Tom Osborne

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 101, which recognizes the contributions of Native Americans to American history, culture, and education. I represent the Third District of Nebraska and a number of Native American communities. The history of my state has deep roots in Native American history. Before Nebraska was settled by Europeans, 40,000 members of the Pawnee, Omaha, Oto, Ponca, Santee Sioux, Dakota Sioux, Oglala Sioux, Cheyenne, Potawatome, Arapahoe, Sac, Comanche, Brule, and Fox tribes lived in what would become the state of Nebraska. Today, there are approximately 9,000 Native Americans living in Nebraska, including those who live on the Santee, Winnebago, and Omaha reservations. As this resolution suggests, Native Americans have richly enhanced our country culturally and politically. They deserve the recognition this resolution offers. Native Americans have greatly influenced the creation of our government and were among the first to implement the principles upon which democracy is based, such as freedom of speech and separation of church and state. In addition to recognizing the contributions of Native Americans to American history, culture, and education, today offers an opportunity to voice our support for Native American communities and their causes. We must increase our support for the Impact Aid program, which supports public schools whose tax bases are affected by the presence of the federal government. In my Congressional District, the Santee Public School, located on the Santee Sioux reservation, depends heavily on impact aid funding for general operating expenses. Because Native American communities often lack a strong local tax base from which to raise revenue, support from the federal government is crucial. In addition, we need to focus on ways to improve the quality of life for Native Americans, particularly for those living on or near reservations. We need to provide support for the Indian Health Service so that more Native Americans can receive adequate and timely health care. Native Americans have high rates of many physical problems ranging from diabetes to alcoholism. In addition, a number of social factors impact their communities. High school dropout rates are high, and truancy in schools is rampant. Native American communities also lack economic resources, and poverty is a serious problem. I don't pretend to have the answers that address the challenges faced by some Native American communities--including many in my Congressional district--but raising awareness of the proud history and culture of Native Americans and looking to Native American leadership are two excellent places to start. This resolution will raise awareness of the proud traditions of Native American culture, which have contributed much to the success of our country. I am pleased to support this resolution, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Minnesota, and I certainly appreciate the comments of my colleagues from Iowa, Nebraska, and others who are going to speak after me. I guess I would like to add my comments of appreciation for what the administration has done. We have heard for a number of weeks that the answer had not been official, but we were going to like what we heard, so I would reiterate what the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham) said, that we believed all along that the President was a man of his word, and so we are glad this has happened. The problem has been that we currently have roughly 62 production plants for ethanol in the United States, and we probably have somewhere near that number in various stages of production. Of course, the thing that has held these people up has been concern, what is going to happen about the waiver in California. If the waiver had been granted, then the demand for ethanol would not have been increased, it would have been reduced. So those people who are sitting on the sidelines and were worried about investment now are free to go forward, and I think we will see an immediate benefit. We will see a great jump in the production of ethanol in the next year or 2 years. This is important. It has been important for the Nation and important for the Midwest. I would just like to mention three areas where I think this will have far-reaching consequences. First of all, as has been mentioned earlier, it reduces our dependence on foreign oil. This is a big issue, because today roughly 56 percent of our petroleum is imported from OPEC; and as has been pointed out previously, OPEC is not necessarily terribly friendly to the United States. If at any time they decide to double the price or simply turn off the spigot, our Nation would grind to a halt within a matter of months. So dependence on foreign oil is a big issue. As the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham) mentioned, the earlier crises in the petroleum industry in the late 70s and 80s, where we had long lines of automobiles lined up for gasoline, at that time we imported 30 percent of our oil from OPEC, and today that number is double. So we are more at crisis today than we were even at that time. Of course, there was a great deal of concern about OPEC in those years. Two-thirds of the world's known oil reserves are located in the Persian Gulf at the present time; and by the year 2010, many analysts believe that more than 75 percent of the world's petroleum will be met by Middle Eastern countries. So we are going to become more dependent, instead of less, if we stay on the current track we are on. In 1998, a poll showed that 83 percent of American voters feared that the United States is extremely vulnerable to OPEC. Of course, if you took that poll today, I am sure that number would be much higher than 83 percent. Currently, I think there is one thing that many people may not realize, but every vehicle marketed in the United States today can run on ethanol blends. Many people feel, well, you have to have a special automobile. That is not true. Every automobile can run on a 10 percent blend. We have many automobiles that run on 85 percent blends. So if you think about the possibilities, we can certainly lessen our dependence on OPEC greatly as we increase the percentages. So this is a very important development. The second area that I think is very important as far as this ruling is concerned, as has been mentioned earlier, ethanol and biodiesel are of great benefit to the environment. It reduces greenhouse gases, global warming, acid rain, ozone depletion; and of course, many of us have been somewhat skeptical about global warming, but a recent study that the administration has ordered indicates that apparently there is something to this. It is something that needs to be addressed seriously, and of course, ethanol and biodiesel are important elements of this equation. Currently, ethanol contains 35 percent oxygen by weight; and of course, that enhances the combustion of gasoline, resulting in a more efficient burn and greatly reduced exhaust emissions. Some people have said it reduces exhaust emissions by as much as 30 to 35 percent. This is a huge factor, and this is why ethanol and MTBE both are required in many of our major cities. Of course, we know that MTBE has been a problem. Ethanol has nearly twice the oxygen content of MTBE, and can provide greater emission reduction on a per gallon basis than MTBE. As has been mentioned earlier, MTBE has been proven to have some health consequences and cancer risks. It does pollute the ground water. It is being phased out in a great many of our States, and we think others will follow. Ethanol is not only better for the environment, it is more cost-effective, and is certainly a superior fuel. Then lastly we might mention, in regard to environmental issues, that ethanol can replace the most toxic parts of gasoline with a fuel that quickly biodegrades in water, reducing the threat that gasoline poses to waterways and ground water. Anyone who has been involved with a brownfield or Superfund problem realizes the threat that petroleum poses to ground water. It has been proven that at the present time ethanol is not a threat, and it is soluble in water, so it is one product that can be used in petroleum that is not a hazard. So environmentally, we see that there are a great many benefits. Lastly, I would mention that there is a serious economic benefit to the Nation, and particularly to the farm economy. All of us who are on the Committee on Agriculture are very aware of the fact that most of our people will tell us, we do not want any more government payments, we just want a fair price. We want profitability in agriculture. So most of us, I think, as we have studied the problem, have come to believe and to understand that the key to profit in agriculture is value-added agriculture. It lies in cooperatives, where the farmer participates in the whole process from the beginning to the end. So this is an opportunity for the Nation and certainly for our farmers to reap some of the economic benefits of this product. Currently, ethanol represents a market for over 600 million bushels of corn each year. This adds $4.5 billion in farm revenue annually. The USDA, as mentioned earlier, estimates that this adds about 15 cents to the price of a bushel of corn. When corn is selling at $1.60, that 15 cents is a huge issue for a great many of our farmers. Currently, more than 1.5 billion gallons of ethanol are added to gasoline in the U.S. each year, and it is estimated on our current track with this ruling that by 2004, that will go to 3.2 billion. It will more than double. Of course, this will pretty much eat up any surplus that we have in corn and milo, and that could probably be in soybeans, as well. This has been one of the factors, of course, that has led to a lower price, so we think this has some great opportunities in this regard. Then we might also mention some statistics put out by the Midwestern Governors Conference. They say that ethanol will boost total employment by 195,000 jobs. That is a huge increase in employment, particularly in the agriculture economy. It adds over $450 million to State tax receipts, and improves the U.S. trade balance by $2 billion. Of course, all of us have been suffering and realize our Nation is suffering from a negative trade balance. This is something that reverses that trend by $2 billion, and it results in a net savings in the Federal budget to $3.6 billion. Of course, that involves all taxpayers, not just people in the farmland, but all taxpayers everywhere. Lastly, let me just mention a couple of other things. As most people know, we have been talking about ethanol, we have been talking about biodiesel, but it is not just that. In the production of ethanol we have by-products, so we have feed, which is very high protein, very nutritious, and of course that adds value to our cattle, and has been a huge benefit to the livestock industry. Also we have wet milling plants that, from the by-products of making ethanol, are able to produce clothing, in some cases; plastics, biodegradable plastics, and other products. So we see great potential in terms of side effects, side products. We think this is going to be very important. So we greatly appreciate the decision by the administration, and that is why all of us are over here tonight voicing our pleasure, our approval. We think it is a win-win situation for the American people, the farmers, the environmentalists, and everyone involved. So I appreciate the gentleman organizing this special order.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), the sponsor of this resolution. (Mr. DUNCAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OSBORNE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Education Reform.

Mr. OSBORNE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I would particularly like to thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) for his efforts on this resolution, and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for his efforts as well.

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

Mr. OSBORNE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Concurrent Resolution 100 which recognizes the American Football Coaches Association for its dedication and efforts to protect children by providing inkless child identification kits for use by parents. In the past 4 years, over 4.2 million identification kits have been passed out at college football stadiums. As a member of the American Football Coaches Association and a former football coach, I have participated in this program myself and know that the kits can be useful tools for parents. My former university, the University of Nebraska, has participated in this program since the program's inception in 1997. In the spring of 1999, 60,000 ID kits were distributed to Nebraska's school children in grades kindergarten through the fourth grade. Statistics about missing children in the United States are staggering. According to the FBI and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, 750,000 children were reported missing last year. Approximately 450,000 of these children ran away, an additional 350,000 were abducted by a family member, and over 4,500 were abducted by a stranger. This works out to be about 2,100 children missing each day. In 1999, the last year with statistics available, almost 3,000 cases of online child exploitation were prosecuted. No place in America is immune from child abductions or exploitation. Earlier this year in a high profile case, a teenager in my district was kidnapped by an escaped fugitive in the parking lot of a shopping mall in Kearney, Nebraska. Fortunately, this kidnapping ended peacefully with the kidnapper's surrender, but many children are not as lucky. If the worst happens and a child is abducted or decides to run away, parents need to have tools to help police locate and identify their children. Because less than 2 percent of parents have a copy of their child's fingerprints to use in the case of an emergency, the American Football Coaches Association created the National Child Identification Program with the goal of fingerprinting 20 million children. The program provides a free inkless fingerprint kit for each child. The inkless ID kit allows parents to take and store their child's fingerprints in their own home. The card remains in the parents' possession. But if it is ever needed, this card will give authorities vital information to assist them in their efforts to locate a missing child. To fund the program, the coaches association has teamed up with local and national businesses and media. In my previous occupation, I signed several hundred football helmets to auction off to raise money for this worthy cause. I believe we must approach the protection of our Nation's youth from a variety of angles. These kits are a start, and they may open the doors of communication for parents to talk to their children about the rules of safety advocated by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and discuss ways to address family problems. I also am a longtime supporter of youth mentoring projects. I believe mentors can provide youth a positive role model and a line of communication with a caring adult. Quality mentoring programs can prevent youth from ever running away from home in the first place. I am pleased to support this resolution that commends the work of the American Football Coaches Association for its efforts to locate missing, kidnapped, and runaway children through the distribution of the inkless fingerprinting kits. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OSBORNE. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. OSBORNE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Concurrent Resolution 100.

Mr. OSBORNE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 100) commending Clear Channel Communications and the American Football Coaches Association for their dedication and efforts for protecting children by providing a vital means for locating the Nation's missing, kidnapped, and runaway children, as amended.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, over the last several days a great deal has been said about our national energy crisis. Unfortunately, most of the commentary has centered on finding blame. At various times, the Bush administration, the Clinton administration, the California legislature, energy companies, environmentalists and others have been blamed. As I see it, the main value of looking at the past is to make sure we do not repeat the same mistakes that caused the current problem. However, dwelling on the past and attempting to fix blame serves no useful purpose and actually impedes progress. What is needed now is to identify solutions and start moving toward those solutions. In my previous profession, which was coaching, there are all kinds of people that could say what went wrong and why it went wrong, but this really did not accomplish anything. What we were looking for was people with proactive ideas, because they were able to help relieve the situation. Part of the solution to the current energy crisis that would appear to benefit all factions involved would be that of ethanol production. The use of ethanol in gasoline has been proven to reduce harmful emissions by 30 to 50 percent and is a renewable source of energy. Therefore, it benefits the environment and should certainly please the environmental community. It has a potential to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by a small but significant amount, which serves our national interests and benefits consumers. It utilizes grain surpluses, improves commodity prices and benefits the agricultural community. If you look at what is going on in agriculture today, ethanol may be about the only real bright spot out there for those who grow row crops. We are poised to increase our ethanol production by 200 to 300 percent, as dozens of new ethanol plants are in various stages of development. The one deterrent to this development is uncertainty as to whether the 2 percent oxygenation requirement for fuel is going to be waived. Currently, about eight-tenths of 1 percent of our national fuel consumption is provided by ethanol. It could very easily go to as high as 5 or 6 percent. If the oxygenation requirement is waived, the demand for ethanol could go down close to zero. So this is a huge factor for those who are involved in the ethanol industry. It is extremely important for all concerned that the matter of whether or not the waiver for oxygenation standards will be granted or not be granted. Further delay will only serve to exacerbate the problem.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, May is National Scholarship Month and one of its galas took place May 23, 2001, in St. Paul, Minnesota. The purpose was to present two significant awards--the Trustee's Award, which was given to the General Mills Foundation, and the President's Award--recognizing a major corporation's and an individual's perpetual assistance to students. The President's award was given to my longtime friend, Col. Barney Oldfield, USAF (Ret.). Born in Tecumseh, Nebraska, he left the state in 1940 to enter military service. Col. Oldfield has lived and worked in 81 countries and on every continent in the world, but he and his late wife, Vada, never forgot their Nebraska roots. He is a discredit to General MacArthur's statement, ``Old soldiers never die, they just fade away,'' because he remains a generous contributor to education and medical research as he nears his 92nd birthday. Since we share a great affection for both our home state and the needs of education, I want to share with my colleagues the acceptance speech of Col. Oldfield. But first, I would like to include the introduction that the Citizens' Scholarship Foundation of America's President, Dr. William C. Nelsen, delivered that evening: As we gather here for the fourth presentation of our President's Award, more than eight hundred young people as far away as Singapore and Hong Kong, as nearby as North and South Dakota and Nebraska, are in careers or preparing for careers because of the one we honor and his late wife. And this is only the beginning as endowments created by them insure education assisting perpetual motion addressing not only the future but as far out as infinity. Communicators themselves, she an artist and himself a writer, no matter where life put them, these skills were put to use in many different applications. In this year, as he works himself toward being 92, he will be in the documentary for theater release called, Marlene Dietrich: Her Own Song, and his participation in Marlene's Biography is being constantly replayed on May 26, on The History Channel. He will be in the Stephen Ambrose funded two hour long production of Moment of Truth. When supreme headquarters, allied powers, Europe celebrated its fiftieth anniversary last month, researchers in Belgium found he was the only survivor on Order No. 1 Dash I, as General Dwight D. Eisenhower's advance man so they had him on camera on all armed forces network TV stations in western Europe telling anecdotes about how the greatest and most successful coalition began. He has been a celebrity ghostwriter known internationally for clients as varied as heavyweight boxing champion George Foreman and jokes for Ronald Reagan for forty years. Imagine what it was like that day when president Ronald Reagan made that Bittburg reconciliation gesture in Germany with German chancellor Helmut Kohl. When he watched on his TV set as Kohl, accompanied by Luftewaffe General Johannes Seinhoff and President Reagan, accompanied by Paratrooper General Matthew Ridgeway walked up to the monument--and he had been the ghostwriter for all four! When his beloved wife, Vada, died after eleven years of Alzheimer's disease . . . and she had been one of the original WAACS, he asked that there be no eulogy as she would always be a ``work in progress'' and after Taps at the Fort McPherson National Military Cemetery that the bugler perform Reveille so she could re-enlist herself as a research ally. Her fund at the Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha has drawn more than $200,000 and grows daily. He has written, spoken, and done documentary participations on military subjects all his life but has never taken the money, giving it instead to scholarships and medical research. This is a partial portrait of the one we honor tonight. A tough act to follow, but how much better off our world would be if others made similar gestures. His motto has always been, ``If each of us who could, would help one who needs it, we would have very few social problems.'' For all these and many other good reasons, these are why our fourth President's Award is presented to Col. Barney Oldfield, USAF (Ret.). [Response of Col. Barney Oldfield, USAF (Ret.) on the receipt of the President's Award at the observance of Scholarship Month in St. Paul, Minnesota in the evening of May 23, 2001:] How can one properly respond to an incredible honor such as your President's Award? Years ago at the old Astor Hotel in New York I stepped on an elevator to go to one of their many meeting rooms to be the luncheon speaker. Only one other person was on it and we were stuck between floors for thirty minutes! I introduced myself. He reached his hand and said he was Gutzon Borglum. . .the sculptor who had done Mt. Rushmore, whose audience that day were national geographic devotees. That has to be a tough audience. I said, ``How do you start a speech to get the attention of such a group?'' He said he was going to tell them of the time he almost fell off Abraham Lincoln's nose! I don't know how he did that day, but I opened my remarks by telling of my elevator hiatus with him and it never went over as well anywhere else in my life. But who will rescue me today? Once when I had a long lunch with comedian Jack Benny, I asked him how he had acknowledged some meaningless award given him. He said, ``I was introduced, and knew I was going to be hooted anyway, so I looked sternly at the audience and said--once every one hundred years or so a great man is born. Now that I am here, make the most of it.'' To let you know I have a hard time taking myself seriously. I have worn this red hat. The late Charles Kuralt did a CBS ``Who's Who'' sequence about me called The Man in the Red Hat in 1977, in which he called me the king of the press agents. Why? In 1941, I made and gave Sonja Henie a valentine made of ice, which is still in storage in Omaha, Nebraska, more than 60 years old, which he declared was the longest running, open-ended publicity stunt in the world. I have worn this red hat in 81 countries on every continent in the world. On February 1, 1938, Robert L. Ripley carried me into more than 1,000 periodicals in his Believe-it-or-Not feature, and it's been like that ever since. But this president's award is highly serious. A peering into the reality that has always been a part of my late wife, Vada, and myself . . . a constancy of interest in education and medical research. She was one of the original WAACS (forerunner of the women's army corps) . . . served two years as a teletype operator with HQ 12th Air Force across North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. We are pedestaled in the celebrities in uniform section of the great US Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio, as a military couple. Clark Gable, Jimmy Stewart, bandleader Glenn Miller, and the fortieth President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, all surround and look down at us. Vada, who fought Alzheimer's Disease 11 years, was still lucid when it happened and when I told her about it, she said ``It's a good thing they can't talk as they're probably saying, `There goes the neighborhood!'' When she died two years ago and was given full military honors at Fort McPherson National Cemetery, I told them there would be no eulogy as her story would always be unfinished . . . a work in progress, and had the bugler play ``Reveille'', the military wakeup call. There is a Vada Kinman Oldfield Alzheimer's research fund at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha, which allies her inspiration with research expertise and is funded to address infinity. A thousand people a day go by her tribute on its wall. As we met on the campus of the University of Nebraska and went the world around . . . none more than us know of the extraordinary difference a college education can make in the lives of two people. Global experience has shown us how brutal lack of knowledge can be . . . how awful is the dirt and disease in which so many lives are lived. We are great believers in living memorialization, naming awards for friends . . . the admired . . . who inspire . . . motivate . . . piggy-back history on educational assistance. We campaign endlessly against those who are in foundations who see themselves only as collectors of money and have neither interest nor time for publicizing the impact on recipients and the goals they achieve because of help at the crossroads of their lives. Oddly, the question Vada and I were, and are, constantly asked has been, ``Why have you been so persistently interested in education when you have no kids of your own?'' Our answer has always been, ``Who says we don't have any kids? You don't read our Christmas mail!'' It comes from all over the world--some as much as twenty years after winning one of our scholarships. Those we knew as struggling students write to us about their successes and their achievements. On the Kinman-Oldfield family foundation stationary there is a photo of Vada giving the first scholarship to an electrical engineering student named Tony Kozlik. He was the son of a dairy worker and his mother was a seamstress and he had to drive 43 miles to and from school each day. The scholarship made possible a room on campus. He graduated 4th in a class of 448 and made the dean's list. He has been an employee of Honeywell ever since. What we are talking about here is the greatest game in town. Give some thought to it personally. You will be startled about how good you feel about yourself And you, too, may come to enjoy your Christmas mail from kids you never had, but will never forget you for what you did. For my Vada and for me, many thanks for this President's Award! It will not be un-employed, but on view at functions related to the Vada Kinman Oldfield and Col. Barney Oldfield Nebraska Dollars for Scholars Program we have launched in Nebraska.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak in favor of the Meek amendment, the mentoring success component of H.R. 1. Traditionally, many mentoring programs involve adults, but there are a great many around the country, as the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner) mentioned, that do use secondary school students to work with younger children. So as the initial introducer of the mentoring component, I certainly support the gentlewoman's amendment, and we hope very much that our colleagues will vote in favor of this amendment. We think it has great merit. We look forward to working with the conference committee to possibly also include younger college-age students in mentoring endeavors.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1. I would like to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner) and the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member, for their work. Mr. Chairman, I was formerly in the coaching profession; and each year we evaluated hundreds of transcripts from all across the country. We found over time that even though someone was a high school graduate, and even though their grades were reasonably good on the transcript, we could not determine from their transcripts that they could adequately read, write, do basic math or perform. So we had to rely heavily on SAT and ACT tests. We have a national crisis in education because so many students are simply passed along. Roughly 68 percent of all fourth graders in the Nation cannot read at a functional level. So I think H.R. 1 really addresses most of these problems and will alleviate much of the crisis that we see before us. I would like to mention very quickly two elements of H.R. 1 that may go relatively unnoticed in the discussion today. First is the rural education initiative. Sometimes rural schools are just as distressed as inner-city schools, and I think this element will be addressed in the bill. Small rural schools, 600 students or less, receive very few Federal dollars. They have no grant riders, and many times the funds really that they might receive are not worth the paperwork. So this particular bill will provide a minimum of $20,000 to those schools. This will reach thousands of schools across the country, 400 in my State of Nebraska; and I think it is something that will really help the smaller school because it will enable them to hire a teacher, buy four or five computers, do something meaningful with the grant money that they are currently foregoing. The second aspect of the bill I would like to mention is that of mentoring. Over the last 10 years, we have spent 80 billion Federal dollars and we have seen absolutely no improvement on test scores or dropout rates. We do not know what return we have gotten for our money. In the city of Kansas City, over the last 15 years they have spent $2 billion on education; and they spend $8,000 per student, more than $8,000 per student. They have excellent facilities, great teacher salaries and excellent curriculum; and yet they lost their academic accreditation last year, first major city ever to lose accreditation. They flunked every State performance standard. So one says, well, what is happening here? Why, if they have been given all these tools, would this happen? I would like to read very quickly a statement from Gary Orfield, a Harvard sociologist who has studied the school system in Kansas City. He said, ``When students come to class hungry, exhausted or afraid, when they bounce from school to school as their families face eviction, when they have no one at home to wake them up for the bus, much less look over their homework, not even the snazziest facilities, the strongest curriculum and the best paid teachers can ensure success.'' So I think that mentoring is something that will address this because it does cut absenteeism, drug abuse, teenage pregnancy, violence, and lowers drop-out rates.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, I have been concerned about attacks made on the Bush administration for their decision to not immediately implement the Environmental Protection Agency's decision to reduce the standard on arsenic in drinking water from 50 parts per billion to 10 parts per billion until further research and data is provided. Since nearly everyone has heard of individuals being poisoned with arsenic, it is assumed that any amount of arsenic is detrimental and that not immediately implementing a lower standard of 10 parts per billion is anti-environment and insensitive to human health concerns. The 50 parts per billion standard has been in effect since 1942, and there is no sound evidence that having a standard of 50 parts per billion has led to increased health problems in the United States. Most people are not aware of the fact that arsenic is a naturally- occurring substance and is present in the groundwater in most western States and parts of the Midwest and even some parts of New England. It is not put there by pesticides, fertilizers or human beings. Ninety- seven percent of the communities exceeding the 10 parts per billion of arsenic in their water supplies are small towns with populations of less than 10,000 people. There are 69 such communities in the State of Nebraska that exceed 10 parts per billion of arsenic. Nearly all of these are small rural communities, and most of them have only 11 to 15 parts per billion of arsenic in their groundwater. In order to meet the 10 parts per billion standard, nearly all of these communities would have to be assessed several hundred dollars per family and several million dollars per community. Much of the EPA reasoning for dropping the arsenic standards to 10 parts per billion has been extrapolated from studies done in Taiwan where water contains an average arsenic level of 250 parts per billion. Some health problems have been detected as a result of the high levels of arsenic in Taiwan. Now, if there is a linear relationship in regard to the level of arsenic and health concerns, reducing the standard level of arsenic from 50 parts per billion to 10 parts per billion would theoretically, and this is theoretically only, prevent three cases of bladder cancer and could possibly prevent a handful of deaths from all causes that might possibly be related to arsenic in the United States annually. If a linear relationship exists, even 1 part per billion poses at least some slight health risk. At the present time, however, there is no clear evidence that there is a linear relationship between arsenic level and health. It is very possible there may be some point that a certain amount of arsenic in the water poses absolutely no health risk. Arsenic is necessary for human life and is present in every person's body. Therefore, 50 parts per billion, 40 parts per billion, 30, or 20 parts per billion could prove to be perfectly safe. We just do not know what that level is. The cost of lowering this standard from 50 parts per billion to 10 parts per billion has been estimated by the EPA to cost $181 million annually. However, the American Waterworks Association has stated that the cost would actually be $600 million annually with an additional $5 billion in capital outlays to pay for the treatment plants. There is a huge discrepancy, obviously, in these figures. The EPA told the State of Nebraska's Department of Health to dump extracted arsenic on open fields, as arsenic is nontoxic. However, a short time later the EPA reversed its opinion and said that arsenic extracted from water must be shipped to toxic waste dumps. It does not appear that the EPA has factored the cost of shipping arsenic to toxic waste sites into their cost estimates. It would seem that the Bush administration's decision to delay implementation of standards until further study has been done is warranted. In short, it seems that all of the evidence that we currently have would indicate that an arbitrary level of 10 parts per billion may be excessively low and it is quite likely not based on any sound evidence. Further data from independent sources is clearly warranted.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 641.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, a few years ago I ran across a study which was done on the Fullerton, California, public schools in 1940. It was kind of interesting, the number of the concerns that the teachers in the Fullerton, California, public schools had at that time. Number one was talking in class, number two was chewing gum in class, number three was not putting waste paper in the waste paper basket, and number four was getting out of turn in line when going from one class to another. More recently I saw this study replicated when they went back to the Fullerton, California, public schools and asked the teachers what their main concerns were, and this is what the list read like. The number one concern was drug abuse, weapons in school, gangs, teenage pregnancy, teenage suicide, alcohol abuse, violence and so on. So, in the last 50 to 60 years, we have seen an amazing shift in our culture. I guess over 36 years of coaching, I saw some of the same changes, the same dynamics in some of the young people I was dealing with. So I guess I have asked myself from time to time, what has caused this shift? I think really two basic elements that I can point to. One is family disintegration. Currently one-half of our children grow up without both biological parents, and back in the 1940s and the 1950s, this percentage was probably no more than 5 or 10 percent. We have 18 million fatherless children in our country today. When your dad does not care enough to stick around to see what you look like, it leaves a vacuum in your life, it leaves a hole that you are oftentimes trying to fill with all the wrong things. So fatherlessness is a huge problem. The out-of-wedlock birth rate has gone from 5 percent in 1960 to 33 percent today. So the family structure has definitely changed. Secondly, I think there have been some things that I would refer to as the unraveling of the culture. I think almost everyone is aware of the fact that we are living in the most violent Nation in the world for young people. We have the highest homicide rate, the highest suicide rate for young people of any civilized nation or any nation anywhere. Thirdly, drug and alcohol abuse has certainly become rampant and a very virulent problem in our society, and, of course, there has been a media influence that I think at times some of the music, some of the television, some of the movies that young people are exposed to has been a problem. So, we may say that I have outlined a lot of problems. What are the solutions? We need some answers. I guess one of the things that I would point to that has proven to be effective is mentoring. A mentor is someone who supports, affirms, provides stability, provides a vision of what is possible for a young person. I guess in athletics I saw this very graphically borne out, because if you told an athlete or a player that he was not very good, that he did not have a future, that he was limited in talent, it would not be long before he would begin to play down to that expectation, and usually he would leave the team before very long. But on the other hand, if you said, I see a great deal of potential, I see some talent, I see some things where you could be a great player, many times that player will begin to perform in a way that he himself did not even begin to expect. So affirmation is critical. Basically, that is what mentoring is. It is affirming. It is supporting. It is telling somebody they can do it. So mentoring actually works. There are studies that have shown realistically that people who are mentored, who are in good mentoring programs, young people will be 52 percent less likely to skip school, 50 percent less likely to begin using drugs, 36 percent less likely to lie to a parent, 30 percent less likely to commit a violent act of any kind, and they are less likely to drop out of school, and have better relationships with friends and family. So for that reason I am introducing today a bill called Mentoring for Success. What this bill does is it provides grants to expand mentoring through new programs and existing programs throughout the country that supposedly, I believe, would probably reach about 200,000 young people in our country. It also would provide for training of mentors, background checks on mentors; and it would study the long-term effects of different types of mentoring programs. Right now there are a lot of them out there. We do not know exactly what is most effective, and this would provide for a study that would provide more data and more information. Currently we spend billions of dollars on incarceration, on juvenile justice programs, and once someone is caught up in the juvenile justice system or the criminal justice system, oftentimes they just do not get out of it. So we need to spend more time on the front end of the process, and mentoring is certainly a very viable alternative and something that I hope that all people would certainly consider. Mr. Speaker, this bill is very important. I think it is something that we really cannot afford not at this time to address.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, if we could create a program that would reduce absenteeism from school by 53 percent, drug and alcohol abuse by nearly 50 percent, teenage violence by 30 percent, and substantially reduce teenage pregnancy, gang involvement and dropout rates, would this be a desirable program? Obviously, the answer to this question is yes. Next week, I will introduce the Mentoring For Success Act, establishing a national mentoring program through the Department of Education. This legislation will connect children who have the greatest need with a responsible adult mentor who has received training and support in mentoring, been screened through background checks, and is interested in working with youth. An adult mentor provides a child with support, encouragement, academic assistance, and a vision of what is possible. Each year, we spend billions of dollars on education, yet see little improvement in dropout rates and test scores. We spend billions of dollars on incarceration and juvenile justice programs, yet have very high recidivism rates. Through one-to-one mentoring, we have a chance to make a difference. Please join me in support of the Mentoring For Success Act.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about energy as it affects agriculture. Due to high fuel prices, the cost of running farm machinery has skyrocketed. In addition, natural gas is necessary to manufacture fertilizers such as anhydrous ammonia. As the planting season approaches, anhydrous ammonia is almost impossible to obtain and extremely expensive if it can be found at all. As a result, the troubled agriculture industry is under even greater stress today than it ever has been. As with most crises, there is also an opportunity. At the present time, we have an excellent opportunity to double or even triple the production of alternative fuels like ethanol and soy diesel. If we do this, three benefits will occur: One, we lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and this will be good for the country. Number two, we will reduce undesirable fuel emissions, and this will be good for the environment. Number three, we will utilize surplus crops in a profitable manner, and this will be good for agriculture.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, on February 6, 2001, I was unavoidably detained and missed having the opportunity to vote on H.J. Res. 7, a resolution recognizing the 90th birthday of Ronald Reagan. If I had been present, I would have voted for the resolution. President Reagan served his country honorably as President and was a great leader of the free world. He is very deserving of this recognition on his birthday, and I deeply regret that I was not present to vote in favor of the resolution honoring him.

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 9, I did not have a beeper notification. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. OSBORNE

Mr. OSBORNE. Madam Speaker, rural poverty is a huge, largely unnoticed problem in our Nation. Currently, the three lowest-income counties in the United States are in my district. The poorest county averages less than $4,000 annual income per person. Paradoxically, in these counties, the unemployment rate is extremely low, the character level is excellent, and the work ethic is exceptional. The problem is that these rural counties are totally dependent upon production agriculture. For this reason today, along with several colleagues, I am introducing a bill that will provide a one-time, $500,000 capital gains tax exemption for farmers and ranchers who sell their land. This exemption would equal the capital gains exemption already granted to homeowners. Many producers feel they cannot retire because of their tax situation. This bill will help. I encourage support.