Bart Stupak

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz), one of the authors of this substitute, and we appreciate her.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a leader who truly left his mark on the labor movement in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan as well as throughout the United States. Thomas James Katona has increased union effectiveness by partnering the historic strengths of labor unions with the innovation of technology. Mr. Katona's induction into the Upper Peninsula Labor Hall of Fame is warranted and deserved. As a dedicated Staff Representative for the Office and Professional Employees International Union (O.P.E.I.U.), Local Union 512 of the AFL- CIO and a proud member of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), Mr. Katona was a committed organizer of working people in the public and private sectors. He has devoted himself to their cause of fair and just representation in the work place. Mr. Katona has been on the forefront of worker education by designing and delivering labor education classes for employees and staff. Always advocating for his membership, Mr. Katona was constantly arguing before the National Labor Relations Board, the Michigan Employment Relations Commission and Administrative Law Judges. He served his larger community as a volunteer mediator for the Delta County Resolution Services, UPCAP and was an active member and participant in the Association Conflict Resolution. Mr. Katona has been described by his union brothers and sisters as a great leader showing persistence and assertiveness as an advocate and problem solver for hIs union and fellow workers. Mr. Katona was a trusted labor and community leader. However, while Mr. Katona will always be remembered by his colleagues and friends for many accomplishments, he has left his mark through his tireless commitment to the development and propagation of ``cyber unionism'' as a means of strengthening and improving communications within the labor movement. As a published author on the subject, Mr. Katona blazed the trail for technological improvements including helping trade unionists design, post and maintain Web pages, Web sites and e-mail magazines. Mr. Speaker, I ask the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in thanking Mr. Thomas James Katona and his family for his dedication and service to the labor movement and to the Office and Professional Employees International Union, Local Union 512, AFL-CIO. Mr. Katona has more than earned his place in Michigan's Upper Peninsula Labor Hall of Fame for his commitment to his community and the labor movement.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an educator who has played a key role in organizing teachers in Michigan's Upper Peninsula for seventeen years. It is for this lifelong dedication to his noble profession of teaching and contributions to the labor movement that Arnold Korpi so richly deserves to be inducted into the Upper Peninsula Labor Hall of Fame. After spending nearly two decades, from 1946 to 1964, as a business education teacher in Rockland and Wakefield, Michigan and as a professor at Gogebic Community College, Mr. Korpi became an early labor leader for the teachers of Michigan's Upper Peninsula. Mr. Korpi was tireless in his commitment as a leader in the labor cause. Mr. Korpi held a number of prestigious positions throughout the Michigan Education Association (MEA) and civic organizations, including his service on the Board of Directors of the Michigan Education Special Services Association (MESSA), as President of Michigan Education Association Region 18, as President of the Upper Peninsula Business Teachers' Association, as President of the Gogebic County District of the Michigan Education Association, as President of the Wisconsin Alumni Association and as a board member and President of the Northern Michigan University ``N'' Club. Mr. Korpi further served the MEA as President and Treasurer of the Michigan Education Association Professional Staff Association serving all Uni-Serv Directors in Michigan; as President of the National Staff Organization; and as the Uni-Serv Director for the Michigan Education Association/National Education Association from 1964 until 1981. In addition to holding many high ranking positions within the MEA, Mr. Korpi was also the founder, leader, organizer and Treasurer of the Upper Peninsula Education Association, which continues to be a valuable organization for teachers bargaining labor contracts across the Upper Peninsula. Arnold Korpi is known for far more than his brilliant organizing and advocacy skills. Described as an early leader and a moving force for the Michigan Teacher Tenure Act, Mr. Korpi helped lay the groundwork for the professional teachers' bargaining and job security issues. He was part of the historic Teacher Tenure legislation which enabled classroom educators to teach and act without fear of reprisal, thus fostering and encouraging the academic freedoms for all Michigan teachers. Mr. Speaker, I ask the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in thanking Mr. Arnold Korpi and his family for his dedication to the education labor movement in Michigan. Arnold Korpi has more than earned his place in Michigan's Upper Peninsula Labor Hall of Fame for his commitment to his community and his teaching profession.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about the markup we had last night in the Committee on Energy and Commerce on the energy bill. The purpose of the energy bill being brought forth by the Republican majority is to address price gouging. We would like to see the price of gasoline go down; and certainly with the excessive profits being demonstrated by the oil companies, especially the refinery companies, we have to do something instead of being gouged at the gas pump. So last night the committee worked some 16 hours, until well after midnight. What we found was this. This chart was in The Washington Post last Sunday. The price of a gallon of gas in 1 year, the price to take it out of the ground, domestic and foreign countries pump crude from the ground, has increased 46 percent in 12 months. The refiners, refineries process crude oil and a variety of products, including gasoline. In 1 year, their profit or their increase is 255 percent. Down here are the distributors. They ship the gasoline from the terminal by truck to the gas station. Their cost has only gone up 5 percent. The end result is in the last 12 months, gas has gone up 64 percent for the American consumer. Even State, Federal, and local taxes have only gone up 2 pennies, a negligible increase. When Members look at the chart, if we want to try to control the price of gasoline, you have to look at the crude oil producers and definitely the refiners at a 255 percent increase in their costs and price to a gallon of gas in the last 12 months. So what happened last night in committee? The Democrats said let us take a look at the Republican bill that we just saw. What they did was this, and we almost defeated it. It was a 26-24 vote. We lost by two votes. It is a bill we will be discussing next week on the floor. The Republicans said we are not going to go after the producers; they can make a 46 percent profit in 12 months. We are not going to go after the refiner; they can make a 255 percent increase profit in 12 months. We are going after the gas station dealer, the one at 5 percent. If they increase their profits more than 10 percent, we are going after the gas station operators, but not all gas station operators, only ones located in the area where the President has declared a disaster. The Republican bill basically says this, we have two disasters in this country, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita. So parts of Texas, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana, they cannot increase their price for gasoline. But the rest of the Nation and north Louisiana, north Alabama, north Mississippi and north and west Texas, they can still increase their prices, no control. They can gouge 255 percent, 46 percent and that is okay under our bill. We are only concerned about the gas station owner who has the least amount to say about the cost of a gallon of gas. So once again Big Oil wins out. Big refineries win out, and the poor person trying to make a penny off a gallon of gas at the gas station is going to get nailed by the majority party's legislation. The Democratic side has our legislation, Free Us From Price Gouging. In our bill we apply all of the way down the chain here every type of oil product: home heating oil, propane, natural gas, gasoline. It all comes under our price gouging legislation. We apply it to producers, refiners, and retailers. We take them all into consideration. We apply our price gouging to the entire Nation. This winter the Midwest is going to pay a 71 percent increase in the price of natural gas. Underneath the Republican bill, there is nothing you can do about it because it only applies to gasoline and diesel. Under the Democratic bill, we can see if there is excessive profits, then you have a right to do something about price gouging. Under the Democrats' bill, we are going to have the FTC define what price gouging is and what factors go into it and then apply it to the facts of this case. We are after excessive profits like 255 percent in 12 months or 46 percent in 12 months, not the person who makes 5 percent in 12 months. And we want it to apply throughout the Nation, not just at the time of disaster and in the area affected by the disaster. We provide the FTC with the right and authority to watch market manipulation. The majority party is silent on that fact.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to give my Special Order speech at this time.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to underscore what the gentlewoman from South Dakota has said. If you have a small business or are a farmer or just an American trying to heat your home, like in my district in northern Michigan, we are expecting snow. So the furnaces are going to be on. They are expecting home heating oil to be up 71 percent over last year, and when we look at the refiners, in 1 year, they have increased their profits by 255 percent. 255 percent in 1 year. That is excessive. That is price gouging. That is predatory pricing. If my colleagues believe that we should put an end to this predatory gas pricing we see at the gas pump and we heat our home and run our businesses and our family farms, then vote for the motion to recommit. If my colleagues believe those prices, a 250 percent increase, is okay, then vote against the motion to recommit. It is time to end predatory pricing. Vote ``yes'' on the motion to recommit.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to offer this motion to recommit with my friend and colleague from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth). Our motion instructs the Federal Government to crack down on price gouging and provides tough Federal penalties for those guilty of gas price gouging. Even before the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina, skyrocketing oil and gasoline prices were taxing American families and burdening our Nation's economy, with the notable exception of the oil industry, which continued to rack up record profits. Following Katrina, gas prices in some areas of the Nation reached almost $6 per gallon, deepening suspicions of the oil and gas industry profiteering. We need a Federal standard to ensure adequate response to energy emergencies that prohibit price gouging with the priority on refineries and big oil companies. Currently, only 28 States have price gouging laws on the books and have enforcement mechanisms to go after those found ripping off consumers. At the Federal level there is no oversight to protect consumers from this predatory pricing. No American should have to pay too much for gas because the oil companies are rigging prices. Our motion to recommit will outlaw the selling of crude oil, gasoline, home heating oil, or natural gas at predatory or unconscionably excessive levels during such a crisis. It will provide new Federal authority to investigate and punish those who engage in predatory pricing from oil companies on down to local gas stations with an emphasis on those who profit most. And it will impose tough maximum penalties on companies that have cheated consumers. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Americans are pulling together, donating to relief organizations, and giving their time to help the people of the gulf coast recover. That is how the American people react when they see their fellow citizens in need. Unfortunately, some have looked at Katrina not as a chance to give but an opportunity for excessive profit. Some have decided to take advantage of this terrible tragedy and line their own pockets by price gouging the American people at the pump. As eight Governors wrote in a letter to the Congress urging passage of a Federal price gouging legislation, they stated: ``To price gouge consumers under normal circumstances is dishonest enough, but to make money off the severe misfortune of others is downright immoral.'' People are rightly angry and frustrated with high gas prices, and they deserve to have someone on their side fighting to ensure that they do not get mugged at the gas pump. Sadly, the administration and the House majority's answer has been to sit on their hands while consumers get the shakedown from the oil companies. It is obvious to me and many Americans that Congress needs to act to protect Americans from price gouging. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the motion to recommit. A ``no'' vote denies the American people a law to stop energy and gasoline price gouging.

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

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Mr. STUPAK. I am in its current form, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. STUPAK. I yield to the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth), my friend and coauthor of this amendment.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and Rita, Americans are pulling together, donating to relief organizations and giving their time to help the people of the gulf coast region. That is how the American people react when they see their fellow citizens in need. Unfortunately, some people have looked at Katrina not as a chance to give, but as an opportunity for excessive profits. Some have decided to take this terrible tragedy and line their own pockets by price gouging the American people at the gas pump. At a time when many Americans are choosing between filling their gas tanks or filling their prescriptions, oil companies are reaping record profits. People are rightly angry and frustrated with high gas prices, and they deserve to have someone on their side fighting to ensure that they do not get mugged at the gas pump. Sadly, this administration's answer has been to sit on its hands while consumers get the shakedown from the oil companies. Eight governors, including Governor Granholm of Michigan, sent a letter to the President and Senate and House leadership urging Congress to act immediately by putting forth legislation that would return excessive, unconscionable collected profits to the consumers. As the governor stated, and I quote, ``To price gouge consumers under normal circumstances is dishonest enough, but to make money off the severe misfortune of others is downright immoral.'' It is obvious to me that Congress needs to protect the American people from price gouging and market manipulations. The Democratic bill, free from price gouging, is the Federal Response to Energy Emergencies bill. The FREE bill, as we call it, as authored by myself, the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth), and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge) is our answer to our Nation's record high gas prices and oil prices. If you look at this chart right here, from 2002 when gas was $1.34 a gallon, all the way up to September 12, 2005, where it is up to $2.96, that more than double. Just take it from 2004, when gas was $1.58. It has doubled in less than a year. Currently, only 28 States have laws on the books that define price gouging and that have enforcement mechanisms to go after those found ripping off consumers. At the Federal level, there is no oversight to protect consumers from this predatory pricing. That is why we need our legislation now, the ``free from price gouging'' legislation. No American should have to pay too much for gas because oil companies are rigging prices. Our bill would give the President authority to take immediate action in the face of an energy crisis by declaring a national energy emergency. Under our bill, for the first time ever, the Federal Government would have a guideline, a definition of price gouging. Our bill would also provide the FTC, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice with the authority to investigate and prosecute those that engage in predatory pricing, from oil companies all the way down to the local gas stations, with an emphasis on those who profit the most. This includes the gouging of gasoline, home heating oil, propane, and natural gas. Our legislation expands the FTC's authority to more aggressively pursue instances of market manipulation, such as geographic price setting and territorial restrictions imposed by refineries. If we look at the second chart, Mr. Speaker, which appeared this weekend in The Washington Post, just look at what has happened in 1 year. As of September 5, 2005 of this year, from last September, we see a 46 percent increase from the crude oil producer; a 255 percent increase at the refinery level; a 5 percent increase for distributors and retailers, and taxes remain at 2 cents difference, with a 64-cent increase to the consumer. This is price manipulation. This is the market setting not the price, but the opportunity to manipulate and, as they call it, to game the system. So with our legislation, we want not only to stop price gouging, but also we want transparency. How does the consumer know when he is being charged a fair price for oil and gas when you see statistics like this? How is the price set? That is what the American people want to know. They want to make sure they are not being gouged or unduly taken advantage of by the oil companies, or the refineries in this case. Our bill empowers the Federal Government to impose tough civil penalties up to triple the damages of all excessive profits of oil companies that have cheated consumers. It also imposes tough criminal penalties of up to $100 million on corporations, and fines of up to $1 million plus jail sentences of up to 10 years for individuals caught in manipulating the price of gas, home heating oil, or natural gas. This bill would provide relief to those paying skyrocketing energy and transportation costs and it would expand the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program through fines for those caught price gouging. Our bill would protect consumers from unfair gas prices and punish those who think the time of a tragedy is the right time to rob Americans of their hard-earned money. It is the right thing to do for consumers and for our Nation. I urge support of the free from price gouging bill.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Americans are pulling together, donating to relief organizations and giving their time to help the people of the gulf coast recover. That is how American people react when they see their fellow citizens in need. Unfortunately, some people have looked at Hurricane Katrina not as a chance to give but as an opportunity to profit. Some have decided to take advantage of this terrible tragedy and line their own pockets by price gouging the American people at the gas pump and in the energy needs they will experience this winter in order to heat their home and their place of employment. At a time when Americans are choosing between filling their gas tanks or filling their prescriptions or providing for their families, oil companies are reaping record profits. People are rightly angry and frustrated with these high gas prices, and they deserve to have someone on their side fighting to ensure that they do not get mugged at the gas pump. Sadly, the administration's answer has been to sit on their hands while consumers get the shakedown from the oil companies. Today, we learn that eight Governors, including Michigan's Governor Granholm, sent a letter to the President and the Senate and the House leadership urging Congress to act immediately by putting forth legislation that would return excessive, unconscionably collected profits to the consumers. The letter, which was signed by Governor James Doyle of Wisconsin, states: ``When the wholesale price of gas went up by 60 cents almost overnight, oil companies were obviously using the most devastating natural disaster in our Nation's history to reap a windfall at the expense of the American consumers. To price gouge consumers under normal circumstances is dishonest enough,'' the letter stated, ``but to make money off the severe misfortune of others is downright immoral.'' It is obvious to me that Congress needs to protect Americans from price gouging and market manipulations. As the lead sponsor of the FREE Act, Federal Response to Energy Emergencies, that I will soon introduce, is the Democrats' answer to the Nation's record high gas and oil prices. I have been joined in drafting this legislation by the Democratic Rural Caucus, especially the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush) and the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth). Currently, only 28 States have laws on the books that define price gouging and have enforcement mechanisms to go after those who are ripping off consumers. At the Federal level, there is no oversight to protect consumers from this predatory pricing. That is why we need this Federal legislation now. No American should have to pay too much for gas for their automobile or to heat their home this winter because the oil companies are rigging the prices. Our bill will give the President authority to take immediate action in the face of an energy crisis by declaring a national energy emergency. Our legislation mandates that the FTC, the Federal Trade Commission, for the first time ever will have to define price gouging and the criteria that makes up price gouging. It will also provide the FTC and the Department of Justice with the authority to investigate and prosecute those who engage in predatory pricing, from oil companies all the way down to the local gas stations, with an emphasis on those who profit most. This includes the gouging of gasoline prices, home heating oil, or natural gas. Our legislation expands the Federal Trade Commission's authority to more aggressively pursue instances of market manipulation, such as geographic price setting or territorial restrictions imposed by refineries and those who are what they call ``gaming the system.'' Our legislation empowers the Federal Government to impose tough civil penalties of up to triple damages of all excess profits on companies that have cheated consumers. It also imposes tough criminal penalties of up to $100 million on corporations, and fines of up to $1 million plus jail sentences for up to 10 years on individuals. This bill will provide relief to farmers and small businesses paying skyrocketing energy and transportation costs, and expand the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, LIHEAP, through fines paid by price gouging companies. My bill will protect consumers from unfair gas prices and punish those who think that at a time of national tragedy it is the right time to rob Americans of their hard-earned money. It is the right thing to do for consumers and for our Nation's economy. Look at what has been going on in the last few months, even before Hurricane Katrina. This is an article out of the Soo Evening News, a newspaper in my district. It is July 20, 2005. It is before the hurricane season. That day, in my home State of Michigan, gas prices went up 80 cents; eighty cents in one day, based upon rumor, fear, and speculation. You cannot tell me that no one is profiting excessively from America's fear. Also, I found an article in the Washington Post with the headline, ``Oil Prices Spike as Storm Nears. Jump of $4.39 is Largest One-day Surge on Record.'' These are the reasons we must have this legislation. Let us pass the FREE Act.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her words and her passion, for the statement. She has been on this issue from day one. She has been a great advocate for New York and the devastation you saw on September 11. And the administration continued to say, the gentlewoman is right, threw a little bit of money the first year, second year; but 3 years later, the last 3 years, the budget proposal by the President and approved by the majority party, the Republican Party in this Congress has zeroed out the only program specifically set up to develop interoperability. Through the objection of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz) and myself, by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), a number of us have come down here repeatedly, saying we have got to fund this program. They say, we will get to it, we will get to it, we will get to it. Even before Hurricane Katrina hit, some of us said, have you got your interconnectibility ready? We know that technology exists. The military has it. Why can we not use it? Once again, it is, we will get to you. We are getting tired of that excuse. So I appreciate the gentlewoman's help and leadership on this issue. Next, I would like to yield to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz), who is a new member of our caucus and has done a wonderful job. She has really been concerned about what happened in the terrorist attack of September 11; and of course, Pennsylvania was part of the September 11 tragedy. We all know too well the lack of communications, how it hindered our operations, even our communication, to know what is going on, whether it was in the air or on the ground in Pennsylvania. So, with that, I yield to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz), my friend.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for coming out and joining us tonight on this Special Order. I was really interested in some of those recommendations she made here earlier tonight. Those are many of the recommendations we have heard for years and failed to act upon. Even the planning money that was to be for this national operability, so they will be coordinated together, has been zeroed out in the budget. Then we have Hurricane Katrina, and it just emphasizes the devastation that occurred and the lack of knowledge and response. People are saying, well, why did we not know? We did not know because there are no communications. We cannot continue to say the excuse we did not know, because we had the opportunity to do this. This has been going on since I worked the road some 20 years ago, and trying to communicate with each other. Unfortunately, we had these tragedies, but maybe we can use this opportunity in a positive light to learn something from this and maybe get some interoperability. I certainly appreciate the gentlewoman's leadership and compassion for those who have suffered so much in Hurricane Katrina. Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, ABC News, Ted Koppel, the headline, ``Primetime Moment of Crisis: System Failure.'' I am not talking necessarily about the lack of communication and who should have done this or not. I just want to talk for a moment about what they saw in this Primetime program last Thursday on communications, just communications. We start with Greg Meffert. I got the transcript of the show because it was so revealing of so many of the problems they had just through lack of communication. Mr. Meffert says, ``The only communication we had was a laptop that we brought, and it had a wireless broadband card that worked all the way up into the Hyatt.'' The Hyatt was where the mayor of New Orleans had his command center. ``So the mayor and the chief and all of us were getting our information via this little laptop. Finally, the Internet feed goes out.'' Ted Koppel says: ``It was one in a series of communications breakdowns that would contribute to untold suffering and a still untallied number of deaths. At 8:14 central time, the National Weather Service issued a bulletin reading, `flash flood warning, a levee breach occurred along the industrial canal at Tennessee Street.' The problem was that by the time the bulletin went out, the hurricane had been battering the city for hours. Electricity and phones were out. So most people neither saw nor heard the warning. Officials in Washington seemed totally oblivious to the bulletin.'' Going on, on Ted Koppel, Live Primetime last Thursday, Michael Chertoff said, ``We are extremely pleased with the response that every element of the Federal Government, all of our Federal partners have made to this terrible tragedy.'' Ted Koppel: ``If Secretary Chertoff was pleased, it could only have been because he had no notion of what was actually happening on the ground in New Orleans. Between 20 and 30,000 people were stuck inside the Superdome. There was no more food and water. The toilets overflowed long ago. While those inside were supposed to be bused to the Houston Astrodome, the streets were flooded and there weren't enough buses available anyway.'' Let me go on. Here is what the President said: ``I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees. They did anticipate a serious storm, but these levees got breached. And as a result, much of New Orleans is flooded, and now we're having to deal with it and will.'' Ted Koppel: ``The President is correct. Nobody did anticipate the breach of the levees, but they did predict that the levees would be flooded. At Toru Hospital, 10 patients have died overnight. There was only one working telephone in the entire hospital and a small staff which was low on supplies. They were forced to make some very tough choices. Correspondent Bob Woodruff was there.'' Female doctor: ``What we're doing today is, the physicians are going around and evaluating every patient. If they can say their name, we're giving them an IV fluid to make their tank better, to kind of give them a boost.'' Bob Woodruff: ``What if they can't say their name?'' Doctor: ``We're not giving them IV fluids. We consider them not viable.'' Going on, underneath this report last Thursday, Lieutenant General Russell Honore, U.S. Army. The reporter asked: ``Will these people be out of New Orleans by sundown?'' Lieutenant General Honore says: ``No, how do you move 20,000 people by sundown? No, hell no.'' Ted Koppel: ``Having heard reports of guns inside, SWAT teams and the military arrived with weapons locked and loaded. From the perspective of those stranded inside, the rescuers looked more like men prepared to put down a prison riot.'' President George W. Bush: ``I'm pleased to report that the convention center is secured. One of the objectives we had today was to move in and secure the convention center.'' Ted Koppel: ``It would be one more day before the buses finally came.'' President George W. Bush: ``I'm going to fly out of here in a minute, but I want you to know that I'm not going to forget what I've seen. I understand that the devastation requires more than just one day's attention.'' I would like to hold the President to his words because I came here tonight to talk about public safety communications and the failure of this Congress and the Bush administration to adequately respond to the communication needs of our first responders. Sadly, we in law enforcement and in Congress who work on these issues were not surprised by the lack of communication after Katrina. Much of that transcript which I read we were not surprised by. We have seen many examples of crises where first responders could not communicate, going back to 1982, with the plane that left Washington National and crashed into the Potomac, or take the Oklahoma bombing at the Murrah Building in 1995, or the California forest fires in 2003, and September 11. We just experienced Hurricane Katrina, and now we have Hurricane Rita knocking at our door. Mr. Speaker, that is why I have been working for years to make the needed investments so that firefighters and police can talk to each other, so that police can talk to EMTs, so that officials can talk to ambulances, so that the medical personnel that people need to get better or to be rescued can talk and communicate and save lives. We thought we finally made some progress when President Bush said, and this is what he said in January of 2002 in talking about 9/11, the President said and I quote: ``It is important that we understand in the first minutes and hours after an attack that that is the most hopeful time to save lives, and that is why we're focusing on the heroic efforts of those first responders. That's why we want to spend money to make sure equipment is there, strategies are there, communications are there, to make sure that they have whatever it takes to respond.'' I agree with the President 100 percent; but, unfortunately, I say they are empty words. What did the President say and what did he close with on the Ted Koppel show last Thursday? He said: ``I'm going to fly out of here in a minute, but I want you to know that I'm not going to forget what I've seen. I understand that the devastation requires more than one day's attention.'' With all due respect, Mr. President, we are pushing 3 years, over 3 years since you gave us almost similar words after 9/11. There has been scant follow-through, very little planning, very little standards-making, and minuscule funding for interoperability. Evidently, former FEMA Director Brown was surprised by the meltdown. Even he told CBS News that the agency failed to anticipate ``the total lack of communication, the inability to hear and have good intelligence on the ground about what was occurring there.'' Perhaps FEMA Director Brown should have read the report published by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which I have cited many times on this floor before. According to the U.S. Conference of Mayors report released in June of last year, more than 80 percent of our cities are not interoperable with Federal agencies. New Orleans is and was one of those cities. This means that in the event of a terrorist attack or another natural disaster, far more than three-fourths of the United States cities would be woefully unprepared to coordinate responses and communicate effectively to be safe, to be secure, and to do their job. Here are some more troubling numbers from that U.S. Conference of Mayors report: 97 percent of cities are unprepared to communicate during a chemical plant disaster; 94 percent of the cities are unprepared to communicate during a rail disaster, much like we saw in Chicago this last week; 92 percent of the cities are unprepared to communicate during a seaport disaster. Clearly, our local public safety agencies are no closer to being interoperable than they were 3 years ago, 5 years ago, 20 years ago, or in 1982 when the plane went down in the Potomac, or even 20 years ago when I worked the road as a Michigan State Trooper. It all points back to the fact that public safety communications have not been a priority for this Congress or this administration. The estimates to make local, State, and Federal first responders interoperable are as high as $18 billion, yet only $260 million has been provided specifically for these upgrades; and the President continues to zero out funding for this program in his budget requests. Mr. Speaker, my legislation would take communications funding away from the whims of the congressional appropriation process and away from the President. H.R. 1323 would set up a public safety communications trust fund, and revenue from that fund would come from the sales of the spectrum. My bill would dedicate 50 percent of the net revenue from future spectrum sales into a public safety trust fund. By dedicating these funds from the sale of the spectrum, we would ensure that funding would be set aside no matter what happens in the annual appropriations process. Local agencies cannot afford to upgrade their communications equipment without Federal assistance. I believe that Federal assistance is more than justified when the Federal Government repeatedly calls upon local first responders to be even more vigilant and to be even more prepared for possible acts of terrorism and, now, from natural disasters. In fact, the 9/11 Commission report outlines a similar recommendation. The report states: ``The inability to communicate was a critical element of the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and Somerset County, Pennsylvania, crash sites where multiple agencies and multiple jurisdictions responded. The occurrence of this problem at three very different sites is strong evidence that compatible and adequate communications among public safety organizations at the local, State and Federal levels remain an important problem. Federal funding of such interagency communication units should be given high priority.'' Last week, the former Republican Governor of New Jersey and co-chair of the 9/11 Commission said their recommendations have not been heeded. Governor Thomas Kean said, ``It's the same thing all over again. It's a lack of communication, first responders not being able to talk to each other. It's no command and control, nobody in charge; it's delayed responses. It's basically many of the things that, frankly, if some of our recommendations had been passed by the U.S. Congress, that could have been avoided.'' Some may argue that local agencies can apply for grants under the Department of Homeland Security State formula block grants. They argue that money can be used for interoperable communication systems. Well, Mr. Speaker, I have been out on this floor and I have offered amendments on the House floor to find out how much money has gone to interoperability. I have received incomplete and delayed responses from the Department of Homeland Security. They have no idea how much money. They can tell you how much money has been spent, but they cannot tell you how much money from these grant programs has been spent on interoperability in 2002 or 2003. They just recently figured out how much has been spent for 2004, but they are not sure if it went to interoperability or not. They sort of think some of it did. That does not say much about the oversight or the planning from the Department of Homeland Security about where the billions of dollars of State formula grant money has gone. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this administration must develop a plan and standards to give State and local officials some guidance. There has to be minimum standards setting. We have been saying this for years. It does not cost that much to set them, but it has not been done. The folks at SAFECOM, which is one of the departments within the Department of Homeland Security that is in charge of developing these standards, SAFECOM, charged with developing these standards, told Congress last year that ``at the rate we're going, it will be another 20 years before our public safety agencies are fully interoperable.'' Another 20 years. I do not know about you, Mr. Speaker, but I am sure the American people would agree with me that we do not have another 20 years. Another terrorist attack on the U.S. is not a question of if, but when. Another hurricane is approaching the gulf as I speak here tonight. Public safety is not an issue where the administration and Congress should continue to drag their feet. Yet here we are, 4 years after 9/ 11, still at square one. It is a disgrace, and it must be changed. I hope that tonight we have helped to enlighten the American people and that interoperability becomes a reality and not a fiction or a dream that many of us in law enforcement have had for more than 20 years. Maybe the words of the President after 9/11 and after Hurricane Katrina, when he says he is going to jump on his plane and do something about it, we will actually get to work and do something now. We cannot take any more natural disasters like the one we saw in the last few weeks on TV because we are unprepared, because we cannot communicate, because we do not have intelligence on the ground, because those who are sent in to do the job cannot talk to each other. How much longer does this have to go on? I hope and pray not much longer.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to appear here tonight on behalf of the Democratic leader to talk about a problem that we have faced for many, many decades in this country and little or nothing is being done about. And actually we have a very huge problem on our hands, and it is a problem that this Republican-led Congress and the administration has tried to minimize and brush aside for way too long, and that is interoperability. Our first responders, our police, our firefighters, our sheriffs, our National Guard members, emergency medical technicians, cannot talk to each other in time of emergency, or even out on routine patrol, they cannot talk to each other across agencies, across country or across city lines. And they cannot talk to each other, to the State, to the local and Federal Governments for which they serve. We have law enforcement and first responders out trying to do their job, but what they see and what happens before them, they cannot communicate with each other. The issue is called interoperability. Can I talk to the agencies next to me? Can I talk to that firefighter? Can I talk as a police officer to the emergency medical technician who is coming to help me? As a former city police officer, and as a Michigan State police trooper, I can tell you that this is something that the law enforcement community has known for decades. The issue gained national attention after the Oklahoma bombing in 1995 at the Murrah Building and again on September 11. Unfortunately after the wake-up calls this country has received, especially after September 11, this administration has simply rolled over and went back to sleep, until it was once again awakened by the arrival of Hurricane Katrina. Local first responders, government officials, military and National Guard leaders have all said that the inability of first responders to communicate made this national crisis, Hurricane Katrina, much worse than what it should have been. With Hurricane Katrina, we witnessed a complete communications meltdown that stretched from the gulf coast all of the way here to the Beltway. We witnessed the unimaginable horror that resulted from this meltdown. We saw babies crying. We saw older women weeping. We saw police officers running towards gunfire, unable to describe what is going on and unable to call for backup, because they had no communications. We saw buildings burning because there was no way to notify the fire department and the firefighters who were still in the area. The communications breakdown was so absolute that the director of FEMA said he did not know until Thursday, 3 days after the hurricane, that there were over 25,000 people stuck in the hell that was once known as the New Orleans Convention Center. We know that the inability to communicate contributed to the deaths of 121 firefighters on September 11. We do not yet now how many people died in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, simply because public safety officials could not communicate with one another. But we do know that people died. We have all seen the pictures of bodies covered in sheets at the convention center. That should not have happened. Those people should not have to have died. We could see the frustration on the faces of the first responders, the medical professionals, the police, who did not have the necessary communications to get the job done and to save lives. Despite the difficult conditions and despite the lack of communication, those first responders should be commended for a job well done with the resources this Nation gave them to work with. But we owe it to our first responders. We owe them more than just thanks, more than just honors, and more than just promises. For once cannot we just stop the rhetoric, and I for one am sick and tired of the rhetoric and the empty promises that they will soon have interoperability, they will be able to communicate with each other, they will be able to save lives, as is their sworn duty to do. And that is why I am down here tonight and joined by some of my Democrat colleagues. That is why we have offered amendments, written letter after letter, and introduced legislation to increase funding for our first responders for interoperability. I am not alone. Democrats have been calling for more resources and more funding for your first responders year after year. Unfortunately, our voices, these calls have fallen on deaf ears of the majority party and this administration. In the years since September 11, in 2 years Congress did allocate $260 million for interoperability. $260 million may sound like a lot, but the communications challenges facing this country, as we have ignored it for so long, are such a daunting task that it is estimated it will take $18 billion for this country to finally become interconnected with their communications for public safety and first responders. So you see, $260 million is really only a drop in the bucket for interoperability. What is more troubling is the last 2 years this administration has zeroed out any money in the budget for the only grant program specifically designed for public safety communications upgrade. In the last 2 years requests put in it get zeroed out by the administration. And the majority party is obligated to do what the administration has been telling them to do, and they failed to provide any money specifically for first responder communications. Shockingly, the administration continues to request no funding. Even in their most current budget, no funding, even though everyone knows and realizes that there is a lack of communications. Interoperability is a problem that must be solved to save lives and to properly respond to the disasters or terrorist attacks here in the country. The Department of Homeland Security has solicited proposals for a $10 billion program to make 80,000 Federal law enforcement officers and agents interoperable. The Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, they want to take most of the money and make sure the Federal Government can talk to each other. That is a good start. But there are about ten times as many State and local law enforcement officers, 800,000 in the United States. We should be making sure we are making the same commitment to our State and local governments, especially after what we saw this month, that State and local governments may be on their own for days following an attack or another hurricane like Hurricane Katrina. Why is it the Federal Government has a plan to make itself fully interoperable, but the first responders who are always the first on the scene, the first at the disaster, the first at the terrorist attack will have to wait until the Federal Government is fully interoperable? It is the local first responders who must be made interoperable first. The lack of commitment to our country's first responders became glaringly evident this past week. As The Washington Post reported on September 2, 2005: ``Police officers and National Guard members, along with law enforcement officers imported from around the State, rarely knew more than what they could see with their own eyes.'' Dr. Lee Hamm, chairman of medicine at Tulane University said three days after the hurricane, ``The physicians and nurses are doing an incredible job, but there are patients laying on stretchers on the floor, the halls were dark, the stairwells are dark. There's no communication with the outside world.'' Major General Harold Cross of the Mississippi National Guard said, ``We have got runners running from commander to commander. In other words, we're going to the sound of gunfire, as we used to say during the Revolutionary War.'' Rescuers and helicopters could not talk to the crews in the boats down below patrolling to try to save and rescue people. Three days after the hurricane, the emergency radio system in New Orleans had the capacity to support 800 users while there were three times as many trying to use that system. It was just simply overloaded. As Louisiana State Senator Robert Barham said regarding communication, ``We are no better off now than we were before September 11.'' The best way we can honor these public safety officials who bravely work through the devastation is to finally provide them with meaningful investment in public safety communications. No more excuses, Mr. Speaker. This Congress is made up of Members who are dedicated to our first responders and many Members with firsthand expertise in public safety communications. This problem has been studied for years. In fact, it has been over-studied. We on this side of the aisle have been saying for years, enough hand-wringing, enough finger-pointing. Let us get a plan and get that plan funded so that all first responders, whether they be local, State or Federal, can talk and communicate with each other at all times during disasters or terrorist attacks or just during routine regular patrol, coordinate their efforts. We know what the solutions are. So why, after all these years, have we done nothing? Why does this Congress and this administration continue to fail our first responders? Because governing is about priorities. And it was the priority of this Congress and this administration to cut taxes for the richest Americans over investing in radios to communicate with each other for our police officers. It was the priority of this Congress and this administration to cut taxes for the richest people in this country rather than investing in a stronger emergency 911 network. In the Committee on Energy and Commerce, a committee which I sit on, we are now going to be ordered to cut $10 billion in Medicaid instead of investing in our health care safety net. This Congress and this administration have the wrong priorities. Tax cuts not only take precedence over first responder funding, but they also take precedence over allocating spectrum first responders need to better communicate. Our first responders need more spectrum because the radio channels they have now are clogged with too much traffic. The lack of spectrum is impeding their ability to talk to one another. Getting first responders the additional spectrum they need must be a priority; but instead of doing what needs to be done, the majority insists on waiting until the reconciliation bill so they can use the spectrum sales to pay for more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. First responders' communications should come before any more tax cuts. After September 11, I introduced a bipartisan piece of legislation along with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel) to create a dedicated funding source for public safety communications upgrades. This sessions I again introduced the Public Safety Interoperability Implementation Act, or H.R. 1323, to create a public safety communications trust fund. Under my legislation, after an initial 3- year grant program, the funding for the trust fund would come from the future sales of the spectrum. Grants would be allocated to eligible entries to achieve interoperability, with multiyear grants available to ensure that agencies can develop a long-term plan without having to worry about funding from one year to the next or who is in charge of the budget. Congress has been using the sale of spectrum as a budget gimmick for years. This year we are again considering the legislation to sell a block of spectrum by 2008 estimated to be worth 10 to $20 billion. Where is this money going? The money is going to offset $126 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. I think the proceeds should go to our police, our firefighters and not the millionaires. With all due respect to the people who are well off in this country, they are not clamoring for these tax cuts. It is just the philosophy of one party over the priority of needs of this great country. Senator John McCain even agrees with me. He has introduced a bill to give first responders the spectrum they need and to direct the proceeds of the spectrum auctions to a public communications grant program. The companies who are going to buy the spectrum are going to use it for advanced wireless communications. But what are we going to do if we do not act now? We will continue to fail our first responders if some of the auction proceeds do not go to ensuring that public safety, first responders, and local governments can invest in the very wireless communications that will result from the sale. It is an embarrassment that our 14-year-old students and kids in many cases have better wireless communications than our first responders. Again, I ask my colleagues in the majority, what is your priority going to be? Tax cuts for the richest of Americans or our firefighters? Tax cuts for the richest Americans or our police officers? Tax cuts for the richest Americans or emergency medical technicians? How many more people will have to die and how many more natural disasters and terrorist attacks will this country have to endure before the excuses stop and actions begin? What communication problems are we going to see with Hurricane Rita currently knocking on our door? We cannot continue to send our first responders out on the beat without the back-up, without the communication tools they need to do their jobs. We have the technology today to fully connect our first responders. Let us make the investment today to keep America safe. Mr. Speaker, as I said, this is an issue some of us have been working on for a long time. We have been to this floor offering amendments. We have gone to the Committee on Rules offering amendments. We have spoken on the floor. We have asked for reports. We want to see where the money is being spent, because it certainly is not being spent on the communications our first responders need. One of the champions, one of them who has been down here day-in and day-out working side by side on this issue is the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). We also have the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz) who is a new Member who has taken up this issue, and she will speak after the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). I yield to the gentlewoman to kindly share a few thoughts with us.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo), the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner), and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) for their work on this bill. There could not be a more opportune time to bring this important legislation to the House floor than today with the aspects of Hurricane Katrina. The heroic and steadfast efforts of the Coast Guard in the wake of Katrina, the worst natural disaster this Nation has ever faced, should be commended by all. This recent tragedy demonstrates how important it is to authorize and fund vital programs that are contained in the Coast Guard bill we are discussing today. This bill will help the Coast Guard to continue to effectively carry out their mission. I represent a district that is almost completely surrounded by water, so I understand the importance of a Coast Guard that has the resources to assist our coastal communities. There is one provision included in the bill that is particularly important to me and my northern Michigan district. It directs the Commandant of the Coast Guard to convey the Cutter Mackinaw to the City and County of Cheboygan, Michigan, for purposes of a museum. The U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Mackinaw is scheduled to be decommissioned in 2006. The Cutter Mackinaw, whose home port has been Cheboygan, Michigan, has served the State of Michigan and the entire Great Lakes region for over 60 years. The conveyance of the Cutter Mackinaw to Cheboygan is both a tribute to the ship that protected Michigan's water and shores and cleared the ice paths for the Nation's mariners. This ship will now serve as an educational resource to help people better understand the history of the vessel, the Coast Guard and the maritime history of the Great Lakes. In this role, it is imperative that Michigan keep this historic treasure. I see no better way to honor the life and name of the cutter than to retire it as a museum to its home port in the Mackinaw Straits area. This Coast Guard treasure will be a valuable cultural and educational benefit for generations to come. Once again, thanks to the men and women of the United States Coast Guard for their work in saving lives in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, my deepest sympathies are with those families who are affected by the worst natural disaster our country has ever seen. I also extend my gratitude to those first responders, members of the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Guard, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for their aid and assistance in relief and recovery efforts. Like the rest of America, I was extremely frustrated and angered with the lack of preparedness and timely response by the Federal Government. This was an instance where the system failed. Five days after the hurricane, thousands were still without food, shelter and clothing. We saw on television grueling pictures of our most needy: the poor, elderly, and children stranded in unbelievable conditions. Many Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike--even President Bush himself--have recognized that the initial federal response was ``not acceptable''. New Orleans is the only major American city below sea level, and it is wedged between Lake Pontchartrain and the Mississippi River. In the case of a bad hurricane hitting, experts have said for some time now, that the city could ``fill up like a cereal bowl, killing tens of thousands and laying waste to the city's architectural heritage.'' Despite speculation that a disaster of this magnitude could occur in this region, the President's recent budgets have actually proposed to reduce funding for flood prevention in the New Orleans area. In June 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, fretted to The Times-Picayune in New Orleans: ``It appears that the money has been moved in the President's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us.'' With hundreds of millions of dollars and 40 percent of our National Guard already dedicated to the War in Iraq, Katrina is a glaring example of the question of whether or not we are able to effectively handle problems that arise here at home. While this is most certainly concerning, the important thing right now, is ensuring that the Federal Government is doing everything humanly possible to help the victims of this catastrophe. As this crisis continues, our first priority must be to provide those affected with basic human needs. Looking to the days and weeks ahead, Congress also needs to investigate the lack of response of government and look into what hampered relief efforts at the most critical time. In this regard, particular focus should be placed on the organization of DHS and FEMA. Again, it is clear that there was a lack of adequate preparedness and response. I had concerns during the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) about whether it was appropriate to fold this vital agency for national emergency preparedness into DHS, rather than leave it as an independent agency. I voted against the inclusion of FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security back in 2002. My concerns in this instance may have been well founded, as FEMA's initial response was lacking at best and failed to deliver urgently needed help. I have joined with Congressman Dingell to introduce legislation to remove FEMA from DHS so it will once again be an independent agency with cabinet-level status. The bill also requires that the Director of FEMA be an emergency management professional, and creates two deputy directors--one responsible for natural disasters and the other responsible for terrorism related disasters with each required to have significant experience related to their positions. While this legislation would be a start in addressing concerns of the American people about the handling of emergency situations, the fact remains that it is still the responsibility of the appropriate agencies to have comprehensive plans in place beforehand in order to avoid the situation we are currently finding ourselves in. At this time, we don't have all of the answers as to why relief and recovery efforts fell short. One thing we do know is this national tragedy in the Gulf States highlights the importance of the ability of our first responders to communicate in the event of a national emergency. Public safety, government and military leaders have all said that the inability of local, State, and Federal agencies to communicate was a major obstacle that made the crisis worse. As President Bush said after September 11th, the ability for first responders to communicate is critical in the hours after a crisis. Unfortunately, it has been 4 years since September 11th, and clearly we have made little progress in addressing our first responders' communications needs. I call on Congress to make a real commitment to the public safety officers who are working so bravely and diligently to help the victims of this national disaster. Finally, I was very pleased Congress acted quickly to pass the $10.5 billion emergency supplemental bill. This is an important first step in the effort to provide direct relief. We are now hearing that the devastation thIs deadly storm has left in its path may cost upwards of $40 billion. That is equal to the funding provided in the emergency supplemental bill passed after the September 11th terrorist attacks. Congress must provide whatever is necessary to help our Southern friends. It is a travesty that here in America we have seen our own citizens affected by Hurricane Katrina suffer without the basic necessities required for survival, including food, water, clothing and shelter. However, communities across our country are coming together to help provide much needed assistance. The Mayor of Detroit, Michigan, has announced that Detroit will provide transportation to the Detroit region, temporary housing, food, and even open their schools and provide counseling for the victims. This is just one example of many across our Nation where the American people are pulling together and showing an outpouring of generosity and regard for humanity. My thoughts and prayers are with all of those who have suffered throughout this tragedy. My colleagues and I in Congress must and will do whatever is in our power to assist the ongoing rescue and relief efforts.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Stupak/Brady resolution. Our resolution will commemorate the 22nd annual National Night Out event which is sponsored by the National Association of Town Watch. I would like to thank my friend Congressman Brady for cosponsoring this legislation with me once again this year. This bipartisan resolution has been supported by dozen of House Members for several years running and I am pleased we have another opportunity to highlight this important event again this year. National Night Out, a nationwide grassroots crime prevention event, will take place on Tuesday, August 2. The event brings together involved citizens, law enforcement agencies, and civic groups throughout the U.S. to heighten crime and drug prevention awareness and to strengthen neighborhood spirit and police-community partnerships. This has been a key part of America's community crime prevention success over the past two decades. Community crime prevention is one of the most proven and effective ways to help law enforcement officials win the battle against crime. Whether it is stopping illegal drug sales, making schools safer, locating missing children, or remaining vigilant against terrorism, local law enforcement officials depend on the support of community networks to succeed. The active involvement of citizens and the presence of local law enforcement in communities is a winning combination that makes and keeps neighborhoods safe. Our resolution expresses Congress' support for community crime prevention and asks that the President focus Federal attention on the issue. With this in mind, we hope that you will show your support for the community crime prevention efforts of citizens and police in your district and across the nation. Vote for the Stupak/Brady National Night Out Resolution.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an outstanding law enforcement officer who 40 years ago began his dedicated career in St. Ignace, Michigan as a police officer and rose through the ranks to head the Mackinac County Sheriff's Department. Sheriff Lawrence ``Lumpy'' Leveille retired this past winter with eight service stars upon his epaulets, each representing five years on the force. Sheriff Leveille's nearly 40 years as a law enforcement officer and leader stand as a shining example to us all. Sheriff Leveille graduated from LaSalle High School in St. Ignace in 1965 where in the 10th grade he was given the nickname ``Lumpy''. Being native of the first city across the Mackinac Bridge from Michigan's Lower Peninsula, it seemed fitting for Leveille to return to St. Ignace when he began his career as a police officer on May 25th, 1965. That same year on September 11, he married Ara Jean Litzner. Through the years, they have grown their family with five children and eleven grandchildren. After nine years of patrolling and protecting St. Ignace along the shores of the Straights of Mackinac, Leveille was promoted to Sergeant of the local police department. Among his long list of accomplishments, Sheriff Leveille has decreased the number of drunk driving arrests thanks to new technology and better training for his officers, despite the increase in Mackinac County's population. He has improved safety for residents and his officers because of new cameras installed on patrol cars and in booking rooms which have lead to a reduction in criminal trials. He was also able to achieve fast finger print and background searches to help officers as well as the Straits Area Narcotics Enforcement Team. Sheriff Leveille's staff of 22 and budget of about $1.5 million made his department the largest in the county. Although Sheriff Leveille's career with the Mackinac County Sheriff's Department has come to an end, he has continued to serve the public as a Mackinac County Commissioner. There he has and will continue to have an influence on local policy with the best interests of County residents in mind. Having worked with many of the people involved in the county's administration, ``Lumpy'' Leveille's transition to the Board has been smooth as he works to bring a better harmony to the system. On a personal note, Mr. Speaker, as a former State Trooper myself, I have had the pleasure of knowing Sheriff Leveille over the years and can attest to his impeccable reputation of being a fair and honest protector of the people. I know that through his work he has encountered both exciting opportunities to grow with the community but also hard times when tragedy and tough times affected the area. He has given his heart and soul to his work and I have always admired his dedication to the people of Mackinac County and Michigan's First Congressional District. Mr. Speaker, I ask the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in thanking Sheriff Lawrence ``Lumpy'' Leveille for his nearly 40 years of service to the people of St. Ignace, Mackinac County and to the State of Michigan and wish him well in his new position. Lawrence ``Lumpy'' Leveille's commitment to community and to justice has been a model of public service.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a festival in my district in northern Michigan that honors the history, heritage, culture and contributions of American-Finnish and Canadian-Finnish people. This joint U.S./Canadian Finnish festival to be held on August 10-14, 2005, in Marquette, Michigan gives the Finnish communities in the U.S. as well as Canada the opportunity to experience activities, educational programs, worship opportunities, musical entertainment, cultural displays and a parade based around the theme ``Heritage Powers the Future''. The Finn Grand Fest 2005 is the second time FinnFest USA and Finnish Canadian Grand Festival will have participated in a joint, international event. The first occasion took place five years ago in Toronto, Canada. Planning committees from both countries have expressed interest in holding a joint festival held every five years as a new tradition. The Canadian festival is considerably older than its U.S. counterpart having first been organized in the 1940's as an influx of Finnish immigrants came to Canada to work. Although Finnish immigrants first came to the U.S. during the decades around 1900, FinnFest USA was not established until 1983 in Minneapolis, MN. Since 1983, FinnFest USA has been held each year around the country except the 1\1/2\ year gaps before and after February 2004 when accommodations were made for a winter festival in Florida. Locations are determined by places where there is a strong Finnish community to organize the event. A large population of people of Finnish decent live in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. This will be the second time Marquette, Michigan has hosted the festival in the United States. They also hosted it in 1996. Other Michigan cities to host this event include: Hankcock in 1985 and 1990 and Farmington Hills in the Detroit area in 1987. Other cities throughout the country include: Seattle, Washington (twice), Lake Worth, Florida (twice), Minneapolis, Minnesota (twice), Fitchburg, MA, Newark, DE, Thousand Oaks, CA, Portland, OR, and Portland, ME. While Canadians have been able to maintain the use of the Finnish language in their current culture, the communities in the U.S. have unfortunately watched as the traditional language has been replaced by English. This happened over the generations as many families spoke Finnish at home but the children learned English in school. As time went on, English was the primary language used to communicate with non- Finns, taught in school and practiced at home. Canadians are facing the beginning phases of this trend that may result in the loss of native Finnish speakers in their country as well. Thankfully, there are still a number of people in Michigan's Upper Peninsula who still speak Finnish. In fact, my district is home to a weekly television program call ``Finland Calling'' hosted by Carl Pellonpaa. ``Finland Calling'' is a weekly show about Finnish heritage that has been on the air for 43 years. Like the Finnish language, the original organizers of FinnFest are slowly slipping away. A major contributor from among the earliest generations was Dr. Sylvia Kinnunen who recently passed away on July 25, 2005. Despite her admired age of 84, she was an energetic force in the planning and execution as the Co-chair of Cultural Programs for Finn Grand Fest 2005. We appreciate her devotion to preserving Finnish culture and for her contributions to Michigan's Upper Peninsula. She will be greatly missed. Americans and Canadians are proud of their Finnish heritage and the Finnish people. FinnFest organizers have noted that even are non-Finns have taken active roles and in some cases are major contributors to the event. Among those non-Finns is the musical headliner White Water made up of a family of folk music artists from Amasa, Michigan. The Premos began incorporating Finnish influence in their music and even performed at a folk music festival in Finland last year. The premiere performances at the Finn Grand Fest 2005 include a solo by Evan Premo during a double bass concerto on Thursday, August 11 and 100 violinists of all ages performing at the opening ceremony organized by Evan's mother Bette Premo. The esteem felt for the Premos by the local Finns is an example of the educational sharing and overall embracing of non-Finns to the culture and heritage of the community. Aside from the encouragement of Finnish people to understand more about their own history and traditions, those involved with this festival hope that all people are able to enjoy and learn more about the Finns' unique ethnicity that has evolved in the American and Canadian societies throughout the years. Mr. Speaker, it has been due to the incredible insight, dedication, passion and innovation of the planning boards from the U.S. and Canada that have made this four-day joint festival possible. I am pleased Marquette has been chosen for the second time to host the U.S. festival and as the first American location for the joint festival--it is because Marquette is ``Sisu''. I applaud the Finnish communities in both the United States and Canada for preserving their sense of identity into the next generation and, based on the theme ``Heritage Powers the Future'', I applaud them for utilizing their past to power the direction of their culture for years to come. I wish the Finn Grand Fest 2005 the greatest success and look forward to participating in the event this August.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition of H.R. 5. Despite its name, this bill is a poor attempt to make health care more efficient, accessible, affordable or timely. It is not even a serious attempt to lower malpractice insurance costs. I agree that Congress needs to comprehensively address medical malpractice issues. I understand and sympathize with doctors facing rising premiums. But this bill is not the answer. Malpractice premiums are rising as costs in all segments of health care are rising. And doctors, according to this USA Today article, still pay less for malpractice insurance than they do for their rent. And as the headline says here, ``Hype outpaces facts in medical malpractice debates.'' I am opposed to this legislation for many reasons. First, it has never been brought to the floor with any consideration by the Energy and Commerce Committee or the Judiciary Committee. No hearings were ever held. And there were no opportunities to amend this bill, to include provisions that might actually help solve the problem of premium increases. The majority believes that the answer to lower medical malpractice premiums is to institute an arbitrary $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages in malpractice suits. However, large jury awards are not the cause of the problem. Only 1.3 percent of all claims result in a winning verdict. But the noneconomic caps hurt the children and the low-income wage-earners the most. Do we really want to create a capped system where the makers of Vioxx, Accutane, Celebrex and any other drug are suddenly off the hook because of a weak FDA, and the only thing to keep them remotely honest is the trial system? In addition, this legislation undermines the foundation of our court system, trial by jury of our peers. If we trust juries to determine whether a person is guilty or innocent and should die in a death penalty case, surely we can trust juries to determine compensation for victims in medical malpractice. The fact is that juries are cautious, and patients only prevail in one of every five cases that ever go to trial. Let me tell you what the bill fails to do. It fails to address the real driver of medical malpractice insurance costs, the insurance industry itself. The insurance industry investments tanked in the beginning of this decade because of a weak stock market, and now the industry is squeezing health care providers in an effort to protect their bottom line. Why are we not looking at the insurance industry, including the fact health insurers continue to be exempt from antitrust legislation? In addition, the bill does not address the rising health insurance costs. The Congressional Budget Office, our own CBO, found that even large reductions in medical malpractice costs will have little effect on health care costs. Finally, the bill does nothing to address the two root causes of medical lawsuits, medical errors and bad actors in the health care system. It is a tragedy that medical errors account for almost 100,000 patient deaths each year, but Congress has done very little to address this issue. The bill also does nothing to address the fact that 5 percent of all doctors are responsible for 54 percent of the malpractice claims paid. Why do we allow health care providers to practice if they have a long record of errors? Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this legislation.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I think what we have before us today is a pretty good energy bill. The conferees worked hard to find a compromise on this legislation, and I think that the majority of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support it today. I want to give particular congratulations and thanks to the leadership of the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) and the gentleman from Michigan (Ranking Member Dingell), and also to Senator Domenici and Senator Bingaman. By all working together, we do have a bill. Is it a perfect bill? No. And if we are going to work via compromise, it cannot be a perfect bill. I would have preferred to see fewer corporate tax breaks; and I think in conference, those of us on the main committee, we were blocked out on those tax provisions. So while I have some objections on some of these corporate tax breaks, overall I think they are fair. In addition, I would have liked to have seen stronger measures for direct relief at the pump for Americans who are suffering right now as we pay record-high gasoline prices. In fact, in Michigan last week, as I noted to the conferees, gas spiked 80 cents in one day, it went up 80 cents, to $3.51. That was based on rumors and everything else. But that is how volatile the situation is out there. So I actually had a provision that said, stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve until a barrel of oil drops below $40 for 2 consecutive weeks. Unfortunately, the language did not make it into the final bill. But we do encourage the Secretary of Energy to look at this, and I would like to take this time to suggest to him that he do something immediately to help out our domestic gasoline market. We just cannot continue to see spikes of 80 cents. Also, I would have liked to have seen stronger language on the underground storage issue. While we did make some improvements on this issue, I think we can ill-afford to allow our groundwater to continue contaminating our drinking water. In particular, we cannot allow MTBE to continue to contaminate drinking water across this country. On a positive note, I am very excited and pleased that finally after all of the years of work, we have a permanent ban on oil and gas drilling in and under the Great Lakes. Whether it is a State permit or a Federal permit, you will no longer be allowed to do it. I am very pleased with that provision that I have worked for for more than a decade to put the provision in there. Also there are some provisions on nuclear energy, and I know that is sort of a controversial thing, but I, for one, believe if we are going to start worrying on dependency on foreign oil, that if we are really concerned about global climate change and climate change here in this country, we must revisit the issue of nuclear energy, and I am pleased this bill provides incentives to make the United States once again a leader in this area, and protect our environment, protect our climate and get America less dependent on foreign oil. Mr. Speaker, as I said, this is not a perfect bill but is one that I can support. After 13 years and seeing so many energy bills come before this floor, none of which I have supported, I am pleased to be able to lend my support for this bill, and once again I would like to thank the leadership for their work on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I think what we have before us today is a pretty good energy bill. The conferees worked hard to craft compromise legislation that I think the majority of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support today. Is this a perfect bill? No. I would have preferred to see some of the corporate tax breaks pared back, but the Energy and Commerce conferees were shut out of discussions regarding tax provisions. In addition, I would like to have seen stronger measures to give direct relief at the pump for the millions of Americans who are paying record high prices for gasoline right now. I had a measure that would have provided millions of additional barrels of oil for the U.S. market by suspending contributions to the strategic petroleum reserve until the price of oil dips below $40 per barrel for two consecutive weeks. Unfortunately, that was dropped in exchange for language allowing the Secretary of Energy to voluntarily suspend contributions if he sees fit. I would like to take this time to suggest that he do so immediately, allowing more oil into the domestic market. I also would have liked to have seen stronger wording for secondary containment of underground storage tanks. While we did make some improvements on this issue, we can ill afford to allow our groundwater to become contaminated with gasoline from leaking underground storage tanks. In particular, we cannot allow MTBE to continue to contaminate drinking water across the country. I am happy that the ``safe harbor'' provisions for manufacturers of MTBE that were in the House bill were dropped. Instead, there is a provision allowing lawsuits to be sent to Federal court if a defendant wants to make a request to do so. During the conference, I asked Chairman Barton about the MTBE provisions in the bill and whether the claims filed after the date of enactment would require a case to be sent to Federal court. The chairman indicated that it did not require a case to be sent to Federal court, but gave defendants in prospective suits the right to ask that the case be sent to Federal courts. I wanted to be sure that we were not conferring any new substantive or subject matter jurisdiction over MTBE cases and I was pleased to hear from Chairman Barton that to his knowledge, the legislation was not doing so. I am happy to see that there are provisions in the bill to increase incentives for the nuclear power industry. While I know that there are those who oppose nuclear energy, I feel that if we are going to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and climate change we need to explore increased nuclear technologies. A provision I am particularly proud to say made it into the conference is a ban on any new oil and gas drilling beneath our Great Lakes. This provision will improve public safety and protect the source of drinking water for more than 30 million residents of the Great Lakes. I've worked on this for more than a decade and this will benefit the people of the Great Lakes for generations to come. Lastly, I am happy to report that this bill does not include drilling for oil and gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Mr. Speaker, this is not a perfect bill, but it is one that I can support and I thank Chairman Barton and Ranking Member Dingell for their tireless efforts to come to the compromise before us today.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker today to honor the parish of St. Louis the King Roman Catholic Church for 50 years of serving the communities of Marquette, Harvey, Lakewood, Hiawatha Shores, Sand River, Beaver Grove, Mangum, West Branch, Skandia, Dukes and Sands. The parish has provided opportunities for thousands of people to seek faith, conduct outreach, and engage in fellowship and worship. On June 30, 1954, Most Reverend Thomas L. Noa D.D. announced the formation of the new parish, St. Louis the King. That day, Rev. David Harris was appointed Administrator. Less than a month later on July 18th Father Harris said his first mass in Chocolay Township Hall beginning one of many ``firsts'' to take place for the young congregation. That first year, St. Louis the King would rejoice in their first baptism of Eileen Marie Williams, daughter of Albert Williams and Frances Casimir; mourn their first death of Larry Wayne Lajeunesse, son of Mr. and Mrs. Lawrence Lajeunesse; witness their first marriage of Leonard Lemieux, son of Wilfred Lemieux and Lorette Gauthier, and Marion Tousignant, daughter of Alfred and Lucelle Santamore; and celebrate their first Holy Communion of thirteen boys and seven girls. After a year of memorable firsts, the parish would also celebrate the ground breaking for the new church on July 20th, 1955 on land obtained from Fred Greenleaf, a member of the parish. While the congregation patiently waited for the completion of the new church, St. Louis the King would continue to evolve confirming their first class of fourteen boys, twelve girls and nine adults by Bishop Thomas Noa on November 5th, 1956. The fruits of their labor and reward of their patience was realized on December 25th, 1959 when members of St. Louis the King heard their first mass in the new church. Solemn High Mass of the Nativity was delivered with a sermon given by Rev. Mr. Allen Mayotte of the parish. He would be ordained six months later becoming the first parish son ordained to the priesthood from the St. Louis the King Parish. Many improvements have been made to the church through the years, but the most important development has been the learning experience parish members have gained from the past 50 years of growing together. As people who started as individuals and families bound together by their faith, they have now created a larger body of Christ united in their Catholic faith. Mr. Speaker, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the St. Louis the King Roman Catholic Church on their first 50 years as a parish and in wishing them success in the future as they continue to grow, love, and live their faith.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, the late Pope John Paul said, ``If globalization is ruled merely by the laws of the market applied to suit the powerful, the consequences cannot be but negative.'' I agree with the late Pope John Paul. Trade is more than just economics. It's about peoples' lives and livelihoods. Our economic policies should create the rising tide that lifts all boats. Each decision we make must take into account the welfare and dignity of all people, but especially the poor and vulnerable who struggle daily to support themselves and their families. When CAFTA is viewed through this moral framework, it is clear the agreement does not pass muster. That is why Pax Christi, Catholics for Faithful Citizenship and 34 other organizations (attached) of faith oppose CAFTA. If this agreement is enacted, the poor will get poorer and the rich will get richer. The consequences of CAFTA will be felt by people throughout the Northern hemisphere--from the Michigan sugarbeet farmer trying to put food on the table for his family to the poor Dominican laborer in need of basic medicines. The developing countries affected by CAFTA have an enormous need for better access to medication. Despite these compelling health needs, CAFTA would undermine their access to affordable medicine and potentially give billions of dollars worth of patent protections to drug companies. Closer to home, the sugarbeet farmers in Michigan will be forced off their farms as the price of sugar plummets. Hourly workers at sugar refineries will find their jobs outsourced to other countries. These workers' and farmers' livelihoods will be ruined. We're not talking about big Agri-business here--we are talking about small farmers who will no longer be able to support themselves. We're talking about small businesses owners laying off their workforces. I ask the Bush Administration and the Republican Leadership, ``If enacted, can you imagine what kind of damage CAFTA would inflict on Michigan's sugar industry, which ranks fourth in the country?'' With a state sugar beet economy that spans 2,000 farms, employs thousands of people, and totals over $300 million annually, it doesn't take a genius to predict that flooding our market with sugar imports will strike a blow that may be unrecoverable. The National Farmers Union, the National Family Farm Coalition, the Institute on Agriculture and Trade Policy, Michigan Sugar Company, and the Monitor Sugar Company--they understand the impact it will have on the sugar industry. Why doesn't the House Leadership pushing this bill get it? Or maybe they just don't care. This bill is bad for sugar beet growers and bad for Michigan. As Pope John Paul said, let's not strengthen the powerful at the expense of the less fortunate. That is what CAFTA will do--advance the financial interests of large multinational companies at the expense of the common good. I cannot support an agreement that fails to protect the livelihood of so many families, in Michigan, the United States, and abroad. That is why I will vote ``NO'' on CAFTA. Interfaith Working Group on Trade and Investment member organizations have mission workers and partner institutions in Central America who believe that DR-CAFTA will harm their families and communities. IWG members on record as opposing CAFTA include: American Friends Service Committee, Center of Concern, Church of the Brethren Witness/Washington Office, Church World Service, Conference of Major Superiors of Men Religious, Columban Mission Center, Columban Office: Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation, Congregation Justice Committee: Sisters of Holy Cross, Notre Dame, IN, Congregation of St. Joseph, Cleveland, Ohio, Office of Governmental Affairs (Evangelical Lutheran Church of America), Franciscan Sisters of Allegheny, New York, Holy Cross Institute Office, Institute Justice Team: Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, International Association of the Presentations, Leadership Conference of Women Religious, Lutheran World Relief, Maryknoll Office of Global Concerns. Mennonite Central Committee: Washington Office, Medical Mission Sisters Alliance for Justice, Missionary Oblates: Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation, National Council of Churches USA, NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby, Presbyterian Church (USA Washington Office), Religious Task Force on Central America and Mexico, SHARE Foundation, Sisters of Charity of St. Augustine: Social Concerns Committee, Sisters of Charity of Cincinnati, Sisters of Humility of Mary, Sisters of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, Sisters of Notre Dame, Justice and Peace Office, United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries, United Methodist Church: General Board of Church and Society, Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations, Witness for Peace.