Bart Stupak

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a community in my district that is celebrating its 100th anniversary as a city. On September 3rd, 2005 the residents of Rose City, Michigan will partake in their annual end-of-summer ox roast and pay tribute to its citizens and their city's history that consists of the All-American boom town tales as well as those more tragic stories. The first settlers to the area worked their way from Saginaw Bay along the Rifle River to what would become Ogemaw County in the 1870s. Ogemaw County, named after local Chippewa Chief Ogemaw-Ke-Ke-To, was home to several family names including Beck, Rose, Zettle, Rau and many others still residing in the region. Among those original settlers was William Rose who founded Rose City, then known as Churchill. Lumber and agriculture brought droves of people to the area where several lumber mills and a flour mill were amongst the more than 30 businesses in the Rose City downtown district. Son of the Churchill founder William Rose, Allen S. Rose partnered with banker M.H. French to establish the French and Rose Land and Lumber Company. According to the local newspaper, in 1893 Rose was instrumental in bringing the first commercial railway, the Mackinaw & Detroit Railroad, to Rose City to service the area's lumber operations. The railroad made its first stop to Rose City that year on Christmas day. The eventual Mayor of Rose City and Michigan State Senator, H.S. Karcher, worked to incorporate the city on April 13, 1905. The city was named after Allen Rose who was also the local Postmaster at the time. During the peak of the lumber period, Ogemaw County contained 30 post offices. Of the many cities incorporated in the region by the State of Michigan in that same year, only two have survived, Rose City and West Branch. This year on April 13th, Rose City's current mayor, William Schneider, and Rodney Mason, the great-great-grandson of Allen Rose, reenacted the signing of Rose City's charter. Rose City has not survived the past 100 years unscathed, however. The famous fire that broke out in D.W. Benjamin's grocery store on April 3rd, 1910 would scar the city's economy and morale for years. The fire that began in the grocery store was not discovered until 3:00 a.m. when flames had engulfed the building. The small town ``bucket brigade'' was not able to fight the fierce fire and one hour later the entire business district was destroyed. That night, 30 of 32 businesses were lost causing an estimated $175,000 worth of damage. The few items salvaged from the businesses were stolen. In his valiant effort to save all the U.S. mail, Postmaster O.F. Honeywell lost all of his personal belongings aside from the clothes on his back and two dollars in his pocket to the fire. Mr. Speaker, Rose City has experienced an All-American history with tales of the best of times and the worst of times. As the entire city gathers this September to celebrate the end of summer with their annual ox roast, it is quite apparent that they have risen from the ashes of their most tragic event to embrace their best assets--one another. I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Rose City and its residents on their first 100 years and in wishing them well through the next century.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Since 2001, I have been an original cosponsor of the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act, or NASPER, as we call it; and I rise today in strong support of its passage. I would like to thank the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) for their leadership on this issue. I would also like to recognize the valuable input of the stakeholders, including the States and physician groups, including the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians. The prescription drug abuse problem is growing at an alarming rate. According to a new report by Columbia University, between 1992 and 2003 the number of people abusing controlled prescription drugs jumped 94 percent. Prescription drugs are now the fourth most abused substance in America, behind only marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco. ``Particularly alarming,'' the authors write, ``is the 212 percent increase in the number of 12 to 17 year olds abusing controlled prescription drugs and the increasing number of teens trying these drugs for the first time.'' Today, Congress has taken an important first step towards addressing this huge and growing problem by ensuring that all schedule II, schedule III and schedule IV controlled substances are prescribed safely. The NASPER Act builds on efforts already under way in many States, including my home State of Michigan, to create electronic monitoring systems. The Government Accounting Office, GAO, found in 2002 that these systems help health care providers ensure that patients are not overprescribed powerful, potentially addictive prescription drugs. The NASPER Act also addresses the problem of people going to other States to circumvent one State's tracking system. This loophole was also identified by the GAO. The NASPER Act will strengthen the ability of practitioners in other States to contact each other and make sure they are not overprescribing these drugs. To conclude, Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. NASPER is more necessary than ever, and now is the time for Congress to pass it and for President Bush to sign it.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a community in my district that is celebrating its 100th anniversary as a city. On June 1, 2005, the residents of Charleviox, Michigan, honored their history that began as an early settlement for Native American Tribes, and grew into an essential regional shipping port and remains a major center for tourism in northern Michigan. Michigan State University archeological digs have uncovered evidence that indicated Michigan's early Native American Tribes established seasonal settlements in the Charleviox area dating back to 1500 B.C. The area, then known as Pine River, also became a seasonal home to Beaver Island fishermen during the mid-19th century. This development would begin the long-time fishing trade that would later position Charleviox as the largest exporter of fish of any port on the Great Lakes during the early 1900's. It was a Mormon family that left Beaver Island in 1854 for more tranquil life that planted the seeds of the city. After starting a farmstead nearby what is now the downtown, many families followed suit by establishing their own farms, fishing businesses and lumbering mills. With the bountiful natural resources, the new community quickly grew. Upon the channel opening in 1869 that created a connection between Round Lake to Charleviox Lake allowing navigation to Charleviox from Lake Michigan. This new access ``opened up the entire northwest comer of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan to national and subsequently international commerce,'' according to local historians. The Federal Government was charged with the maintenance of the channel due to the increasing economic importance Charleviox was having on the area as a principal shipping port in the area. As years went on, travelers to Pine River began referring to this area as the ``town in Charleviox County'' and then simply as Charleviox. In 1879, the village was chartered under the county name of Charleviox. With a long standing maritime history that included canoes, yachts, passenger liners, lake freighters, pleasure crafts and a U.S. Coast Guard Cutter, Charleviox has been considered one of the finest harbors on the Great Lakes. During the late 1800's, the harbor's easy access, beautiful scenery and reputation for a healthy atmosphere made Charleviox an attraction for tourists and resorters from around the country. The establishment of a railroad in 1892 and three of the finest resorts in America made Charleviox a national vacation destination drawing tens of thousands of guests each summer. As the influx of out-of-towners grew each year, the numbers those who stayed in Charleviox increased. The village of Charleviox was charted as an official city by the State of Michigan in 1905 but maintained its quaint small town feel and the appeal of a major harbor resort area. Mr. Speaker, due to the influence of Native American settlements, trades that were based on the bountiful natural resources and the beauty of the region, the history of Charleviox is unique. Charleviox, known to its residents as ``Charleviox, The Beautiful'' was able to capitalize on its unique attributes which have drawn visitors from every State in the Union and countries from around the world to its little comer of Michigan. I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Charleviox and its residents on their first 100 years and in wishing them well through the next century.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), who has been a champion on this issue. (Ms. McCOLLUM asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, as someone who has worked more than 12 years to protect the Great Lakes, I have serious concerns about this amendment and I would urge my colleagues to oppose it. To be clear, I strongly support the amendment's stated intent. Congress should encourage the Great Lakes Governors to work together to develop a common standard for Great Lakes water withdrawal. But there is little similarity between the gentleman from Michigan's stated intent and the real effect of his amendment. The Rogers amendment would, for the first time ever, put Congress on record as granting all management authority over the Great Lakes to the eight State Governors and two provincial governments of Canada. In doing so, it would undermine our efforts to protect the lakes from oil and gas drilling, wastewater blending, invasive species, and water diversions. In short, the Rogers amendment would be a recipe for disaster for the Great Lakes. This amendment is absurd. Would Congress cede control of coastal portions of the Atlantic Ocean to a foreign government? Would we allow Mexico the power to decide whether or not to drill for oil and gas in the Gulf off the coast of Florida, Louisiana or Mississippi? The answer is absolutely not. So why would Congress cede management control over the Great Lakes, the source of drinking water for over 33 million Americans, to Canada or any other foreign power? If you vote for the Rogers amendment, that is exactly what you would be doing, giving away our national sovereignty. Current law already allows the States a great deal of input into Great Lakes management. It strikes the appropriate balance between the State and the Federal Government. It is the right way to protect the Great Lakes. It ensures that we have one smart policy to protect the Great Lakes, not eight. That is why Annex 2001 requires congressional approval. Specifically, this amendment uses the phrase ``remain vested'' when referring to the Great Lakes States' management authority. Congress has never provided full management authorities of the Great Lakes to the States. How can the States ``remain vested'' with authority that Congress has never granted? This language is not a minor detail. In reality, it would mean the Federal Government would be ceding its lead role in protecting the Great Lakes to several States and to Canada. This is not a recipe for a smart, coordinated effort to protect our Great Lakes. As Members decide how they will vote on the Rogers amendment, I ask them to consider the following: The Federal Government does have a role in the policies regarding the Great Lakes, just as we have a role in policies governing coastal issues along our ocean borders. If Members support the environment and want to protect our country's largest source of fresh water, vote no on the Rogers amendment. We cannot risk having eight different policies from eight different Great Lakes States. If Members support the Constitution, vote no on the Rogers amendment. We should never cede control of our natural resources to two Canadian premiers. This amendment is inconsistent with constitutional interpretation, and could provide States more leverage to negotiate directly with other countries on interests of national concerns regarding the Great Lakes. A simple reading of the Rogers amendment, especially the last paragraph, could only lead to two conclusions: Either the amendment fails to understand law or it is purposely attempting to undermine existing Great Lakes protections. In either case, the amendment should be defeated. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) for his support, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer this important amendment along with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra). Our amendment directs the Army Corps of Engineers to budget and request appropriations for operation and maintenance harbor dredging based upon criteria used in fiscal year 2004. Beginning in fiscal year 2005, OMB and the Army Corps began implementing new guidelines and criteria for determining whether a harbor is eligible to be considered to be funded for dredging in the President's budget. According to the Corps, in order for a commercial harbor to be considered high use and therefore eligible to be included in the budget, it must now move at least 1 million tons of cargo annually. As a result of this tonnage requirement, a number of routine Army Corps operations and maintenance harbor dredging projects will not be carried out this year or in fiscal year 2007. There are 293 harbors in the U.S. classified as low use. Thus, barring exceptional circumstances, these harbors are not eligible to be included in the Corps budget next year simply because of this tonnage requirement. These highly inadequate guidelines are unfairly biased against rural communities and will have a detrimental effect on 19 communities in my Northern Michigan district, and to 274 other communities across this country. If these harbors are not dredged, small town, rural America will suffer more job losses, businesses will struggle, and infrastructure could be damaged. Members only need to look at the community of Ontonagon in my district for an example of the devastating effect this policy will have. Ontonagon was taken by surprise when they were not included in the President's budget for the first time in more than 5 years. Just last year, Ontonagon was dredged to approximately 19 feet. Today, it has silted back to 6 feet. In less than a year, two-thirds of this harbor has been silted back in. This happens each and every year because of a silting problem unique to this harbor. While the Army Corps has recognized Ontonagon's unique problem in the past, the new tonnage requirement fails to recognize the unique circumstances around the country some of these harbors face. If this harbor is not dredged, the future of SmurfitStone Container Corporation, which relies on the harbor for coal and limestone deliveries, and the White Pine Power Company, a revitalized coal plant that depends on the harbor for coal deliveries by ship for its power generation, will be in jeopardy. Imagine the consequences for small towns like Ontonagon if their largest businesses are unable to receive the goods they need to remain competitive. This is just one example of many harbors that have been or will be shortchanged. Rural communities already have limited resources available to them, and this will just add an additional hardship. The Army Corps must develop requirements to determine whether a harbor is to be included in the President's budget for a yearly dredge that does not unfairly impact small harbors and rural communities. We need to ensure the Corps is putting forth guidelines and policies that are as fair as possible to all communities across the country. I urge my colleagues to support the Stupak-Delahunt-Hoekstra amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a community in my district that is celebrating its 100th anniversary as a village. On Sunday, July 3, 2005, the residents of the village of Curtis, Michigan, will host a parade to honor their history that 100 years ago began with the establishment of a post office. The official Centennial Celebration will take place September 2nd through 4th. Local historians have documented evidence of human civilization in the area dating back more than 13,000 years. Explanations suggest that native tribes moved with the gradual northern movement of the glaciers that sculpted the region and helped structure the forest and copper rich area, now known as the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Excavation sites dating back as early as 3500 B.C., show evidence that seven spots were used to extract copper. As time went on, Native American Indian tribes visited Curtis as a favorite camping site while early historical references indicate explorers traversed nearby waterways in search of resources and western passages from the 1600s to the late 1800s. However, settlement and population growth began in 1881 when the Detroit, Mackinac and Marquette Railroad was built bringing lumber workers to the area. A township board was elected in 1887 to locally govern Portage Township with just over 150 people residing in its borders. In 1905, the Manistique Railroad that ran from Grand Marais to Seney and Germfask was extended to Curtis and a post office was established. The first postmaster facilitating the operation was Mark Howard Miller. A sawmill started by Jesse Sherbrook later that year in Saw-wa-qua-to- beach on South Manistique Lake gave the town the resources they needed to establish itself. What began as a town of roughly 75 people, Curtis and the surrounding township now make up approximately 1,000 residents. Through the years, this close knit community has thrived as the tourist, fishing and logging industries have flourished in the area. Nestled between the two beautiful, large, pristine Manistique Lakes, the people of Curtis have grown to be nothing short of a family. Many of the names of original settlers can still be found among the rosters of the 13 civic and fraternal organizations including the Lions, Fireworks Committee, Ladies Aid, The Fish Coop, and the Curtis Community Arts Council. Curtis's four churches, library, school, medical clinic, post office, bank and public housing facility make the town completely self- sufficient and an attraction for families and businesses looking to move into an All-American community. The history of Curtis contains many interesting facts and figures as well as tales of its growth as an area inhabited for over 1,000 years by early mankind. As a small town tucked between waterways and engulfed in thick forests in the middle of Michigan's eastern Upper Peninsula, the people of Curtis were able to build their community with their own resources and based on their own value driven standards to create an amazing town. Mr. Speaker, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the village of Curtis and its residents on their first 100 years and in wishing them well through the next century.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the Michigan Congressional Delegation consisting of Senators Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow, Congresswomen Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick and Candice Miller, and Congressmen Dave Camp, John Conyers, John Dingell, Vernon Ehlers, Peter Hoekstra, Dale Kildee, Joe Knollenberg, Sander Levin, Thaddeus McCotter, Mike Rogers, Joe Schwartz, Fred Upton and me. We pay tribute today to an agency in Michigan that has spent the last 100 years improving the means by which those in the far reaches of our beautiful peninsulas utilize our most well-known state product, the automobile. Today, we in the Michigan Congressional Delegation would like to honor the 100th Anniversary of the Michigan Department of Transportation also known as MDOT. It all began with the innovative spirit of a bicycle enthusiast and entrepreneur, Horatio ``Good Roads'' Earle, when he became Michigan's first highway commissioner. He began a movement by aligning the professional road builders and engineers to improve road transportation throughout the state. On July 1, 1905, the voters in the State of Michigan overwhelmingly approved state spending for roads making Michigan the 18th state in the Union to establish an agency to oversee transportation. Since that day that the State Highway Department was established, Michigan has not only led the world in automotive advancements but has achieved many firsts in the state, country and world for transportation initiatives. There were many transportation firsts in Michigan including the construction of the first international underwater railroad tunnel (Port Huron-Sarnia Tunnel) in 1891; the first international underwater automobile tunnel (Detroit-Windsor Tunnel) in 1930; and the first freeway-to-freeway interchange on Jan. 18, 1955 at I-94 (Edsel Ford) and M-10 (John Lodge) in Detroit, permitting motorists to make turns ``simply by moving in the direction they wish to go.'' Both the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit in 1929 and the Mackinac Bridge in 1957 were the world's longest suspension bridges when they were built. The world's largest automobile tire, utilizing the Ferris wheel ride from the World's Fair in New York from 1964, can be found next to eastbound I-94 just east of the M-39 (Southfield Freeway) interchange in Allen Park. MDOT was also the World's first transportation agency to automate management and processing of construction products from the construction site through contractor payment, saving taxpayers more than $20 million per year in 1993. The national innovations are endless but include some of the most significant to our everyday living like the nation's first mile of concrete highway built by the Wayne County Road Commission on Woodward Avenue between 6 and 7 Mile roads in Detroit in 1909, the first painted centerline in 1911 and the first state trunkline in the nation to sport a centerline from Marquette to Negaunee Road (now US 41/M 28) in 1917. The nation's first highway materials testing lab was at the University of Michigan in 1912 and the nation's first four way red/yellow/green electric traffic light was at the comer of Woodward and Michigan Avenues in Detroit as the invention of Detroit Police Officer William Potts in 1918. Other national firsts include the first roadside park on US-2 in Iron County, completed in 1919; the first practical highway snowplow was built in Munising in 1922; and the first ``super highway'' was an eight-lane divided highway with a 40-foot median built in 1923 along Woodward Avenue between Detroit and Pontiac. MDOT was the first highway department to use yellow centerlines to designate ``no passing'' zones in 1927. Michigan has the nation's first state operated information center which opened in 1935 near New Buffalo. Michigan was the nation's first state to complete a toll free border-to-border interstate on I-94 running 205 miles from Detroit to New Buffalo in 1960. In 1977 US-31 in Oceana County won the national ``most beautiful highway'' by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The nation's largest concrete segmental bridge opened up in 1988 when the Zilwaukee Bridge opened carrying I-75 over the Saginaw River. Recently, in 2003, Gloria Jeff was named the director of MDOT becoming the first female and African American State Transportation director in the nation. Mr. Speaker these are only a few of the facts, figures and historical moments that are seemingly infinite examples that mark the significant influence this agency has had on transportation in our country and the world. In fact much of this information and a detailed outline of MDOT's history can be found through the resources of MDOT's centennial website at www.michigan.gov/mdot100. However, the greatness and innovation displayed by MDOT throughout this past 100 years is not limited to our history and evolution as a modern state. The recent state accomplishments and the goals laid out for the future show the numerous advancements this department continues to make on behalf of it residents. Horatio ``Good Roads'' Earle would be proud of the efforts to make our roads, highways and bridges better each year. According to MDOT, since 1999, they have completed more than 93 percent of the road and bridge preservation programs announced in the fiveyear program making 88 percent of the vehicle miles traveled on Michigan freeways done so on good pavement. In the last three years, the capitol preventative maintenance program increased the life span of 3,710 miles of highway by up to seven years with a special treatment. Additionally, MDOT has made significant improvements to trunkline bridges through the state due to strategic planning as well as opening almost 80 miles of widened roadways and passing relief lanes to relieve congestion, reduce delays and improve safety. Other program successes have been in overall safety, economic development projects, parking, roadside programs, and environmental quality. Mr. Speaker, on June 30th, a special ceremony to celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the Michigan Department of Transportation will be held at the Mackinac Bridge in my district, one of the world's largest suspension bridges that connects the Upper and Lower Peninsulas with five miles of concrete and steel innovation. Friday, July 1st, the department's employees will also celebrate the anniversary in Lansing, Michigan. Celebrating this milestone year at the Mackinac Bridge is most appropriate because of the symbolism the Mighty Mac shares with that of this accomplished state department. MDOT has connected people from Copper Harbor to Coldwater, has set a number of firsts in national accomplishments, and continues to look ahead at ways to improve transportation for Michigan residents and visitors. Since its inception by Mr. Earle, MDOT has focused on the quality of its services and resources, the effectiveness of their work, the dedication to the needs of their travelers, the integrity to improve transportation the right way the first time, and the pride of being the best as what they do. I ask the United States House of Representatives to join the Michigan Congressional Delegation in congratulating the Michigan Department of Transportation on its first 100 years and even better success through the next century.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, congressional Republicans unveiled their own Social Security privatization plan last week, stating repeatedly that their proposal would protect the Social Security trust fund. It is an interesting comment considering the fact that Republicans have raided $670 billion from the Social Security trust fund over the last 4 years alone to help pay for their giant tax breaks for the wealthiest elite. The majority party seems to forget that during the Clinton years, we ensured Social Security trust funds were locked away so they could not be used by the Federal Government. That quickly changed after President Bush came to town, and now congressional Republicans are being disingenuous by attempting to sell their Social Security proposal as a way to prevent the trust fund from being raided in the future. Republicans are simply misrepresenting their proposal. When asked last week how the government would fund the programs now being funded by the Social Security trust fund money, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery), Social Security Subcommittee chairman, said that the cash can still be used the way it is now. In other words, despite their rhetoric, Republicans would continue to raid the Social Security trust fund. Americans should not be fooled by this latest privatization proposal. If the President and Republicans are serious about saving Social Security, let us pay back what we owe on Social Security now.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a community in my district that is celebrating its 150th anniversary as a city. On Thursday, June 30, 2005 the residents of Tawas City, Michigan celebrate their history that 150 years ago began a rollercoaster of triumphs and tribulations. From fishing to lumber to railroad to a military base, this city has adapted to each new opportunity resulting in a rich history and growth. In the early days of what is now known as Tawas Bay, the fish rich area was difficult to traverse because of the seafaring dangers. A lighthouse was constructed in 1853 attracting the first of the English settlers including Oakland County Judge Gideon O. Wittmore, founder of Tawas City. Whitmore was drawn to the increasingly valuable endless supply of timber in the area. Timber was in great demand as new settlements were established in the Midwest region. Whitmore constructed the first sawmill, Whitmore and Company, and platted the city in 1855 as Tawas City. The city was named after the local Native American Indian tribe the Ottawas. Just 15 years after becoming an official village, the rough waters of Tawas Bay had brought sand and sediment unto Tawas Point rendering the lighthouse useless to mariners. Almost immediately, work began on a replacement lighthouse that was completed in 1876 and is still in use today. This lighthouse, the Tawas Point Lighthouse, was recognized in 1984 in the National Register of Historical Places. Throughout the late 1800's, the lumber boom had become a major facet in the local economy as the home for sawmills and the historic Detroit and Mackinac Railroad. It also provided many tales of great lumberjacks from the Michigan lumber camps. Some local residents believe that many stories we tell today about the great Paul Bunyan originated from that area. However, by the 1890's the lumbering boom had dwindled from depleted resources and the immense damage to the forests. The land resembled that of a wasteland and farming quickly took over as a top industry alongside fishing. However, with the invention of the automotive assembly line, young sons of farmers headed downstate to make quick money leaving hundreds of family farms vacant. With its natural resources exhausted, young people left the Tawas area. The once beautiful landside was left naked, polluted and over fished. Tawas thought it had seen the worst but, on July 11, 1911 a fire leveled communities of neighboring Oscoda and AuSable with five dead and 2,000 homeless. Tawas area residents took in survivors and helped the two devastated communities rebuild. In the process of rebuilding the communities, they had the opportunity to establish six hydroelectric dams in the AuSable River that are still in use today. It was around that time that Tawas City would see nearly 70 years of revitalization and economic opportunity come to the area. In the 1920's the United States Army Air Corps began a flight training program that would evolve into Wurtsmith Air Force Base. From the mid 1920's to the 1950's the Civil Conservation Corps planted nearly 500 million trees to restore much of the area ravaged during the lumber years. In 1937, the Tawas Post of the Michigan State Police became a permanent part of the Tawas community. Even during the war years, Tawas played an important role in protecting America and its soldiers from poisonous attacks with the Tawas plant, staffed by women, producing up to 42,000 gas masks a day. In 1965, Tawas Point State Park was created and provided 175 acres of camping sites, picnic areas, beaches and the lighthouse area which attracts over 250,000 people per year. In the 1990's Tawas City would see another great challenge with the closure of the Wurtsmith Air Force Base. However, after nearly a century and a half of rising to meet challenges in the past, the local community partnered with State, local and Federal resources to turn the base into a thriving opportunity. The Wurtsmith redevelopment was so successful in turning the economy around they were cited as an example throughout the country on how small towns can overcome the hardships of military base closures. Mr. Speaker, the history of Tawas City is made up of the tales of brave fishermen, innovative entrepreneurs, legendary lumberjacks, dedicated neighbors, hardworking farmers, courageous soldiers, devoted workers, and All-American families. The values that extend from each industry, every challenge, and every triumph have added to the fabric of this community. I applaud the people of Tawas--past and present--for advancing this city to be the outstanding place it is today. Furthermore, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Tawas City and its residents on their first 150 years and in wishing them well through the next century.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate a historic symbol of exploration and commerce in my district. On Friday, June 24th the City of Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan will kick-off a summer of activities to honor the 150th Anniversary of the Soo Locks. Hundreds of years ago settlers established the oldest city in Michigan and third oldest in the United States, Sault Ste. Marie, named by French explorer Father Jacques Marquette in honor of the Virgin Mary. The area, rich with fur trading and fishing, was difficult to travel by water because of the rapids or ``Bawating'' as referred to by the local Anishnabe Native American Tribe. As a voyager entered the St. Mary's River to sail from Lake Superior to Lake Huron the rapids dropped 21 feet and was too treacherous to traverse. Voyagers, explorers and tradesman were forced to portage their canoes, unloading and reloading their cargo via the land trail along side the rapids to complete their travels. The Northwest Fur Company engineered the first locks on the Canadian side of Sault Ste. Marie in the late 1700's. The system involved moving a ship into a chamber of water, or a lock, and then raise or lower the water level to be even with the body of water they wished to traverse. This first set of locks was unfortunately destroyed in the War of 1812 and travelers were once again forced to carry their cargo by land. The present day lock system, mimicking the original design, was developed by civil engineers in 1850. In 1852, Congress offered a large public land deal as payment to any company that would construct the new lock designed to continue commerce between the lakes. The Fairbanks Scale Company agreed to the proposal in 1853 because of its mining interests in the Upper Peninsula. On May 31st 1855, two 350 foot long locks were given to the State of Michigan. The State instituted a small toll in the early years of the lock for maintenance but in 1877, when commerce exceeded the capability of the locks, the State recognized that a new set of locks was necessary. In 1881, the locks were transferred to the Federal government under the U.S, Army Corps of Engineers. Since that time, the Soo Locks have operated toll-free with two canals and fours locks that included the Davis, Poe, MacArther and Sabin locks. The value of the Soo Locks was never fully appreciated until World War 11. As the United States was attacked, it became necessary for America to build the ``arsenal of democracy''. To build the world's arsenal, America needed steel for its ships, guns, tanks and vehicles. In order to make that steel, America needed to mine the iron ore rich regions of Minnesota and Michigan's Upper Peninsula. The only practical way to move the massive volume and weight of iron ore was by ship from Lake Superior, through the Soo Locks, down the St. Mary's River and out to Lake Huron, Michigan, Ontario, and Erie to the steel mills of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana and Illinois. As the war's demand for iron ore was at its greatest, Congress authorized a new Soo Lock capable of handling the 640 foot ships loaded with up to 17,500 tons of iron ore during the 1942 Maritime Class. America worked around the clock to build the new lock to hold the iron ore boats that stoked the war machine. With the end of World War II, the importance of the Soo Locks did not diminish. As trade and steel demand increased a new even larger lock was needed. In 1965, Congress authorized a new 1000 foot Super Lock. As with all the locks, the new lock was named after the engineer in charge of the Soo Lock, General Orlando M. Poe, also known for his eight lighthouses that grace Michigan's waterways. The Poe Lock is the largest lock in the Western Hemisphere and the busiest lock in the world. Each year, 80 to 90 million tons of freight move through the Soo Locks. Still today, more than 70 percent of the raw materials needed to make steel pass through the locks, as does low sulfur coal and grain exports. The Great Lakes shipping industry helps sustain thousands of jobs in mining, construction, steel making and a multitude of support industries. In fact, shipping is so important to our economy that just one 1000 foot ore boat can deliver enough iron ore to build 60,000 cars. Currently, \2/3\ of all freight is restricted to the 32 year-old Poe lock, which is the only lock capable of handling 1000 foot ore boats. Without this lock, the steel, coal and grain industries would be helpless. Recognizing this, Congress authorized construction of another ``Poe'' size lock in 1986. Over the last eight years, I have been proud to secure funding for preconstruction, planning, engineering and design for the new lock. Since 2003 alone, over $10 million have been secured toward the construction of this new lock. I am pleased that the States of Michigan, Illinois and Pennsylvania recognize the economic importance of this additional lock by contributing their non-Federal cost shares to the project and encourage the other Great Lakes States to join us in securing the necessary funding to build this new lock. Mr. Speaker, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the historic engineering marvel we call the Soo Locks as they celebrate 150 years of exploration, commerce and trade. This engineering wonder has provided a proud past of innovation to evolve into the critical link to deliver the arsenal of democracy during world wars and the economic feasibility for the steel, coal and grain industries now and into the future, From the Anishnabe Tribe of Native Americans to the men and women who first explored, built and operated the locks; to the City of Sault Ste. Marie and her people; to a Nation at war; to tomorrow's commerce that flows to and from Lake Superior to the other four Great Lakes; the Soo Lock have withstood the test of time by meeting the demands of a great Nation, to traverse the ``rapids'' of history always opening its lock to a brighter future for America. Once again with the help of the United States Congress, I hope to continue the legacy of the Soo Locks by providing the resources to build another super lock that will ensure another successful 150 years of waterborne commerce by and through the Soo Locks located at Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Paul Blewett, a public school teacher who has served the young people of the Bark River Harris School District in Michigan's Upper Peninsula for the past 42\1/2\ years and has made a significant contribution to his professional organization. Paul Blewett was born in Ishpeming, Michigan on January 21, 1940 to the late Fred and Evelyn Blewett. He graduated from Ishpeming High School in 1958 and received his BA and Masters Degree from Northern Michigan University in Marquette, Michigan. After being awarded his Professional Teaching Certificate in 1963, he entered the challenging and rewarding field of teaching in the Bark River Harris Public School System in Bark River in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. Mr. Blewett's first position at Bark River Harris Schools began a very long and successful career and a true commitment to his community. Mr. Blewett taught Algebra I and II, General Math, Geometry, and Advance Mathematics for over 42 years to students in the Bark River Harris High School along with being the driver education instructor for 40 of those years. Paul made a commitment to his students in the classroom and to their activities outside of the regular classroom. They respected him as a teacher and appreciated the guidance and counseling that he provided. Aside from his full time teaching responsibilities, Mr. Blewett also made a major commitment to his professional organization and contributed to the development and the building of the Michigan Education Association as one of the leading professional education organizations in the nation. Mr. Blewett was recognized by his colleagues for his talent, hard work and willingness to participate because they elected him to serve as the local Education Association President, Negotiator, Regional Council President, President and Treasurer of the Upper Peninsula Education Association, a member of the Board of Directors for the Michigan Education Association for thirteen years, a delegate to National Education Association Representative Assembly and a delegate to the State Representative Assembly for 30 years. He was also involved in the Political Action Committee of the Michigan Education Association. While doing all of this, Mr. Blewett held many other roles within his professional educational organization. With so much time contributed to his teaching, community and professional development, Mr. Blewett extended family was his students and colleagues until he met a lovely nurse from Wisconsin. In April of 2003 he married Vera and gained a wonderful stepson, Lyndon. Mr. Blewett made time to pursue his love for photography. As a special project, he made a photographic record of many events in school to capture current student life with the intent of preserving history. In addition to exploring his craft through creative means, his natural talent made him in-demand for weddings and social events. Mr. Speaker, it is time to say ``Thank You'' and recognize this teacher for his dedication to his students and his professional involvement with the Michigan Education Association at all levels of responsibilities. Paul's involvement in public education and his professional organization made a difference in the delivery and development of public education for the Upper Peninsula and the State of Michigan. We thank Paul for his commitment, his friendship and we wish him and his wife Vera the best in retirement.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the dedication of a small town public library that was once a vision for a better place to learn and discover. The vision became a dream and today the vision is a reality. It can best be described through the words of the American Writer Normal Cousins--``a library, to modify the famous metaphor of Socrates, should be the delivery room for the birth of ideas--a place where history comes to life''. On June 18th, 2005, the City of St. Ignace, Michigan will dedicate their new library that will serve as the central location to explore historic knowledge, current cultural awareness and unlock future technological advancements. To fully embrace the significance of the work and commitment that went into the completion of this new library, we must understand the humble beginnings of the original public library in St. Ignace. In 1924, the first library began as a Civil League Library in the old City Hall comprised of only 100 books donated by the local League. For a short time following, the books were transferred to the LaSalle High School Library. However, upon the completion of the new Municipal Building in 1940, the Civic League was given a new home for their growing collection of over 1,000 volumes. The League understood that if the library was to continue to grow at the successful rate it had been, they would need an oversight group to maintain the collected works, so they established a Library Board in 1944. Within a short 10 year period, the library had 4,000 volumes and a circulation of 10,000. In 1969, when the Civil League dissolved, the Library Board continued on with a new mission of creating a building to permanently house their library resources. Fourteen years later, in 1983, the 10,000 volume collection moved out of City Hall and into the Spring Street building where it would stay until 2005. In 1993 the library received its first computer and one year later began providing Internet access. Today, the St. Ignace Public Library has a circulation of over 22,000 books, videos, audio books, and CD-ROMS and has access to six computers. The library informs me that over the past 10 years they have watched their ciruculation grow by 57 percent. They have issued roughly 2,000 library cards. Between the influx of people and learning materials, their 2,600 square foot building could hardly keep up with the growth. The new library, being dedicated this Saturday, is 6,600 square feet and contains a larger children's section and expanded computer facilities. In addition, the library will contain a community room for programs, lectures and public use making this library today's new town square that will bring families together to share, learn and grow. Mr. Speaker, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the St. Ignace Library Board, Funding and Building Committee and Steering committee for continuing the strong legacy of growth for the library and the vision to see it through. This nearly $1.5 million structure took many partners to accomplish. This was financed through private donations, foundations and state and federal grants as well as in-kind support went into making this happen. I was happy to be able to earmark two grants in the federal appropriations process for $175,000 and $225,000 to help the vision of this amazing project go from dream to reality. Just as the City of St. Ignace is the northern home to the Mackinac Bridge that connects to our neighbors in Michigan's Lower Peninsula, this library bridges and connects to neighbors next door and across the globe. Local residents now have the opportunity to connect with their neighbors through learning and activities while also connecting to those around the world through better access to technology. I applaud the St. Ignace community for their commitment to this great accomplishment that is clearly bridging them to the future.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Obey amendment. This amendment would restore crucial funding for State and local law enforcement back to the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. This bill cuts the funding for these programs by $410 million from the fiscal year 2005 enacted levels, and the 2005 enacted level was already $226 million less than was provided the year before that. So in 2 years, we have cut $636 million from law enforcement programs. How long are we going to continue on this downward slope of funding for our critical law enforcement programs? The Obey amendment would restore funding for the Byrne-JAG program and COPS, Community-Oriented Policing Services program. The COPS program has been highly successful and provides funding for our local and State agencies that they need to hire and train new police officers. According to the Department of Justice, every dollar we invest in the COPS program contributes to a decline in 10 violent crimes and 27 property crimes per 100,000 residents. As a former city police officer and a Michigan State Trooper, as well as cochair of the Congressional Law Enforcement Caucus, I understand how much our local communities need and rely on the Byrne grants and COP grants to keep these successful programs going in their neighborhoods. The Byrne-JAG grants provide funding for 29 different and vital programs such as antidrug education programs, treatment programs, and alternative sentencing initiatives, giving the States the ability to choose which programs they find most beneficial in their State to do under this Federal funding. As most of us know and we hear when we go back home to our local districts, the Byrne grants fund the local drug enforcement teams. We have to provide this funding so our drug enforcement officers can do their jobs. We must listen to what our drug enforcement officers are telling us and fully fund the Byrne grant program. Local drug enforcement teams are crucial to keeping our communities safe and drug free. If Byrne grants are funded at the level currently provided in this bill, our teams will be unable to hire the officers they need to sustain their drug enforcement teams. In my home State of Michigan, we would lose 11 of the 25 teams we have in Michigan. California would lose 26 teams. Texas would lose 21 drug enforcement teams. New York would lose 34 drug enforcement teams. Losing these drug enforcement teams would have a devastating and far- reaching effect not only in Michigan but throughout this country, especially in our rural communities. Let me be really clear. When it comes to crime and drug abuse and drug dealers, no community, urban or rural, is immune to this problem. Congress needs to step up to the plate and show their strong commitment to law enforcement and the criminal justice system. Today we have a chance to do that by voting for the Obey amendment and showing our support for law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line each and every day to keep our communities safe and drug free. I urge support of the Obey amendment.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Congressman Terry for his leadership on this issue. I am pleased to be able to join my colleagues, as a co-sponsor and advocate of our amendment to restore funding to the Byrne-Justice Assistance Grant, JAG, program in the Science-State appropriations bill. If, we, as the House, do not pass the Obey amendment, then we must pass the Terry amendment--even though it may hurt some programs, we all support. Unfortunately, this program is grossly underfunded in the bill-- cutting funding from the $634 million that was provided in fiscal year 2005 to only $348 million in fiscal year 2006--a 45-percent cut. Our amendment restores $286 million to Byrne, which will put the funding back to last year's level. If we do not restore this funding now, it will only be a matter of time before this program is completely wiped out. As a former Escanaba city police officer and Michigan State trooper as well as co-chair of the Congressional Law Enforcement Caucus, I understand how much our local communities need and rely on the Byrne grants program monies. Byrne grants provide funding for 29 vital programs such as anti-drug education programs, treatment programs and alternative sentencing initiatives, giving the States the ability to choose the programs where this Federal funding would be most beneficial to law enforcement issues faced in their State. Local drug enforcement teams are crucial to keeping our communities drug free. Without our amendment, our teams will not have the funding to hire the officers they need to sustain their drug enforcement teams. In my home State of Michigan, we would lose 11 of our 25 task forces. California will lose 26 of 58, Texas will lose 21 of 46 and New York will lose 34 of 76. Fighting the war on drugs must be an inter-jurisdictional, unified effort between local, county, and State police working together. Without the necessary Federal funding, this coordination will not be possible because our local task forces will no longer be in existence. Losing these task forces is a frightening thought considering that 90 percent of drug arrests nationwide are made by State and local law enforcement agencies. This would have a devastating and far reaching effect in Michigan-- especially on our rural communities. Let me be clear--when it comes to drug abuse, no community--urban or rural--is immune to this problem. Congress needs to step up to the plate and show their strong commitment to law enforcement and the criminal justice system. They have that chance today by voting for our amendment and showing their support for law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line to keep our communities safe and drug free.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I come here tonight concerned about drug safety and to speak out to protect our children from the acne drug Accutane. As a legislator, I have called for more restrictions on the distribution and use of this drug, which is known to cause severe birth defects and a form of impulsive behavior and depression in patients taking this drug. This drug has devastated my family with the loss of our son BJ and more than 268 other families who have lost their young son or daughter while he or she was taking Accutane. News stories persist concerning the safety of our prescription drugs. When an FDA safety reviewer, Dr. David Graham, testified before the Senate Finance Committee this past winter, he stated, ``I would argue that the FDA as currently configured is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx.'' He went on to tell the Senate Finance Committee that ``there are at least five other drugs on the market today that should be looked at seriously to see whether they should remain on the market.'' He cited the acne drug Accutane. Why Accutane? Accutane is the poster child for why we need an independent body to approve and review drug safety. Accutane causes horrendous birth defects and may cause psychiatric disorders such as depression and suicide. It is linked to over 268 suicides, according to the FDA. A recent study here by Dr. J. Douglas Bremner demonstrates how Accutane affects the brain, possibly causing impulsive behavior due to changes in the orbitofrontal cortex. This is the front part of the brain. This is an area known to cause or mediate depression. As Dr. Bremner showed us in his study of the brain, there is a decrease in the metabolism of the brain. This chart here is of two PET scans of the same person's brain. The PET scan on your left establishes a baseline for the person before they took Accutane. Now look at the second PET scan of the same person after 4 months on Accutane. Notice in the first scan before the Accutane the color red representing brain activity in the front part of the brain. Now, on the second PET scan, the post-Accutane one, notice very little red, representing decreased brain activity in the same person after 4 months on Accutane therapy. Accutane decreases the metabolism in the front part of the brain, the area we know that mediates depression. Dr. Bremner has concluded that this one patient here, there is a 21 percent decrease in brain metabolism in this patient. This change in the brain only occurred in Accutane patients. Dr. Bremner performed PET scans on other non-Accutane patients who were taking a different oral antibiotic for acne. None of these patients experienced any brain changes. Dr. Bremner also found that one-half of his Accutane patients in this study experienced a brain change, those who complained of severe headaches. Is it the excessive dosage found in the current formula of Accutane that is the cause of the change in the brain that we see in this PET scan? The medical evidence is clear that Accutane causes changes in the brain, and this may be what leads some people to take their lives. Let us join with Dr. Graham, the Centers for Disease Control, and other health care groups that have expressed strong concerns about the safety of this drug and who have called for Accutane to be withdrawn from the market as far back as 1990. Let us pull Accutane from the market at least until we have all the answers surrounding this powerful drug. At the very least, the FDA should immediately require a large-scale review and study on the drug's effects on the brain. Is this change of metabolism we see, that we see here, is it reversible? Will the brain repair itself? What amount or what dose of Accutane is safe? What amount or what dose of Accutane can be safely taken so the human brain is not affected? Has the FDA done enough to protect the American people, especially our young people, from the side effects of Accutane? Has the FDA seriously looked at Dr. Bremner's study and similar studies in animal testing, all of which demonstrate Accutane affects the brain? It is time to protect our children. It is time to withdraw this drug, Accutane, from the market until all of our important safety questions are fully and completely answered.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) for yielding and thank the gentleman for his leadership on this issue. We have had this issue a couple of times come before the Congress, and each time we have been pretty successful in trying to defeat the changes and the cuts in the appropriations to the Byrne grants because, as all my colleagues know, the Byrne-Justice Assistance Grants are of great importance to all of our States, to our local, our city police, especially in the fight against drugs because of the drug task force that they do fund. Our law enforcement officers who are in our communities who serve and protect us every day have asked repeatedly that we not cut this one vital program, which gives them discretion at the State level on where to put these justice grants, these Byrne grants, if you will, and how to use them in their States. Unfortunately, this program is grossly underfunded in the bill that we will have up this week, and it is going to cut funding from $634 million that was provided last year to $348 million for this fiscal year. That is about a 40, 45 percent cut. So, tomorrow, I look forward to joining with my colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstead), my other co-chair of the Law Enforcement Caucus, and others to offer this important amendment. Our amendment will ensure that our local law enforcement has the resources it needs to control and eliminate drug threats, keep our court systems up and running smoothly and provide funding for anti- terrorism training. As a former city police officer and a Michigan State police trooper, as well as the co-chair of the Law Enforcement Caucus, I understand how much our local communities need and rely upon the Byrne grants. In fact, we had hearings in the Law Enforcement Caucus earlier this year about what these Byrne grant cuts would mean to law enforcement, and law enforcement from Maryland, Illinois and all over the country came and testified the devastating effect it would have. So what our amendment would do to tomorrow is restore the $286 million that is being cut out of the Byrne grants by making a .448 percent cut, that is less than a half a percent, from every agency in this bill to fully fund Byrne grants. Why should every agency take a hit? Because this is how important the Byrne grants are to law enforcement and our continuing fight against drugs in this country. So I am hopeful that the entire House of Representatives will take to heart the importance of the funding of the Byrne grant program and vote for this amendment. Most of us are well aware that the funding this grant provides is instrumental to our law enforcement teams, but this Byrne grant does so much more that is often overlooked. In fact, the Byrne grants actually provide funding for 29 different programs, vital programs such as anti-drug education programs, treatment programs, alternative sentencing initiatives, giving the States the ability to choose the programs where funding would be most useful to them back at home. The Byrne grants also fund programs important to our court and prison systems. It provides funding to improve the operational effectiveness of the court process by expanding judicial resources and implementing court-delay reduction programs such as automated fingerprint identification systems. The Byrne grants provide long-range corrections and sentencing strategies and fund programs that teach inmates to acquire marketable skills and to make restitution payments to their victims. Byrne grants can also be used to implement antiterrorism training programs, enforce child abuse and neglect laws, improve the criminal justice system's response to domestic and family violence, and, finally, the grants can also be used to establish cooperative programs between law enforcement and the media, such as the AMBER alert system, which we use when there is an abduction or a missing child or young adult. We flash it across the highways, the byways, the TVs, and radios. That is all funded by the Byrne grants. So why would we put a 40, 45 percent cut in that system that we seem to be relying upon, unfortunately, more and more each day? As most of us have been hearing from our local drug enforcement teams back home, and the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) certainly articulated those needs, we have to provide the funding so our drug enforcement officers can do their jobs. We can do this only by fully funding the Byrne grants. We have a list we are putting out, and the gentleman from Nebraska has worked on this, and all of us who are supporting this amendment tomorrow. If you look at California, our largest State, it has 58 drug enforcement teams, task forces. If these cuts go through, they will be down to 32. They will lose 26 drug task forces; Georgia, 16; Louisiana, 17; New York will lose 34 of their 76 teams; Ohio will lose 14 of their 32; Texas will lose 21 of the 46 drug enforcement teams; and Wisconsin, my neighboring State, will lose 15 of their 34. Basically, of the 828 drug enforcements teams we have across this Nation, we will lose 373, or 45 percent of them. So really, if we are to keep our communities safe and drug free, we really have to fund this. Local drug enforcement teams are crucial to keeping our communities drug free. If the Byrne grants are funded at the level currently in the bill, as I said, our teams would not be able to hire the officers they need to sustain drug enforcement teams. In my home State of Michigan, we would lose 11 out of our 25 drug enforcement teams. Losing the task forces would have a devastating and far-reaching effect on Michigan, especially in rural communities like I represent. Let me be clear. When it comes to drug abuse, no community, urban or rural, in this country is immune from the problem. The methamphetamine problem alone, as the gentleman from Nebraska just spoke of, is destroying families and taking lives in rural America. To highlight how important these drug enforcement teams are, there was a recent article in one of my little local newspapers in the First Congressional District of Michigan which cites that back 2 months ago, on April 13, HUNT, the Huron Undercover Narcotics Team, HUNT as we call them, seized 3,000 OxyContin tablets from one home in rural Presque County. This critical seizure is just one example of the work our narcotics teams do each and every day to keep our communities safe. These local agencies, like HUNT, who do so much for our local communities, will take the brunt of the Byrne grant cuts. It is a scary thought, considering that 90 percent of the drug arrests nationwide are made by States and local law enforcement. Ninety percent of all drug arrests are made by local and State. And where do they get the bulk of their money? The Byrne grants. Our country's drug problems are not going away. In fact, with the emergence of prescription drug use, methamphetamines, and OxyContin, some would argue our problem is only getting worse. So my question is why would we, as a Congress, cut the funding that enables teams like the HUNT undercover narcotics team to exist and combat this problem that is only becoming more severe? I know we have other Members who wish to speak, but I am hopeful as Members take to the floor tonight, they will keep in mind and urge their colleagues to support the Terry-Stupak-Ramstad amendment tomorrow to restore the funding to this critical program. Again, we talk about drugs tonight, but there are 29 different programs. It is one of those few programs where we say to the States, here is some money, we want you to do it for law enforcement, and do what is best for your State. We do not mandate it, but here is a pot of money you can take it from, and we hope you do what is best in your State. After all, you know what is best. The State and Antidrug Task Forces are just one example that we all deal with day in and day out, and I would hope people would support our amendment by cutting less than \1/2\ of 1 percent from the other agencies in this bill to fully fund the Byrne grants. Mr. Speaker, I yield back to the gentleman and thank him once again for his leadership on this issue, and I look forward to arguing this amendment with him tomorrow on the floor.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, before the gentleman yields to our colleague, may I comment on one point that he brought up, if I may?

Mr. STUPAK. If my colleague would be so kind, and I appreciate our colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), being down here to work with us on this issue. These local teams understand they are not just getting Federal money, and the Federal Government is funding the whole thing. Whether it is Presque County or the little city of Escanaba, where I was a police officer, or whether it is the big city of Detroit, the local units of government must put in money. It is a matching grant program. They have to put in resources. So it is a unified effort between local, county, and State police working together, and the seed money is really the Federal Government. Without the seed money, there is no incentive or urging of the county board of commissioners to fund an officer to work on the undercover task force team, because there will not be any. So it is always a fight every year to keep these teams together and keep them properly funded and staffed with personnel. And if we lose the Federal funding, a 45 percent reduction, the problems that I am sure the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) and I have spoken about will only get 45 percent worse within the year. So I appreciate the gentleman's leadership and the Members now with us.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) for asking me to come down and speak with him and speak out against the Central America Free Trade Agreement called CAFTA. I am pleased to be here with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) and the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), all from the great State of Ohio. As we continue to look at just your map there, the job loss is 216,000 in Ohio, 210 in Michigan. Just one slight correction, if I may, on your map. The Upper Peninsula of Michigan still belongs to Michigan, not to Wisconsin. But anyone saw me down here arguing this from my district and knowing that I live in the Upper Peninsula, they would say, whoa, what happened here?

Mr. STUPAK. But, you know, if CAFTA passes, there might as well not be an Upper Peninsula of Michigan just because we have lost so much. In fact, Michigan, right now our unemployment remains the highest in the State at about 7 percent. The small and the medium-sized manufacturing jobs are gone. We just have great difficulty with it. One industry we still have left in Michigan, and a little bit that it is, but it is vitally important, a new part of my district down there by the thumb area, as we call it, is the sugar industry. And CAFTA will just really wipe out the sugar industry in Michigan. We recently just have been declared a disaster area because of higher than normal temperatures in the region, where we lost 200,000 tons of sugar. That cost $33 million to our farmers. But now if we pass this trade agreement, and if it goes into effect, U.S. markets will be flooded with sugar imports, striking an even greater blow to our Michigan economy, especially our agriculture and sugar. And sugar actually ranks fourth in the country in production, Michigan sugar does. So we have a vital stake in the sugar industry in this Nation, being fourth in the country in production. And our sugar comes from sugar beet. And the sugar beet economy in Michigan, if you will, is about 2000 farms, employs thousands of people, and annually it is a $300 million product to agriculture in Michigan. Michigan farmers know how damaging CAFTA would be to them. We will also endanger many of the thousands of jobs at the mid-Michigan- based Michigan Sugar Company. That is a cooperative, and they have worked very hard to maintain their jobs. And if CAFTA goes through, we think the Michigan Sugar Company would be history. We in Congress we need to send a strong signal to the Bush administration that this is one instance where sugar, if you will, does not belong on the table, so to speak. What can we expect from CAFTA? And I know all my colleagues here joined me in that fight in NAFTA about some 10 years ago. A significant job loss. Over the past 10 years we have 766,000 jobs lost here in the United States. And where did they go? They went to Mexico and other places for lower wages and labor standards that are appealing to big corporations. How many more American jobs can we afford to lose as a result of CAFTA? Why would CAFTA, under the same labor and environmental framework as NAFTA, be anything better for our manufacturing industry, our sugar industry or the American worker? CAFTA would allow foreign corporations to challenge U.S. environmental laws once again by establishing a three-member panel of international judges who meet behind closed doors with the power to award billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayers to multinational corporations. CAFTA's environmental provision is a sham. The agreement says that nations would simply enforce existing environmental laws, even though many of those laws are inadequate. Even that provision, the environmental provision, even that one fails to have a meaningful enforcement mechanism. CAFTA does not ask other nations to better preserve or protect their environments. It just says whatever laws you have is fine. In the U.S. we have many environmental laws to protect our food, other residents, our natural resources. Yet if CAFTA passes, we will import goods from countries that do not have the same safety standards. We all know about the food. I know the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) has helped on the Energy and Commerce Committee where we both sit on food safety issues, whether it is tomatoes out of Mexico versus Florida tomatoes. In this country we still, we pass every year a labeling law to label our food. So we could say, okay, these tomatoes are from Florida. We know what standards they are grown by. These are from Mexico. We do not know what standards they are grown by. We pass it, but yet it is never implemented by the current administration. People are willing to pay a few extra pennies, if you will, on their fruits or vegetables or beets or seafood just to know where it comes from, because our standards, our environmental standards, our consumer standards, our health standards, our safety standards are so much greater in this country than elsewhere. So CAFTA, in a way, wipes out all these protections for the American worker, for the American homeowner, for our American family. CAFTA also fails to protect Americans workers. It fails to offer protections to Central American workers who fall victim to their country's own diminishing standards. CAFTA does have its benefits. The only benefits I can find are to companies that would leave the U.S. to exploit cheap labor in countries with minimal protections. We need to be promoting business development and jobs in the U.S., not sending more of them overseas. Michigan, as I said, has lost, and on the gentleman from Ohio's chart there, 210,000 manufacturing jobs. Just since NAFTA alone, we can draw a direct line between NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and 130,000 manufacturing jobs, just manufacturing jobs in Michigan. Companies are practically crawling all over one another to leave the U.S. for cheap labor in countries with little protection for their workers or the environment. Now I want to be clear, and I am sure all of us here tonight, we support fair trade agreements; however, CAFTA is unfair at its worst. It is unfair to workers both at home and in Central America. It is unfair to small businesses. It is unfair to our communities, unfair to our environment. So I would urge the administration and this Congress to stop the exodus of jobs from the U.S., stop the challenges to our environmental protection laws. And when I came down here tonight to join you, you were talking a little bit about what about a faith base or a moral basis for some of these agreements, especially here in the United States. When you take a look at the United States Catholic Conference and the United States Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Relief Services have all come out opposing this trade agreement on basic fundamental human rights issues. Trade is all about people, their livelihood and how they live their lives. And they found CAFTA, you know, Catholics for Faithful Citizenship, they found that CAFTA is a trade investment agreement negotiated between the United States and six countries, and they are, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Dominican Republic. And the President wants us to pass this trade agreement. But before we go ahead and do it, just from a moral and faith-based perspective, we have to ask questions like how will CAFTA address the needs of small and medium-sized manufacturing and farms here in the United States and Central America? How will CAFTA protect the rights of worker and the environment? How will CAFTA impact the lives of people throughout this hemisphere, be it U.S. and Central America? What is the intellectual property provisions for protection of your intellectual property? What does CAFTA have? Very little. What is CAFTA's purpose, or how does CAFTA promote really human development and human rights, especially amongst poor people in Central America? If you start asking these questions, it is very clear this trade agreement is not negotiated in the best interests of the American people. It is not negotiated in the best interests of faith-based people. It is not negotiated in the best interests of people who come to this floor or go to work every day with a moral purpose of what they do. I have always been taught you work hard, you play by the rules, and good things will happen. Unfortunately, with these trade agreements, you work hard, you play by the rules, not only do you lose your job, but your job is shipped overseas, and it is sort of a race to the bottom, because the job you had before, now you earn so much less when you try to pick up a new job because there is just not the jobs there. I mentioned Michigan at about 7 percent unemployment. A month or two ago it was 7.5 percent. The tourism industry is starting to take off, so we are starting to see a little bit of an improvement in our economy, but still at 7 percent. We just cannot. The auto industry is hurting terribly in this Nation, and as we ship more and more jobs south to produce more and more cars, to produce our sugar, to produce our meats, our vegetables, our fruits, what is left for the farmers? And you cannot tell me these farmers in Central America are making the money. They really are going to be squeezed. The small and medium- sized farmers will be squeezed out in these countries as the big international conglomerates will take over, and they will reap the profits, and these people will continue to live in poverty and in misery. So when the United States Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Relief Services come out against a trade agreement because they do not believe it will do anything to lift the workers, the farmers, the peasants out of poverty in Central America, at the expense of U.S. jobs, that is a strong statement. So I would hope people would take a very close look at CAFTA. Take a look at it from just your own job in our own district. Take a look what is does to the United States. But take a look at it from a moral and ethical perspective and say, is this the kind of trade agreement I can honestly vote for and go to church this Sunday and say, you know, I did the right thing? I think when we examine the questions put forth by all of you here tonight, I think the American people would agree that this CAFTA is just a bad deal not just for U.S. sugar, but for all of the United States and all of our manufacturing, and does nothing to help the people it professes to help in the Central America region of this hemisphere. So I would hope that people would not support this agreement. There is a lot of pressure being applied by the White House right now. There are meetings going on all the time. There is actually a picnic this Wednesday at the White House. I am sure they will be asking Members there in between their enjoyment to vote for this trade agreement. The President has sort of staked part of his administration upon it, and I hope we would see through all this and see what is done to our Nation, all these trade agreements that are really unfair. Again, not against trade agreements, but they have to be fair to both countries, to all the countries involved, and they have to be enforceable, and we are just not enforcing it. I mentioned the intellectual property rights. We have had hearings in our committee on China where they just openly are manufacturing these games that we see that young people play, whether it is their Gameboy or all of these video games, openly doing it in front of the Chinese officials. And they say, yeah, but they will not crack down on it. The intellectual property rights. The movies. The intellectual property rights is one of the last few industries we have left in this country where we have world supremacy on it, but yet we cannot get countries like China to enforce it, to protect it, even though it is part of all these trade agreements. It is just amazing. It is just simply amazing that we have these trade agreements we know are being violated, nothing is being done. Let us not do another trade agreement, this one being the Central America Free Trade Agreement, that is going to harm us not just from an agricultural point of view and manufacturing point of view, but even our intellectual property rights. If they cannot protect something like a video game, how are they going to protect your best interest when it comes down to these trade agreements? So I would hope that this House would reject this CAFTA. And remember, it is an agreement, and when it comes to the floor we cannot amend it, we cannot change it, we cannot alter it. It is either a yes or no vote.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I ask for the learned chairman to tell me where we are imposing a new duty on the FDA. What we are asking here is simply that the FDA follow the law; that they not use funds, as my colleague put it, for reprisals against employees who are encouraged to speak their mind, and when they speak their mind, they are investigated and harassed and intimidated and asked to leave their jobs. My amendment specifically says we do not disclose, and make sure we do not disclose, anything that is confidential, proprietary, proprietary interests of the drug companies. As long as those are not disclosed and not confidential in that manner and no one does it, then there is no reason to be harassing, intimidating, and investigating people who testify before advisory committees. There is no new change in the law. All we are saying is FDA, you are also subject to law. You have to follow the law. And those things that are confidential and proprietary in interest, we do not expect you will disclose them; therefore we do not do it. So if someone can tell me what is the new duty, I will be happy to draft my amendment before we are done tonight, and we will make it in order then. I really do not see any new duty being imposed here, with all honesty. I am not trying to be flippant; I am just trying to get an answer to my question. Just like the last one, there is no new duty. So if someone can tell me that, I will be happy to change the amendment to make it germane.