Rush Holt

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I would like to begin with a testimonial to the work of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula). He not only has introduced this bill, but, as chair of the Subcommittee on Interior of the Committee on Appropriations, has made tremendous contributions this year to environmental protection and to our natural resources. Many of us would like to commend him for that. Madam Speaker, the Lincoln Highway was begun in 1913 and eventually became the first transcontinental highway in the United States. The highway covered 13 States in its more than 3,000-mile route from New York to San Francisco, and it played an important role in allowing people and goods access to the western United States by automobile. Eventually, many segments of the highway were abandoned or realigned, but major segments of the highway as well as intense public interest in its history remain. H.R. 2570 would authorize a study of the routes which made up the Lincoln Highway to evaluate various options for interpretation and preservation. The bill specifies that representatives from each State traversed by the highway as well as private nonprofit groups with an interest in the highway shall participate in the study. The legislation requires the study be presented to Congress 1 year after funds are made available to carry out this act. As one who has traveled long stretches of this highway starting as a young boy, I offer my strong support for this study. We on the minority side join the administration in supporting H.R. 2570.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. HOLT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, the gentleman from Arizona has given an eloquent and articulate statement of the need for this memorial tribute, and I thank him for that. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Shows).

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, no one can argue with the substance of this concurrent resolution. The Second World War is recognized as the most significant event of the 20th Century. Millions of American men and women served with distinction and honor in that conflict and more than 400,000 made the ultimate sacrifice as part of their service to their Nation. The core principles of this legislation, that it is the sense of Congress that a memorial commemorating the World War II activities should be built within area 1 on the Mall and that it should be built as expeditiously as possible, that is incontrovertible. Of course, we are all aware that there is some remaining controversy, but that controversy has moved to the courts, and Congress really has no further role in resolving that issue. As the process moves towards what we hope will be a rapid resolution, it is appropriate that Congress re-assert its support for this important project, and as a result, the minority side fully supports the passage of this measure. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, H.R. 4187 authorizes the Federal Government to pay up to one-quarter of the cost of a $40 million visitors facility to be constructed as part of a vast recreational complex being developed around a new locally owned water project in California. The complex is reported to include golf courses, restaurants, and concert areas centered around this new reservoir. While we of the minority do not intend to oppose this legislation, H.R. 4187 does raise some serious concerns. The bill authorizes this Federal expenditure, despite the fact that there is no substantive Federal connection to this project. None of the facilities, nor any of the land, are federally owned or operated. We are told that during the construction, important archeological artifacts were discovered and therefore the Federal Government should pay for a visitors center. However, if these artifacts are truly important, funding for them is available through existing grant programs, and earmarked funding for a visitors center is therefore unnecessary. I guess I should point out that there is a certain irony that some on the majority side are asking for Federal funding for this. But it has been argued also that because the local water district was required to set aside a nature preserve as a species mitigation measure, the use of Federal funds for this visitors center is justified. However, the set- aside was required by law and does not entitle this project to a taxpayer-funded visitors center. In the view of the minority members of the Committee on Resources, Congress should allocate Federal resources to address the multibillion dollar maintenance and construction backlogs on Federal lands, and non- Federal projects such as this one should receive the bulk of their funding from the States and localities who own and operate them. While the minority will not oppose H.R. 4187, we would caution against similar authorization in cases with such limited Federal interests. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, H.R. 5041 would establish the boundaries and classification for a segment of the Missouri River in Montana that was designated under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act in 1976. This is legislation introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Hill). Madam Speaker, this legislation was introduced in late July, and while the bill was never considered by the Committee on Resources, we at least have the views of the administration on this matter. In a letter dated October 3 of this year, the Department of the Interior indicated their support for H.R. 5041. Evidently, in the late 1970s, several procedural steps were not followed in establishing the river's boundaries and providing for its classification. By adopting the river's boundaries and classification by statute, H.R. 5041 would remove any doubt that may exist on this matter. Madam Speaker, we have no objection to this legislation, which we view as a technical housekeeping matter. We urge its passage.

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. HOLT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4386 and urge my colleagues to pass this important legislation. I am grateful for the strong bipartisan support this legislation has received and I am proud to support this bill again so it can be forwarded to the President for signing and passage. Mr. Speaker, passing this bill is critical for all Americans, but it is especially critical for families in my home State of New Jersey where breast cancer death rates are the highest in the nation. The program served women with incomes that are low but above the eligibility of Medicaid. Ten years ago this Congress established a screening program to prevent and detect breast and cervical cancer to be administered under the auspices of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). In my home State of New Jersey, 20,000 women have been screened for breast cancer under the CDC program since 1996, and 16,000 have been screened for cervical cancer. Nationwide, over 200,000 women received mammograms under the CDC program in 1997 alone. But until now, the program has not assured those women unfortunate enough to be diagnosed with either of these diseases that they would receive coverage and treatment, because, while they were uninsured, they had income above the limit set by State Medicaid programs. Too many of these women were left without hope. This was a great travesty. Mr. Speaker, we must do more than just diagnose the problem. We must take the next step to ensure treatment for those without health insurance and pass this important legislation. Thanks to this bill these women will now be eligible for Medicaid coverage should they be diagnosed with either of these diseases. This bill will save lives. I know that many here in this Congress have been working hard to see this discrepancy addressed. I applaud their efforts and I am glad that we are finally having a chance to pass this much-needed legislation this year.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support today of the Fiscal Year 2001 Defense Authorization bill. I am proud to support this legislation because of the long awaited health benefits for military retirees that in includes. Mr. Speaker, I have heard from many military retirees in my district of Central New Jersey who were promised lifetime military health benefits when they entered the service. For many years, this promise has not been kept. Military retirees were only allowed to keep their military health care until they turned age 65, after which time the only coverage they had was Medicare. Now, Mr. Speaker, Medicare is a great program. It has helped to keep millions of beneficiaries out of poverty. But we know, Mr. Speaker, that many seniors have additional coverage during retirement through coverage provided by their employers. For military retirees, who sacrificed their lives and careers for military service, their employer is the federal government. Like many other Members of this chamber, I believe we owe our military retirees the lifetime health coverage they were promised, and access to the best and broadest health care coverage available. This year's defense authorization is an important first step towards keeping that promise and providing that coverage. For this reason, I am proud to support this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. By taking this action today, Mr. Speaker, we are letting all our military personnel--past, present, and future--know that their government will keep its promise and provide the health care protection they and their families need--for life.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, this nation has 157,000 miles of aging pipeline. The fact is that pipelines transport most of the natural gas and hazardous liquids in the United States. In many places, pipelines go unnoticed. Sometimes people don't even know that there is a pipeline near their home. However, in places like Lively, Texas; Mounds View, Minnesota; Bellingham, Washington; and Edison, New Jersey, just north of my district, pipelines are no longer taken for granted. Explosions have rocked these communities and taken innocent lives. We need to ensure accidents like these will never happen again. We need stronger pipeline standards. There must be statutorily required inspections at least once every five years. There must be a national safety certification program for pipeline operators, like programs for railroad engineers or FAA mechanics. And we need penalties for spills occurring on land to be made as stringent as existing penalties for spills occurring in water under the Clean Water Act. S. 2438 does not ensure that these protections are provided. I am proud to join my colleagues Representative Inslee and Representative Pascrell (Pallone, Baird, Smith, Dicks, McDermott are also sponsors) in sponsoring the ``Comprehensive Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2000'' (HR 4792) that will make these protections mandatory. Time is running out in this Congress to provide these protections. We need to act now. For all these reasons, I will be opposing this bill today. I urge my colleagues to defeat S. 2438 so that we can bring up real, strong, pipeline safety legislation.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for passing S. 2311 to reauthorize the Ryan White CARE Act. I am proud to be a cosponsor of the House reauthorization (H.R. 4807) that we passed by voice vote on July 27, 2000. I am equally proud to stand in support of Senate bill 2311. I urge my colleagues to continue their support for these amendments by voting for S. 2311, and help ensure that those with AIDS will continue to receive the support and resources they need. Mr. Speaker, we all know the troubling statistics. Since its inception, AIDS has claimed over 400,000 lives in the United States. An estimated 900,000 Americans are living with HIV/AIDS today. Women account for 30 percent of new infections. Over half of all new infections occur in persons under 25. As the AIDS crisis has continued year after year, it has become more and more difficult for anyone to claim that AIDS is someone else's problem. Since 1990, the CARE Act has helped establish a comprehensive, community-based continuum of care for uninsured and under-insured people living with HIV and AIDS, including access to primary medical care, pharmaceuticals, and support services. The CARE Act provides services to people who would not otherwise have access to care. As a result of the CARE Act, many people with HIV and AIDS are leading longer and healthier lives today. Mr. Speaker, since my election to Congress, I have strongly supported increases in funding for medical research. As the spouse of a physician, I have a special affinity for those suffering from life- threatening illnesses. I know some believe that government is the problem and not the solution. But the truth is the opposite: in times of great human suffering and injustice, our government has acted to help our fellow citizens overcome life-threatening conditions and situations. Federal aid for the Ryan White CARE Act is a prime example of the good government can do in the face of tragedy and national danger. By passing S. 2311, we are making clear that the AIDS epidemic in the United States will receive the attention and public health response it deserves. By passing S. 2311 today, Mr. Speaker, we will affirm our commitment to people living with HIV/AIDS and their families. We will also be affirming our dedication to sound public policy. By reauthorizing the CARE Act, today, Mr. Speaker, we will give hope and a real chance for a better life to thousands of HIV/AIDS victims.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, yesterday the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century issued its report entitled ``Before it's too late'' on the state of math and science teaching in America. The Glenn Commission, as it has come to be known, identifies teaching as the most powerful instrument for reform in education, and thus the place to begin. I am proud to be one of four Members of Congress selected to serve on the Glenn Commission, which was chaired by former senator and astronaut John Glenn. As the report concludes, we must significantly increase the number of teachers who feel qualified to teach math and science, and change the environment of professional development to create an ongoing system of improvement in our schools. Teaching our children math and science is important for economic productivity and national security. It is also important at an even more profound level than the practical benefits to our economy. Math and science bring order and harmony and balance to our lives. They teach us that our world is not capricious, but predictable, that it contains pattern and logic. They also provide us with foundational skills for lifelong learning, for creating progress itself.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank my colleague from California and rise in support of H.R. 5034. As my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania mentioned, this bill of our colleague from South Carolina provides up to $20,000 in student loan forgiveness to fully qualified teachers teaching in high-need schools and districts. I certainly view loan forgiveness as one of a number of strategies to ensure that we have enough highly qualified teachers, especially in the critical areas of science and math. This bill expands upon a Democratic initiative included under Title IV of the Higher Education Act during the last reauthorization that guarantees $5,000 in student loan forgiveness to any teacher who teaches in a high-need school for a period of 5 years. Now, $20,000 is obviously a more powerful incentive than $5,000; and given the looming teacher shortage, high-needs schools and districts will need all the help they can get in recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, and I applaud the gentleman from South Carolina for his interest in improving and expanding the existing program. I would be remiss, however, if I failed to mention some of my concerns about this legislation. For although I am disappointed that Democratic offers to work with our friends on the other side of the aisle to improve this legislation before it came to the floor were rebuffed, it is still my hope that some of my concerns and some of the concerns of my colleagues can be remedied should this bill be taken up in the Senate. To begin with, the bill is written in such a way that it is really unclear as to the relationship between this loan forgiveness program and the existing loan forgiveness program. I worry this could be confusing for students and school officials. We need to simplify student aid, not make it more complicated. In addition, funding for this program does not kick in until 3 years after the date of enactment, meaning that teachers could not benefit from it, as I understand it, until 2004. We are losing teachers to more lucrative professions today, and will in 2001 and 2002 and 2003. If we want to keep these talented individuals in the classroom, it seems to me prudent to provide them with loan forgiveness today. And perhaps most important, funding for this program is discretionary rather than mandatory, as is Title IV of the Higher Education Act. So depending on the spirit and generosity of the appropriators 3 years from now, although I presume we will have generous appropriators 3 years from now, but depending on that spirit of generosity, some teachers might benefit while others, though equally qualified, might not. In fact, should the appropriators decide not to fund the program at all, no one will benefit, and we will be no closer to addressing the teacher shortage than we are today. So I would like to work with my colleague to see if there is some way we can ensure that all eligible teachers can benefit from this valuable program. After all, his intention, I am sure, is to provide an incentive that will be meaningful to recruit and to encourage teachers. Finally, I feel I must make one last point. For although it is not directly related to this bill, I think it is an essential part of this debate. We will not be able truly to address the problem of poor teacher recruitment and retention rates, particularly in high-need urban and rural communities, until we improve conditions faced by teachers in the classroom. For no matter how tempting the monetary incentive, good teachers will be unlikely to remain in the classroom if they are overcrowded, lacking supplies, and have buildings falling down around them. However, despite all this, I believe that H.R. 5034 is a good first step, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat that we support this bill. It does need some perfecting, but it gets at the heart of what we must address in education. Teachers are indeed the key. Teachers are the key for special education. Teachers are the key for languages. Teachers are the key for science and math. In fact, tomorrow the Glen Commission, the National Commission on the Teaching of Mathematics and Science, will be issuing our report; and that will also highlight the need to recruit good teachers, to provide them training before they go in, mentoring as they enter their field, and life-long professional development. Loan forgiveness is part of the number of steps that we must take in order to have the kind of teaching that we need to give our students the education they need for fulfilling lives in the 21st century. We must recruit teachers. Loan forgiveness will help with that. But we also must look at the environment where they will teach, the class sizes, the facilities, and we must make sure that the environment provides an atmosphere of continuous improvement and professional development. With that, we can find the teachers we need, train them, and give our students the education they deserve. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the 55th Anniversary of Freehold VFW Post #4374. This organization has made lasting contributions through hard work and dedication to those in need. The VFW is a patriotic organization devoted to serving the widows and orphans of the Veteran. The VFW promotes the institutions of freedom and democracy, to preserve and defend the constitution of the United States of America. The Veterans of Foreign Wars was formed after World War One and continues to maintain a strong presence today. Freehold's VFW Post #4374 first opened its doors in 1945 under the watchful eye of its first elected Commander, Francis Vanderveer. Commander Vanderveer lead Post #4374 until 1947. The VFW Post #4347 first held its gatherings for Freehold area veterans in a meeting hall space borrowed from the Knights of Columbus. Then, in the 1960's, construction began on the present Post Home on Waterworks Road, where they continue to serve the community. Since its inception, Post #4347 members have canvassed the Freehold area for needy families during the holiday season. Last December, like many before it, they held a Christmas party for nearly 100 needy kids, kids who otherwise would have no holiday celebration. As extraordinary as this effort was, it was just one of many times that VFW Post #4347 has worked on behalf of those in need. Throughout the years, VFW Post #4347 has gone the extra mile to take care of not only our veterans, but also our community. Freehold VFW Post #4347 is a great asset to both Central New Jersey and our nation. I urge all my colleagues to join me today in recognizing its dedication to our veterans, community service and Central New Jersey.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, it is an honor to rise today to join the New Jersey congressional delegation and my colleagues in paying tribute to Senator Frank Lautenberg. This legislation which we passed earlier in the day to name the post office and courthouse at Federal Square in Newark after the Senator is just one small way to honor a man who has done so much for New Jersey and the Nation. I will be delighted to support it and I am pleased to see the House take it up. Frank Lautenberg, born into an immigrant family residing in Paterson, New Jersey, Frank and his family dealt with numerous obstacles and struggles that were common experiences for many Americans during the 1920s. After moving from city to city, the Lautenbergs and Lautenberg's father found work at the renowned silk mills in Paterson. His father was soon able to eke out a living to support his family. Sadly, just as Frank was on the brink of manhood, he lost his father to cancer. Upon his graduation from Nutley High School, Frank Lautenberg enlisted and served in the Army's Signal Corps in Europe during World War II. After serving his country, he attended the prestigious Columbia University on the GI Bill where he studied economics. With his eyes set on the innovations of the future, Lautenberg, accompanied by two childhood friends, founded Automatic Data Processing, a payroll services company. ADP quickly rose up the ladder of business and emerged as one of the world's largest computing service companies with over 33,000 people on its payroll. Since his election to the Senate in 1982, Frank Lautenberg has given back to the State of New Jersey and our Nation throughout his senatorial career. By writing laws that established age 21 as the national drinking age, by banning smoking on airplanes and forbidding domestic violence abusers from owning guns, Lautenberg insured the health and security of our families. As a strong environmental leader, Frank Lautenberg sought to protect all aspects of our beautiful environment, mainly through the Superfund program to clean up toxic waste sites, the clean air and safe drinking water acts, and the Pets on Planes acts. With the best interests of New Jersey and New Jersey's beaches in mind, Frank Lautenberg wrote legislation that would ban ocean dumping of sewage, rid our beaches of garbage, control medical waste, and stop oil drilling off our famed Jersey shore. Standing as an example of an American success story, Frank Lautenberg has dedicated 18 years of his career to public service here in the United States Capitol and in New Jersey. And, despite his retirement, Senator Lautenberg will always be remembered for his many contributions made to better the lives of millions of Americans. I am sure he will continue to dedicate himself to improving lives, to healing the world. On a more personal note, no one has done more to help me as a new member of the New Jersey congressional delegation than Senator Frank Lautenberg. His advice, guidance and assistance are things that I will always remember with gratitude.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I would also, before we finish this, just commend the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge) for his very attractive tax credit school bond proposal. It would be of great benefit to districts like mine. New Jersey would be able to get on with building a couple hundred million dollars worth of school construction, just in my State, if this legislation goes through. I certainly am doing all I can to advance this legislation, and I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for bringing it forward and for pushing it. There are only a few precious weeks of legislative time left this year, and this is surely one of the most important things that is remaining on our agenda.

Mr. HOLT. If the gentleman would yield, I would like to underscore a couple of points that he has made about these numbers. The latest numbers I have from the Department of Education say that in the next 10 years we will need somewhat more than 2 million, probably 2.2 million new teachers, just to stay even. This is not to have smaller class sizes, to reach this optimum of 18 students in the early grades, but this is just to stay even with the attrition, the retirement of the teachers and the students that are now in the pipeline. Where are we going to get these teachers? This raises questions of where we will recruit them, how we will encourage them and mentor them, train them and see that they are treated as the professionals that they are, and how they will get ongoing professional development. I think the gentleman's proposal is a very good one, and that will help in this. We must at the same time work for smaller class sizes. The President's proposal, he has made this a personal cause, is to get smaller class sizes in the early few years, and I hope we can do that. Once again we are coming to the end of the appropriations cycle and the money is not there. In the past 2 years the President has been able to succeed in the negotiations with his masterful negotiation skills to get the installments on these 100,000 new teachers. I just hope we will be able, before we go out of session this year, to get the next installment on that.

Mr. HOLT. Yes, I can imagine. Some days I know what that is like. I would like to turn our attention to your school construction legislation, because I would like to believe that if my colleagues here understood it, and if the leadership really understood the legislation that the gentleman has put forward, they would not stand in the hallways, they would not block this. It makes such good sense. I would like to ask my colleague to explain for us why this is not taking away local initiative, the local control of schools? As my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), said, part of the genius of this is it allows the local school districts to decide when and what needs to be constructed.

Mr. HOLT. If the gentleman will yield. Of course the real purpose of our being here this evening is to call attention to the action that we have yet to take here in the House of Representatives, to call on the leadership to act on these bills. The school construction bill is a wonderful partnership between the Federal Government and the local school district, and it is applicable not just in schools that are overcrowded because of a booming population, such as in my district. It is also applicable to the school districts where the schools are aging. Across the country the average age of a school now is well beyond what a business or industry would consider satisfactory for use. It is well into the 40 years for an average school. In New Jersey it is actually closer to 50 years for the average age of schools. We have all heard stories of ceiling collapses, of teachers who put cheesecloth over the vents to stop the lead paint flecks from coming in to the classroom. Estimates by the civil engineering societies say that school construction is the number one infrastructure need of the United States of America, and to put America's classrooms reasonably up-to-date would have a price tag of several hundreds of billions of dollars. The school construction legislation that the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge) has presented to us as a companion piece to that that is sponsored by Representatives Johnson and Rangel that would be a great boon to school districts that have aging schools and to school districts where the population is booming and they cannot keep up the construction, have enough construction to keep up with the population, and in the school districts who need to build so that they can have enough classrooms to have the smaller class sizes that are ideal for education.

Mr. HOLT. If the gentleman would yield, the students tell me that they get teased because they get wet going back to the classes that they have in the other building, and these trailers are not a cheap solution either. They are expensive to install, expensive to maintain. And what I am struck by is that their long and narrow floor plan makes them really totally unsuitable for instruction. I asked a teacher, well, what do you do when you need to write on the blackboard, because the students on either wing cannot see the blackboard, and he said, well, he has to talk about word by word or number by number what he is writing on the blackboard and hope they can take it down. That is no way to teach children.