Bart Stupak

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize that October is National Spina Bifida Awareness Month and to pay tribute to the more than 70,000 Americans--and their family members--who are currently affected by Spina Bifida--the nation's most common, permanently disabling birth defect. The Spina Bifida Association of America (SBAA), an organization that has helped people with Spina Bifida and their families for over 30 years, works every day to prevent and reduce suffering from this devastating birth defect. The SBAA was founded in 1973 to address the needs of the individuals and families affected by this disease and is currently the only national organization solely dedicated to advocating on behalf of the Spina Bifida community. As part of its service through almost 60 chapters in more than 125 communities across the country, the SBAA puts expecting parents in touch with families who have a child with Spina Bifida. These families answer questions and concerns and help guide expecting parents. The SBAA then works to provide lifelong support and assistance for affected children and their families. Together the SBAA and the West Michigan Spina Bifida Association, the Spina Bifida Association of Southeastern Michigan, the Spina Bifida Association of Upper Michigan, and the Southwest Michigan Spina Bifida & Hydrocephalus Association work tirelessly to help families meet the challenges and enjoy the rewards of raising their child. I would like to acknowledge and thank SBAA and these local Spina Bifida organizations in Michigan for all that they have done for the families affected by this birth defect, especially those living in my state. Spina Bifida is a neural tube defect that occurs when the central nervous system does not properly close during the early stages of pregnancy. Over 1,500 babies are born with Spina Bifida each year. There are three different forms of Spina Bifida with the most severe being Myelomeningocele Spina Bifida, which causes nerve damage and severe disabilities. This severe form of Spina Bifida is diagnosed in 96 percent of children born with this condition. Between 70 to 90 percent of the children born with Spina Bifida are at risk of mental retardation when spinal fluid collects around the brain. The exact cause of Spina Bifida is not known, but researchers have concluded that women of childbearing age who take daily folic acid supplements reduce their chances of having a Spina Bifida pregnancy by up to 75 percent. Progress has been made in educating women on the importance of consuming folic acid supplements and maintaining diets rich in folic acid. Recent data from the Centers for Disease Control shows an increase in consumption of vitamins with folic acid by 8 percent over 2003. Since the Food and Drug Administration decision to fortify enriched grains with folic acid, CDC has documented a 26 percent decline in these birth defects. Although this is good news, we will still have babies born with Spina Bifida who need intensive care and families that need guidance and support in caring for and raising these children. The result of this neural tube defect is that most babies suffer from a host of physical, psychological, and educational challenges, including paralysis, developmental delay, numerous surgeries, and living with a shunt in their skulls in an attempt to ease their condition. Today, approximately 90 percent of all babies diagnosed with Spina Bifida live into adulthood, approximately 80 percent have normal IQs, and approximately 75 percent participate in sports and other recreational activities. With proper medical care, people who suffer from Spina Bifida can lead full and productive lives. However, they must learn how to move around using braces, crutches or wheelchairs, and how to function independently. They also must be careful to avoid a host of secondary health problems ranging from depression and learning disabilities to skin problems and latex allergies. After decades of poor prognosis and short life expectancy, breakthroughs in research combined with improvements in health care and treatment children with Spina Bifida are now living long enough to become adults with this condition. However, with this extended life expectancy people with Spina Bifida now face new challenges in the fields of education, job training, independent living, health care for secondary conditions, aging concerns, and other related issues. I am proud to cochair the Congressional Spina Bifida Caucus with my colleague Representative Christopher Smith. The Congressional Spina Bifida Caucus brings increased attention to this condition and advances initiatives that will improve the quality of life for those individuals and their families living with Spina Bifida. So far we have 43 members, and I encourage my colleagues to join the Caucus. I again wish to thank the SBAA and its chapters for all of their hard work to prevent and reduce suffering from this birth defect and for their commitment to improve the lives of those 70,000 individuals living with Spina Bifida throughout our nation. The Spina Bifida community and our nation owe a tremendous debt to the SBAA for its work over the past three decades. Much more work still needs to be done, and I am confident this fine organization and its chapters will lead the effort for decades to come. I wish the Spina Bifida Association of America the best of luck in its endeavors and urge all of my colleagues and all Americans to support its important efforts.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of a hospital in my district that has recently passed a remarkable milestone. On October 25, the board of trustees and members of the staff at the West Branch Regional Medical Center, formerly known as the Tolfree Memorial Hospital in West Branch, MI, will celebrate their 75th anniversary. For the past 75 years, the West Branch Regional Medical Center has provided service and care to patients in West Branch area. The original Tolfree Memorial Hospital was built in West Branch in 1929, through the generosity and vision of local farmer, lumberman and banker John Tolfree. Over the years, as the community grew and the hospital became more regional in scope, several additions were constructed. In 1991, it was determined by the Tolfree Memorial Hospital's Board of Trustees that the region had outgrown the facility. After careful financial planning which included fundraising, ground was broken for what is now known as the West Branch Regional Medical Center in 1996. The center was dedicated in 1999 and has been successfully serving Ogemaw County and the surrounding counties ever since. Patients no longer have to travel to Saginaw, MI, which is over an hour away. West Branch Regional Medical Center is the result of many dedicated people who from the beginning had the foresight and the dedication to see this hospital grow with the community and become a regional medical facility. In the tradition of the past administration, the current board of trustees for the West Branch Regional Medical Center have also recognized they could offer more services to the community. Along with celebrating their 75 years of service, on October 25, the West Branch Regional Medical Center will also unveil its plan for the next 3 to 5 years which includes the construction of an Ambulatory Care Center. Mr. Speaker, I ask the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the West Branch Regional Medical Center and its staff on their first 75 years of service and wishing them well in their next 75 years.

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. Last weekend, I joined the residents of Standish, Michigan as they marked this great milestone. The land that is now Standish was originally surveyed and mapped in 1871 by P.M. Angus, who had to travel there on foot since the railroad had not yet been extended to the area. Mr. Angus was hired by John D. Standish, who owned most of the land, and whose saw mill was the first industry in the new settlement. The first official name of the settlement was Granton, but in 1884, the Village of Granton changed its name to the Village of Standish. The same year that Standish was founded, the community built its first school, and the railroad was eventually extended to the area. The residents of Standish have a strong sense of their history, and the current Standish Elementary School stands at the same location as that original school. Also, the original railroad depot for the town is still in use, thanks to the local fundraising and restoration efforts of the community. In 1904, Standish was first incorporated as a city. Over the following years and decades, the community grew and marked a series of firsts along with the rest of our nation. By 1938, it had 913 residents, and today its population is 2,091. The first cars came in 1907 with the arrival of a Buick dealership. Next came commercial electricity, speed limits, the first Prohibition arrests, battery operated radios, and city water and trash removal services. The story of growth and development in Standish is the story of small town America. Mr. Speaker, Standish is a warm, welcoming community, and I can personally attest to that. The city was part of the area added to my district after the 2000 census, and I held a town hall meeting at Standish-Sterling High School in February of 2003 in order to get to know my new constituents. I was impressed by their thoughtful questions and touched by their welcome to me as their new Representative. I was, and continue to be, very proud to represent this fine community in Congress. Mr. Speaker, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the City of Standish and its residents on their first 100 years and in wishing them well through the next century.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, as an original co-sponsor of the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting, or NASPER, Act of 2003, I rise today in strong support of its passage. The prescription drug abuse problem in our country has been well documented, and by passing the NASPER Act (H.R. 3015), Congress will take one step towards addressing the problem. The NASPER Act will help ensure that Schedule II, and III, and IV controlled substances are used and prescribed safely and responsibly. The legislation will help States create electronic monitoring systems that will allow physicians and pharmacists to ensure that their patients are not being over-prescribed these powerful, yet potentially dangerous drugs. The legislation builds upon proven programs already started in 15 States, including Michigan. The Government Accounting Office (GAO) found in 2002 that these State programs are useful tools to help prevent the illegal distribution of these drugs. However, the GAO also found a loophole that is often exploited. The States with electronic monitoring systems are often undermined by neighbor States who lack monitoring systems. The NASPER Act addresses this problem by allowing States to contact each other so that practitioners in one State can ensure that their patients are not receiving medications in another State. I am proud to join with Congressmen Pallone, Whitfield, Strickland, and Norwood in providing leadership on this issue. I also applaud the tireless work of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians to combat the illegal use and inadvertent over-precribing of controlled substances and promote this legislation.

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. This weekend, I will join the residents of Standish, Michigan as they mark this great milestone. The land that is now Standish was originally surveyed and mapped in 1871 by P.M. Angus, who had to travel there on foot since the railroad had not yet been extended to the area. Mr. Angus was hired by John D. Standish, who owned most of the land, and whose saw mill was the first industry in the new settlement. The first official name of the settlement was Granton, but in 1884, the Village of Granton changed its name to the Village of Standish. The same year that Standish was founded, the community built its first school, and the railroad was eventually extended to the area. The residents of Standish have a strong sense of their history, and the current Standish Elementary School stands at the same location as that original school. Also, the original railroad depot for the town is still in use, thanks to the local fundraising and restoration efforts of the community. In 1904, Standish was first incorporated as a city. Over the following years and decades, the community grew and marked a series of firsts along with the rest of our nation. By 1938, it had 913 residents, and today its population is 2,091. The first cars came in 1907 with the arrival of a Buick dealership. Next came commercial electricity, speed limits, the first Prohibition arrests, battery operated radios, and city water and trash removal services. The story of growth and development in Standish is the story of small town America. Mr. Speaker, I said that Standish is a warm community, and I can personally attest to that. The city was part of the area added to my district after the 2000 census, and I held a town hall meeting at Standish-Sterling High School in February of 2003 in order to get to know my new constituents. I was impressed by their thoughtful questions and touched by their welcome to me as their new Representative. I was, and continue to be, very proud to represent this fine community in Congress. Mr. Speaker, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the City of Standish and its residents on their first 100 years and in wishing them well through the next century.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, last night I spoke on the floor about the troubling new information about the effects of Accutane. I will continue to speak out and advise Americans about the dangers of Accutane until the FDA does its job. Next to me is a PET scan taken from a study completed by Dr. J.D. Bremner from Emory University. It is a brain scan of a patient who took Accutane. The first scan on the far right is the baseline scan before the patient even began Accutane. On my left here is a scan after 4 months of Accutane treatment. Dr. Bremner studied 30 patients, 15 on Accutane and 15 on antibiotics. His research found that Accutane affects the metabolism of the orbitofrontal cortex, a brain area known to mediate depression in the front part of the brain. Four months after the baseline PET scan was taken, he found that with antibiotics, they had no changes in the brain. Accutane patients, those who complained of headaches, had a change in the front of the brain. Even an untrained eye can see there is a difference in this PET scan. There is a 21 percent difference in the brain after 4 months of Accutane. Dr. Bremner will present the findings of his study in November at a neuroscience conference. I will share those complete findings at that time. For now, his abstract is found on the Internet and we can see that Accutane causes changes in brain function. Why is this important? Here is an e-mail I received from a family in North Carolina. ``On July 12, 2004, our precious 17-year-old son, Nicholas, took his life by a gunshot to his head. He had been taking the drug Accutane. I have read about what happened with your son, and certainly understand what you and your family are feeling. Like your son, Nicholas was a star athlete and honor student. Please send us any information you think would be of help. We are overcome with grief and still have a hard time realizing that he could take himself away from us and his four siblings.'' I receive an e-mail like this on average once a week or so. As of 2004, according to reports received by the FDA, there have been 235 suicides associated with Accutane. The FDA admits they are receiving only 1 of 10 percent of the actual events being reported. If 235 suicides represents 10 percent of the total, that would mean there are actually 2,350 suicides associated with this drug. If 235 suicides have been reported and it represents 1 percent of the total, that would mean there are actually 23,500 suicides associated with this drug. Still, the drug manufacturer, Hoffmann-LaRoche, Roche Pharmaceuticals, continues to deny that Accutane affects the brain. Just look at this scan. It does. FDA believes there is a link. That is why there is a bold warning on its label, ``Accutane may cause depression, psychosis, and, rarely, suicide ideation, suicide attempts, suicide, and aggressive and/or violent behaviors.'' However, the FDA says they do not know the reason for this link. They need to look at these PET scans. They need to demand research, they need to demand answers. The bottom line, 235 young people have taken their life while on Accutane, including our son, B.J., who died in May of 2000. Some patients never recover from their adverse effects to the drug. There is damage to the brain. I am constantly receiving e-mails like this one from Michigan. ``Dear Congressman, Just a note to thank you for your ongoing effort to educate the public about the dangers of Accutane. I am a psychiatric social worker in a hospital emergency room, and whenever I meet an adolescent patient who is depressed and taking Accutane, it raises a red flag. I make sure that the other social workers are informed about its link with depression and suicide, as I have a personal connection with it. ``My son Eric was an outgoing, happy kid and a respected leader in his school. He began taking Accutane at age 16 and, a few months later, began having difficulty keeping up in school. He failed to turn in homework and his grades took a nose-dive. To make a long story short, he became deeply depressed and he began talking about ending his life. That is when we knew this was not the run-of-the-mill ups and downs that teenagers sometimes have. We did manage to get help for him, but it was a long journey through a dark tunnel of despair. He is now 23 and still has a bright, articulate mind, but he is forever marked by the depression that stole his joy during adolescence. It is because of his journey that I have added an MSW degree to my high school teaching credentials, so I can be more educated to help young people who are at risk.'' As we can see, there is damage done to the brain. Why the FDA allows Roche to continue to market this drug is beyond me. We should not leave this drug out there until these questions are answered. Questions such as, is this damage to the brain permanent? For more than 20 years, the FDA has done little to address the adverse effects caused by Accutane. We know Accutane affects the brain. It is time for the FDA to pull this drug from the market until all of the questions surrounding Accutane are fully addressed.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, I ask to proceed out of order and take the time of my Special Order at this time.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take a moment to discuss today's floor vote on H.R. 3193, to repeal the DC gun ban. I voted in favor of this bill. However, I am concerned with how this legislation came to the floor--without a hearing and without the opportunity to offer amendments. In addition, I am a strong supporter of local rule and this legislation, although I agree with the principle, blocks the local District of Columbia government from having any authority over the matter. Again, I support the legislation in general, I just don't believe appropriate procedure was followed on such a controversial issue.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for his efforts and for leading our intelligence task force in all the work we have been doing here under the gentleman's leadership on this issue, along with the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen), the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson- Lee), who we will hear from next. Having been in law enforcement for many years, and having founded the Congressional Law Enforcement Caucus here, we are now looking at the third anniversary of September 11, and the question on many Americans' minds is: Are we safer? Is America safer today than we were on 9/11? The current administration says we are safer. The Republican leadership in Congress says we are safer. But just because they say we are safer, does not make it so. For instance, when we are talking about our northern border, I come from Michigan and I border Canada. President Bush said on January 25, 2002, ``We are analyzing every aspect of the border and making sure that the effort is seamless, the communication is real, that the law enforcement is strong.'' He also said on February 2, one week later, ``We are focusing on the heroic efforts of those first-time responders. That's why we want to spend money to make sure the equipment is there, strategies are there, communications are there to make sure that you have whatever it takes to respond.'' The Bush administration has mastered the rhetoric. They talk a great game about homeland security, but the numbers reveal a stark reality. Here are a few points: we are 2,000 border patrol officers short along the northern border with Canada, and the President's budget request fails to include additional funding to make these border patrol officers a reality. Only 5 percent of passenger planes are screened for explosives, according to the GAO. And the President wants to cut the number of air marshals by 20 percent this year. Our maritime security efforts are severely understaffed and underfunded, allowing us to screen only 5 percent of the nearly 8 million seaborne containers entering the U.S. each year, and $7.5 billion is needed over the next 10 years in order to secure our ports and waterways. The Bush administration has distributed a mere $441 million for this purpose. This year's budget is the first time the Bush administration has ever asked for any port security grant money. Without the Bush administration's support, Congress has provided only $587 million for port security since 2001. That is less than 10 percent of the money we need to do the job. The President has cut overall funding for adequate protective gear and training for first responders. And this year is no different. He proposed more than a 20 percent cut in first responder training and State grants for training, equipment, and other homeland security needs. More than 40 percent of our Nation's firefighters have not received training for responding to nuclear, biological, or radiological attack. Finally, national reports on the 9/11 emergency response found that the inability of our first responders from different agencies to talk to one another was a key factor in the deaths of at least 121 New York firefighters at the World Trade Center. The independent 9/11 Commission report said ``funding interoperable communications should be a Federal priority.'' Here is what they said, the 9/11 report says: ``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 State, local, and Federal levels remain an important problem. Federal funding for such interagency,'' interoperability as we call it, ``units should be given high priority.'' Here is what the President said: ``It is important that we understand in the first minutes and hours after attack. That is the most hopeful time to save life, and that is why we are focusing on the heroic efforts of those first-time responders. That is why we want to spend money to make sure equipment is there, strategies are there, communications are there to make sure you have whatever you need to respond.'' Strong language from the 9/11 Commission; strong language from the President. The reality is what it costs to get interoperability going in this country 3 years later is $18 billion. What has President Bush requested since 2003? He has requested $100 million. The President even has zeroed out these accounts in the Department of Homeland Security budget over the past 2 years. At the rate we are going, according to the Department of Homeland Security officials, it will be another 20 years before our Nation's first responders are interoperable, where they can talk to each other, communicate with each other. Madam Speaker, we do not have 20 years to wait. Earlier this year, on this floor, I asked how much in the formula grants provided for State homeland security has gone to interoperability. The Department of Homeland Security could not tell me. They committed to let Congress know the answer soon. We have recently found out that it is going to be about another year before we can even get an answer as to where the money has been spent, if it has been spent at all on interoperability. That does not say much about the oversight or planning in the Department of Homeland Security, and about where the billions of dollars of State grant formula money is going. Madam Speaker, the problems I have outlined are occurring because of a lack of commitment on this administration to homeland security. Even the Department of Homeland Security still has not hired some 30 percent of the needed staff to properly run the agency. The homeland security challenges we face, whether it is border, airline, rail, or port security all require the same approach: real solutions instead of rhetoric, real resources and not political pronouncements. Day after day we are told our Nation is better prepared against a terrorist attack than it was 3 years ago; but when only 4,000 Americans guard a border over 4,000 miles long, I cannot agree our Nation's northern border is secure. When our ports are not secured from the entry of a chemical, biological, or nuclear attack, I cannot take the word of anyone when they tell me my family and constituents are well protected. And there is no comfort in the fact that our first responders are no closer now than they were after 9/11 to be able to talk to each other in times of natural disaster or terrorist attack. So how safe are we? The administration points to the toppling of Saddam Hussein. That does not make it. How does that make us safer when he was not an imminent threat, when there were no weapons of mass destruction, and we have diverted so much of our military and intelligence operations to Iraq. Osama bin Laden is still out there. Iraq is now a haven for new terrorist groups. Our country internationally is hated more than ever. We have alienated our allies, so exactly, how are we safer? In the meantime, the current administration and the Republican Congress refuse to give our local, State and Federal agencies what they need to protect our borders and our communities. We will not even give them the equipment to talk to each other. On these issues, sure the present administration has mastered the rhetoric, but when looking at facts, we are dangerously behind in securing our borders to help prevent another attack or be ready when one comes. As head of the Congressional Law Enforcement Caucus, we are going to have a hearing next week on intra operability. There are technologies which could be implemented today where police officers, State, local, and Federal, could talk to each other because of software developed by some of these companies. It is there. We should not have to wait more than 3 years after 9/11 for something as simple as allowing people to talk to each other. We hope we do not have another terrorist attack, but if we do, maybe we can tell those brave first responders, say, with the second building at the World Trade Center, the building is about ready to come down, get out. We could have saved 120 lives if we had the ability to communicate. Having been involved with law enforcement for over 30 years, it is time to look at reality. This administration is not doing the job. We are not safer at home than we were before, at, during or after 9/11. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) for heading up our homeland security task force in our committee, and I look forward to working together in the future. Maybe together we can convince this Congress and the American people something as simple as first responders being able to talk to each other would save so many lives if we only had a commitment. I thank the gentleman for his leadership.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to inform the American public on the safety concerns of Accutane. Accutane is a dangerous, powerful prescription drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1982 to treat severe, recalcitrant, nodular acne that is unresponsive to conventional treatments, including antibiotics. Today, approximately 1.5 million prescriptions are written each year to hundreds of thousands of young people. The horrific birth defects associated with Accutane are well-known and understood. The psychiatric effects associated with the drug, including depression, suicidal thoughts and behavior, suicide and aggression are less known and are denied by its manufacturer, drug company giant Hoffman-LaRoche. Tonight, I want to share the results of a study that sheds light on these psychiatric effects. Dr. J.D. Bremner of Emory University recently completed a study which demonstrated that Accutane affects the metabolism of the orbitofrontal cortex, a brain area known to mediate symptoms of depression. If you look at this chart, Dr. Bremner had two PET scans, the baseline PET scan before the patient began Accutane therapy and 4 months into the Accutane therapy. Even my inexpert eyes can tell the difference, and Dr. Bremner will present his findings in November to a convention of psychiatrists studying this issue. For every question Dr. Bremner's work may answer, there are other questions that need to be answered about the psychiatric effects of these drugs. These scans show the promise more research can hold. If you take a look at these, you can see there is a 21 percent change in the metabolism of the front orbitofrontal cortex. These scans show the promise of more research, and Hoffman-LaRoche has always denied that Accutane affects the brain. We know this is not true, as the PET scans show. This person had a 21 percent change in their orbitofrontal cortex of the brain. Is this damage to the brain permanent? Only more research will answer this question. I do not know why the FDA and Hoffman-LaRoche seem reluctant to look for these answers. The FDA has already determined that the link between Accutane and psychiatric events is strong enough to require a bold warning on the physician label and the packaging label for this drug. The FDA should also re-examine previous studies submitted on Accutane. A 2001 review of three studies that were not disclosed by the drug company found the drug to cause an excessive serotonergic response and concludes that it should be noted that increased serotonergic function is presumed to be the mechanism of action of a major class of antidepressants or SSRIs, or selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors. In other words, Accutane acts like antidepressants in the brain so it couldn't possibly cause psychiatric effects. We all realize the uproar that has been caused by the FDA when they would not allow their own expert to testify that antidepressants used in young people were ineffective and increased suicidality. The British came to the same conclusion, and they banned the use of antidepressants in people under the age of 18. Just 2 weeks ago, the FDA finally declared that there is an increased risk in suicidality in children who take SSRIs. It has created a firestorm of debate about how safe these drugs are and how they affect kids. Yesterday's Wall Street Journal had a story about the possible reasons why there is an increase of suicidality of children who take antidepressants. The story says, ``One hypothesis is that, in some patients, these drugs have a disinhibiting effect,'' says one Wayne Goodman, chairman of the FDA panel that examined the issue in young people. ``Children are already a bit disinhibited because their brains aren't fully developed.'' Remember, in 2001, Accutane studies that the FDA reviewed concluded that Accutane was like the antidepressants with its SSRI function. The FDA must demand a full accounting of how these drugs, both Accutane and antidepressants, affect our children and their developing brains. There is no excuse for allowing Accutane to be prescribed to hundreds of thousands of kids without, at the very least, continuing to demand answers as to the effect of this drug on the brain. At the very least, FDA can begin to address the ``off label'' use of this drug, but yet the FDA estimated in 2002 that 90 percent of the prescriptions were written for ``off label,'' meaning they were not written to treat severe acne unresponsive to other antibiotics. At the very least, FDA can finally approve a mandatory risk management plan to track Accutane's side effects and prevent thousands of pregnancy exposures, miscarriages and abortions each year. FDA advisory committees have called for stricter distribution of the drug and a registry of the patients to control the use of this drug. They have called for this twice in the last 4 years. Unfortunately, the FDA has ignored these recommendations, and the same failed policy and system is in place with this drug. Last week, I and a few of my colleagues shared our concerns with the Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson about the lack of action on implementing these advisory committee recommendations. The birth defects caused by Accutane are similar to those of thalidomide. People of my generation and older remember vividly the thalidomide babies of the 1960s. Over 1.5 million prescriptions for Accutane and its generics were written in 2003, and clearly, Accutane has the potential to do greater damage, so why do we not have the same controls as we do on thalidomide? Madam Speaker, my time has expired, and I will insert the rest of my remarks at this point in the Record. It's no secret that I am no fan of the FDA's handling of Accutane or the drug company, HLR's, constant denial that Accutane does not cause depression or affect the brain--we know with this PET Scan their denials are baseless! However, I am appalled at the FDA's inaction on this registry. That's why in June, I joined with colleagues on both sides of the aisle and introduced the Accutane Safety and Risk Management Act (H.R. 4598). The legislation would create a mandatory program to manage the drug, and includes provisions to protect the health of patients and their children. To make sure we do not allow our children and their developing brains to be destroyed. History suggests that unless there is strong leadership from Congress on this issue, the Advisory recommendations to the FDA will end up collecting dust on a shelf. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in cosponsoring this important legislation to send a strong message to the FDA and HLR that we will not accept their inaction any longer.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed out of order and address the House for 5 minutes.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, today's grand opening of the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian is an excellent opportunity for this Congress and the public to develop a deeper understanding of issues that currently affect Native Americans, and also to celebrate their rich history and culture. I am proud to be here today to commemorate the history of Native Americans nationally, and in my district of Northern Wisconsin, which is home to six Native American tribes: The Bay Mills Chippewa Indian Community, Hannahville Potawatomi Indian Community, Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, Little Grand Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indiana, and the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians. The Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian is a great way of preserving their vibrant history and culture to our Nation. This beautiful long-awaited museum, located on the National Mall, will honor the culture of Native Americans who have contributed so much to this Nation and the world. The museum, which is set against a backdrop of the United States Capitol building, symbolizes a deeper understanding and reconciliation between America's first citizens and those who have come to make these shores their home. This museum represents a spirit of the Native American tribes across this great Nation. I join them in celebrating the museum's grand opening. Mr. Speaker, let us all work together to educate ourselves as to the issues affecting Native Americans in this Nation.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a community in my district that is celebrating an important milestone. This weekend, Williams Township in Bay County, Michigan will celebrate its 150th anniversary. Williams Township is a small community, but a warm welcoming one, and should stand as an example to us all. In the fall of 1854, Williams Township began its history in the same way as many communities in Michigan and throughout the country. A small party of six men visited the area, which was then uninhabited wilderness. Charles Bradford, John Gaffney, William Spafford, Charles Fitch, George W. Smock, and Lyman Brainard found the land inviting, and returned to Flint, Michigan to purchase the land they would shortly settle. On November 18th, 1854, John Gaffney felled the first tree in the area. It was his birthday, and Williams Township's. In 1855, the Township was organized as a part of Midland County. Two years later, Williams, along with Hampton Township succeeded in persuading the Michigan State Legislature to combine them into the new Bay County. Though there was much dispute over whether Midland and Saginaw County residents could vote on approving the new county, the State Supreme Court allowed it to go forward in 1858, and on August 10th, the new Bay County held its first board meeting. Those early settlers of Williams Township were primarily farmers, and their numbers gradually increased. By 1869, the population had grown significantly, and the Township was reduced to its present size of 36 square miles. Today, the population is about 4,500 strong, with another 2,000 or so in the City of Auburn, which split from the Township in 1948. And though the largest employer now is Dow Corning Corporation, which has its world headquarters and a specialty materials plant in the Township, farming and agriculture remain a vital foundation to the Township's economy. Mr. Speaker, I said that Williams Township is a warm community, and I can personally attest to that. The Township was part of the area added to my district after the 2000 census, and I have visited several times in order to get to know my new constituents. I held a town hall meeting in Auburn in February of 2003. I was impressed by their thoughtful questions and touched by their welcome to me as their new Representative. Later, in October, I went back to Bay City Western High School to speak to an American Government class and to have lunch at the Williams Township Senior Center. Again I was impressed by the residents of the Township, young and old. I was and continue to be very proud to represent this fine community in Congress. Mr. Speaker, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Williams Township and its residents on their first 150 years as a community and in wishing them well in their next 150 years.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 757, is a resolution to mark the anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11. Although I voted in support of this resolution, I do have some reservations about the statements it contains. Specifically, the resolution and the Bush administration's assertion that Iraq is the ``central front'' in the war on terror--while previously wrong--has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. What have the administration's tactics amounted to? We now see terrorists in Baghdad--where none were before. We now see Iraq is a symbol for terrorist recruitment--where no symbol existed before. Congress and the American people trusted the President when he said we needed to go to war in Iraq. It is clear that trust was misplaced. As a result, what we have to show from trusting President Bush and his administration is 1,000 American lives lost, close to 7,000 of our men and women wounded. We have a military stretched so thin it is practically to its breaking point. We are spending billions of taxpayer dollars each month that we could be using to fix critical gaping homeland security vulnerabilities here at home or for counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan and elsewhere. And this Administration has destroyed our international credibility--even with many of our closest allies. We know the President's justifications for going to war in Iraq have proven to be false--even experts within the administration have stated that Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction. The independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission unequivocally found that Iraq had no ties to the 9/11 attacks and there was no collaborative relationship between Hussein's regime and al Qaeda. The American people deserve the truth. The truth is not that we entered into war in Iraq because Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction or on the basis of terrorism. The truth is that this administration used September 11 as an excuse to enter into a war in Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein--and has, in the process, created a rallying cry and call to arms for terrorists around the world as a result.

Mr. STUPAK

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

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to increase funding for seniors' meals programs by $10 million. The Meals on Wheels program is a critical lifeline to our Nation's seniors who are most in need of our assistance. The bill includes $730 million for senior nutrition programs, $16 million more than last year, or a 2.2 percent increase. I wish to thank the chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), for including these additional funds and recognizing the importance of these programs to our seniors. I am offering this amendment because, despite the increase in the bill, the funding falls far too short. I am sure that all of us have met and spoken with seniors in our districts. I am sure that the seniors have told my colleagues how much they depend on senior meals assistance and the Meals on Wheels program, or the meals they receive at the senior centers. I am sure that if Members, like I have done in the past, would go out and actually deliver senior meals to the homes of homebound seniors, they would realize how important not just these prepared meals are but also the social interaction these homebound seniors have with members of the public. I have heard from the area agencies on aging in my district that they are cutting meals they are offering. In Michigan, we have had to cut back significantly weekend meals, evening meals, and even the senior lunch meals. The challenges faced by our Meals on Wheels program is compounded by the fiscal problems of the States that have not been able to increase their contributions, despite their acknowledgment that the need for these programs continues to grow. This amendment would simply increase funding for the Nutrition Services Incentives Program by $10 million to $160 million. The House approved a similar amendment of mine back in 2001. Unfortunately, that amendment back in the 2001 appropriation bill to increase funding for the program to $160 million was dropped in conference. That was 4 years ago, and funding for senior meals programs has stayed basically flat until this year. Mr. Chairman, we need to make this investment now. Nationally, 4.6 million Meals on Wheels meals were cut last year, and a number of congregate meals were cut by 2.9 million, for a total of 7.5 million meals that had to be cut last year because of lack of funding. These decreases in funding ignore the 25 percent increase in the number of Americans who are expected to be eligible for the Older Americans Act programs in the next 5 years. It is critical that we include the highest level of funding possible for senior nutrition programs. I understand and I appreciate the work of the committee and what they have done to increase funding. I appreciate the fact that both the ranking member and the chairman have indicated that, if possible, they will try to increase funding in the conference report. Mr. Chairman, I will ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment with the understanding that we will continue to work to increase funding in the future. This program is critically important to our seniors. While I appreciate the appropriators' work, I think we need to continue to highlight the concerns that we have for the lack of funds for the Senior Meal Program. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate a church in my district that recently celebrated a remarkable milestone. On July 2, the members of the Grace United Methodist Church in Houghton, Michigan celebrated their congregation's 150th anniversary. For the last century and a half, Grace United Methodist Church has been a place of worship, prayer and fellowship for the people of this community in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. In 1854, the same year that the Village of Houghton was founded, Reverend Lewis W. Earl organized the Portage Lake Class, which would become today's Grace United Methodist Church. Three years later, the small congregation resolved ``to build a house of worship in Houghton,'' and construction began in the spring of 1859. Later that year, the structure, which was still being built, was moved to the corner lot that is the site of the present church, thanks to the generous gift of Mr. William Newcomb. During the pastorate of Reverend C.V. Thompson from 1888 to 1893, the congregation decided to construct the elegant stone church building that is in use today. In June 1893, the completed church was dedicated with much ceremony. Several of the day's most prominent clergymen came to Houghton to give lectures or sermons as part of the dedication activities, including Reverend Earl Cranston, Reverend Joseph Frazer, Reverend Bishop Ninde, and Reverend A.R. Bartlett. On the evening of November 24, 1916, tragedy struck as Grace Church was almost completely destroyed by fire. Fortunately, the red sandstone walls remained standing, which also protected the church's beautiful stained glass windows. While the members of Grace Church were understandably upset by this turn of events, the other churches of Houghton were quick to offer their assistance. As a result, services were held for several months in the Masonic Temple, and then for 2 years the congregation held joint services with the Presbyterian Church while Grace Church was being rebuilt. Reconstruction of the church building was delayed by the start of World War I, and the congregation was not able to move back into its own church until 1918, when steps were taken to at least rebuild the basement level. Complete restoration of the church was finally achieved in 1924 when Reverend John E. Lewin worked tirelessly to raise the necessary funds and secure a loan from the Board of Home Missions and Church Extension of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Mr. Speaker, much has changed in the Grace United Methodist Church's first 150 years. After the church recovered from the 1916 fire, it continued to make improvements and expansions to accommodate its growing congregation. It has also received the guidance and leadership of a number of pastors from its founding by Reverend Earl to the current pastor, Reverend Tom Anderson. But throughout these changes, the members of the Grace United Methodist Church have been true to their faith and to each other. Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House join me in congratulating the Grace United Methodist Church and its members on their first 150 years as a community of faith, and in wishing them well in their next 150.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, on August 13, 1979, the city of Marquette, MI, entered into a sister city relationship with Yokaichi, Shiga Prefecture, Japan. Since then, the relationship has flourished, and I would like to congratulate both cities on their upcoming 25th Anniversary of this sister-city bond. In his September 12, 1992 remarks to the 102nd Congress, my predecessor, Congressman Robert Davis, praised these sister cities and included an extensive history of that relationship (E2819-2821). I would also like to highlight the history of the Marquette-Yokaichi sister-city program: On September 12, 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower initiated the Sister City program to build close relationships and cultural understanding between people of different countries. President Eisenhower's theory: these new relationships could be a powerful force in promoting world peace and would help prevent misunderstandings between the governments of those countries. On November 14, 1968, Michigan Governor George Romney and Shiga Prefecture's Gov. Kinichiro Nozaki initiated a Sister State relationship. This was followed by annual exchanges between these states and the encouragement to establish bonds between their cities. When the cities of Marquette, Michigan and Yokaichi, Shiga, Japan signed their August 13, 1979 Sister City Agreement, its focus was directed to cultural exchanges with the intent of developing long-term friendships and understanding between the people of these two communities. Several actions have assisted its continued expansion and success: Annual exchanges of formal delegations and several informal delegations have occurred since 1979. Each delegate, visitor, student, teacher artist or other representative to his or her sister city is welcomed as a member of an extended family and stays with a host family that may include three generations in its household. ``Sister'' agreements were signed between the Rotary Clubs in 1979 and the Chambers of Commerce in 1983 of the two cities. The two cities have also had many exchanges through their education programs. Northern Michigan University has offered an academic year scholarship to a student from Yokaichi since 1980 and several have returned to receive degrees there. The Japan Center for Michigan Universities, located twenty miles from Yokaichi, has offered scholarships to three Northern Michigan University students each academic year since 1989. Marquette and Yokaichi school students exchange letters and the schools in each city teach their pupils about their Sister City. Michigan and Shiga initiated annual teacher exchange and government worker exchange programs in the early 1980's. Michigan and Shiga initiated a summer high school student exchange program in the 1990's. Finally, over 100 Marquette or Yokaichi casual visitors have been welcomed to their sister city. More than 2,500 delegates, host family members, students, teachers, government officials and informal visitors have participated directly in the Marquette-Yokaichi partnership. With each exchange has come the opportunity to plant new seeds of friendship and understanding, many of which have become self-sustaining gardens that are freely shared with others in the community. With each exchange has come the opportunity to become a member of an extended family. And for many, it has become a life-changing experience. Mr. Speaker, again I applaud the cities of Marquette and Yokaichi for their great success in building this special relationship through their sister-city status. I congratulate them on their 25th anniversary and I wish them continued success for the next twenty-five years.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of a church in my district that has recently passed a remarkable milestone. On July 11, the members of the Bethany Lutheran Church in Isabella, Michigan celebrated their congregation's 100th anniversary. For a century, the Bethany Lutheran Church has been a place of worship, prayer, and fellowship for the people of this small farming community in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. On July 11, 1904, what was then the Swedish Evangelical Lutheran Church held its first meeting at the home of John Wester in Isabella. This first service was conducted by a seminarian, J.J. Youngren, who used Matthew 5:20-26 for his sermon. Reflecting the heritage of the community, Swedish was the primary language of the congregation for its first twenty years. On December 26, 1904, the church's first ordained pastor, Reverend K.M. Holmberg, held his first service, using John 1:1-14 as the basis for his sermon. The following spring, the church purchased a half acre of land from one of its members, Mr. Jacob Carlson, where the church building stands to this day. By 1906, the church's Secretary, Mr. Martin Nyquist, was planning for the church building, and construction began on May 31, 1908. The church architect and chief carpenter was Fred Magnuson. Just over four years later, on July 14, 1912, the congregation attended the first service in the church's new home. Though there have been a number of improvements to the building, the congregation of the Bethany Lutheran Church still meets each Sunday in that original structure. Mr. Speaker, much has changed in the Bethany Lutheran Church's first century. Always a small congregation, the church's membership has waxed and waned over the years from the original 39 members to the 17 of today. It has also received the guidance and leadership of a number of pastors from Reverend Holmberg to the current pastor, Reverend David Hueter. But throughout these changes, the members of the Bethany Lutheran Church have been true to their faith and to each other. Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House join me in congratulating the Bethany Lutheran Church and its members on their first 100 years as a community of faith, and in wishing them well in their next 100.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I take very seriously my oath of office to the U.S. House of Representatives. In it, I swear to ``always protect and defend the Constitution of the United States . . . so help me God.'' I will be doing just that when I vote against H.R. 3313. This bill, which strips the courts of their right--and obligation--to hear challenges to federal law, is a direct attack on our U.S. Constitution. I have long been a supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act that Congress passed in 1996.-I believe that marriage should be defined as a union between a man and woman. Despite my support for DOMA--we cannot as Members of Congress, knowingly vote for legislation that undermines the clearly stated separation of powers between the three branches of government as outlined in the Constitution. This separation of power between the legislative, executive and judicial branches serves as the foundation of our democracy and our system of government. If we fail today to ``support and defend'' the Constitution, what's next? This legislation sets a terrible precedent! Will Congress prevent the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from interpreting civil rights, worker or religious rights laws? Will the courts next be blocked from reviewing actions of the executive branch? Do we really want to head in a direction where the Constitution and courts reflect only on the political views of the political party that controls the U.S. House, Senate and the Presidency? I will not use my constituents' vote in the U.S. House of Representatives to undermine our Constitution for blatant election-year politics. And election-year politics is the only reason why this misguided legislation is on the floor. It is truly shameful, as this legislation undermines the integrity and the moral authority of this legislative body to the American people. Vote ``no'' on H.R. 3313.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an extraordinary vessel stationed in my district. For the last 60 years, the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Mackinaw and her crew have sailed the northern Great Lakes, keeping these vital waters open and safe. On August 12, past and present crew members of the Mackinaw will gather in Cheboygan, Michigan to celebrate the ship they affectionately refer to as ``Big Mack'' or ``Queen of the Seas,'' and its six decades of service to the State of Michigan and the United States. In 1941, the United States Congress authorized the construction of a new ice breaker for the Great Lakes. Three years later, on December 20, 1944, the Mackinaw was commissioned in Toledo, Ohio and made its maiden voyage to its new home, Cheboygan, Michigan. At 290 feet long, the Mackinaw was, and is, the largest and most powerful Coast Guard vessel on the Great Lakes. Today, there are still men and women in Cheboygan who remember the Mackinaw's arrival in their harbor when thousands gathered on Christmas Eve to welcome the new cutter to their city. Since then, the residents of Cheboygan have taken enormous pride in the Mackinaw as the ship and her crew worked to keep shipping lanes open. In its first year of service, the ship opened waterways nearly six weeks ahead of schedule, which allowed vital cargo to reach its destination and kept our nation's war machine running at top capacity. As the nation shifted to peacetime production, the Mackinaw kept up its wartime pace. It continued to break up ice several feet thick every spring to ensure the safe arrival of essential raw materials for the steel and auto industries of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan. The Mackinaw has seen the extraordinary expansion of American industry, and made an extraordinary contribution to that expansion. Mr. Speaker, my most fond memory of the Mackinaw is the bitterly cold winter of 1993-1994. During that winter, the Mackinaw showed her brute ice-breaking strength time and time again. The Mackinaw freed countless vessels from frozen icy impasses. She has rescued stranded boaters, provided safe passage, and even rescued animals in peril. Staff of the Mackinaw so admire the vessel and the Cheboygan community that they gather every five years for a reunion of current and past shipmates. Mr. Speaker, the Mackinaw and her crew have played a role not only in national and international commerce, but also in more local relationships. The crew of the Mackinaw has long been an important part of the community in Cheboygan, with members pitching in to fight fires, forming relationships with residents, and many even settling in Cheboygan after their retirement. As we move closer to 2006 when this historic vessel is decommissioned and replaced with a new cutter Mackinaw, Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in paying tribute to the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Mackinaw and her crews over the last 60 years. They deserve our deepest gratitude, and I wish them well when they gather next month to celebrate 60 years of fond memories.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) for his support in including my provision in this bill that calls for the timely review and adjustment of pilotage rates by the United States Coast Guard; and of course, special thanks to the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), for his continued efforts to advocate for the just treatments of our American maritime pilots. Unfortunately for American maritime pilots, the review has been far from timely, and a permanent adjustment flat out has not happened. Last fall, during floor debate on this bill, I engaged in a colloquy with the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) to raise the issue that no permanent rate adjustment for pilots had been made. At that time, I was vexed at how the Coast Guard, whose responsibility it is to set the rates that American pilots charge shipping companies for pilotage services, let the 2003 shipping season come and go without issuing a permanent rate adjustment. The Great Lakes pilotage system performs critical safety and environmental functions for the Great Lakes. And not only that, it also requires by law that every vessel entering the Great Lakes has a maritime pilot on board. It does not make sense to underfund a pilotage system which is crucial to the largest freshwater body in the world, yet the Coast Guard failed to complete a permanent, full rate adjustment at all last year. At the end of last year, the Coast Guard finally did issue an interim rule which provided only a partial rate adjustment. In a letter I received from the Commandant earlier this year, I was advised that a supplemental rule scheduled to be published in February was going to be delayed until May. Mr. Speaker, Members, you might further understand my utter disbelief and complete frustration that a supplemental rule is still not out yet, and there are signs now it will not be out until October and maybe later. Remember, the supplemental rule will not change the rate. It will just trigger another round of public comment. Every day that goes by is another day that pilots are not getting the pay that they not only deserve but are entitled to. This is contrary to the Coast Guard's promise of last year to adjust the current pilot system funded at 1997 levels. This is particularly disturbing because the Coast Guard regulations require rates to be reviewed and adjusted on an annual basis. Setting rates to 1997 levels will inevitably result in the fraying of the Great Lakes pilotage system. Foreign shipping companies and their agents in the United States have urged the Coast Guard to delay and reduce the proposed rate increase. This is not surprising because foreign shipping companies have an economic interest in reducing these rates, which they pay. However, it is the Coast Guard that by law bears the responsibility for ensuring that rate reviews and adjustments are completed in a timely manner and reflect the formula set out in detail in the agency's own regulations. It is simply not acceptable for the Coast Guard to have repeatedly missed its own deadlines of a rate adjustment. Such delays will only continue to subject the Coast Guard to the charge that it is placing the economic interests of foreign shipping companies ahead of the environmental protection and marine safety of the Great Lakes. It is unbelievable to me that it is actually possible that another shipping season will come and go without a permanent adjustment. After having written five letters in the last year requesting a prompt establishment of a permanent Great Lakes maritime pilotage rate, that is five times we have written, enough is enough; and I believe we need to call on GAO to investigate this issue. Again, I exhort the Coast Guard to follow its own rules and implement a full pilotage rate adjustment on the Great Lakes now. The pilots in my congressional district bordering Lakes Michigan, Superior, and Huron as well as pilots throughout the Great Lakes have waited long enough for the Coast Guard's empty promise to come to fruition.

Mr. STUPAK. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. STUPAK. I thank the ranking member, and I think the chairman for his help and support.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, this week the President visited Michigan's Upper Peninsula. Too bad his visit was a pep rally. Instead, he owed the people of Northern Michigan some answers about his failed policies that have taken this Nation backwards in so many ways. This is what the President should have talked about: how we would address the infinite list of problems and confusion with the sham Medicare prescription drug law; why we created new mandates for Northern Michigan schoolteachers and students through No Child Left Behind, but then failed to provide the needed financial resources to meet them; how he will restore the 397,000 jobs in Michigan we have lost, and more than 2 million nationwide. Many of these jobs have been shipped overseas. The deficit: why the country has gone from record surpluses to a record $521 billion deficit. Why did the President choose tax cuts for the wealthy at the expense of putting the Nation's checkbook deep in the red? Homeland security: Why has the President repeatedly cut needed funding for homeland security grants to local and State agencies. The Great Lakes: How will he restore the Great Lakes? His current proposal is a study of studies that will only keep us treading water. Instead of real answers, all this President can give the American people is a pep rally. The American people deserve better.