Rush Holt

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this appropriations bill. One of the most important roles of government is ensuring public safety. Over the last several years, the Federal Government simply has not been providing enough support to local and state law enforcement. The Justice Department's Uniform Crime Report statistics have now shown for 2 consecutive years measurable increases in violent crime nationwide. The Bush administration clearly has its priorities skewed, as the budget it proposed for the Community Oriented Policing Services (C.O.P.S.) program for Fiscal Year 2008 was a mere $32 million, a reduction of over half a billion dollars from last year's level. This bill addresses that problem by increasing C.O.P.S. program funding to $725 million, and designating $100 million of that amount to be used to hire an additional 2800 police officers nationwide. There is simply no question that our country's far more robust commitment to putting cops in the streets in the 1990's help reduce violent crime over the last decade. According to the General Accountability Office ``C.O.P.S. funded increases in sworn officers per capita were associated with the declines in rates of total index crimes, violent crimes, and property crimes.'' The same GAO study showed that between the years of 1998 and 2000, C.O.P.S. hiring grants were responsible for reducing crime by about 200,000 to 225,000 incidents--one third of which were violent. Across the state of New Jersey, approximately 4,790 officers were hired by local police departments using C.O.P.S. funds. This meant an additional 628 police officers and sheriff deputies walking the beat in the local communities of my Congressional District. Further, 33 school resource officers were hired to ensure that our children's schools are safe. The committee's increase in funding for this program for Fiscal Year 2008 is a welcome change from recent years, but I hope it will only be a down payment on much larger increases to come. Ideally, we should return to the kind of funding levels that gave us the kind of nationwide police presence we enjoyed in the last decade. I am pleased that the committee has provided a robust increase for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants Program by more than $80 million over the Fiscal Year 2007 level to $600 million. These grants are vital to our local communities--they help local law enforcement organizations get the support they need to combat violent crime, particular gangs and drug-related criminal activity. In the area of science funding, the bill provides for much needed increases in the overall budget of the National Science Foundation, and for science education funding. Recent history has shown that when the federal government invests in science programs and education, our Nation as a whole benefits. When funding for the National Institutes of Health was doubled during the previous decade, many students recognized the opportunity and acted accordingly. Federal seed money fostered high-income, highly desirable jobs and entrepreneurial companies that lead the 21st century economy. Their innovations have made the U.S. the global leader in the life sciences and biotechnology. Earlier this year, I led more than 80 of my colleagues in an appeal to this committee that it increase overall funding for the NSF as well as education-specific funding. I'm pleased that the committee responded by increasing NSF funding to $6.509 billion, $80 million over our collective request, as well as adding $72 million specifically for science education funding. I want to thank the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Obey, and the subcommittee chairman, Mr. Mollohan, for demonstrating a commitment to make meaningful investments in the NSF's physical sciences and engineering programs. Finally, the Commerce Department portion of this bill provides badly needed additional funding to address perhaps the greatest threat to our collective future--global climate change. The committee has added $171 million over the President's request to help fund a number of key climate change initiatives, including a comprehensive study of the problem, as well as changes to National Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) program to ensure that critical climate monitoring sensors are added onto future NPOESS platforms. It is vital to both our economic and our national security that we take whatever measures are necessary to gain a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms that drive global warming so that we can implement the full range of measures necessary to combat it. Mr. Chairman, I commend the committee for bringing us a bill that reflects the priorities of the American people, and I urge my colleagues to vote for it.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill. This week, the White House announced that it foresees American troops in Iraq into at least 2009, and the President has even gone so far as to suggest that our presence in Iraq may evolve to look like our presence in South Korea. We've had troops stationed in South Korea--on permanent bases--for over 50 years. This resolution says clearly to the President and the people of Iraq that we will not turn our temporary presence in Iraq into a permanent one. The Congress should take whatever additional measures are necessary to ensure that no funds are expended for the construction of permanent bases in that country, and to that end I urge my colleagues to vote for this measure.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join the gentlelady from New York, Ms. Gillibrand, in support of H. Res. 521, Celebrating the 75th Anniversary of the 1932 Winter Olympic Games in Lake Placid, New York. This was truly a great moment in the history of sports. The beautiful Lake Placid-Wilmington region played host to athletes from around the globe and the event put the USA on the map of winter sports. The graceful Norwegian figure skater Sonja Henie won the second of her three gold medals. American speed skater Jack Shea won two gold medals, a first for Olympic competition. The United States won 12 medals in all, the most in the competition. Ever since, the spirit and beauty of competitive winter sports have remained on display in Lake Placid, which played host to the United States' memorable 1980 hockey victory over the Soviet Union, and in countless skiing, skating, sledding and other events. We can all be proud of Lake Placid's rich history.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, at the end of last month, Dr. William Wulf ended his 11 years as the President of the National Academy of Engineering. Many of us have come to rely on the NAE, along with its affiliated organizations, the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine, to help sort through the increasing science and technology quotient in our policy debates. Bill has been extremely effective in helping Members of Congress understand how technical issues affect our lives. He was instrumental in the National Academy work Rising Above the Gathering Storm, which caught the attention of America about students' and workers' declining ability to compete internationally. He was among the first to warn of the increased need for cybersercurity, which everyone is talking about now, but Bill Wulf was realizing 10 years ago. He also worked on data copyright issues, patents, energy legislation--the list goes on. He also has shown great interest in deploying reliable voting machines around the country. Bill Wulf was a frequent resource at committee hearings, where he taught many in the research community about the value of skillful communications with policy makers. He has led the NAE with grace and with vision and the organization emerges from his period of leadership strengthened and invigorated. Bill is heading back to his faculty post at the University of Virginia, where many fortunate students, both in engineering and in the liberal arts, will now get the benefit of his thinking that has been so helpful to us here in Washington. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Bill Wulf for all he has done for the Academies and for the Nation. We look forward to continuing to work with you in the years to come.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I rise today to oppose the amendment offered by my colleague from Indiana, Mr. Pence to the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2008. Mr. Pence's amendment would deny Federal funding under Title X of the Public Health Services Act to Planned Parenthood health facilities throughout the country. As a supporter of Planned Parenthood and the services that it offers to my constituents in my central New Jersey district, I firmly oppose this purely political amendment. This should not be an anti-choice or pro-choice debate about one of the many services that Planned Parenthood provides. In fact, according to Federal statute, no money from Title X can be used for abortion services. Title X makes grants to public and private nonprofit organizations to provide family planning and basic reproductive health care information and services to low-income women. Therefore this debate should be about prevention. It should be about continuing to provide women with the necessary tools for proper prevention, including contraception and education. It should be about protecting women's health by providing women with access to reproductive health care. Planned Parenthood's 841 affiliates provide reproductive health care services to 5 million men and women annually including 84,500 in the state of New Jersey. 63 percent of these patients receive reproductive health care services and 37 percent receive family planning services. Through family planning services Planned Parenthood estimates that its services prevent over 631,000 unwanted pregnancies annually. Cutting Title X funding to Planned Parenthood is nothing short of irresponsible. The low income women who are served through Title X are four times more likely to face an unintended pregnancy. As a safety net provider, Planned Parenthood plays a critical role in serving these women. Title X has proven to be effective and prevents 1 million unwanted pregnancies each year. Planned Parenthood, as the Nation's oldest and largest family planning provider, is responsible for preventing 60 percent of unwanted pregnancies and we should not act to prevent women from getting the reproductive health care they need. I urge my colleagues not to support the Pence amendment.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his agreement, and simply ask that he continue, as he always has, to stand up for the American ideal of equality for all at the polling place.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, as you may know, the funding authorized for the Help America Vote Act of 2002, known as HAVA, for disability access and protection and advocacy payments, was never fully appropriated. Section 261 of HAVA authorized $100 million in disability access funding to make polling places accessible to individuals with disabilities and to provide them with information about the accessibility of polling places. I am sure the Chair and my colleagues would agree, it is important for equality under the law that all voters have good access to voting. In addition, section 291 authorized $10 million annually for fiscal years 2003 through 2006 and such sums as necessary thereafter to pay for the protection and advocacy systems of each State to ensure full participation in the electoral process for individuals with disabilities, including the process of registering to vote, casting a vote and gaining access to polling places. To date, only $55 million of that amount has been appropriated under HAVA to fund accessibility, and only $22 million has been appropriated to fund protection and advocacy systems. Voting is indeed the cornerstone of our democracy, and unless all eligible voters are assured access to the polls, that fundamental right and the integrity of our electoral system generally are severely undermined. Therefore, I seek to amend the bill to provide $15 million in funding for accessibility under section 261 of HAVA, and an additional $6 million in funding for protection and advocacy systems under section 291 of HAVA, for a total increase of $21 million. This would result, as you can quickly calculate, in several hundred thousand dollars per State to assist in voting for voters with disabilities. I urge my colleagues to support this increase. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, this amendment is intended to make it possible for more teachers throughout America to have the professional development that we have promised them in science, math and technology education. You may know that under No Child Left Behind, the Elementary and Secondary Act reauthorization, that was the Eisenhower Program that provided teacher training and professional development, was changed to Math and Science Partnership. Subsequently, the funding was cut to about a quarter of what had previously been provided, and it has never recovered. I recognize that the committee under Chairman Obey's leadership has tried to get back that lost ground that was lost under previous leadership. Nevertheless, the teachers and hence the students are not getting what they need. Whether you look at the ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm'' report of the National Academy of Sciences or the Congress's own Innovation Agenda or the President's Competitive Initiative, we are all saying, in fact leaders of this country are yelling and screaming that we must do better in science and math education for our competitiveness, for our quality of life. If we are to do that, we must help the teachers with their professional development. Funding prior to No Child Left Behind for math and science teacher development was $485 million. Currently under this appropriations bill in front of us, the funding for the successor programs for math and science teacher professional development is $182 million. Again, I recognize what the committee has been trying to do. It is not enough. We owe it to the students. We owe it to the teachers. But even more, we owe it to our society. If our economy is to grow, if our productivity is going to grow, we must do better in math and science education. This is one of the important steps as recommended by the Glen Commission on Elementary and Secondary Education, as recommended by the National Academy of Sciences, as recommended by so many, including so many in this room. So I urge the adoption of my amendment which would put $25 million additional dollars into the Math and Science Partnership. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I also thank him for presenting this amendment, similar to an amendment that I offered earlier in a larger dollar amount. Perhaps this one will have a better chance of success. It still should provide funding for hundreds of teachers in each State, to get some of the professional development that we have promised them that they need and that will help our competitiveness, our quality of life, our economic productivity and the science capacity of our students. Madam Chairman, we are not doing nearly enough in this area, and everyone says so. We should look for every opportunity to enhance our science and math education, and start by helping the teachers whom we ask to teach these subjects to our students.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 980, the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act. I have been a cosponsor of this legislation in every Congress since I was first elected, and I am glad that under Democratic leadership, it has finally come to the floor of the House for a vote. It is imperative that we do all that we can to assist the police and firefighters that sacrifice so much in order to protect us. This bill requires States to establish a collective bargaining floor to allow police and firefighters the chance to negotiate their labor agreements. Many States already have similar laws on the books, but for those that don't, this is a good starting point. Public safety officers should have just as much of a right as other workers to organize. When they do so, they not only benefit themselves, but also society as a whole. We are not forcing unionization on States, nor are we doing anything here today that could in any way jeopardize public safety. We are simply allowing those brave men and women who provide for our safety the chance to negotiate a more livable wage, a better pension plan, and expanded health insurance coverage. We owe it to them, and I am glad that this body will finally take up this important bill. I urge passage of H.R. 980.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill. If enacted, this act would compel the President to begin redeploying our troops from Iraq not later than 120 days after it becomes law. It creates the appropriate framework and mechanisms for ensuring an orderly withdrawal of our forces, and it puts the responsibility for Iraq's security where it belongs--on the Iraqis. But once again, the President has declared--long before this bill was brought to the House floor--that he would veto it or any other measure that attempted to correct his failed policy in Iraq. He has become intransigent and disconnected from the reality on the ground in Iraq, and indifferent to the will of the American people. The President's much-vaunted ``surge'' has been underway for 6 months now, and the results are obvious: Iraq is no less violent and chaotic than before the ``surge'' began. Indeed, American casualties--both killed and wounded--have been on the rise for nearly a year, long before the surge started. By pouring more troops into Iraq, the President has simply given the insurgents more targets to shoot at. Perhaps, even worse, he is ruining our ability to work with other countries to foster peace in the Middle East, and he is fanning the flames of a conflagration that is now likely to engulf other countries around Iraq. The President's refusal to change course in Iraq is an enormous injustice to the brave Americans he has put in harm's way. Our troops accomplished the goal of removing Saddam Hussein from power more than 4 years ago. They accomplished the mission that they were given--and then were given another mission for which they were not provided the proper equipment and resources: being forced to act as referees in Iraq's growing civil war. Our troops deserve better. Moreover, the President and his advisors have continued their well- established pattern of moving the goal post on his Iraq policy. Every year, the Congress has been told that Iraq's security forces would be ready to assume responsibility for their country's security in 12 to 18 months. And every time we reached that 12 to 18 month benchmark, the Administration would reset the goal post another 12 to 18 months down the road. The American people have had enough of this bait-and-switch game. Iraqis must accept responsibility for their country's future. Indeed, the President's troop increase has played into the hands of Iraq's current government, which continues to claim that the additional American forces are needed to quell the violence--without mentioning that it is Prime Minister Maliki's own policies that are helping to fuel that violence. Prime Minister Maliki's refusal to purge his security forces of militias and sectarian death squads is a prime reason why Sunni insurgents continue their attacks against Iraq's security forces. Prime Minister Maliki's refusal to compromise on the distribution of power and oil revenue among Iraqis is why the insurgency has only gained in intensity over the past year. How long will we continue to provide military and financial support to his corrupt and ineffectual government? How much longer should our brave fighting men and women serve as referees in the middle of a spreading civil war? If passed, this bill would compel Iraq's leaders to face the fact that we will not continue to indefinitely provide for their country's security with the lives of America's military men and women, and that they must take the necessary political steps needed to end the violence. It is for all of these reasons that I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California and congratulate him and thank him for developing this legislation. We've outlined many of the provisions of the bill today. I would just point out that this will result in more than $250 million in additional loan and Pell grant aid to New Jersians. I'm also pleased that this legislation includes provisions from my bill, the Part-Time Student Assistance Act, that will make Pell Grants available year-round instead of the current two semesters a year, and this is important for students who work and go to school. Also, we have raised the income protection allowance in the College Cost Reduction Act so that students who will have to work to support themselves and their families can earn more without having that count against their student aid. The bill also includes provisions from my bill, the National Security Language Act. This provides $5,000 in loan forgiveness for Federal employees with critical foreign language skills. The bill also provides upfront grant aid for those who are becoming math, science and foreign language teachers. Without qualified teachers in these areas, we're endangering the competitiveness of our children in the global economy. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I'm pleased the House has acted on this important legislation. I want to compliment my colleague, the chairman of this subcommittee, Mr. Edwards of Texas, for the work he and his colleagues put into this bill. The priorities in this bill send a strong message to our military servicemembers and our veterans that we are serious about honoring our obligations to them. To help deal with the constant problem of medical inflation and the rising costs of health care, this bill provides $37,122,000,000 for the Veterans' Health Administration--an increase of $4,442,265,000 or 13.6 percent over the FY 2007 level and $2,509,329,000 more than the President requested. This increase is long overdue and vitally needed. Since the attacks on 9/11, more than 1.5 million American military personnel have been deployed in support of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. When those men and women eventually separate from the service, a large number of them will require ongoing medical care for the wounds and injuries they've suffered in service to our country, particularly for mental health needs and traumatic brain injuries, TBI. This bill provides $604,325,858 to increase funding for treatment in these areas. We all know that TBI has, tragically, become the signature injury of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to providing an overall higher level of funding for medical care for all veterans, this bill directs that all future budget requests include TBI as a Select Program--in other words, as a dedicated line item. That designation will help ensure that TBI treatment and rehabilitation programs receive the funding and focus required to meet the needs of veterans who are living with this life-altering injury. This bill also recognizes that substance abuse and post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, are plaguing record numbers of veterans. The National Center for PTSD has reported that 58 percent of veterans who have substance abuse problems also have lifetime PTSD and are three times more likely to have PTSD than veterans who do not suffer from substance abuse disorders. To deal with this challenge, the bill provides $428,873,754 for the Substance Abuse Program, an increase of $70,880,754 over the President's request. Finally, this bill contains an important accountability provision that the Bush administration opposed. Specifically, the committee mandates in this bill that the Department of Veterans Affairs provide quarterly reports on the financial status and service level status of the VHA and each of its Veterans Integrated Service Networks, VISNs. The reports must contain the time required for new patients to get their first appointment, the time required for established patients to get their next appointment, the number of patients on wait lists for inpatient services or any mental health or substance abuse program, the number of staff shortages for mental health services, the planned and actual expenditure rates for contracted mental health care, and the number of unique veterans and patients being served. Specific reports on the blind rehabilitation service, OIF/OEF veterans, prosthetics, and substance abuse programs are also mandated in this bill. I am pleased that Chairman Edwards and his colleagues are taking this approach to auditing the VA's programs. We all know that veterans are waiting longer to get their first or follow up appointments with their primary care providers. These provisions will help us establish just how serious the problem is and whether inadequate resources, poor management, or both are contributing to these delays in the delivery of vital health care services to our veterans. For these and the other reasons I've cited, I look forward to this bill's final passage by the Congress.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my support for the inclusion of $300 million in funding for election reform programs under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2008. Although this represents less than half of the funding that still remains unappropriated under HAVA, it will help states improve and secure their election systems before November 2008. We have now been through our second post-HAVA general election, but both the 2004 and 2006 elections provided strong indications that there is much work yet to be done in the area of election reform in this country. Election protection groups across the country published extensive reports after each of those elections, documenting machine failures, incidents of suppression, voters being told wrongfully that they were not on the voter registration rolls, voters being denied provisional ballots, and a myriad of other problems. One of those reports documented more than 1,000 incidents of machine failure in more than 300 counties in 36 states. In addition, a report issued by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University school of Law following an in-depth examination of all of the major voting systems used in the United States found that all such systems are vulnerable to tampering and failure. Granted, many problems with our electoral system can be solved through better procedures and better enforcement of existing procedures, and do not require funding. But that is not true of issues related to the security and reliability of our voting equipment. That is why my Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act (H.R. 811) authorizes $1 billion to help states transition to voting systems that provide a durable voter verified paper ballot for every vote cast, and $100 million to reimburse states for conducting routine random audits. As the situation now stands, in November 2008, six entire states and various counties in 13 more and the District of Columbia will conduct their elections on voting systems that neither produce nor require the use of voter verified paper ballots, and therefore will provide no means of conducting meaningful recounts or audits. In total, approximately 35 million voters will be casting votes that will be completely unverifiable. That is more than ten times the margin of victory in the last Presidential race. In 2008, if the outcome of the Presidential race hinges on Pennsylvania, or Georgia, or Tennessee, or anyone of the other unauditable jurisdictions, there will be nothing tangible left that the voters themselves created or verified; whatever they will have seen on the touch screen on election day, it will be gone forever and all that will remain is a software translation that may or may not reflect voter intent. And we will never know, unless we have strong new legislation and adequate funding. As a country, we simply cannot afford to have un-resolvable election problems in 2008. Election anomalies can be corrected by funding measures to ensure that voting systems produce durable paper ballots and that jurisdictions conduct routine audits of those ballots. Therefore, I commend the Financial Services Committee for including $300 million in HAVA funding, which may be used to meet and improve upon HAVA's requirement for permanent paper records with a manual audit capacity, in the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2008, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2643. I want to thank my colleague and friend, Chairman Norm Dicks, for his tireless work in bringing to the floor a bill that we should all be proud of because of its commitment to protecting and conserving our environment and natural resources for future generations to enjoy. John F. Kennedy said in March 1961, ``It is our task in our time and in our generation to hand down undiminished to those who come after us, as was handed down to us by those who went before, the natural wealth and beauty which is ours.'' In previous years we have passed Interior Appropriations bills that do exactly the opposite--we have cut essential funding that has put our natural resources at risk as well as allowed policy decisions to hamper our ability to protect at-risk land, wilderness and wildlife. In previous years, I have stood before this Congress and expressed disappointment and anger with our complete disregard for environmental stewardship. But this year is different. We finally have a bill that reflects where our budget priorities should be. While this legislation may not solve all of our problems, I believe it is an enormous step in the right direction. First, I am proud to say that this bill allocates $50 million for the stateside grant program of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The Land and Water Conservation Fund was separated into two components--the full federal program and the stateside grant program--to help address overdevelopment in both urban and rural areas. The stateside program has increased the number of recreation areas and facilities in our communities. It has also increased local involvement in land protection and open space preservation. In New Jersey alone, the LWCF program has helped preserve of 73,000 acres of land by providing more than $111 million in funding. Some of the funding has been used to cleanup playgrounds, and build baseball fields, develop waterfront parks and restore open spaces. It is beyond me why the President continues to propose eliminating a program that is so successful. Fortunately, Chairman Dicks and the members of the Subcommittee understand the vital role this program plays in protecting and maintaining vital open spaces. They have invested in a program that remains a staple for conservation and land protection across the country. These funds are long-term gifts that allow for the preservation of the wild and untouched places in America that our children and their children should have for their enjoyment. These funds provide for Tuesday night baseball games and Sunday walks along the river, along with keeping what remains of our natural resources clean and pollutant free. I also want to commend the committee for recognizing the dire situation of the National Parks. In preparation for the 100th anniversary of the National Parks System in 2016, we have included a hefty increase in the Parks budget for this fiscal year. This will go to park improvements, staffing increases, and visitor center upgrades in the Parks. Nearly a hundred years ago, Theodore Roosevelt urged the American people and the government to begin to conserve what natural resources we had so that some of the most majestic parts of this country would remain intact. With the 100-year anniversary of the National Park Service drawing closer, I echo the call to bring our National Parks up to standards. Again, I would like to commend Chairman Dicks for crafting this bill before us today and I urge my colleagues to support it. By starting here today with this bill, we are voting for our sons and daughters and our grandchildren to be able to enjoy the natural resources of our country that so many of us have had the opportunity to experience in our lifetimes.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished Chair, and I commend him for his work in this area, and I rise today to urge my colleagues to support the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act. This important legislation, as you have heard, would make it a crime knowingly to communicate false information about an election with the intention of preventing another person from exercising the right to vote and would require the Department of Justice to take immediate corrective action on behalf of affected voters, as well as to refer such matters for appropriate prosecution. It pains me deeply, as I think it does all here, that this is necessary still four decades after the enactment of the Voting Rights Act. It should pain us all that when the United States looks in the mirror, what we see staring back at us is an electoral system still rife with abuses. It embarrasses me to say this, but it is what we must do, take an honest look to begin to correct. This legislation is essentially the legislation that I introduced in the previous Congress, along with a companion bill in the other body by Senator Obama. I am pleased that Representative Emanuel and Chairman Conyers and many others have joined to advocate this bill now. Now, consider just a few examples. In the 2004 elections in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, fliers attributed to a nonexistent organization called the Milwaukee Black Voters League were distributed in minority neighborhoods warning residents that ``if anyone in your family has ever been found guilty of anything, even a traffic violation, you can't vote in the presidential election,'' and that ``if you violate any of these laws, you can get 10 years in prison.'' It sounds like nonsense, but to those voters, that was intimidation. It was no better in 2006. In a documented case in Virginia, a registered voter received a telephone message from a caller claiming to be from the Virginia Board of Elections informing him that he was not registered, and that if he showed up at the polls to vote, he would be criminally prosecuted. Again, it is easy to dismiss that as nonsense, but it is coercion. It is disenfranchisement, it is deception. Now there is no way to know exactly how many voters were deterred or led astray by such deceptive practices, but such practices are no less criminal than outright threats or intimidation. Now as you've heard from the chairman and others, this is not the be all and end all of election reform legislation. We still have to prevent disenfranchisement that results from the shortage of equipment, equipment inequitably distributed among precincts. We still have to prevent disenfranchisement by manipulation of the registration lists. We still need to require that provisional ballots be counted if they are legitimate because under the Help America Vote Act, they must be offered to voters who are not on the registration list, but if it turns out that the voter is a legitimate voter, the provisional ballot is not required under law to be counted. We must make sure that tabulation of results after the polls close is more transparent. I have various legislation that would deal with these things, as well as legislation that would ensure that every voter has a voter-verified paper ballot and that audits would apply in every Federal election. Those are some of the things we need to do. But this is an important step to beat back, to subdue the cynicism about our government. When I talk with students, I often ask them what they think is the most ingenious invention of humans. And they, knowing that I am a scientist, often come up with some technological answer. I would argue that it is our constitutionally democracy. It has transformed not just America but the world, demonstrating that peaceful and productive government by the consent of the governed is possible. That consent, the very cornerstone of the system, is given by the vote. And the Supreme Court has held that the right to vote is the most fundamental right as it is the preservative of all others. The measure before us will criminalize knowing acts of deception designed to prevent voters from voting. Our democratic government works only if the people believe it does. Think about that. If we are to let people work their will at the polling place, we must remove coercion, deception, distortion and disenfranchisement. Cynicism about the process, cynicism about our ability to governor ourselves is at a critically high level. By passing this legislation, we can help to reduce that cynicism and help to realize the promise of the genius of Philadelphia 220 years ago.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2641, the Energy and Water and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2008. I would like to thank Chairman Visclosky and the Energy and Water Subcommittee for drafting a bill that clearly defines what our Nation's priorities should be in promoting and developing sustainable energy sources as well as taking a firm approach to dealing with our Nation's nuclear weapons complex. This Energy and Water Appropriations bill is making two very important statements. The first relates to our Nation's energy path and climate change. I believe this bill starts to direct us to where we should be--which is on a sustainable energy course. By increasing the investment we are making to sustainable energy sources, we are making a commitment to developing an energy plan that promotes renewable energy, promotes efficiency and promotes conservation. Last year, I criticized the Energy and Water bill for continuing the status quo and for not putting us on a path for a sustainable energy future. Today, the bill we are considering is vastly different. We have increased by 52 percent over the President's budget for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. This funding is used for energy efficiency programs such as technologies to make buildings more efficient and programs like EnergyStar. This bill also provides significant funding for alternative energy sources such as biomass, solar, and hydropower. These are the technologies of the near future and we must make the investment now. Equally important is the public policy statement that this bill makes about nuclear nonproliferation and how we as a Nation bring rationality to our own nuclear weapons complex. Last year Congress approved a nuclear cooperation agreement with India. That deal, I believe, created a more dangerous and unstable world. We spoke at great length about the details of this cooperative agreement. We spoke at great length about how good a friend India is to us. We talked about the so-called reality of an imperfect ability to control the militarization of nuclear reactions. I said last year during that debate, that if we really believe that nuclear proliferation and loose nukes are the greatest threat to world peace and security, as I do, then we should be holding on to every tool we can find to prevent that threat. That is why I am pleased that this bill sends a clear message about how we view our nuclear weapons complex. I believe that instead of wasting billions of additional dollars on a nuclear weapons program we don't need and that would only undermine our global nonproliferation efforts, our country should be dismantling its excess nuclear weapons and working to get other nuclear powers to join us in the effort to create a world free of nuclear weapons. Equally important, our country should be expanding its effort to secure loose or inadequately safeguarded nuclear materials in the former Soviet states. Securing these materials is our best insurance policy against terrorists getting their hands on such material and using it against us or our allies. For these reasons, I am pleased that the Energy and Water bill cuts the Department of Energy's portion of the RRW program. We must set a global example, and this is a start on moving us towards global nonproliferation. Also, by way of my background as a scientist and researcher at the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab, I understand how essential it is to fully invest in programs like the Fusion Energy Sciences Program. I applaud the $427.9 million investment in this program. Never has a national commitment to fusion energy research been more timely or important to our Nation's energy future than it is right now. Fusion energy is the power of the sun and the stars, and holds the promise to become an economical, safe and clean domestic energy source. Fusion is an energy source that has the potential to increase our national energy security, while also decreasing overall world carbon dioxide emissions. I am glad to see that the Committee has decided to honor our Nation's commitment to ITER, which is a seven nation fusion program being developed currently in Cadarache, France, by allocating $160 million in funding. The remaining $267.9 million will allow the United States to be competitive in the development and deployment of fusion energy and to train and retrain the next generation of young fusion researchers who will be expected to work on ITER and in the field of fusion energy research beyond ITER. This is a good start for an energy appropriations bill. I thank the Chairman for his cooperation and leadership on this bill and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Fiscal Year 2008 State-Foreign Operations Appropriations bill and also to congratulate Chairwoman Lowey for her impressive job in crafting a spending bill that meets our important commitments to the international community. I would especially like to thank Chairwoman Lowey and the State- Foreign Operations Subcommittee for including language in the Committee Report that I requested regarding the science and technology literacy and capacity in the U.S. Department of State. Additionally, the Committee Report includes language I requested supporting the variety of science fellowship programs in the Department of State, including the science-diplomacy fellows of the American Association for the Advancemnt of Science (AAAS), the professional society fellows, and the recently established Jefferson Fellows Program. The Office of the Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary of State (STAS) has played an important role at the Department of State since 2000. As the chief scientist at State, the Adviser has brought greater visibility to ``science for diplomacy'' and ``diplomacy for science.'' STAS has increased the number of PhD scientists and engineers employed at the Department, including AAAS fellows, professional society fellows, and most recently, Jefferson Science Fellows program. I am glad that the Committee Report includes language applauding the work of the STAS for continuing to promote the essential role of science and technology in diplomacy. More importantly, the committee strongly encourages the Department to continue to increase science and technology capacity and literacy within the Department and the role of science and technology in our Nation's foreign policy. And the committee requests that the Secretary of State be prepared to report during hearings on the Fiscal Year 2009 request on progress made during the 2008 fiscal year. I look forward to working with the State Department and the Appropriations Committee to ensure that advances are made to achieve these stated goals during this upcoming fiscal year. Second, language included in the Committee Report supports the JSF and the other science fellowship programs in the Department of State and makes clear that the committee believes they are valuable programs that should be expanded in the years ahead. As a former AAAS science fellow I know first hand about the important role that science fellows serve in helping policymakers better understand and are able to advance science and technology as a major component of diplomacy. One such program, the Jefferson Science Fellows (JSF) program was established Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in 2003. By providing 1-year fellowships to tenured academic scientists and engineers from our Nation's colleges and universities, the JSF program works to incorporate the American science, technology, and engineering communities into the formulation and implementation of U.S. foreign policy. Each Jefferson Science Fellow is hosted during their fellowship at the Department of State or a foreign embassy abroad. Jefferson Science Fellows are now contributing their scientific expertise to such challenging problems as nuclear non-proliferation, assessments of nanotechnology, pandemics like avian flu, and extreme weather. As the JSF program matures, this growing cadre of practicing experts with first-hand knowledge of the workings within the Department of State will be an increasingly important resource throughout the government. Again, I would like to thank the committee for including this language and I look forward to working with the committee as we build the role of science in our Nation's diplomacy.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to two destructive amendments to the State-Foreign Operations Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2008. First, I oppose the amendment offered by my colleague from Pennsylvania, Mr. Pitts. This amendment will strike an essential provision in this bill for preventing the spread of HIV and AIDS around the world. Mr. Pitts' amendment would strike a provision included in the bill which give the President greater flexibility and the ability for U.S. funded HIV/AIDS programs to better respond to the epidemics in each country. This does not have to be a pro-choice or pro-life debate. In fact, it is short-sighted for us to think of it that way. This debate should be about prevention. It should be about providing necessary tools for proper prevention including providing contraception, ensuring access to condoms and providing educational information to those in need. We have the ability to reduce the number of cases of HIV/AIDS around the world by allowing for greater flexibility in how we implement prevention funding. Instead of taking an approach where we require that one-third of all HIV/AIDS prevention funds be spent on abstinence only programs, that are not only ineffective in preventing sexual activity, but in fact harmful to the health and well being of young women, we should be allowing for greater flexibility in how we allocate these essential funds. The statistics on the number of cases of HIV around the world are startling. In 2006, there were 4.2 million new HIV infections. According to UNAIDS, women and girls make up half of all HIV infections worldwide. And according to the World Health Organization, unprotected heterosexual sex is the leading cause of HIV infections around the world and 80 percent of new infections in sub-Saharan Africa. Clearly, calls for abstinence alone are not working. We must admit to ourselves that young people, whether by choice or through coercion, are engaging in sexual activity. We have the tools to prevent less unintended pregnancies. We need to use them efficiently and effectively. In order for any HIV/AIDS prevention program to be successful, we must make sure that we use proper prevention tools like condoms and contraception. I urge my colleagues to oppose the Pitts amendment. Further, I rise today in strong opposition to the amendment offered by my colleague from New Jersey, Mr. Smith and my colleague from Michigan, Mr. Stupak. Access to contraceptives and condoms is essential to stop the number of cases of HIV/AIDS around the world. With good reasons, the Subcommittee under the leadership of Ms. Lowey from New York has included a provision that will allow foreign organizations that are currently prohibited from received family planning assistance under the global gag rule to receive in kind contributions of condoms and contraceptives. I believe that the global ``gag rule'' is onerous and should be lifted because it not only bans foreign non-governmental organizations, NGOs, from using their own funds to engage in free speech and assembly activities on a woman's right to choose, but it also prevents health care providers from counseling the world's poorest women about all their legal health care options. But the provisions in this bill do not lift the global gag rule. What these provisions do is promote proper family planning information and services. As a basic prevention form of healthcare, family planning services can improve maternal and child health in developing countries, lead to better diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, and reduce the incidence of unintended pregnancy and abortion. The global gag rule has stopped U.S.-donated contraceptives from reaching 16 countries with people in desperate need in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Simply allowing access to contraceptives is a small and necessary step in prevention. I urge my colleagues to oppose the Smith amendment.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend Mr. Inslee from the State of Washington, and I would add that we believe that the Department of Energy should consider both conventional hydropower energy provided through dams, as well as hydropower through the movement of waves, tides, and currents in the oceans and free flowing rivers, lakes and streams. Each of these forms of hydropower holds the potential to improve greatly the way we generate energy. We're pleased that the Appropriations Committee has recommended that the Department of Energy use some of this funding for nonimpounded marine renewable technologies, and we think it's important for the subcommittee to continue to provide oversight of the Department of Energy in support of this form of sustainable energy research. Will the chairman and the committee continue to investigate the potential of this energy source by working with and providing oversight of the Department of Energy and look for increased opportunities for funding in the future? I yield back to my colleague from Washington to obtain a response from the chairman.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, because I was voting in elections in the State of New Jersey I was not in attendance on June 5th. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 426, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 427, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 428, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 429, and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 430.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, today, the House will again pass legislation to support humane and potentially life-saving embryonic stem cell research. I am a cosponsor of this essential legislation to increase the number of embryonic stem cell lines that can be used to conduct federally funded research to search for cures for a number of diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's, ALS, multiple sclerosis, and cancer. The opponents of this legislation say that we should pursue alternative avenues for research, such as adult stem cells, cord blood cells, and amniotic fluid cells. And they are correct; we should investigate each one of them. Yet, that is not a compelling reason to block researchers from pursuing embryonic stem cell research, which experts agree holds the greatest potential because of the pluripotent nature of the cells. As a research scientist, I understand that we will only understand the true value of each of these cell types when the research is done. That is why it is essential that we pass this bill and make more embryonic stem cell lines available for exploration. My home state of New Jersey has demonstrated real national leadership on stem cell research. In 2005, New Jersey became the first state in the nation to award public funds for research on human embryonic stem cells. Just last month, Governor Corzine pledged an additional $10 million in public funds for stem cell research. And the state legislature recently approved $270 million for new stem cell research centers. New Jersey is taking the lead on this ground breaking research, but that can not be an excuse for inaction on the federal level. It would be immoral for the federal government not to pursue this promising avenue of research, which holds the potential to revolutionize medical care for those afflicted with tragic diseases and conditions. I implore President Bush to put his veto pen away--he must stop standing in the way of scientific progress that could benefit all Americans.