Sue Kelly

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a group of hard working women who have given their all in order to continue one of the Hudson Valley's greatest dynasties. On Sunday afternoon, the 14 members of the Our Lady of Lourdes women's basketball team cruised to their third consecutive Class B State title, the Warriors' eighth crown in the past 15 years. Under the guidance of 18th year coach Brian Giorgis, Our Lady of Lourdes won their final 27 games en route to a 27-1 record and a 22nd place ranking in USA Today's national poll. After defeating Garden City, 57-37 to reach the championship games, the Warriors put the crown jewel on their season by setting down Iroquois, 57-28 in the final. Throughout the year, the Warriors embodied the American ideal, working together as a team to accomplish a goal. From seniors who had played on two previous State championship teams to first year players getting their first taste of interscholastic competition, the team formed a cohesive unit under coach Giorgis and steamrolled the competition, outscoring its opponents by a whopping 1,905 to 978. At the same time they showed dedication to their sport and their teammates, they held the same high standard towards their education and the local community, making it easy to understand their near invincibility. While Our Lady of Lourdes is not a large school, it looms large in the annals of women's basketball. My fellow colleagues, please join me in congratulating coach Brian Giorgis, the Most Valuable Player of the Tournament, Kristin Keller, all-tournament team members Jenna Viani and Kristen Vilardi, team members Kelly Barnum, Kim Boone, Sue Clanci, Kathy Duffy, Jocelyn Kelly, Vicki Koster, Lauren Martinez, Aimee Meyer, Kelly Roche, Natalie Serkowski and Julianne Viani and all who assisted the Our Lady of Lourdes Warriors in building the latest empire in the Empire State.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues to commemorate the 180th Anniversary of the Green revolution. In 1821, the Greeks, after nearly 400 years of slavery under the Ottoman Empire took up arms and fought for their freedom. March 25, 1821 marked the beginning of this Greek revolution and their struggle for independence. For many centuries, Greece, the birthplace of democracy, was subject to foreign domination and political control under the Ottoman Empire. Unfortunately, the Greeks did not enjoy the freedoms given in a democracy and so, with a strong determination for liberty, they began a lengthy crusade. When the fighting began, Greece came under fire in several areas ranging from its Northern province of Macedonia, to a near-war that began over the island of Imia near the coast-land of Turkey. The prospects for the rebels' success were not always promising. In fact, they were aided by several of their European neighbors who came to their assistance. England, France and Russia sent their naval fleets to help defuse the Egyptian navy, which was helping the Ottoman Turks exploit internal strife within the Greek ranks. These nations came together to break the bonds of the Ottomans' tyranny, and help the Greek people win the right of self determination. On March 22, 1829, Greece emerged from their fierce campaign for democracy and created the modern Greek state. Here in the United States we owe a debt of gratitude to the many Greeks whose labor has helped to build this great nation. Throughout our history, the United States and Greece have shared a unique bond in that both nations have struggled for the right to freedom and self- governance. Clearly, our Founding Fathers had a deep admiration for the ancient Greeks who championed their own independence and modeled the American form of government upon the principles of Greek democracy. The ideology of Greece can be found in our own Constitution and these common ideals have promoted a strong bond between our two nations. We share a similar devotion for additional nations to join in our mutual values, goals and respect by embracing the rights and liberties we hold dear. Greek Independence Day is a celebration for both Greek and American freedom. I would like to thank the other members of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues, and particularly the co-chairs, my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and my friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), for their efforts in organizing this fitting tribute.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Conforming Amendments of 2001. This bill is a technical correction to legislation adopted by the 105th Congress that ensures reconstructive surgery coverage for all stages of reconstruction, including symmetrical reconstruction, for breast cancer patients. During the 105th Congress, I introduced the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1998. A specific provision of this bill that requires coverage for reconstructive procedures after breast cancer surgery was passed into law in Title IX of the 1998 Omnibus Budget Bill. While passage of that legislation was a wonderful step forward, a loophole has been identified which seriously weakens the intent of this legislation. The bill I am introducing again today, would correct this flaw by conforming the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to the requirements consistent with the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act. This change would provide a civil monetary penalty against those health plans who fail to provide coverage for breast reconstruction following mastectomy or other breast cancer surgery. There is indeed precedence for such a technical correction. Similar corrections were made to the Internal Revenue Code as part of the Taxpayer's Relief Act of 1997 to ensure compliance to the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 and the Newborns' and Mothers' Health Protection Act of 1996. The correction I am seeking today is like these and would ensure compliance to the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1998. Studies have documented that the fear of losing a breast is a leading reason why women do not participate in early breast cancer detection programs. Now that coverage is guaranteed for reconstructive surgery following breast cancer surgery, it is time to put the teeth in that language and hold health plans accountable for providing that coverage. As we begin to set the agenda for the 107th Congress, let us make this important correction to ensure the best possible support for breast cancer victims.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support for H.R. 333, the Bankruptcy Reform Act, because it boils down to two words: personal responsibility. If one assumes a debt, they should do everything in their power to pay it off. However, a safety net has to remain for those who legitimately cannot pay their debts. Creditors should be made whole, if possible. Some of my colleagues here today are trying to paint the word creditors to mean faceless financial institutions who are tricking consumers into assuming debt. They specifically speak of credit card debt. They unfortunately failed to note that credit card debt in the United States amounts to only 3.7 percent of all consumer debt. Furthermore, only 1 percent of credit card accounts end up in bankruptcy. Of that 1 percent it is estimated that 15 percent of those accounts can afford to repay some or all of their debt. The people who are truly being hurt by our current bankruptcy system are Americans who play by the rules and pay their debts. Bankruptcy costs the average American family an average per year of $400. Needs-based bankruptcy reform is well overdue, and that is what H.R. 833 delivers. It is the people who game the system that we have to stop. I heard from my colleagues from Virginia (Mr. Moran). He stated last year more people filed for bankruptcy than graduated from college. That is a staggering fact. I am pleased to support H.R. 333's provisions which strengthen the Bankruptcy Code protections for ex-spouses and children. They have to be supported. In the current bankruptcy law, child support and alimony are placed seventh behind attorney fees as debt obligations. If enacted, this bill would move child support and alimony payments to first on the list of debt obligations. Also under current law, some debtors use the automatic stay to avoid paying child support payments after they file for bankruptcy. H.R. 333 exempts State child support authorities from the automatic stay, thus insuring less delay in the proper payment of child support. I vehemently oppose any legislation that would reduce the ability of women and children to receive support payments. H.R. 333 is a good bill that moves us in the right direction, and I ask my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to join me in support of this reasonable reform.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report and urge its passage. The report before us will enact by reference H.R. 5667, which contains the provisions of the Small Business Reauthorization Act of 2000. This is the 3-year authorization for Small Business Administration, and it will continue to improve an array of important small business programs that have the overwhelming support of this body. H.R. 5667 contains the provisions of H.R. 2392, which reauthorizes and improves the Small Business Innovation and Research Program. This program authorizes millions of dollars of research funds for small businesses on the cutting edge of technology. It also contains the provisions of H.R. 2614, H.R. 2615, H.R. 3845, and H.R. 3843, which reauthorize and improve the 7(a), 504, and SBIC programs. These programs represent over $11 billion in guarantees to ensure that small business has access to the financing necessary to create jobs and build our economy. Mr. Speaker, all these provisions passed the House earlier this year by overwhelming margins, and I am certain they will retain the support of this body. I believe strongly in all these SBA provisions, and I urge my colleagues to support them and this conference report. I also want to simply take a moment to thank the gentleman from Missouri (Chairman Talent) for his very hard work as chairman of the Committee on Small Business. All of us in small business owe him a great debt of gratitude for his tremendously good work.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, where is our President? While we are here working conducting necessary business, I understand our President is out campaigning. He is not in the Middle East solving problems. He is not working on North Korean peace, but he is out campaigning. Mr. President, the town of New Castle, the Village of Chappaqua, needs you here to work with us to help them. Because you chose to veto the Treasury Postal bill, the supervisor of the town I represent, the town where Chappaqua is, has indicated she may have to raise taxes, your taxes in Chappaqua, Mr. President, by 3.5 percent to cover the cost of the extra police protection for you. The citizens of Chappaqua ought not to have to carry this burden because you chose to veto a bill. This burden, Mr. President, is just one example of where you have put politics over people. Mr. President, please stop campaigning. Come back to Washington and do your job.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, Republicans have made a solid commitment to education. But the Clinton-Gore administration and the Democrats in Congress want the Federal Government to decide what local schools can and cannot do. This is really what separates the two parties on education policy. The focus of education should not be about quantity and process. It should focus on quality and results. This is what will help our children and grandchildren secure America's future. Our children and grandchildren will benefit greatly from the work we have done and the decisions we have made. Paying off the debt means $1,348 in savings for every man, woman and child. That is money that can be spent for education or even retirement savings. It also means $5,200 in savings for every American family, which is enough money for annual tuition at a public university. Mr. Speaker, this Congress has ended the old spend-now-and-pay-later attitude that created deficits as far as the eye could see. I believe it is morally wrong to pass on our debt to our children and grandchildren. They should not have to inherit prior profligate spending. By committing to dedicate at least 90 percent of future surplus to reducing the national debt, we will secure America's future for our children and our grandchildren.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the need to attract young women towards scientific studies and to honor a program which encourages girls to pursue careers in this area. Science and technology have taken on a large role in our society. The need for people skilled in these fields is critical to our future success, yet there is a disturbing trend--young women are shying away from science studies. Just 29 percent of high school girls say that they wish to become a scientist, half of the percentage of boys. This dichotomy is what makes programs such as the IBM Technology Camp for Young Women so critical. Designed to show the importance of math, science and technology, the camps provide a positive image of these careers. There are currently five camps in three states encouraging the scientific talents of young women. Schools now report that more girls are signing up for math and science courses. Parents and educators have noticed increased self- esteem among female students. Finally, this bond between employees and students continues through an e-mentoring program, allowing the interest to grow. As a time when science plays an important role in our lives, I urge parents, teachers and businesses to help us foster the role of young women in science and commend IBM for its novel and innovative idea.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, almost a week ago, people all over the world awoke to the news of a terrorist strike against one of our naval ships. Like countless other Americans, I was stunned by the early reports. Over the next several hours and days, the gravity of the situation became clearer. The Navy has reported that seventeen sailors were killed by this blast and another 33 were injured. Today, I join many with my colleagues in rising to honor these men and women who gave their lives to protect our nation and all she stands for. Today, the families of those lost honored them at a memorial service in Norfolk, Virginia, the Cole's home port. Throughout the ceremony we were reminded of the sacrifice by not only those in uniform, but their families as well. Unfortunately this sacrifice is often forgotten, but it is never unappreciated. It is truly an extraordinary person who is willing to commit to this type of service and dedicate his/her life to something larger than him/herself. It is an individual's commitment to the service of this country that we are reminded of as we mourn those who gave their lives. My own district also suffered the loss of a loved one in this attack. Patrick Roy, a onetime resident of Cornwall on Hudson, New York was a Fireman Apprentice on the U.S.S. Cole, and I offer my deepest sympathies to his friends and family. I want to applaud the efforts of the remainder of the Cole's personnel who did their job, manned their stations and saved their ship even while they knew that they had suffered the possible terrible loss of shipmates and members of their naval family. The United States military has served as liberator and protector and has provided a source of hope for millions around the world in times of peace and in war. While it may be of little solace to those who have lost a loved one, the men and women of the Cole who gave their lives in an effort to serve as a protector will remain beacons of hope and will be remembered as heroes. My deepest condolences go out to all of the friends and families who have lost a loved one in this cowardly attack.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule for H.R. 4386, the Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act. Back in May, the House passed this legislation under the suspension of the rules. Today, we have the opportunity to again support this important legislation which would provide treatment for low-income women with breast and cervical cancer by closing the gap in an existing Federal program that screens low-income women for breast and cervical cancer but does not provide treatment once diagnosed. The rule we are now considering will allow the House to consider the same bill which the Senate passed this week, and by the end of today we will have a bill to send to the President to close this gap and provide treatment for the hundreds of thousands of women across this country who need this treatment. The rule removes the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn). His amendment addresses a serious disease, the human papilloma virus. But unfortunately this language may have slowed this bill's passage in the other body. I support the efforts of my colleague, and I look forward to joining him in the future to have these concerns considered. I join my colleague, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), the cochair of the House Women's Caucus, in committing to work within the Women's Caucus for the inclusion of his bill in any vehicle possible this year so we can address this dangerous virus. Presently, I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule, however, and the underlying bill. This legislation is a critical step in ensuring women have access to the treatment that they need for these terrible diseases. I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio) for their work on this issue.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to being attention to one of the concerns I have with this bill. To be specific, I was very troubled to find that the conference report being considered today includes language which restricts funding for the American Heritage Rivers Initiative (AHRI). When this bill first came to the floor in June, it included language which prohibited funding for the Natural Resources Conservation service (NRCS) from being used for the American Heritage Rivers Initiative. I offered an amendment to strike this language out, and it was adopted with unanimous support from this body. In light of this body's support for my amendment--and the fact that no such similar language was in the bill passed by the other body--it is difficult to understand why the conferees found it appropriate to include the restrictive language in the conference report. As I have noted on the floor in the past, I understand that some enmity exists for the American Heritage Rivers Initiative by those who feel that the initiative represents an intrusion of the federal government into local affairs. Though I'm confident that an examination of AHRI's record will show that their concerns are entirely unfounded, I will not attempt to dissuade my colleagues from their opinion. These Members had the opportunity to protect their communities from this phantom threat when the initiative was implemented, having been given the power to veto the involvement of their districts in AHRI. I would like to remind my colleagues that the only communities which remain in the initiative are the ones which have actively chosen to participate, including communities in my district, and so I resent these actions undertaken by Members--behind closed doors--which certainly will have a negative effect only on communities other than their own. I will support this bill only because so many important programs stand to benefit from its enactment, but I regret the failure of the conferees to abide by the will voted by this body in June. In the future, I hope they will be more respectful of the decisions made by communities in other Member's districts.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2614) to amend the Small Business Investment Act to make improvements to the certified development company program, and for other purposes, with a House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, insist on the House amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and the underlying bill, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act Conference Report. The package of legislation we have before us is critically important to the lives of millions of people across the world and here at home. Passage of this package will have a tremendously positive effect on the quality of life for millions of people across the world. Just over a week ago, I joined my good friend, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), here on the floor to urge support for H.R. 1248, the Violence Against Women Act of 1999. Today, we have yet another opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to this important legislation. While the Justice Department has estimated that since the start of the VAWA programs in 1994, domestic violence has dropped by almost 21 percent, this epidemic is not over yet. Still today, one in three girls age 16 to 19 will be abused by their boyfriends, and it is estimated that approximately 3 million children witness domestic abuse in their homes. The legislation we have before us today will take a serious step towards breaking this cycle of violence and providing a better future, not only for the millions of women who have come to rely upon the services provided under VAWA, but also for the millions of teens and children who will now have access to services and will see that violence is not necessarily a way of life. I would also like to take a moment to note that this legislation includes a measure I introduced in Congress to strengthen the Federal anti-stalking statute, the Stalking Prevention and Victim Protection Act. This bill, which passed the House unanimously last November, strengthens current law, which stipulates that one must travel across State lines in order to commit a Federal stalking offense. My measure acknowledges that stalking can be perpetrated through other mediums, such as over the telephone, through the mail, or over the Internet. Today we again have the opportunity to help millions of people feel a little safer, knowing that we are here, that we are listening, and that we will once again fulfill our promise and continue to supply the resources to help them escape from abuse and end the cycle of violence. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my friend, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), for her tireless efforts on behalf of these men and women. I would like to thank my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), who helped move this legislation forward. I urge my colleagues to help me in supporting this rule and the underlying bill.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a man from my district, Lieutenant Bruce Joseph Donald of Poughkeepsie, who was killed last Friday when his F-18 Hornet strike fighter crashed in the Persian Gulf. Lieutenant Donald, known by his call sign, ``Straydog,'' was a 1995 graduate of the Naval Academy where he earned a Bachelor of Sciences degree in Ocean Engineering. Following graduation, Lieutenant Donald spent 6 months at his alma mater on temporary duty prior to being sent to Pensacola, Florida, to begin preflight indoctrination training. Afterwards, he traveled to Corpus Christi, Texas, for primary flight training, and then completed advanced jet training in Kingsville, Texas. According to his superior officers, Lieutenant Donald performed exceptionally during flight school and, in February of 1998, he earned his Wings of Gold and an assignment to F-18 replacement pilot training at VMFAT-101. Having successfully completed replacement training, ``Straydog'' reported to VFA-25 in July 1999. As a member of the ``Fist of the Fleet,'' he excelled as a strike fighter pilot and served as the squadron's naval aviation training and operations procedures standardization officer, air-to-ground training officer, coffee mess officer, and landing signals officer. Lieutenant Donald was an exceptional pilot with sound judgment and was a designated combat section leader. Although we live in a time of relative peace, we must never forget that the men and women who serve this Nation are constantly putting their lives on the line. We owe a tremendous debt to these men and women and to their families who love and support them through their training and deployments so that we may continue to live in a world of hope and the promise of peace. Having dedicated much of his young life to the service of this Nation, it is only fitting that Lieutenant Donald can be commemorated here. Lieutenant Bruce Donald is survived by his parents, Patrick and Elaine Donald, his brother Brian, all of Poughkeepsie, New York. I offer the Donald family and their friends my deepest condolences.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, the Truth in Regulating Act represents the culmination of nearly 4 years of hard work and an effort that will provide Congress with a new resource for reviewing new government regulations before they take effect. I first introduced this legislation during the 105th Congress, Mr. Speaker, with the goal of giving Congress the tools it needs to oversee the steady stream of new and often costly regulations coming from the Federal government. Government regulations have an impact on every American. We see an average of close to 4,000 new regulations promulgated every year. In most cases, regulations speak to a noble purpose, and can often be viewed as a measure of the value that we place in protecting such things as human health, workplace safety, or the environment. Yet, too often the government oversteps its bounds in its attempt to achieve these goals, and we all pay the price as a consequence. The price of regulations poses a particularly heavy burden on small businesses and manufacturers. They drive our economy forward. They need our help. Estimates vary on the annual cost of government regulations from a range of $300 billion a year to $700 billion every year. Congress has a special entity, the Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, to help it grapple with our enormous Federal budget. There is growing sentiment that a similar office is needed within the legislative branch to review and analyze the numerous government regulations that are developed and issued every year. To address this need, in 1997 I first introduced legislation to create the Congressional Office of Regulatory Analysis, or CORA. Today's legislation is the culmination of that effort. As the vice chairman of the Committee on Small Business and the Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork Reduction, and as a small businesswoman myself, I know that small business owners are very familiar with the burdens that Federal regulations place on them. Some studies have shown that for small employers, the cost of complying with Federal regulations is more than double what it cost their larger counterparts. Mr. Speaker, we do not need any study to reach that conclusion. Common sense says that if a regulation costs a company with a $5 billion revenue stream the same as it does a company with a $5 million revenue stream, the overall impact on the smaller company will be significantly more on a per unit basis. S. 1198 creates an office within GAO that would focus solely on conducting independent regulatory evaluations of regulations to help determine whether the agencies have complied with the law and executive orders. The fact is, Congress cannot obtain unbiased information from the participants in the rulemaking because each participant, including the Federal agency, has a particular viewpoint and bias. This legislation will fill the information gap and assist Members in Congress in determining whether action is warranted. The purpose of the bill is to ensure Congress exercises its legislative powers in the most informed manner possible. Ultimately, this will lead to better and more finely tuned legislation, as well as more effective agency regulations. The office will provide Congress with reliable, non-partisan information, levelling the playing field with the executive branch and improving Congress' ability to understand the burdens that are placed on small businesses and the economy by excessive regulation. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan) for his work on this issue, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. McIntosh) for his strong support, as well as the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Condit) for their longstanding support for this legislation. I would also like to thank the ranking member of the Committee on Government Reform, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), as well as the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), for their support in moving this legislation forward. Finally, I would like to thank especially the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) for moving this legislation quickly to the floor today, and for his leadership on this issue. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this effort.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Violence Against Women Act of 1999. Today's Washington Post includes an editorial in support of H.R. 1248. The column states, ``There seems to be no good reason, practical or substantive, to oppose reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.'' Mr. Speaker, this editorial hits the nail on the head. The U.S. Department of Justice has estimated that between one and four million women are physically abused by their husbands or live-in partners each year. There is violence in one out of four American homes. Justice also reports that up to 40 percent of teenage girls, age 14 to 17, report knowing someone their age who has been hit or beaten by a boyfriend. Family violence costs the Nation upwards of $10 billion annually in medical expenses, police and court costs, shelters and foster care, sick leave, absenteeism and nonproductivity. And, Mr. Speaker, I have only touched on the tip of the iceberg. Unlike many people, we are in a position to help turn these statistics around. We can begin by passing this bill today and help thousands of men and millions of women who face abuse in their own homes to feel a little safer knowing that we are here, that we are listening, and that we will once again fulfill our promise and continue to supply the resources to help them escape from abuse and end the cycle of violence. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), for her tireless efforts on behalf of these men and women; and especially my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde); and my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), who all helped move the legislation forward. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, in anticipation of the 25th Anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, I rise today to urge my colleagues to join with me in acknowledging the good this program has done for our children and their future. Almost twenty-five years ago, Congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. This landmark legislation established the federal policy of ensuring that all children, regardless of nature or severity of their disability, have the right to a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment. Throughout the years, Congress has seen fit to update this legislation, first to create a preschool grant program and an early intervention program to serve the needs of children starting at birth and going through the age of five. Since 1990, this program has been known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Improvements made to IDEA in 1997 changed the focus of the educational process of disabled children from the procedural requirements to individualized education programs to better serve our children. In 1997, we also implemented behavioral and intervention strategies for those children whose behavior impedes the learning process. Today, IDEA serves approximately 200,000 infants and toddlers, 600,000 preschoolers, and 5,400,000 children from 6 to 21 years old. It is through efforts of this program that we have seen a substantial increase in the numbers of disabled students graduate high school, and the number of disabled students who enroll in college. However, much still needs to be done to make this program reach its potential. Almost twenty-five years after its enactment, this program is only being funded at 13% of the federal share. Originally Congress committed itself to covering 40% of the costs of this program. Since 1995, the funding for this program has increased by almost 115%, which is an increase of over $2.6 billion. Yet, even after this sustained funding increase, this program is still grossly underfunded. When I arrived in Congress in 1995, I began working with Chairman Goodling to fight for increased funding for this program. Throughout the past six years, full funding for this program has remained one of my top education priorities. If the federal government fully funded its share of the costs of this program, my own state of New York would have received $1.087 billion for fiscal year 2000, instead of the $344.3 million it did get. Fully funding our part would help to ease the burdens on our local taxpayers who bear the brunt of education costs. Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the opportunity to have worked with Chairman Goodling over the past several years. His commitment to education is clear through his long history as a school teacher, principal and superintendent and his efforts on behalf of our children and our nation will not soon be forgotten. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution and continue to make full funding of IDEA a priority in the future. Our children deserve no less.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 590) providing for the concurrence by the House with an amendment in the amendment of the Senate to H.R. 2392.

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the resolution before us combines the reauthorization of the Small Business Innovation and Research Program with overall Small Business Administration authorizations and technical amendments passed by the House earlier this Congress. The purpose of this is quite simple, to provide a vehicle for the reauthorization of the Small Business Administration and its programs before the fiscal year ends on September 30. Mr. Speaker, this is a noncontroversial piece of legislation. Its components are bills that already passed this House by overwhelming margins. We are simply acting now to fulfill our responsibility to keep the Small Business Administration and its programs authorized for the next 3 years. Mr. Speaker, let me briefly describe to my colleagues the provisions in the bill before us. The base legislation for this bill is reauthorization of the Small Business Innovation and Research Program. Established in 1982, SBIR serves as a vehicle for helping small business, the most dynamic and innovative segment of our economy, gain access to millions of dollars of Federal research and development funds. The SBIR program operates at every Federal agency with an extramural research budget of more than $100 million and offers funding to small businesses in three phases. Phase one is initial research and development; phase two, continuing research for the most promising projects; and, phase three, final assistance moving new technologies to the Federal procurement marketplace and the private sector. The result has been an unqualified success. Small businesses given access to these Federal dollars have created exciting new technologies, created new jobs along with them, and helped expand their business and the economy. The bill before us expresses the sense of Congress regarding the overwhelming success of the SBIR program and reauthorizes the SBIR program for 8 years. H.R. 2392 also includes the Committee on Science in reporting requirements for the SBIR program, clarifies the funding requirements for third-phase participation in the SBIR program, and the rights in technical data granted to SBIR awardees. H.R. 2392 will also add new provisions to the program requiring agencies participating in SBIR to include the program in their annual performance plans, creating a database to compile information on the projects funded through the SBIR program, and technical corrections to improve the data collection currently required by the program. Finally, the bill contains a program added by the Senate to establish technical assistance programs at the State level to assist small businesses in working with the SBIR program. Mr. Speaker these are all simple, common sense improvements to a successful program with strong congressional support. The additions to this bill concerning SBA reauthorization are also simple and common sense. The first and most important is the language from H.R. 3843, the 3-year reauthorization for the Small Business Administration and its programs. This is a straight, numbers-only reauthorization. There are no modifications to the programs, no new programs, just the authorization levels for the next 3 years and extensions of existing programs. We passed this very measure in March of this year by a vote of 410 to 11. In addition to the reauthorization language of H.R. 3843, the amendment to H.R. 2392 will include the language from H.R. 2614, H.R. 2615, and H.R. 3845. These bills will respectively make technical corrections to the section 504 loan program, the 7(a) loan program, and the Small Business Investment Company program. All three of these bills passed the House under suspension in the beginning of this year and were supported overwhelmingly by my colleagues. These technical corrections are matters that will improve the function of the programs and assist the SBA in continuing to provide financial support to the small business community. Mr. Speaker, I believe this legislation represents a good package for small business. It is simple, straightforward, and uncomplicated. In essence, it represents good government. The resolution contains what we need to do in order to fulfill our responsibility to the small business community, and I urge its passage. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), my colleague and fellow New Yorker, the ranking member of the committee, for her assistance. This is an excellent and much-needed piece of legislation, and we appreciate her assistance and the assistance of her staff. This legislation is an important effort to finish the business of Congress and reauthorize programs vital to the small business community. The staff has worked hard on this. I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H. Res. 590.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5109, the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care Personnel Act of 2000, with one reservation. It is a good bill. The committee has worked hard on it, and my colleagues should be commended for it. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5109 corrects a real problem with the pay increases of VA nurses. While the current system of salary adjustments for VA nurses does not allow salary decreases, the current system does allow for the salary to be frozen for a number of years. With inflation, this is tantamount to a cut in salary, with VA nurses having to spend more of their salary each year on the increasing cost of living. This includes the yearly increases that Federal employees must pay on their health care premiums. In the lower New York area, we have one of the highest costs of living in the Nation. The struggle of our dedicated nurses to raise a family and save for the future is a daily challenge. At the very least, we have to ensure that all VA personnel salary is adjusted for inflation, and this good legislation corrects a grave injustice that has denied nurses pay raises that virtually all Federal workers are given on a yearly basis. This portion of the legislation has my strong support. Unfortunately, section 401 of the legislation concerns me and colleagues I have spoken with, and that is the section that is entitled, Coordination of Hospitals Benefits Program. It would create a pilot voucher-like program in four geographic areas. The section would authorize the VA to cover a veteran's cost of inpatient care at non-VA facilities. The VA would thus become a secondary insurance for any out- of-pocket expenses of veterans with insurance, including Medicare, when veterans seek inpatient services in private sector hospitals. It is a good idea, but right now the VA can and does contract with non-VA hospitals to treat veterans for their service-connected conditions. The premise of this pilot gives veterans a financial incentive to go to non-VA facilities for their inpatient care. It establishes an entirely new eligibility category for veterans care based not on the veteran's status or need, but purely on the veteran's geographic location, and to a great extent, the veteran's own health insurance. It could create real problems. First, it creates a disparity between health care available to veterans who choose to use the VA health care facilities and those primarily with their own insurance who have previously chosen not to use VA facilities. Second, it sets a precedent for sending veterans to non-VA providers for inpatient services that are paid by veterans' insurance. The VA would now subsidize care outside the system, losing both the direct and appropriated dollars on any third-party reimbursements. This worries me. If this precedent is set and expanded, the VA health care facilities would only become local referral centers without the resources to sustain a full range of care, including the acute beds and specialized services such as spinal cord injury care and substance abuse treatment for which it is well known. The VA would not really have the control to manage a veteran's case once referred because it would be a secondary payer, not the provider of care. It is my hope this section could be removed or greatly modified before the legislation comes back to the House.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 4945, the Small Business Competition Preservation Act of 2000. Small businesses are a key factor in the growth of the American economy, and women-owned businesses are a vital element. Nevertheless, there remains one sector of the American economy in which small businesses in general and women- owned businesses face difficulty entering: the provision of goods and services to the Federal Government. Congress has enacted goals for small business participation of 20 percent and for women-owned businesses 5 percent. Not one Federal agency has met either of these goals. Despite the goals, Federal agencies and, in particular the Department of Defense, have instituted procurement policies that are more focused on alleged efficiencies in the procurement system than in meeting the statutory goals. By putting together and bundling a number of requirements into one contract, the Federal agencies erect a barrier to participation by small businesses. I have cosponsored H.R. 4945 because I believe it is a necessary step in eliminating unnecessary contract bundling. I sat in committee hearings listening to both Federal bureaucrats and small businesses disagree over the impact of the same contract. Obviously, each side has their own slant on whether the contract will benefit or detract from small businesses; but, of course, intuitively it makes sense that the larger the requirements for a contract the less likely that a small business will have the resources to win that contract. H.R. 4945 provides Congress and the Federal Government with the necessary data to properly assess contract bundling. H.R. 4945 requires the SBA to maintain a database of bundled contracts, determine how many small businesses are displaced as prime contractors and analyze bundled contracts to determine whether real savings or other benefits have accrued to the Federal Government. It seems very sensible to me. Even though the Small Business Reauthorization Act of 1997 requires procuring agencies to perform such studies, we all know that the agencies can clearly bias their analytical information to support the result they wish it to be, in a regulation or specific contracting action. In the same way that the Truth in Regulating Act gives the Government Accounting Office the authority to provide Congress with information about regulations, H.R. 4945 authorizes the Small Business Administration to provide unbiased information to Congress on the effects of contract bundling on small businesses. Once we have this data, Congress will then be able to sensibly consider what changes are needed to Federal Government procurement statutes to ensure that small businesses, especially women-owned businesses, are not excluded from providing goods and services to the Federal Government. I urge the Members to support H.R. 4945 and bring to light the Federal Government's procurement practices that hinder small business participation, reduce competition and ultimately cost the American taxpayer.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, when I first met Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, it was early in his career. As a graduate of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, he was, with characteristic concern for quality education, working with my husband and others to form a New York chapter of the Tufts Alumni Association. Its purpose was to found and fund scholarships and identify bright young students who would benefit from a college education. I remember then thinking how impressive he was in his grasp and understanding of the need of a quality education for all and the need for its early recognition. When Daniel Patrick Moynihan ran for Senator from New York, it was as native son come home. A list of Senator Moynihan's accomplishments would run on for hours, and we have heard many of them recounted here today. However, the most important things I believe so many will remember about him will be the fact that he changed their lives. He changed so many by applying intellect and concern for policy over politics. During his distinguished career, many people gained a better quality of life and many people were able to better understand the government's functions, thanks to his thoughtful work. Senator Moynihan, it has been a great pleasure to work across the aisle from this House to the Senate and with you. We thank you for your hard work, and I thank you also for the work of your excellent staff. Although Washington may miss you, sir, we welcome you back to New York.