Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez). (Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn). (Mr. WYNN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, could the attacks of September 11 have been prevented if someone had connected the dots? Could the war in Iraq have been avoided if intelligence had been better? I honestly do not know. But what both situations tragically highlight is one fundamental truth: Our Nation needs intelligence reform. The September 11 Commission report released over 5 months ago outlined the gaps and weaknesses in our current intelligence system. It also made 41 recommendations to Congress that, if implemented, would make America safer. Today the House at long last is poised to consider the conference report to S. 2845, the National Intelligence Reform Act. This measure seeks to implement the core intelligence reforms recommended by the 9/ 11 Commission and makes significant improvements to emergency preparedness and aviation and border security. Since July, Governor Kean and Representative Hamilton have tirelessly worked to ensure their recommendations are not relegated to the circular file of history. Throughout the summer, they testified before congressional committee after congressional committee in the hopes of building momentum before the third anniversary of the attacks. After reading their fine report and participating in a hearing with them in the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I, like most, if not all, of my Democratic colleagues in the House, endorsed all 41 recommendations. The Commission report attributed structural weaknesses as partially to blame for the intelligence failures prior to the 9/11 attacks. A culture of isolation and separation exists between the 15 intelligence agencies that must be dismantled if we are to transform the environment and foster information-sharing among government agencies. We need to have a strong Director of National Intelligence to coordinate all intelligence efforts. It is my understanding that last-minute changes were made to the conference report. We only received it an hour ago. I sincerely hope that the final version of this report vests the new Director with the people and the budget authority necessary to assert control over all 15 intelligence-collection agencies. Mr. Speaker, we all know that the men and women on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan need to be assured that the intelligence they get is good intelligence. No one in this body would ever agree to reform our intelligence apparatus in any manner that would undermine our soldiers. Today we mark the 63rd anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Yesterday terrorists opened fire on Americans working in the U.S. Consulate in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia. Whatever changes we make cannot be simply cosmetic. Our Armed Forces, Congress, the President, and the American people need to have confidence in the quality of their intelligence. In the post-September 11 world Americans demand a national Intelligence Community that works together for the benefit of the national security, and Congress must act decisively to bring about those structural reforms. The stakes are very high. There is no room here for egos. There is no room for turf war. There is no room for bureaucratic haggling. The report also closes critical gaps in aviation and border security. With respect to aviation security, it calls for the deployment of new explosive-detection screening technologies for carry-on bags and blast- resistant cargo containers. On border security the report calls for unmanned aerial vehicles to be placed along the 5,500-mile border between the United States and Canada, especially in areas far from a legal port of entry. This is an issue I care deeply about as my western New York district is a major gateway to Canada, the second busiest at Niagara Falls, New York. Ever since the 9/11 Commission recommendations were released in July, there has been a steady drumbeat of support from my district. Like me, my constituents believe that an overhaul to the Nation's intelligence apparatus is critical to the future of this great land, and much of what is being considered here today will accomplish this vital end. Mr. Speaker, it bears repeating that we could have passed these reforms months ago, but the leadership did not want to act. Now, today, they want us to consider the report under martial law, even though Democrats have been ready to act for months. Moreover, if Democrats had not insisted on a recorded vote to correct a taxpayer privacy provision in the omnibus bill, Congress would not have returned to Washington, and this bill would not have passed before adjournment. Democrats have worked hard to make the country safer, and we look forward to working with the new Director of National Intelligence to do everything we can to make sure this tragedy is never repeated. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to an active debate on this critical piece of legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member on the Committee on Appropriations.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, we are here to consider a package of reforms that, despite garnering broad bipartisan support throughout the Nation, was not cleared for the floor until today. The House received this blueprint for making America safer in the form of the September 11 report in July, well over 5 months ago; and upon release of the report, and ever since, the commissioners have been appealing to the House to respond to its recommendations with a great sense of urgency. To its credit, throughout the summer recess the House undertook an ambitious schedule of hearings on the 9/11 report; and as a member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I heard the impassioned testimony from both Governor Kean and Representative Hamilton as they presented a compelling case for why structural reforms were essential to enhancing the security of the American people from the threat of terrorism. At the time, I believed we would get this intelligence reform package cleared by both Houses of Congress well before the third anniversary of the 9/11 attacks; but as we all know, despite broad bipartisan support in both bodies, it simply did not happen. Instead, it was left in sort of suspended animation for months while the House leadership secured support from the majority of the majority in the House. Mr. Speaker, in my 18 years in the House of Representatives, I have never heard of such a standard. Whether it is the product of an arrogant belief that the views of the minority in the House are now somehow subordinate or it is the manifestation of leadership drunk with power, I truly do not know; but if this is any indication of how the House leadership intends to do business in the 109th Congress, be warned that the American people will not like it. It is not just the red States that are populated with patriotic, moral Americans who serve courageously in our Armed Forces or as first responders. Patriotic, moral Americans live in blue States and every State of this Union. We are all Americans. We are all equal under the law, and we all have an important role to play in the life of this Nation. I would also caution the majority to bear in mind the words of the 18th century philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau who said, ``It is unnatural for a majority to rule, for a majority can seldom be organized and united for specific action, and a minority can.'' I think we saw that well-demonstrated today. Satisfied that it has secured support from a majority of the majority, the House leadership is now rushing this bill to the floor, denying Members adequate time to review each and every critical provision. Have we learned nothing from the debacle surrounding the omnibus spending bill? The privacy rights of millions of American taxpayers were put at risk by one small provision inserted into that 3,000-page bill. Under the regular order of the House, we should have had 3 days to review the report; but with a martial-law rule, we do not even get one. In the 108th Congress, the Committee on Rules has reported 29 martial rules and 17 in the second session alone. At the rate we are going, the regular order of business is becoming the irregular order of business. Mr. Speaker, the majority has delayed this bill long enough. I would have preferred this bill, so crucial to defending our country, be considered by unanimous consent; but I know there are many people who would be happy if this legislation never saw the light of day. Before I close, I want to reiterate my support for the intelligence reform package. Despite my opposition to the way it has come to the floor, I intend fully to vote for it later. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. John DiPofi of Niagara Falls, NY, who passed away this week at the age of 106. He was the oldest living Marine in the United States at the time of his death. Mr. DiPofi joined the Marines on November 10, 1922, and served for 3 years in Haiti. He was an expert rifleman and was assigned to guard the country's agricultural assets. Mr. DiPofi was born in Italy and came to America in 1913 at the age of 15. He lived and worked in Niagara Falls after his tour of duty. It was an honor to have Mr. DiPofi living in the 28th Congressional District. I was privileged to meet him last year and congratulate him on his good health and service to our nation. I offer my sincerest condolences to Mr. DiPofi's family. The nation has lost a good soldier, and Niagara Falls has lost a good friend. His extraordinary life will never be forgotten.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I wish to honor the work and life of Dr. Melvin Dyster of Niagara Falls, New York, a family practitioner, who this past weekend was honored by the Niagara Falls Memorial Medical Center for 50 years of practicing medicine. Dr. Dyster is 77 years old and still makes early morning rounds seven days a week at Niagara Falls Memorial Medical Center, sees patients at his office, and students at Niagara University in Lewiston, New York. Dr. Dyster has had many accomplishments over the years. He started a Family Practice Residency Program in 1976 at the hospital to avert a shortage of primary care doctors. He became involved with a fledgling migrant worker clinic 25 years ago. He secured donated drugs for the clinic, and encouraged residents and medical students to become involved with the clinic, the County Health Department, and Memorial Medical Center, which now sends its mobile clinic to the farms in the area. His accomplishments have led to many honors and awards. In 1995, Dr. Dyster was recognized as Doctor of the Year by the New York State Academy of Family Practice. He has received an honorary doctorate degree from Niagara University and the University of Buffalo Medical School Dean's Award for community involvement. He also received the Niagara University College of Arts and Sciences Dean's Award for his establishment of the Dr. Melvin B. Dyster Health Science Resource Center in 2003. Dr. Dyster goes out of his way to provide services for those in need, working at the Hamilton Mizer Primary Care Center in Niagara Falls, which serves predominantly inner city residents. Dr. Dyster is a consultant for the Niagara Falls City Task Force for Bioterrorism Preparedness, a member of Niagara County's Health Emergency Alert Response Team and an advisor on Memorial's Disaster Planning Committee. Dr. Dyster's efforts on behalf of the Niagara Falls community extend beyond the medical world; he was instrumental in saving the former Niagara Falls High School from demolition, which has become a well used arts and cultural center. Dr. Dyster is a retired full colonel in the Army Reserve and was chief of staff at the 865th General Hospital at the Niagara Falls Air Base. I am honored to have such a caring and compassionate man as Dr. Dyster live and work in my district.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend two colleagues who will not be here when the next congressional session begins-- Congressman Amo Houghton and Congressman Jack Quinn. It has been a true honor to work with them. They will be greatly missed. While we did not share the same political party, that fact never prevented us from working together to improve Upstate New York. These two men had very different backgrounds: Jack Quinn was a union steelworker and teacher before entering politics; Amo Houghton was head of Corning Glass Works. Yet, they are good friends who have represented the working families in their districts well and with grace. In 2002, when a State redistricting plan proposed to match these two men against each other, I think their statements at the time reflect their character and friendship: ``In my heart, I don't want to knock out Jack Quinn,'' Houghton said. ``He's an extraordinary guy.'' ``I hope it is not against my good friend, Amo Houghton,'' Quinn said. ``If it is, I'll just invite him to dinner, maybe take our wives, and talk about what is best for the people of western New York.'' Through their committee posts, both moderate Members fought for the interests of New York State. As the former chairman of a Fortune 500 company, Amo Houghton understood how the Federal Government could play a role in sustaining and creating local businesses. As a senior member on the House Ways and Means Committee, Representative Houghton partnered with me to help create and maintain the wool duty relief program, which is credited with stemming the loss of manufacturing jobs in the suit industry. Duty relief on imported wool suiting fabrics has proven critical to the survival of Hickey-Freeman, a high-end suit manufacturer that has long operated in Rochester. I was privileged to work closely with Representative Quinn after the redistricting process in 2002 when we came to share the city of Buffalo. Jack went out of his way to introduce me to the area and its people. He is truly the ``Big Man from Buffalo.'' As one example of his effort to improve the local economy, we cohosted a widely attended forum with local manufacturers to discuss what action the Federal Government must take to ensure that western New York and the rest of the United States will remain competitive in the manufacturing sector. I will miss the partnership I enjoyed with both men, and their decency and respect for this institution. I have heard it said that legislation is the art of compromise, and both of these men understood that principle. We need more people with the ability to reach across the aisle. I know that this is not the last we will hear from either of them. Both of them still have much to contribute to public discourse and Upstate New York. I wish both of them the best of luck and continued success in their future endeavors.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my outrage about a dangerous antiwoman provision that is in this omnibus bill. I know that is not going to be changed, but I do want all women in America to know what is coming for them. Let us say a woman is the unfortunate victim of a partial spontaneous abortion. Under the law that has been passed now in the United States, that woman may not go to the hospital and have that completed unless the hospital wants to do so. Presently, the law requires that a woman be taken care of; but even if a woman's life is at stake, even if she is going to die, the hospital does not have to do it. Now, what happens if the hospital does it in defiance of what this law says? They then put into jeopardy every cent of money they bring in from the Labor-HHS bill, which would include all their State Children's Health Insurance money, all their Head Start money, all their child care development block grant money, all social services money, and perhaps all senior nutrition programs. This is really draconian when it comes to saving a woman's life. States will not be allowed anymore to require an HMO that is participating in Medicaid to either cover abortions for a rape victim or tell them that they are eligible to get services and where to get it. What a step backwards for the United States. Mr. Speaker, I am submitting for the Record an article from today's Washington Times announcing what is yet to come. [From the Washington Times, Dec. 6, 2004] Pro-Lifers Set Sights on New Congress (By Amy Fagan) The pro-life movement, which helped pass several initiatives in the 108th Congress, thinks Republican gains in the Senate will aid the chances for bills to enforce state parental notification laws and to alert pregnant women about fetal pain. ``There is enough of a shift that we think bills such as these two . . . have a real chance,'' said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. The Senate has been the biggest blockade to pro-life bills. Republican pickups in this year's election mean the chamber will have about three additional pro-life votes come January, Mr. Johnson said. He said he hopes the defeat of Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, South Dakota Democrat, might make some pro-choice senators ``who marched in lock step with the abortion lobby . . . less inclined to get out on thin ice'' in blocking abortion restrictions. Both sides of the abortion debate are anticipating a Supreme Court vacancy, particularly after deteriorating health has forced Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist to miss several sessions. Mr. Johnson said a battle over any Supreme Court nominee would take top priority for his group. Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation, also said a Supreme Court vacancy would be a ``huge priority'' for her side. She promised a ``tremendous fight'' over any nominee who would ``turn back the clock'' on abortion or other rights. Until that fight erupts, however, the pro-life lobby will focus on other legislation. One priority, introduced as a bill for the first time in May, would require doctors to tell women seeking abortions after 20 weeks about the capacity of the fetus to feel pain and offer the option of pain-reducing drugs. The fetal-pain issue garnered interest during a federal court case in New York, in which the government was defending the federal ban on late-term partial-birth abortions. The judge in that case said the defense presented ``credible evidence'' that a fetus feels pain. Mr. Johnson said there is growing support for the fetal pain bill in the House, and he hopes it can pass both chambers this term. A bill returning to the scene next session would make it a federal crime to circumvent a state's parental-notification law by transporting a pregnant teen across the state line for an abortion without parental involvement. The measure passed the House three times but stalled in the Senate. Miss Saporta said the fetal-pain bill is ``part of their campaign to separate the fetus from the woman.'' Although the teen-transport bill likely will be introduced in both chambers, she said, passage would ``put the most vulnerable teens at risk'' by forcing those in dangerous family situations to involve their parents in abortion decisions and by making other family members criminals if they intervene. Connie Mackey, vice president for government affairs for the Family Research Council, said her group also will push a ban on cloning human embryos for any purpose. The legislation stalled last session, but House and Senate sponsors plan to bring back their bills next session. ``We will be working hard'' to pass them, Mrs. Mackey said. She said her group will fight for more federal funding for adult stem-cell research, as a more promising alternative to embryonic stem-cell research. Pro-life lawmakers also are considering proposals to regulate abortion clinics and ban or limit RU-486, a home drug treatment that induces an abortion. Miss Saporta said she also suspects conservative lawmakers will try to ban or limit RU-486 but predicted they will fail. ``It will be somewhat easier for anti-choice forces to pass further restrictions on abortion, but they won't be successful in all of their initiatives,'' she said.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise to express my great regrets about the inclusion of the Weldon-authored provision that undermines the rights of a State to enforce its own laws. If this bill passes, and I am sure it will, that means that from now on State and local governments failing to comply with the Weldon provision put at risk all of their State Medicaid funding, all their SCHIP funding, all their Head Start money, all their child care development block grant money, and all their social services block grant money. In short, anything that comes to the State or local government from the Labor-HHS bill. How is that for coming down with a pretty heavy hand? Simply put, it restricts the States' autonomy and right to self- governance and undermines States' ability to enforce their own constitutional protections. If a State chooses to enforce its own laws and require an HMO to provide abortion counseling or services, it will pay a very heavy price. None of us, I believe, are going to want to explain to the senior citizens that the nutrition programs are over, that Medicare is gone, that the Social Security check will not be there, denying the Federal funds for State and local governments that attempts to ensure that a woman has full access to reproductive health services and information. Information. Once again, the land of the free and the home of the brave is going to control the information going to its citizens. In fact, the way the proposal is worded, even Federal programs could be stripped of their funds if they were to comply with this law. Moreover, it interferes with State and local governments' responsibility to set the parameters of their Medicaid programs, something that they are very concerned about. And I know that New York, which I represent, is very concerned about the cost of Medicaid. Right now, if a woman is raped and receives her health care from Medicaid, States can force all HMOs that participate in Medicaid to either pay for her abortion or tell her that she is eligible to get that coverage and where she can get it. If this provision passes, the States will not be able to enforce this requirement and Medicaid HMOs can simply refuse to cover the woman's abortion and not give her any information that she can get coverage elsewhere. I am sure that is what the intent is. It even interferes with, and possibly overrides, current Federal laws, such as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, which ensures that women in life-threatening circumstances receive the medical care they need. Suppose a woman comes into the emergency room of a hospital with an incomplete miscarriage which can threaten her life. Under present law, the hospital must stabilize her. If stabilizing requires completing the abortion, they have to do it no matter what their religious belief. But when Weldon passes, the hospital can say it is discrimination to force them to do this and so the woman can just die. I call on my colleagues to understand what is happening here. I know when the women in America find out what is happening here, there is going to be great outrage.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced the Prevention of and Response to Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence in the Military Act. This bill will address the ongoing problem of violence against women in our U.S. Armed Forces. There have been at least 261 reported cases of sexual assault in current operations in Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Bahrain between August 2002 and November 2004, as well as at least 27 cases of sexual assault prior to deployment. My legislation will help address this issue by improving prevention programs, enhancing victim treatment services and changing the Uniform Code of Military Justice to more effectively deal with perpetrators of these crimes. For too long, the problem of sexual assault in the military has been brushed under the rug. Women and men who report sexual assault are often ignored or demoted, while perpetrators go unpunished--or are even promoted. We cannot continue to tolerate this culture of abuse, which has destroyed lives, careers and families. A soldier's job is perilous enough--how can they serve with a criminal in their own ranks? My bill seeks to transform the process used by the military to handle abuse of its own soldiers. It will make important changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice to make certain that those who commit crimes are dealt with swiftly and harshly. The legislation will ensure that victims are protected and have access to both physical and mental treatment and care. We must change entirely the culture that permits this kind of abuse to occur. It is my hope that this bill is a first step in that direction. This legislation updates and revises the Uniform Code of Military Justice to incorporate Federal statues addressing sexual assault, domestic violence, family violence and stalking. The definition of sexual assault is expanded to include a wider range of sexual misconduct. The bill also closes loopholes in Federal law relative to interstate domestic violence and enforcement of protection orders. Moreover, the bill establishes two senior executive level offices, Director of Special Investigations and Office of the Victims' Advocate. The Director of Special Investigations would support timely and appropriate investigations of sexual assault, domestic violence, family violence and stalking and would implement and support Sexual Assault Response Teams (SARTs) and Domestic Violence Response Teams (DVRTs). The Office of the Victim Advocate would improve access to services for victims and survivors. Under this legislation, services and treatment for victims of sexual assault, domestic violence and stalking will be enhanced and made more widely available. Such services would be expanded within the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans' Affairs to include health care response teams, community health centers, additional sexual trauma counseling centers to furnish both inpatient and outpatient services, and services for reservists victimized by sexual assault or domestic violence. The proposal would also entitle a servicemember to extended emergency leave in order to seek medical treatment, obtain psychological counseling or victim services, and participate in safety planning as a result of sexual or domestic violence. My bill will also enhance the rights of victims to safety and justice. It will better protect a victims' privacy, including communication between a victim and her advocate. It will also provide restitution to victims. As co-chair of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues, I have been helping to lead the charge to end sexual assault in the military. For example, last March, I chaired a hearing at which Jennifer Machmer, an Army captain from Buffalo who was assaulted in Kuwait, testified before Women's Caucus members. I also offered a successful amendment to the FY 05 National Defense Authorization bill that codifies many of the recommendations made the Department of Defense Task Force on Care for Victims of Sexual Assault. This bill encompasses a comprehensive framework to deal with all aspects of violence against women in the military. It represents the continuation of an ongoing dialogue between legislators, the Pentagon, victims and the advocacy community to address these issues. On Veteran's Day last week, we honored and commemorated all of the brave women and men who have so valiantly served our Nation within our U.S. Armed Forces--both in the past, as well as those who continue to serve our country today. We must do everything that we can to ensure the safety and well-being of all of our U.S. servicemembers. I urge my colleagues to support this important initiative.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of my constituents, Steven J. Sarkees, on his appointment to Chief Petty Officer in the United States Naval Sea Cadet Corps. While a high school senior in Grand Island, New York, Cadet Sarkees is a member of the Sullivans Division, Naval Sea Cadet Corps located in Buffalo, New York. Cadet Sarkees' appointment to Chief Petty Office is bestowed on less than one half of one percent of the ten thousand Naval Sea Cadets in the program, and is a reflection of his exceptional leadership skills and mastery of seamanship training. The U.S. Naval Sea Cadet Corps was established in 1958 in order to provide youth with a drug-free and gang-free environment where individuals between the ages of 11 and 17 could develop an appreciation for the United States' naval history, customs, traditions and its significant role in national defense. The goal of the Sea Cadet Corps is to encourage young people to develop an interest in basic seamanship and teach Cadets patriotism, courage, self-confidence and self- reliance. Chief Petty Officer is the highest level a Cadet can attain and reflects years of hard work and dedication. Cadet Sarkees has developed into a mature leader, and is a fine example of what the Sea Cadet Corps strives to develop in young people. He has earned his appointment to Chief Petty Officer by completing a challenging course load, passing a leadership exam, completing 6 months time in rank, and attending 2 weeks of advanced training. Again, Cadet Sarkees is a positive role model to his fellow cadets, and exemplifies the best qualities of a patriotic American. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in congratulating Cadet Sarkees for his significant achievement as a member of the U.S. Naval Sea Cadet Corps.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 second just to say that President Bush, in his first State of the Union said, ``We owe it to our children and grandchildren to act now,'' speaking about his plan to pay off in the next decade the entire $2 trillion in government-debt held by the public. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt). (Mr. SPRATT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)