Jim Langevin

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause 7(c) of rule XXII, I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 3295 tomorrow. The form of the motion is as follows: I move that the managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Senate amendments to the bill H.R. 3295 be instructed to recede from disagreement with the provisions contained in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 101(a)(3) of the Senate amendment to the House bill (relating to the accessibility of voting systems for individuals with disabilities).

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I was saddened to learn of the recent passing of a former constituent of Rhode Island's Second District, Albert C. Geremia, native and long-time resident of the City of Providence. Mr. Geremia passed away on June 4th at Hickory House Nursing Home in Honeybrook, Pennsylvania. Mr. Geremia was a Navy veteran of World War II and had a long and distinguished career in management for two Providence firms. As a Navy veteran, Mr. Geremia was a founding member of the Congressionally-chartered veterans service organization, AMVETS, of which Mr. Geremia was the last surviving founder. Mr. Geremia was one of eighteen individuals who began AMVETS. He worked to secure its Congressional charter and to establish an office in Washington, DC. For his efforts, AMVETS awarded him the organization's ``Ray Sawyer Award'' at their 1952 National Convention. Since its founding in 1944 in Kansas City, AMVETS has worked tirelessly on behalf of America's veterans and the community at large. Veterans across the nation owe men like Albert Geremia a debt of gratitude for all they have done to keep and protect those benefits promised to our veterans. Our nation can never have too many men the caliber of Albert Geremia. By helping to found AMVETS, he strove for something larger than himself. A man should not be remembered for the wealth and possessions he earned in life, but rather, for what sort of man he was and what he did to make the world a better place. Mr. Geremia is survived by his wife, Anne, a daughter, Linda, and son, Paul. I offer them my deepest condolences at this time of great loss, and I hope they will take great comfort in knowing how fondly Albert will be remembered by those whose lives he touched.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 7(c) of rule XXII, I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 3295 tomorrow. The form of the motion is as follows: I move that the managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Senate amendments to the bill H.R. 3295 be instructed to recede from disagreement with the provisions contained in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 101(a)(3) of the Senate amendment to the House bill (relating to the accessibility of voting systems for individuals with disabilities).

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, Congress must add meaningful prescription drug coverage to Medicare. Prescription drugs can cost as much as $500 per month; and in Rhode Island alone, 200,000 seniors lack drug coverage. A study I commissioned last year found that the uninsured elderly in the district of Rhode Island pay an average of 78 percent more for the most commonly used prescription drugs than do seniors in foreign countries. That is why I support the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit and Discount Act which adds a new part D in Medicare that provides voluntary prescription drug coverage for all beneficiaries. It includes a premium of just $25 a month, which would be subsidized for low-income seniors. It has a $2,000 out-of-pocket limit per beneficiary per year. In contrast, the Republican plan would require high out-of-pocket costs for seniors while offering low benefits. We must ensure that seniors do not have to choose between food or rent and getting their prescriptions filled. We must provide meaningful drug coverage.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 4070, the Social Security Program Protection Act, which will provide new safeguards for the nearly 7 million Social Security and SSI beneficiaries who use a representative payee to receive their benefits. Social Security is among the most important and successful Federal programs ever created. In my home district alone, 110,000 people rely on this critical safety net for their livelihood. When I was elected to Congress, I promised these Rhode Islanders that I would protect Social Security. While I am pleased by the consideration of H.R. 4070, I would be remiss if I did not voice any adamant opposition to the Republican leadership's privatization proposals which would jeopardize the benefits to which our Nation's seniors are entitled by subjecting them to the whims of the financial markets. I urge Members to support this important legislation and to reject privatization proposals which fail to guarantee the continuation of benefits to the most vulnerable among us.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise in support of H. Con. Res. 416, which congratulates the Navy League of the United States on the occasion of the centennial of the organization's founding. The Navy League was formed in 1902 as a way for citizens to educate the public about the sea services and to support the men and women that proudly wear the Navy, Marine, Merchant Marine and Coast Guard uniforms. The Navy League has done and continues to do a remarkable job. Navy League Councils exist throughout this great nation where they honor outstanding officers and enlisted members, host awards ceremonies, sponsor the Naval Sea Cadets Corps and support ship commissioning events. On a national level, the Navy League is an invaluable resource to members of Congress and our staffs. They provide an excellent forum for the scientific, legislative and defense communities to discuss and understand the needs of our maritime services. My home state of Rhode Island has almost 500 Navy League members. We are very proud of our Navy heritage in Rhode Island, where we create outstanding naval vessels in our shipyards and outstanding naval officers at the Naval War College in Newport. A strong navy can never be taken for granted. We have learned that we must be ever vigilant and in a high state of readiness. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this resolution and I'm grateful that we have the Navy League to constantly remind us how valuable our Navy, Marine Corps, Merchant Marine and Coast Guard are to us.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to announce introduction of H.R. 5007, a bill to authorize the National Academy of Sciences and the Librarian of Congress to conduct a study on the feasibility and costs of implementing an emergency electronic communications system for Congress to ensure the continuity of legislative operations during an emergency. Let me first express my most sincere gratitude to a man who illustrates the power of responsible, effective leadership, a man who made today possible and whom I am so proud to call my close friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney). The Chairman has devoted an immense amount of time to this issue of congressional continuity. He has led this House through one of the most difficult times in our history and has done so with great dignity. I honestly cannot thank him enough for his dedication and hard work in joining me in introducing H.R. 5007. I also want to thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the ranking member of the Committee on House Administration. He has provided the same kind of leadership, wisdom, and guidance in moving this issue through the legislative process. He has worked closely with me ever since I introduced legislation to investigate alternatives in conducting congressional business in the United States Capitol and surrounding areas if there was a future attack or disaster. I would like to thank him for his support and commitment throughout this process. Mr. Speaker, many of my colleagues know that for months now I have promoted the establishment of an electronic communications system for an emergency situation. When I introduced the Ensuring Congressional Security and Continuity Act last year, I wanted to spur some meaningful dialogue among Members on what we need to do to prepare for what was once an unthinkable but now, according to our own Vice President, is inevitable. I am pleased to report that the dialogue has indeed begun. On February 28, the House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution began this dialogue with a hearing on how to replace Members if a significant number were killed or incapacitated in an attack. My good friend, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird), has introduced some insightful legislation to address this very issue. On May 1, I was proud to see the Committee on House Administration hold a hearing on my proposal and the various issues surrounding the use of technology to conduct congressional operations in an emergency situation. On May 16, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) brought together chairmen, ranking members, and other leaders in this area to discuss congressional continuity issues. Since then, the Cox-Frost team has continued to study this issue in a bipartisan and thorough fashion. September 11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks on our congressional offices exposed just how vulnerable we are, particularly because we are centrally located. While none of us wants to think about or face our mortality, especially at the hands of terrorists, we have to recognize that it could happen. It is our duty as Members of Congress to ensure this country remains safe and we leave the American public with a system that ensures our freedom and democracy will prevail over any catastrophe. Mr. Speaker, today we can do just that by passing H.R. 5007. I urge the leadership to bring this bill to the floor as expediently as possible. I would also like to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), the chairman; the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the ranking member; and their staffs for working with me to meet this objective.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3389, the National Sea Grant Program Act, which authorizes Sea Grant through fiscal year 2008. This legislation, which I am pleased to cosponsor, reaffirms federal support for essential marine research programs. I wish to thank the members of the Science and Resources Committees, who have collaborated to craft legislation that will encourage significant developments in marine research in the coming decade. Sea Grant is particularly important to the state of Rhode Island, whose history and economy have been tied to the ocean since our earliest days. The University of Rhode Island, one of the premier Sea Grant institutions in the United States, has strengthened this bond by delving deeper into the ocean's complexities and enriching us with their findings. I am proud of their impressive accomplishments and will continue my efforts to vigoroulsy advocate full federal support for Sea Grant. I am particularly pleased that the committees of jurisdiction did not move Sea Grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to the National Science Foundation (NSF), as recommended by the Bush Administration. While I have nothing but the greatest respect for the NSF's work, Sea Grant's research is noteworthy because of its immediate practical application through NOAA and other Department of Commerce agencies. URI's work in the fields of fisheries management, biotechnology, aquaculture, and marine security has helped business leaders, educators, and policy advocates when considering complicated maritime issues. Furthermore, URI's educational outreach efforts, especially in grades K-12, demonstrate Sea Grant's effectiveness not only at undertaking state-of-the-art research, but also in cultivating future generations' interest in ocean and environmental science. I urge my colleagues to support this measure today so that our universities and scientific institutions will be able to build upon their successes with the Sea Grant program.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the outstanding accomplishments of a remarkable young man in my district. Mr. David Carnevale of Cranston, RI, has earned The Congressional Award Gold Medal. As you and my colleagues know, The Congressional Award Gold Medal is awarded to young people who have demonstrated a significant commitment to improving their own lives as well as the lives of others, and is a highly regarded achievement. To fulfill the committee service and personal development requirements of the award, David, 18, volunteered with the Boy Scouts of America as both a Senior Patrol Leader and Junior Assistant ScoutMaster. For personal development, David developed his leadership skills at the American Baptist Churches' Youth Leader Core program and designed a soil and water conservation project for the American Baptist Camp. As a member of the Ranger Challenge team at the New Mexico Military Institute, David followed a rigorous military conditioning program consisting of various grueling physical challenges, including a 10-kilometer road march with full pack and equipment. During his expedition to the Western Caribbean islands of Cozumel, Haiti, Jamaica, and Grand Cayman, David performed a wide array of physical challenges, such as scaling a waterfall in Dunn's River. Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I am proud to represent this exceptional young man in Congress. His pursuit of challenges and commitment to himself and others is a lesson to us all. I congratulate him on earning The Congressional Award Gold Medal, and wish him the best of luck in all of his future endeavors.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the one-year anniversary of Section 508. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires federal agencies' electronic and information technology (IT) to be accessible to individuals with disabilities. It specifically requires that when federal agencies develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology, they ensure that it is accessible, unless it would pose an undue burden to do so. But the regulations do not apply to the legislative and judicial branches, state and local governments, or the private sector. If we truly are a government of, for and by the people, then every American must have access to it. Today, the Bipartisan Disabilities Caucus and the Congressional Internet Caucus teamed up with the American Foundation for the Blind, HIR, Microsoft, Adobe and Freedom Scientific to demonstrate how easy it is to comply with Section 508 in making websites accessible. Today's ``Congressional Web Accessibility Day'' educated Members' staff and the American public on Section 508 and the importance of making government accessible. Through one-on-one sessions with HIR web experts and hands-on, interactive learning, this event was an important first step toward making government accessible. Web accessibility is not just for the 54 million individuals with disabilities or for the millions of elderly Americans with diminished vision, hearing and other senses, but for any one of us who might one day need this technology. It also provides more options for a typical user who may prefer text over fancy graphics. With 68 million American adults using government agency websites, this typical user is evolving into a powerful ``e-citizen.'' I hope that today's event marks the beginning of some exciting, new changes in Congress. The time has come for us to make our websites accessible to our growing e-citizenry. The progress has begun in the federal agencies, and now Congress needs to follow suit.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ms. Virginia W. Improta, an exceptional history teacher and role model from Johnston, RI. Ms. Improta has been named one of eight national finalists for the Richard T. Farrell Teacher of Merit Award. This national award is presented every year to an educator who develops and uses innovative and creative teaching methods to enhance students' interest in history. As a teacher at Nicholas A. Ferri Middle School in Johnston, RI, she has shown exemplary commitment to making history education engaging and exciting, while involving her students in the National History Day Program. National History Day is a yearlong program in which students explore historical topics related to an annual theme. Participants qualify for national competition after competing in several local and state competitions. In preparing her students for the program, Ms. Improta's work ethic and research skills provided students with the tools necessary to be successful in competition. Mr. Speaker, I find it heartening that there are educators in this country who devote so much time and effort to shaping the minds of our young people. I hope you and our colleagues will join me in recognizing Ms. Virginia Improta for her dedication to educating the potential leaders of tomorrow.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 200, Obey amendment No. 52, and on rollcall No. 201, Obey amendment No. 51, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on both amendments.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, there are two issues before us today, and on one of them I do not think we will find a hint of dissent. We are at war and we stand united in our support for the President, the war on terrorism and the men and women of our Armed Forces who are fighting valiantly to preserve freedom and democracy. As a proud member of the House Committee on Armed Services, I have been a passionate advocate for providing whatever support our military needs to win this war and the funding in this bill is critical to meeting that goal. We should have an up-or-down vote on this important issue and we will, but there is another important issue at hand today, Mr. Chairman, and that is the Republicans' attempt to raise the debt limit. It is this issue that makes today a defining moment for this Congress and this country. Decades from now history will judge us by how we handled the fiscal situation that confronts us right now, and my heart is heavy because I have seen the response of the majority, and this is a travesty. We should have an up-or-down vote on this important issue of raising the debt limit, but we will not. A year ago the administration claimed there would be no need to increase the statutory ceiling on the public debt until 2008 if the Congress adopted the Republican budget. Last week, Treasury Secretary O'Neill wrote to Congress supporting the very same administration's recent request to raise the debt limit by three quarters of a trillion dollars in order to avoid default on interest payments due by July. These startling developments clearly highlight how responsible the fiscal policy of the administration and the leadership of this House has been. Last year I joined my Democratic colleagues in cautioning that the administration's budget simply did not add up. Sadly, our warnings were ignored and we were instead continually reassured that we could afford an enormous tax cut, ensure the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, pay down the national debt, fund our domestic priorities and still have a large reserve fund for unanticipated emergencies. As is now clear to us all, that budget was based on unrealistic surplus projections that never materialized and a misguided tax cut that lavished the vast majority of benefits on the wealthiest Americans. Not surprisingly, we now face deficits and an ever increasing national debt that stretch far beyond the temporary economic downturn or the costs of the war on terrorism. Each of us was elected by a majority of the people in our districts to come to our Nation's capital to vote and speak the will of the people. Yet the Republican leadership, in an attack that is becoming all too familiar in this Chamber, has denied an up-or-down vote on an issue that is critical to every one of our constituents. Let me be perfectly clear on one very important point. Any funds that become available from a debt limit increase come directly from the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. There is simply no other money available, and as we pull out the national credit card and say charge it one more time, we are saddling future generations with massive debt and endangering the future fiscal stability of this Nation. Mr. Chairman, when the American people are already paying $1 billion in interest-only payments on the debt every day, we have a problem. When a debt ceiling of $5.95 trillion is no longer high enough, we have a problem. When the interest payments on our debt are on a fast track to become our single largest annual expenditure, we have a problem. And when the leadership of this body responds by raising the debt limit by a back door parliamentary maneuver instead of an honest up-or-down vote, we have a problem. That problem is a fiscal policy that does not work and a Republican majority that is willing to dip into the Social Security and Medicare trust funds to make up for a shortfall created by a $1.8 trillion tax cut pushed through the House last year. This country will not survive economically if we do not get our fiscal house in order. The crisis is upon us now and the time to respond is now. Are we going to continue to mortgage our children's future or are we going to face this challenge with courage and integrity and put America back on the right track? It is time to leave behind these secretive, shameful, partisan ploys and honor our commitments. We could do this by working together to craft a bipartisan plan that will responsibly address the debt limit issue while protecting the Social Security and Medicare and ensuring the burdens of today's fiscal policies are not placed on the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. We need light in this Chamber. As President Woodrow Wilson once said, ``Wherever any business affecting the public is conducted, wherever any plans affecting the public are laid, over that place a voice must speak with the divine prerogative of the people's will the words `let there be light.' ''. Mr. Chairman, there is no light in our work today.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition not only to this bill, but to the entire process for its consideration today. Meaningful democracy in America requires open, honest debate in the U.S. Congress. The Republican leadership has blocked this opportunity by passing a rule that only allows for one substitute amendment. Their new rule just passed today is equally restrictive. Welfare reform affects every State and locality throughout the country. Members have a right to engage in extended dialogue on this legislation and to offer amendments to strengthen the bill. This is particularly necessary due to the numerous problems with H.R. 4737. This so-called welfare reform bill level funds one of the most important national programs Congress has ever created and imposes massive, costly new mandates on States that they cannot afford. Today's economy is vastly different than it was when welfare reform was first enacted. Six years ago, the economy was booming, unemployment was at a 50-year low, and employers were straining to find qualified workers. Today, the unemployment level is higher than it's been in years. Workers are more vulnerable, and employers and struggling to keep costs down by laying people off cutting employee benefits and raising the workers' share of health insurance premiums. In Rhode Island, 35,000 children--15 percent of all the children in the State-- are still living in poverty despite the fact that their parents are working. With the economic boon long gone, H.R. 4737 needs to provide increased funding, not level funding with expensive new mandates, for this vital program. Eighty percent of the States report they would have to implement fundamental changes to their current welfare programs in order to comply with H.R. 4737 which is precisely why I cannot support it. Rhode Island has developed an effective welfare to work program that moves parents into sustainable jobs as quickly as possible in a way that is consistent with their employment readiness needs. Under the Rhode Island Family Independence Program (FIP), all parents are required to develop and participate in an employment plan within 40 days of applying for cash assistance. Rhode Island also provides a cash supplement to low-wage-earning families and stops the 5-year clock in any month in which the parent works at least 30 hours. This provides much-needed stability for vulnerable families and ensures that children live in families with enough income to meet their basic needs. What makes the Rhode Island Family Independence Program so effective is that its employment preparedness activities are tailored to the parents' needs and include a range of education and training services to help parents become job-ready. The program recognizes that 25 to 40 percent of welfare recipients have learning disabilities by identifying such individuals early and providing specialized assistance in preparing for, finding and maintaining a job. In fact, the Rhode Island Learning Disabilities Project, a collaboration between the Department of Human Services and the Vocational Rehabilitation program, has received national recognition for ensuring that parents receive the services they need to become gainfully employed. Since 1997, Rhode Island has seen a slow but steady decrease in its caseload from 18,904 to 14,972. This progress is not due to harsh cuts in benefits or forcing people to work without access to education and job training, but to prudent State policies that examine the holistic needs of the family and tailor assistance to help individuals gain the skills to obtain and retain meaningful jobs. Moreover, a recent report, ``Rhode Island's Family Independence Act: Research Demonstrates Wisdom of Putting Families First,'' concluded that the Rhode Island Family Independence Program is working. Among other findings, the report found that parents who participated in education and training had significantly higher levels of both employment and earnings as compared to the period before welfare reform was begun in Rhode Island. If H.R. 4737 becomes law, the progress Rhode Island has made in helping parents gain sustainable jobs and overcome significant barriers to employment will come to a halt. Rhode Island would need to radically change its program or risk significant fiscal penalty for failing to meet the new participation rates. In addition, since Federal TANF and childcare funds would not be increased, Rhode Island would need to find additional State funds to meet the new requirements. These funds simply do not exist. If this bill is enacted, the Rhode Island Department of Human Services estimates it would cost an additional $5.6 million in childcare costs--31.2 percent of the current expenditures for childcare--about $3 million more for employment-related and other services designed to offer participation opportunities and get parents into work, and about $1.1 million for additional social work and case management staff. In addition, if Rhode Island does not follow the new participation rates, it will lose $4.5 million per year in TANF funds. The bill also does not include guaranteed minimum wage protections even though 39 States could not fulfill the bill's work requirement without violating the current minimum wage rate for a two-person family. Further, the bill's requirement that parents spend at least 24 of their 40 hours in ``direct work activities'' to count toward the participation rate, would turn Rhode Island FIP on its head. It would no longer be able to allow parents to engage in education or training prior to going to work, even though this is the best way to prepare a parent for sustainable employment. Currently, there are 1,000 parents participating in vocational education programs that would no longer count toward the participation requirement. Finally, the superwaiver policy in this bill is unnecessary and irresponsible. Allowing the Executive branch to override decisions made by Congress to target funds to specific populations or for specific programs undermines the safety net of services the States have worked so hard to build. Flexibility in Federal funding is precisely what was needed in 1996 to change the system and empower individuals to move from welfare dependence to self-sufficiency. That flexibility spurred the success we see today in States like Rhode Island. Maintaining the ability to waive certain program rules to improve service delivery and coordination makes sense. Giving authority to one branch of government to completely redesign and redirect resources does not. The Republican so-called welfare reform bill is a sham. It ignores the accomplishments States have already made in moving people from welfare to work. It limits State flexibility and imposes work requirements most States have rejected, while making it much harder for welfare recipients to become economically independent by eliminating education from the list of activities that count as a work-related activity. Education opens the door to higher earnings and a better quality of life. It is critical to effectively move people from welfare to meaningful, long-term employment. Mr. Speaker, I must encourage my colleagues to oppose this legislation. It does nothing to strengthen our welfare system and imposes costly burdens on our States at a time when they cannot afford it.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney). (Mrs. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

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

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to just take a minute to thank the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler) once again for their leadership and determination. I think that this bill sends a very clear message about how we expect our soldiers to be treated overseas and in this country.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, before I explain the bill the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler) and I wrote together and introduced today, I would like to thank the Members who made this possible. From the moment I introduced language that prohibited the requiring or strongly encouraging our military women to wear abayas, both the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler) and the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) were by my side. As we negotiated with the committee, maneuvered through the Committee on Rules, floor consideration and final passage of the National Defense Authorization Act, the three of us illustrated the power of bipartisanship and determination. I am truly honored to have worked with such knowledgeable and dedicated Members of this body. Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman McHugh) of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel and the members of the Committee on Armed Services for their understanding and willingness to work with us to include this language in the defense bill. To clarify for the Congressional Record, it is the intent of the House that this language be included in the final defense bill that is passed by both Chambers and enacted into law. Mr. Speaker, one last thank you before I highlight the importance of this legislation, and that is my constituent, Lt. Colonel Martha McSally. Many of you know her as the first female fighter pilot to fly in combat, as well as leader in the effort to change the military's policy of requiring military servicewomen in Saudi Arabia to wear abayas. For 7 years this battle was fought. She is a remarkable person, whose patriotism is undeniable, integrity unquestionable, and determination to do what is right unparalleled. I am deeply honored to sponsor this legislation today to help Lt. Colonel McSally end this battle once and for all. My colleagues have heard me say it numerous times before: women make first-class soldiers and should not be treated like second-class citizens. This bill we consider today will prohibit the military from requiring or formally or informally compelling servicewomen in Saudi Arabia to wear abayas and would block the military from making regular procurements of abayas. This sends a very strong message. It says Congress will no longer tolerate forcing our dedicated military servicewomen who are on the front lines risking their lives, protecting and fighting for freedom and democracy and to defend Saudi Arabia itself to wear a religious garment of faith most of them do not follow. As you can see from this picture, the abaya and head scarf cover the entire body from head to toe. Our female servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia are wearing this and having the most radical of Islamic beliefs imposed upon them, even though the Department of State does not require or encourage any of its employees to wear the abaya. It does not require its employees to wear abayas while on duty precisely because they are representing the United States of America. Not even the spouses and dependents of the State Department staff wear the abaya, nor did Mrs. Cheney or former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright during their visits to Saudi Arabia. The Government of Saudi Arabia itself does not require non-Muslim women to wear abayas. My colleagues may be interested to know that even General Schwarzkopf did not issue any mandate requiring the servicewomen to wear abayas during the Gulf War. Male servicemembers are not required to wear the abaya, grow beards or embrace any Islamic religious beliefs in this way, so neither should women. Forcing our female service troops to wear the abaya has a negative impact on our recruitment and diminishes morale, unit cohesion and the chain of command headed by female servicemembers. Most of all, this practice is completely unnecessary. Mr. Speaker, this is about leadership. This is about sending a message to the world that America treats its citizens equally. And this message comes from the top. On November 17 of last year, President Bush launched a worldwide effort to focus on the brutality against women and children by the al Qaeda terrorist network and the Taliban. Under this regime, women were denied access to doctors and education and could not work outside the home or even leave the home by themselves. This severe repression of women under the guise of religion masked an insidious discrimination that neither America nor many Muslims condone. In fact, most of the Islamic world recognizes women make important contributions to their societies. That is why America must affirmatively reject subjecting our military servicewomen to this discrimination and that is why I have fought to bring this bill to the floor today. I urge my colleagues to join me, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler), and the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) in passing this legislation and ending the demeaning practice of making only American servicewomen wear the abaya. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), our esteemed ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule. The Committee on Rules has denied the House the opportunity to eliminate the demeaning practice of making only American servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia wear an abaya, a religious garment of faith most of them do not follow. These women are on the front lines risking their lives fighting to protect our freedom and democracy and to defend Saudi Arabia itself. The Langevin-Hostettler amendment should have been ruled in order. Women make first-class soldiers and should not be treated like second- class citizens. Our amendment would have prohibited the military from requiring or strongly encouraging servicewomen to wear abayas and would have stopped forcing the American taxpayer to pay for them. As we can see, the abaya and head scarf cover the entire body from head to toe. The State Department does not require or encourage any of its employees to wear the abaya on duty precisely because they are representing the United States. Are our military not doing the same? Not even the spouses and dependents of the State Department staff wear the abaya. The government of Saudi Arabia does not require non-Muslim women to wear the abaya, and neither should we. General Schwarzkopf agrees. During the Gulf War, he never issued such a mandate. Male servicemembers are not required to wear the abaya, grow beards, or embrace any Islamic religious beliefs in this way, so neither should the women. Forcing our female troops to wear the abaya has a negative impact on our recruitment and diminishes morale, unit cohesion, and the chain of command headed by female servicemembers. Most of all, it is not necessary. As I said, the Saudi government does not require non-Muslim women to wear the abaya. I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, today I join my colleague, Mr. Bereuter, in offering an amendment that strengthens the athletic skill, unit cohesion and morale of our dedicated service members. As my colleague has explained, this amendment authorizes the National guard to use its appropriated funds to cover the costs of conducting and participating in athletic events related to military duties or physical fitness requirements. This is of particular importance to my state, as Rhode Island is home to the Leapfest event. But the entire country benefits from these National Guard competitions. Through these activities, the National Guard provides our service members with the opportunity to hone their service-related skills in competitive events and provides incentives for its recruitment and retention programs. However, currently state National Guard units can use only non- appropriated funds to cover operating expenses for the events and related personal expenses for participating unit members. These non- appropriated funds are extremely limited, leaving most National Guard members paying out of their own pockets. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to place our Nation Guard members on a level playing field with their Active Duty and Reserves counterparts. I'd like to thank Mr. Bereuter for his leadership on this issue and ask members to vote yes on the Bereuter-Langevin Amendment.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor some very special young people who have made considerable contributions to Rhode Island's communities. In particular, I would like to recognize the achievements of Ms. Nichole Magnifico of Warwick, RI and Ms. Kristin Pallister of East Greenwich, RI. These two young women have been selected to receive The Prudential Spirit of Community Awards for outstanding community service. Ms. Nichole Magnifico is a high school senior. She is being recognized for organizing the first special needs cheerleading squad in the state of Rhode Island. With Ms. Magnifico's guidance the squad raised funds and began cheering at Special Olympics basketball games, including the Special Olympics Basketball Championship. Ms. Kristin Pallister, an eighth-grader, volunteered at a nursing home for Alzheimer's patients. Ms. Pallister provided comfort and company to the residents, and has demonstrated her commitment to those in need. The Prudential Spirit of Community Awards were created in 1995 by Prudential Financial in partnership with the National Association of Secondary School Principals to impress upon all youth volunteers that their contributions are critically important and highly valued. Over the past seven years this program has grown into the largest youth recognition effort based solely on community service. Ms. Magnifico and Ms. Pallister should be extremely proud to have been singled out to receive this honor. I am heartened, Mr. Speaker, by the selflessness of these young people. While numerous statistics show that Americans are less involved in their communities, it is important that we encourage youth volunteers. They have the power to inspire each and every one of us to make a difference in our own towns and neighborhoods. I hope that you and our colleagues will join me in recognizing these two dedicated young women, for they are among our brightest hopes for a better tomorrow.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding group of young people from West Warwick Senior High School. These students will represent Rhode Island in the ``We the People . . . The Citizen and the Constitution'' Civics Competition being held from May 4-6 here in Washington, DC. The program is administered by the Center for Civic Education and more than 1,200 students from across the United States will participate in this 3-day event. Participants will give presentations on current constitutional issues, and be judged on their depth of understanding and their ability to apply their constitutional knowledge. The Rhode Island representatives in this year's competition are: Najiya Abdul-Hakim, Janice Abueg, Peter Calci III, Kristin Capaldo, Elizabeth Champagne, Tara Cooney, Tara Czop, Paul DiMartino, Thomas Driscoll, Christopher Ellis, Tinisha Goldson, Kenneth Halpern, Sarah Johnson, Alyssa Lavallee, Robert Martin, Michael Muschiano, Lindsay Nagel, Michael Oulette, Anthony Politelli, Michael Ryan, Kendall Sylvia, Sarah Smith, Corey St. Saveur, Kate Studley, Erin Watson, and Shane Wilcox. The team is led by teacher Marc LeBlanc. I congratulate them all on their success thus far. It is inspiring to see these young people exercise their knowledge of the fundamental ideals and principles of our government. These principles formed the historical foundation for our way of life, and they provide the framework for the future. I commend the participants from West Warwick High School for their hard work and dedication, and wish them the best of luck in the upcoming competition. Mr. Speaker, I hope you and our colleagues will join me in recognizing these exceptional students from Rhode Island and all the participants in the ``We the People . . . The Citizen and the Constitution'' Contest. They represent the future leaders of our nation and deserve our support and encouragement.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor the achievements of Mr. John Elkhay of Providence, RI. The U.S. Small Business Association has recognized Mr. Elkhay for his achievements as a chef and restaurateur by awarding him the Rhode Island Small Businessperson of the Year award. Mr. Elkhay has worked his way to the top in the restaurant business, from his beginnings as a dishwasher to his current vantage point as a leader among Rhode Island entrepreneurs. His two critically acclaimed restaurants, XO Cafe and Ten Prime Steak & Sushi, have been key to the revitalization of downtown Providence. Mr. Elkhay's determination to be a leader in this field is evident from his continuous work ethic and innovation. He began studying the culinary arts as a senior in high school. Enrolled in the Johnson and Wales College while he finished high school, John quickly proved to his teachers and employers that he was capable and creative. His experiences in the numerous highly respected kitchens took him all over the country, where he was able to hone his skills. After returning to Rhode Island Mr. Elkhay opened a chic tapas restaurant with Guy Abelson. This venture soon led to several other opportunities, and finally to his current ventures. John has been featured in a number of national publications including Bon Appetit, Nation's Restaurant News, and Gourmet Chef. While he takes these accolades in stride, John plans to open four more restaurants in Rhode Island. John Elkhay is not only a respected chef and businessman; he is an outstanding person whose own hardships have led him to help others. John lost his 12 year-old son to cystic fibrosis, and established the Ross Elkhay Foundation in his memory. Additionally, his Chefs for CF program has raised thousands of dollars in donations for research over the years. Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I am proud to represent John Elkhay in the House of Representatives. Please join me in recognizing this outstanding individual whose personal and professional contributions have garnered him the Rhode Island Small Businessperson of the Year Award.