Carolyn Maloney

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I support the DeLauro motion to instruct and in support of the highest possible funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) program. This vital program helps low-income households pay for home energy costs--including home heating costs in the winter and home cooling costs in the summer. Every year, we see seniors die from the lack of air conditioning during a heat wave, or from the severe cold weather we've seen so much of recently. This could usually be prevented, if only these seniors could have afforded the cool air or heating assistance they needed. Approximately 4.4 million of the most vulnerable households in this country depend on the LIHEAP program each year. And in the year 2000, 1.8 million families are eligible for LIHEAP assistance in New York State alone. And a significant portion of those receiving LIHEAP assistance are the elderly. The LIHEAP program truly saves lives--by helping the frail elderly stay warm in the winter and cool in the summer. The LIHEAP program will be especially important this winter--which is predicted to be more harsh than last winter. The GOP-controlled Congress has failed to put forward its own energy policy over the last six years--and has continuously voted down the energy proposals of President Clinton. Now, there is growing concern over energy supply and costs. Indeed, the American Petroleum Institute is reporting home heating oil inventories 20% lower than last winter. Experts are predicting that a 30% increase in home heating costs this winter is now unavoidable. It was just 5 short years ago that this Republican Congress took over and voted to zero out funding for LIHEAP in the House-passed Labor-HHS bill. Thankfully, after a vigorous protest by Democrats and a presidential veto, money was restored. But this was a dangerous lesson for all of us. We simply cannot trust the Republican Congress to stand up for low income seniors. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the DeLauro motion.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Nick A. Andriotis, the former president of the Parish Council at the Saint Demetrios Cathedral and Co-Chairman of the St. Demetrios School Board in Astoria, Queens, New York. Mr. Andriotis will receive this years Odyssey Award from the Cathedral in recognition of his long and distinguished service to the church. The award will be presented at the church's 73rd Anniversary celebration this month. Mr. Andriotis has been a tireless activist for the entire Greek- American community of Astoria through his work with the Hellenic Cultural Center and the St. Demetrios School System. He has served as a strong advocate for the preservation of the Greek Orthodox faith, as well as for Greek culture, traditions, and the Greek language. He is the founder of the St. Demetrios High School, which is the direct product of his vision, determination, and enthusiasm. In fact, the new high school building became a reality due to Mr. Andriotis's valiant efforts. Mr. Speaker, I am immensely proud to have such a community-oriented leader and visionary working to improve the lives of the many Greek and Greek-American residents of New York. This year's Odyssey Award will honor a worthy man and a diligent and faithful member of the Greek- American community. I congratulate Mr. Andriotis on his award and his many years of community service and I am confident that the selfless dedication he has demonstrated toward his friends and neighbors will continue through the work of the Saint Demetrios Cathedral.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I enthusiastically honor today Dr. Paul Greengard, the 2000 Nobel Prize winner in medicine, who resides and teaches in my district. Dr. Greengard received the Nobel Prize for his discovery of how dopamine--a human neurotransmitter that controls one's movements, emotional responses, and ability to experience pleasure and pain--affects the central nervous system. His advancements in the field of neuroscience have greatly increased our understanding of the relationships between neurobiological chemicals and some of the world's most widespread neurological disorders, such as Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease, and Schizophrenia. Such an achievement is one I hold in tremendous regard and I truly hope my colleagues recognize the importance of Dr. Greengard's groundbreaking discovery. Neurological diseases touch most every human being in some way. As the founder and Co-Chair of the Congressional Working Group on Parkinson's Disease, I am especially spirited by Dr. Greengard's research. I sincerely hope that medical and academic professionals, buoyed by Dr. Greengard's achievements, continue their pursuit of uncovering the causes of the most pressing neurological disorders. Dr. Greengard is a genuinely fascinating individual. He currently serves as the head of the Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Neuroscience at The Rockefeller University in new York City and is the director of the Zachary and Elizabeth M. Fisher Center for Research on Alzheimer's Disease, also at Rockefeller. The Fisher Center, where I serve as a member of the Board of Trustees alongside Fisher CEO Michael Stern, is an extraordinarily valuable research center where Dr. Greengard has made pioneering discoveries in neuroscience which provide a more conceptual understanding of how the nervous system functions at the molecular level. His research into the abnormalities associated with Dopamine serves as a window through which scientists can examine the effects that Dopamine has on psychiatric disorders of human beings, such as substance abuse and Attention Deficit Disorder. Dr. Greengard has dedicated his life to scientific exploration. Since 1953, when he received his Ph.D. in biophysics from Johns Hopkins University, Dr. Greengard has worked as a scientific professional in every sense of the word. From his days as a scholar at Cambridge University in London, and years as a professor of pharmacology at Yale University, Dr. Greengard has possessed a passion for knowledge into the scientific basis of human existence. His life is nothing short of an admirable testament to the joy of scholarship and the rewards of knowledge. Mr. Speaker, I am immeasurably proud to have such an esteemed American living and working within my district. Dr. Greengard's Nobel Prize is a well-deserved honor and a tremendous reward for his dedication and tireless pursuit of scientific truth.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this resolution in the strongest possible terms. This highly-partisan, misguided resolution has absolutely no business being on the floor of the House today in the final hours of this session. As many of my colleagues know, I have been involved for years working on issues related to Federal oil royalties and I have worked tirelessly in a bipartisan way along with the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) of the Committee on Government Reform. What we looked into, put simply, is that we discovered that the oil industry is required, of course, to pay royalties to the Federal Government based on the value of the oil taken out of the Federal land that is owned by the people of this country. But what we found is that they were paying prices to the government that was much lower than the price that they were paying themselves. They were keeping two sets of books, one for themselves and one for the people of America. And guess who was making the record profits? The oil companies. The gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) and I issued several reports; and as a result of our hearings and investigations by GAO that documented the underpayment, there has been a change in the way that the oil companies now pay the Federal Government. They now pay market price. That is what is fair. When you look at these settlements, POGO has been part of lawsuits that have resulted in $438 million coming back into the Federal Treasury. That is a lot of teachers, that is a lot of roads, that is a lot of police officers. They did good work in uncovering fraud and abuse. $438 million. And because of the change in the formula now, OMB projects there will be 66 additional million dollars coming into the Federal Treasury because the oil companies will be paying market price. Yet instead of looking at the systemic underpayment, and they uncovered seven different ways that they underpaid the government, yet this committee did not have one hearing on the systemic underpayment by the oil companies. And here they are. Why do we not have some hearings on this? As my colleague pointed out, there is an article today in the Washington Post and it reports that the highest energy prices since the 1990 Persian Gulf crisis have produced a financial bonanza for the Nation's three largest oil companies which yesterday reported quarterly profits totaling a record $7 billion, double last year's earnings. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record other editorials that have appeared around this country. [From the Casper Star-Tribune, July 28, 2000] Cubin Goes Astray With Attack on Whistleblowers Wyoming's lone representative in Congress, Barbara Cubin, seems to have lost her way. Cubin has been using her House Energy subcommittee to launch an attack on the nonprofit watchdog group, Project on Government Oversight (POGO). POGO investigates whistleblower allegations that certain mineral industries are cheating the American public by not paying royalty payments when taking mineral resources found on federal land--as required by law. Recently, a number of oil companies settled a lawsuit filed by POGO that alleged that they systematically underpaid royalties on oil produced. POGO gave a portion of that settlement as public service awards to two federal employees who helped POGO make its case against the oil companies. Under Cubin's direction, her subcommittee is investigating those service awards, instead of those companies accused of cheating the American taxpayers by underpaying on federal royalties. We take no position on whether POGO broke the law by offering the awards or whether the federal employees did by accepting them. However, fairness demands that if two employees working to uncover royalty fraud should be victims of a politically motivated investigation, then surely the subcommittee's attention should be directed at the oil companies that have settled lawsuits alleging that they cheated the public out of vast amounts of money over the years. One doesn't fix the system by attacking those who are trying to ferret out fraud. Cubin should turn her attention to the problem of royalty underpayment, which would be a more legitimate exercise of the power of her subcommittee. The direction Cubin has taken with her subcommittee makes one wonder whether her loyalties lie with the American taxpayer or with the extractive industries that contribute so much to her campaign fund.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, in the closing days of this session, indeed, closing hours, the Republican majority has attached language to the BBA agreement that would allow CBO to have access to confidential census material. This is just plain wrong. This is greater than a census issue, this is a confidentiality issue, a privacy issue. Secretary Minetta has written the President and called for a veto of any legislation that has language that violates the privacy of the census. He recalls that his own family was interned during World War II based on confidential census material. We cannot violate the confidentiality of the Census Department. During the census surveys, this poster was up across America, assuring the American people that their information was private. They should have added ``No Republican Congress.'' Say ``no'' to any vehicle that violates the confidentiality of the Census Department and the privacy information of the American people.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the bill and the way it has been brought to this floor. I want specifically to talk about protecting the privacy of American people. Last night, under the cloak of darkness, the Republican leadership added to this bill an amendment that would have allowed confidential Census information to go to the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office. Let me tell my colleagues that this past year in every State and community, this poster was up, assuring the American people of their privacy: No INS. No FBI. No CIA. No IRS. We should add no Republican majority. The Secretary of Commerce, Secretary Mineta, has a very strong objection. Mr. Speaker, I will place his objection and veto threat in the Record. Mr. Speaker, I recently just spoke to Mr. Crippen, the head of CBO, who tells me that after seeing the Secretary's objection, he has decided to proceed with attempting to get the provision he wants out. He says he will remove it. Since Mr. Crippen is not a Member of Congress, I would hope that someone in the Republican leadership could assure me that what he is saying is correct and that my colleagues will not add this provision to any other vehicle going through Congress that is a violation of the privacy rights of the American people. Mr. Speaker, I ask if there is any assurance from anyone in the Republican leadership. The Secretary of Commerce, Washington, DC, October 25, 2000. Dear Member of Congress: As you may know, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is currently seeking legislative language which would amend Title 13, the Census Act, to allow CBO to acquire confidential information collected from the American people in several census surveys. I am writing to express my strong opposition to any attempt to force the disclosure of personal census information currently protected by the confidentiality provisions of Title 13. If this proposal is adopted by the Congress, I will recommend a Presidential veto of the legislation. The American people place a tremendous trust in the Census Bureau and the Department of Commerce when they provide us with the personal information collected by these surveys. They do so, in overwhelming numbers, because the Census Bureau and the Commerce Department have assured them that their privacy will be protected by the provisions of Title 13. The critical work of dozens of government agencies could not be accomplished without the public's voluntary cooperation with these surveys. The change to census confidentiality contemplated by CBO has been developed behind closed doors, at the 11th hour of a legislative session, with no public hearings and no opportunity for public comment or congressional review. The American people are already gravely concerned about the privacy of their personal information. The adoption of these changes with no public debate runs the very serious risk of undermining the public's confidence in the privacy act of census information. Should that happen, it should surprise none of us that the public's willingness to cooperate with census surveys will rapidly decline. As the CBO Director obliquely points out in his October 24, 2000 letter to Congress on this issue, there have been times in our history when census information has not been protected as it should have been. My personal knowledge of this incident is somewhat less than oblique. Director Crippen's reference is to the Census Bureau's assistance, at the beginning of World War II, for the War Department's efforts to locate Japanese Americans in the western United States and confine us to internment camps. My family and I were among the 120,000 Japanese Americans forced from our homes and interned. I fail to see why this history should make the Commerce Department, or the Congress, less concerned about the confidentiality of census information. Over the course of the 58 years since that incident, the Census Bureau and the Department of Commerce have built a relationship of trust with the American people, many of whom are profoundly distrustful of government. We have promised them that their privacy would be protected, and that personal information about them would be subjected to the most stringent controls. I do not believe we should alter that commitment, in law or in practice, without a full and open discussion. As a former Member of Congress, and a former Member of the House Budget Committee, I take CBO's work very seriously. I have the highest respect for the professionalism and integrity of the men and women who make up that agency. However, I must restate the strongest opposition of the Department of Commerce to any effort to alter the privacy protections currently provided by statute for personal census information without a full opportunity for careful congressional review and public comment. Sincerely yours, Norman Y. Mineta.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time and for her great leadership on this bill. We are 25 days late and $11 billion over the President's request. The bill does many good things, funding for Israel and other countries in the Middle East. It has funding for debt relief, relief for the AIDS epidemic. But I object to the fact that the bill also raises the cap on the total amount of discretionary spending on this and other fiscal year 2001 appropriations bills by $37 billion. The conference report is the first step toward restoring the U.S.'s commitment to saving women's lives through international family planning without the onerous gag rule. The antidemocratic gag rule would have silenced women around the world by barring them from using their own funds to lobby for or against abortions or perform abortions. This is a short-term solution as it removes the gag rule until February 15, 2001, when the next President would have the ability to support or gag women's voices around the world. This is another reason why the choice for President on November 7 is so important. Last year, President Clinton pledged to women Members of Congress that he would not sign any legislation that included the gag rule again. We thank him for standing firm and removing the gag rule that would be unconstitutional in our own country and it is unconscionable to force it on some of the world's poorest women. This conference report is the first time in 5 years that this body has increased funding for international family planning. Just 5 years ago, we spent $200 million more a year to save women's lives. With the increase in this bill today, raising USAID funding to $425 million from $385 million last year, we are taking the first step to restoring our commitment to the life-saving resources international family planning provides to some of the world's poorest women.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation which will reauthorize the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and will finally authorize the desperately needed Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve. I do not need to remind my colleagues how important the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the new Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve are to the people in this Nation, and especially to my constituents and others in the northeast. Last month's swap of oil from the Strategic Reserve has kept gas and heating oil rates down even as turmoil in the Middle East has prompted market uncertainty. Consumers have benefited from this swap and they will likely continue to do so. The need for this legislation is clear. What is not so clear is why we are considering this bill, which passed the House in April, during the last week of this session. Apparently, some of our colleagues in the other body thought it would be a good idea to attach an amendment to this legislation that would have created a huge loophole for the oil industry to avoid paying the appropriate amount of royalties for oil taken from Federal lands. The rider would have authorized and expanded the controversial Royalty-in-Kind Program which would give the oil companies the ability to pay their royalties in kind, not in cash as they do now. It would have encouraged the Interior Department to take substantially more royalties in kind. That means that the Federal Government would suddenly find itself in the oil business. The Interior Department would be forced to transport, market, and sell massive quantities of oil and natural gas. Mr. Speaker, I honestly thought that state-run industry had been discredited after the fall of the Soviet Union. Now, it seems some of our friends on the other side of the aisle want to give it a try. I should also point out that in 1998, the GAO specifically said that royalty in kind was unlikely to be profitable for the taxpayers. Now, after running the pilot programs for less than 2 years, the Interior Department admits they still do not have a revenue analysis of the program. We have no data available to determine if this program is breaking even. I would like to enter into the Record a letter I sent to Interior Secretary Babbitt on this issue which further describes the many problems with the Royalty-in-Kind Program and urges him to resist efforts to expand this program. So--why was this issue even on the table? I will tell you why-- because the oil industry, which has already seen skyrocketing profits, decided to try and shortchange the Federal Government yet again. I am frankly astonished that anyone would consider attaching a giveaway to the oil industry in the midst of a bill designed to help consumers deal with rising oil prices. Mr. Speaker, this year we have seen consumers and businesses continue to absorb higher energy prices. At the same time, industry profits have continued to soar and OPEC nations have failed to adequately increase supplies. Even if heating oil prices remain stagnant, the outlook for the winter is grim. Now is the time to focus on long-term energy strategies that will help consumers and businesses, not pad the pockets of wealthy oil companies. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and other sensible energy strategies and to avoid many of the oil-industry giveaways that are being circulated as false solutions to our Nation's energy problems. Congress of the United States, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, September 13, 2000. Hon. Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior, Washington, DC. Dear Secretary Babbitt: It has recently come to my attention that Senator Murkowski, without any committee consideration, will offer an amendment to drastically expand the Royalty-in-Kind program. As a Member who has worked for years to make sure that taxpayers receive the fair amount of oil royalty payments, I am extremely concerned that this proposed amendment could seriously affect the ability of the Federal government to collect the appropriate amount of royalties from oil taken from Federal lands. Specifically, I am concerned that this amendment would replace the existing standard for ``fair market value'' of oil sold from Federal lands with one that is vaguely worded and potentially designed to benefit the oil industry's legal challenges to the recently enacted oil valuation rule. Earlier this year, after years of industry resistance, your Department was finally able to implement a new oil and gas valuation rule to ensure that the Federal government is properly reimbursed for oil taken from Federal lands. The new rule requires oil companies to value oil based on market- based spot pricing (i.e., fair market value) instead of so- called ``posted prices'' which companies determine on their own. As a result of these changes, the Federal government will finally end an industry scam that was costing taxpayers more than $66 million each year. Language to fundamentally redefine the ``fair market value'' of oil in statute could effectively undermine the new valuation regulations. This is completely unacceptable. This issue is too important to be rushed through Congress in the waning hours of this session. In addition, I am extremely concerned that Congress is on the verge of fully authorizing a program which has never been considered in committee and which the General Accounting Office (GAO) expressed concern about as recently as August 1998. The GAO is currently reexamining the Royalty-in-Kind program to see if any progress has been made. I strongly urge you to oppose this legislation until we have the opportunity to hear from the GAO and the appropriate committees on this critically important issue. Instead of this unnecessary amendment, I ask that you urge the Senate to recede to the House on the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations bill and allow the Royalty-in-Kind pilot program to deduct transportation processing costs for one year. In that way, we can learn more about the viability of the concept and also allow Congress the time to more carefully and collegially consider this proposal. I look forward to hearing your views on this legislation and hope you will join me in publicly opposing it. Thanks in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, Carolyn B. Maloney, Member of Congress.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, as an original sponsor of this important and humane legislation, I rise today in support of H.R. 3514 which will provide a sanctuary for chimpanzees that are no longer needed for public research purposes. This is an issue that I have cared about for a long time and one which has required an enormous amount of effort to resolve. Currently, there are more than 1,700 apes in labs across the United States used for a variety of research purposes including infectious disease testing, AIDS research, spinal and brain injury research, and toxicity testing. Although scientists have been highly successful in breeding chimpanzees in captivity to meet their research needs, there has been no consideration of what to do with chimpanzees when they are no longer needed. Given the surplus of chimpanzees in captivity, the National Institutes of Health, which owns the title to many of these research chimpanzees, projects the divestiture of a large proportion of the chimpanzees from their facilities in the near future. Without this legislation, these retired chimps will continue to be housed in expensive facilities that provide marginal or inhumane care. One of the worst examples of these substandard facilities is the chimpanzee housing operated by the Coulston Foundation. Despite being cited for numerous violations of the Animal Welfare Act, Coulston retains many chimpanzees simply because there are no available alternatives. This bill will finally provide a safe home for these chimpanzees. Fortunately, this legislation will also help us care for surplus chimpanzees in a way that saves taxpayer resources. Currently, NIH is supporting approximately 600 chimpanzees at a cost of between $15 and $30 per day per ape. The U.S. Government spends at least $7.5 million annually to warehouse surplus chimpanzees in labs where they are no longer needed. These chimpanzees can be maintained in better environments at a far lower cost in a sanctuary setting that allows many chimpanzees to be stored together in a healthy and comfortable environment. For all these reasons, I strongly support this legislation and I urge its immediate passage.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I enthusiastically rise today to honor Dr. Paul Greengard, the 2000 Nobel Prize winner in medicine, who resides and teaches in my district. Dr. Greengard received the Nobel Prize for his discovery of how dopamine--a human neurotransmitter that controls one's movements, emotional responses, and ability to experience pleasure and pain--affects the central nervous system. His advancements in the field of neuroscience have greatly increased our understanding of the relationships between neurobiological chemicals and some of the world's most widespread neurological disorders, such as Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease, and Schizophrenia. Such an achievement is one I hold in tremendous regard and I truly hope my colleagues recognize the importance of Dr. Greengard's groundbreaking discovery. Neurological diseases touch most every human being in some way. As the founder and Co-Chair of the Congressional Working Group on Parkinson's Disease, I am especially energized by Dr. Greengard's research. I sincerely hope that medical and academic professionals, buoyed by Dr. Greengard's achievements, continue their pursuit of uncovering the causes of the most pressing neurological disorders. Dr. Greengard is a genuinely fascinating individual. He currently serves as the head of the Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Neuroscience at The Rockefeller University in New York City and is the director of the Zachary and Elizabeth M. Fisher Center for Research on Alzheimer's Disease, also at Rockefeller. The Fisher Center, where I serve as a member of the Board of Trustees alongside Fisher CEO Michael Stern, is an extraordinarily valuable research center where Dr. Greengard has made pioneering discoveries in neuroscience which provide a more conceptual understanding of how the nervous system functions at the molecular level. His research into the abnormalities associated with Dopamine serves as a window through which scientists can examine the effects that Dopamine has on psychiatric disorders of human beings, such as substance abuse and Attention Deficit Disorder. Dr. Greengard has dedicated his life to scientific exploration. Since 1953, when he received his Ph.D. in biophysics from Johns Hopkins University, Dr. Greengard has worked as a scientific professional in every sense of the word. From his days as a scholar at Cambridge University in London, and years as a professor of pharmacology at Yale University, Dr. Greengard has possessed a passion for knowledge into the scientific basis of human existence. His life is nothing short of an admirable testament to the joy of scholarship and the rewards of knowledge. Mr. Speaker, I am immeasurably proud to have such an esteemed American living and working within my district. Dr. Greengard's Nobel Prize is a well-deserved honor and a tremendous reward for his dedication and tireless pursuit of scientific truth.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) for his efforts in working with me to secure the funding for the project. I also want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), chairman of the Subcommittee on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies, and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), ranking member, for their commitment to work with us to secure funding for this important project next year.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the 75 Cypriot women participating in this week's World March of Women 2000. The World March of Women is an annual event that occurs in my district that focuses on ending worldwide poverty and violence against women. Women from around the world participated in the march and a great number of them were from Cyprus, representing twenty-four Cypriot Women's Associations and Labor Syndicates. The march took place in front of the United Nations Building where the participants met with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. On October 17, 2000, the official International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, was a time to acknowledge the grave disparities in economic prosperity throughout the world as well as the disturbing issue of violence against women. The Cypriot participants, hoping to bring attention to the twenty-six year conflict on their Mediterranean island, urged the U.N. and its member states to take concrete measures toward finding a just and peaceful resolution to Cyprus. Twenty-six years ago, Turkey invaded the northern section of Cyprus. Today, there is still a barb-wire fence, known as the Green Line, that cuts across the island separating thousands of Greek Cypriots from the towns and communities in which they and their families had previously lived for generations. The Cypriot women came to New York to raise their voices against the years of injustice and seek action toward a final resolution to the divided island. The Cypriot women also raised the question on many families' minds, ``Where are the missing Greek Cypriots?'' More than 1600 Cypriots and five Americans have been missing since 1974. They have never been seen or heard from since their capture 26 years ago. Families have waited long enough to hear the truth. Throughout my years in Congress, I have ardently supported democratic rule of Cyprus. The United Nations has also passed several resolutions calling for democracy in Cyprus. However, even after the passage of resolutions and international meetings between Cyprus and the Turkish- Cypriots, peace is still elusive. Mr. Speaker, I not only salute these courageous Cypriot women, but I also would like to pay tribute to each one of the participants of the World March of Women 2000. These brave women recognize the plight of women throughout the world. The women participating in the World March encourage international solidarity among women and the development of unique ideas and real solutions to end the troubling state of women in every nation of the globe. These women deserve our respect for their courage in bringing their concerns before the United Nations and the international community. I sincerely hope that the concerns of the Cypriot women, as well as the concerns of all the women participating in this important event, are addressed by the international community. With a little determination and hope, we will all one day live in a world of peace and one where poverty and violence against women are creatures of the past.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me the time and for her leadership. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in support of the underlying legislation, which is among one of the most important bills that this Congress will consider this session. The notional value of the derivatives market is fast approaching $100 trillion. By comparison, the entire Federal budget is closer to $1.7 trillion. This legislation increases the legal certainty of these instruments and makes sure that market participants are held responsible for their losses or gains. In the Committee on Banking, I offered an amendment that was supported by the CFTC to limit the trading of energy derivatives when conducted off exchange and out of public view. Energy derivatives are based on underlying commodities, such as oil and gas, that are critically important to consumers. While my amendment was narrowly defeated, I continued to work on this issue after the markup. I am pleased to report that my concern has now been addressed at least in part. This legislation now gives additional authority to the CFTC to monitor day-to-day prices and to issue regulations to police fraud and manipulation in off-exchange energy derivatives trades. These powers will increase public confidence in the markets and reduce the potential of manipulation by big players operating off-exchanges. This provision could be further improved by deleting language that favors electronic trading facilities over traditional exchanges. Monitoring derivatives markets will be a major focus of the Committee on Banking for years to come. When properly used, large companies and financial institutions decrease economic risks and benefit consumers through the use of derivatives. Large financial institutions use derivatives to hedge interest rate risk and decrease potential market disruptions. I just want to close very briefly by thanking the chairman of the Committee on Banking, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), for his 6 years of leadership and the ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce). This will probably be the last bill from the Committee on Banking while he is chair of the committee.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Population Institute's 16th annual ``World Population Awareness Week (WPAW).'' The theme of this event, ``Saving Women's Lives,'' is an appropriate reminder of the hundreds of thousands of women who die each year due to reproductive health complications. Every minute of every day a woman somewhere in the world dies from pregnancy related complications, a total of 600,000 women each year. According to Population Institute President Warner Fornos more than 350 million married women in developing countries still lack access to information, education, and the means to obtain a range of modern family planning methods. This problem is further exacerbated by the fact that a disproportionately large share of the poorest of the poor and malnourished in the world are women and girls. In addition to focusing on the status of women around the world, World Population Awareness Week strives to develop awareness to the environmental and social complications caused by rapid population growth across the globe. Two hundred thirty organizations from 62 countries around the world co-sponsored World Population Awareness Week, including the Family Planning Association of India, the National Association of Family Welfare of Cameroon, and the Educational Foundation for Reproductive Health of Cambodia. Over 200 mayors across the United States have also proclaimed the event, along with the following 34 Governors: Governor Tony Knowles of Alaska, Gray Davis of California, Bill Owens of Colorado, John G. Rowland of Connecticut, Thomas Carper of Delaware, Roy Barnes of Georgia, Benjamin Cayetano of Hawaii, Thomas Vilsack of Iowa, Dirk Kempthorne of Idaho, Bill Graves of Kansas, Paul Patton of Kentucky, Angus King, Jr. of Maine, Parris Glendening of Maryland, Argeo Paul Cellucci of Massachusetts, Jesse Ventura of Minnesota, Kirk Fordice of Mississippi, Mel Carnahan of Missouri, Mike Johanns of Nebraska, Kenny Guinn of Nevada, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Christie Todd Whitman of New Jersey, Gary Johnson of New Mexico, James B. Hunt, Jr. of North Carolina, Edward Schafer of North Dakota, Rob Taft of Ohio, Frank Keating of Oklahoma, John Kitzhaber of Oregon, Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania, Lincoln Almond of Rhode Island, Jim Hodges of South Carolina, Don Sundquist of Tennessee, Howard Dean of Vermont, Gary Locke of Washington, Cecil Underwood of West Virginia. Mr. Speaker, next week during World Population Awareness Week, we have the perfect opportunity to show the world our commitment to international family planning without the anti-democratic restrictions by supporting full FY 1995 funding levels for international family planning and once and for all remove the onerous Gag Rule from law. Women's lives around the world are depending on it.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Illinois delegation for organizing this Special Order tonight, and I want to thank my friend Judy Biggert for coordinating this particular effort honoring Congressman John Edward Porter. I am here to honor my friend, Chairman John Porter, who is retiring at the end of this session of Congress. Mr. Porter has been a good friend, he has been a terrific legislative partner, and he has been a superior legislator. I have had the privilege of working with Mr. Porter on such a wide variety of issues--women's rights, health care, human rights, family planning, the environment, and many, many more. He has always been a tremendous advocate for bipartisan cooperation. Over the years, we have often worked together to forge commonsense solutions to important issues facing our Nation. And I know that there are many Members of Congress who would join me in this sentiment. I believe that alone is an outstanding tribute to any Member of this House. In the case of Congressman Porter, it is an exceptionally fitting tribute. I had the distinct pleasure of working with Mr. Porter on international family planning issues. We stood together in opposition to any anti-democratic gag rules, which interfere with the availability of family planning around the world. On this issue, as with so many others, Congressman John Porter has touched so many lives, it is hard to measure the full impact of his efforts. He is a leader on protecting the environment. As co-chair of the Human Rights Caucus, he has been a leader on human rights. As Chairman of the Labor-HHS Subcommittee, he has been a leader on biomedical research. This year, I am proud to serve as the co-chair of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues. And every year, the Women's Caucus testified before his subcommittee. Congresswomen would line up to testify about a whole host of issues-- family planning, women's health, title IX, biomedical research, education funding, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, obesity, long-term health care, breast cancer, teen pregnancy, mental health, AIDS, osteoporosis, STD's, child care, homelessness, Head Start, pediatric asthma, violence against women, and many more subjects. Chairman Porter often said it was his favorite day in the subcommittee. Mr. Porter was always interested, attentive, informed, and compassionate. We always knew we had a real advocate and friend on so many of these important issues in Chairman Porter. He will be sorely missed by the Women's Caucus, he will be missed by the entire Congress, and his leadership will be missed by countless Americans whose lives have been touched by his work.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Queensview Inc. cooperative housing complex of Queens, New York, on its 50th anniversary. The Queensview Inc. opened on June 3, 1950 in Long Island City, Queens, as a result of the lack of affordable housing for middle class residents in the New York City area. Although the concept of living in a cooperative housing complex was a new one, the effort made by the Queensview Inc.'s founders kept middle class families from having to leave New York City. Queensview, which consists of 14 buildings on 14 acres of park-like land, was conceived through the efforts of shareholders who agreed to pay $2,500 for unseen apartments and the city of New York, which provided both reclaimed land as well as a partial tax exemption for 25 years. For the past 50 years, Queensview residents have lived in cooperation with each other in a wonderful environment in which to raise a family. The fact that 627 of the first Queensview families continue to reside in the complex attests to the success of the Queensview complex. This extraordinary housing complex, constructed at the conclusion of World War II as families began settling New York City's outer boroughs, has devoted itself to improving the quality of life for its residents, enabling them to build lives of dignity and self worth. Queensview's conception resulted from the tireless efforts of many prominent citizens who were greatly concerned with improving the standard of living of the burgeoning American middle class. Their efforts not only greatly improved the quality of life for the residents of Queensview, but they also prevented the residents from being forced to relocate out of New York City due to financial hardship. Had it not been for the founders of Queensview, many of the most prominent residents of Queens would not remain in the area today. Mr. Speaker, I am proud today to honor and commend those original founders of the Queensview Inc. If not for their foresighted interest in the well-being of many World War II veterans and their families, many residents of my district would not have realized the American Dream. The Queensview community deserves a moment of recognition because so many people's lives have changed as a result of this exceptional cooperative living complex. I sincerely hope that the families of those original Queensview founders can enjoy the cooperative living experience at Queensview for another 50 years.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Fedkids Child Care Center of New York City and its founder, the late Susan Kossin. This is a special time for the Fedkids Center, which is one of the first childcare centers established for the children of federal employees, because it has recently added more than 1,500 square feet of additional space. This expansion more than doubles the capacity of the center and creates additional space that will be able to comfortably care for 83 chidren--twice the number of children the center could serve when it opened in 1988. This expansion was made possible by the generosity and vision of the founder of Fedkids, Susan Kossin, who unfortunately passed away earlier this year. Ms. Kossin, who founded the Fedkids Center while employed by the federal government, created the Center, based in Lower Manhattan, because she recognized the lack of adequate childcare facilities in the mid-1980s. Ms. Kossin took on the arduous task of guiding the decisions on site selection, facilities, renovation, equipment, curriculum, licensing, finances, legal issues, contractual issues, affordability plans, and many other aspects of undertaking such an extraordinary challenge. Ms. Kossin, a working mother herself, ardently supported the Fedkids Center from its conception up until the time of her death. The recent expansion was made possible through a grant that Ms. Kossin left to the Fedkids Center. Aside from the money that financed the expansion, Ms. Kossin's estate has also financed the establishment of a scholarship fund to assist in financing the tuition for children in the Fedkids program. The enthusiastic and nurturing spirit of Ms. Kossin will live on through the Fedkids expansion as well as through her scholarship. The organized leadership and guiding spirit of Ms. Kossin made it possible for many mothers and fathers employed by the federal government to feel confident that while they are at work, their children are safe, supervised, and cared for. For providing such an invaluable service, the work Ms. Kossin put toward the Fedkids Center will continually be appreciated in the Lower Manhattan area. This month, the Fedkids Center will be opening its newly expanded facilities and naming the new center that Ms. Kossin's generosity and guidance created ``Fedkids at the Susan Kossin Child Care Center.'' This new center will continue the mission that the Fedkids Child Care Center set out to accomplish--to provide loving and attentive care for the children of fedeal and non-federal workers in Lower Manhattan. Mr. Speaker, I am confident that this mission, based on the unique and foresighted vision of Susan Kossin, will continue for many years to come. Today, I am proud to salute the Fedkids Child Care Center and the admirable generosity of a woman far ahead of her time, Susan Kossin.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the conferees, especially the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Dixon), for working together to include in this conference report the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Disclosure Act which I authored along with the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) and Senator DeWine. This provision will extend the original Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act for 3 additional years while also adding responsibilities to the Interagency Working Group's work as it pertains to war crimes committed by the Japanese Imperial Government during World War II. In 1998, President Clinton signed into law the original Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act that established a process for the declassification of documents maintained by government agencies about Nazi war criminals and its allies. To date, the Interagency Working Group has reviewed more than 6 million pages of material and has released over 1.5 million pages of previously classified documents to the public regarding World War II. Already, significant new information about World War II war crimes has been revealed in the more than 400,000 Office of Strategic Services records released this past June by the Interagency Working Group at the National Archives. However, even with the diligent work the Interagency Working Group has accomplished, there is an overwhelming amount of material that still needs to be reviewed and declassified. This success has also been achieved even though the Congress has not appropriated funds for the support of the Interagency Working Group or for the activities carried out by the various agencies that hold the records. Without the resources to review the materials being released, it will be years before we truly understand the significance of what is contained in the declassified materials. This conference report is a step forward in providing the Interagency Working Group the authority and support it needs to complete the tremendous tasks before them. I still have some concerns regarding the language concerning the cooperation of U.S. Government agencies with the Interagency Working Group and the ability of the Interagency Working Group to review the more than 18 million pages of Japanese Imperial Government information that the U.S. returned to Japan after World War II. However, I support this conference report before us and hope that the chairman and ranking member will work with me next year to clarify this language and intent of this legislation so as to further the success of the Interagency Working Group. Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify one point concerning title 8 of this bill. Is it the gentleman's understanding that this section in no way affects the authority of the Interagency Working Group established under Public Law 105-246, the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act of 1998, with regard to the ability of the Interagency Working Group to retrieve documents from U.S. Government agencies?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Further, is it the gentleman's understanding that the exceptions enumerated in that act are in no way affected by the bill before us today?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I just first of all want to commend the gentleman from Oklahoma for his efforts, his really sincere and hard efforts to alert the public on the danger of HPV, which is a very widespread sexually transmitted disease. As cochair of the Women's Caucus along with my dear friend and colleague from the great State of New York (Mrs. Kelly), he has my absolute commitment to work this year to find some vehicle to have this study and the important work that he is supporting in a package this year. But as the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) pointed out, the Senate has said they want a clean bill. That is what we want to give them. But we applaud his efforts, his work and we want to work with him.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) for yielding me this time, and for her leadership. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and the underlying bill. This is an extremely important bill, and it will literally save thousands of women's lives. Mr. Speaker, I ask everyone to stop for a moment and think about what they might do if they were diagnosed with cancer but were told that no treatment options were available under their insurance and that they could not afford treatment because they could barely afford to feed their family and pay their rent. Mr. Speaker, for thousands of women in this country, this is an unfortunate reality. There is an outstanding program under the CDC called the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection program. It provides screening for low-income women who have little or no health insurance, but for women who find that they have cancer from this important screening program there is no guarantee of any treatment. It is clear that this situation must change. This bill will do that. The Women's Caucus has made it a top priority. I want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick), the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. Danner), and my Women's Caucus cochair, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly), for their tireless work to get this bill passed. I also want to thank all the members of the Women's Caucus who signed a letter to Speaker Hastert this week urging swift passage of the bill. This bill gives States the option to provide Medicaid coverage to uninsured or underinsured women who have been diagnosed through the CDC's screening program. It passed overwhelmingly in the House and Senate, and every day this bill is delayed we have women dying from treatable breast and cervical cancer. Today is a great and important day for women facing breast and cervical cancer. I commend the leadership for bringing it to the floor today, and I also want to commend the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn) for his efforts and pledge my support to continue working with him on the dangers of HPV. I urge total support and passage and to the President's desk.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding time and for his leadership. Mr. Speaker, it is with great regret that I come to the floor in opposition to this bill. I supported this bill when the House first voted on it. Unfortunately, the majority has taken a bill in which I thought we had made good progress and chosen to railroad it through the House without really holding a conference and by tying it to a totally unrelated embassy bill. Furthermore, I appreciate the comments and would like to be associated with the gentleman from Michigan's comments about the many leading women's organizations that oppose the bill. Also, the majority has deleted a critical provision that Senator Schumer added to the bill. This provision prevents those who commit acts of violence at reproductive health clinics from escaping paying penalties for these actions. Clinic bombers should not be allowed to excuse penalties assessed on them by the courts through bankruptcy. This bill would allow them to excuse these debts and to walk away from these penalties. Mr. Speaker, bankruptcy reform is important to the American people, but so is protecting women's safety and reproductive freedom. This is a growing problem that the majority is ignoring. Between 1993 and 2000, three doctors, two clinic employees, one clinic escort and one security guard have been murdered in acts of violence at clinics. There have been 16 attempted murders since 1991. More than 2,400 acts of violence have been reported at clinics since 1997. These included bombings, arsons, death threats, kidnappings, and other acts of harassment. The Senate approved this amendment by a vote of 80-17. Why has the majority now excluded it? Why should clinic bombers be allowed to excuse their penalties by declaring bankruptcy? I urge all Members who care about women's safety to vote against this bill for this reason and also because of the abusive procedure under which it has been brought to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a letter from John Podesta, chief of staff to the President, in which he writes that the President will veto the bill because, and I quote, it gets the balance wrong. The White House, Washington, DC, October 12, 2000. Hon. J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker. I understand that the House will take up today the conference report on H.R. 2412, which apparently incorporates the text of S. 3186, a recently filed version of bankruptcy legislation. If this bankruptcy legislation is sent to the President, he will veto it. Over the last few months, this Administration has engaged in a good faith effort to reach agreement on a number of outstanding issues in the bankruptcy legislation. The President firmly believes that Americans would benefit from reform legislation that would stem abuse of the bankruptcy system by, and encourage responsibility of, debtors and creditors alike. With this goal in mind, we have pursued negotiations with bill proponents on a few key issues, notwithstanding the President's deep concern that the bill fails to address some creditor abuses and disadvantages all debtors to an extent unnecessary to stem abuses by a few. An agreement was reached in those negotiations on an essential issue--limiting homestead exemptions--with compromises made on both sides. Unfortunately, H.R. 2412 fails to incorporate that agreement, instead reverting to a provision that the Administration has repeatedly said was fundamentally flawed. The central premise of this legislation is that we must ask debtors, who truly have the capacity to repay a portion of their debts, to do so. This would benefit not only their creditors but also all other debtors through lower credit costs. Unlimited homestead exemptions allow debtors who own lavish homes to shield their mansions from their creditors, while moderate-income debtors, especially those who rent, must live frugally under a rigid repayment plan for five to seven years. This loophole for the wealthy is fundamentally unfair and must be closed. The inclusion of a provision limiting to some degree a wealthy debtor's capacity to shift assets before bankruptcy into a home in a state with an unlimited homestead exemption does not ameliorate the glaring omission of a real homestead cap. Moreover, the President has made clear that bankruptcy legislation must require accountability and responsibility from those who unlawfully bar access to legal health services. Yet the conference report fails to address this concern. Far too often, we have seen doctors, health professionals and their patients victimized by those who espouse and practice violence. Congress and the States have established remedies for those who suffer as a result of these tactics. However, we are increasingly seeing the use of the bankruptcy system as a strategic tool by those who seek to promote clinic violence while shielding themselves from personal liability and responsibility. It is critical that we shut down this abusive use of our bankruptcy system and prevent endless litigation that threatens the court-ordered remedies due to victims of clinic violence. The U.S. Senate was right in voting 80-17 to adopt an amendment that would effectively close down any potential for this abuse of the Bankruptcy Code. We fail to understand why the bill's proponents refuse to include this provision and shut down the use of bankruptcy to avoid responsibility for clinic violence. I repeat President Clinton's desire to see balanced bankruptcy reform legislation enacted this year. The President wants to sign legislation that addresses these known abuses, without tilting the playing field against those debtors who turn to bankruptcy genuinely in need of a fresh start. He will veto H.R. 2412 because it gets the balance wrong. Sincerely, John Podesta, Chief of Staff to the President.