Rush Holt

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge), for yielding to me. I am pleased to be here with the gentleman on his Special Order this evening to talk and focus on school construction and talk about the implications that that has for education overall. I do thank the gentleman for setting up these Special Orders. The gentleman has been a leader in education, starting with his school board back home and going through his time as State superintendent of schools in North Carolina and then preceding me here in the House of Representatives. The gentleman has been a true leader. Mr. Speaker, I visited nearly 100 schools in my district; and everywhere I go across the five counties that I represent, I hear from parents and teachers and administrators and students about the problems of overcrowding. It is no wonder the number of school children, certainly in my part of the country and in many other parts of the country, is setting record levels. We are experiencing what is sometimes called the echo of the baby boom, and there are schools where the student population has doubled in the past 10 years. I can show my colleagues school districts where the kindergarten is twice the size of the 12th grade. We do not have to have higher mathematics to understand the implications of that for school construction. The classrooms are overcrowded. To alleviate this, many schools are turning to trailers. Trailers may be a temporary solution. In one place in my district, in one school district, in fact, at one school, there are 18 temporary trailers out back, and another three in the school next door and others that will be moved in in coming weeks.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, the clock is ticking. The clock is ticking and this Congress has yet to hear the message delivered by the one million mothers on May 14 of this year. An extraordinary thing happened this past Mother's Day when so many New Jerseyans joined families from all over the United States in the ``Million Mom March'' here in Washington. Now, all of us know it, Mr. Speaker. Over the last years, our Nation has been shaken deeply by incidents of gun violence. All of us were floored by the tragedy in a Michigan elementary school where a 6-year- old child, a child who had not yet learned to read, had learned how to kill with a handgun. That was just the latest in a long line of gun-related tragedies. We know the litany. Columbine, West Paducah, Jonesboro, Conyers, and in too many other communities across America. These have been matched by countless other gun tragedies less public but no less tragic for their families and their communities all across the Nation. In school yards, what would have a generation ago been a fist fight now becomes a blood bath. Since these tragedies, citizens all across my State of New Jersey have called louder than ever for passage of stricter gun safety laws. But despite the outcry, a few politicians in Congress here in Washington have stood in the doorway, have blocked reform, refusing to act on common sense gun safety proposals like those that the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) and I are sponsoring here in the House of Representatives. On August 26, I was joined by my colleague and good friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), for a public meeting in Plainsboro, New Jersey. The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) and I were joined at that event by 66 families who once again called on this body to act on sensible gun safety legislation. Mr. Speaker, I would like to read into the Record a letter to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the Speaker of the House, signed by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), myself, and 66 families who joined us in Plainsboro, which I will personally deliver to the Speaker this evening. Mr. Speaker, as concerned citizens of the State of New Jersey, we are writing to request your immediate assistance in having Congress consider gun safety legislation before Congress adjourns for the year. As you know, in June of 1999, following the tragic murders at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, Congress considered a package of juvenile justice proposals. When this legislation was considered in the Senate, an amendment by Senator Frank Lautenberg was attached that would close the dangerous gun show loophole, ban the importation of high- capacity ammunition magazines, and mandate the use of child safety locks on firearms. These three proposals, which have been introduced in the House of Representatives, are mainstream, common sense measures that polls show are supported by a large bipartisan majority of the public. While we in New Jersey do not have gun shows, other States do. That undermines our gun safety laws because they allow criminals to buy dangerous firearms without background checks, waiting periods or identification at these shows. A law mandating child safety locks, if enacted, could save the lives of hundreds of young Americans. Many of us visited Washington, D.C., as part of the ``Million Mom March'' this Spring. And, I might add, I made that trip by bus from New Jersey, too. In the many weeks since that watershed event, attended by thousands of Americans from all parts of the Nation and all walks of life, no effort has been made to bring the Juvenile Justice legislation back before the House. In fact, these measures have remained bottled up with delay tactics and parliamentary maneuvering. Now, as less than 20 days remain in the scheduled legislative session, the need for leadership and action on this issue is greater than ever. Stemming the tide of gun violence is an issue of deep importance to us and to our Nation. Now is the time for our leaders in Washington to roll up their sleeves, not sit on their hands. We urge you in the strongest possible terms to use your influence as the highest ranking Member of the House of Representatives to bring immediately these legislative proposals back before the Congress so that they can be sent to the President for his signature. ``Respectfully,'' and it is signed by 66 family members from central New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I include the letter for the Record: August 26, 2000. Hon. J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House, U.S. Capitol, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker: As concerned citizens of the State of New Jersey, we are writing to request your immediate assistance in having Congress consider gun safety legislation before it adjourns for the year. As you know, in June of 1999, following the tragic murders at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, Congress considered a package of Juvenile Justice proposals. When this legislation was considered in the Senate, an amendment by Senator Frank Lautenberg was attached that would close the dangerous gun show loophole, ban the importation of high- capacity ammunition magazines and mandate the use of child safety locks on firearms. These three proposals, which have also been introduced in the House of Representatives, are mainstream, common sense measures that polls show are supported by a large, bipartisan majority of the public. While we in New Jersey don't have gun shows, other states do. That undermines our gun safety laws because they allow criminals to buy dangerous firearms without background checks, waiting periods or identification at these shows. A law mandating child safety locks, if enacted, could save the lives of hundreds of young Americans. Many of us visited Washington D.C. as part of the ``Million Mom March'' this Spring. In the many weeks since that watershed event, attended by thousands of Americans from all parts of the nation and all walks of life, no effort has been made to bring the Juvenile Justice legislation back before Congress. In fact, these measures have remained bottled up with delay tactics and parliamentary maneuvering. Now, as less than twenty days remain in the scheduled legislative session, the need for leadership and action on this issue is greater than ever. Stemming the tide of gun violence is an issue of deep importance to us, and to our nation. Now is the time for our leaders in Washington to roll up their sleeves, not sit on their hands. We urge you in the strongest possible terms to use your influence as the highest-ranking member of the House of Representatives to immediately bring these legislative proposals back before Congress, so that they can be sent to the President for his signature. Respectfully, Signed by 66 New Jersey citizens. Mr. Speaker, every school I visit, every PTA meeting that I attend, every classroom that I teach in, kids, moms and dads, in fact nearly everyone I talk with in New Jersey, tells me it is high time that Congress take action to keep guns out of the hands of kids and criminals. Mr. Speaker, the time has come for Republicans, Democrats, and Independents to join together to pass these common sense gun safety measures.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4865 to repeal the 1993 tax on Social Security benefits. I have spoken to and heard from many residents in Central New Jersey who want to see this Social Security tax eliminated. Since coming to Congress, I have stood for targeted and reasonable tax reductions, I have crossed party lines to phase out the estate tax, and to eliminate the marriage penalty. I also support ending the 1993 tax on Social Security benefits. As I do, however, I want to be sure that this body understands and appreciates the context in which this tax was enacted. The 1993 tax on Social Security benefits was a small part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which paved the way for significant deficit reduction, and the large budget surpluses we enjoy today. OBRA, particularly the 1993 Social Security tax, was initially unpopular. Many Members in fact lost their seats in this House for voting for it. But it was enacted for a good cause--to reduce the deficit and help shore up the Medicare program. It's important to remember the status of the Medicare Trust funds at that time. Medicare was in far graver condition than Social Security and was rapidly nearing insolvency. In fact, the 1993 Medicare Trustees report projected that Medicare would become insolvent just six years after the report in 1999. Thanks to the cumulative effects of the 1993 package, however, as well as changes made in 1997, the Medicare program is projected to remain solvent through at least 2025. That is a remarkable turn around, and we have a lot of courageous Members of Congress who are no longer with us today to thank for it. These measures also helped to create a budget surplus that we could never have imagined just a few years ago. We have gone from budget deficits of over $200 billion per year--deficits which, by the way, included Social Security surpluses--to record on-budget surpluses today. Now that budget surpluses have been created and are projected to continue into the next decade we can make reasonable and targeted tax cuts. But we must not get complacent about the condition of Medicare or Social Security, or minimize the challenges that will only increase as the baby boom generation reaches retirement. It is crucial that we maintain the strength and long term solvency of Medicare and Social Security through whatever tax reductions are ultimately passed, following the negotiations that will take place with the leadership of Congress and the White House. I am satisfied that H.R. 4865 provides a general revenue offset to replenish the loss of revenue from repealing the 1993 tax--revenue that is dedicated to the Medicare trust funds. But this also means that these are now funds that cannot be used to meet the many other varied needs a rapidly aging population presents. I challenge this Congress not to neglect the other essential needs of our seniors and our communities. While passing meaningful tax relief is essential, I also intend, and hope Members on both sides of the aisle will work with me, in seeing that a real prescription drug benefit is provided under Medicare. This is what our seniors want and are asking for. It is especially critical that a prescription drug benefit be a central part of Medicare and not as an add-on. We know Medicare. Medicare works. Insurance companies, on the other hand, have not demonstrated a dedication to guaranteeing coverage to seniors, and indeed, their business is not geared towards that goal. Their representatives have made that clear. I also hope we can begin to work in a bipartisan way to establish a long-term care insurance program for older Americans and persons with severe disabilities. By reauthorizing the Older Americans Act and by creating a tax credit for caregivers, we are making promising strides in that area. But there is a long way to go, and meeting the needs of our rapidly aging population will require our utmost attention. Mr. Speaker, while we take action to provide meaningful tax relief here today, we must not lose sight of the larger overall need to maintain our budget surplus and continue to preserve Medicare and Social Security for today's and tomorrow's workers.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, in this new century, an education is more important to Americans than ever before in our nation's history. We have progressed from the agricultural-based economy of our forefathers to one that is knowledge-based and dependent on information and communications technology. Today, in order to succeed and even just to function in this new economy, Americans must have a solid education and foundation of skills. In addition, Americans must be equipped with the skills necessary to continue learning. They must be prepared to survive in a world of rapid social and technological change. Literacy is the primary tool needed for lifelong learning. It opens up doors to new opportunities and experiences. Yet, today, too many Americans are unable to read a single sentence. In fact, nearly 40 percent of our nation's children cannot read at grade-level by the end of the third grade. In disadvantaged communities, this failure rate is a shocking 60 percent. Without the basic skill of literacy, these children are likely to fall to the wayside in our new economy. We must combat illiteracy. However, we cannot wait until these children start school; we must reach them earlier. We should eagerly seek to give these children the excitement, the satisfaction, the empowerment, and the impetus for growth that comes from reading. Studies have confirmed that reading to young children in the years before age 5 has a profound effect on their ability to learn. Doctors have told us that a child's brain needs intellectual stimulation to grow to its full potential, so we must read to our children from birth through school age. But many families do not have access to children's books. A recent study found that 60 percent of kindergarten children who performed poorly in school did not own a single book. The Book Stamp Act, which I am introducing today along with my colleagues Mr. Upton, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Miller, Mr. Owens, Mr. Payne, and Mr. Romero-Barcelo, and which was recently introduced in the Senate by Senators Kennedy and Hutchison, will help provide children with their own books before they enter school. The act authorizes an appropriation of $50 million a year for this purpose. It also creates a special postage stamp, which will feature an early learning character and which will sell at a slightly higher rate than the normal 33 cents, to create additional revenues for the Book Stamp Program. The resources will be distributed through the Child Care and Development Block Grant to the state child care agency in each state. The state agency then will allocate its funds to local child care research and referral agencies throughout the state on the basis of local need. These non-profit agencies will work with established book distribution programs such as First Book, Reading is Fundamental, and Reach Out and Read to coordinate the buying of discounted books and the distribution of the books to children. However, since these young children cannot read on their own. These agencies will also work with parents and child care providers to educate them on the best ways to read to children and the most effective use of books with children at various stages of development. Illiteracy is a serious problem. For our Nation to continue to thrive in this new century, we must ensure that all children have the ability to read and learn. The Book Stamp Act will help achieve this goal. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in support of this bill.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. If we could get class sizes down to an average of 18 students in kindergarten through third grade, it would benefit not only those teachers and those students during those years, it would benefit those students when they get to high school. The literature is clear on this, and that is what the President has been talking about in his effort to get 100,000 new teachers, particularly in the early years, so that we can have an average class size that appears to be optimum at about 18 students. That is what teachers tell me. One does not need to be smaller than that, but they should not be larger than that. It is a worthwhile goal. As the gentleman knows, we are two years into this process now. We have appropriated funds for 30,000 new teachers around the country, but we still have more to do. This would be in addition to hiring the teachers necessary to just keep up with retirement and attrition. This would be to actually reduce class sizes.

Mr. HOLT. Smaller class sizes, particularly in the early years, are essential. It is when students learn how to learn. The educational literature is clear on this. Smaller class sizes help students, and the advantage lasts for years and years. In fact, it may last a lifetime.

Mr. HOLT. The key is what the gentleman referred to just a moment ago, is every student. That is our national ideal, that we provide an excellent education for all students; not just science education for future scientists; not just smaller class sizes for those who can afford private schools; not just reading for those who are fortunate to have good pre-school access and exposure to books. No; for all children. That is the ideal that we should be upholding in everything we do here in the Congress, is that this general education, which is special to America, is what has made us so successful and what we must at every opportunity talk about and try to ensure in every school district across the country, that we are talking about education for all.

Mr. HOLT. There is nothing that should lead us to believe that teaching techniques cannot advance just as business and manufacturing techniques advance. We have learned a lot in the last 50 years, in the last 100 years, about how children learn. Some of that has implications for how we construct a classroom and how we run a class. We need modern facilities.

Mr. HOLT. If I may comment on that point, nationally schools now have an average age of about 45 years. In New Jersey, it is a little closer to 50 years. The average school age in any other business that would be considered obsolete.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join with my colleague from North Carolina, who has been a leader throughout his career on education, and has brought that lifetime of experience here to the House of Representatives. The number of school children is growing now at a record-setting pace. We are experiencing the echo, the baby-boom echo, where the children of the baby boom are in school. I can tell you in my congressional district, there are some school districts where the number of children in kindergarten outnumbers the number in the 12th grade. You do not need to have higher mathematics to understand the implications of that for school construction and the need to provide good classrooms for those teachers and students. With more than 52 million students in schools today, an all-time high, we are experiencing real crowding in the classrooms. To alleviate the crowding, many of the schools in my district are using the temporary solution of temporary structures, long, narrow, trailer-like facilities that are really unsuited for classrooms. But many schools are forced to use that. New Jersey communities, as in many other parts of the country, need assistance to help provide the space for the children to learn, for the teachers to teach, and we really cannot postpone that any longer. The civil engineers point to this as the number one infrastructure problem facing the country today. We are investing billions of dollars in new prisons, we are investing billions of dollars in military installations. We should be investing resources in our schools for the sake of our children. It is the seed corn that my colleague speaks of. I visited more than 80 schools in this term that I have been in Congress, and everywhere I go I hear from parents and teachers and students who feel that there is a role for the Federal Government. We can help. Together with my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina, I am working to help these fast-growing school districts, such as he has in his district, such as I have in mine, helping them to afford new and modern schools with what I think is a very attractive concept, tax credit for the holders of school construction bonds, in effect using Federal tax credits so that the school districts are reduced from the pressure of having to pay the interest to raise the capital for the school construction. These interest-free capital bonds will leverage the amount of money available to the school districts. My colleague has been a leader in devising and advocating this really very creative and attractive way of funding school construction.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, we certainly should have the opportunity to debate this and vote on it on the floor. It takes away no local authority. The local school authorities will determine what needs to be built and where it needs to be built and when it needs to be built, but I know in my district, many of the towns have difficulty justifying to the taxpayers the large increase in property taxes that would result from the necessary school construction. Now, this is not a free lunch. Of course, what we are doing in effect is deferring Federal revenue, but in the case of the school districts in central New Jersey it would be a shift away from property taxes, which would allow school districts to get on with the school construction that they know, that we all know, that they need to do. I think it is a very attractive concept. I only wish, as my colleague says, that we could get this to the floor to be debated as it should be. The gentleman has been a real leader in advancing this idea and I think this will find favor all across the country. One other thing I would like to comment on is technology education, science education, and the importance of teachers. I think one of the greatest disservices that we do to students and to teachers is sometimes when people will talk about a born teacher, so and so is a born teacher, there are no more teachers born than there are born lawyers, born doctors, born engineers. When we talk about it that way, we lose sight of the fact of what hard work it is to be a teacher, and how a teacher must work to keep up with developments in their field and developments in learning, learning how children learn. So that if we are going to invest in the children of this country and in their education, we must invest in the professional development of teachers. In most businesses, it is customary to spend several percent, maybe 5 percent, maybe 10 or even 20 percent of salaries in the training and development of the employees. In the field of education, in schools, that is typically 1 percent or less that is invested in the professional development of teachers. We must recognize that teaching requires continuous learning, continuous development, so that teachers can be the professionals that we want them to be. In the area of technology, our cars now have more computing power than the Apollo spacecraft had. Computers can send billions of dollars of capital around the world at the touch of a key, and our economy is booming with growth in high-tech industries, and yet a recent survey published by the Department of Education tells us that only 20 percent of teachers feel qualified to use the technology that is now available to them. Not some future technology that is coming but what is available to them today. That is why I am cosponsoring legislation to help teachers teach technology education. We must do more. In order for our country to continue growing and prospering in this century, we must ensure that our students receive a quality education in science and mathematics and technology. We must do what we can to help the teachers be prepared to teach those subjects.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I must say that we are fortunate to have the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge) in the House of Representatives keeping us focused on these issues. There is no one in this body who has more experience, more knowledge, and more dedication to the providing of excellent education for all of America's children. I thank the gentleman, not just for tonight's special order, but for what the gentleman does day in and day out to keep the House of Representatives focused on the most important investment that we as a country make: The investment in the education of our children.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, there is no better investment for the future. The gentleman speaks about the need for more teachers, and the gentleman is right. This is a subject for an entire day's discussion, I think; but let me just point out, as the gentleman knows well, in the next 10 years we will need to hire 2.2 million new teachers just to stay even. Not for smaller class sizes, but just to keep up with the current needs as teachers retire, as teachers, for various reasons, leave the profession. 2.2 million teachers. We have to make sure that we provide the training. As they enter the profession, that they are provided the mentoring in the early years and that we provide a climate of continuous improvement. That is what we talk about in industry; we should have the same thing in the teaching profession as we have in the medical profession and the legal profession. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield back to the gentleman.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the accomplishments of the Flemington American Legion auxiliary #159. This organization has continually made lasting contributions to its local communities through hard work and dedication to those in need. For nearly fifteen years, its members have canvassed the Flemington Area for needy families during the holiday season. Last December, they raised enough money to shop for sixty families with over one hundred children. Four ``Santas'' personally presented each family with two large boxes of food, toys, games and clothing for the children. This past January, the organization made another demonstration of its commitment to the community during times of crisis. On January 22, a gas explosion badly injured and burned a fire chief and police patrolman after they responded to a 911 call, resulting in their lengthy hospitalization. in response, the organization hosted a benefit spaghetti dinner. With a massive volunteer effort, members worked as cooks, dishwashers, and parking attendants. Contributing both time and money, the group served over 800 dinners, raising enough funds to present the two men checks of $5,000 each when they were finally discharged from the hospital. As extraordinary as this effort was, it was just one of many times that the American Legion Auxiliary #159 has worked on behalf of those in need. Throughout the years, the American Legion Auxiliary #159 has donated money to Special Olympics, Childrens Miracle Network, Cancer Research, March of Dimes, Red Cross, Salvation Army and numerous other local charities. Working with its ``Legion Family'' that includes the American Legion and Sons of the American Legion Post #159, it has continually demonstrated its dedication to the community. The American Legion Auxiliary #159 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 community service and Central New Jersey.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the Somerville Carpenters' Local Union #455's 100th Anniversary. Over the last century, Carpenters' Local #455 has made significant contributions to our community by supplying skilled Craftsmen that have helped fuel the tremendous growth of Somerset and Hunterdon Counties. Carpenters Local Union #455 was founded in Somerville on January 24, 1900 by Peter J. McGuire. Serving at the time as the Secretary Treasurer of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, he understood what was necessary to train first-rate, professional carpenters and ensure that they produced a top-notch, reliable product. With this knowledge, the Carpenters' Local #455 was established to provide training to its workers that would allow them to produce the excellent craftsmanship vital to the development of our communities. In the 100 years since its founding, the Carpenters' Local #455's trade and communities have experienced significant changes. Throughout these transitions, it has grown even stronger. It has remained firm in its commitment to providing the very best Craftsmen to build our communities and in its desire to ensure a fair wage for its hard working members. I am pleased to say that it has been successful in its goals. Without the expertise and reliability of its Craftsmen, the tremendous growth that Somerset and Hunterdon Counties have achieved in the last century would not have been possible. Be it the homes we live in or the buildings we work in, the importance of excellent craftsmanship cannot be overlooked. Thanks to the efforts of Carpenters' Local #455, the foundation of Central New Jersey's development has been a firm and secure one. The Somerville Carpenters Local Union #455 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 Central New Jersey's development and workers.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman is very eloquent and has been very eloquent on the subject this evening, as she always is on every subject.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to associate myself with the remarks of the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), and I thank her for organizing this Special Order this evening to talk about an issue that is not getting enough attention, the issue of mental health. It is an issue that needs so much attention, because, as the speakers tonight have pointed out, we have a lot of work to do. We talk about health care a great deal here, but there is an aspect of health care that does not get much talk. Many of us can remember a day when we could not talk about cancer or about AIDS, how many people suffered; people who did not come forward for treatment because of those stigmas. Mental illness is really the last great health stigma. We need to continue this fight, to fight the ignorance, first of all, to fight the ignorance with information. All of us can think of Americans who have struggled with mental illness, whether it was Abraham Lincoln or William Styron or countless others. Mr. Speaker, the fact is, we do not need to look that far. All of us, every one of us knows someone who has had a mental health problem. In fact, 50 million Americans will experience a mental health problem at some point in their lives. Those Americans deserve our respect, our help, and our understanding. But because of the stigma associated with mental illness, the job is harder. We not only have to work to pass protections for those who suffer from mental illness, protections like a strong Patients' Bill of Rights, parity in insurance coverage for serious mental illness, guidelines for the use of restraints in mental health facilities; in addition, we have to educate people. We have to educate them about the misperceptions that are associated with mental illness, Mr. Speaker, to assure everyone that Americans can and should get the mental help they need to lead productive lives, whether they are suffering from depression, bipolar illness, or schizophrenia, because only 20 percent of people seek treatment for mental health conditions, and it is a tragedy. We must create a climate to change that. We need to help stress that early intervention, continued research at NIH, and the National Institutes of Mental Health will help lead to better treatment and a cure for mental illness. Mr. Speaker, we talk about the violence in schools, and, of course, there are many aspects to that. There are many facets to the violence that we have seen. It raises questions about our parenting, about our teaching, about our school administering, about our policing. It raises questions about almost every aspect of our society. But one thing that it clearly cries out for is more attention to the mental health of our children in school. School counselors are not just those who advise students on college admission. We should have counselors in ample supply in all of the schools to deal with the tough growing up problems, including mental health problems that our students experience. Most of all, we need to remind people that mental illness affects people and it affects families. So I am proud to join tonight with the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) to continue to call attention to this important subject. I am pleased to join the gentlewoman in recognizing the courage of those who are living productive lives with mental illness.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize Science Day 2000, sponsored by The Science Coalition, an alliance of more than 400 organizations, institutions, and individuals dedicated to sustaining the federal government's historic commitment to U.S. leadership in basic science. Representatives of The Science Coalition visited several Members of Congress today to remind us that an investment in research is an investment in our future. Medical advances depend on advances in basic science and engineering. For example, scientists are recreating pancreatic islet cells to replace damaged ones, essentially reconstructing the pancreas to treat diabetes. Islet implants are possible thanks to nanotechnology. Working molecule by molecule, scientist are able to create new molecular structures and this ability may lead to new ways of building human tissue and organs. The federal investment in research makes many of these breakthroughs possible. Advancement in science and engineering requires the interactions of many disciplines. The interaction of physics, chemistry, materials science, computer science, and engineering in combination with the biological sciences makes advancements in health technologies, instruments, and treatments possible. The physical sciences have transformed the modern world. We could not have mapped the human genome without advances in information technology. Modern navigation aids would not be possible without the Global Positioning System, an outgrowth of astronomy. New diagnostic tools such as digital mammography are grounded in electrical engineering and mathematics. The economy is changing. Innovations in information technology and research based industries like telecommunications and biotechnology are leading the nation to a new level of prosperity based on federally funded research. Twenty years ago few could have imagined an economic expansion based primarily on fiber optics and information technology. Yet they are at the core of today's information and innovation economy. How did we get there? Through university research. The next new economy is taking shape at universities today. Alan Greenspan and leaders of industry continue to state that our economic prosperity is flowing from investments in science and technology we made years ago. Technologies that fuel today's economy came from these investments at university laboratories. The global market for products manufactured by research-intensive industries such as aerospace, computers, electronics, communications, and pharmaceuticals, is growing more than twice as fast as that for other manufactured goods. This is driving national economic growth around the world. Increased federal investment in university research is one of the most important steps we can take to prepare for the ``information and innovation'' economy of the 21st century. The current pace of new scientific breakthroughs holds the promise to raise the quality of our lives even further. To make this a reality however, it is imperative that we continue to fuel this engine by ensuring a sustained commitment of federal funding for basic research in these fields. As a scientist and a Member of Congress, I am in a special position to speak about the need to ensure continued success of the research and development enterprise by increasing federal support for basic research. With this goal in mind, I am a cosponsor of The Federal Research Investment Act, H.R. 3161. This bill calls for doubling the federal government's current rate of investment in research and development over a 10-year period. This would be achieved through annual increases above inflation, so that by fiscal year 2010, 2.6 percent of the Federal budget would be spent on non-defense R&D. This bill would assure a basic level of federal funding across a wide array of non- defense, basic scientific, biomedical, and engineering research. This legislation would provide a balanced investment across 15 agencies engaged in activities for basic research including: the National Institutes of Health, within the Department of Health and Human Services; the National Science Foundation; the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Centers for Disease Control, the Department of Energy and the Department of Agriculture. We must fuel the engine that directs such prosperity by adequately funding the next generation of potential scientific discoveries. In addition to increasing our financial commitment to the basic research enterprise, we must also ensure that we produce a technologically proficient workforce. Improving science education for all children in our public schools is also critical to developing a broader appreciation for science and the scientific method in society and producing well-trained and informed citizens. I believe that teachers are the most critical element in improving education. Nothing makes more of an impact on our children than a well-trained, caring, and dedicated teacher. Public schools will have to hire more than two million new teachers over the next 10 years. Many of these new teachers will have to teach math and science in the elementary grades. Unfortunately, many of today's teachers, especially in elementary school, do not feel prepared to teach science. Over half of America's high school teachers of physical sciences (including chemistry and earth science) do not have a major or minor in any physical science. About one-third of public high school math teachers do not have a teaching certificate in math. Science literacy is at the core of maintaining our economic strength, given the realities of global competition. We must strive for an education system that teaches every student every science every year. The support of professional scientists and engineers in education is important in assuring the development of concerned and responsible citizens in the future who understand the nature of the self-correcting system of science. Again, I applaud the efforts of the Science Coalition in promoting Science Day 2000. I urge my colleagues to consider the high return on the investment in basic research as we move forward together.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize Mr. Manuel Almeida, a distinguished veteran and accomplished VFW commander. Mr. Almeida is being honored this Saturday as the State Commander, Department of New Jersey, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States. Mr. Almeida saw action in the Army during the Korean War. He was awarded the purple heart, the combat infantry badge, and the United States, the United Nations, and the Korean Campaign Ribbons with two Battle Stars. One event that serves as a testament to the bravery and dedication of Mr. Almeida happened in 1952, in the affectionately named ``Old Baldy'' area. On this occasion, our forces were conducting a raid on an outpost. They withdrew, and it soon was discovered that there were some wounded men left behind. Mr. Almeida and two of his colleagues volunteered to return to ``Old Baldy'' and retrieve the injured men. Upon retrieving the men, Mr. Almeida and the other soldiers were hit by a mortar barrage. One of the soldiers who was acting as a stretcher bearer was hit by mortar schrapnel, and Mr. Almeida as well as the other remaining volunteers carried through with their mission and brought the original wounded men back to safety, returned for the injured stretcher bearer, and brought him to safety as well. Mr. Almeida's service to his country did not end with the completion of his tour of duty. He went on to serve in the US Army for 20 years, receiving numerous citations and awards. After his 20 year Army career, Mr. Almeida worked for the US Army Electronics Command at Fort Monmouth as a logistics maintenance manager and again retired from the Federal Service in 1995. Mr. Almeida joined VFW #2226, Oakhurst, New Jersey, was extremely active, became one of their All State Commanders, and now will command the Department of New Jersey, Veterans of Foreign Wars for the year 2000-2001. I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring Mr. Almeida for his many achievements and for his contributions to our country and to our Veterans. I wish him well in his new position.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Burton. This debate seems to be an unfortunate rite of summer here in the House. Every year we debate a Foreign Operation Appropriations bill and every year the gentleman from Indiana tries to cut funding for India, one of our most important allies. As in previous years, this attack should be rejected. The amendment in question would eliminate programs aimed at improving India's development. As my colleagues know, U.S. aid to India is primarily used for food, family planning programs, child survival programs and infrastructure development. We should be doing all that we can to support India's government in stimulating economic development and opportunity for the Indian people, not standing in the way of these productive efforts. Unfortunately, U.S. policy-makers have long neglected this important region, one that is home to one-fifth of the world population. That's why I applaud the efforts of President Clinton who visited India earlier this year and who has invited the Indian Prime Minister to the United States later this year. There has been good news about India's economic performance in recent years; fiscal reforms, market opening and the privatization of state- owned companies has led to reduced inflation and tariffs as well as a reduced budget deficit. The economy's current 6 percent rate of expansion puts it among the fastest-growing in the world, as the Economist reported earlier last month. India's economic growth underlies its enhanced significance politically as a power that will play a decisive role for many years to come. The U.S. is India's largest trading partner and largest investor. India continues to reduce and eliminate barriers to trade, and U.S. investment has grown from $500 million per year in 1991 to over $15 billion in 1999. Passage of the Burton amendment, however, would be a blow to the flourishing bilateral partnership between the United States and India and a setback to Indian political and human rights reform. As in previous years, the Burton amendment is wrong. It was rejected in a bipartisan manner. I urge all of my colleagues to again defeat this amendment.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, March 14, 2003 will mark a milestone in the history of wildlife in America--the centennial anniversary of the National Wildlife Refuge System. When President Theodore Roosevelt set aside tiny Pelican Island on Florida's East Coast for birds nearly a century ago, he began a conservation legacy that now spans 93 million acres across the United States and its territories. The National Wildlife Refuge System is America's only network of federal lands dedicated specifically to wildlife conservation, representing a steadfast commitment to protecting our wildlife heritage. This vast network of strategically located habitats protect hundreds of endangered species, serves as stepping stones for millions of migratory birds and conserves our premier fisheries. Incredibly, one of these stepping stones lies just 26 miles west of New York City's Times Square. The Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge in Morris County, New Jersey, which is just north of my district, was established in 1960. This 7,500-acre refuge consists of swamp woodland, hardwood ridges and cattail marsh. In the heart of one of the most densely populated areas in the world, the Refuge is home to more than 220 species of birds, as well as white tail deer, mink, beaver, river otter and coyote. As development and sprawl continue to swallow more and more of our nation's critical wildlife habitat, we need to ensure that refuges like the Great Swamp continue to thrive. I have worked with my colleagues in Congress to protect our irreplaceable ecosystems by reinstating full state funding in Land and Water Conservation Fund. We are now setting aside proceeds from offshore oil drilling to protect our open spaces. H.R. 4442, the National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Act would greatly help improve the operations, maintenance and expansion of the refuge system to ensure that wildlife gets the protection it deserves. The refuge system currently has a $1 billion operations backlog and a $800 million maintenance backlog. H.R. 4442 would require the Secretary of the Interior to prepare and submit to Congress a long term plan to address these deficiencies and outline system expansion Maybe most importantly, however, this legislation would establish a commission to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the refuge system. This would be instrumental in broadening public understanding and appreciation of protecting our wildlife heritage. I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to express my appreciation to, and tremendous respect for, a dedicated public servant that is leaving my staff today, my administrative assistant, Steven R. Maviglio. Steve is leaving Capitol Hill after many years of dedicated service to the U.S. House of Representatives and to the nation. Steve has been a key policy, political and management advisor to me since my election to Congress nearly two years ago. More than that, he has been a trusted friend. Prior to heading up my office, Steve served as a top aide to California Representative Vic Fazio, as Director of the House Democratic Caucus, and in high-level positions in the Department of Justice and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Having been an elected official himself, Steve's guidance and counsel have been of tremendous value to me, as a new representative. When it comes to politics, Steve is a seasoned pro, and this institution will miss him. Anyone who has worked with Steve knows that his experience, his passion, and his humor are assets that will be sorely missed. As my colleagues know, serving in the House of Representatives is a great honor and an even greater responsibility. Among the real benefits of being here is having the opportunity to work with some of the finest and most decent men and women anywhere in our nation. Steve is one of those talented people who have made my time here memorable and successful. When the public looks at Congress, it is often easy to miss the dedicated staff that work here, helping Member's to do the people's business. Congressional staffers like Steve are the members of the congressional family who rarely get the attention they deserve. They share our hopes, our dreams, our commitment, our purpose, and our idealism. They are the ones who are in the office when we arrive in the morning and are still there when we leave at night. For my entire first term, Steve's commitment and hard work helped set me on the right course. He helped to oversee and implement all of the pieces that make up a successful Representative's office. Being the top aide to a Member of Congress isn't an easy job. It's a position that is made up of many roles. Steve has been my adviser, gatekeeper, eyes, ears, and voice. Top aides like Steve act as all of these things and more. They are diplomats and negotiators, fighters and sometimes even scapegoats. When Members look good it is often because of the hard work of people like Steve. When something goes wrong they often shoulder the blame. While staffers are often overlooked, overworked, and under appreciated, I wanted to take this time to let Steve know that he is not. I am grateful for all that he has done for me, for the people of New Jersey and for this great institution. The Democratic Members of this body and the people of central New Jersey have gained much from Steve Maviglio's years of hard work, his dedication, his friendship and his wise and reasoned counsel. Steve leaves my office today to begin work as the Press Secretary for Gov. Gray Davis of California; he will be missed here by me and his many friends. I hope all of my colleagues will join me in extending to Steve our appreciation for a job well done and our best wishes for the challenges that lie ahead.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the weak and untested legislation we are considering and in support of real voluntary, reliable, affordable, Medicare prescription drug coverage for our seniors. I strongly support the inclusion of prescription drug coverage under the Medicare plan. Unfortunately, the only bill being considered on the floor of Congress today is not a Medicare prescription drug plan--it's an untested, unreliable, proposal that gives money to private insurance companies instead of seniors. What's worse, it offers no real relief to those in central New Jersey who need it. Today, more than at any time in our nation's history, prescription medications are helping Americans live longer, healthier lives. It is difficult, however, for many that lack good health care coverage to afford these products. Older Americans--the men and women that won World War II, built our nation, and raised our families--shouldn't be forced to choose between medicine and food. They shouldn't have to worry that an insurance company clerk is going to deny them lifesaving medicine to save a buck. It is only common sense that Medicare include drugs as an integral part of health care in its benefits package. Medicare is a program that works. Seniors rely on it. All of us should be able to agree on that. We must work together in a bipartisan fashion to include drug coverage under Medicare. There are too many questions about this hastily-written plan we are voting on today. Insurance companies say they have no interest in writing the prescription drug coverage policies that the bill calls for. In central New Jersey, just a handful of insurance companies dominate the market. In addition, seniors' experience with HMO insurance plans is not good. Service is often unreliable. Premiums have risen by more than 100 percent in some instances. Well . . . health care that you can't count on is no health care at all. We need to do better than that. There are several proposals being considered in Congress which are intended to help seniors pay for prescription drugs. While I have opposed policies that put government price controls on medicines, some of the other proposals being discussed are promising. We need to put the politics aside and have a serious discussion about how to help seniors. They deserve it. We must help seniors by passing a voluntary, affordable, reliable Medicare prescription drug benefit that helps seniors and allows us to continue to develop these lifesaving drugs. The choice we are faced with today is an easy one. We can vote with insurance companies or with senior citizens. Mr. Speaker, I choose to side with the seniors.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak on behalf of the health and safety of our children, our families and our communities. I rise today to call for increased funding for our environment. H.R. 4635 funds the Environmental Protection Agency at $199 million or nearly ten percent below the Administration's request for basic environmental and public health protection. These programs are considered the backbone of the Agency's work. A cut of this magnitude would seriously affect EPA's ability to provide American communities with cleaner water, cleaner air, and an improved quality of life. Toxic air emissions (e.g., benzene, formaldehyde) from industrial plants, cars and trucks will not be reduced. This will expose approximately 80% of the American people to greater risks of developing cancer and other serious health problems (birth defects, reproductive disorders, and damage to the nervous system). By delaying implementation of new standards for high-risk chemicals such as arsenic, radon, and radionuclides, public health and safety will be jeopardized for 240 million Americans who get their drinking water from public water systems. Fish kills and hazardous algal blooms in the Nation's rivers, lakes, and estuaries will increase as our ability to develop national criteria to control excessive nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) will be significantly delayed. The reduction in EPA's funding will hinder successful voluntary partnerships with private companies to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and other air pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides (NOX). As a result of this cut, over the next decade 335 million tons of greenhouse gas pollution will unnecessarily be emitted into the atmosphere and 850 thousand tons of nitrogen oxide will be emitted into the atmosphere. Finally, as we enter the summer, millions of American's visiting beaches will be at increased risk because there will be significant delays in the Agency's ability to monitor and collect adequate information about beach contamination. I urge my colleagues to protect their communities and reject this anti-environment bill.