William Lipinski

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the remarkable young men of Riverside-Brookfield and Joliet Catholic high school football teams, who faced off during the Class 5A quarterfinal for one of the most exciting games of the season. Before a standing room only crowd, Joliet Catholic scored on each of its five first half possessions, scoring 35 points on 47 running plays and one pass. Riverside-Brookfield marched down the field twice in a combined 34 seconds before going into halftime. Late in the fourth quarter, Joliet Catholic went up 56-44 with 2:07 left in regulation; however, Riverside-Brookfield answered with a 30-yard touchdown pass with just 51 seconds remaining. After recovering an onside kick at Catholic's 47-yard line, Riverside-Brookfield was stopped first up the middle and then with a broken pass in the end zone. The quarterfinal showcased two of the top talents in Illinois, Tim Brasic and J.R. Zwierzynski. Orchestrating Riverside-Brookfield's five receiver offensive set, Brasic completed 24-of-48 passes for a playoff record of 571 yards and 7 touchdowns. Brasic's record-breaking season included 4,622 passing yards and 485 attempts, 58 touchdowns and 700 yards rushing. Brasic's performance earned him a spot on the 2001 All- Chicago Area team, and Player of the Year honors. Brasic's career honors include 7,888 passing yards, 953 attempts, and 87 touchdowns. On the opposite side of the field, J.R. Zwierzynski of Joliet Catholic rushed for 312 yards and five touchdowns on 43 carries. Leading the two time defending state champion Hilltoppers, one of the most consistently dominating teams in Illinois winning 38 out of their last 39 games, Zwierzynski is the lone repeat selection from last year's All-Chicago Area football team. Riverside-Brookfield and Joliet Catholic, and their leaders Tim Brasic and J.R. Zwierzynski demonstrated talent and sportsmanship in their quarterfinal match up and throughout the 2001 season. I whole- heartedly congratulate the teams, coaching staff, and schools and wish them all the best in the future.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me the time. Hopefully, I will only need 2 minutes, though, and not 5 minutes. First of all, I want to thank the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young); the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the ranking member; the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica); and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio); the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan); the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri); and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) for all their extraordinary hard work in drafting this outstanding conference report; and I do not just say that to say it. These Members put in many days, weeks and hours on this legislation in this conference report. They came to the conference committee from many different points of view. Some of the differences were small, some of them were large, and some of them were very large. But through cooperation, compromise, and flexibility, an excellent conference report was forged. I would also like to thank Senator Hollings, the chairman of the conference, for his steady, sure, strong leadership. Without his leadership, we might still be working on this conference report. Because of these Members and the many others working on this conference, the American flying public and American aviation will be safer and more secure than it ever has been; and the added safety and security will get Americans back in the air and the American economy back on its feet. In closing, I would also like to thank all staff members for their many, many, many hours of hard work, without which we would not be voting on this conference report today. This conference report is a landmark piece of legislation that I am honored to have played a very small part in.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Madam Speaker, we must pass as soon as possible an aviation security bill. It has been over 6 weeks since we passed the bail-out bill for the airline industry. I said at the time that I could not vote for that bill, not because it was a bad bill, but because it did not do anything to protect laid-off workers in the aviation community. And it did nothing to upgrade security in this country. Today we still have that problem. People are still not willing to get back into planes to any great degree. Just this past Saturday at O'Hare, we had another incident that shows that we have to change security in this country. An individual carrying a stun gun, a can of Mace, and several knives in his carry-on luggage bag passed through screening at the airport without anyone stopping him whatsoever. That was after he had actually shown them two knives that he was carrying on the plane. This did not alert them whatsoever. They let him proceed right through that security point. He was stopped at the gate. He was stopped by a United Airlines employee who had been informed by some other United employees that he had purchased a one-way ticket with cash. That United person at the gate stopped him, went through his bag, did find the Mace, did find the stun gun, did find the other knives. He was taken into custody by the Chicago Police Department. He was turned over to the FBI. He was then released by the FBI. By that time, though, he missed his flight to Omaha, a flight that he had put checked luggage on that wound up going to Omaha. After all of this, no one thought to remove his bag from the plane that went to Omaha. This shows that we have to get rid of the status quo. We have to start with something brand new as far as aviation security. That is why we have to pass a bill as quickly as we possibly can. Thanksgiving is the greatest travel day we have in this Nation. We must have a new security bill in place before that so the American flying public will feel secure. There were eight screeners that the FBI said were fired at O'Hare Airport because of this incident. Argenbright, the security company, simply said that they were suspended. Of those eight individuals, three of them have criminal records. One of them is a known member of a gang. That is why we must change the status quo in aviation security as quickly as possible. Since September 11, the aviation industry has contracted to a very, very significant degree. At Newark, Reagan National, and Houston, flights are down by 35 percent; at Kennedy, 34 percent; Seattle, Boston, LaGuardia, Portland, and San Francisco, they are all down by over 25 percent. The Nation's top 31 airports are all down a minimum of 18 percent. Since September 11, United Airlines and American Airlines have cut 22 percent of their flights; Northwest, 15 percent; U.S. Airways, 25 percent; Delta, 15 percent; Alaskan Airlines, 26 percent; and Continental, 44 percent. We are never going to get this economy going until we pass an upgraded aviation security bill, and we must pass that as quickly as possible. The House has named their conferees, the House has made a motion to instruct those conferees to go to conference, and we are waiting for the Senate. The Senate must move as quickly as possible and join the House in conference so we can work out a bill to protect all the American flying public by the end of this week, so people will know the skies are safe when they are flying at Thanksgiving.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to get back to this O'Hare situation, Mr. Speaker, that the chairman of the subcommittee were talking about. The gentleman volunteered at security that he had two knives. They put his bag through the X-ray machine; and they did not find the mace, the stun gun, or the other four knives. He goes up to the counter or the gate at United. They were warned ahead of time that he bought a one-way ticket with cash, so they do stop him. They do talk to him. They then discover all of these other items. Now, he also had a checked piece of luggage. No one bothered to go through that checked piece of luggage. It was put through a machine all right, but no one bothered to go through it. He, because of all the confusion and everything going on regarding him, misses his flight to Omaha. His checked piece of luggage goes on that plane to Omaha. Now, to me that is a total breakdown in the existing system that we have. We can blame the airlines, we can blame portions of the Federal Government, we can blame the screeners, we can blame everyone; but believe me, this is why we have to pass a new aviation security bill as quickly as possible, to protect the American people from things like this.

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I think the chairman, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), and the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), and myself all have the same goal in mind: We want to produce the best possible security bill for aviation that we can. I would simply like to go back once again to the O'Hare situation, though, so everyone realizes that the system is broken and the system has to be repaired as quickly as possible. Of the eight screeners who were suspended last Saturday by the FBI, three of them have criminal background records and one of them is a gang member. We cannot continue to allow people like this to handle the screening at our airports. I am confident that very soon we can resolve this with the cooperation of all the conferees.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for yielding time to me. First of all, I would like to thank the Committee on Rules and the Speaker for giving us an opportunity to actually have an up-or-down vote on this particular issue we are all debating at the present time, the Federal screening of individuals. I also would like to compliment the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Mica) for the great deal of work they have put into this bill. They have done an outstanding job. It would have been nice if we could have come to an agreement, but unfortunately, we could not have done so. I also want to thank the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), and my very good friend, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), for all the great work they have done on this bill. I would simply like to make mention at the present time, the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Mica) has talked about the failure of the FAA and the Department of Transportation to put rules in place over the course of the last 5 to 10 years. I certainly agree with him on that. That is why I am happy to see that a portion of this legislation is going to be in the Justice Department so we will have other individuals working on this, and I am quite sure that those individuals and the new Deputy Secretary for Security in the Department of Transportation will be able to put everything in place as quickly as possible.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, 6 weeks ago tomorrow the House passed, with the speed of a rocket-boosted jet engine, the American aviation financial bailout bill, a bill I voted against because it did nothing for the laid-off aviation workers, and it did nothing to upgrade aviation security. I said at the time that we can give the airlines all the money they want and even more, but if we do not upgrade aviation security and show the American flying public that our skies are once again safe and secure, then the American aviation industry will continue to flounder and shrink, because the American public will not go back to flying until they believe that American aviation is as secure as possible. In the past 6 weeks, we in the House have done nothing to upgrade aviation security. Unless we pass the bipartisan substitute and it goes directly to the President to be signed, and he will sign it, as he has said on numerous occasions, we will pass H.R. 3150 and be forced to go to conference. The forces opposed to hiring fully-trained, well-paid, federally- supervised professional Federal screeners to protect the American flying public will delay the conference until long after Thanksgiving, the Nation's greatest flying weekend. Mr. Chairman, this is what has happened to American aviation since we passed the bailout bill but did not strengthen security: There are more than 2,000 fewer domestic and international flight departures each day than last year at the same time, a reduction of over 20 percent. At the same time, passenger emplanements are down 25 percent. Since September 11 until now, scheduled domestic flights have dropped by the following percentages at the following airports: Newark, Reagan National, Houston, down over 35 percent; Kennedy, down 34 percent; Seattle, Boston, LaGuardia, Portland, San Francisco, down over 25 percent. The Nation's top 31 airports are all down. Since September 11, America West has dropped 12 percent of its scheduled flights; Delta, 15 percent; Northwest, 15 percent; United and American, 22 percent; US Airways, 25 percent; Alaskan Airlines, 26 percent; and Continental, 44 percent. Why? I believe because we have not passed an upgraded aviation security bill into law to protect the American public. That is why we must pass today a bill that the President will sign into law tomorrow. American aviation is a matter of national security. Public safety is threatened by an unprecedented war declared on the American people by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network. It is the Federal Government's job to protect our country during time of war. Security at our Nation's airports is no longer a private sector matter; it is the last line of defense at our airports, and it is part of the front line of our national defense. Congress needs to treat this as a question of national security, and put in place an effective Federal law enforcement system.

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for yielding me this time. I just wanted to state, since it was mentioned earlier that a police union supports the Young-Mica bill, that the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, is a strong supporter of the bipartisan substitute, and this union would wind up losing employees if our substitute is passed.

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I want to go on record as saying that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) has done an outstanding job trying to bring everybody into this process. He put a tremendous amount of time into it. I certainly appreciate that, and I know everybody on this side appreciates it very much. We do not know where the 31,000 figure comes from. I know that it comes from the Congressional Budget Office, but it is really up to the President to determine how many there will be. Members have to remember that we do enplane over 600 million passengers in this country every year.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Mr. John Sirles for his 30 years of service to our nation as a civil servant with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Since February 1999, he has served as the Deputy District Engineer for the Army Corps of Engineers' Chicago District. Over the course of his career with the Corps, Mr. Sirles has received numerous awards. He's been awarded the Bronze Order of the deFleury Medal, the Special Act Award, and the Superior Civilian Service Award. He's also received the Exceptional Performance Award on four separate occasions and the PMRS Performance Award five times. But Mr. Sirles' legacy will not be the countless awards and citations he's received--his legacy will be the public works projects he's worked on and the countless number of individuals he's inspired over his three decade long career with the Army Corps. If any of my colleagues should visit Chicago, I would encourage them to take a look at the Chicago Shoreline project. Mr. Sirles oversaw and led the completion of the third Project Cooperation Agreement, a critical component to a $276 million project that will help protect downtown Chicago from flooding. If any of my colleagues should visit Chicago, I would encourage them to take a look at the Tunnel and Reservoir Plan, an ongoing project with an extensive network of tunnels and reservoirs. This project will help reduce flooding to hundreds of thousands of households and improve water quality of the rivers and streams throughout Chicagoland. Mr. Sirles helped champion these projects and many more during his tenure at the Chicago District. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring John Sirles. He's been an exemplary public servant, and his record serves as an example for others.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay my respects to a distinguished leader, family man, and deputy fire chief in my district, John ``Jack'' F. McCarthy, who recently passed away. Born in 1927, in the Ogden Park Neighborhood, John had a long record of faithfully serving his country and community. He joined the Fire Department in 1951 after serving as a mechanic in the U.S. Army. In 1961 he was promoted to the rank of Captain, and three years later he was made battalion chief. In 1985, John retired from the fire department as deputy chief, having served for 34 years. Mr. McCarthy was respected and loved by those who had the privilege to work with him and by his family. He was known for his even-handed leadership, willingness to help other, and for his studious approach to firefighting. John is survived by Patricia, his wife of 34 year, his son Kenneth, and his three daughters, Patricia McCarthy, Pamela Amico, and Marie Connolly. Mr. Speaker, John ``Jack'' McCarthy's strong dedication to his family, fire department, and the community as a whole will be sorely missed. I am certain that his legacy will live on for many years to come.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a remarkable civil servant and protector of the public. I would like to honor Chief Michael E. Rio on his retirement from the Chicago Ridge Police Department and to pay tribute to his many years of service to the officers and citizens of the village of Chicago Ridge. Chief Rio retired from service to the department on August 31, 2001. Chief Rio is a 31-year veteran of the Chicago Ridge Police Department. Hired as a patrol officer in 1970, he had risen to the rank of Detective and then was appointed Chief in August of 1987. He was the first member of the Chicago Ridge Police Department to attend the prestigious FBI national academy. His dedication, excellence, and courage can be seen through the numerous awards and commendations he has received, including two Awards of Valor for his actions in life- threatening incidents. Also, during his many years of service, Chief Rio has been instrumental in reforming the Chicago Ridge Police Department, making it one of the most state-of-the-art facilities around. Chief Rio is well regarded by his family and the community for his personal character, honesty, and integrity. He is a father of four children, Linda, Joseph, Michelle, and Michael Jr., as well as the proud grandfather of six. Mr. Speaker, as Chief Rio leaves behind a long and rich history at the Chicago Ridge Police Department, I would ask that my colleagues join me in honoring this great man.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, first of all I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert); our leader, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt); the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young); and the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), for their leadership and cooperation in putting this legislation together. I know that they have done the best that they possibly could; but, unfortunately, I feel very strongly that I have to rise in opposition to this bill. As ranking member of the Subcommittee on Aviation, I know how important the aviation industry is to the economy of this Nation. I do not want to see the planes stop flying. But let me tell Members, we do not have to pass this legislation tonight. The real deadline is this coming Wednesday, because Wednesday is the day when the airlines lose their insurance. So we could work on this bill Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and even Wednesday, to improve it and take care of many of the concerns that people have, and the planes will keep flying at least until then. Now, the first way to improve this bill is by improving security. I do not care how much money one gives to the air carriers. I do not care how solvent one makes them. Unless we can get passengers back into those planes, they are not going to be making any money, and the best way to get people back into the planes is by proving to them that the planes are safe and secure. So what we should be doing in this legislation is passing some dramatic safety improvements. We should be passing things such as making the cockpit impregnable; we should be passing the federalizing of the screeners; we should be passing not only an authorization, but an appropriation to pay for 1,200 sky marshals. Nothing will deter terrorists more than sky marshals. We also should be restricting carry-on luggage to one piece, thereby reducing by 50 percent what a screener has to watch. If we did something dramatic such as that, we would restore confidence in the minds of the American traveling public, and they would get back on these planes. We could also take care of the 100,000 workers who have already lost their jobs in the aviation industry. We could be getting them extended unemployment compensation; we could be getting them health care; we could be doing retraining for them; but no, unfortunately, we are rushing this bill through tonight. It is a shame; it is a mistake. I just hope and pray that the promises that have been made for the future in regards to safety, in regards to workers come to pass. In closing, I would like to clear up one point that has been made on this floor on numerous occasions. It has been stated that there is a $300,000 cap on executives in the airline industry. That is totally incorrect. What it states in the bill is that anyone making over $300,000 cannot make anymore in 2001, in 2002 than they made in the year 2000. So if they made $10 million, $15 million, $20 million, they can still make that amount of money in 2001 and in 2002. That only applies to people who take the low money, not people who get to direct $5 billion in cash. So I say to all my colleagues, we have time, if we really want a bill that takes care of all Americans and not only the aircraft CEOs and the air carriers, vote against this bill. We can pass a better bill by Wednesday.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, America was faced with a gutless, cowardly attack yesterday. Innocent people were murdered in cold blood--America was awakened to a new type of warfare. A type of warfare that was unfathomable to decent God-fearing people around the world. Yet, as in the past, once awakened, together as a people, we will rise up in defense of democracy, rise up in defense of liberty. America was also awakened to its lost patriotism, a patriotism that we drifted away from because of the security and prosperity this great land of freedom has enjoyed so long. We are a peaceful people--but we will not turn the other cheek. No one should doubt our resolve. As President Bush said, not only those individuals in this evil should be targeted, but countries who support these people and these acts must and will be punished. It is sickening to me to see pictures of people celebrating the deaths of innocent Americans. It is heartening to me to see the pictures of the heroes during this opening shot of war--those who helped others--firemen, policemen, doctors, nurses, paramedics--the list goes on and on. And ultimately, that is the list that will win this war. While we mourn the growing list of victims--we must celebrate the growing list of heroes. Those are the ones who will win this war. I pray for the victims and their families. I pray for our Commander- in-Chief. I pray that justice will be ours.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to John and Mary Kolimas who recently celebrated their fiftieth wedding anniversary on June 16, 2001. John and Mary represent the epitome of married life and family values. They have raised six wonderful children--Mamie, Chris, Bob, Barb, Rich, and Paul. I can attest firsthand to their ability as parents; their son Paul is a former employee of mine and a man I have great respect for. John and Mary have also been blessed with nine beautiful grandchildren: Nicole, Jordan, Kelly, Amie, Cathy, Samantha, Alexandria, Jesenia, and Michael. They also have one deceased grandchild, Elizabeth. Friends of the couple fondly recall their meeting at a dance in 1948 at St. Stanislaus Bishop and Martyr Catholic Church. They were married at that same church three years later in 1951 by Mary's brother, Father Edwin Karlowiczier. Their outstanding devotion to the Catholic Church has continued throughout their marriage. Both John and Mary attended St. Stanislaus Bishop and Martyr Catholic Grammar School. John graduated from Foreman High School, where he was class president. He served in the Navy for two years, and then attended Loyola University in Chicago under the GI Bill. Mary graduated from Holy Academy High School. The couple was surrounded by seventy-five relatives and friends for mass and a joyous reception at the Rosewood West Restaurant on Saturday, June 16. Mary's brother, Father Edwin Karlowiczier, presided over the mass along with Father John Sayaya. In attendance for the celebration were Mary's four sisters: Therese, Kay, Janet, and Jean; and John's sisters: Helen, Bernice, and Emily. The group enjoyed a video presentation of pictures and music from the couple's fifty years together. I have the highest level of respect for devoted couples like John and Mary. Their ability to love and raise children serves as a model for all of us to follow. I encourage my colleagues to join me in celebrating the fiftieth wedding anniversary of John and Mary and the strong family values they represent.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to one of the most respected citizens in my district, Bernard Sims. Bernard Sims died on June 3rd at the age of 97. Bernard was well known throughout his hometown of LaGrange, Illinois as a leader, counselor, and teacher. During his ninety-seven years, Bernard fought for equal rights for all citizens. Bernard refused to tolerate discrimination in any form. His promotion of mutual respect has forever made the city of LaGrange a better place. One of the most respectable traits of Bernard's character was his ability to get things done. He led through action. His friends respectfully recall when Bernard led a sit-in at the Walgreen's lunch counter until the establishment agreed to serve African Americans. His nonviolent approach and his positive attitude shaped the LaGrange civil rights movement. Bernard was wholly diplomatic in his actions and respect for him crosses all racial and ethnic lines. Bernard was a well-known football and baseball star at Lyons Township High School. He worked as an auto mechanic, a handyman, and a real estate entrepreneur. He was born to the first African American family in LaGrange and Bernard met his wife, Helen, in 1923 at a LaGrange diner. The couple spent a remarkable seventy five years together until his death. Bernard lived his ideals through membership in the Knights of Columbus, Toastmasters, and the NAACP. His active life and positive attitude helped him make a difference everywhere he went. Bernard was an asset to our community and will be greatly missed. My thoughts and prayers go out to Bernard's family and the LaGrange community during this time of mourning. I am certain Bernard's legacy will live on in the community for years to come. His community minded spirit holds a lesson for all of us. I encourage all of my colleagues to join me in remembering Bernard Sims and the contributions he made to his community.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of an amazing woman, my friends and neighbor Betty Headtke, who has recently been named St. Richard's Council of Catholic Women ``Women Of the Year'' for 2001. Throughout her life, Betty has been very involved in the community in which she lives. She has been married to her husband Ray for the past 47 years, and they have raised five wonderful children. Betty has worked for Holy Cross Hospital in the accounting office, and then as a secretary for Neo Product; the latter company for whom she worked 25 years before retiring just a few short years ago. During this time, she found the time and energy to act as a lunch monitor and a school chaperone for seventh and eighth grade dances. Over the past several years, Betty's community involvement has increased. Following her retirement, she has been the Vice President of the Council of Catholic Women, and the Membership Chairperson of the same organization. While she is no longer the vice president, she retains her post of the latter, as well as expanding her duties to include the Treasurer of the Golden Agers and an auxiliary minister for her church. Her role is not merely limited to being a member of the Council of Catholic Women. She also volunteers as a carnival worker and supports many other functions that St. Richard's provides. Further, Betty plays the role of caregiver towards her immediate family, and baby-sits any number of her 11 grandchildren whenever she has the time to do so. While a banquet is being held on her behalf, I feel a great need to honor this pillar of my community among my fellow representatives. Betty is an incredible, warm-hearted person who deserves our gratitude for the lives that she has touched over the past half-century. I whole- heartedly congratulate Betty and wish her all the best in the future.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, recently, there has been much said and written about the possibility of new runways at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport. Some might think new runways are a new idea. They are not. In fact, in 1991, the Chicago Delay Task Force, which was composed of representatives from Chicago's Department of Aviation, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), air traffic control, and airport users, recommended that new runways be added to O'Hare in order to reduce delays and improve efficiency. The final report of the Chicago Delay Task Force reads that new O'Hare runways ``represent the greatest opportunity to reduce delays in Chicago, particularly during bad weather conditions.'' Unfortunately, this recommendation was ignored because the governor at the time was opposed to new runways at O'Hare. (Fortunately, most of the other physical and technical improvements that the Task Force recommended were implemented and, as a result, delays at O'Hare decreased by 40 percent between 1988 and 1998.) Fast-forward a decade to 2001. Delays are once again on the rise at O'Hare. In fact, according to the FAA, O'Hare was ranked the third most delayed airport in the country in 2000 with slightly more than 6 percent of all flights delayed more than 15 minutes. Once again, a Chicago Delay Task Force has been convened and representative from the Department of Aviation, The FAA, and the airport users will study O'Hare Airport to determine what can be done to most effectively reduce delays. No one will be surprised when the Task Force determines--once again-- that adding runways are the most effective way to reduce delays. This is a well-known fact. Mitre, NASA, and other technical organizations have reviewed all of the capacity enhancing technologies and procedures that are in development and have concluded that the cumulative effect of implementing all of these technologies would increase capacity only by roughly 5 to 15 percent. In contrast, building new runways at capacity constrained airports increases capacity by 40 to 50 percent. Additional runways--at O'Hare and throughout the nation--are the answer to the congestion problem plaguing our national aviation system. Additional runways are especially critical at O'Hare Airport. Chicago is, and always has been, the nation's transportation hub. O'Hare is a domestic and international hub that serves not only Chicago passengers but also passengers that pass through Chicago on their way to destinations across the United States and across the globe. O'Hare is the lynchpin of our national aviation system. Therefore, the congestion and delays that plague O'Hare also plague the rest of our national aviation system. Delays at O'Hare ripple throughout the system, earning O'Hare the undesirable designation as a ``chokepoint'' in our national aviation system. If O'Hare remains a chokepoint, it threatens the reliability and efficiency of the entire United States aviation system. The fate of new runways at O'Hare rests with George Ryan, the Governor of Illinois. A small provision tucked away in Illinois law effectively gives the Governor the ability to approve or deny development at O'Hare Airport. Unfortunately, despite Governor Ryan's exemplary record in terms of transportation investment, the Governor is politically hamstrung in what he can do regarding additional runways at O'Hare. As the U.S. Representative for residents living near Midway Airport, I know that quality-of-life issues in communities surrounding airports are very important. The City of Chicago Department of Aviation has been quick to address these important quality-of-life issues. In fact, the City of Chicago has spent over $30 million dollars at O'Hare alone on noise mitigation efforts, such as installing a $4 million state-of-the- art noise monitoring system, constructing a $3.2 million hush-house on the airfield, and soundproofing 75 schools and 3,934 homes for a total cost of $309 million. The City of Chicago has been mentioned as a model for the nation for its noise mitigation efforts. Yet, despite these mitigation efforts, some of the airport's neighbors still seek to constrain the growth of O'Hare. Unfortunately, this group has the attention of their local political leaders in the state legislature as well as the Governor. Governor Ryan has offered to review plans for new runways but local politics, I believe, prevent the Governor from ever seriously considering new runways at O'Hare. For months, I have been working quietly behind the scenes with all of the major parties involved in moving new runways at O'Hare forward. It is clear that local politics will prevent new runways from being added at O'Hare. Of course, local concerns must be addressed. But, a powerful few cannot continue to derail future development of O'Hare International Airport, the heart and soul of our national aviation system. Therefore, a national solution is needed. For this reason, I am introducing legislation today that, by preempting certain state laws, will elevate the decision to build new runways at O'Hare to the federal level. O'Hare needs new runways to remain a viable and competitive airport. Nothing is going to change at O'Hare unless the federal government gets involved. The federal government recognizes the importance and necessity of new runways at O'Hare and is ready to act to make them a reality. An Act to End Gridlock at Our Nation's Critical Airports allows the federal government to do just that. I urge my colleagues to support this vital legislation.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, recently there has been much said and written about the possibility of new runways at Chicago O'Hare International Airport. Some might think new runways are a new idea. They are not. In fact, in 1991, the Chicago Delay Task Force recommended that new runways be added to O'Hare in order to reduce delays and improve efficiency. The final report of the Chicago Delay Task Force reads that new O'Hare runways ``represent the greatest opportunity to reduce delays in Chicago, particularly during bad weather conditions.'' Unfortunately, this recommendation was ignored because the Governor at the time was opposed to new runways at O'Hare. Fast forward a decade to 2001. Delays are once again on the rise at O'Hare. Once again the Chicago Delay Task Force has been convened, and representatives from the Department of Aviation, the FAA, and the airport users will study O'Hare Airport to determine what can be done to most effectively reduce delays. No one will be surprised when the task force once again determines that adding runways are the most efficient way to improve capacity and end delays at O'Hare. Jane Garvey, the administrator of the FAA, testified that, while the FAA's ongoing air traffic control initiatives will increase capacity, the initiatives will increase it only by a very small amount compared to what the increase would be if a new runway or two were added at O'Hare. Additional runways are needed not only at O'Hare but throughout our national aviation system. New runways are the key to ending delays and congestion and adding to our capacity. Additional runways are especially critical at O'Hare. Chicago is and always has been the Nation's transportation hub. Therefore, the congestion and delays that plague O'Hare also plague the rest of our national aviation system. Delays at O'Hare ripple throughout the system, earning O'Hare the undesirable designation as a choke point in our national aviation system. If O'Hare remains a choke point, it threatens the reliability and efficiency of the entire United States aviation system. The fate of new runways at O'Hare rests with Governor George Ryan. Unfortunately, despite Governor Ryan's excellent record in terms of transportation investment, the Governor is politically hamstrung in what he can do regarding additional runways at O'Hare. As the U.S. representative for residents living near Midway Airport, I know that quality-of-life issues in communities surrounding the airport are very important. The City of Chicago Department of Aviation has been quick to address these important quality-of-life issues. In fact, the City of Chicago has spent over $320 million at O'Hare alone on noise-mitigation efforts. Yet despite these mitigation efforts, some of the airport's neighbors still seek to constrain the growth of O'Hare. Unfortunately, this group has the attention of their political leaders in the State legislature as well as the Governor. George Ryan has offered to review plans for new runways; but local politics, I believe, prevent the Governor from ever seriously considering new runways at O'Hare. For months I have been working quietly behind the scenes with all of the major parties involved in moving new runways at O'Hare forward. It is clear that local politics will prevent new runways from being added at O'Hare. Of course, local concerns must be addressed; but a powerful few cannot continue to derail future development of O'Hare International Airport, the heart and soul of our national aviation system. Therefore, a national solution is needed. For this reason I am introducing today legislation that will preempt certain State laws and will elevate the discussion to build new runways at O'Hare to the Federal level. O'Hare needs new runways to remain a vital and competitive airport. Nothing is going to change at O'Hare unless the Federal Government gets involved. An act to end gridlock at our Nation's critical airports allows the Federal Government to do just that. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this very vital legislation. This is the only way that we will end delays, the only way that we will end congestion, and the only way that we will add capacity to the United States aviation system.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for ending the sugar subsidy program. A program which some claim costs ``absolutely nothing'' is actually costing the government millions, and consumers billions. This program triggers unemployment in the sugar refining industry and it is not how a farm program should work. In the 1996 Farm Bill, we committed ourselves to phasing out price supports for every commodity except sugar and peanuts. It is time to level the playing field and expose the sugar program for the sham that it is. The sugar support program is supposedly designed to operate at ``no direct cost'' to the Federal Government. The Department of In fact, according to the USDA, last year the government bought more than 1 million tons of sugar for 435 million dollars, and it now pays 1.4 million dollars monthly to store the sugar. In addition, the government gave some of the sugar back to the same industry that ``forfeited'' it in the first place, in exchange for the processors getting the farmers to destroy some of their growing crops. As a result of the sugar program, domestic prices for raw sugar are typically twice world market prices, and sometimes more. Currently, sugar costs 9 cents a pound on the world market, but the government sets the domestic price for raw sugar at 18 cents a pound and 22.9 cents for refined sugar beets. According to the General Accounting Office, this price difference means that consumers are paying 1.9 billion dollars more than they need to for sugar and products containing sugar. Yet, maybe most importantly, hundreds of jobs have been lost in the refining industry just in the past few years due to this unwise sugar subsidy. Since the mid-1980's, 12 of the What is particularly infuriating about the situation is that these refinery jobs are good-paying jobs located in inner cities and areas where other employment opportunities are scarce. For example, the confectioners who want to use domestic sugar are instead having to send those jobs to Canada or Mexico where they can purchase affordable sugar, costing American workers they jobs. It is the families who work in these closing sugar refineries who suffer because of this sugar program. The Agriculture Committee is writing a new farm bill, and we can not afford to have the sugar lobby write the sugar policy. Until the Sugar Subsidy Program is phased out, costumers will pay more for products containing sugar. Taxpayers will continue to pay more to buy surplus sugar. Workers in the candy industry and the cane refining industry will continue to lose their jobs. The sugar program will continue to benefit a few, without solving the problems of family farmers. We must insist on real reform in the sugar program, and end the regulations that are costing Americans money and American jobs. In closing, I'd like to thank my colleague, Mr. Davis, for his leadership on this issue and allowing me to speak on this important reform.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. I appreciate very much the gentleman taking this special order tonight. It is another demonstration of his outstanding leadership here in the Congress of the United States. I am certainly happy to see that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush) has also joined the gentleman here tonight, another excellent leader in the Congress from the State of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for ending the sugar subsidy program. A program which some claim costs absolutely nothing is actually costing the government millions and consumers billions of dollars. This program triggers unemployment in the sugar refining industry and is not how a farm program should work. In the 1996 farm bill, we committed ourselves to phasing out price supports for every commodity except sugar and peanuts. It is time to level the playing field and expose the sugar program for the sham that it is. The sugar support program is supposedly designed to operate at no direct cost to the Federal Government. The Department of Agriculture provides a loan to sugar growers. The growers use sugar as collateral. When the loan comes due, if the processor can make a profit, repay the loan and sell the sugar on the open market, that is what he does. However, if raw sugar prices fall below a predetermined price, the growers simply default on the loan and forfeit the sugar they put up for collateral, a practice which is becoming increasingly more common. Clearly, this is a cost to the taxpayers and a waste of taxpayers' dollars. In fact, according to the USDA, last year the government bought more than 1 million tons of sugar for $435 million and it now pays $1.4 million monthly to store the sugar. In addition, the government gave some of the sugar back to the same industry that forfeited it in the first place in exchange for the processors getting the farmers to destroy some of their growing crops. As a result of the sugar program, domestic prices for raw sugar are typically twice world market prices and sometimes more. Currently, sugar costs 9 cents a pound on the world market but the government sets the domestic price for raw sugar at 18 cents a pound and 22.9 cents for refined sugar beets. According to the General Accounting Office, this price difference means that consumers are paying $1.9 billion more than they need to for sugar and sugar products. Yet, maybe most importantly, hundreds of jobs have been lost in the refining industry in just the past few years due to the unwise sugar subsidy. Since the mid-1980s, 12 of the nation's 22 cane sugar refineries have gone out of business, including one in Chicago. Just last year, a large Brach's candy factory on the West Side of my hometown Chicago was forced to shut down due to inflated sugar prices. What is particularly infuriating about this situation is that these refinery jobs are good-paying jobs located in inner cities and areas where other employment opportunities are scarce. For example, the confectioners who used to use domestic sugar are instead having to send those jobs to Canada or Mexico, where they can purchase affordable sugar, costing American working men and women their jobs. It is the families who work in these sugar refineries that are being closed down who are suffering the most. The Committee on Agriculture is writing a new farm bill, and we cannot afford to have the sugar lobby write the sugar policy. Until the sugar subsidy program is phased out, consumers will pay more for products containing sugar. Taxpayers will continue to pay more to buy surplus sugar. Workers in the candy industry, in the cane refining industry, will continue to lose their jobs. The sugar program will continue to benefit a few without solving the problems of family farmers. We must insist on real reform in the sugar program and end the regulations that are costing Americans money and American jobs. Once again, I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for holding this special order tonight. This is a very important area of concern for the Congress of the United States. I am sure that with his leadership we will be able to do something about it in this coming agriculture bill that we will be working on very shortly. I thank the gentleman once again for giving me the time tonight.

Mr. LIPINSKI. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LIPINSKI. Madam Speaker, what I was going to say is that I can understand somewhat subsidizing an industry that is creating jobs here in the United States of America. I think that that sometimes is good public policy. But to me here we have a law, a program, which is costing the American citizens more money not only out of their pocket directly but in taxes; as I said earlier, even more importantly, costing us jobs in this country. It has to be an absolute minute minority of American citizens that benefit out of this program at the expense of all the other American citizens, and really something should be done about this. As I say, as far as public policy, if an industry is going to be subsidized in this country in some way, shape or form, then they should be creating economic development; they should be creating jobs.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the majority leader for yielding me this time, and I rise today in strong support of the Armey-DeLay- Watts-Lipinski amendment to H.R. 1. This amendment creates a school choice demonstration research program that would research how effective school choice is in improving the academic performance of low-income disadvantaged students. I first became interested in school choice in 1979, when, as chairman of the Chicago City Council's Education Committee, African American Aldermen brought this issue to my attention. They told me that the only true way to reform the poorly performing schools was to provide for school choice. The heightened national popularity for school choice has led more and more school districts and more and more State legislatures to consider various parental choice proposals. This amendment would allow five educational agencies to voluntarily participate in school choice research programs. I stress that the amendment builds upon the success of current school choice programs, not by taking funds away from public schools, but by authorizing new funds. This amendment will allow some students to move from failing schools to safe and academically sound schools. I do sincerely believe that the competition that choice will provide will motivate the public school system to do a better job across the board for the well-being of all students. Vote for this amendment and my colleagues will be able to bear witness to disadvantaged students succeeding because of school choice.

Mr. LIPINSKI

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to pay tribute to a remarkable group of dedicated health professionals--the nearly 3 million registered nurses in the United States. These outstanding men and women of every race, creed and ethnic background will celebrate National Nurses Week May 6-12, 2001. This week is set aside as a special week to recognize those who have worked hard to save lives and maintain the health of millions of individuals. I believe that all Americans who have ever been cared for or comforted by a nurse should celebrate National Nurses Week. According to the American Nurses Association, National Nurse Week was first observed October 11-16, 1954, on the 100th anniversary of the founding of modern nursing by Florence Nightingale during the Crimean War. National Nurses Day and Week was eventually moved to May to incorporate Florence Nightingale's birthday, which is May 12th. This year, the American Nurses Association (ANA) and its 53 constituent associations will highlight the diverse ways in which registered nurses, the largest health care profession, are working to improve health care. Studies show that the higher the ratio of nurse- to-patients in a hospital, the lower the patient death rate. In short, registered nurses provide top-quality, cost effective health care services for their patients. Mr. Speaker, I commend all of America's nurses during this week of May 6-12, 2001 and encourage my colleagues to do the same.