Ron Kind

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for yielding me this time. I want to commend the leadership of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, from Chairman Boehner and Ranking Member George Miller to Subcommittee Chairman Castle and Ranking Member Woolsey, all the members of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, the work that was done in the conference committee for trying to produce this bipartisan bill. That is why today I am proud to stand in support of the rule and also in support of the reauthorization of IDEA. Mr. Speaker, this is an incredibly important program that was created in the mid-1970s. It was created under the premise that every child in America should have access to a quality education, including children with special needs. Since that time, the schools throughout the Nation have brought these kids in, have embraced them, have dealt with issues in regards to the authorization language, in regards to funding issues; but fundamentally it is a program that works and is working for our children with special needs. This legislation, I think, goes to clean up a lot of the problems that were inherent in IDEA. The gentleman from Delaware just referenced some of the paperwork burden that our special education teachers have been straddled with for so many years. There has been the issue of disciplinary problems in the classroom that I think we have reached a good compromise on now. It was the goal in this reauthorization bill to improve the quality of the teachers in the classroom dealing with these children with special needs, the second most important determinant on how well our kids are going to perform just behind parental involvement. It does strive to increase student performance and educational achievement. Overall, this is a very good bipartisan bill, and I would recommend my colleagues today to support this reauthorization bill. But there are also some things in the future that we have to stay focused on and continue to work on and that is the impact of No Child Left Behind and the new standards and the testings and the impact it is going to have on these children with special needs and the fact that under No Child Left Behind, every child is supposed to be 100 percent in conformance of the rules that were written by the Department of Education by 2014. We just know now that there are some children that are not going to be able to obtain that high standard. Unless we are willing to start telling the schools that by 2014 every one of them is going to be failing, I think we need to be a little bit more realistic in our approach to these children and what is going to be required, but without leaving any child behind. But I think another big problem that we are going to have to continue to slug out here starting with this omnibus coming up but also in future years is the funding of IDEA. The Congress has never lived up to the full cost share promise that was made, the 40 percent cost share for IDEA funding. This means the financial burden has been left at the local level. It is affecting property taxes back in the State of Wisconsin, which are going up way too much; and it is starting to pit students against students in the classroom over the allocation of the limited resources that we are allotting for IDEA and also now for No Child Left Behind. I am disheartened to hear some of the figures coming out of the omnibus discussions where the President was requesting a $1 billion plus-up for IDEA. It looks like we are only going to get about $600 million. That is far short because this last fiscal year we were only funding it at 19 percent of the 40 percent full cost share. We can do better. For $10 billion, we could fully fund IDEA and get up to that 40 percent cost share and alleviate the financial burden that is straddling so many of our school districts throughout the Nation. It is just a question of priority, a priority of what we are going to place first as an investment in our budget, whether it is going to be the children and the future of our Nation or whether it is going to be other priorities that we are going to see in this omnibus. Let us face it, Mr. Speaker. By the end of this year, we will have allocated close to $200 billion for what is taking place right now in Iraq. We are hearing rumors now that the administration is going to come back early next year requesting another 70 to $75 billion in Iraq. With just a fraction of that amount, we could fully fund IDEA, fully fund No Child Left Behind, give the schools, give the teachers, give the parents the resources they need to make sure that every child has the opportunity that they need to succeed in this country and in this world. That is what is at stake. While we have got a good bill to support today, I think there is more work that we have to stay focused on and try to work in a bipartisan fashion to address the implications of No Child Left Behind with IDEA students and the element of full funding for this program. Hopefully, we will have the same type of bipartisan spirit as we move forward in the future.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, I think the gentleman is right. I think this really comes down to two different visions, two different camps of what we can and cannot do. The optimist versus the pessimist. The optimist which we are members of happily really do believe we have the innovation, the creativity, technological know-how to lead the rest of the world in developing the changes that have to be made in regards to energy use and new energy technologies coming on line. Conservation could be a big part of what we are talking about as well. It is something that unfortunately the Vice President poo-poos every time someone tries to bring it up, is the things we could be doing to develop more energy-efficient machines that we rely on for our quality of life. It was interesting that when California just a couple of years ago was going through their energy crisis, energy consumption dropped 11 percent within the first month through increased energy conservation practices. So conservation can also be a part of this. What does this mean for the average person back home in western Wisconsin, the district that I represent? We have a very good manufacturing company called the Trane Company. It is one of the largest employers in western Wisconsin, over 2,000 workers. They manufacture high-efficiency commercial heating and cooling units to be sold. They are so efficient and so good at what they do that those machines are already in full compliance of what the Kyoto treaty calls for. If we unleash this potential, that means creating more jobs in districts like the third congressional in western Wisconsin, with new companies being able to expand by developing a market share with these new machines, these new technologies that are crying out to be developed. But again it is a question of political leadership and whether or not we have enough visionary people to see where we can take it and what steps we have to do and what each of our roles is going to be as consumers, as manufacturers, as producers, as policymakers because there is going to be a role for all of us to play, but it will require a buy-in. The gentleman mentioned the Apollo program of the 1960s. When President Kennedy first announced the goal to put a man on the Moon by the end of the decade, most of the scientific experts did not think it was possible. We were experimenting with Saturn and Jupiter II missiles that if they were not exploding on the launch pad at the time, quickly exploded after launch or dovetailed into the oceans off the launch pad. And for the President at the time to conceive of putting a live human being on top of these flying bombs that were blowing up typically on the launch pad, and safely launching them out into outerspace and then landing them softly on the Moon, and then relaunching them from the Moon and landing them softly on the Earth's surface so that we do not lose anyone, was a vision that very few people in the scientific community in the early 1960s thought could be achieved by the end of the decade. But it was that political leadership and vision and marshaling the resources and the best and the brightest that our Nation had to offer that enabled us to achieve that dynamic mission by 1969. It was an incredible technological achievement, and it was spurred by a vision that President Kennedy had for our Nation at the time.

Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, if the gentleman will yield for one final point, this has been a consistent pattern with this administration. Even with their own agencies producing reports on global warming, the President on down has kind of pooh-poohed the findings. And in fact at one time the President commented on one of the global warming studies that came out of the EPA that it was just the work of a bunch of career bureaucrats, as if to discount the findings of that report. But the most recent one, just released in August, was signed off on by the agency heads of those departments, so it is a little more difficult then for the President, with these political appointees, to claim they are just a bunch of bureaucrats doing what bureaucrats supposedly do, in his eyes, and that is producing a bunch of invalid, nonscientific- based reports, when in fact the information out there is just to the contrary. This administration has tended to base policy more on faith-based initiatives rather than science-based findings and studies, and that is very disturbing. Because if your instinct is wrong on something as important as this, it could lead this Nation down a disastrous course that could take decades to try to reverse and change, if it is not too late already. That is why during the course of the election there were so many scientists around the Nation writing letters and indicating their concerns and displeasure in regards to the administration's practice of discounting scientific research and findings on the important topics of the day, and that pattern has been consistent from day one. Now we have a second term that is about to begin. We have new political appointees that will be made. Many of the Secretaries have submitted their resignations, so there will be a turnover in leadership, and what will be very interesting and I think very important in the days and weeks to come is who the President is deciding to head up these very agencies that will have so much influence and so much say in the future course of the policy that this Nation will follow which will have implications not only for us here at home but on a global basis. So these appointments are going to be very important in the days to come. When my colleague and I were in Norway, studying their alternatives and renewable energy plan, we received a briefing on the global circulatory system and how that could be impacted from global warming. I do not know if too many people watching tonight realize our oceans have this circulatory pattern to it with the water flow. The gentleman from Washington mentioned the gulf stream a little earlier that warms in the southern climates and goes up north and keeps the Northern Hemisphere warm and the shoreline free of ice accumulation. The fear with global warming is that as the water goes to the north, it will not cool. And if it does not cool, it will not drop. And if it does not drop, it will not continue the circulatory pattern in the other oceans throughout the world and so the whole system could shut down. Like the blood that rushes through our body, if it stops pumping and stops circulating through our body, you can imagine the disastrous consequences. The Earth's environment and ecosystem is based on that ocean circulatory system that would be adversely affected if global warming continues at the pace that it currently is. It could potentially shut down, creating an environmental havoc that perhaps is only realized in the imagination of Hollywood producers right now in the movies they are starting to produce but which may not be that far off from reality. This too I think is a huge implication that we have to start studying more and taking seriously in the policy decisions that we face in the upcoming session of Congress. Again, Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his leadership on the issue and for garnering some time this evening.

Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, we are seeing a very exciting development. In Wisconsin, people think the Dairy State, a lot of farms. There are still a lot of family farms in that. The operations are getting better. The livestock herds are getting larger. One of the grant programs that I and others were able to include in the last farm bill was a methane digester grant program going to these family farmers to start developing methane digesters. That is using the waste that these livestock herds are producing and converting it into energy. Again, it is another small piece of the energy puzzle that we need to be looking at in further developing as this Nation, because there is not going to be a silver bullet that is going to provide the cure-all for all of this, but it is finding out where the pieces need to fit in, whether it is solar, whether it is the wind turbine farms, whether it is methane digesters, whether it is the further development of hydrogen fuels in this society. Thomas Friedman of the New York Times wrote a really interesting article just a couple of months ago in regards to the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and he said that that is not our only intelligence failure in Iraq, not being able to find these weapons of mass destruction. If we do not learn from this, that our dependence on their oil in that region is a large cause of what is happening over there right now, and that, too, will be another intelligence failure on our part if we do not derive the lessons of our dependence on the oil in the Middle East and start converting to a new energy policy for a new century and wean ourselves off from that dependence, which would then start forcing those regimes in the Middle East instead of basing their whole economic model on the natural resources that are being extracted from their soil and instead forcing them to diversify their economic base, and have them start drilling their human capital more than their natural resources, that is going to lead to the type of transformations and reforms that we desperately need throughout the Muslim and the Arab world right now. But so long as we, the largest consumer of these fossil fuels, remain the supply line for those regimes and their economic base, as long as we remain addicted to what they have got, we are not going to see the type of economic and political and the cultural reforms that that region of the world desperately needs right now. That, too, is something that we have got to wake up and realize, in light of what is happening in the Middle East today, that a lot of this stems from our dependence on their energy that they are producing and our inability to start pivoting now and seeing the long-term ramifications that this has and the national security implications that I believe it holds for our Nation in future years.

Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from Washington State, for yielding me a little bit of time for this very important discussion. First of all, I commend him for it, his leadership throughout Congress and the Nation, in trying to draw attention to and highlight an incredibly important issue not only for the current generation but future generations. That is, how are we going to, as the world's most powerful Nation, economically, militarily, culturally, our influence throughout the world is going to address one of the seminal issues of our generation, and that is global climate change and warming, what we can do policy-wise to try to effectuate the needed changes in order to stem the terrible results that might occur if we do not start acting today on it. The science is in. My colleague from Washington has cited the scientific studies. In fact, even the current administration now is releasing recent reports indicating that climate change is real, that global warming is occurring, that it is heavily influenced by man-made objects and that it is something we cannot ignore any longer. The problem we have, however, with the administration is lack of leadership and a lack of ideas and a solution on how to address it. They have the science before them. The President during an initial report that said, hey, this stuff is real, it is happening, we have got to take corrective action, excused the record as the work of bureaucrats within the EPA and various agencies that was putting the science together. But a more recent study that just came out in August highlighted the very real effects and the tracking data of climate change and the fact that it is heavily influenced by man's action on this globe. The question is now what are we going to do with the science. It was interesting to note and see that Russia has been the latest signatory to the Kyoto treaty which now puts the treaties into effect because they had to have a certain number of nations that produced a certain amount of these greenhouse gasses to first sign the treaty before it would be implemented. Russia now puts them over the top. Granted there are some problems with Kyoto, issues that need to be addressed and cleaned up and further corrected; and that is why there was an overwhelming vote against the Kyoto ratification in the Senate about a year ago. But what has been lacking in this debate on a global basis is U.S. leadership and what are we going to do about it. I know the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) has been one of the champions of a new Apollo energy program, one that makes sense for us not only addressing the global climate changes that is occurring now but makes sense for us economically in regards to our long term energy needs as a Nation. If we do not get our energy policy right, we will not be very successful in growing the economy and creating jobs. We have seen what the dependence and addiction to foreign oil has done to us economically. We have been looking at $2 a gallon for gas prices for too long. It is a hidden tax on working families that are paying more out of their pocket at the pump in order to pay for these increased energy costs. Gas prices this winter will be 30 to sometimes 40 percent more in the upper Midwest and in the northern regions that will be relying on heating bills to get through the winter season. And we see the implications foreign policy-wise of our addiction to oil in the Middle East and why we are so heavily involved there right now. There is something we can do about it. I guess what is so frustrating, serving on the Committee on Resources, as my friend from Washington and I do, is there are certain steps that we can be taking in order to wean ourselves off from this dependence on foreign oil in order to move to a new energy policy that emphasizes alternative and renewable energy sources: the wind, the solar, the geothermal, the biofuels, the ethanol. And also a major investment in the energy source of the future, fuel cell development, so we become a hydrogen-based energy society as opposed to a carbon fossil fuel base that we are currently dependent upon and that is creating these greenhouse gases. So the question now becomes what are we going to do about the science that is staring us in the face. Are we going to continue to ignore it, claim we cannot do both, grow the economy and address global climate change at the same time? I believe we can. And I believe there is job creation involved if we do start bringing these new technologies online, creating new businesses and new industries to deal with the new Apollo energy program for this country. We should see the leadership from the White House setting dates certain for certain goals of achieving greater alliance on alternative and renewable energy sources, but we are not. In fact, the energy bill that is currently pending before Congress is better suited for the 1950s as opposed to the 21st century. There is a lot of new technology that can be developed that will spur economic growth and jobs if we have the political will to do it. And I believe at the end of the day this can be a win-win scenario, not only for job creation in this country but in addressing the root causes of global climate change, something that the rest of the world is waking up and realizing and starting to take action on their own. But if the world's largest economy and the world's greatest consumer of fossil fuels remains on the sidelines, as this administration has decided to do, we will not see tremendous progress being made on this front regardless of what other countries throughout the globe are trying to do right now. That is why I commend my good friend from Washington State for getting up here on a late evening here, Tuesday night, to continue talking about this very important issue. And it is an issue that the younger generation gets. I do not know if it is intuitive or if they have just gotten enough information themselves, but they know the problems we are facing ecologically and environmentally. They also believe in this whole global warming science that is out there right now. I believe they also believe that it is their generation that will pay the highest price if action is not taken today with the policymakers we have right now. I believe it was one of the more important issues in the last Presidential campaign that did not receive the attention that it deserved. I pledge tonight to continue working with my friend from Washington State to continue to draw attention on this important issue, to see what we can do working in a bipartisan fashion, because this is going to be an issue that we will have to lock arms together and jump into the icy waters on if we will have significant progress on it. And there can be a lot of different areas of the sensible center that we can pursue in this Congress in the upcoming session, and hopefully being able to work with the administration even though they are doing new personnel changes right now, to address one of the more pressing and important issues changes of our day, that is, global warming. And what this generation is going to leave as a legacy for the next generation to inherit. Unfortunately, there has been too much dithering. There has been study after study and scientific report after scientific report, all pointing in the same direction; but it is falling on deaf ears right now. And we do not have the luxury of time on our side. The longer we delay in taking affirmative action on this, the harder it will be to address this at the end of the day. So the clock is ticking. We will continue speaking out on this. We will continue working amongst ourselves trying to form these bipartisan coalitions, trying to develop a greater consensus in our country to address this. I think the American people are there as well. I think given the option, they want to see us moving to a more sustainable energy policy that is more ecologically and environmentally friendly for their children and grandchildren as well. Lord knows the rest of the world is waking up to the possibilities that exist out there. And there is so much potential with the creativity and the innovation that this country has, that the American workers and with the science that we are developing in this country. What is lacking and what the missing ingredient I believe is is the political leadership and the will to get it done. That is really what is at stake. And I thank my colleague for having this Special Order this evening talking about this issue and for his leadership on it as well.

Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, it is one of the fascinating conversations I like to have with our astronauts. We are very proud of Mark Lee who is an astronaut who grew up in Viroqua, Wisconsin, Western Wisconsin. Of course, Deke Slayton was from the Sparta area in Western Wisconsin. I had a meeting with one of the Shuttle astronauts down at Cape Canaveral about a year-and-a-half ago, and I asked them all, what is the one thing that really leaves an impression upon you when you are out in space and looking back. They all say it is the greater respect for our environment and our ecosystem on this planet because, from their perspective, out in space looking back, I think they see intuitively how fragile our environment really is and the atmosphere and this planet that we all share together, and I think they all understand that much more work needs to be done on this front. The fact that we have had an energy bill now pending for the last couple of years I think speaks more to the dysfunctional nature of this Congress recently that has become so polarizing, so partisan, and there is not enough outreach, not enough effort to find that sensible center on policy, to try to come together and work in crafting truly bipartisan bills where we understand it is going to be a process of give and take and that compromise should not be a four letter word in trying to make our democracy function. But unfortunately, there is this 218 strategy where the leadership on the other side just wants the minimum number of votes, and more Republicans, the better, in order to get anything passed around here that it makes great achievements virtually impossible today. On issues like the environment and energy policy, it is something that is going to require the Nation coming together if we are going to be make significant strides. It is going to be interesting that later this week we are going to be dealing with another vastly important issue, and it is not one that is really short term, but it has long-term implications, raising the national debt ceiling limit. This is not something that we are going to see tangible results tomorrow if we start addressing it, but it does have future long-term implications about economic growth, and it is the same thing in regards to global warming. It is something people are hearing about now, and they are starting to see the science come in, but it is not something that is going to a direct and immediate impact on their lives tomorrow. What we are talking about is what this means for the next generation and the generation after that and why it is incumbent upon us to start worrying about this today rather than punting it for future generations. I am concerned that the same attitude is being taken with the huge accumulation of debt in this country today, that all we have to do this week is jam another $900 billion increase in the debt ceiling in a bill that has to pass in order to keep the government functioning, and there is very little thought about the long-term implications of what these decisions mean in the future. Again, this is a classic issue, and I have enjoyed working with my colleague from Washington State and look forward to working with him on this in the future because it is an issue that obviously is not going to go away anytime soon, and it is going to require a lot of hard work.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, this literally is the ticking time bomb sitting beneath Social Security and Medicare. They do not want to talk about it. They do not want to talk about fiscal solvency and fiscal responsibility that will help shore up Social Security and Medicare for the next 75 years. But this really gets to the crux of it. And later, next year perhaps, in the next session of Congress, we are going to have a serious discussion about Social Security reform. I think the best reform measures we can start taking today is instilling a little more fiscal discipline in the budgetary decisions so that this $160 billion annual raid on the Social Security trust fund stops and we have that ability to deal with the baby boom generation's retirement, which is about to explode in future years. But, again, it is the lack of leadership right now that we are seeing from the administration and here in Congress that is preventing us from really shoring up Social Security and Medicare as viable programs for many generations to come.

Mr. KIND. My colleague from Tennessee has been a real voice of reason on the committee as well as the ranking member of the Committee on the Budget for trying to inject a little voice of reason in this whole fiscal responsibility debate that we need to have in this Congress and throughout this Nation. Because it is staggering, looking at these numbers and what the administration is coming back to Congress and asking for this week, another huge increase in the debt ceiling limit. There are a lot of ramifications to what the President is requesting us to do this week in increasing the debt by addressing the symptom but not addressing the cure that we need to get out of the fiscal mess that has been created in this Nation over the last few years. It is a mess that is spiraling out of control. We see the increased costs and what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan right now. We are also butting up against an aging population in this country, the so-called baby boomers who are about to begin their massive retirement in a few short years, putting in jeopardy Social Security and Medicare solvency for future generations. And we are not addressing a cure to the solution, one of which the ranking member and those of us on the Committee on the Budget here tonight have been advocating for the last 4 years, and that is reinstituting the budget tools that were in effect in the 1990s, the pay-as-you-go rules, so we maintain balance in the budgeting decisions. If you are advocating a spending increase or a tax cut somewhere, you have got to find an offset to pay for it to maintain that balance. It worked well in the nineties. It gave us 4 years of budget surpluses, a couple of years in which we were not even touching the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, and all that has been reversed under the current administration and with the leadership of the current Congress. One of the more disturbing aspects about this whole debt ceiling limit and the fiscal irresponsibility is who we owe it to. Right now, a majority of the debt is owed to foreign interests, Japan being the largest purchaser of government debt today, soon to be surpassed by China as the number one purchaser of our debt in this Nation. I do not believe it is in our best long-term economic interest to be so dependent on China, to be financing our red ink in this country for years to come, because it can wreak havoc on the financial markets in this country if they decide to take their investments somewhere else. That really has not received the attention I think it deserves, given the long-term implications of our dependency now on foreign countries in order to finance the debt that is being accumulated because the current administration is not willing to make the tough decisions to maintain fiscal responsibility around here. It is going to be an important debate we have this week. There is going to be an increase in the debt ceiling at the end of the day. Those of us who want to reinstitute these rules do not have the votes to do it today, but hopefully with the help of the American people, some who are watching perhaps tonight, we are going to create this synergy that is necessary in this Congress in order to start making these tough decisions again that worked very well in the 1990s and gave us incredible economic prosperity and job growth and an incredible dynamic to help grow the economy which is being lost now based on the decisions that we are seeing. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, if the gentleman would yield for one final point.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, the land of the ``not quite right'' has turned into the land of the ever more dangerous and difficult. I returned to Iraq last week on a Congressional fact-finding mission after less than a year since my previous visit. The trip gave me an opportunity to hear from our troops in the field, meet with military commanders and visit with some Iraqi citizens. Unquestionably, the mission in Iraq has become more dangerous and difficult. The insurgents have expanded their support. They are more sophisticated, coordinated and lethal in their tactics. They enjoy sanctuaries in some major cities and they are exploiting the lack of progress in rebuilding the Iraqi infrastructure to their advantage. Our troops are doing a terrific job under difficult and dangerous circumstances. We can all be proud of our men and women in the military who are following their orders, carrying out their missions and sacrificing so much to give the Iraqi people a chance for a more peaceful and prosperous future. But they seem tired and stretched very thin. I had lunch and dinner with many of our soldiers from Wisconsin during my trip. Nothing makes you more proud to be an American than the chance to see our soldiers performing their duties under trying conditions. They are all well-trained, well- motivated and represent the best America has to offer. Fortunately, the conditions for most of our soldiers have improved from a year ago. The supplies have caught up to them. They have a good selection of food and beverages. Most have air-conditioned places in which to sleep. Communications back home have gotten much better and on-line education courses are offered to those interested in continuing their education. But when they go out on patrol, they don't know who the enemy is, where the next ambush is going to come, and whether they are going to get back to camp in one piece. Many have to go out on patrols seven days a week. They return to get some sleep before they go out again the next day. They would gladly welcome a cold beer when they do finish their shift (alcohol is prohibited in Iraq) and they hate the ``stop- loss'' orders that prevent them from being rotated out of Iraq at the end of their tours. Forty percent of our troops in Iraq are Guard and Reserve Units. They are there for 1 year once their boots hit the ground. With training and preparation before deployment, our Guard and Reserve are away from their families and jobs for up to 18 months. And many that have returned home are being put on notice for future activation and deployment. Clearly, such a sacrifice on so few for so long is unsustainable. I was surprised by the lack of progress in rebuilding the Iraqi infrastructure to meet the basic needs of the people, such as: running water, electricity, garbage pick-up and a good workable sewer system. Of the $19 billion appropriated to rebuild Iraq only $1 billion has been spent so far. I spoke to one Iraqi woman and asked if she felt her neighbors are growing impatient. She chuckled and said ``we're tired of being patient. We've been patient for 35 years, we want results now.'' The Iraqis are a people who believe that if the United States can put a person on the moon, then we are capable of helping them so much more. They see our impressive military with all the technology rolling through their communities and they are wondering why we can't get their water running or their electricity hooked up. And the insurgents are quick to pin the blame on us. But without security it will be difficult to make significant progress with reconstruction. It's hard to walk into a neighborhood with a hammer in one hand and a gun in the other. Nor are the Iraqi Security Forces trained and equipped sufficiently to assume more of the security responsibility themselves. Many of the Iraqi forces and their families are being targeted themselves by the insurgents and there are numerous instances of insurgents penetrating these forces for their own advantage. But helping the Iraqis to develop the capability to provide for their own security is our ultimate exit strategy and it seems we've wasted a good year in doing that. What then needs to be done? First and foremost, we need to make sure our troops are getting everything they need to do their job effectively and safely, which includes double reinforced steel vehicles to protect our troops against roadside bombs, the weapon of choice by the insurgents. We need to enhance security so there is a safe environment for the Iraqi people to participate in the national elections by January. That means trying to work with Iraqi Security forces to take away the insurgents' sanctuaries and diminish their capability. We need to step up our efforts in employing local Iraqis to rebuild their own country. There is a direct correlation between those areas with a high unemployment rate (70 percent in some places) and from where the insurgency is coming. We need to ask for more help from NATO and countries in the Arab League to provide training and equipment for a new Iraqi Security Force so we can begin to fade into the background and eventually bring our troops home. Cutting and running is not an option. It would guarantee chaos, possible civil war, a sanctuary for international terrorism and a power vacuum that Iran would be more than happy to fill in the region. But our leaders in this country need to level with the American people. Our task in Iraq will not be easy. It has already become more difficult. More international support would alleviate the high cost we are now paying in both lives and money as well as add legitimacy to what we are trying to accomplish with the Iraqi people. It is not a lost cause, yet. But our window of opportunity is closing rapidly.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the good works of first Lieutenant Ryan Casper, who has served both his country and the Iraq community in an astounding manner. Lt. Casper, an Army Reservist serving in the 477th Ambulance Company, has demonstrated unyielding dedication to improving the dire situation thousands of Iraqi students are experiencing. Lt. Casper, a history teacher from Ellsworth High School, has extended his passion for education from his classroom in Wisconsin into the Iraq community. He has been instrumental in meeting the needs of the students by restoring educational structures in Iraq. The deteriorating infrastructure of the education facilities and the absence of essential school supplies generated Lt. Casper's inspiration to create a charity that ministered to the needs of school-aged children. Lt. Casper understands that a sanitary and well-equipped facility is necessary before a quality education can be achieved. As an active member of the military for twenty years, Lt. Casper is executive officer of a ground ambulance company that transports patients and medical supplies from Baghdad to Southern Iraq. Casper's charity, the 477th Hearts and Minds Club, has provided numerous children with school supplies. Lt. Casper's operation was made successful by the donations he received from citizens in the United States. The largest contributor to his cause were Ellsworth High School students who collected over a thousand items to be used by students in Iraq. The supplies donated to the Hearts and Minds Club were delivered to various schools during ambulance runs performed by Lt. Casper's unit. Lt. Casper's actions were successful in furnishing Iraqi schools with essential supplies, but more importantly, his actions altered the mindset of students in Iraq. The poor perception of American soldiers by Iraqi children wavered with the arrival of new materials. The once feared soldier was transformed into a heroic character overnight. In October of 2003, and September of 2004, to personally lend my support to the troops engaged in this war, I had the great privilege of visiting Iraq. I met with troops and received a first-hand assessment of the reconstruction activities. After witnessing the poor conditions facing many citizens of Iraq, I felt great inspiration that one of my constituents had demonstrated such steadfast leadership in serving both his country and the citizens of Iraq. I would like to congratulate and thank Lt. Ryan Casper for his perseverance and unselfish desire to improve the world around him. Lt. Casper once said, ``A goodwill gesture can go a long way in this country and hopefully we can supply that gesture.''

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of this important bill, but with great disappointment in President Bush's failure to take affirmative action to support the two-year extension of the Milk Income Loss Compensation (MILL) program to help Wisconsin's dairy farmers survive when milk prices plummet. Two days ago, President Bush came to Wisconsin to proclaim his support for extending the MILC program for our hardworking family dairy farmers. Today, that provision was stripped by the Republican leadership in Congress from the last bill the House will consider until after the November election. The Milk Income Loss Contract Program, was established by the 2002 Farm bill, and is the first national dairy program to transcend the usual regional tension that have arisen over past safety net proposals. The MILC provides a basic level of direct support to all dairy operations, regardless of the end use of the farmers' milk, by providing assistance only on the first 2.4 million pounds of production annually roughly equivalent to production of a 130 cow operation. As a result, nearly 86 percent of all dairy farms in the country, and nearly 90 percent in the Upper Midwest, are fully eligible for assistance under this limit. This counter-cyclical program has provided Wisconsin's struggling dairy farmers with $413 million in crucial assistance since its inception. Unfortunately, this national safety net for dairy farmers will expire in 2005 if we do not act quickly to extend it. Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing to have the President say one thing while campaigning in Wisconsin and then do absolutely nothing to get the job done. All it would have required was a one-minute phone call with House Speaker Hastert asking him to extend this program for an additional 2 years and it would have been signed into law.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, the retaliatory tariffs that the European Union has issued over our delay in complying with World Trade Organizations are hurting manufacturers all over this country, and it is past time to address this issue. Legislators on both sides of the aisle and in both the House and Senate agree on this basic premise, and it is a shame that a bill to solve this problem has been burdened with unnecessary tax incentives to corporations. I, along with many other members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have been pushing for congressional action to fix the international trade dispute over the extraterritorial income (ETI) and Foreign Sales Corporation (FSC) programs. We have a bipartisan, fully paid-for remedy that would reform these tax provisions, put the United States tax code in compliance with the World Trade Organization (WTO), and reduce the tax burden on American manufacturers and farmers. Unfortunately, the Majority leadership ignored this bipartisan approach in favor of a budget- busting, controversial bill that does little for small manufacturers in Wisconsin and includes multiple provisions completely unrelated to the trade problem we need to fix immediately. Because of the House majority's previous inaction on reforming the FSC-ETI trade dispute, the European Union (EU) continues to ratchet up tariffs on nearly 100 categories of U.S.-produced exports. This costs American businesses and workers by making our products less competitive in the major European market. Unless we reform the FSC-ETI tax provisions, EU tariffs on American products will continue to climb, potentially costing American exporters over $4 billion. With over two million American manufacturing jobs lost since 2001, it is critical that we act to reverse this trend by eliminating incentives for American jobs to be sent overseas and working to end trade barriers that hurt American exports. Anticipating the EU tariffs, Congressmen Crane, Rangel, Manzullo and Levin introduced bipartisan legislation last year to address the FSC-ETI trade dispute. H.R. 1769, the Jobs Protection Act, would have eliminated the American tax breaks found in violation of WTO rules, and reinvested the savings back into American manufacturers by reducing their tax rates. I, along with 175 other members of Congress, cosponsored this legislation and have pushed for the House to consider this legislation. Despite this bipartisan compromise, the conference agreement brought to the Floor today a fiscally irresponsible bill that is filled with special interest breaks and will increase already record budget deficits. H.R. 4520 provides over $42 billion in tax incentives for large multinational corporations while providing little to no tax relief to small and medium-sized manufacturers, farmers, and unincorporated businesses. The Republican chairman of the House Small Business Committee has expressed his opposition to this legislation because it fails to include smaller non-Chapter S corporations in its manufacturing benefit. Furthermore, the House shamefully misses an opportunity to meaningfully reform the regulation of tobacco in this country. While I support the buyout for tobacco farmers, which will help hardworking farmers in Wisconsin, I am disappointed that the bill does not include a Senate provision giving the Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate tobacco. This hard-won provision was supported by major tobacco manufacturers as well as health advocacy groups, and the conference committee, by eliminating it, has allowed an historic opportunity to improve the health of this country pass by. Mr. Speaker, with 2.7 million American manufacturing jobs lost over the past years, including over 80,000 in my home state of Wisconsin, we should not be playing partisan games on the House floor. We should be considering legislation that will end European tariffs on American exports, helps domestic farmers and manufacturers be more competitive, closes abused corporate tax loopholes, and does not burden our children with huge amounts of debt that they will have to pay off in the future. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 4520 in its current form so that Congress can move forward on responsible ETI-FSC legislation.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Menendez substitute to H.R. 10, legislation to reform our country's intelligence agencies. I support this substitute so that as a country we can move forward quickly to a short conference and then give the President a completed bill to sign. The security of the people of western Wisconsin is of an utmost priority, and I am supporting measures that will make changes necessary to protect our homeland. On September 11, 2001, our Nation was brutally attacked and several thousand of our citizens were killed. Our country was shocked and dismayed, but we were far from defeated. The resolve of our Nation is strong, and we stood up to the challenge and struck back. After the attacks on that fateful day in September, many questions about our homeland security were raised. I supported and worked for a comprehensive Homeland Security bill that created the Homeland Security Department and cabinet level secretary. The creation of the Homeland Security Department was an important first step for our country to ensure the security of its citizens. But there remained many unanswered questions about our Nation's intelligence failures before September 11, which is why I supported the creation of the independent bipartisan 9/ 11 Commission. On July 22, 2004, the 9/11 Commission provided a full and complete report to Congress and the American public. I praise the Commission for its excellent work, leadership, patriotism, and service to our country. We owe it to the families of the victims of 9/11 and to the citizens of our country to use this report to make certain this type of attack never happens again; I fully support the unanimous and bipartisan recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. That is why I am a cosponsor of H.R. 5150, the Shays/Maloney bill to implement the Commission's recommendations. This legislation is the bipartisan companion bill to the Collins/Lieberman bill which just passed in the Senate on October 6, 2004, by a vote of 96-2. I am disappointed that House leadership has refused us the opportunity to debate this bill. Rather, today on the House floor we are debating a different 9/11 bill, which was drafted solely by the Republican leadership, which is not bipartisan, not supported by the 9/11 Commission members, or most of the families of the victims of September 11. Regrettably, it is rare these days for Republicans and Democrats to come together and work toward the greater good of the country. But that is exactly what happened this summer when five Democrats and five Republicans on the 9/11 Commission voted unanimously on 41 key recommendations to make our country more secure. And, this October, it happened again when the Senate worked together to pass the Collins/ Lieberman bill endorsed by the 9/11 Commission. Unfortunately, in the House, intelligence reform has taken a turn in the opposite direction and we are being forced to debate and vote on a bill that is not endorsed by the 9/11 Commission. H.R. 10 would strip power from the National Intelligence Director and the National Counterterrorism Center; it does not create an office to oversee civil liberties; and, H.R. 10 does not increase congressional oversight of our intelligence agencies. Further, this bill includes several provisions not recommended by the 9/11 Commission, including increased removal of immigrants without a hearing or review, and easing rules of the U.N. Convention Against Torture. Essentially, H.R. 10 strips away the 9/11 Commission's recommendations and adds language not endorsed by the Commission. When the security of our country is at hand, politics should not play a part. But, again, here we are debating a bill without support from both sides of the aisle, and the will of the few is being forced upon the many. This is not the right way to make important changes for a nation's security. The partisanship of H.R. 10 will only delay making our country safer. We need to pass H.R. 5150, so it can be brought to the President's desk immediately, instead of further delaying the process by passing H.R 10. But if the substitute fails, I have decided that for the purpose of moving this process forward to conference quickly I am going to support H.R. 10. When the safety of our country is at hand we need to be able to cross the aisle and work with our colleagues to protect our country. After passage of H.R. 10, I plan to work closely with the members of the conference committee on the 9/11 Commission Recommendation Implementation Act to more closely align the conference report with the 9/11 Commission's 41 recommendations and the recently passed Senate bill. Mr. Chairman, the 9/11 Commissioners' recommendations are thorough and complete, and I stand behind them. Let us make our country safer now, not later. I urge my colleagues to support the substitute and the underlying bill.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my disappointment that this body has brought the Federal Marriage Protection to the Floor at a time when only one of the thirteen appropriations bills has been passed into law and other important legislation, such as the transportation reauthorization bill and intelligence reform have not yet become law. This is not to say that I believe the issue of gay marriage to be unworthy of discussion. I understand that some people firmly regard gay marriage as a civil right while others find it antithetical to their religious or moral beliefs. Reasonable people can disagree on this issue, and it is a subject which our country must continue to discuss. In America, however, the authority to grant legal status to a marriage has been a function reserved for the states, and different states have different laws regarding issues ranging from blood-testing to waiting periods before marriage. Some, including the proponents of this bill, will argue that an amendment to the U.S. Constitution is necessary to keep one state from forcing another to accept same-sex marriages. In fact, this is not necessary because of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Law, which provides that states, U.S. territories, or Indian tribes do not have to recognize same-sex marriages granted by other states. Further, the Act defines marriage, for the purpose of federal benefits and rules, as the legal union between one man and one woman. Therefore, the Wisconsin law which recognizes marriage as a relationship between a husband and wife is protected. Mr. Speaker, when it comes to amending the United States Constitution, I am very conservative. Like Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, conservative columnist George F. Will, and the Republican author of the Defense of Marriage Act, Bob Barr, I am opposed to amending the Constitution for the purpose of outlawing gay marriage. In its 215-year history, the Constitution has been amended only 27 times, and we must not add amendments limiting rights rather than expanding them. Dick Cheney has stated ``With respect to my views on the issue, I stated those during the course of the 2000 campaign, that I thought when it came to the question of whether or not some sort of legal status or legal sanction were granted to a same-sex relationship that that was a matter best left to the states. That was my view then. That's my view now.'' (Scripps Howard New Service, January 9, 2004). As recently as August, 2004, Vice President Dick Cheney, speaking of gay marriage, affirmed that, ``marriage has historically been a relationship that has been handled by the states.'' Like Vice President Cheney, I do not believe the U.S. Congress needs to intrude on this state issue. Because of my great respect for the Constitution, and for the federal nature of the government which the document dictates, I will vote against this resolution, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do the same.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2363, legislation to further the support of the Boys and Girls Clubs of America. As a former participant of the Boys and Girls Clubs, I know first hand how successful it is in giving young people a sense of usefulness, belonging, and influence. Today, my two little boys, Johnny and Matthew, participate in this organization's flag football, baseball, and basketball leagues. I have seen that it provides young people with a safe place to learn, establish strong relationships, and build good character. The Boys and Girls Clubs of America has been ranked number one among youth organizations for the tenth straight year, and has been listed as 15th among all nonprofit organizations. It is the nation's fastest- growing youth development organization with a primary focus on young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. It serves more than 4 million boys and girls through 3,400 club locations, which are located in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and both domestic and international military bases. Sixty-five percent of the children that participate in the Boys and Girls Clubs are from minority backgrounds. The wide reach of this organization helps all types of children develop creativity through the arts, a healthy lifestyle through fitness activities, and a career through educational, character, and leadership programs. Having served on the Board of Directors for the La Crosse Boys and Girls Clubs, I know the amount of time and hard work that goes into operating this organization. I would like to thank Terry Erickson, the current director of the La Crosse Boys and Girls Clubs, who has served since I was a participant. Terry has taken the La Crosse Club to heights never before imaginable. He has become synonymous with the Club and a role model to everyone involved. I would also like to thank Natalie Carlise for providing the enthusiasm at the relatively new Boys and Girls Clubs of Sparta. Terry, Natalie, and their staff provide a safe and nurturing atmosphere for the children of western Wisconsin. Their commitment to the Boys and Girls Clubs is greatly appreciated by volunteers, parents, and especially the children at the Clubs. I cannot thank them enough for their selfless giving of time, and love for our children. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support this legislation on the floor today, to extend the authorization of this important program for our children who represent the future of our country.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a proud member of the House Native American Caucus, to celebrate the opening of the National Museum of the American Indian. I also extend a warm welcome to the members from Wisconsin's seven tribes: the Oneida, Ojibwe, Ho Chunk, Stockbridge-Munsee, Menominee, Brothertown, and Potawatomi who have traveled to Washington, D.C. this week. They join the nearly twenty-thousand Native Americans, representing the nearly five-hundred state and federally recognized tribes, who have gathered here to celebrate the opening of the museum in the largest tribal gathering in our nation's history. After 15 years of planning and five years of construction, the National Museum of the American Indian celebrates the traditions, diversity and vitality of America's first people. Located within reach of the Capitol dome on the National Mall, the museum focuses on the art, history and culture of Native Americans. The museum's impressive design and extensive exhibits were developed in close consultation with nearly 150 communities from Central and South America, the Caribbean, Canada and the United States. The pieces in the collection of eight-hundred and fifty thousand items represent a `living history' that will take visitors on a journey from past to present, and show that Native Americans continue to make vital contributions to contemporary American culture and art. The National Museum of the American Indian, with its graceful architecture and soaring atrium sited on the country's most ceremonial ground is a long-overdue recognition of the many contributions made by tribe members. I encourage all Americans to join me in honoring them by experiencing the museum and learning more about their heritage.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I am a strong supporter of the Pledge of Allegiance. I believe ``under God'' should be in the Pledge of Allegiance. But what I cannot support today is legislation that basically tells the third branch of our government, go home, no thanks, we do not need you any more. Judicial review has been a part of our democracy in this constitutional government for over 200 years. And now with the fancy language embodied in this legislation and other pieces of legislation that have been pending, they are trying to disrupt that delicate balance of power, the checks and balances that exist that allows the Federal courts from time to time to take a look at the work that we are doing in this Congress to see whether or not we are complying with the highest law of the land, the United States Constitution. That is what judicial review is all about. What is so ironic about today's debate is that the courts have already weighed in and said that the Pledge is okay, ``under God'' is okay. So what are we doing here when we have anemic economic job growth in the country, rising health care costs and tuition that is placing college out of the reach of students. We can do better by the American people.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the good works of Marilyn Hurt, who has served as supervisor of the School Nutrition Program for the school district of La Crosse, Wisconsin for 27 years. Mrs. Hurt has been dedicated to improving the lives of children and child nutrition, and I would like to thank her for all her hard work upon her retirement. Over the years, Marilyn has been an active member on numerous community boards, including the American School Food Service Association and the Wisconsin School Food Service Association. Marilyn has found good public policy to be her passion, which she has illustrated by serving as a legislative chair on Wisconsin's executive board, six times, and, in 1984, she was appointed as regional Representative on ASFSA's public policy and legislative committee. Further, in July of 2000, Marilyn was installed as president of ASFSA. To better serve her community, she was mayor of Dakota, Minnesota for two terms, participates in rotary international, and is part of the La Crosse area hunger task force. Her relentless commitment to improving the lives of those around her has earned Marilyn several honors. In 1994, she was the first recipient of the WSFSA Director of the year award. The Massachusetts school food service association selected Marilyn to receive the Thomas O'Hearn award, and most recently, she was the recipient of the prestigious silver plate award, bestowed by the International Food Service Manufactorers Association in 2000. Marilyn has nourished the lives of countless children, and I am proud to have had the opportunity to have worked with such a committed and devoted person. Marilyn's dedication has satisfied more than the grumbling stomachs of young children. Her efforts have improved the food service program in numerous schools across Wisconsin. Marilyn has played an instrumental role in the lives of children and their families and her selfless desire to improve the nutrition of children will be remembered not only by the children who walked through the lunch line everyday, but by the entire La Crosse community. She will be missed, and we are grateful for the work she has done over the past 27 years.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 757, ``expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks launched against the United States on September 11, 2001.'' The terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on September 11th were monstrous and cowardly acts that will be forever etched in our national memory. In remembrance of that tragic day, I wish to express my condolences, and the condolences of a mournful Nation, to all those who suffered losses. Today, America again honors the courage and bravery of those who willingly risked their lives to save others, and recognizes those dedicated men and women in service now, defending worldwide peace and security. In the 3 years since the terrible acts of September 11th, the United States has taken various steps toward preventing another attack on our country. Immediately following September 11th, our country began fighting a global war on terrorism to protect America and our friends and allies. In addition, Congress has created a Department of Homeland Security and reorganized several intelligence departments. All of these steps were taken to make America safer. As a member of Congress, one of my top priorities is protecting the citizens I represent, and if there is any issue that should lead to crossing party lines, it is protecting our Nation. Recently, the bipartisan September 11th Commission finalized its report with 41 recommendations that they feel would not only make America safer, but would make the world safer. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission Report Implementation Act. This bill would enact into law the 9/11 Commission's 41 recommendations. On this solemn day, I again stand up to recognize our brave men and women that tragically lost their lives on that fateful day in September of 2001. I wish to show my deepest appreciation to our military men and women fighting terrorism around the world. The opportunity is upon us to make serious and thoughtful change and to ensure that another tragedy does not befall our Nation.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3313, the so- called Marriage Protection Act. I believe Congress should be focused on supporting American troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, helping the eight million Americans who are looking for jobs, and passing a budget laying out our priorities for fiscal year 2005. Instead, we are debating a bill that fails to address the issues that are of the most importance to our citizens and that is blatantly unconstitutional. H.R. 3313 would strip the Federal courts, including the Supreme Court, of jurisdiction over any cases dealing with the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). This would lead to a patch-work of different decisions from various States which would prove to be unmanageable. Furthermore, it would establish a ridiculous precedent. Whenever Congress passes a law, it could merely insert comparable language prohibiting Federal courts from ever reviewing that legislation to ensure it complies with the United States Constitution. In effect, this bill places the actions of Congress above the law. Clearly, this is not what our Founders intended when they established the separation of powers that has worked well for over 200 years. This bill is unconstitutional in three ways: it violates the principle of equal protection by depriving a group of people of their right to their day in court; it is inconsistent with the due process clause which demands an independent judicial forum capable of determining Federal constitutional rights; and it violates the concept of separation of powers, so crucial to our system of governance. Grammar school students in my home state of Wisconsin could tell you that the American system of government finds its strength from our system of checks and balances, a concept that was bold and revolutionary when the Constitution was written over 200 years ago and is now embraced by countries around the world. It is this system that keeps the presidency from becoming a dictatorship, the court from becoming an oligarchy, and members of Congress from becoming despots. If we strip the Federal courts of their seminal role in our process of law, we will have rejected the work of James Madison and the other Founding Fathers who wrote the document that is the oldest written constitution in the world still in effect. Furthermore, it jeopardizes all the rights guaranteed in our Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. It would also allow a future Congress, that may not like gun ownership in our country, to prohibit gun ownership and then strip Federal courts from the ability to review the law to see if it complies with the Second Amendment. I cannot vote for a bill that would blatantly reject the Constitution, a document which I swore to uphold upon entering Congress. Regardless of our views on particular issues, I believe that each of us in the House of Representatives should respect the Federal courts as an equal branch of government, and I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3574, the Stock Option Accounting Reform Act. I believe it is extremely important to the nearly 15 million Americans who hold stock options that we pass this legislation. As a member of the New Democrat Coalition, I have always supported protecting stock options. The promotion of stock options is an important tool for businesses seeking to recruit and keep employees. Innovative, creative companies have recognized that a key component to keeping the brightest and most talented workers is giving employees a stake in their company. The increasing accumulation of stock options by American workers has proved a financial success for employees and an important tool in helping the economy. Another mark of the success of stock options is that employees at all ranks of companies hold them. Contrary to popular belief, it is not only corporate executives who hold stock options; rather, 85 percent of stock options are held by non-management workers. H.R. 3574 simply assures that these rank-and-file workers will have continued access to an important benefit. At a time when Americans are increasingly worried about losing jobs overseas and many small businesses are struggling, the protection of stock options is crucial to helping this country's economy. Employee stock options are threatened, however, by a Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) proposed standard that would require companies to expense all employee stock options. This decision was made over the objection of numerous businesses and despite the likely negative economic consequences of the proposed standard. If Congress does not react, we run the risk of allowing millions of hard-working Americans to lose the financial benefit they have enjoyed from stock options as well as hurting small and large businesses throughout the country. Cleary, there is a great need for the Stock Option Accounting Reform Act, which would require that stock options given to the top five executives of a company be expensed and require a study to review the possible implications of the FASB proposal on workers, businesses, and the American economy. The FASB ruling has the potential to do great harm to our country's economy and its workers. To prevent such harm, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill that is so important to American workers.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of H.R. 4766. While I intend to vote for this bill, I support my friend and colleague, John Peterson's request that conferees work to increase the producer value added grants program and the rural broadband loans program. These two programs are extremely important to the future of rural areas like those found in my district of western Wisconsin. Furthermore, I strongly urge conferees to do more to meet the funding needs of voluntary conservation programs that serve farmers and ranchers while also helping to improve soil, water and air quality, and provide critical wildlife and fish habitat. Farmers and ranchers, especially those from regions who may not benefit from the estimated $130 billion in crop subsidies, rely on U.S. Department of Agriculture conservation assistance to provide much- needed financial support as well as meet critical environmental challenges. Unfortunately, this bill would set a $1.01 billion limit on the environmental quality incentives program--compared to a FY2005 level of $1.2 billion set in the farm bill. Likewise, the farmland protection program is set at $112 million, $13 million less than the budget request. Lastly, the wetlands reserve program will enroll 175,000 acres, which are 25,000 less than prescribed in the farm bill. I am pleased, however, that this bill rejects the Bush administration's proposed sharp cuts in natural resources conservation service programs. It will provide $993 million for the five NRCS conservation programs, $176 million more than the administration's request. Secondly, I appreciate that the Appropriations Committee acted on the request made by myself and other members of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus Chronic Wasting Disease taskforce in providing $18.589 million in aid to states' fight against CWD--a fatal neurological disease found amongst our Nation's populations of wild and captive cervids. I'm particularly pleased to note $1.75 million will go directly to Wisconsin, which has been especially hard hit by this devastating disease. These federal funds are crucial to help authorities continue to monitor this deadly disease in order to avoid future outbreaks.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as national cochair to honor the outstanding work of the National Youth Sports Program in my home State of Wisconsin and the 200 programs throughout the Nation and to recognize the essential role NYSP plays in children's lives during those crucial weeks during the summertime. For 35 years, NYSP has brought organized athletics and academic courses in math and science into the summer routines of low-income children aged 10 to 16. For 5 weeks, children learn leadership skills and work to develop strong moral character through sports. Furthermore, NYSP provides students with education in substance abuse prevention, career instruction and perhaps their first comprehensive physical. In addition, students receive a hot, well-balanced USDA-approved meal each day. As a former college quarterback and a father of two little boys, I know the opportunity that sports can have on positively impacting the lives of our children. Thanks to NYSP, a soccer field, a basketball court, a swimming pool turns into classrooms. The lessons in these innovative classrooms are civility, teamwork and responsibility. Mr. Speaker, it is our duty as policymakers to preserve these vital opportunities. It is in the interest of our children and our country to do so. For proof of the importance of the National Youth Sports Program, I invite the Members to look at two participating institutions that I had the opportunity to visit recently from my home district in western Wisconsin. At the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, over 300 children participate in NYSP each summer. In addition to excellent athletic and academic instruction from a dedicated staff, these children have participated in a ropes course to foster higher self-esteem, have been treated by local physicians and dentists free of charge, participated in the DARE and GREAT programs with local police officers, and have painted over graffiti found on public property. The NYSP at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse is enriching the lives of low-income children while simultaneously enriching the community as a whole. I would like to take this opportunity to thank program director Mary Beth Vahala and the many community volunteers, including Dr. Richard Foss and Dr. Holly Grimslid for their integral role in the success of NYSP at La Crosse. The NYSP at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, directed by Dr. Bill Harms and Mr. Tom Pratt, has been consistently ranked as one of the top summer programs in the entire Nation. Every summer, over 500 children learn to live the NYSP creed, ``to walk tall, talk tall and stand tall.'' In addition to a wonderful selection of standard athletics at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, students spend time each day studying math and science in an effort to teach the importance of these subjects at a young age. Under the excellent tutelage of coordinators Ms. Sunshine McFaul and Mr. Jayson Leslie, students discover the value of math and science in their lives. I also want to thank and commend NYSP's national director Dr. Gale Wiedow for his terrific leadership of these 200 programs throughout our Nation. Mr. Speaker, these two fine programs in my home district in western Wisconsin are indicative of the quality of NYSP as a whole; and I am thankful for the dedicated staff and volunteers that make it happen. Unfortunately, the President proposed to eliminate NYSP program funding in the next fiscal year's budget. Fortunately, however, NYSP has enjoyed wide bipartisan support in Congress. I also want to thank my good friend and colleague from Buffalo, New York (Mr. Quinn) for cochairing the National Youth Sports Program with me in recent years. He has been a terrific advocate of youth generally and of NYSP specifically. I appreciate his hard work in going to bat for this program. He will be sorely missed in this Chamber, and we all wish him a happy retirement. Tonight I stand with thousands of children to thank the Committee on Appropriations for fully funding NYSP, and I urge my colleagues to remember the value of athletics and academics in our children's lives and the important role NYSP plays in delivering both during the summer months. Mr. Speaker, the legendary coach of the Green Bay Packers, Vince Lombardi, once famously said, ``Once you learn to quit, it becomes a habit.'' The National Youth Sports Program teaches children not to quit, and it is our responsibility not to quit on them.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, America's manufacturing sector has been in crisis for the past 4 years with over 2.7 million quality jobs lost, including 80,000 in my home state of Wisconsin. Congress must act to stem this trend and invest in programs that help our Nation's manufacturers compete and grow in the global economy. Throughout the Third Congressional District, I have been meeting with local business owners, workers, educators, and government officials to discuss economic challenges facing Wisconsin to determine what can be done to help Wisconsin businesses grow. As a member of the Congressional Manufacturing Task Force, I have focused on how the federal government can most effectively help small- and medium-sized manufacturers compete and grow. There are no easy answers to this problem, but through good investments and smart practices, the federal government can better assist American companies and help America keep its economic edge. One of the most successful programs helping manufacturers throughout the Nation is the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program within the Department of Commerce's National Institutes of Standards and Technology. Through a national network of manufacturing extension centers, MEP is designed to benefit domestic manufacturers by providing expertise and services tailored to their most critical needs. This includes assistance in process improvements, worker training, and information technology applications. In Wisconsin, MEP has served over 110 firms. To strengthen this program, I support an amendment offered by Representative Gordon to increase the authorization limit for MEP and help states match funding so more businesses can benefit. With our manufacturing sector suffering, it is important that we build on the successes of the MEP program. In addition, I support the amendment offered by Representative Jackson-Lee to halt a misguided proposal by the Administration to ``recompete'' MEP centers. Recompetition of MEP centers could destroy the effective national system of centers established over the past 14 years. This could result in fewer projects initiated and consumes valuable resources that could be used to help American businesses. Mr. Chairman, it is important that we step up and help manufacturers in real, measurable ways. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to continue to invest in small- and medium-sized businesses.