Betty McCollum

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests at this time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 3313, the Marriage Protection Act. This dangerous bill would severely undermine our constitutional checks and balances and set a precedent that undermines the independence of the federal judiciary. Republicans in Congress and the Bush Administration know their domestic and foreign policies are failing--so they are changing the subject. The war in Iraq is a quagmire. Our schools under funded. Our seniors are without the prescription drugs they need and millions of Americans are without jobs. Despite the many challenges facing our nation, the Republicans have chosen to ignore the real needs of the American people. In the process, they are hijacking our constitutional checks and balances and advancing an extreme right-wing agenda. For years, key decisions by the courts on the social issues of the day, including school prayer, busing, abortion and the Ten Commandments, have been followed by Republican court-stripping bills to remove the court's authority to hear challenges to such important cases. The Marriage Protection Act is just another example of a power grab that extends Republican control from the White House to Congress to the federal judiciary. This attack on the Judicial Branch's authority to hear cases based on Legislative and Executive actions is in fundamental contrast to the spirit of our democracy and the U.S. Constitution. Appropriately, most legal scholars have agreed that even if this bill was to become law, it would be unconstitutional. The fact that this legislation has advanced far enough to warrant a vote in the full U.S. House should raise alarm to the extent the Republican Majority will go to advance their right wing agenda. This legislation should be defeated. The House must send a strong message that we reaffirm our constitutional system of checks and balances between the three branches of government, and we support the basic, civil rights of all Americans--regardless of age, gender, race or sexual orientation. We have a responsibility to protect the Constitution, not render it unnecessary. Mrs. BONO. Mr. Speaker, I rise against H.R. 3313, the Marriage Protection Act, not because I seek to promote gay marriage but because I believe this bill fails to pass constitutional muster. Perhaps it is for this reason that Congress has never enacted legislation to prohibit all federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from hearing cases on constitutional matters. It is not within the interest of this institution to begin this practice now. This path can only lead us towards a slippery slope with no clear end in sight. I understand there are strong feelings on the issue of gay marriage on either side of the debate. I, for one, strongly believe in the sanctity of marriage and that marriage is between one man and one woman. But what this bill does is preclude even the ultimate arbiter of the United States legal system, the Supreme Court, from reviewing a constitutional matter. In fact, under this bill, even those who would seek to overturn a state's gay marriage law would not be able to appeal to the Supreme Court. Certainly, Congress has stripped statutory questions, like tree cutting, from federal courts. But none of these issues have fallen upon constitutional grounds. Even the non-partisan Congressional Research Service maintains that ``We are not aware of any precedent for a law that would deny the inferior federal courts original jurisdiction or the Supreme Court of appellate jurisdiction to review the constitutionality of a law of Congress.'' However, I strongly believe in the concept of ``checks and balances.'' Rest assured, should a federal court begin to exercise judicial activism that hijacks the powers of the other two branches, it is up to those branches of government to check the judicial branch and bring it back into balance. But this isn't the case here. In fact, one could question whether or not Congress, with this bill, would encroach upon the powers of the Supreme Court in having the final say. As of today, our system of ``checks and balances'' is working. Until this environment changes or breaks down, the most positive action Congress can take is to let the system work.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona, the subcommittee chairman, for entering into this colloquy. Mr. Chairman, I am seeking at least $3 million from the State Department's Nonproliferation Anti-terrorism Demining and Related Programs Account to fund demining activities in Laos. A persistent and deadly legacy of our country's involvement in the Vietnam War continues to kill and maim thousands of children, women, and men in the impoverished nation of Laos. I am speaking of the millions of unexploded cluster bombs left by a decade of bombing by the United States during the Vietnam War. This is a human rights tragedy for the people of Laos. From 1964 to 1973, the U.S. flew 580,000 bombing runs over Laos, one every 9 minutes for 10 years. More than 2 million tons of ordnance were dropped on Laos, double the amount dropped on the European theater during the entirety of World War II. As many as 30 percent of these bombs dropped on Laos did not explode, leaving up to 20 million unexploded submunitions, known as bombies, litter throughout the country. These American bombies may be 30 years old, but they continue to kill and maim children as well as farmers clearing the land for farming. In the first 5 months of 2004, 39 people died and 74 have been maimed by unexploded ordnance. In the 30 years since the end of the Vietnam War, an estimated 10,000 Laotian people, including thousands of children, have died. And yet while families struggle for food and survival, tens of thousands of acres of land cannot be put into agricultural production because the Earth is contaminated with this deadly cluster ordnance. In today's dollars, our Nation spent $9 million every day for 10 years dropping millions of tons of bombs on Laos. This year, fiscal year 2004, the State Department will spend only $1.4 million helping to remove our Nation's deadly legacy. We have a responsibility to help to end this ongoing human rights tragedy. I had intended to offer an amendment to more than double the level of the current funding in this account for Laos. However, I understand the chairman of the subcommittee has agreed he will seek to include language in conference with the other body that sufficient funds be found in the Nonproliferation Anti-terrorism Demining and Related Programs Account or from the Bilateral Assistance programs for Laos in order to continue this important work in fiscal year 2005; and, if possible, at $3 million in order to help provide for the expeditious removal of the unexploded munitions from Laos. Mr. Chairman, does the gentleman agree he will help to include such language in conference with the Senate?

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Subcommittee on Africa, I rise in strong opposition to the Kennedy amendment cutting funds for the International Development Association which is helping the Earth's poorest countries reduce poverty. In 2005, a country with a gross national income per capita exceeding $2.45 a day is not eligible for IDA loans. Imagine the poverty and the misery of nations impacted by IDA loans. IDA serves 38 nations in Africa that are among the world's 48 poorest nations. This amendment is exceedingly harmful to people of the 29 African nations that currently receive IDA support, but are not included in the President's AIDS initiative. Millions of poor Africans are the losers. It is foolish to fight HIV by cutting IDA funding for HIV in Chad or cutting support for children's health in Madagascar or by cutting the support for building peace in war-torn Sierra Leone or cutting educational assistance to Malawi. People living in desperation and misery on $1 or $2 a day should be supported in this House and International Development Association, and we should not punish the planet's poorest people. The amendment's author mentioned, where is the accountability? I would like to point out that two nations, Turkey and Korea who were once recipients to this aid, are now participants in IDA. This is a program which does have oversight, which does help the poorest of the poor in the world; and I would urge that the Members not support this amendment.

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I sincerely thank him for his courtesy and also for pursuing this. I also want to thank the ranking member, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), for her support on this matter. I look forward to working with both of them to address this important issue.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, the policy of the United States of America was articulately restated today by the Bush administration, and that statement is that there is only one China. The one China policy and the Taiwan Relations Act have resulted in stability and peace between China and Taiwan for more than a generation. This policy has created security for our allies, benefited U.S. interests in the region, and allowed for unprecedented economic growth in the region, improving the lives of millions of people. While the Taiwan Relations Act allows for the U.S. to supply military assistance to Taiwan to defend itself, this resolution ignores a very important component of the U.S. policy that is critical to this debate. In light of the rising tensions between China and Taiwan, potentially dangerous tensions, Taiwan has a responsibility, in fact, the obligation, not to pursue policies that would unilaterally alter its current status. The Taiwan Relations Act is intended to defend Taiwan, but it must not be considered a blank check to commit U.S. forces to defend any pursuit of independence by political leaders in Taipei. I cannot and I will not support an ambiguous resolution that could one day serve as a premise to commit American sons and daughters to defend the reckless political actions of Taiwan's leaders. The presidential elections earlier this year in Taiwan and the controversy regarding how they were conducted should raise very serious concerns in this House. The future of Taiwan's relationship with the U.S. is dependent upon a peaceful and stable Taiwan Strait. This is clear. A similar message is absent from this resolution that also must be sent to Taiwan's leadership. I will oppose this resolution today because it fails to send a message of prudence and responsible behavior to both China and Taiwan. That is the foundation of the one China policy.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the nearly 200,000 American servicemen and women, civilian government officials and private contractors working to secure, reconstruct and establish stability in Iraq. Their collective service and sacrifices, and the sacrifices made by their families in their absence, are to be honored and profoundly respected. The brave and proud people of Iraq also deserve to be recognized for enduring a very difficult and often violent transition from brutal authoritarian rule to the beginnings of self-rule. There remains years of work ahead by the Iraqi people and their journey will be difficult and bloody, but the path to an open, stabile and prosperous Iraq now lies ahead of them. The current situation in Iraq and the June 30, 2004 transfer of limited sovereignty requires U.S. policy makers and elected leaders to examine the very difficult reality of today and tomorrow with determination and honesty, rather than the best-case planning and irrational optimism that has plagued the occupation for the past twelve months. The U.S. occupation will continue on July 1, 2004 and tens of thousands of Americans remain working in a very dangerous war zone for an indefinite number of months or years. Today, over one hundred Iraqis and three American soldiers were killed in a series of coordinated attacks across Iraq. Hundred more Iraqis were seriously wounded. Yet, today in this House we debate House Resolution 691 which calls for the American people to ``celebrate the restoration of freedom in Iraq'' with the June 30th transfer of authority. The absurdity and contradiction between the reality in Iraq and this resolution's call for Americans to celebrate in the face of a murderous day and difficult days, months and years ahead is something I cannot support. Iraq is a war zone, where guerilla-style attacks take place everyday and our troops operate in an extremely hazardous environment. There is a phenomenal amount of work that still needs to be done before Iraq and the world can celebrate sovereignty. Mr. Speaker, I know the people of Minnesota honor the service of tens of thousands of brave Americans serving in Iraq with their thoughts and prayers every day, as do I. We also share in the mourning with the families of service men and women who have died in Iraq. We support the men and women who have come home wounded and need support and time to heal. We witness the tragic deaths of Iraqi women, men and children and feel anguish at the unending violence. Mr. Speaker, this is no time for the American people or the people of the world to celebrate as House Resolution 691 urges. On July 1, 2004, the first step toward Iraqi autonomy will be taken and the long and difficult path to peace, security and hope begins. It is at the end of this path--when Iraqi sovereignty does not require 140,000 U.S. troops to support it and when peace is real and the Iraqi people are celebrating their own freedom from occupation and violence--that the Congress, the American people and the world should join them in the celebration. We should be planning for success in Iraq, not planning for a celebration.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I would like today to rise in strong support for what the gentleman from Wisconsin was so eloquently up here speaking about before, the Environmental Management Program. This is a program that provides critical resources to keep the Mississippi River healthy and enjoyable for all of our citizens. The Mississippi River is a working river, and it is a river, which, when navigation takes place and projects by the Army Corps are put in effect for flood control projects, we quite often find ourselves with unintended consequences to the river's habitat. Without additional funding, the river habitat will continue to be lost and hundreds of species that depend upon the health of the river will struggle to survive, but it is not just fish and wildlife at stake. Millions of visitors spend annually billions of dollars on recreating along the Mississippi-Illinois rivers supporting thousands of jobs. The Mississippi River is also a source of drinking water for millions of Americans. The Environmental Management Program is the Nation's premier large-river monitoring and restoration program. It is a model for interagency and interstate cooperation on an equal system level national resources management. This is a very important management program; and as the committee moves forward, I would encourage it to look for any additional funding dollars.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today the House is considering legislation touted as a bill to create jobs and help our struggling manufacturing industry when in fact it does nothing of the sort. Instead, H.R. 4520 would give U.S. multinational corporations more incentive to ship jobs overseas, adds $34 billion to the deficit and includes billions in tax breaks for special interests, while failing to help small businesses. Small business firms create 75 percent of all new U.S. jobs every year and should be receiving tax relief in today's legislation. In addition to a $10 billion tobacco buyout, this legislation includes tax breaks for special interests such as bow and arrow makers, tackle box companies, and sonar fish finders. Unfortunately the House Republican leadership chose to use the FSC/ETI repeal to provide a broad and complex tax break for large corporations, rather than more focused relief that would also benefit smaller manufacturers and farm cooperatives that create jobs and have production solely in the U.S. Even the Bush Administration has expressed concern over several of the provisions of the bill. This legislation, by offering tax relief to manufacturing firms, but not giving a clear definition of what a manufacturing firm is, creates incentive for firms to characterize themselves as in manufacturing opening the tax code up to new abuses. For example, efforts have already been underway to include food processing and the mixing of water and concentrate to make a soft drink in the definition of manufacturing. Congress should not be creating incentives for businesses to manipulate their services. There is a bipartisan proposal in Congress to stop the sanctions and create American jobs, but the Republican leadership blocked Democrats from offering this legislation as a substitute. This substitute would strike the provisions that promote shipping jobs overseas, add provisions to create more jobs in the U.S. by giving tax relief to American manufacturing including small business and farmers, and strikes the narrow special interest provisions. Furthermore the substitute is paid for by cracking down on tax shelters and corporations and individuals that move abroad to avoid paying taxes. I strongly support providing tax relief to our manufacturing firms, businesses and family farmers, but it is irresponsible to only provide tax relief to large multinational corporations. I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation and instead pass a bill that would provide benefits to all U.S. manufacturing firms, big and small, without the costly special interest buyoffs found in this legislation.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased to be here to support House Resolution 630, congratulating the University of Minnesota Golden Gophers women's hockey team for their NCAA 2003-2004 women's ice hockey championship. I also want to congratulate head coach Laura Halldorson on being named the American Hockey Coaches Association's Coach of the Year for the third time since 1998. This women's hockey team is the first women's team at the University of Minnesota to win an NCAA championship. We are all proud of the extraordinary accomplishment of all of these women. The success this team has achieved this year will help to continue to fuel women's hockey, which is exploding in Minnesota and across the country. The success of the Golden Gophers and the ever-growing opportunities for women in sports remind us of the importance of title IX, the landmark legislation that banned sex discrimination in schools. Since its passage over 30 years ago, title IX has kicked open the door for women and girls in athletics and education; and since the passage of title IX, girls and women have gone from hoping for a team to hoping to make the team, from ringette to ice hockey. Unfortunately, there are still some who would like to turn back the clock and see this law weakened. But as women continue to make strides toward equal opportunity, title IX must continue to remain strong. We must uphold the progress we have made, and we need to continue to expand the opportunities for our daughters, our granddaughters, our nieces, and for the next generation of young girls. Every girl and young woman must be given a chance one day to become a national champion, just as these Golden Gophers women had the chance. Once again, I congratulate the University of Minnesota Lady Gophers on their extraordinary year.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge my colleagues to support a provision regarding cluster munitions that I have included in the Manager's Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2005 Defense Appropriations bill. I also want to thank you, Chairman Lewis, and Ranking Member Murtha for recognizing the unintended collateral damage and human damage caused by cluster munitions. The provision would require that the Department of Defense issue to Congress a written report on steps being taken to reduce the dangerous, unintended consequences of cluster munitions and submunitions. In particular, it will help hold the Pentagon accountable to their own policy standards and to the American people by helping ensure cluster munitions have a failure rate, or ``dud-rate'', of 1 percent or less. Cluster munitions are large weapons that contain hundreds of smaller submunitions, which upon release spread across a broad footprint and explode. These weapons continue to be used extensively by the U.S. military, even while alternatives and advanced technology exists. The use of cluster bombs in populated areas has taken a tremendous humanitarian toll. According to USA Today, one Iraqi father, after witnessing a U.S. cluster bomb strike in Iraq that killed his son, said ``Regular shells would hit only one spot, not every place just like a rain of death.'' Cluster munitions strike without distinction. They rain hundreds of thousands of smaller submunitions. Many of these submunitions have high dud rates--as high as 10 percent to 30 percent in certain instances-- which leave large numbers of unexploded submunitions that become de facto landmines that continue to kill and main, even long after the conflict is over. Extremely hazardous, these unexploded ``duds'' have been lethal for U.S. soldiers, peacekeepers, and local civilians. Children, especially, are often tempted to pick up these weapons since submunitions are small and can appear to be an intriguing object to play with. The use of cluster munitions is widespread. In Iraq, for example, Human Rights Watch used Pentagon figures to estimate that the use of cluster munitions in populated areas in Iraq caused more civilian casualties than any other factor in the coalition's conduct of major military operations. U.S. and British forces used almost thirteen thousand cluster munitions, containing nearly two million submunitions that killed or wounded more than one thousand civilians. Cluster munitions also take a toll on U.S. service personnel. A tragic example, reported by the Associated Press, involves U.S. Army Sergeant Troy Jenkins. After seeing an Iraqi child pick up a cluster submunition off the ground. Sergeant Jenkins rushed over to take the cluster submunition from the child. The ``bomblet'' then exploded and Sergeant Jenkins was killed. Today, countless U.S. service personnel encounter this unexploded ordnance. It makes their job extremely difficult and much more dangerous than it already is. The Pentagon has recognized the dangers of cluster munitions and has looked for solutions. In 1999, then-Secretary William Cohen issued a department-wide policy memorandum stating that all submunitions that reach full rate production during the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2005 must meet a failure rate standard of 1 percent or less. I ask unanimous consent to put a copy of Secretary Cohen's memo into the Congressional Record to accompany my statement. Despite this action, the Pentagon continues to produce and procure cluster munitions that have high ``dud'' rates when other alternatives are available. The Department's budget for the coming fiscal year contains several procurement requests for weapons programs that do not meet the 1 percent or lower standard. This is unacceptable. It is time for the Pentagon to stop buying or using cluster weapons that employ old technology. Mr. Chairman, our troops in the field, their families and the American people deserve accountability and answers from the Pentagon. It is time for the Pentagon to purge our arsenal of legacy submunitions and move toward the 1 percent dud rate. This report will help in these efforts, but it is not nearly enough. In the end, I believe we must find a way to ensure cluster munitions are never used in populated areas and we must do more to address the unintended consequences of these weapons. Our troops, their families and the innocent victims living in post-conflict areas deserve our full attention. Again, I thank Chairman Lewis and Ranking Member Murtha for their support of this provision, I urge its passage. The Secretary of Defense, Washington, DC, January 10, 2001. Memorandum for the Secretaries of the Military Departments. Subject: DoD Policy on Submunition Reliability (U). Submunition weapons employment in Southwest Asia and Kosovo, and major theater war modeling, have revealed a significant unexploded ordnance (UXO) concern. The following establishes the Department's policy regarding submunition weapons acquisition. The policy applies to systems delivered by aircraft, cruise missiles, artillery, mortars, missiles, tanks, rocket launchers, or naval guns that are designed to attack land-based targets and that deploy payloads of submunitions that detonate via target acquisition, impact, or altitude, or self-destruct (or a combination thereof). It is the policy of the DoD to reduce overall UXO through a process of improvement in submunition system reliability--the desire is to field future submunitions with a 99% or higher functioning rate. Submunition functioning rates may be lower under operational conditions due to environmental factors such as terrain and weather. Program Managers shall include the non-recurring cost of increasing the overall functioning rate; the operational use costs, including the cost of clearing UXO on test and training ranges in accordance with DoD policy and operational requirements; and disposal costs, as part of the life-cycle costs of all future submunition weapons. The Program Manager should establish submunition functioning thresholds and objectives that advance the process of improvement in system reliability, and that take into consideration the benefits from reduced UXO (i.e., a cost-benefit analysis of increasing the functioning rate (cost) and the resulting reduction in UXO (benefit)). The Services may retain ``legacy'' submunitions until employed or superseded by replacement systems in accordance with the above policy. The designation ``legacy'' would apply to submunition weapon acquisition programs reaching Milestone III prior to the First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2005. The Services shall evaluate ``legacy'' submunition weapons undergoing reprocurement, product improvement, or block upgrades to determine whether modifications should be made to bring them into compliance with the above policy. The Services shall design and procure all future submunition weapons in compliance with the above policy. A ``future'' submunition weapon is one that will reach Milestone III in FY 2005 and beyond. Waivers to this policy for future ACAT I and II submunition weapons programs, shall require approval by the JROC. This policy applies to all acquisition category submunition weapons programs. Compliance with this policy shall be assessed by the Component or Defense Acquisition Executive, as appropriate. Bill Cohen.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to legislation that would significantly weaken the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. The bill on the floor today exempts any federal agency from considering alternatives when assessing the environmental impact of renewable energy projects. It eliminates input from local communities, states and the public. I strongly support wind, solar and other clean, renewable energy projects. They are critical to our clean energy future. I have cosponsored legislation that permanently extends the wind energy tax credit. This tax credit will spur additional windmill development in Minnesota. I have cosponsored legislation that increases the use of biodiesel and ethanol. Minnesota is a national leader in producing these renewable fuels. The Republican leadership, however, isn't allowing these bills to be considered today. Renewable energy projects can adversely impact our environment and public health if not designed and operated properly. We have rules that ensure that all energy projects on public lands are subject to a full environmental and public health review required by NEPA. Congress must recognize the renewable energy development is key to our energy future. We must not pass legislation that fails to ensure that environmentally important renewable energy development occurs in a timely manner, in the right locations, is subject to the terms that fully protect the public interest and that there is ample public input. I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill today.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleague to join me in opposing a bill that fails to protect human health, our environment and our economy. In the name of reducing gas prices, the House today is debating legislation that will allow the Secretary of Energy to overturn the environmental and health concerns of our federal, state and local leaders. We need to increase our Nation's refinery capacity. Refineries are running full speed to meet gasoline demand. There are many reasons, however, why the number of domestic refineries has declined since the early 1980s. Congress should examine how consolidation in this industry affects gas prices. There have been no hearings on today's bill. No record has been established that fully describes the impact of this legislation on gasoline prices, refining capacity, our environment and especially our public health. Instead of finding ways to ensure that our refineries protect the public's health, House Republican leaders want to allow the Secretary of Energy to override clean air, clean water and hazardous waste laws. There was recently a discharge from a local refinery in Newport, Minnesota. My constituents were concerned that their homes and yards were covered with a fine white dust when they woke up a few weeks ago. They didn't know the dust wasn't toxic and dangerous to their health. This bill doesn't protect their public health from future threats. The Environmental Council of the States, the National Conference of State Legislatures and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials oppose this bill. The House should heed their warnings and reject this bill today.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Assistance for Orphaned and Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act. I want to thank the author, Ms. Lee, for her hard work and leadership in advocating for orphans for vulnerable children affected by the AIDS crisis. Today, there are more than 110 million orphans throughout the world. Communities heavily affected by AIDS are being robbed of a generation of adults in their most productive years, leaving behind children to be raised by relatives, left on their own in households headed by children, or even worse--living in the streets. The scope and complexity of the challenges facing children affected by HIV/AIDS cannot be overstated. Children often must take over adult work responsibilities and provide care for sick parents or family members, forcing them to drop out of school and social activities. Children are forced to find any work necessary to support themselves and often their younger siblings. We have a responsibility today to make a firm commitment to ensure that the funding we promised last year, in the Global HIV/AIDS bill, goes to improve the safety, health, and survival of these children. This important legislation will establish a new office of Orphans and other Vulnerable Children within USAID to adopt a comprehensive approach for assistance and coordinate that assistance provided to orphans and vulnerable children. By passing this legislation today and maintaining our promise for HIV/AIDS funding in the appropriations bill we are preparing to consider this year, we can provide hope and opportunity to the villages and communities where these AIDS orphans live, we can play an important role in educating and investing in future generations to fight this dangerous and deadly disease, and we can preserve the history of their culture for future generations. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, the House today is considering legislation that continues to ignore the real needs of our families. Today's energy bill won't create jobs, won't lower gas prices and weakens our strong environmental standards that protect our nation's health. America needs a comprehensive energy plan that strengthens our national security, grows our economy and protects our environment. We need to pass legislation that invests in energy-efficient technologies of the 21st century, expands conservation efforts and builds an infrastructure based on renewable, homegrown fuels. Democrats have a plan that would appropriate sufficient funds for the development of domestic energy sources. This includes measures to increase the use of renewable energy resources and the use of emerging technologies that could increase energy efficiency and reduce overall energy consumption. Unfortunately, Republicans won't allow this plan to be considered. Once again the House is considering pork-laden energy legislation that adds $140 billion to our deficit, benefits the Republicans special interest friends and fails to create twenty-first century jobs without providing energy independence. The Republican energy plan on the floor today is the same one the House passed last year. Their plan still tilts too far towards oil and natural gas production. I support domestic production of oil and natural gas. It must be done sensibly, however, to not harm our nation's environment. I also strongly support investing in energy efficient technology and renewable fuels. Minnesota leads the nation in wind power, ethanol and biodiesel. The energy bill we are passing yet again fails to adequately recognize these homegrown fuels. Instead of passing the balanced energy plan Minnesotans demand, the Republicans have loaded this bill up with giveaways to corporations making record profits. I will not vote for a pork-filled energy bill that doesn't meet our nation's energy needs for the first century. I urge my colleagues to vote no today.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to today's ill-conceived bill. Today, we should be creating jobs to replace the more than 2 million that have been lost the last three years. 38,000 private sector jobs and 43,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost in Minnesota alone since January 2001. This bill does nothing to replace them. We should be investing in our Nation's existing workforce training infrastructure. Last year, the Dakota County Workforce Council in my district helped over 1,000 dislocated workers and their resource rooms served nearly 40,000 individuals. Even more people could have received job training assistance with adequate funding for our One-Stops. Instead, the Republican leadership's bill gives unemployed workers a voucher--up to $3,000--instead of the job training they need and deserve. This bill ignores the real problems facing our working families. I have heard from Minnesota's workforce professionals who are worried that without new money, job training funds will be diverted under this plan, reducing funding for proven, successful job training programs offered by workforce training centers in my district. Congress needs to help the unemployed now, not start new, unproven programs. We should be extending unemployment benefits for the 1.5 million workers who have exhausted their current benefits, including over 26,000 Minnesotans who lost their benefits because Congress failed to act in December. Workers in my district aren't asking for new employment vouchers. They are asking for jobs. We are passing a bill that creates no new jobs while limiting worker access to existing training services. These vouchers undermine benefits for the long-term unemployed who can already access job training services. I urge my colleagues to vote no.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today as this House honors the life of the Fortieth President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, we remember both the man and the public servant. As President Reagan lies in state under the dome of this Capitol, the American people reflect on a man of optimism, a leader committed to freedom and a citizen who personified the American spirit of boundless ambition and achievement. President Reagan lived a life unlike any other American president. A sports broadcaster, a movie star and a television personality, President Reagan entertained Americans with his charm, smile and warmth. He combined the skills of an actor with the determination of a pioneer to transform public life as he entered the political realm in California and finally was elected by the American people to the White House. As President of the United States, Ronald Reagan won two large election victories in 1980 and 1984 to set this Nation on a course to transform our economy and confront communism. The outcomes and consequences of his policies will be interpreted by historians for years to come, but there is no doubt President Reagan motivated a new generation of conservatives to join his crusade as well as a generation of progressives to unite in pursuit of an alternative path of action. Our State of Minnesota had a unique relationship with President Reagan. Minnesota was the only State in the Union to never give President Reagan an electoral victory. Minnesotans stood twice with our homegrown son, but we respected the President, his skills as a communicator and his determination to elevate the American spirit. President Reagan lived a truly American life and, in his final years, stood hand in hand with Mrs. Reagan to encounter Alzheimer's with dignity and grace. The life of President Reagan the leader and Ronald Reagan the man will be remembered, honored and celebrated this week by Congress, the American people and people in nations around the world. On behalf of the families of Minnesota's Fourth Congressional District, we extend our prayers and sincerest condolences to Mrs. Nancy Reagan, her children and all of the family and friends of President Reagan.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4060, the Health, Safety, and Security of Peace Corps Volunteers Act of 2004. The Peace Corps represents our nation's enduring commitment to progress, opportunity, and expanded development--beginning at the grassroots level. Since 1961, more than 170,000 Peace Corps Volunteers have served in 137 countries to promote the Peace Corps' mission of world peace and friendship. Volunteers offer skills in education, healthcare, business, agriculture and the environment. They respond to the world's most challenging crises like poverty, hunger and HIV/AIDS. They are to be commended for their sacrifice, their hard work and their commitment to improving the lives of others. Today, more than 7,500 Peace Corps Volunteers--young and old--serve in 71 countries around the world, including 25 volunteers from my Congressional District. With an increase in volunteers comes a greater challenge for the Peace Corps to ensure the safety and security of all Volunteers. Expanding the Peace Corps' missions in Africa, the Middle East and other volatile regions increases the chance of criminal activities and requires the dedication of greater time, energy and resources toward safety issues. H.R. 4060 takes a good step toward strengthening the Peace Corps and making sure all Volunteers are safe. The bill creates a Peace Corps Ombudsman to receive and inquire into complaints, questions, or concerns raised by current or former volunteers or employees of the Peace Corps. This legislation also establishes an Office of Safety and Security within the Peace Corps to help coordinate all security activities. These are important steps which I support. I believe a Volunteer's safety is both the responsibility of the Peace Corps and the Volunteers themselves. Weeks of safety training and country background preclude any Volunteer's departure overseas and Volunteers are advised of the precautions necessary before integrating into some of the poorest and disparaged communities in the world. As Ambassador and Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, Tony Hall said, ``You have to go into the service with your eyes open''. Nonetheless, it is appropriate that the House International Relations Committee worked with the Peace Corps to address the needed improvements to security for Volunteers and the Peace Corps has begun implementing these changes. As a member of the House International Relations Committee and a strong supporter of the Peace Corps, I urge passage of this legislation. We must do everything we can to ensure the mission of the Peace Corps is carried on and our Volunteers are protected.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 413 honoring the contributions of the more than 6 million American women, symbolized by ``Rosie the Riveter,'' who served our country on the homefront during World War II and the changes to our society that came about because of them. I am extremely proud to join all 62 women Members of Congress as cosponsor on this legislation as well. Today, we recognize the contributions to those who may not have faced enemy fire but were no less a part of our decisive victory in those dark times: the millions of Americans who across the Nation heeded a call to serve when their country needed them. During World War II, this remarkable band of women picked up the rivet guns left on factory floors and shipyard docks by their departing husbands, boyfriends, sons and dads and those women started building the tanks, airplanes, and ships that America needed to win the war. The legacy of Rosie the Riveter is the creation of opportunities to all Americans. For the first time in America, during World War II, women and minorities gained access to high-paying jobs in industry. Employee-sponsored health care and services such as child care for children of workers were developed during this time. I am proud to join my colleagues today in applauding the improvements in the workplace and our society during the Rosie the Riveter Era and in honoring these women for stepping forward when their country needed them.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today the House considers H.R. 4359, to make the increase in the child tax credit permanent and expand it for taxpayers in the $110,000 to $300,000 range. Instead of taking responsible steps to make permanent a tax cut to help working families with children, this bill balloons our federal debt and gives thousands of dollars in extra tax breaks to the very wealthiest Americans. Meanwhile, those who need help the most, low- to moderate-income working families with children, receive little benefit under this bill. And those at the very bottom get nothing. Even worse, this bill threatens middle-class families as the legislation fails to pay for these tax cuts--increasing record deficits that threaten economic growth, raise interest rates, and cost jobs. I support middle-class tax cuts and the child tax credit, but middle- class families would be much better off if these tax cuts were paid for and targeted to those who need them most. I support the Democratic alternative which makes sure these tax cuts are paid for through 2010, increases the child tax credit for more than 31 million middle-income families with children, over 75 percent, currently receiving the credit, and provides the child tax credit to an additional 2.5 million working families, instead of showering more tax cuts on those who have already benefited under the Bush tax cuts.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2432, the Paperwork and Regulatory Improvements Act of 2004. The paperwork and regulatory burdens on businesses could certainly use improvement. Unfortunately, this bill is actually an underhanded way to weaken important regulations that protect our clean air, clean water, public lands, and workplaces. This bill would diminish, rather than improve the process of developing federal regulations by elevating the interests of industries over all other considerations. This bill also fails to address real current problems in federal regulation, such as the pressure on agencies to misuse or ignore science for political ends. I strongly support the Waxman-Tierney amendment to establish an independent commission on the politicization of science in the regulatory process. The amendment responds to a growing concern among scientists and the environmental community that the Bush administration is placing politics above science. Just last month the Bush administration issued a new policy that would allow hatchery-raised salmon in the Pacific Northwest to be included in wild salmon population counts, which could have a significant impact on whether or not the species are listed under the Endangered Species Act. It has been reported that this was done over the objection of an independent panel of scientists commissioned by National Marine Fisheries Service to advise them on the issue. I am deeply disappointed that H.R. 2432 takes us in the wrong direction by advancing a misguided concept that elevates the interests of regulated industries over the health of our communities. I understand the burden that many businesses, especially small businesses, face in filling out government paperwork. This bill, however, is more about coming up with excuses to undermine vital health, safety, and environmental regulations than about relieving the growing paperwork burden.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, it is with great reflection that I rise to recognize the hundreds of thousands of soldiers serving in our armed services today around the world, and to remember those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in the protection of our great country. This has been a difficult year for many families in Minnesota, particularly those who have loved ones serving overseas in the armed forces. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the global campaign against terrorism have required much of the American people and the sacrifices are significant. War has separated thousands of Americans from their loved ones. Many families have not seen their fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, or friends and relatives for many months. Today, the House rises in a moment of silence to recognize our fallen heroes. I would like to specifically mention the eight Minnesotans whose selfless acts of heroism in Iraq over the past year cost them their lives: Jim Herrgott, 20, of Shakopee; Brian Hellermann, 35, of Freeport; Dale Panchot, 26, of Northhome; Patrick Dorff, 32, of Buffalo; Matthew Milczark, 18, of Kettle River; Levi Angell, 20, of Cloquet; Moises Langhorst, 19, of Moose Lake; and Tyler Fey, 22, of Eden Prairie. Their service and their spirit live on in the memory of all Minnesotans. This Memorial Day, I urge all Minnesotans to pause and remember those who have served our nation and those that continue to serve today. The debt of gratitude we owe these brave men and a woman is great and we must never forget their sacrifices for our freedom.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 352 and to recognize the great contributions of people of Indian origin to the United States and to strengthen our bilateral relationship with the people of India. For decades, people of Indian origin have immigrated to the United States. They have made extraordinary contributions to our Nation, from advancements in science and technology to business development, philanthropy, literature and the arts. Their contributions have helped make the United States a more diverse and prosperous country. In Minnesota, people of Indian origin have made their presence felt throughout our communities and neighborhoods. Small and large Indian businesses have flourished in Minnesota. Groups like the India Association of Minnesota, the Asian Pacific Policy Roundtable and CAIR Minnesota have worked very hard to promote a strong, bilateral relationship between India and the United States, raising greater awareness toward human rights and regional reform. Other organizations, like the Indo-American Association of Minnesota, have taken the lead in promoting arts, cultural, spiritual and classical music as well as entertainment. Our colleges and universities have also expanded educational exchanges and opportunities between Minnesota and India, fostering new relationships and promoting greater cooperation between our two countries. Minnesota has also seen a rise in new and exciting Indian-American leaders, including State Senator Satveer Chaudhry, elected in 2000 and representing Senate District 50 in my Congressional District. Senator Chaudhry is the highest-ranking Indian-American elected official in the country. As a friend and a former colleague, Senator Chaudhry's leadership has ensured that Indian-American families in Minnesota, as well as all the families in his district, are well represented. Again, I support H. Con. Res. 352 and I urge passage of this important legislation. Minnesota has benefited greatly from its Indian- American community and I look forward to strengthening our relationship with our Indian friends and neighbors in the future.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the more than 2 million taxpayers who are unfairly burdened by the alternative minimum tax. The AMT was originally designed in 1969 to ensure that the wealthiest Americans would still pay a fair share of taxes. The AMT now burdens many middle income Americans in what was once envisioned as an alternative minimum tax has now become more of a mandatory maximum tax. The AMT is not a technicality of significance to only a few bureaucrats and the tax lawyers. It is not a mere glitch, the repair of which would only help a handful of wealthy individuals. It is a system that affects 2.4 million families this year. By 2010, 30 million Anrencans will be faced with minimum tax liability. Unfortunately, under the Republican bill today, AMT exemption would only be raised to $40,250 for single taxpayers and $58,000 for married couple filing jointly in 2005. This would still leave 1 million families paying the AMT. Unlike other tax cuts being forced through by Republicans, this will only be a temporary 1-year fix. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that a true fix of the AMT would cost $376 billion over 10 years. But Republicans have refused to pull back their tax cuts for the wealthy, which have created a $3 trillion deficit, in order to pay for this essential middle class tax relief. I ask unanimous consent to insert into the record an editorial from the May 10, 2004 Los Angeles Times highlighting the budget gimmicks being used to disguise the cost of AMT and other tax cuts. Today Democrats bring to the House floor a true solution to the AMT problem. The Democratic substitute completely exempts married couple families with incomes under $250,000 from the alternative minimum tax, providing tax relief to more than 10 million families. The Democratic plan is fully paid for by cracking down on corporate tax shelters. Nearly two-thirds of corporations paid no tax at all in 2000 and this is an important step to ensuring that corporations pay their fair share while relieving middle class families from the unfair burden of the alternative minimum tax. It is important that we act today to ensure average income Americans will not unfairly face the alternative minimum tax in 2005. However, I believe we should provide this relief in a fiscally responsible manner that will not burden future generations of Americans. I urge my colleagues in joining me today in support of real AMT relief. [From the Los Angeles Times, May 10, 2004] Presto!--It's Deficit Magic Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan is increasingly testy about the perils of the federal budget deficit, warning Congress and the Bush administration last week that it poses ``a significant obstacle to long-term stability.'' The higher the debt goes, the more the threat of inflation increases. That forces the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates, slowing economic growth. Friday's sunny job creation figures, though good news, also intensify pressure to raise rates. The Congressional Budget Office projects a deficit of $477 billion for 2004--and by 2013, a recent average college graduate will shoulder $51,520 of the total national debt. The new $25 billion request by the White House to underwrite the Iraq occupation will be on top of those projections. But Congress continues living in a fiscal house of mirrors, using gimmickry to disguise the cost of current and proposed tax cuts. The mischief begins with the one-year curb on the so-called alternative minimum tax that the House approved Wednesday. If enacted, it will shield about 9 million individuals and families at a cost of $17.8 billion to the Treasury. The AMT is a parallel tax system originally designed to prevent the wealthy from avoiding all income taxes. But because it was not indexed for inflation, middle-class taxpayers are falling within its limits. Indexing the tax makes sense, but not on top of the more reckless cuts already passed. Now Congress seeks to have it both ways by relying on one- year extensions. It pretends at budget time that hundreds of billions of AMT dollars will be available over the next decade. Then it can turn around and extend AMT relief for another year. The ``marriage penalty'' produces another sleight of hand. A tax code quirk often penalizes married couples when both spouses work. Once again, relief is good in theory but lawmakers aren't honest about lost revenue. By pretending the AMT will be in effect, they assume for budgeting purposes that about half of the tax cuts the AMT is intended to provide for married couples will be canceled out. Dizzying as well as deceptive. The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that if, as is likely, the AMT is curbed each year, the bill the House passed April 28 for marriage relief would cost $204 billion over 10 years, not $105 billion. If Congress rolled back the parts of the tax cuts that benefit the most wealthy, changes to the AMT and marriage penalty could be considered, but cuts already enacted reduce federal taxes of households with incomes above $1 million an average of $123,600 in 2004. Over the next decade, interest payments on tax-cut debt will amount to all that the government spends on the departments of Education, Homeland Security, Interior, Justice and State. The longer that lawmakers budget by fakery, the more they will inundate future generations with trillions in debt. Whom will those generations blame?