Sue Kelly

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich). This amendment is not balanced. It goes too far, and I do not believe it would do anything but great harm to the businesses of this country. The free market is important, and it is important that we do not do things that will have unintended consequences and choke that free market. This amendment could do away with all accounting firms because, as the amendment states, and I quote, ``The only truly independent audit is one by a government agency.'' As we heard, the amendment creates the Federal bureau of audits. I guess it is modeled after the FBI so I can see auditors storming into companies with their calculators drawn, demanding individuals to freeze and drop their pencils. The amendment seems to envision that the most efficient and effective auditor would be the U.S. Government. Somehow I just cannot agree with that, and I think this amendment is important for us to take a good look at for its unintended consequences. I think the author is looking to combine the same level of efficiency to accounting that HUD brought to housing, perhaps. I imagine that the author is looking for the effectiveness of the IRS in its customer service. Finally, with the accounting expertise of the Department of Defense with $100 hammers, I am sure our corporations will be in the best hands possible. This amendment does not understand, I think, the concepts of reasonable, responsive response from our government, and I think this amendment needs to be defeated. I urge Members on both sides of the aisle to think about this and join us in the opposition to the amendment.

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the substitute amendment offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce). The substitute makes clear the different philosophical positions from which we seek to address the problems of the accounting industry. While CARTA gives broad authority to the SEC to set up the new public regulatory organization, this substitute stipulates exactly how it is going to be set up, to what extent the powers will be, regardless of what the experts may think, especially the experts at the SEC. Unfortunately, I do not believe that most of these provisions would actually do anything to prevent future Enrons and Global Crossings. So I am thinking about what the American investors do. I think the American investors will only risk their savings based on truth and transparency in the market. No smart investor should be required to buy a ``pig in a poke.'' This bill provides control without choking the free market. The reason the people put their money in the market is to make a good return on their money. Many Americans have saved for their retirement through pension funds and 401(k)s. This money is often invested in the markets, so the markets must function with transparency and truth if we expect our citizens to invest their future in the stock of American corporations and other investment vehicles that are offered in the markets. The CARTA act will ensure transparency and truth responsibly and appropriately. This substitute was defeated during committee consideration and does not enjoy the broad bipartisan support that the underlying bill enjoys. So I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join us in opposition to this amendment.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, Republicans in the House have been leading the charge on the issue of welfare reform. In 1996, overcoming vehement opposition and tremendous obstacles, the Republican majority passed groundbreaking welfare reform that cut caseloads in half. This year, as Congress is scheduled to reauthorize welfare reform, I would like to share the four principles being promoted by welfare proponents, proponents of welfare reform. Promoting work: Our plan strengthens the path toward independence. We will continue to support strong work requirements as a centerpiece of our plan for reauthorizing welfare reform. Improving child well-being: Our plan aims to lift millions more out of poverty. We are developing new initiatives to reduce child poverty and enhance opportunities for a brighter future. Promoting healthy marriages and strengthening families: We will continue to promote policies that reduce illegitimacy and divorce, while encouraging healthy marriages. Fostering hope and opportunity: Boosting personal incomes and improving quality of life, we will build on these successes by developing additional plans to place recipients on long-term career paths, promoting self-esteem and improved quality of life. These are our guiding principles. They are worth fighting for. Strong families are worth fighting for. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join in this noble cause.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, the unprecedented suffering our country endured on September 11 has been met with unprecedented compassion. The American people have shown their true colors in the wake of the attacks by selflessly giving their time and money to the victims of the attacks. People from all over come to New York now. They come to visit, hold hands and it helps us. This helps us to recover, and we from New York thank you for coming. Please come in great numbers and spend money. It will help us a lot. Congress is continuing to show its strong commitment to help those most affected by September 11. This bill would extend unemployment benefits to those individuals who lost their jobs as a direct result to the attacks to 39 weeks after a major disaster has been declared. It is common-sense legislation. It says that Congress will protect American families and see them through tough economic times brought on by these attacks until they can get back on their feet. I would like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Quinn), my fellow New York Republican for his work on this issue; and I thank the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Cooksey) for allowing me the time. It is important legislation. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 3986.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I, too, have been a member of the Board of Visitors of West Point for 8 years. Mr. Speaker, the freedom of this Nation was bought through the ideas of democracy and independence of our Founding Fathers, but those ideas would never have come into a reality without a commitment of men to fight for those ideals. Throughout our country's history, we have been led through tumultuous times by the men and women of the military who are motivated by a deep patriotism and a willingness to put their lives on the line to defend our Nation and keep us safe. It is no secret that many of the great leaders of these brave men and women have been trained on the hallowed grounds of West Point. As mentioned before, George Patton, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ulysses Grant, and Douglas MacArthur are just a few of the names on a long list of the leading American soldiers who obtained the tools to become great American leaders as cadets on the banks of the Hudson River at West Point. Our Nation owes a continuing debt of gratitude to strong men and women who are at The Point and who have graduated from The Point and are leading our armies even now. I am proud that this illustrious institution is in my district. The history of The Point, dating from the very first days of the revolutionary war to the present, is one of heroism and leadership. I wish a happy anniversary to the U.S. Military Academy and congratulate all of those who have had an association there on 200 years of dignified service to this Nation. I congratulate the men and women who teach at The Point and those who have taught there. Thank you for training generations of young people to understand just what the motto ``Duty, Honor, Country'' stands for. Congratulations to all of our West Point grads, past and present and future. Our Nation is grateful to you for your selfless service.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Nurse Reinvestment Act, which is a substantial first step in addressing the growing shortage of nurses currently being experienced by health care facilities nationwide. Today we are working on both short- and long-term solutions to the problem, and I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) for their hard work in bringing the legislation to the floor. It is my hope that this is the first of many steps that Congress will take to make sure there are enough health care professionals to care for a growing number of patients. Let us think about what nurses do for a minute. They are there at our birth; they are more than likely there at our death. And in between, nurses are apt to be there to support and care for us during every single serious medical crisis that we face, helping us through good news and bad. They care for patients, they advocate for patients, they are there for our long-term care, and those who are nurse anesthetists make us comfortable during surgery and during medical stress. Now more than ever, attention needs to be focused on the ability of our health care personnel to respond to critical situations, and we have a crisis on our hands. The shortage of nurses in our Nation's hospitals and the pending retirement of many nurses should be worrisome to all of us. Hospitals cannot run without nurses. Without adequate nursing staff, hospitals are forced to close units, turn away patients, and redirect emergency cases. This results in long waits and reduced quality of care. In critical situations, time is everything; and when patients have to travel farther or wait longer for care, they are less likely to have a positive recovery. So let us consider this bill. It focuses on attracting students to nursing by educating them about the benefits of a nursing career. Its outreach and public awareness campaigns should help ensure stronger registration at nursing schools so that we have a steady supply of well-trained nurses to replace the retiring RNs; and, believe me, they are retiring very rapidly. In New York, the average age of a nurse is 48 years old. We need to attract new people, people who may not traditionally have considered a career in health care. The bill expands loan repayment assistance to encourage nurses to serve after graduation in an area that is experiencing a shortage. This bill will not only facilitate the entry of students into nursing schools, it also anticipates additional issues that we may encounter. It requires the GAO to evaluate the need for nursing faculty recruitment. In New York State, our faculty average age is somewhere around 52 to 53 years old. We need to raise the consciousness of nurses that they can enhance their skills and become a part of faculty. This provision particularly is important, since we need qualified educators to train those who want to enter the field and seek to expand their expertise into the advanced practice of nursing specialties. In short, the bill does a simple thing. It sets forth a method to get more nurses into the field. This should give relief to the nursing staff that are already stretched too thin and provide much-needed care to patients. It is a small step, but it is a necessary beginning. There is much more to be done. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the passage of this legislation and to continuing to explore new innovative solutions to relieve America's nursing shortage. I urge my colleagues to support America's nurses and support this bill and strengthen our Nation's health care in the workforce.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this measure honoring my friend and colleague Jerry Solomon. As the rest of my colleagues, I was deeply saddened by his passing in October. Jerry Solomon was my friend. His gruff exterior belied the thoughtful and kind man's interior. Jerry fought for his Nation, his family, and his district like the admirable Marine he was. If the Hudson Valley had a need, Jerry was there to help, either with legislation of his own or by supporting legislation of those of us representing the Hudson Valley. To meet Jerry was to fall under this great driving strength and to be offered an invitation to join him in whatever battle he was engaged in, and the Saratoga National Cemetery was a battle he fought for and won. He was a great man, and we remember and honor him with this action today.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 25, expressing the sense of Congress regarding tuberous sclerosis. I commend the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Commerce, and the chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), for acting so quickly to report this important legislation. H. Con. Res. 25 represents the opportunity Congress has to educate Americans about the little known genetic disease tuberous sclerosis. It is estimated that at least two children born each day will have tuberous sclerosis. There are approximately 1 million people worldwide who are affected. TS is a disorder that can be inherited or result from genetic mutation. The disease is characterized by seizures and tumors which form in vital organs such as brain, heart, skin, kidneys and lungs. Though not malignant, these tumors can cause debilitating and sometimes life-threatening problems. Diagnosis of TS is very difficult, and all too often it goes undetected or is misdiagnosed because its symptoms are similar to those of more common conditions like epilepsy or autism. It is often first recognized following a series of epileptic seizures or varying degrees of developmental delay. An average TS diagnosis takes 90 days and involves up to three specialists and numerous tests. Preliminary research has found specific genes associated with tuberous sclerosis, but to date there is no widely used genetic test, leaving diagnosis to be based on clinical findings. Increased awareness of TS among health care providers and the general population is the key to early diagnosis. As is the case with many diseases, early detection often determines TS patients' successes in managing the disease. With the variety of treatments currently available to ease symptoms and improve the quality of life for people with tuberous sclerosis, funding to promote awareness in the medical community as well as research to increase early diagnosis really are imperative. For instance, early intervention has the potential to reduce developmental delay experienced by young patients. Likewise, surgery to remove tumors can help preserve organ function. TS is a permanent medical condition, and those affected and their families must cope with the illness for their entire lives. In some cases, TS does not preclude those who have it from living a relatively normal life. However, in most cases, it is much more intrusive. In addition to the difficulty of diagnosis, there are other post-diagnostic issues with which families must contend, such as obtaining adequate health insurance and, later in life, arranging for independent living solutions. H. Con. Res. 25 highlights the severity of tuberous sclerosis and affirms the Federal Government's responsibility to facilitate research in this area. We must build on the foundation of knowledge of tuberous sclerosis that has already been built, largely through the organization and resources of friends and families of TS patients. This bill instructs the director of the National Institutes of Health to work with the appropriate offices within NIH to bring awareness to this disease and to devise a 5-year plan for outlining research initiatives for TS. Congress must act to foster increased research on tuberous sclerosis. We must use our excellent scientific and medical resources to better understand this very complicated disease. I urge my colleagues to support this worthwhile and necessary legislation.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Madam Speaker, I want to rise in support of this measure which reminds us of the importance of honoring our nation's veterans. In light of our current circumstances, with American soldiers now on hostile ground, we ought to be especially mindful of our efforts to acknowledge and honor those who have served our country. While I understand that some may see this annual day of honor also as a day of convenience, an already-established holiday that can be used for other purposes, I believe that any effort to place any other designations on this day is unacceptable. These are our veterans. These are the men and women who have put the well-being of their country ahead of their own. It is not asking too much to have one day a year dedicated solely to their efforts. Our veterans deserve it.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Terrorism Risk Protection Act. This legislation is essential to not just the insurance industry, but to the entire economy. Businesses in America face a crisis this year, and they will face a crisis next year if we are unable to obtain commercial insurance coverage, which includes insurance against terrorism losses. Without this insurance coverage, businesses will be unable to obtain financing for new building projects, and an already weak economy will be served another harsh blow. With the cowardly acts of September 11, our insurance industry faces a new reality which must be addressed as soon as possible. This is a reality in which an act of terrorism is a risk which requires insurance, the cost of which is impossible to predict, and hence, impossible for an insurance company to price. Because of this, insurance companies are currently unable to offer coverage for impossible future terrorist acts. To prevent this crisis, TRPA would spread the risk for possible future acts out across the insurance industry, giving the industry time to develop their own mechanisms to cover risk for the future. TRPA is designed to provide only the necessary temporary stability to the insurance market and sunset shortly thereafter. Unlike like some of the solutions put forward, TRPA does not put taxpayers' money at risk. All loans made under the act must be repaid. In addition, the triggers in the bill are low enough to ensure that small insurance companies remain competitive. Finally, I want to assure my colleagues that the Committee on Financial Services' work on the issue only begins with this legislation. As the chairwoman of the oversight subcommittee, we will be vigorous in our follow-up on this crisis. We must ensure that we do all in our power to provide stability to the industry while we give the private market time to innovate and quickly establish a new market to cover potential terrorism loss. TRPA is an excellent solution to this crisis and deserves our full support. I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in the strong support of this bill. Mr. Speaker, obviously, I am pleased that the Financial Services Committee and this House have acted expeditiously on the terrorism reinsurance crisis, and that this legislation is being considered today. Today in this chamber, we are appropriately engaging in a fierce debate over various aspects of how to make this legislation work for insurance consumers. We are debating federal backstops, mandates for coverage, tort reform, and all trying to do the best thing for the American economy--in the hope that this very complex and difficult issue can be resolved by the time Congress recesses for the year. But I would appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to take just one step back from this debate, and remind us all again why we are here. One of the persons who would have been intimately involved in the creation of a federal terrorism reinsurance program was Charlie McCrann. Charlie was a senior vice president at Marsh and McLennan, the world's largest commercial insurance brokerage firm, and his responsibilities included advocacy at both the state and federal levels. Charlie was a pivotal player on many of the issues surrounding insurance regulation over the years--from the product liability crisis of the 1980s, to the Dingell insurance solvency legislation in the 1990s, to our debates on agent/broker licensing reform as a part of Gramm-Leach-Bliley two years ago. As he spoke on behalf of the firm that sells more business insurance (and reinsurance) than any other firm in the world, this terrorism insurance coverage legislation would have been right down Charlie's alley. As always, he would have done everything in his power to make sure that we craft a bill that restores and calms the marketplace without overreaching. On September 11, Charlie had arrived early to his office on the 100th floor of 1 World Trade Center. Like 294 of his colleagues at Marsh, he perished. As a profile in the New York Times recently said of him, Charles Austin McCrann was a levelheaded, respected executive, devoted to his wife, Michelle, and children, Derek and Maxine. He was also a splendid attorney and representative of the insurance industry, through his earlier work at the New York Assembly's Insurance Committee, and at the law firm of LeBoeuf, Greene & McRae. At Marsh, where he served since 1979, in addition to his advocacy, he was a regulatory compliance officer, and was responsible for interpreting industry regulations and providing guidance on these regulations to Marsh's brokers throughout the country. He represented the National Association of Insurance Brokers and its successor organization, the Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers, before the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. I could go on and on. As a subcommittee chair on the Financial Services Committee, I mourn the fact that Charlie is not in this chamber today witnessing our spirited debate and our actions designed to assist the commercial insurance marketplace. And I hope that as this legislation continues to move through the legislative process, we will be mindful of the 500 employees of the world's two largest commercial insurance brokerages-- Marsh and Aon--who lost their lives on that horrible day.

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding me this time. The gentleman from New York has offered a well thought-out substitute. However, I believe we simply have different beliefs as to how the market should operate. I believe that we should allow the market to work out problems as much as possible. We are here today because the reality of a war on terrorism has knocked out the commercial property and casualty insurance industry and put them in a crisis. To stabilize that industry, we have drafted TRPA. Unfortunately, the Democratic substitute goes farther than I think we should on a number of points. I want to focus on the provision in the substitute that would mandate that property and casualty companies provide terrorism coverage. ``Mandate.'' That is the operative word. It is our responsibility to ensure consumers have the options to choose from, not mandate that they are forced to comply with. Terrorism coverage will be more expensive to all businesses, but every business should be able to make the choice of whether they should pay for it and take the risk. Let us consider the cost of this mandate for things like museums, like schools, like hospitals. A hospital in California, a hospital in New York, most hospitals in this Nation operate on a very thin operating edge. They are on the very edge of solvency. A sudden increase in premiums could plunge them into oceans of red, resulting in closure. Schools. A flower shop in Buffalo, New York, ought to have the ability to make that choice to take that risk if they choose, not be mandated. A museum in Katonah, New York, should have the ability to choose. Only these entities know what their risk is. Only these entities know what their need is. These entities ought to not be mandated to share a risk they do not feel they have. Small business is the strongest bulldozer pushing our economy and its growth. We all know the margins between profitability and failure are razor thin with most small businesses. The cost of mandated coverage could mean the difference between more or less employment or helping these people keep their jobs. I urge that people defeat this Democratic substitute. This is just one of the many reasons the Democratic substitute should be defeated. There are others. Give our schools, hospitals and small business the choice and join with me in voting against the Democratic substitute.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. The residents of my district and my State have suffered greatly. I am here today to speak for them. Congress has to do everything it can to help us rebuild our lives and our communities. The amount of money contained in the final bill is sufficient for now, but this vote seems a chance to get more funding for New York faster and send a clear signal to Congress that New York's needs persist and will continue to persist. For many of us who support the measure of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Sweeney) it is not about doubting the promises that have already been made. The President has shown tremendous compassion for New Yorkers in the aftermath of September 11. I trust the President. I take him at his word when he says New York is going to receive the full $20 billion commitment from the Federal Government. So while I appreciate the efforts of my colleagues who have worked very hard to meet the needs of New Yorkers, I believe this amendment reflects the true magnitude of the State's loss and deserves support. This is not just about bricks and mortar. It is about the people. It is not just the heroic police and firemen, the public safety officers, the real heroes that went in and pulled people out of those buildings and helped that day. But it is about the extended family around New York, the people from my district who suffered then and are still suffering. It is about supporting those people in their loss. It is about supporting our city that we all, so many of us, work in. It is a very important amendment to so many of us that I feel it really needs support.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference report for the PATRIOT Act, in particular, title III of the Anti-Money Laundering Act. This legislation takes substantive steps to halt the transfer of illegal funds which are used to perpetrate cowardly acts of terrorism against Americans and support the illegal drug trade. We have a duty and a responsibility to do all in our power to stop these illegal activities. The legislation takes this fight to a new level by creating new public-private partnerships that will enable government and businesses to work together to stop these illicit funds. In addition, the legislation will make progress to stop hawalas, an ancient system of trading value from one place to another in an attempt to avoid taxes, tariffs, and detection. The bill will combat hawalas by ensuring that the law which requires money transfer businesses to be licensed can be used to prosecute these illusive operations. This legislation will also ensure that financial institutions of all sizes implement programs to combat their vulnerabilities to those who would seek to use them to transfer or launder illegal funds. The Treasury is required to review the new law and publish rules to ensure that the size, location, and activities of these businesses are taken into account. I would like to enter into a brief colloquy with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley). I understand this legislation is intended to impart greater authority and flexibility to the Secretary of the Treasury, particularly regarding the due diligence provisions in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 in section 312(b) of the bill. Is this the understanding of the gentleman from Ohio?

Mrs. KELLY. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mrs. KELLY. Reclaiming my time, the Congress has come together to strengthen our financial laws to combat those who seek to harm our Nation. I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this Act. Let us make America financially safe and strong.

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. KELLY. With all due respect to the ranking member, I believe that he may be referring to a different part of the bill. The part I was referring to was paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of section 312(b) of the bill. I think if the gentleman will refer to that, he will see that there has been no change other than what we have agreed to.

Mrs. KELLY. If the gentleman will continue to yield, I was dealing with section 312, not section 311.

Mrs. KELLY. As a member of the committee, I was there for those votes and there for that discussion, and I believe that that was section 311, not 312. I was referring in my discussion with the chairman of the committee to section 312.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this act. This legislation takes substantive steps to combat how terrorists and drug traffickers move their money. One issue that has been given little attention in our war against terrorism is that the chief export of the Taliban is illegal drugs. Hence, efforts on both fronts have been essential in crafting this legislation. One of my deepest concerns in our effort to dry up the funding sources for terrorist activities is how we can combat hawalas. This is an international underground economic system by which financial operators in different locations honor each other's financial obligations by making payments in a way which avoids taxes and tariffs. There is no movement of money between countries; hence no taxes and tariffs are paid. At best, there are very small traces of the transactions. This legislation takes the first important step to combat hawala by enforcing the law against unlicensed money transmitting businesses. While there have long been laws on the books to ensure that money- transmitting businesses be licensed, these laws have been unenforceable due to court rulings which require knowledge of the law and willful intent. In effect, the law is unenforceable. Section 103 of this legislation removes the standard and tightens up the law to ensure that law enforcement has the tools to go after the threat. This legislation takes important steps to ensure that more financial institutions have in place antimoney laundering programs. But this is not a one-size-fits-all mandate; and size, location, and activities of a business are taken into account. This will ensure everyone, from the very large financial institutions, with billions in transactions every day, to small stores that offer wire transfers, has in place internal policies and procedures and controls to minimize their susceptibility to inadvertently assisting criminals. We know the terrorists of September 11 were savvy and familiar with the law. We know that the terrorists used money orders and had bank accounts. We know the terrorists were careful not to do anything that would have attracted attention to themselves before they carried out their plans of terror, murder, and destruction. We must take steps to ensure that if future manipulations take place, law enforcement will be notified in time to prevent acts of cowardice. The Financial Anti-terrorism Act takes these steps. I urge support of the bill.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by my colleague from New York, Mr. Boehlert. I rise in support of the amendment offered by my colleague from New York, Mr. Boehlert. This proposal significantly increases the investment in an array of important programs which are critical to conservation efforts in my state of New York and in other states across the country: the EQIP program, the Farmland Protection Program, the Wetlands Reserve Program, the Conservation Reserve Program, and the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program. This amendment will help us reach more farmers in more parts of the country. And will assist these farmers in their efforts to protect and restore the health of their land and the livability of their communities. So I thank my colleagues--Mr. Boehlert, Mr. Kind, Mr. Gilchrest, and Mr. Dingell--for their work on this proposal, and offer my strong support for this amendment.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the amendment by my colleagues from New York to prevent the marketing of downed livestock. On a daily basis, animals so sick that they can barely stand are dragged into the market to be sold to slaughterhouses. That is abusive and torturous, it is bad treatment of these sick and injured animals, it is cruel and it places our food supply at risk. In response to the fact that meat from downed animals is more likely to be contaminated, the USDA now prohibits the purchase of beef from downed animals into the National School Lunch Program. Major fast food restaurants forbid the use of downed animals in their products. While we can compliment these small measures, we must give the USDA the authority to deal with the downed animal problem. In order to protect both our animals and our food supply, we need to prevent the marketing of downed livestock. I urge my colleagues to join me in the support of this amendment.

Mrs. KELLY

Mrs. KELLY. If the gentleman will yield, Mr. Chairman, I am sorry, perhaps the gentleman was not listening. Yes. The National Association of Women Business Owners and the Women Impacting Public Policy both. That is only two. There are others.

Mrs. KELLY. Yes.

Mrs. KELLY. I do not have a list of them in my hand, but there are others.