Melissa Hart

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Stewart E. Sutin, Ph.D., upon his appointment as president of the Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC). I am confident that Dr. Sutin will be an excellent addition to CCAC, as well as to the community of southwestern Pennsylvania. Dr. Sutin was previously employed by Mellon Financial Corp. as the senior vice president and head of the international department. He is a member of the Research Advisory Committee for Carnegie Mellon University and a member of the Bosch Institute for Applied Studies in International Management, one of Germany's largest international corporations. Dr. Sutin also serves on the advisory boards for the Center for International Studies, the Center for International Business Studies, and the Center for Latin American Studies, all at Duquesne University. Currently, he is a part-time lecturer at the Katz School of Business at the University of Pittsburgh. Dr. Sutin brings extraordinary management experience, including a history of working with CEOs and motivating large and diverse staffs. He has energized business, as well as developed strong ties to all levels of the Pittsburgh business community, including significant relationships with area business and community leaders. One of Dr. Sutin's main focuses will be to ensure that CCAC's educational programs and workforce development initiatives meet local, national, and international economic trends. This will help to ensure that the nearly 81,000 credit and noncredit students that annually attend CCAC will remain among the region's most prepared to meet the challenges of the business world. I ask my colleagues to join with me in commemorating Stewart E. Sutin, Ph.D., for his recent appointment as the new president of Community College of Allegheny County. His success serves as an inspiration to all of western Pennsylvania, as well as CCAC.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I also would like to commend the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Miller) for his sponsorship of the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3389) to amend the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 to permit the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards to be made to nonprofit organizations.

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3389.

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award was established by Congress and signed into law in August of 1987. The first awards were presented in 1988. This award was established because many industry and government leaders saw that a renewed emphasis was a necessity for doing business in an expanding, competitive world market. But many American businesses either did not believe quality mattered for them or did not know where to begin. The Baldrige Award was envisioned as a standard of excellence that would help United States organizations achieve world class quality. Mr. Speaker, the award is named after Malcolm Baldrige, who was Secretary of Commerce to President Ronald Reagan from 1981 until his tragic death in July of 1987. Malcolm Baldrige thought the keys to this country's prosperity and long-term strength was quality management. He was involved with the creation of the act and his name was added after his death. The Baldrige Award is given by the President of the United States to businesses, manufacturing and service businesses, both small and large, and to education and health care organizations. Applicants prepare detailed assessments of their management systems. The criteria are built upon a set of 11 interrelated core values and concepts. The seven criteria categories provide a system essential to achieving performance excellence, leadership, strategic planning, customer and market focus, information and analysis, human resource focus, process management and business results. Baldrige applicants receive detailed written feedback about their strengths and opportunities for improvement from a team of independent Baldrige examiners. A panel of judges determines which organizations will be finalists for the award and those organizations receive site visits to verify and clarify their applications. Two such businesses in my district have been recipients of the Malcolm Baldrige Award. This year's awardee, the 2003 manufacturing recipient, was Medrad, Inc., of Indianola, Pennsylvania. They are a leading provider of medical devices that enhance medical imaging procedures of the human body and also of injector systems. The first manufacturing recipient in 1988 was also in my district, Westinghouse Electric Corporation's Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division. Our amendment today will make one simple change to the Malcolm Baldrige Awards. It will adds the words ``nonprofit organization'' to those who are eligible to receive the award. Currently only manufacturers, service businesses, small businesses, education organizations and health care organizations are eligible for the Baldrige Award. Baldrige-based State award programs, however, have added additional categories that include nonprofits and government agencies. However, there are three types of nonprofit organizations that are not eligible to apply for the Baldrige Award. These organizations account for a significant portion of the U.S. economy, and cannot benefit from the assessment and feedback process of the Baldrige Award. They are public agencies of the Federal, State and local government; independent, private not-for-profit organizations; for example, human service organizations, religious organizations, cultural or professional organizations; and also quasi-public organizations created by legislative authority are also not eligible; for example, public utilities, mutual insurance companies or credit unions. In 1999, it was recognized that the Baldrige Award's performance standards can help stimulate improvement efforts in other sectors vital to the U.S. economy and the areas of education and health care were added to that criteria. Since then, a total of 66 applications have been submitted in the education category and 61 in the health care category, obviously giving these organizations an opportunity to improve their systems. As it has for current eligible U.S. businesses, the Baldrige Award program can help nonprofit organizations improve their performance and also to foster communications, sharing of ``best practices'' and partnerships among schools, health care organizations and businesses. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I also would like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) for his involvement and support for the Baldrige Awards, as I understand he was involved with the Baldrige Awards at their inception. I also would like to thank former ranking member of the Committee on Science, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), for his support for this legislation and for the Baldrige Awards, and also our current ranking member, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon), for his hard work and bipartisanship in working to grow the Baldrige Awards and give others the opportunity to participate in that wonderful process. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) for yielding me this time. I rise in support of the legislation, H.R. 1561. Congress has been working on this legislation for a number of years, in fact, since before I got here. I know since the 106th Congress, they have attempted to solve the problem that exists in the Patent and Trademark Office, that is, funding problems, structural problems, and approval-time problems. Passage of this bill is imperative, and it is long overdue. Unfortunately, quality, pendency, and overall efficiency have continued to be a problem throughout these years. In fact, there is a greater threat to the health of American's intellectual property system than ever. The longer we wait to confront these issues and pass this bill, the more costly and time consuming it will be to overcome the problems. Through working on the legislation, it has become clear to me that a strong patent and trademark system is not only essential for continued growth of the high-tech industry here in this country, but for our entire economy. H.R. 1561 has fee readjustments that will enable the Patent and Trademark Office to fund its operations as needed to ensure that the long-term goals of enhanced efficiency and proficiency of staff are met by providing a more vibrant, seamless, and cost-effective intellectual property system. The readjustment of the fees will generate an additional $201 million in revenue for improvements at the Patent and Trademark Office. That means less time to review a patent, better quality staffing, and better quality patents. While fee readjustment alone is insufficient, the enactment of this bill is a necessary precursor to the implementation of crucial administrative changes, such as quality checks at every stage of the examination process, improvements in patent practitioners in customer service and ability to provide competent analysis of applications, refinement of training and performance assessment programs, testing for and evaluations of these patent examiners to ensure thorough understanding of relevant technology, applicable law, and related internal procedures. Also of key importance is acceleration of processing time by transitioning from paper to e-government processing, hiring of almost 3,000 examiners, reduction in the pendency of these applications and the backup at the PTO. All of these issues will be addressed under this bill. Failure to enact the bill will mean that quality and pendency issues will continue to cause harm to American innovators and to American job creators. Without this legislation, the backlog of applications will skyrocket to over 1 million applications by 2008, more than double the current amount. The pendency time will also continue to increase. This cannot be tolerated. We need to pass this bill. Finally, families in the communities I represent are dependent upon this bill's success. A significant number of the people in my communities are employed in the coatings industry, in the glass industry, plastics, specialty steel, not to mention high-technology communications and technology for health care devices. These products are unique processes and are unique products. We need to have these products patented to keep these jobs in the United States, to keep these people in my community employed. I know that employers and innovators are at the heart of providing these jobs. We need to protect their innovations and their processes. We need to make sure that our Patent and Trademark Office works for them. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Slovene National Benefit Society (SNPJ) in honor of their 100th anniversary celebration on April 6, 2004. As a U.S. Representative of Western Pennsylvania, I am proud of its rich Slovenian heritage and SNPJ's efforts to preserve it. The Slovene National Benefit Society was founded on April 6, 1904 to provide affordable life protection to immigrant Slovenian families. Today the Slovene National Benefit Society still provides affordable life insurance to Slovenian immigrants; however, it has grown to include members from all ethnic backgrounds and has developed into a diverse fraternal society which today can boast $100 million in assets. SNPJ also continues to offer a full package of social, athletic and cultural opportunities, along with college scholarships and community service projects. SPNJ's social and fraternal events provide a way for people from all backgrounds to preserve a culture of a homeland while building new long lasting friendships in America. I ask my colleagues to join with me in commemorating this fine organization and the members that maintain its excellence. It is my pleasure to recognize that efforts of the Slovene National Benefit Society to preserve the rich Slovenian heritage and foster new friendships in America.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Mine Safety Appliances Co. and their Modular Integrated Communications Helmet/Advanced Combat Helmet for being recognized by the U.S. Army's Materiel Command Unit for ``one of the Greatest Inventions of 2002.'' The Modular Integrated Communications Helmet/Advanced Combat Helmet has been credited with saving the lives of many soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq. It provides the soldier with protection from 9mm handgun rounds and fragmentation in any environment and allows maximum sensory awareness for the user. Further, it allows for night-vision devices to be integrated with respiratory protective equipment. According to Mine Safety Appliance Co., the helmet provides maximum balance, stability and comfort, while providing the proper size, fit and ventilation. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in commemorating this valuable invention. Mine Safety Appliance Co. and their helmet have not only improved the lives of soldiers on the battle front but also the lives of the men and women on the home front in Western Pennsylvania.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and my subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), for their hard work on this issue throughout the time I have spent in Congress over the last 3 years and throughout the time I have been the principal sponsor of this legislation. They do have women and families in mind, as I do and as the supporters of this bill do. It is interesting rhetoric when it is claimed that prosecution of a crime against a woman or an allegation against a perpetrator of a crime against a woman is not happening. It is already against the law to attack a woman and cause her injury or death. That should not be a surprise to any of us. It is not, however, on the Federal level a crime to attack a woman and cause injury or death to the unborn child as a separate crime. There are two victims in these kinds of crimes. That is so clear from the Laci and Conner Peterson case. The family came to visit us and asked that we name this bill after Laci and Conner Peterson in remembrance of them. That family showed us what the real loss is. They have lost a daughter, Laci Peterson, and their grandson Conner. That cannot be restored by enhancing the penalty for the attack against Laci Peterson. It cannot be restored at all; but the least we can do as lawmakers is recognize the loss to the family. It is shocking to me that anyone would support a substitute to the legislation that recognizes what families who have gone through this tragedy have asked us to do. Studies have shown, unfortunately, that domestic violence against pregnant women is prevalent, that fully one-quarter of women who are pregnant who die are victims of homicide. These families are crushed when this happens. They lose the woman, and they lose the hope of the child for the future. This bill is all about recognition of a family's loss. It is about prosecution of a terrible crime. This bill is about making sure that we recognize what is really happening in these kinds of crimes. Numerous reports show us that the motivation behind a crime against many of these pregnant women is the fact that she is pregnant, the fact that she has chosen to carry a child makes someone angry, and it makes someone angry enough to attack her and her unborn child. Mr. Speaker, we recognize unborn children with inheritance rights. This Congress recognized unborn children enough to prevent the execution of a pregnant woman in prison. It is about time we recognize for that family who has suffered a grave loss a crime against that woman and her unborn child with a two-victim bill such as this. I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 1997.

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time as well as the opportunity to debate the substitute. This bill, the underlying bill, does address the rights of women. We have heard many who oppose it and support the substitute state that it does not. And it clearly allows a woman to seek punishment from the perpetrator of a crime against her that she may survive and that may cause the death of her unborn child. A woman who has made a decision to carry a child has that taken away from her during a violent act. Somehow I do not see how this reduces her rights. The Lofgren substitute, however, fails entirely to recognize unborn children as victims of violent crime; in fact, transforming the child's injuries to what amount to mere abstractions. The terminology in this substitute is virtually incomprehensible, and if adopted, it will almost certainly jeopardize any prosecution for injuring or killing an unborn child during the commission of a violent crime against the mother. The substitute amendment provides an enhanced penalty for what is called interruption of the normal course of pregnancy, resulting in prenatal injury, including termination of pregnancy. The amendment then authorizes greater punishment for the interruption that terminates the pregnancy than it does for a mere interruption of the pregnancy. But what exactly is the difference between the termination and the interruption of a pregnancy? It implies that a pregnancy can stop and start again, but does not an interruption of a pregnancy necessarily result in the termination of the pregnancy? And what does the phrase ``termination of the pregnancy'' really mean here? Does it only mean that the unborn child died, or could it also mean that the child was born prematurely even without suffering any injury? These ambiguities make the substitute impossible to comprehend and certainly difficult to enforce. Second, the substitute amendment appears to operate as a mere sentence enhancement, authorizing punishment in addition to any penalty imposed for the crime against the mother. Yet the language suggests there should be a separate offense for killing or injuring the unborn child, but then it does not allow the prosecutor to proceed with a crime against the unborn child. Is a separate charge necessary for the enhanced penalty to be imposed? The substitute amendment simply does not make this clear. It also mischaracterizes the nature of the injury that is inflicted when an unborn child is killed or injured during the commission of such a violent crime. Under the current language of the bill, a separate offense is committed whenever an individual causes the death or injury of a child who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place. The substitute would transform the death of the unborn child again into an abstraction, ``terminating a pregnancy.'' Bodily injury inflicted upon the child would become a mere prenatal injury. Both injuries are described as resulting from the interruption of the normal course of pregnancy. These abstractions ignore the fact that the death of the unborn child occurs when a pregnancy is violently terminated by a criminal. The substitute also fails to recognize that a prenatal injury is an injury inflicted upon a human being in the womb of his or her mother. If an assault is committed on a pregnant woman, and her child subsequently suffers from a disability because of the assault, the injury cannot be accurately described as an abstract injury to a pregnancy. It is only an injury to a human being. Our bill recognizes that; the substitute does not. The substitute is fatally flawed and should be rejected. Sharon Rocha, the mother of Laci Peterson, the grandmother of unborn victim Conner Peterson, has written that ``the Lofgren proposal would enshrine in law the offensive concept that such crimes have only a single victim, the pregnant woman.'' The substitute amendment embodies the extreme ideology of those who are unwilling to recognize the unborn child under law in any way. Our approach works. Twenty-nine States have laws that recognize two victims. They have been challenged in court and have survived. Reject this substitute. Support the bill that will provide for two victims, and one that we know that works, and one that is not offensive to the families of these victims.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments and for his support for the legislation. I want to also emphasize the support we have heard today not only from our colleagues, but the support we have heard today from the Lyons family from Kentucky, the support that we have heard from a number of different families who have experienced this tragic loss of their daughter and their grandchild. It is a very sad situation that we are talking about with this legislation, but it is one that we obviously can try to help prevent through a criminal law, through recognition of the mother and the child both as victims, and one that I think we would be remiss in fact in our work if we do not pass this legislation. Recent polling shows that upwards of 80 percent of registered voters, and that includes 69 percent of registered voters who identify themselves as pro-choice, believe that prosecutors should be able to separately charge the attacker who attacks a pregnant woman and causes injury or death to her and/or her unborn child. Twenty-nine out of the 50 States already have legislation that recognizes that crime, the crime against the mother and the crime against the unborn child. The language that we use, which has been somewhat controversial by those opponents of this bill, is where we describe a child in utero. This is actual language that this House has used before, and the House passed the bill unanimously. So that language was supported unanimously on a bipartisan basis in legislation that passed before I came to this Congress. I believe it was in the 106th Congress that they passed a bill called the Innocent Child Protection Act, which banned the Federal death penalty for a woman who is pregnant and they described the pregnancy as ``carrying a child in utero,'' and defined that child exactly to the word as we have defined that child in our legislation. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that this is not new. This language is well set and accepted by this House of Representatives, and anyone who tries to make a claim to the contrary is simply ignoring the truth. They are ignoring the facts. The most important part, though, Mr. Speaker, is that we recognize families. We recognize women who have made a choice to carry their child to term, a mother to carry her child to term. A woman who is attacked, who may be murdered or may just be seriously injured and survive the attack, will have to live the rest of her life with the knowledge that someone attacked her and took that choice away from her, killed her child. It is important for us to recognize and allow our law enforcement and prosecutors to recognize that child, recognize that family's loss, and allow a prosecution of that crime. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to bring up a couple of points about domestic violence. We have seen statistics that show that unfortunately the cause of death among pregnant women in States that actually keep those statistics, Maryland, New York, Illinois, among the ones that we saw, showed us that upwards of a quarter of the pregnant women who die, die as a result of a homicide. Mr. Speaker, the recognition of that fact is important for us as well. It is a serious case of domestic violence when a woman is beaten to death, clearly. It is a serious case of domestic violence when both the woman and her child are beaten to death, her unborn child is beaten to death. It should be recognized by this Congress. It should be recognized by this Nation. I encourage my colleagues to support our two-victim bill, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, named in honor and remembrance of Laci and Conner Peterson; and I thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Akin) for yielding to me.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise in support of the rule and in support of the underlying bill and, along with some of my colleagues, with a little bit of mystification as to the reaction of those who oppose the rule and the underlying bill. It appears as though we have some ignorance of facts going on here. Some of the Members and many of the Members remember the case of Laci Peterson. In fact, it is being adjudicated right now in the State of California. Laci Peterson's mother, Sharon Rocha, called me, the prime sponsor of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, and Senator DeWine, who is the sponsor of the legislation in the Senate, and requested that we name the bill in honor of her daughter Laci and her unborn grandson Conner. We did so without hesitation. It was very simple to understand and do so as a result of her request and also understand the grief that she and her family felt as a result of the murder of her daughter and her unborn grandson. She said, ``Please understand how adoption of a single-victim proposal,'' one that will be offered in opposition to the underlying bill, ``would be a painful blow'' to the victims' family, a family like Ms. Rocha's, ``who are left to grieve after a two-victim crime because Congress would be saying that Conner and other innocent victims like him are not really victims, that, indeed, they never really existed at all. But our grandson did live,'' she says. ``He had a name, he was loved, and his life was violently taken from him before he ever saw the sun.'' Unfortunately, the Peterson case is not the only case like this; more recently the family in Kentucky that just helped the Kentucky Legislature pass legislation similar to this in the Kentucky State Legislature. We need to pass a bill that recognizes two victims. There are two victims. In fact, our bill specifically separates abortion from an act of violence against the mother. We are talking about a mother and a family who have chosen to bear a child. That family is preparing for that child's birth. That family has often named that child. That child is actively now a member of that family. But, unfortunately, facts in this world make some pretty ugly figures. We see that where statistics were kept about the cause of death to pregnant women in Maryland, Illinois, and New York, that fully more than one-quarter of the pregnant women who died died at the hands of a criminal. They were victims of homicide. Along with their death was the death of their unborn child. Why then should we not recognize two victims? There were two victims. There were two victims in the Peterson case and two victims in all of those statistics that New York, Maryland, and Illinois kept. If our job here as legislators is not to recognize crime and prosecute crime, then I am not really sure what it is. I request my colleagues to support the rule for the two-victim Unborn Victims of Violence Act, the Laci and Conner law, and also to support the underlying bill.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate The Carnegie Science Center, one of four Carnegie Museums in Pittsburgh, for being named one of the three recipients of the 2003 National Awards for Museum Service, the country's highest honor for extraordinary community service provided by a museum. The Carnegie Museums empowers the residents of Western Pennsylvania with knowledge in the fields of science and technology. The team at The Carnegie Science Center is truly committed to their surrounding communities. On January 22, 2004 it was honored in The East Room of The White House by First Lady Laura Bush for their dedication. Those present at the ceremony to receive the award were: Mareena Woodbury-Moore, a ninth grade student at Scheneley High School in Pittsburgh and also a standout participant in Mission Discovery-- Carnegie Science Center's outreach program. Mareena was joined by Joanna E. Haas, director of The Carnegie Science Center, and Howard J. Bruschi, Chairman of the Carnegie Science Center board of directors. Since 1994, The Carnegie Science Center has run neighborhood programs that educate local residents, of all ages, about the advantages of technology. Their hard work and dedication has made the city of Pittsburgh a better place. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in commemorating the efforts of The Carnegie Science Center to improve the quality of life in the City of Pittsburgh. It is an honor to represent the Fourth Congressional District of Pennsylvania and a pleasure to recognize the leadership of The Carnegie Science Center.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to praise a valuable organization based within the Fourth Congressional District of Pennsylvania which has made a significant improvement in the lives of western Pennsylvanians. I am proud to represent the congressional district which is the headquarters for Benson's Battalion, a charitable organization created to fight terror and provide financial support to Pennsylvania police, fire and other related public safety groups. Kris Benson, a pitcher for the Pittsburgh Pirates, along with his wife Anna founded Benson's Battalion in October 2001 following the tragic events of September 11, 2001. Since the creation of the organization, Kris and his wife have donated a significant amount of time and money to benefit local firefighters and police agencies. Benson's Battalion has provided local police stations with over $3,000 in funds matched by the government for new equipment and over $5,000 in grants for local firefighters to assist in the purchase of new equipment as well. This is truly an organization that makes the lives of Western Pennsylvanians better every day. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in honoring this fine organization and the volunteers who support it. It is an honor to represent the Fourth Congressional District of Pennsylvania and a pleasure to recognize Benson's Battalion for its efforts to improve the safety of western Pennsylvanians.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, the amendment has been explained in a number of, I think, quite confusing ways this afternoon. I think it is important that we make clear what this amendment does. This amendment changes the Civil Rights Act. The amendment would prevent religious organizations from employing persons in a manner that is consistent with their faith as currently allowed and allowed for a number of years under the Civil Rights Act. This amendment, again, changes the Civil Rights Act and in my opinion takes the rights of people away. The amendment would really destroy the opportunity for many very small faith-based institutions to continue operating as they do today. Do not tell my constituents in the very small towns that I represent in western Pennsylvania that they are not allowed to utilize those from their faith community to provide the services that they currently provide. In fact, many of the people who actually provide those services are not employed; they are volunteers. But the few that they do actually employ are people who are not just working for the faith- based community's service project. This discussion has been such that these church organizations or church-related organizations are a Federal hiring program. They are not a Federal hiring program. The purpose of the Federal dollars is to empower them with more resources to provide services through the Community Services Block Grant program. That block grant program is not a hiring program; it is a service program. Do not tell the constituents in the small towns that I represent in western Pennsylvania that they are not allowed to do double duty; that they cannot be, for example, a part-time church secretary of the faith of that institution and also be part of the organization that provides service to alcoholics who are trying to overcome that difficulty. Do not tell the churches or the synagogues or mosques in my community that they cannot take the part-time person who helps perhaps maintain their building to provide services with organizing their job placement program. Do not tell the people in my community that this amendment does not violate the Civil Rights Act, because it changes it significantly. These community organizations are very small, and they exist in communities where we do not have great big Federal programs. They are filling in the gap where Federal programs have not been effective. These programs have been supported by Republicans and Democrats alike, people of all different faiths; and they have been very successful. Do not tell the people in my communities who have been helped by these small programs that there is something wrong with the way that things have been run. They are most often not using these Federal dollars to hire someone new. They are using Federal dollars to help them carry out the service, whether it is to buy some more food for their soup kitchen program or to help provide more resources for the Meals on Wheels or buy gasoline for Meals on Wheels. This is not a jobs program. This is a service program, and the people are motivated to provide service, often as volunteers; and a couple of them perhaps will get paid as a result of the monies they get through the Community Services Block Grant program. It is important that we as Members of Congress look at where these dollars really go. This is not a jobs program; it is a community service program. The law as it is protects civil rights. The law as it is is part of the Civil Rights Act. This amendment would take civil rights away.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) for his patience with trying to get this bankruptcy legislation through in a form that can be supported across the board and in fact in a form where it deals with the issue of bankruptcy. The Congress has been working on this legislation for a number of years, actually since before I got here; and this passage of this bill is long overdue. Since Congress began working on this legislation, bankruptcy filings continue to rise. In fact, data recently released by the Administrative Office of United States Courts showed personal bankruptcies continued to rise at a record-setting pace of 7.4 percent last year. Some of this is necessary. Some of this is abuse of the bankruptcy system. It has had a negative impact on our economy, amounting to a loss of $110 million a day. The abuse of the bankruptcy code continues with opportunistic filings and abusive loopholes in the code. One most notable, as I serve on the Committee on Financial Services, dealing with corporate crooks, this bill closes the mansion loophole for greedy corporate culprits. Under current bankruptcy law, debtors living in certain States can shield from their creditors virtually all of the equity in their homes. That includes a $3 million estate. Congress spent a considerable amount of time discussing the issue of corporate responsibility, and this bill closes that loophole to continue the work we began last year. Some debtors have moved to particular States in order to take advantage of this loophole. This bill closes the loophole. It requires those debtors to reside in the State for at least 2 years before they can claim a homestead exemption; they have to have owned that home for at least 40 months; and most importantly, it caps the amount at $125,000, a reasonable amount for a family to keep a roof over their heads, but certainly not $3 million that they can just save from their prosecution. This legislation also helps women and children in bankruptcy. It prioritizes the collection and payment of spousal and child support, giving them the highest payment priority under the bankruptcy law. The legislation also allows child and domestic violence proceedings to continue, notwithstanding the debtor's filing for bankruptcy protection. Mr. Chairman, it is crazy for us not to move this bill at our, finally, hopefully, last opportunity.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the contribution of bravery and dedication of an outstanding unit of first responders in my area, the North Hampton Volunteer Fire Department. The following firefighters reached important career milestones in 2003: Adam Millstein: 500 career calls. James Harrington: 500 career calls. Paul Satzger: 1,000 career calls. William Bailey III: 1,000 career calls. Kevin Jordan: 1,500 career calls. Richard Marsico: 1,500 career calls. John Kuss: 2,003 career calls. Albert Hahn: 3,000 career calls. David Hoburg: 5,000 career calls. The following firefighters responded to over 100 incidents of fire calls in 2003: David Hoburg: 455 calls. Paul Satzger: 346 calls. Adam Millstein: 321 calls. Richard Marisco: 307 calls. Albert Hahn: 305 calls. Jerry Wittmer: 298 calls. John Kuss: 267 calls. John Damski: 255 calls. Richard Wauchter: 248 calls. Vincent Conti: 240 calls. David Primrose: 232 calls. Chris Wise: 163 calls. James Harrington: 156 calls. Mary Primrose: 156 calls. John Schwend: 146 calls. William Bailey III: 138 calls. Josh Rosensteel: 135 calls. Kevin Jordan: 119 calls. Clayton Kerrigan: 118 calls. Drew Leahy: 107 calls. I ask my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in praising these brave individuals on the commitment that they have demonstrated to their critical mission of responding to fire emergencies.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to praise a leader in the business community in my congressional district. Recently the Pittsburgh Business Times named Berner International Corporation, a leading manufacturer of air curtains and air doors, ``Manufactuer of the Year'' in the small manufacturing facility division. Berner has grown from 35 to 52 employees over the past three years and has purchased new equipment which will fuel its success. Its expansion to a new 61,000 square foot facility will assist in increasing capacity. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in praising Berner's president, Georgia Berner, and its employees for taking this Western Pennsylvania manufacturer to new levels of achievement. I am proud to represent an area which has produced business excellence and I look forward to further growth of Berner International in the future.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to wish the membership of the Organization of Chinese Americans a healthy and happy New Year for the year 4702, the year of the Monkey. The New Year is a time for reflection and thanksgiving for the joys of life and loved ones and I am thankful for the richness that this organization brings to my region. Chinese Americans have made great contributions to Western Pennsylvania and to our nation as a whole and I am very honored for this opportunity to wish them the best year yet in 4702. I encourage my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join with me in wishing the members of the organization of Chinese Americans a very happy and prosperous New Year.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the completion and grand opening of the Diamond Training Center, a 30,000 square foot, state-of-the-art, baseball and softball practice center, located in Warrendale, PA. I am happy to see the spirit of entrepreneurship flourishing in the congressional district that I represent. The training center will combine traditional baseball practice methods with new technology such as the Pro Batter--a newly developed improvement upon the traditional style of batting cages. Management anticipates that the center will service nearly 10,000 patrons per year; including, but not limited to, little league, high school, and local college teams, and even a potential minor league franchise. I ask that all of my colleagues in the House of Representatives join with me in recognizing the grand opening of this new enterprise. I am proud to have the Diamond Training Center in my district, where it will not only stimulate the economy but also will provide a functional athletic facility for the residents of Western Pennsylvania.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to praise some admirable residents of Lawrence County, in the Fourth Congressional District of Pennsylvania who will soon be honored by 4-H at the annual Lawrence County 4-H Banquet. I am proud to represent such dedicated individuals who give so much back to their community every year. The recipients of these awards have excelled in numerous categories including, Jr. Leaders, Club Achievements, Leader Recognition, Collegiate Scholarships, and outstanding 4-H Members. The commitment to helping the community that these individuals display serves as an inspiration. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in honoring these fine individuals and their efforts to improve Western Pennsylvania. It is an honor to represent the Fourth Congressional District of Pennsylvania and a pleasure to recognize the leadership of the Lawrence County 4-H.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to have the opportunity to congratulate Medrad, Inc. for receiving the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. This award is managed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in conjunction with the private sector and honors achievements in quality and business excellence in manufacturing. Medrad received the news of its achievement in November from U.S. Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans, and I had the pleasure of attending the company's announcement. The award is a tribute to Medrad's President and CEO, John P. Friel, and his excellent team of workers. Medrad, Inc., a company specializing in medical imaging, is headquartered in Indianola, Pennsylvania, and employs more than 1,000 people in fifteen locations around the world. Medical imaging is an important tool used to explore the vast terrain of the human body and Medrad has proven itself worthy of this award. With its dedication to continually improving the quality of their work, Medrad has become a business leader in the fourth district. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Medrad, Inc. on their accomplishment of receiving the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award.