Betty McCollum

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Conference Report on the fiscal year 2006 Agriculture Appropriations Act. While this bill takes some positive steps, overall it is a missed opportunity. This bill provides increased funding for critical food assistance programs, including Women, Infants and Children, WIC, and school lunch. The conference report also upholds current adjunctive eligibility requirements for WIC and Medicaid. This will save local WIC agencies in six states, including Minnesota, from having to conduct 275,000 duplicative eligibility determinations and keep resources devoted to nutrition assistance. Voluntary conservation programs that I support, such as the Conservation Reserve Program, CRP, and the Wetlands Reserve Program, WRP, receive $840 million in funding. For generations, farmers and others working close to the land have made positive contributions to the conservation effort. Programs like CRP and WRP assist landowners in reducing erosion, improving soil and water quality, and enhancing fish and wildlife habitat. Funding for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, APHIS, is increased to address food safety and emerging diseases, namely avian influenza. Prompt action is needed to safeguard against further spread of this deadly strain and to be prepared for a potential outbreak at home or abroad. Despite these positive aspects, Congress missed an opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of families by failing to provide relief for the millions of Americans facing soaring prescription drug prices. I supported language passed by the House of Representatives to allow reimportation of prescription drugs. Unfortunately, this language--which would have barred the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, from preventing prescription drug reimportation--was stripped in conference committee for a third year in a row. It is unacceptable for anyone to suffer because prescription drugs have become too expensive, and it is disappointing that once again Congress has prioritized pharmaceutical companies over families. This bill also imposes further delays upon implementation of mandatory Country-of-Origin Labeling, COOL, requirements. COOL provides our families with important information on meat, fish, fruits and vegetables. It also gives U.S. producers credit for the considerable investment they make in the quality and safety of their products. The 2002 Farm Bill required mandatory labeling by 2004. but the fiscal year 2004 Agriculture Appropriations Act delayed implementation of COOL to 2006. This conference report further delays implementation of COOL until 2008.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to make known my position on H.R. 1751. Although I was on the floor yesterday during the debate on this important legislation and intended to cast an affirmative vote, my vote was not recorded. The record will reflect that I was present for the preceding votes. I strongly support the Secure Access to Justice and Court Protection Act of 2005. This legislation was written in response to recent violence against judges and employees of the courts. It increases penalties against those who threaten, assault, or murder judges, as well as court and law enforcement personnel. Members of the judiciary and their staff are critical to ensuring that all Americans have access to our courts and to guaranteeing that justice and fairness remain essential values of our society. Many Democratic amendments were accepted during debate in the Judiciary Committee that make this a stronger bill. The changes focused on providing increased grants to state and local governments to prevent violence. This bill includes grant programs for states to assess court safety, to improve witness protection programs, to create databases to track domestic crime and terrorism and to develop programs to help juvenile witnesses. Court officials in Minnesota have stated that these dollars will be extremely useful in protecting witnesses who are often reluctant to testify for fear of their safety. The courts can use this funding for temporary or permanent relocation to help keep witnesses, who are vital to successfully prosecuting criminal cases, remain safe. In addition, special training for court staff, judges, and attorneys will help make juvenile witnesses more comfortable and able to deal with their important role in trial. Mr. Chairman, this is an important step in preventing and prosecuting violence against the judiciary and I am pleased that H.R. 1751 passed the House overwhelmingly.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, every year on November 11, the American people honor the men and women who have served and sacrificed for our Nation as members of the armed forces. The sacrifices of our veterans and their families are the foundation of our Nation's freedom. All Americans owe them a debt of gratitude for their service. Veterans Day is a national holiday for remembrance and appreciation. Whether a veteran served during WWII, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, or have recently returned from Iraq and Afghanistan, they have earned our respect. As a member of Congress, I feel strongly about honoring our veterans and their families. With over 25 million veterans in America, Congress must keep its promise to those veterans who have served, as well as those who will be returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan. Providing the necessary healthcare, education, and disability benefits to meet the needs of our veterans is both a responsibility and a moral obligation. This Veterans Day, let us thank our family, friends and neighbors who have served our Nation in uniform. Their courage is to be celebrated. Their commitment to our Nation must be matched by a commitment from Congress to truly honor their service by guaranteeing the benefits they deserve.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to recognize and honor the life and legacy of civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks, who passed away recently at the age of 92. Ms. Parks was a daughter, a wife, a mother, a seamstress, who, like all of us, was trying to make a good life for herself and her family. On December 1, 1955, Ms. Parks refused to relinquish her seat to a white man in a segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama, and this simple and courageous action changed the course of American history. Her strength and willingness to take a stand for her rights and those of others sparked the beginning of the Montgomery bus boycott and paved the way for the historic 1964 Civil Rights Act banning racial discrimination in public facilities. Ms. Parks' act of courage and bravery inspired the modern civil rights movement that went on to revolutionize our country. Her steadfast faith in justice and equality, and the power of an individual to initiate change, has served as inspiration and encouragement for equal rights movements the world over. Millions of people with disabilities, and those who are discriminated against around the world, have looked to Ms. Parks' leadership in their claims for equality in the face of injustice. My constituents, and indeed this entire country, are grateful for her strength and courage. We as a country have been made better by the movement Ms. Parks ignited. Mr. Speaker, in remembering her greatness, her dignity, and her legacy, Members of this House also recently made an historic vote. When this House voted to allow Rosa Parks to lay in honor in the Capitol Rotunda, it marked one of the few occasions a citizen who did not hold public office, and the first time a woman, has been recognized in this way. With that vote, we commemorated more than the great civil rights movement that her act initiated. In bestowing this honor upon Ms. Parks, we recognized that one person, one individual citizen, can have an impact, and can change lives. Rosa Parks' legacy is one that will lead us in continuing the fight for social justice and the struggle for equality for all people. We must all remain committed to fighting the inequities that remain in our country and to championing fundamental rights for all whether they are voting rights, or a commitment to ending poverty in America. This is the true legacy of Rosa Parks which will live for years and decades to come.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution and join my colleagues in condemning the vile statement made this week by Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, when he called for Israel to be ``wiped off the map.'' Such words are not empty rhetoric but poison aimed at inspiring hate, violence and terrorism. The fact that these words were spoken before an audience of 4,000 students is a dark and ominous demonstration of the current Iranian president's pathological leadership. Israel is a sovereign democracy in which free people deserve the right to live in peace and without fear of terror or threats. While this dangerous man speaks venom, the people of Iran must be reminded that the people of the U.S. and the entire Congress stand in strong support of Israel. As Israel exists today, so will it exist one hundred years from now, and I hope, a thousand years from now, as a strong and inseparable partner of the American people. Iran's president is the voice of hatred and moral corruption. It is a voice not to be ignored, but guarded against. The people of Iran are not served by this voice and neither is the civilized world. President Ahmadinejad must be placed on notice by all nations of the world and all voices of civility and dignity--the people of Israel are our brothers and sisters and such a threat is not only a threat against Israel but against the entire world community. Collectively we seek peace, but we also deserve security, the U.S., Israel and all nations that reject these virulent sentiments.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, today we will vote on a resolution in support of preventive programs; yet this Congress continues to underfund the critical resources needed to address the problems faced by these vulnerable youth. Homelessness is merely a symptom of a bigger problem. For many youth, their home situation is violent and it is unhealthy. The Wilder Foundation, a nonprofit health and human service organization that has served the greater St. Paul area since 1906, understands this issue well. They tell us that children who run away are three times more likely to have been physically abused, five times more likely to have been treated for drug and alcohol problems. These young adults need our help, they need our support, and they need the opportunity to know that they can get their lives back on track. And there are many in our community and across this country who are ready to serve homeless youths. In Minnesota there are groups such as the Ain Dah Yung Center, serving Native American youths; the Bridge For Runaway Youth, and they are working hard to provide critical services. When I visited one of the homeless shelters for youth just recently, I found out that they had to cut their hours back, that they could not provide a safe haven for children to escape the cold during the day and to get counseling, to reunite them with their families when possible or to put them in a place where they would be safe. These children need our assistance. They need a partner at the Federal level, one that they can count on, not only for well-intentioned resolutions but the dollars needed to provide those resources, those safe havens, especially as winter sets in on these young adults in Minnesota. They need resources. They need beds. They need counselors. But most of all they need to know, our children need to know that Congress is prepared to vote for them and to approve not only this resolution but in the future the resources needed in order for them to turn their lives around. Our children deserve our hope for a better future for them, and they deserve an opportunity to have that future.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this important legislation to address the needs of children orphaned and vulnerable as a result of the AIDS pandemic. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) and her staff, as well as the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), and the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach) are to be commended for their commitment to setting forth a policy that creates a framework to meet the needs of AIDS orphans. This bill deserves the full support of this House. At this moment millions of boys and girls, children, across the continent of Africa are struggling to survive, struggling to find food and shelter and to care for siblings. They too often live in fear of sexual exploitation or are forced to use sex in exchange for food, safety, and survival. By 2010 an estimated 25 million children across Africa alone will be orphaned as a result of AIDS. Millions more will be caring for sick parents as well as for brothers and sisters. Mr. Speaker, today's Seattle Post-Intelligencer details how the small southern African nation of Malawi is facing an AIDS disaster which is now fueling a famine. In this nation of nearly 12 million people, nearly 1 million more people are infected with HIV, many too sick to farm their fields. Five million Malawians are at risk of starvation. In Malawi there are also 700,000 AIDS orphans struggling to survive a famine, and this does not include the vulnerable children. When a country is starving, who feeds the children? Who feeds, cares for, educates, and protects the children, the AIDS orphans? Mr. Speaker, AIDS is killing an entire nation, and the children left behind must be protected and cared for and educated and, most importantly, valued. This bill is an important first step. U.S. leadership is needed for these children who deserve our help. Mr. Speaker, for the Record I submit the Seattle Post-Intelligencer article. [From the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Oct. 18, 2005] Malawi Village Underscores Impact of AIDS (By Clare Nullis, Associated Press Writer) Napasha, Malawi.--It's so quiet you can hear scrawny hens pecking at the dust. A few ragged children peer timidly from the shadow of their mud huts but show no interest in playing. Beyond them lie barren cornfields, abandoned to the blistering heat. The despair is unmistakable in Napasha, a village in the southern African nation of Malawi where an AIDS epidemic has compounded the vicious cycle of poverty, hunger and disease. ``Our fields are idle because there is nobody to work them,'' says Toby Solomon, a local commissioner. Subsistence farmers dominate Malawi's struggling economy. But an estimated 900,000 of 12 million people are infected with the HIV virus, a national rate of just over 14 percent. In the southern province of Nsanje, which includes Napasha, the rate is as high as 35 percent, according to Solomon. ``We don't have machinery for farming, we only have manpower,'' Solomon says. ``If we are sick, or spend our time looking after family members who are sick, we have no time to spend working in the fields.'' Numbers aren't easy to come by in Napasha, a cluster of simple mud buildings with no electricity or sanitation and just one communal water pump. But the 400 or so households here include about a hundred children who have lost one or both parents to AIDS. The epidemic has aggravated a food crisis stemming in part from a drought that is withering corn crops. President Bingu wa Mutharika declared all of the southern African nation a ``disaster area'' Saturday and appealed for international help. He warned that 5 million people, almost half the population, are threatened with hunger. Monica Kasitomu, a tiny graying woman who thinks she is around 70, is struggling to feed three young grandchildren who lost both their parents to AIDS. She says she depends on the corn meal and oil she receives from the United Nations. ``I'm getting too old to care for my grandchildren,'' she frets. ``When I die, I don't know what will happen to them,'' she says, tears in her eyes. One roadside sign near Napasha urges people to use condoms. ``AIDS is real. It's not witchcraft,'' it says. Many people here, as in much of Malawi, believe AIDS is caused by witchcraft and consider condoms taboo. The government and foreign relief agencies have launched campaigns to try to educate people about the disease, but results have been slow to filter down. AIDS kills about 90,000 people in Malawi every year, and about half of the country's hospital beds are occupied by people with AIDS-related complications. Napasha, which is far from any health facilities, has at least eight households with terminally ill AIDS victims. One is Melania Nakhove, a tall and graceful woman who looks older than her 50 years. She lost her husband to AIDS in 2002 and then discovered that she too was infected with the virus. She used to have a job but gave it up when she became too ill to work. Her house--like most others in the village--is bare. Her monthly ration of cornmeal lies drying on the floor of her living room, adorned only with a 2002 calendar and an AIDS awareness poster. Nakhove counts herself lucky to receive both food aid and anti-retroviral medicines thanks to a government program funded by foreign donations. Of an estimated 140,000 Malawis who need the life- prolonging drugs, only 19,000 were receiving them in June, according to the World Health Organization. The government aims to put 80,000 on treatment by the end of the year, but that is subject to foreign funding. At the Saint Montfort feeding center in southern town of Nchal, nurse Getrude Mkwapu estimates half the children admitted to the intensive feeding ward are HIV-positive, complicating efforts to treat their malnutrition. James, just 14 months old, is one of them. The skeletal boy, who looks no older than four months, wails incessantly as his grandmother, Weza Jugen, tries to coax him to drink a cup of milk. ``I don't know what I can do,'' Jugen said. ``All I can try to do is to give him milk and porridge.'' James, whose mother died last month, is one of 700,000 orphans in Malawi. ``The epidemic is giving people a sense of no hope,'' says Solomon. ``No hope for life.''

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, as our nation continues to reel from the tragic effects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, we need to have an honest debate about our nation's energy policy and dependency on foreign sources of oil. The recent natural disasters along the Gulf Coast not only revealed the failures of our federal emergency plans, they also exposed the vulnerability of our nation's refineries and oil and gas pipelines. A comprehensive energy policy that promotes efficiency and invests in alternative energy is desperately needed. The proof is at the pump--consumers are facing soaring prices on the road, and record heating costs will await them at home this winter. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that home heating prices will experience the biggest annual increase in three decades. In my state of Minnesota, the largest natural gas utility is projected to charge 77 percent more than last year. Unfortunately, the bill before us today appears to reflect the wishes of special interests, not the reality facing ordinary Americans. This Republican bill promotes consumption and increases pollution but does nothing to lower the cost of gasoline, reduce our dependency on foreign oil, or keep our environment clean. It was very disappointing that the Rules Committee rejected a very important amendment, which I would have supported, offered by Rep. Gutknecht of Minnesota. This amendment would have added a 10 percent ethanol requirement for all gasoline sold in the United States by the year 2010. Minnesota is a leader in renewable fuels, having enacted a 10 percent ethanol requirement in 1997. Unfortunately, the House was denied the opportunity to consider this worthy amendment. This bill severely limits the use of ethanol and homegrown fuels by creating a federal fuels list limited to two diesel and four gasoline fuel blends for the entire nation. If a state or local program wished to promote a cleaner-burning fuel, the EPA could deny the plan on the grounds that it would interrupt the fuel supply in surrounding states. This bill also fails to protect the American consumer from price gouging. As prices soared in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, refineries cashed in. The industry reported a 255 percent increase in profits from just one year prior. Provisions in this bill, however, target only retailers, many who show only marginal gains during price hikes. These anti-gouging measures are also limited to disaster zones, leaving consumers in the rest of the country at the industry's mercy. H.R. 3893 further exploits these natural disasters by rolling back basic environmental and public health protections. Cities with the most persistent smog problems would be allowed to delay their cleanup deadlines for many years. The bill also requires the president to designate sites for new refineries on federal land, with no exemptions for national wildlife refuges and national forests. When it comes to our energy policy, Americans can no longer afford business as usual. The Democratic energy plan offered by Representatives Bart Stupak and Rick Boucher, which I support, is a reality-based solution to our energy needs. This package provides meaningful relief to American consumers and small businesses by promoting efficiency and investing in alternative sources of power. The Stupak-Boucher bill establishes a Strategic Refinery Reserve to allow for the release of refined product during energy emergencies. This reserve would maintain a capacity of five percent of the total U.S. daily demand for gasoline and home heating oil. This would double the spare capacity that currently exists and would help curb the skyrocketing prices that disproportionately affect seniors and low- income households. The Democratic plan provides real protection from price gouging by covering the entire production and supply chain. In addition to gasoline, it would protect against price gouging of propane, natural gas, and home heating oil. It would extend beyond disaster zones to anywhere in the country price gouging occurs. The Republican-controlled Rules Committee demonstrated their intolerance for energy efficiency by rejecting the Boehler/Markey amendment. This amendment would have increased the fuel efficiency standards of cars and trucks from twenty-five to thirty-three miles per gallon by 2016. By reducing our consumption of gasoline we could have relieved market pressure and decreased our dependency on foreign oil. Now is the time to invest in the next generation of efficient technologies and to move our nation toward a sustainable and energy- independent future. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 3893 and support the Democratic substitute.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3824. This legislation seeks to undermine one of the most successful and visionary environmental policies, the Endangered Species Act. For 32 years, the Endangered Species Act has been a safety net for wildlife, plants, and fish that are on the brink of extinction. Since its enactment in 1973, the Endangered Species Act has prevented the extinction of hundreds of species. In fact, 99 percent of the species listed are still with us today, and more than two-thirds of all currently listed species are improving. Minnesotans have witnessed the success of this Act first hand. In Minnesota, the bald eagle population grew from a dwindling 380 eagles in 1981 to more than 1,400 eagles today. This is more than double the recovery goal of 600 eagles. We have seen the gray wolf population grow from 300 in 1975 to 3,020 in 2004. Again, that is more than double the recovery goal of 1,400 wolves. Minnesota is also home to the dwarf trout lily, which is found nowhere else in the world. In April 2005, many of my constituents showed their support for endangered species during Aveda Corporation's Earth Month. In Aveda salons and stores across the country, more than 170,000 people signed petitions asking for a strong, fully funded Endangered Species Act. These petitions were delivered to the steps of the Capitol in July. The message is clear. Americans want to protect endangered species for future generations. Unfortunately, H.R. 3824 makes it harder to protect threatened and endangered species. It repeals one of the most important parts of the act--critical habitat protection. Habitat destruction is the primary reason many animals end up on the Endangered Species List. Species with designated critical habitats recover at twice the rate of endangered species without critical habitat. Yet, this bill provides no alternative to protect the places where vulnerable species live. This bill also creates a new corporate welfare entitlement for developers. Under this bill, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would have only 180 days to review proposed developments and their impact on endangered species. If an assessment cannot be reached within this time frame, the project is allowed to proceed. If it is determined that endangered species would be harmed by the project, the Federal Government must pay the landowner the value of the proposed development. This would encourage speculative development schemes aimed at harming endangered species in order to receive windfall payments from the government. A frenzy of fraud and abuse will not help responsible landowners comply with the law, and it will not help species recover. The use of sound science is also undermined by this bill. It gives political appointees the authority to determine the ``best available science'' without having to consult with recognized scientists and other experts in the field. Under this bill, the use of sophisticated scientific modeling could also be banned. This opens the door to the use of questionable science and politically-motivated findings. This bill also repeals all Endangered Species Act provisions related to pesticides. Pesticides, such as DOT, have contributed to the decline of many species, including the American bald eagle. Under this bill, the Environmental Protection Agency can approve pesticides without considering their impact on threatened and endangered species. Given the choice between recovery and extinction, this bill appears to favor extinction. I supported a responsible alternative aimed at recovering species. The Miller/Boehlert substitute amendment contained a more flexible timeline for consideration of projects, clarified the obligation of federal agencies, and provided real landowner incentives for conservation and species recovery. This approach responded to the legitimate concerns of landowners and sportsmen while continuing efforts to recover endangered species. Unfortunately, this amendment was not adopted. Mr. Speaker, the Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act fails to protect vulnerable wildlife and plants and threatens to break the federal bank with a new open-ended entitlement for developers. I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and work together to create a strong, scientific and bipartisan Endangered Species Act.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution to recognize the goals and ideals of Domestic Violence Awareness Month. This week we will also be considering legislation that will reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. It is my hope that we will strengthen and improve measures to ensure safe homes and communities for children and families. Congress must continue to raise awareness of domestic violence in the United States and the devastating effects violence has on too many of our American families. We must also ensure that the organizations working to end domestic violence in our communities have the resources they need to provide services to the survivors of family violence, sexual assault, and stalking. These families and organizations deserve our commitment. In my own State of Minnesota, VAWA funding went to programs and services for battered women and their children. Some of those projects in my own District include: The St. Paul based Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services, which provides legal advocacy services to young Native American women in collaboration with the Ain Dah Yung Center. Breaking Free in St. Paul: A transitional housing program for women of color escaping prostitution. St. Paul-based Minnesota Coalition of Battered Women, which links battered women's programs across the state to help fulfill the goals of VAWA, including legal assistance; training for police, prosecutors, and court officers; and protection for battered women and their children. Other projects in Minnesota include: The Domestic Abuse Intervention Project in Duluth--a comprehensive review of the criminal justice and civil court response to battered women. The Women's Rural Advocacy Program in Southwest Minnesota, which purchases and implementation of digital cameras and printers for improved prosecution of domestic violence cases. Migrant Health Services in Crookston, which provides domestic violence and sexual assault services to Hispanic migrant farm workers in the Red River Valley. In addition to the lives saved by improved responses to violence against women, VAWA has saved our country nearly $15 billion in social costs, such as savings in the judicial and health care systems. The month of October also marks the anniversary of a great loss to the domestic violence community--the untimely deaths of Paul and Sheila Wellstone. Not only were Paul and Sheila tireless advocates for abused women and children, they were also instrumental framers of VAWA. The Wellstones are greatly missed by Minnesotans and people throughout our Nation. It is in recognition of those who continue the legacy of a commitment to ending domestic violence in homes and communities across our Nation, and in honor of survivors of domestic violence, that I stand today in support of Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to oppose the Boustany amendment and all the explicit discrimination it represents. Mr. Boustany's proposal fundamentally changes Head Start hiring and firing protections provided for Head Start teachers and staff by Federal Equal Employment Opportunity laws. If this amendment passes, this would be the first time Congress has acted on the House Floor to specifically repeal civil rights protections established to combat discrimination. The amendment is a blatant attack on civil rights. And, it is offensive to Americans who value equal rights and justice, and to the many of us who are strong people of faith. This amendment would allow faith-based organizations that receive Federal Head Start dollars to discriminate in the hiring and firing of Head Start employees simply based on religion. These changes could also affect Head Start parents who might serve as volunteers or advisory board members for their children's Head Start program. And these acts of discrimination would be paid for with U.S. taxpayer dollars! In addition, this amendment changes Federal Equal Employment Opportunity laws in the Head Start Act. The effects of these changes on the rights of women and people with disabilities are unclear. Certainly the questions surrounding this possible reduction in rights should be answered before we undo hard-fought civil rights protections. Let us be clear. Faith-based organizations currently are providing Head Start services. I support faith-based organizations. Their missions and their work are valued by all of us. This amendment provides no additionl opportunities to faith-based Head Start providers. It simply provides them the explicit right to discriminate based on religion using taxpayer dollars. Mr. Speaker, Head Start is a program intended to reduce barriers and to provide increased opportunities and equality for low-income children and their families. It is shameful that some of my colleagues are acting today to reduce opportunities and increase barriers for Head Start families. I urge my colleagues--don't give discrimination a Head Start. Oppose this dangerous amendment.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my sincere disappointment in the Committee on Rules decision to report a restrictive rule for consideration of the bill before us today, the reauthorization of Head Start, the future of our children. Several common-sense amendments that were offered to strengthen this bill were not ruled in order. Not surprising, most of them were Democratic amendments. Instead, several amendments that were ruled in order will weaken Head Start and the opportunity for our children to succeed. In committee, there was bipartisan support for adding ``faith-based'' language into the Head Start Act, even though faith-based institutions currently participate in providing Head Start programs. We were happy to do this in committee; I was happy to do so, along with my colleagues, because the Federal Equal Opportunity Employment laws are spelled out clearly in the bill, which do not allow for discrimination in hiring. But there was another amendment that was not ruled in order--my amendment. My amendment would have protected the privacy of our faith- based organizations and the integrity of our tax dollars. The amendment that I offered in the Committee on Rules would have simply required faith-based organizations to create a separate bank account, a separate bank account in which to receive Federal dollars for the Head Start program--distinct and from the private dollars that a religious organization collects to advance their religious mission. Why do we need to do that? Well, first, we need to protect Federal tax dollars from being used improperly; and, secondly, we need to protect the privacy of faith-based organizations' accounting books for their religious mission. With the commingling of funds, if fraud is suspected, a faith-based organization would have to open up all of their books for inspection. My amendment would have required separate accounts, therefore, protecting the church's mission and the Federal education mission of Head Start. Mr. Chairman, let me quote from the Covenant Companion, a Christian publication, which I submit for the Record, as well as one other publication that speaks to this issue. From the Covenant: ``Churches are particularly vulnerable to embezzlement because of the high-level of trust given to employees and volunteers that lack the sophistication, fiscal controls, and oversight.'' My amendment simply would have been a preemptive strike against financial abuse that we know will happen because it has already occurred. For example, this past summer, $800,000 was stolen from a Federal Head Start program run by a church. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule. We need a new rule, one that will protect the taxpayers, one that will protect faith- based organizations, and one that will prevent discrimination.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Madame Speaker, I rise today in support of the temporary 3-month extension of the Higher Education Act. I would prefer to rise today to express my support for a bill that expands access for students to college and fulfills the Federal government's promises to make college more affordable for the millions of students attending our nation's colleges and universities. Unfortunately, that is not the bill before us today. It is my hope, however, that the Republican leadership will use this time provided by the extension to improve their plan to reauthorize the Higher Education Act--H.R. 609. The Republican bill that passed out of the House Education and the Workforce Committee on a strictly partisan vote balances the massive deficit created by enormous tax breaks to America's most fortunate and the war in Iraq on the backs of students--who continue to face increased tuition costs across the nation. H.R. 609 cuts nearly $9 billion from the Federal student loan program, with Republican plans to cut an additional $2 billion in order to balance their misguided budget. This cut is the largest cut to student financial aid in the history of Federal student financial aid. The Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act should be an opportunity to enhance access for our nation's low and moderate income students and first generation students to a higher education. Instead of finding ways to increase college affordability and fund student financial aid during this reauthorization, Republicans have been focused on finding ways to open up more Federal dollars for for-profit education institutions, while finding ways to usurp college campus autonomy. Instead of increasing access, millions of students will see the cost of a college education increase significantly because of provisions found in H.R. 609. In committee, I voted to support the Democratic amendment to reauthorize the Higher Education Act, which would have increased access and enhance affordability for all students--all without raising taxes. The Democratic plan would have increased Pell Grants and would have maintained the promise Congress made in 2002 to cap the interest rate on student loans at 6.8 percent. The tax cuts proposed by President George W. Bush and the House Republican budget, forces college students to bear the weight of irresponsible fiscal policies. Today, this temporary extension is necessary, but I will continue to work to ensure that students will not be forced to pay for this enormous deficit now through financial aid cuts and in the future as taxpayers.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I want to express my support for H. Res. 375, as well as H. Res. 408 and H. Res. 419, all requesting information from the Administration regarding plans and communication leading up to the war in Iraq, as well as requesting information regarding the leak of CIA Agent Valerie Plame's name to the media. These resolutions highlight a disturbing trend within the Bush Administration to hide critical information from Congress and the American people. The President owes Americans the truth, especially when it involves the lives of our sons and daughters. Like so many of my colleagues, and so many of my constituents in the 4th District of Minnesota, I was profoundly disturbed when I learned of the so-called Downing Street Memo in May 2005. This document details minutes of a July 2002 meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his cabinet. The minutes of the meeting indicate that British officials believed President Bush had already decided to pursue war with Iraq. The minutes further appear to indicate that the Bush Administration was intentionally distorting intelligence information to justify the case for invading Iraq. Concern by Congress and the American people regarding the Downing Street Memo have escalated since first reported. Earlier this year, over ninety Members of the House sent a letter to President Bush requesting a full accounting of these allegations. The President has yet to respond to this letter. However, the British government has not disputed the authenticity of the Downing Street Memo, and a former senior Bush Administration official has confirmed the accuracy of this account to the press. The failure of the Administration to address these concerns and to adequately investigate the leak of an undercover CIA agent's name to the media is obstructionist. This is a meter of accountability and transparency, and I support all three of these resolutions. While all Americans stand united in support of our troops, President Bush has offered no plan for success in Iraq. In fact, most Americans now agree that the President's complete mishandling of the war in Iraq has transformed Iraq into a terrorist haven and made our own nation less safe. As a member of the minority party in Congress, I will continue to hold the Bush Administration accountable for the flawed and dangerous policy in Iraq. H. Res. 375, H. Res. 408, and H. Res. 419 should be favorably reported out of the House International Relations Committee, and the citizens of this country should finally be told the truth by this Administration.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, today I rise to oppose the Boustany amendment and all the explicit discrimination it represents by removing Head Start hiring protections provided by the Equal Opportunity Act. Currently, Head Start law embraces the Equal Opportunity Act. This amendment cuts the heart out of it. This is a blatant attack on civil rights and this sanctions discrimination. This would allow organizations to discriminate based on religion, as well as fundamentally changing disability laws, discrimination paid for by U.S. tax dollars. This amendment is offensive to Americans who value civil rights, equal justice, and to many, many of us who are strong people of faith. Let us be clear. Faith-based organizations currently are providing Head Start services, and their mission, their work is valued by all of us. This amendment provides no additional opportunities to faith-based organizations, because they can currently apply for Head Start dollars.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my sincere disappointment in the Committee on Rules decision to report a restrictive rule for consideration of the bill before us today, the reauthorization of Head Start, the future of our children. Several commonsense amendments were not ruled in order. Not surprising, most of them were Democratic amendments. Instead, several amendments that were ruled in order will weaken Head Start and the opportunity for our children. In the committee, there was support of adding the language ``faith- based'' into the bill, even though faith-based institutions currently participate in providing Head Start programs. We were happy to do this in committee; I was also, along with my colleagues, because the Equal Opportunity Employment Act is also spelled out clearly in the bill, which does not allow for discrimination in hiring. But there was another amendment that was not ruled in order, my amendment, an amendment which would have protected the privacy of our faith-based organizations and the integrity of our tax dollars. The amendment that I offered in the Committee on Rules would have simply required faith-based organizations to create a separate bank account, a separate bank account in which to receive Federal dollars for the Head Start program, a distinct and separate bank account from the private dollars that a religious organization collects to put forward their religious mission. Why do we need to do that? Well, first, we need to protect Federal tax dollars from being used improperly; and, secondly, we need to protect the privacy of faith-based organizations' accounting books for their religious mission. With the commingling of funds, if fraud is suspected, a faith-based organization would have to open up all of their books for inspection. My amendment would have required separate accounts, therefore, protecting the church's mission and the Federal education mission of Head Start. Mr. Speaker, let me quote from the Covenant Companion, a Christian publication. I quote from this publication, and I will also include this in the Record, as well as two other publications that speak to this. From the Covenant: ``Churches are particularly vulnerable to embezzlement because of the high-level of trust given to employees and volunteers that lack the sophistication, fiscal controls, and oversight.'' My amendment simply would have been a preemptive strike against financial abuse that we know will happen because it has already occurred. For example, this past summer, $80,000 was stolen from a Federal Head Start program run by a church. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule. We need a new rule, one that will protect the taxpayers, one that will protect faith- based organizations and stop discrimination. [From the Covenant Companion, Apr. 2003] When the Numbers Don't Add Up (By Bob Smietana) Sandra had a problem--an overdue Visa bill for $672 and no cash to pay it. And the Visa bill wasn't the only problem. Sandra was behind on a number of other bills and her creditors were calling. And calling. Then Sandra, the bookkeeper at a small manufacturing company in Kansas, came up with a desperate plan. She would use one of the company's checks to pay her bill. ``I thought, just this one time, just to get back on my feet,'' she told Fortune Small Business (FSB) magazine. ``No one will know.'' To disguise her actions, Sandra recorded the check under the name of one of the company's vendors. When the bank statement came, she removed the canceled check, leaving no trace of the theft. But it wasn't just one time. From 1992 to 1999, Sandra, a former small town cheerleader and mother of two, wrote out eighty-eight checks to pay her bills and made eighty-eight false entries. The total, according to FSB, was $248,383--all of it going to pay living expenses. Since her employers at the small, family-run business trusted her, they never checked her work. The embezzlement was discovered when Sandra went on vacation. While she was gone, one of the canceled checks was found and her boss discovered what she had done. Sandra was convicted of embezzlement and sentenced to eighteen months in prison. While fraud at major companies like World Com and Enron have made headlines in recent years, small businesses, nonprofits, and churches arc particularly vulnerable to embezzlement because of the level of trust given to employees and volunteers and the lack of sophisticated financial controls and oversight. In the past three years, GuideOne, which insures 45,000 churches in the United States, paid 3,845 claims to churches for losses from theft (by people outside the church) or embezzlement (by people inside the church). Those claims total over $8 million, with an average claim of $2,106. In the past ten years, at least eleven Covenant churches have reported being victims of embezzlement, with anywhere from ``just over'' $10,000 to more than $300,000 taken by people they trusted--volunteer treasurers, church staff, even a pastor. At least one major embezzlement at a Covenant church was discovered in 2002. And the actual number of embezzlements is likely higher because many churches are reluctant to report when a member of the church has embezzled money. Kent Egging, interim pastor of Bethany Covenant Church in Mount Vernon, Washington, has studied embezzlement in churches as part of a doctor of ministry degree program. Egging also knows the effects of embezzlement on a church firsthand--while he was co-pastor of a Covenant church in Portland, Oregon, the church's treasurer embezzled more than $45,000. The embezzlement began in 1992, soon after Jim, a member of the church, became treasurer. His main qualification, Egging says, was not formal training in business or accounting--``he was willing to do the job.'' Soon after starting, Jim learned that the church had a separate account to handle funds for a campaign to build a Christian education (CE) wing. Since the funds were not needed immediately, there seemed to be no need to closely monitor the account. That separate account gave Jim two things that an embezzler needs to succeed--access and no accountability. ``He found he could transfer funds into this CE account and then withdraw them,'' says Egging, ``and absolutely nobody knew.'' The transfers were made by phone, leaving no paper trail, and then the treasurer would create a false financial statement, which made it appear that the transactions had never taken place. ``When the building committee began asking for access to the CE funds, they had a hard time getting Jim to write them a check. In April 1993, he admitted--at first--taking $20,000. After learning about the embezzlement, the church discussed whether or not to call the police. In the process, Egging talked with a friend who worked in the local district attorney's office. ``You call the police now,'' his friend told him. ''You call them now. Here's what I can tell you--if he says it's twenty, it's probably forty. If he says he'll do anything you want right now to repay it, two months from now he won't be willing to do anything.'' Much of what Egging's friend said was accurate. A thorough investigation revealed that $45,000 was missing. While the church filed a police report, they did not press charges. Instead, they reached a binding agreement with their former treasurer to repay the money. ``We ended up having a stipulated statement of judgment,'' says Egging, ``which is a combination of a legally binding confession to a crime, so there is no need for prosecution, and a contract for repayment.'' The agreement for repayment was for about $50,000. The church only received about $300. Restoring trust after an embezzlement at a church is a long process. The first step is getting an accurate picture of what was lost. ``It was very important for us to do a proper accounting,'' says Egging. ``The biggest issue in all of this is trust, the violation of trust. It's not about the money so much. It's about the trust. He violated our trust. The trust of leaders in the congregation was in question because of this.'' To prevent any embezzlement from happening in the future, the church revamped its entire financial system. They hired a CPA to set up and monitor new accounting procedures. The church changed its bank accounts so that telephone transfers were no longer allowed. All financial statements were kept at the church, and all accounting work was done on the church's office computer rather than on a volunteer's home computer. That's an area of vulnerability in most churches, says Egging. ``I would bet that most churches in America have some or a significant number of financial records at somebody's house in a box or on somebody's home computer,'' he says, ``because home computers are generally better than church computers. A church wants to make it easy for a volunteer who's working on church finances.'' Embezzlement can happen even when a church has taken steps to prevent financial losses. That was the case at Highland Covenant Church in Bellevue, Washington, during the mid- 1990s. The church had a number of common financial safeguards in place--two signatures were required on every check, two people were present whenever collections were counted, and the church did an internal audit of its book each year. Highland also practiced a ``segregation of duties.'' One person, the financial secretary, deposited funds; another person, the bookkeeper, prepared checks. Neither the bookkeeper nor the financial secretary was allowed to sign checks. For the most part, Beth, the church's bookkeeper, generated Highland's checks on her computer. ``But every few months, she would call up and say her printer wasn't working,'' says Dave Kersten, who was pastor of Highland Covenant from 1986 to 1997. When this happened, Beth would prepare all of the payroll checks by hand and then send them to the church office to be signed. After they were signed, she would alter the checks, adding just a single digit to increase the amount, sometimes by several thousand dollars. ``She would write herself a check and her husband a check, because he was the part-time janitor,'' says Kersten. ``Instead of it being a check for $700--it could become a check for $4,700.'' Over a seven-year period, Beth took more than $300,000. The embezzlement was not detected because the church's bookkeeper had control of the bank statements. Early on, she had asked that all of the church's bank statement be sent to her home. ``And in a very trusting environment,'' says Kersten, ``that was the big mistake.'' When the first altered check was discovered, Kersten called the Bellevue police and spoke to a fraud detective. ``As soon as he heard that she had control of the bank statements, he knew that he had a real case,'' Kersten says. ``Invariably, when an organization allows a person who is writing the checks to control the bank statements, they are very vulnerable.'' While the church's financial reports indicated that it had money in savings and other discretionary funds, that proved to be false as well. All of those funds had been folded into the church's checking account. And because the embezzlement had taken place slowly, over a long period of time, it was easier to hide even during internal audits. Each year, two members were appointed to audit the books. They would call up Beth and ask her to send 3 months of statements, picked at random. ``She would pick months she didn't embezzle any funds and send them those accounts,'' says Kersten. ``The books balanced and that was the end of the story.'' The embezzlement came to light in April 1995, after the church let Beth go as bookkeeper because of suspicions that something was wrong with the church's finances. She was arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced to 40 months in jail. The decision to turn the matter over to the police had been fairly straightforward, because of the amount of money involved. Because their policy limited the amount of losses due to embezzlement or fraud, Highland received less than $20,000 from their insurance company. But the church was able to recover from the embezzlement, and by the time Kersten left in 1997, had rebuilt their savings and completed a major fundraising campaign. Most churches, charities, and businesses that arc victims of embezzlement are never able to recover the funds they lost. Often their insurance policies have clauses that limit liability due to fraud. Many embezzlers have financial problems and, despite stealing large sums of money, have no assets left when they arc caught. And while embezzlers often make restitution plans, it is difficult to enforce them. Remember Sandra, the accountant from Kansas? She was released from prison 2 months early so she could start repaying what she stole. According to FSB, she makes a monthly payment of $100--at that rate, it will take 20 years to pay it all back. She said she told her story because she wanted to help prevent other people from making the same mistakes she did. ``I'm not a bad person,'' Sandra told FSB. ``But I did a really bad thing.''

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. In 2006, American museums will celebrate 100 years as a profession with a prominent place in U.S. society. The recognition of 2006 as the Year of the Museums will allow Congress and the American people to have the opportunity to formally recognize and celebrate the many contributions our Nation's museums continue to make to our culture and life. Thank you to Congresswoman Slaughter and Congressman Shays, co-chairs of the Congressional Arts Caucus, for taking the leadership in introducing this resolution. As a member of the Congressional Arts Caucus and of the National Council on the Arts, as well as a Representative for a Congressional District rich in the arts and humanities, I am proud to be a cosponsor. Museums encourage the participation in and appreciation of the arts and humanities. They connect citizens to increasingly diverse world and help to preserve a community's culture and history. Museums also play a critical role in providing children and youth with opportunities that enhance their education in arts and humanities, by providing hands-on learning experiences. Relationships between museums, schools, colleges and universities, and other community organizations ensure that children, youth, students, and adults all have access to objective and educational information that enhance and broaden our understanding of the world we live in. Without museums, the historical preservation of, as well as the display of and care for, artistic pieces, artifacts, and living specimens would not be possible. Museums exist to connect people with art, history, and culture. In my District, more than a dozen museums contribute to the historical preservation and artistic expression of their communities, including the American Museum of Asmat Art, the Bell Museum of Natural History, the Como Zoo and Marjorie McNeely Conservatory, the Dakota County Historical Museum, the Gibbs Museum of Pioneer and Dakota Life, the Goldstein Museum of Design, the Jackson Street Roundhouse Museum, the Minnesota Children's Museum, the Minnesota History Center's Museum, the Minnesota Museum of American Art, the Minnesota Wing Commemorative Air Force Museum, the New Brighton History Center Museum, the Schubert Club and Museum of Musical Instruments, the Science Museum of Minnesota, and the Twin City Model Railroad Museum. Our communities count on our nation's museums, as well as our art and humanities organizations, to help educate, engage, and delight our citizenry and to strengthen our local economies. It is with great pride and appreciation for the role of museums in our communities that I submit this statement for the official United States Congressional Record.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act to Meet Immediate Needs Arising From the Consequences of Hurricane Katrina, 2005 (H.R. 3645) and of the decision to call this special session to send resources to Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama quickly. The thoughts and prayers of all Americans go out to the citizens of the states and communities devastated by Hurricane Katrina. The entire country has watched the images of the destruction caused by this natural disaster with shock and sadness. Those who have lost loved ones, their homes and their communities must receive immediate aid and the legislation we are passing today will start that process. As we respond to the immediate needs of the families displaced by this tragic natural disaster, the citizens of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama also have my commitment that I will work with you to rebuild New Orleans and the rest of the Gulf Coast. The impacts of this disaster on families, communities, the economy, and the environment will be long lasting. It will take resolve and commitment to ensure that we complete this enormous task. The American spirit and the generosity of our citizens will be there for the victims of this tragedy. The first responder in this effort, however, must be the federal government--both for immediate needs and for long term rebuilding. Today is a critical first step in that effort and I am pleased to support this bill.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, Hurricane Katrina has inflicted destruction, suffering and death on our Nation. The people of Mississippi and Louisiana have our prayers, and they deserve our Nation's full support. Our gratitude also goes out to the relief workers, law enforcement and military personnel who are helping, healing and saving lives. Now, as one Nation, Congress must act to provide the necessary relief, shelter, jobs, schools and hope our fellow citizens need to restart their lives. This is a long-term commitment, and these families must not be left behind. Katrina exposed the Federal policies that have neglected and abandoned our Nation's poor, elderly and disabled. Congress must address these shameful failures of the Federal Government's pathetic emergency response that left thousands of Americans vulnerable, exposed and abandoned. The American people and Katrina's victims deserve action and answers, and Congress has the obligation to deliver both.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, in North St. Paul, MN, this year marks 100 years of North High School, a pillar of the community since 1905. North High is one of three high schools serving the North St. Paul-Maplewood-Oakdale School District, a district which educates nearly 12,000 students each year. As illustrated by the school's vision statement and exemplified in the work of its faculty and staff, learning and citizenship come first at North High. Generations of students and their families have acquired knowledge, attained skills, and developed values that prepare them for lifelong learning and civic participation in our democratic society. Learning and growth happen outside of the classroom at North High as well. Students are provided with many leadership opportunities, including participation in more than 25 clubs and organizations, such as National Honor Society, Students Against Destructive Decisions, and Teens Advocating Peace. In addition, North High offers more than 26 athletic team opportunities for both boys and girls to learn the values associated with teamwork and physical fitness. Many families in Minnesota and in North St. Paul have shared memories and developed lifelong friends because of their North High experiences. My own family has strong connections to North High--both of my children are alumni of North High and I was a student teacher at North High while finishing my bachelor's degree at the College of St. Catherine. We count on our Nation's schools to help create and support our communities, strengthen our neighborhoods, and educate and prepare our children and youth. North High is a wonderful example of such a school. It is with great pride and appreciation for the role that students, faculty, staff, and alumni at North High play in North St. Paul and surrounding communities that I submit this statement for the official United States Congressional Record.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, Congress had the opportunity and the charge to develop a comprehensive energy policy that would make America safer, decrease our dependency on foreign oil, and invest in the next generation of clean and renewable energy. Unfortunately, H.R. 6 fails the current and future needs of our Nation miserably. As gas prices and oil industry profits rise, this bill rewards oil and gas companies with $2.8 billion in tax breaks and provides $1.4 billion in tax breaks for coal producers. These corporate giveaways only continue our addiction to Middle Eastern oil and enable our dependency on old and polluting technologies. Mr. Speaker, the U.S. needs to be a world leader in energy self- sufficiency through conservation, alternative energy sources, and responsible leadership from the White House and Congress. Regrettably, this bill fails on all those counts. It neglects to include a Renewable Portfolio Standard, which would have required large electric companies to obtain 10 percent of their power from clean renewable energy sources by 2020. This act, once again, fails to increase much-needed fuel efficiency standards of cars and trucks. As if this bill was not already bad enough, a new provision appeared after the conference committee had adjourned, which steers $1.5 billion to a private consortium located in the home district of Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay. It provides that the consortium, of which Halliburton is a member, can keep up to 10 percent of the funds for administrative purposes. This is an outrage and a mockery of the democratic process. America deserves a comprehensive energy policy that invests in the development of the next generation of fuel sources like fuel cells, hydrogen power and home grown Minnesota fuels like ethanol. I was pleased to see the measure tripling the amount of ethanol required in gasoline by 2012, but this bill could have done so much more to liberate our Nation from Saudi Arabian and Middle Eastern oil and move our Nation toward a sustainable and energy-independent future. Mr. Speaker, this is an energy bill for 1950, not 2050. It would have been difficult to support this outmoded policy decades ago, and I certainly cannot vote for it today.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference agreement on the Department of Interior Appropriations, H.R. 2361, because it addresses urgent needs within our veterans' health care system. Last month, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced a $1.3 billion shortfall in funding for veterans' medical care, and it is estimated that in FY 2006 this shortfall could grow. This is unacceptable. With thousands of new veterans entering our health care system every year--including those that have fought in Iraq, Afghanistan and the global war on terrorism--we must provide the resources they need and deserve, as well as continuing to provide for those who came before them. This bill provides $1.5 billion in emergency funding in FY 2005 for veterans health care and keeps our promise to those who have so honorably served our nation. This bill also provides a $5 million increase for the National Endowment for the Arts. I support this investment in our artistic resources. It enhances the richness of Minnesota and our nation's cultural legacy and allows participation in the arts by many who would not otherwise have the opportunity. Regrettably, this bill falls short on supporting the federal programs that conserve our environment and protect the public's health. This bill cuts funding for the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund by 17 percent. This fund allows states to allocate funds for local water and sewage treatment projects. St. Paul Regional Water Services recently applied for Clean Water funds for a water filtration project and were denied because there wasn't enough funding. Funding for the National Park Service is also cut by three percent. These dollars are used to protect our national treasures like Voyageurs, Yosemite and Yellowstone National Parks. The maintenance backlog at our National Parks has increased from $4.9 billion in 2000, when President Bush pledged to eliminate the backlog, to $7.1 billion today. We should give the Park Service the resources to maintain these national treasures instead of slipping farther and farther behind in unmet maintenance needs. I am pleased to support our nation's honored veterans. Unfortunately, while this bill could have done so much more to keep our families and communities strong and healthy and protect our nation's cherished natural resources for generations to come, this Congress failed to make the environment and public health a priority.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my opposition to the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act. We live in a world in which vital issues of national security, homeland security and intelligence gathering need to be balanced with the most fundamental freedoms and civil liberties granted to the American people by our Constitution. Terrorism is a real threat to our security, but laws that empower over zealous government officials to enter the private lives of individuals and ``sneak and peak'' based on suspicion is also dangerous. There was an opportunity to find a common sense, bipartisan agreement on protecting our security and our liberties that has been ignored by this legislation. There are sixteen provisions of The USA Patriot Act that the Bush Administration proposes to make permanent without sunsets. The bill before the House made 14 of these provisions permanent with two of the provisions scheduled to sunset in ten years. The purpose of a sunset is to allow Congress oversight over the implementation of the law. By making these fourteen provisions permanent, Congress abdicates its responsibility to review these provisions in favor of granting power to the executive branch. As co- equal branches of government, I strongly believe Congress has a responsibility to check the power of the executive branch, not cede authority that can threaten the civil liberties of our citizens today and tomorrow. Provisions in the Patriot Act continue to allow for government access to business records, private e-mail accounts, library reading lists and the monitoring of Internet habits. Credit card information and other private records including medical, employment and personal financial records can also be monitored. Virtually every aspect of an individual's life can come under profound scrutiny by government officials based on suspicion. This to me is frightening and to millions of honest, hardworking Americans. Fighting terrorism, organized crime and narco-terrorism is critical to keeping our communities and families safe. The men and women in law enforcement from local, state and Federal agencies--and throughout the criminal justice and counter-terrorism systems--have my deep admiration and respect. Their job is difficult, but this legislation fails to provide additional resources to confront threats and keep our communities safe. It instead creates endless opportunities for the violation of civil liberties and the freedoms we deeply cherish as a nation. Many people speak of sacrificing some of our freedoms in the name of security. This is a formula that empowers terrorists and encourages the very enemies of freedom. It is the wrong approach. I applaud my Republican colleagues who have joined Democrats in working for a common-sense Patriot Act that protects our security and our liberties. It is my hope that as this bill moves to conference committee with the Senate that the extremes in this legislation are tempered by a wisdom that embraces the American people's respect for privacy and desire for freedom.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my concern with the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007. While this bill authorizes I numerous commendable programs that strengthen U.S. efforts to advance foreign policy interests and America's role in the world, I am very concerned that this bill has become a vehicle for an extremist agenda which harms our Nation's global leadership role. Having started working on this reauthorization in the International Relations Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations, I would like to express my appreciation to Chairman Smith for accepting language to conduct a report on the issue of child marriage around the world. Child marriage, often involuntary and far too frequently intergenerational, puts girls as young as 8 and 9 years old at severe physical, emotional and health risk. The transmission of HIV, complications from early pregnancies and diminished economic and social power are common consequences of this harmful tradition practice that undermines U.S. development efforts in many African and Asian nations. My principal opposition to the final version of this bill is the result of the inclusion of the Hyde amendment to impose an onerous set of mandates on the United Nations. This amendment will hold the U.N. hostage to the whims of Republicans in the U.S. Congress. The Hyde Amendment is virtually identical to the Henry J. Hyde United Nations Reform Act of 2005 (HR. 2745) which I voted against on June 17, 2005. This legislation is opposed by the Bush Administration and eight former U.S. ambassadors to the U.N. Sadly, this amendment taints a bill that could have otherwise been generally acceptable. Finally, I would like to comment the amendment offered by Representative Tom Lantos, ranking member on the International Relations Committee, requiring the State Department to develop a strategy to counter perceptions among international students they are no longer welcome to study at our institutions of higher education. While national security is our top priority, if we are serious about reaching out to the international community and repairing damaged credibility in the world, we must be open and accommodating to foreign scholars and people wishing to come to the United States to further their education and contribute to the great wealth of intellect in this country. I commend Ranking Member Lantos for his efforts in this area. The U.S. role in the world is critically important at a time in which we are confronting terrorism as well as the human challenges of extreme poverty and global pandemics like HIV. This re-authorization should provide an opportunity for the House to provide meaningful policy direction to the executive branch. Instead an all too familiar unilateral approach to foreign policy has reemerged by demanding the withholding of the United States' contribution to the U.N. If the intent is to create an expedited process to destroy the U.N. and diminish U.S. credibility in the world even beyond the extraordinary efforts of the Bush Administration, this bill has succeeded. I strongly oppose this abrasive, ineffective and counterproductive tactic.

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota

Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5, the Republican Medical Malpractice legislation. This flawed bill provides sweeping liability protections to pharmaceutical and insurance companies, provides inadequate protections for doctors, and will do nothing to lower health care costs. Doctors are rightly frustrated over the significant increases in medical liability insurance premiums and I am truly concerned that additional costs make it more difficult for physicians to stay in practice. However, I do not believe that this legislation addresses the real problem, which lies with the insurance companies. Republicans have for years claimed that the rising costs of malpractice insurance are due to a dramatic increase in malpractice lawsuits. However, a recent study of the 15 largest insurance companies shows that over the past 5 years, premiums have doubled while claims payments have been reduced or remained static. This study proves that insurance companies are simply increasing their profits on the backs of our physicians. Another totally outrageous provision of this bill is the sweeping liability protection for pharmaceutical companies. This bill states that if a product has gone through the Food and Drug Administration approval process, no punitive damages can be awarded against the manufacture of the device or drug later. If this were to become law, the manufacturers of Vioxx would be protected from lawsuits from the families of those harmed or killed by this faulty medication. It is unacceptable to put into law that pharmaceutical and insurance companies are without accountability when their products or decisions knowingly cause harm. This Republican bill will hurt patients who are harmed by medical malpractice by arbitrarily capping damages and denying justice to injured patients and their families. This is not only unfair, it is unnecessary. New information shows that there is no link between the existence of malpractice caps and insurance premiums. Finally, because medical malpractice accounts for less than one percent of national health care costs, this legislation will do nothing to reduce health care premiums. Families across America are struggling to afford quality health care and the numbers of uninsured are on the rise. We need to address the real issues involved in the dramatic increase in health care costs, such as the cost of prescription drugs, provider shortages, uninsurance, and the cost of new technologies. This Congress must become serious about increasing access to quality health care. We need to put families, not pharmaceutical companies, first. I support the Democratic substitute which would have weeded out frivolous lawsuits but allowed justice for injured patients. Democrats were ready to take steps to really reduce insurance premiums by requiring insurance companies to give half of their savings to reductions in medical malpractice rates for doctors. Finally, this substitute would create a commission to evaluate the real causes of increases in premiums as well as insurance reform proposals. We all recognize that this is an important issue. This substitute will give us an opportunity to work together, with accurate information, to make real progress for patients and providers. Mr. Smith of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.