation. For decades, the United States has been the leading voice in the world for the free market system and economic cooperation among nations because capitalism works for America. We were one of the founders of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade as well as its successor, the WTO. America has consistently pushed for a rational, rules-based approach in dealing with international trade because we know our unique, competitive, vibrant, and innovative economy will allow most U.S. economic sectors to compete successfully against any nation provided we have a fair playing field and open access to foreign markets. If we abandon the WTO, we abandon those years of leadership in trade. Do we want the Europeans or the Japanese to be the economic model other nations look to emulate? Do we really want them to decide the rules by which the rest of the world economy will run? If we shut ourselves out of the process, we put our farmers, manufacturers, businesses, an workers at a strategic disadvantage compared to others in the world. North Carolina's economy depends on exports, and we need to break down barriers to overseas markets so that our technology, agriculture, manufacturing and other sectors can expand on our progress in international competition. Studies show that one in five manufacturing jobs in North Carolina depend on exports. These jobs on average pay 13- 18 percent more than the U.S. average. Every $1 billion in exports creates 20,000 jobs in the United States. The United States represents only 4.7 percent of the world population. If we want our economy to continue to grow, we need to be able to sell to the other 95.3 percent of the world. The WTO, for all its flaws and faults, remains the best venue for leveling the playing field and gaining access to new markets. That is why I urge my colleagues to vote down this resolution.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Michael Galbraith Kroart and Mrs. Elizabeth Sparrow Kroart on the birth of their child, Master Jonathan Wallace Kroart. Jonathan was born on Thursday, May 5, 2005 and weighed 7 pounds and 14 ounces. My wife Faye and the entire Etheridge family join me in wishing Michael and Elizabeth great happiness during this very special time in their lives. As a father of three, I know the immeasurable pride and rewarding challenges that children bring into your life. Their innocence keeps you young-at-heart. Through their inquiring minds and wide-eyed wonder, they show you the world in a fresh, new way and change your perspective on life. A little miracle, a new baby holds all the potential of what human beings can achieve. I welcome young Jonathan into the world and wish Michael and Elizabeth all the best as they steer him through all of the joys and challenges that life brings.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, in its current form, yes.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I know the hour is late and folks want to go home. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the chairman and the ranking member for their hard work on this bill. But like anything we do in this body, we can do better. This coming Friday will begin Memorial Day, and for many Americans it really is the beginning of summer. On that day, tens of thousands of North Carolinians and millions of Americans are getting into their cars and hitting the road for vacation. They may visit our State's beautiful beaches or seashores. They may visit the cool mountain vistas to the west. Or they may just leave our State altogether and travel across this country. Regardless of where they go and how far they travel, they will all be confronted by the same ugly truth: Our Nation is experiencing the highest gasoline prices in the history of this country. The average price of regular unleaded gasoline in the United States is over $2.12 a gallon, 6 cents higher than it was a year ago. For diesel fuel users like truck drivers and farmers, the national average is over $2.15, 39 cents a gallon higher than last year. In the central Atlantic States, like North Carolina, the price for regular unleaded and diesel are higher than the national average. As I travel throughout my district, I regularly hear complaints from my constituents about higher gasoline prices and diesel fuel prices. Farmers, commuters, employers, senior citizens and all North Carolinians have been hit hard by higher gasoline prices. Truck drivers are seeing their businesses suffer. Farmers are forced to watch their costs escalate, eating into their bottom line, especially now, when they are getting into the fields. And for people who have lost their jobs and still cannot find work, higher gasoline prices place an even higher burden on them. People who live in rural districts like mine have to travel farther than folks living in any other area to go to work, to get to a store, to go to church, to take their children to school and any number of places. While high gasoline prices hurt everyone, rural Americans are especially hit hard. Everyone talks about the problem. The United States is too dependent on foreign oil. Every time we have a small disruption in the Middle East, the marketplace reacts wildly and drives the price of a barrel of oil even higher. We need to reduce our Nation's dependency on foreign oil, and we need to bring gas prices down, and this motion to recommit is a step in that direction. This motion will direct $500,000 from the Energy Information Administration for analysis of imported crude oil and its impact on petroleum sales. It also provides $1 million for the Secretary of Energy to conduct a conference with foreign oil producers of foreign oil-producing nations. I remember when Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations used to say they wanted to get the price of a barrel of oil between $22 and $28 a gallon. Mr. Speaker, this is a serious issue. We may not think so in this body, but I guarantee you the people across this America do. And let me tell you, when the Saudis said $22 to $28 a barrel they were shooting for, and it is now $50 and above, they missed that by a country mile where I come from. If they truly want to bring down prices, they could do that today. Actions speak louder than words, and it is time for action. This administration must insist that Saudi Arabia and OPEC nations raise their production levels now. And this motion will ensure that the administration has the means to bring these nations together at a conference and deal with this issue immediately. Every day we continue to experience higher gas prices is another day that is a drain on the wallet of every single American. Last Sunday at church a church member came to me and he said, You know, I am an independent truck driver, and the cost of my fuel is going up, and it is going to put me in bankruptcy. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of people across this country tonight in that same situation, and we can do something about it. Instead, we are not offering the kind of proposal to make a difference. This will offer a proposal to the U.S. Department of Energy Information Administration to move and take action and take action quickly. Mr. Speaker, the bill that we passed earlier on energy will increase the cost by 85 percent in 20 years. That is increasing our dependency. This is an opportunity for a solution. This is the way that we should impact it positively. I urge my colleagues to vote for this motion to recommit.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 810, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Scientific and biomedical research and innovation has made our Nation and our world a safer and healthier place. Advances in medicine have made virtually obsolete killer diseases like smallpox and polio, have increased life expectancy and improved the quality of life for people around the globe. From Roman times around 2000 years ago to 1900 life expectancy increased from 25 to 47 years of age. However, because of important discoveries and advances in medicine and medical treatments, by the year 2000 life expectancy had increased to over 76 years of age. The advances in medicine that resulted in this dramatic increase in life expectancy did not happen by accident. They occurred as a result of visionary leadership in both the public and private sectors. They occurred as a result of political will and public capital. They occurred because of the private sector's ability to convert government funded basic research into life-saving applications. Government funded basic research has and continues to serve as the foundation for the medical advances that have improved the health and quality of life for millions of people. While the advances we have made in medicine in the last century have been both impressive and historic, we have a long way to go. Far too many people in our society suffer from debilitating diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and diabetes for which there are no cures. The scientific community overwhelmingly believes that embryonic stem cell research holds the potential for medical advances and therapies that could make these and other diseases as obsolete as polio and small pox, and the National Institutes of Health have proposed an ethically sound policy to further this research. I support Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research because without it we run the risk of missing an historic opportunity to improve the lives of millions of North Carolinians, Americans and people around the world. Without Federal funding for this basic research we could condemn millions of human beings to the pain, misery and suffering of debilitating and degenerative diseases that otherwise might be cured. I understand that many of the opponents of this legislation have moral qualms about using embryos for research. But the embryos covered under this legislation would otherwise be discarded, so defeat of this legislation would do nothing to assuage moral difficulties surrounding destruction of embryos. And defeat of this legislation would deny innocent victims of terrible diseases the opportunity of relief from their suffering and healing of their afflictions. I support funding for this research because of the bright promise it holds to make life better and more productive for generations to come. Our North Carolina values guide us to expand scientific and medical knowledge to enhance the health and well being of our families, neighbors and fellow citizens, and this research is key to that effort.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I join my friend the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) and my other colleagues tonight because I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the University of North Carolina's men's basketball team on their latest national championship. As has been already been stated, soon the North Carolina Tar Heels will be raising the school's fourth NCAA basketball championship banner in the rafters of the Dean Dome. In North Carolina, college basketball is as much a part of our culture as barbecue and sweet tea. Children know whether they support Carolina or Duke or Wake Forest or North Carolina State before they can walk, and a good basketball season is almost a birthright in North Carolina. It has been 12 years and a few close calls since Carolina's won a championship, but after a spectacular season, the nets have again been cut and a another championship trophy is in Chapel Hill. In the NCAA champion game in April, the Tar Heels defeated the Illinois fighting Illini 75 to 70 in an outstanding display of teamwork and outstanding talent. Led by the performance of now former players Raymond Felton and Sean May, the Tar Heels played strong basketball on both ends of the court, along with the other members. They were able to make critical baskets when the game was on the line and played tough defense that stifled their opponent when necessary. Just 2 years ago, Coach Roy Williams came home to North Carolina to coach a Tar Heel team coming off an 8-20 season. His leadership turned a group of talented young men into great players with heart and determination. They made a commitment to work hard, to become a better team, and now they will join the ranks of other North Carolina basketball championship players, and the list is long, two of whom I will mention, Michael Jordan and James Worthy. As the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) has previously stated, UNC is well-known for producing student athletes who not only succeed in the NBA but in every walk of life, and this is important, from the university with a rich history. I wish the best of luck to the graduating seniors and expect that they will continue to have success in their future endeavor, and I am proud to join again my colleague the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) and my other North Carolina colleagues this evening in congratulating the University of North Carolina players, coaches and their fans on this singular accomplishment. Go Tar Heels.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Cox) and the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), ranking member, for conducting what I think is a thoroughly balanced markup of this bill, the first House authorization of the Department of Homeland Security. This bill is a bipartisan product of our committee, and I am pleased that the committee included my amendment addressing the importance of agriculture security in the bill. Too often folks take the safety of our food for granted. It is critical that the Department of Homeland Security work in close cooperation with other agencies of the Federal Government, especially the U.S. Department of Agriculture, to ensure the safety of the food in this country. Although the authorization bill addresses many important issues, it is far from perfect. It fails to address a number of the important and wide-ranging security gaps, including the need for communication and interoperability between first responders. We also need more investment not only in the research and development of security technologies but also in the training of scientists, researchers, and analysts to support and protect our Nation. This bill is a good first step, and I look forward to working on a bipartisan basis to address the remaining security gaps, and hopefully we will get a chance to vote on them today. I thank the gentleman from Mississippi for his hard work and for yielding me this time, and I am proud to support this legislation.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi for yielding me time. Let me thank the chairman and ranking member. Both of them did an extraordinary job of pulling together an important piece of legislation, a complex piece of legislation, that every Member of the House should endorse wholeheartedly. Every member of the committee was a cosponsor of the legislation, myself included. I am pleased to join them as a member of the Committee on Homeland Security and in being responsible for this legislation. This, as has been said, is a first-responder-driven bill. I want to thank the committee for accepting my amendment on agro-terrorism, an issue important all across America for our food supply. But, equally important, to have homeland security, we must have hometown security, and the formula this bill is driven by, that is what it is about. It is good for my home State of North Carolina, because the current formula, with North Carolina being the 13th largest State in population, we end up 49th in per capita homeland security funding. I do not think we are next to last in risk. And others can say that. The funding formula proposed in this piece of legislation will allow Federal homeland security funds to be disbursed on a threat, risk and vulnerability basis. Let me thank all of my colleagues for that, because that is the way it ought to be. The formula follows the recommendation, as has been said, of the 9/11 Commission. The Commission said, ``Homeland security funds should supplement State and local resources based on the risk or vulnerabilities that merit additional support.'' This bill does that. North Carolina and its critical infrastructure have significance far beyond the borders of our State. The State is home to the Nation's largest army base, the Nation's second largest financial center, three nuclear power plants, major highways, ports and airports and an agricultural economy that supplies goods to one in ten people in this country. I am confident that the formula in H.R. 1544 will give every State the opportunity to receive adequate and appropriate funds for terrorism and prevention and response that is necessary for our local hometown heroes. H.R. 1544 is good public policy that will make a difference to strengthen the security and safety of communities in North Carolina and across America. By putting the resources in place to address real risk and vulnerabilities, we can fight the threat head on. Simply put, H.R. 1544 will help save lives and secure our country. I recommend this bill to all my colleagues. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1544, the Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act. I am pleased to join all the members of the House Homeland Security Committee as a cosponsor of this legislation. This bill is good for my State, North Carolina, and for the Nation. Under the current funding formula, North Carolina, the 13th largest State by population, is 49th in per capita homeland security funding. My State is certainly next to last in risks. The funding formula proposed in H.R. 1544 will allow Federal homeland security funds to be distributed on the basis of threat, risk and vulnerability. This formula follows the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. The Commission said, ``Homeland security funds should supplement State and local resources based on the risks or vulnerabilities that merit additional support.'' North Carolina and its critical infrastructures have significance far beyond its borders. The State is home to the Nation's largest Army base, the Nation's second largest financial center, three nuclear power plants, major highways, port and airports, and an agricultural economy that supplies food to one in ten people in our country. I am confident that the formula in H.R. 1544 will give every State the opportunity to receive adequate and appropriate funds for terrorism and prevention and response. H.R. 1544 is good public policy that will make a difference to strengthen the security and safety of communities in North Carolina and across the country. By putting the resources in place to address real risks and vulnerabilities, we confront the threat head on. Simply put, H.R. 1544 will help to save lives. I recommend the bill to all my colleagues in the House.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to note the passing of a distinguished gentleman. Bill Horner, Jr., the former publisher of The Sanford Herald, was a great North Carolinian. He died last month after a 3 year battle with cancer, and is survived by a fine and loving North Carolina family. I ask permission to submit for the Record several newspaper reports on this sad occasion. Bill Horner Jr., 67, Newsman was Publisher of the Sanford Herald (From the Associated Press) Sanford.--Bill Horner Jr., the middle man in a family tradition of publishing The Sanford Herald, died Thursday of cancer, the newspaper reported. He was 67. Horner died in Sunset Beach, where he had moved after his retirement 7 years ago. Beginning in the 1960s, William Edward Horner Jr. worked in all departments of the paper before he finally followed in the footsteps of his father, Herald founder W.E. Horner, as publisher in 1991. He retired April 1, 1998, when the newspaper was sold to Paxton Media Group, a family-owned company based in Paducah, Ky. His son, Bill Horner III, is the current publisher. Horner was born in Sanford and graduated from Sanford Central High School. As a youth, he delivered the Herald on his bicycle and later spent afternoons and evenings working in the mailroom. He earned an English degree at UNC-Chapel Hill in 1959, working in the newspaper industry during the summers. Horner served 2 years in the Navy after graduation, then returned to the Herald at the behest of his father, who told his son he would start as a printer's devil. ``I had some idea of what a printer's devil was,'' Horner wrote in 1980, ``and it didn't sound nearly as flashy as being a lieutenant (jg) in the U.S. Navy.'' But he came home nevertheless, working in the print shop and then moving on to other parts of the newspaper, including the newsroom. He gradually assumed a greater role in the management of the newspaper, taking over major decisions about the business upon W.E. Horner's semiretirement in 1966 at the age of 65. ``Bill was very kind and supportive to me over the years, and I always considered him more of a friend than as my boss,'' said R.V. Hight, who began work at The Herald in 1979 as sports editor and now serves as special projects editor. ``He loved this newspaper and was a strong leader as both general manager and publisher. I am grateful to have known Bill, and I shall miss him.'' In addition to his son, he is survived by his daughter, Belinda Horner Cooper of Hampstead; close friend Carol Bowman of Sunset Beach; sisters Louise Horner Bowles of Greensboro and Nancy Horner Hulin of Carolina Beach; four grandchildren; and two nieces and a nephew. The family asks that, in lieu of flowers, people consider making donations to the Lower Cape Fear Hospice & LifeCareCenter, 10 Doctors Circle, Suite 4, Supply, NC, 28432, or to the charity of their choice. A memorial service is scheduled for 11 a.m. Tuesday at St. Luke United Methodist Church. [From the Sanford Herald] Former Herald Publisher, 67, Dies Sunset Beach.--Former Herald Publisher Bill Horner Jr., who oversaw the newspaper's conversion from ``hot-type'' to ``cold-type'' offset printing, died Thursday of complications following a three-year battle with cancer. William Edwin Horner Jr., 67, was the son of Herald founder W.E. Horner, who died in 1994, and father of current publisher Bill Horner III. A memorial service is planned for 11 a.m. Tuesday at St. Luke United Methodist Church, where Horner was a member. The Rev. Bob Yandle, a friend of Horner's for many years, will officiate. Diagnosed with esophageal cancer in the fall of 2001, Horner underwent surgery for the disease on two occasions and was in remission for a time, but the cancer returned and his health declined steadily in the last year. In addition to his son, he is survived by his daughter, Belinda Horner Cooper, of Hampstead, and her husband Billy; his special friend Carol Bowman of Sunset Beach; sisters Louise Horner Bowles of Greensboro and Nancy Horner Hulin of Carolina Beach; and grandchildren William E. ``Zachary'' Horner IV, Addison Horner and Karis Horner, children of Bill III and his wife, Lee Ann. Also surviving are nieces Cheryle Hulin Brown of Knightdale and Laura Bowles Warren of McLean, Va., and nephew Jim Hulin of Jamestown. In addition to his father, Horner was preceded in death by his mother, Nannie Andrews Horner, in 1978. Horner was born in Sanford and graduated from Sanford Central High School, completing his high school degree while working afternoons and evenings in the mailroom of The Herald. Upon turning 12 years old, he took a bicycle paper route that served 125 customers in a section of downtown Sanford near the family home. Following high school, he attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, earning a degree in English in 1959. During his college years, he stayed close to the newspaper business--working one summer as a reporter for The Raleigh Times, the now-defunct sister newspaper of The News & Observer, and another selling subscriptions door-to-door in rural Kentucky for The (Louisville) Courier-Journal. After his graduation from Chapel Hill, Horner--who was a part of the Reserve Officer Training Corps during his college years--was commissioned as an ensign and called up for a two- year hitch with the Navy. He spent most of that time aboard the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Forrestal as chief disbursement officer on the ship's supply officer staff. Horner wrote in the 50th anniversary edition of The Herald in 1980 that while aboard the Forrestal, his duties ranged ``from being disbursing officer in charge of the ship's finances and safes, in which I kept more than $7 million in cold, hard cash, to being an assistant stores officer when about all I had to do was check storerooms to make sure the pliers, wrenches and ballpoint pens were counted correctly.'' Eventually promoted to the rank of lieutenant (junior grade), Horner was about to disembark in Naples, Italy and fly back to Norfolk, Va., for mustering out when he wrote he ``received THE letter from the `old man'--not the Navy one, the Herald one.'' Horner said his father detailed plans in the letter for his son to come back to the newspaper to formally learn the trade--beginning with the job of ``printer's devil'' in the newspaper's ``back shop,'' and then learning to operate a linotype machine, before moving to the other departments of the operation. ``I had some idea of what a printer's devil was,'' Horner wrote in 1980, ``and it didn't sound nearly as flashy as being a Lieutenant (jg) in the U.S. Navy.'' By then, he was married to his first wife, the former Shirley Prendergast, whom he met in the Navy, and Horner eventually worked his way through all departments of the newspaper, even serving as interim editor for a period in 1964. One of his experiences that same year as a reporter, he'd later say, showed him the importance of a newspaper's role in the community. He was assigned to cover a gathering of the local chapter of the Ku Klux Klan, which was active in Lee County at the time. After being searched for weapons and a camera, Horner was allowed to enter the area where the Klan was preparing for a cross burning. He furiously scribbled notes about what he saw, and when it was all over with, he headed back to his car. ``I got stopped by one of the Klan's security guards on the way out,'' he'd later say. ``They searched me again and found my notebook. They wanted to see what I had written, so I showed it to them--but I handed them my notebook upside down. One of the guards looked at it for awhile--nobody could read my handwriting except me--and gave it back and said, `OK, you can go.' I came back and wrote the story.'' Horner gradually assumed a greater role in the management of the newspaper, especially upon W.E. Horner's ``retirement'' in 1966 at the age of 65. The elder Horner never really left the business, keeping an office and writing the ``Good Afternoon'' column nearly every day until the mid- 1980s. But he did leave the major decisions about the business to his successor. The son eventually succeeded the father as publisher in 1991 and retired on April 1, 1998, when the newspaper was sold to Paxton Media Group, a family- owned company based in Paducah, Ky. ``Bill was very kind and supportive to me over the years, and I always considered him more of a friend than as my boss,'' said R.V. Hight, who began work at The Herald in 1979 as sports editor and now serves as special projects editor. ``I shall forever be indebted to Bill for hiring me and for the encouragement he gave me over the years. He loved this newspaper and was a strong leader as both general manager and publisher.'' ``I am grateful to have known Bill and I shall miss him.'' Robert Stone worked at The Herald for 44 years, retiring in 1996. ``He understood that a local newspaper is all about local news,'' Stone said of Horner. ``And I think, really and truly, he understood better that the employees were the important part of the organization. Charlie Welborn, a partner with the accounting firm of Davenport, Marvin, Joyce & Co., was a best friend of Bill Horner III and eventually became the newspaper's accountant-- and a close friend of Bill Jr.'s as well. ``Bill was a very successful businessman who carried on the tradition of The Herald that was founded by his father,'' Welborn said. ``I enjoyed the business relationship that we had, but more importantly he was a very good friend. I visited him often at the beach and he was always interested in the news from Sanford/Lee County. He would reminisce about his career, family and friends. I will miss him greatly and feel that I am a better person for having known him.'' A former member of the Kiwanis Club of Sanford and the Rotary Club of Sanford, Horner was a lifelong member of the General Alumni Association of UNC and was also active on the boards of directors of several local organizations, including Southern National (and later BB&T) Bank. He served a term as a director for the North Carolina Press Association--an organization for which both his father (in 1939) and son (in 2002) both served as president--and was a member of St. Luke United Methodist Church. Horner moved to Sunset Beach a few months after his retirement and became active as a member of the board of directors of the Providence Home Family Emergency Teen Shelter in Southport, and played a key role in the organization's fund-raising efforts. He enjoyed sailing and for many years held a private pilot's license and built and flew his own remote-control airplanes. He was an experienced gardener and ham radio operator, and once talked to explorer and adventurer Thor Hyerdahl during one of Hyerdahl's ocean-crossing raft trips, as well as to King and Queen Hussein of Jordan. He enjoyed reading and classical music and was a keen observer of current events and world politics. In lieu of flowers, the family has requested friends consider making donations or memorials to the Lower Cape Fear Hospice & LifeCareCenter, 10 Doctors Circle, Suite 4, Supply, N.C., 28432, or to the charity of their choice. Arrangements are by Brunswick Funeral Services in Shallotte and Rogers-Pickard Funeral Home. The family will receive friends following the memorial service at the home of Bill Horner III.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, last week, on Roll Call vote 150, I was not able to vote. Please let the record show that had I been present, I would have voted Yes on House Resolution 210, supporting the goals of World Intellectual Property Day and recognizing the importance of intellectual property in the United States and worldwide.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 366 as it reauthorizes the Perkins Act, which provides critical funding for occupational preparation and vocational and technical education at secondary and post-secondary education levels. It is the largest Federal investment in secondary education. Although I am concerned about some provisions of this bill, like the merger of tech prep into the basic State grants, on balance, H.R. 366 makes many improvements to current law, and I will vote to pass it. But let me say, we started the tech prep in North Carolina, and I share with my colleagues that merging raises some real concerns. More flexibility without more funding is not necessarily what we need. Talk to any educator, and what they need is resources to get the job done. The American people need to understand what this charade is about. Although H.R. 366 reauthorizes critically important education programs under the Perkins Act, Republicans in Congress last week passed a budget that eliminates those very same initiatives. Only in Washington, D.C. could Congress eliminate a program one week and reauthorize it the next week. In North Carolina, we have one of the strongest community college systems in this country. Our community colleges work in partnership with our universities and the public schools to provide career training and critical technical skills. My State has suffered hundreds of thousands of layoffs in recent years in agriculture, furniture and in the textile industry. To a mill worker laid off from the only job he or she has ever known, the services provided through the Perkins Act literally are a lifeline. These services are the difference between hope of gainful employment and the despondency of unemployment and dependence on others. Brown University has conducted a study that demonstrates that obtaining a high school equivalency makes a clear difference between moving into a new job after a layoff and not. These are real people that we are talking about. We ought not to be cutting out the only real hope that they have for a better life for themselves and their families. In conclusion, I encourage and urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 366. But more importantly, I urge my Republican colleagues and leadership and the administration to restore these devastating education budget cuts. That is where we will make a huge difference.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this misguided resolution that represents a missed opportunity to address some of America's most pressing problems in a fair and equitable manner. The budget is much more than just a government document; it is a statement of our nation's priorities and values. This budget fails the test of moral leadership by increasing the burdens on the poor, the middle class and those families struggling to get into the middle class. The American people deserve better. I am tremendously proud that in my first term as the Second District's Representative, Congress and the President balanced the budget for the first time in a generation. Until just a few years ago, the budget remained balanced and the surpluses we produced were being used to pay down the national debt and strengthen the solvency of Social Security. But this Administration and its allies the Republican Congressional Leadership have squandered the budget surpluses on wasteful tax policies and are running record budget deficits as far as the eye can see. That's just plain wrong. This budget resolution contains deep cuts in services to the most vulnerable in our society, including Medicaid, which provides medical care to 870,000 poor children in North Carolina. This budget resolution continues to shortchange the No Child Left Behind education reform law, which is now $39 billion below budget. This budget spends more than three times in taxpayer funds on interest on the national debt as we are investing in education on the federal level. Folks, cutting our investments in education is like eating our seedcorn. This budget resolution eliminates proven programs and cuts essential services like law enforcement and Border Patrol. And this budget resolution makes the deficit bigger not smaller while automatically raising the limit on the national debt which is increasingly held by foreign countries. Instead of this wrongheaded budget resolution, Congress and the White House should work together to balance the budget with real PAYGO enforcement rules, provide middle class families tax relief and make real investments in our nation's future through science, technology, agriculture and health care. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in rejecting this budget resolution.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2005. For the third time in 5 years, the House Republican leadership has passed up an historic opportunity to craft an energy policy for the 21st Century. With oil prices hitting record levels and repeated predictions that the cost of a barrel of oil could hit over $100 in the coming years, we should be focusing our efforts on alleviating our nation's dependence on fossil fuels. Instead, H.R. 6 is stuck in the past. Modeled after the energy plan developed by Vice President Cheney's secret energy committee 4 years ago, H.R. 6 reflects the philosophy that the only solution to the high price of oil is more oil. However, analyses by the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration indicate that even if the provisions of H.R. 6 becomes law, America's imports of foreign oil will still increase by as much as 85 percent during the next 20 years, thereby increasing our dependency. H.R. 6 should have been an honest, bipartisan effort to halt America's growing dependence on fossil fuels for energy. It could have been focused on developing new technologies, improving energy efficiency, promoting renewable energy, and conducting the research and development that could produce the breakthroughs that would power the world of tomorrow. I have no objection to supporting some new or additional oil and gas exploration or production because, until we develop the energy alternatives of the future, we must continue to meet our oil and gas needs. Unfortunately, the majority of the bill's eight billion dollars in energy tax incentives are for oil and gas production. That's billions in tax breaks, paid for by our children and grandchildren, going to energy companies that have been earning record profits. Even President Bush admitted recently ``. . . with $55 oil, we don't need incentives for oil and gas companies to explore.'' His fiscal year 2006 budget called for $6.7 billion in tax breaks for energy with 72 percent going toward renewable sources of energy and energy efficiency. In contrast, H.R. 6 only provides six percent of the tax benefits for renewable energy and energy efficiency. In addition, H.R. 6 irresponsibly sacrifices environmental protection for petroleum production. Exposing our great natural treasures, especially the North Carolina coastline, to exploitation and possible degradation is not responsible. For example the bill shuts states out from the appeals process for offshore mineral development, thereby limiting coastal states' ability to protect their coastlines from unwanted energy development. I am also dismayed that H.R. 6 continues to provide liability protection for methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) manufacturers for past contamination of water supplies. So Republicans believe when somebody gets sick from MTBE, these companies should not be held accountable. That's just plain wrong. If it becomes law, the provision will force local governments to foot the bill for removing MTBE from water supplies. It was this single issue that scuttled the energy bill last year. Despite this, the Republican leadership's arrogance demands that this provision remain in the bill. Gas prices in America continue to reach record heights. Natural gas prices have increased raising the cost not only of the gas itself but of derivative products like fertilizer. Gas prices and energy costs affect every American. This problem is particularly acute in farm country. Unfortunately, the Republican congressional leadership wasted an opportunity to develop a prudent energy policy that directly addresses these issues and instead developed a bill that serves as a tremendous handout to oil companies. As a result, I oppose H.R. 6.