Allyson Schwartz

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, Joseph Hoeffel honorably represented Pennsylvania's 13th Congressional district for 6 years. And, on October 16, I proudly joined with area Democrats in naming Joe the ``Montgomery County Democrat of the Year.'' As a lifelong resident of Montgomery County, Joe was elected in 1976 to the first of four terms in the Pennsylvania State House, representing the Abington area until 1984, where he worked on budget and government reform, economic development and programs for seniors. In 1991, Joe was elected to the first of two terms as Montgomery County Commissioner where he fought for open space preservation, community revitalization and reforms of patronage and pay-to-play abuses in the courthouse. In 1996, Joe ran for the U.S. House of Representatives, challenging a freshman incumbent and losing by just 84 votes. However, he returned to the campaign trail in 1998 and was successful--earning the opportunity to represent the 13th district in the 106th, 107th, and 108th Congresses. Joe campaigned on a platform of creating jobs, bettering our public school system, expanding access to health care, balancing the Federal budget, and ensuring that we have a robust foreign policy. During his tenure, Joe fulfilled many campaign promises. He authored various pieces of legislation to better the 13th district and the Nation, including bills to create a veterans' cemetery at Valley Forge, to eliminate wasteful corporate welfare, to reform Federal support for public schools and to establish a patients' bill of rights. At home, Joe was a constant figure throughout the community. He was intimately involved in bringing a public health center to Norristown and establishing the Center for Sustainable Communities at Temple University-Ambler. Additionally, he secured Federal funds for the Schuylkill Valley Metro, Title I education, riverfront development in Norristown and Northeast Philadelphia, the Montgomery County Community College and the Abington Arts Center. From his seat on the International Relations Committee, Joe also advocated for the United States to play an active role in international efforts to bring peace to the Middle East and throughout the world. Joe's reputation as a hard-working legislator and an outspoken, progressive Democrat will not be forgotten. I know many of my colleagues continue to rely on Joe's guidance and advice and wish him well in his new endeavors. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all of my colleagues here in Congress I again want to congratulate Joe Hoeffel on being recognized as Montgomery County's Democrat of the Year. Although his service in Congress has come to an end, I know Joe will continue to work on behalf of the people of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, and our Nation for many years to come.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 248, a resolution to honor the life and work of Simon Wiesenthal and reaffirm the commitment of Congress to fight against anti-Semitism and intolerance in all forms, in all forums, and in all nations. On September 20, 2005, the world lost a true hero--a voice for those souls who could not speak and a witness against those criminals who sought to go unnoticed. After surviving the Holocaust himself, Simon Wiesenthal devoted his life to seeking justice for the six million Jews who were systematically murdered at the hands of the Nazis, including 89 members of his family. Through sheer perseverance and determination, he hunted those who committed the most heinous acts--helping capture and ultimately convict more than 1,000 war criminals, including Adolf Eichman. He found the killers who ruined his youth, exterminated his people and displayed their evils before the eyes of the world. Simon Wiesenthal did not ask that the world never forget the Holocaust; he demanded it. And we, as leaders of the most powerful and just nation in the world, have an obligation to carry out Simon Wiesenthal's legacy. We must continue to investigate and bring to justice perpetrators of the Holocaust, as well as those who have engaged in acts of genocide in Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia and the Sudan, to show the world that those guilty cannot hide in the shadows. We must work to end anti-Semitism and intolerance in the United States to prevent the spread of hatred that has led to so much undue evil. And we must educate our children about the Holocaust to ensure that future generations understand the evils that can befall humanity and appreciate the righteous figures who can emerge from it, like Simon Wiesenthal.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, the 2006 homeland security spending plan is something we must enact to sustain our ongoing efforts to protect the American people from harm. For that reason, I will support it. However, I have strong reservations with the bill. First, the Republican majority has attached a plan to fundamentally reorganize the Department of Homeland Security to this must-pass bill-- effectively forfeiting the oversight responsibility of the Congress. They are willingly making these sweeping changes, despite the fact that no meaningful hearings, discussions, or analyses have taken place on this proposal. My colleagues, there are many lessons to be learned from Hurricane Katrina that ought to be incorporated into any restructuring plan of our Department of Homeland Security. Yet, the Republican majority has not only failed to undertake a full investigation of what went wrong in the Gulf Region, but it is now denying Congress the opportunity to appropriately study or amend Secretary Chertoffs proposed changes-- which were submitted one month prior to the hurricane. This is wrong, and denies us the opportunity to learn from the mistakes of the last few months so that we might do better in the future. Moreover, Mr. Speaker, while this bill represents an attempt to make up for some of the funding shortfalls in the President's fiscal year 2006 homeland security budget--allocating $1.3 billion more for homeland security efforts this year than proposed by the Administration--it still does not adequately fund essential security initiatives that are needed to protect our citizens. Specifically, the measure cuts by $60 million funding for Firefighter Grants. It also fails to provide the level of funding needed to fully protect our Nation's ports which, according to the Coast Guard, will cost $4.8 billion. Our constituents are depending on us to keep them safe from harm and the nation free from terror. This bill fails to live up to our promise--and this Administration's promise--to provide real leadership in the face of real threats. Mr. Speaker, I will reluctantly vote for this measure because it would be irresponsible to cut off funding for our homeland security efforts altogether. But, from my seat on the Budget Committee, I will continue to work to ensure that Congress lives up to its responsibility to provide strong leadership and to meet the Nation's security needs.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on May 3, 1996, 16-year- old Christa Lewis's life was cut tragically short after she was stabbed while attending a local carnival with her friends in the Philadelphia neighborhood of Tacony. The death of Christa Lewis stunned her family, friends and community. At the time of her death, Christa Lewis was a sophomore honors student at St. Hubert's Catholic High School who excelled at soccer and lacrosse. Friends described Christa as fun-loving, popular and vivacious. Christa is survived by her parents, Joan and Greg Lewis, as well as two younger brothers, Bud and Evan and her younger sister, Cory. Her sudden death shocked the close-knit community and shed light on the growing problem of youth violence. We all know how important it is that we address the overwhelming pressures that teenagers face during their developmental years. It is imperative that we do all we can to address violence done to and by teens that can lead to the tragic and untimely death of a young person. In the aftermath of her murder Christa's entire community rallied around the Lewis family as well as worked to ensure the safety of area residents. Since her death nearly 10 years ago, many people have worked hard to keep Christa's memory alive. Members of the community organized sports tournaments and local dinners to benefit the Christa Lewis Memorial Fund, a non-profit organization that supports local children and schools. On October 3, 1997, the Historical Society of Tacony also dedicated the Christa Lewis Memorial Arboretum in Disson Park. On October 15, I joined Christa's family at the unveiling of the seventh series of memorial stones at the Christa Lewis Memorial Arboretum. Christa's father said at the initial dedication of the arboretum that it was to be used by the community--including the Tacony and Mayfair sections of Northeast Philadelphia--to honor and reflect on the memory of their loved ones. It is now filled with stones and trees memorializing friends, family and loved ones from throughout the community. Although Christa sadly lost her life at such a young age, the park serves as a place of love and remembrance. This past weekend, I was honored to join Christa's family in celebrating her life, spirit and the memory of so many others at the arboretum.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Stupak-Boucher-Bishop-Schwartz-Barrow substitute amendment, and I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) for his leadership on this issue of national importance. Mr. Speaker, Americans across the country are deeply concerned about the skyrocketing costs of gasoline, and rightly so. This year, the average American family will pay nearly $4,500 to meet their energy needs. This is 19 percent more than last year. Contributing to these costs, as we all know, is the dramatic increase in the price of gasoline. In the midst of Hurricane Katrina, gas refiners were selling a barrel of gasoline for 434 percent more than a barrel was selling exactly 1 year ago. These steep costs make it difficult for hardworking Americans to meet their financial obligations, and they underscore the reality that the President and the majority party in Congress have failed to enact policies to protect American consumers from price gouging and reduce the Nation's overall dependence on gasoline and oil. The American public is concerned, and they are concerned that at the same time that oil refiners' profits are more than tripled over the last year, consumers are paying record high gas prices. They are concerned because after a double-digit increase in home heating costs last year, prices are expected to increase at even higher rates this winter. They are concerned that the cost of gasoline is rising faster than the actual price of crude oil. Mr. Speaker, they are concerned that neither the White House nor the Republican Congress has put forward a plan to address this problem. The bill before us is yet another giveaway, not a plan. Behind the rhetoric is an empty bill that favors the oil industry while failing to take meaningful action to reduce prices for consumers. In fact, it makes matters worse. It ignores the harsh realities of price gouging at the pump by weakening our ability to crack down on those trying to manipulate the market for their own profit. And it eliminates long-standing production and refining standards that safeguard the environment and the public's health. My colleagues, we have the opportunity to answer the concerns of everyday Americans and to promote our nation's and our families' security and economic well-being. To meet this goal, we must make clear that price gouging and profiteering is unacceptable and will be met with stiff penalties. We must reduce our reliance on foreign oil. We must find better, more efficient ways to use traditional energy sources. And must help bring to market more affordable, reliable, and cleaner energy sources. And, the plan we are offering in the substitute amendment today will help to meet these goals. It will provide relief at the pump by bolstering our ability to punish oil companies and refiners who wrongly ratchet up the cost of their product. Our plan will stop price gouging, not just for gasoline, but for natural gas, home hearing oil, and propane. And our plan will improve our nation's energy security through the establishment of a Strategic Refining Reserve so that we are never again are in the position of releasing crude oil from our emergency reserves, but unable to refine it and bring it to market. Do not be fooled by the title of this bill, vote for this substitute. Enact a plan that will deliver real relief to the American people.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that the entire Nation is paying a price for the astronomical costs of oil and gasoline, and, Mr. Speaker, Pennsylvanians are no exception. Just yesterday, Philadelphia residents were told that their home heating bills would increase by 19.4 percent. That comes on top of double-digit price increases that they had to absorb last year, and it means they will pay on average an additional $335 to heat their homes this winter. Winter can be very cold in Pennsylvania, and if Congress fails to take immediate action, some of my constituents will simply not have enough money to pay these high prices and may be forced to choose between heating their homes and putting food on their table. That, Mr. Speaker, is a decision that no American should be forced to make. And it is more than just home heating costs. In the last 60 days, it has gotten a whole lot more expensive to drive to and from work, with the price of gasoline going up. It rose about 55 cents in just the last 2 months. Higher home heating costs, higher gas prices, these are daily expenses for most Americans, and they have real consequences for families across this Nation and to our national economy. The bill under consideration today is simply another giveaway for special interests, and it comes at the expense of hardworking Americans. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop) and I stand here today offering a way to give the Federal Government the authority to investigate and punish those using anti-competitive practices. It ensures immediate action to address the concerns of our constituents suffering from the high price of energy. Support the Bishop motion to recommit and report this bill back to committee so we can adequately address price gouging and reduce costs for everyday Americans.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize that on September 27, 2005, I voted ``yea'' on H.R. 438 (rollcall 495), which designates the United States Postal Service facility located at 2000 Allston Way in Berkeley, California, as the ``Maudelle Shirek Post Office Building.'' Before voting on H.R. 438, many of my colleagues discussed Ms. Shirek's efforts on behalf of her community. At the time, I found them reason to support H.R. 438. However, after I voted ``yea'' on H.R. 438, I was informed of Ms. Shirek's active support for the release of Mumia Abu-Jamal--the same man who killed Daniel Faulkner, a Philadelphia police officer. Had I known of Ms. Shirek's statements regarding Mumia Abu-Jamal prior to voting on H.R. 438, please let the Record reflect that I would not only have voted ``nay'' on passage of this bill, but I also would have urged my colleagues to join me in opposition.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I do appreciate the opportunity to speak with my colleague. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for organizing this evening's conversation on first responder communications. This past weekend, I joined with other Members of this body on a fact-finding mission to the gulf shore communities which have been ravaged by Hurricane Katrina. I was struck by several things, two particularly relevant to this evening. First, I felt, as so many other witnesses have felt, that the images on television, on the Internet, in the printed press, do not do justice to the enormity of the devastation. Second, I was moved by the sense of shared duty among the first responders who have arrived on the scene from all across this Nation. These police officers, firefighters, medics and National Guardsmen and -women came to the distressed gulf coast region, and many of them came voluntarily because they saw their fellow Americans in need of help. They came because they felt duty bound to their brothers and their sisters, their fellow Americans, most of whom they had never met. Mr. Speaker, we in this body are also duty bound. It is our duty to ensure that our first responders have the tools that they need to protect and serve any community in this Nation, under any circumstances. We seemed to understand this responsibility after the tragedy of September 11. Our respect and admiration for the role of first responders in New York and here in Washington and in Pennsylvania was to be matched by a Federal commitment to address some of the difficulties that they faced in the minutes and hours after the plane struck. However, what we found in the aftermath of Katrina was that our first responders still lack the tools that they need to be most effective. Four years ago, almost to the day, evacuation orders were not heard in the towers of the World Trade Center because the police, the firefighters and other emergency personnel simply could not speak to each other. And just weeks ago, in the days following Hurricane Katrina, similar problems hampered initial search-and-rescue, security, and relief efforts. Those of us who are participating in this evening's discussion, along with many of our colleagues who could not be with us this evening and Americans across the country, were alarmed by the lack of leadership coming from the Federal Government, particularly the administration, in preparation for and in response to Katrina. The American public was rightfully disappointed, if not horrified, by the Nation's state of preparedness, which appeared to be so woefully inadequate, despite our past experiences and promises from this administration to do better. Over the past 4 years, members of this body, like my colleague from Michigan, like my esteemed colleague from New York, have worked tirelessly to prod the Department of Homeland Security to provide our Nation's cities with standards for interoperable communications. As a State senator in Pennsylvania, I authored and passed a resolution calling on Congress to act; yet this guidance has not yet come. So as we await leadership from the Department of Homeland Security, communities across the Nation are working to equip themselves with the technology necessary to enable various local and regional first responders to seamlessly communicate in the event of an emergency or mass incident, and they are doing so because they cannot afford to wait. In my region, the Philadelphia Police Department, along with Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority officials, are working to address the fact that their radio systems are not compatible, making it virtually impossible for them to communicate should a coordinated response be necessary in any of our subway tunnels, as might have happened, and did happen in London. I have been working closely with city and transit officials to find interim remedies to this problem, but the Federal Government should be enabling them to implement a long-term solution. This is what is required nationally. The President must propose, and Congress must act, to provide a dedicated radio spectrum for first responders. The Department of Homeland Security must establish Federal standards for interoperability. The President should request, and the Congress should provide, the funding necessary to implement these goals. Mr. Speaker, I stand with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) tonight to say that the time for these actions is now. Our communities and our citizens across the Nation cannot wait.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2005, a bill that will provide the men and women of the Coast Guard with equipment and tools that they need to monitor and protect our coastal waters. In keeping with our efforts to improve the Federal Government's ability to prevent and respond to potential mass incidents, whether caused by terrorists, an act of nature, or human error, H.R. 889 will maintain the Coast Guard's traditional mission of water safety while also improving its ability to contribute to our Homeland Security. To that end, H.R. 889 includes provisions from the Delaware River Protection Act, a bill Representatives LoBiondo, Castle, Andrews, Saxton, and I co-authored in the aftermath of the November 2004 oil spill in the Port of Philadelphia. The Athos I oil spill caused an estimated $200 million in damages, injured wildlife, and temporarily impeded trade and traffic. It served as a costly reminder that the Port of Philadelphia contributes significantly to our region's economy and that we cannot afford, for economic and environmental reasons, to put it in harm's way. Under this legislation, strong but necessary steps will be taken to prevent a similar incident in the future. However, we cannot stop there. We must consider other activities in our ports and waterways that might impact the region. That is why I am grateful to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) for including at my request a provision requiring the Coast Guard to conduct a vulnerability assessment of a proposal to turn an LNG, liquefied natural gas, peak shaving plant into an LNG import terminal in my district in Port Richmond, Philadelphia. Since coming to Congress, I have been committed and outspoken about implementing innovative solutions to our Nation's energy needs by promoting more efficient use of traditional sources of energy as well as making substantial new investments in discovering and bringing to market new energy resources. I support improved efficiency standards and enforcement of environmental standards so we can reduce consumption of foreign oil; and I led an effort on this floor to accelerate the research, development, and deployment of new energy technologies. These are critical steps we must take to ensure our Nation's access to the energy that we need to power the 21st century. There is no doubt that LNG can play a role in efforts to diversify sources of energy and supplement our national gas supply and production. However, due to the inherent volatility of LNG, there is concern that LNG tankers and storage locations will be marked as a potential target by terrorists. Their presence on the Delaware also raises the risk of another major spill occurring in the river. There is no doubt that an incident of an LNG tanker would be devastating to the people of Philadelphia, a city home to 1.2 million people, as well as those living in the surrounding suburbs, and in the States of New Jersey and Delaware. Therefore, we must ensure that LNG tankers and facilities are situated safely and appropriately to protect our citizens from a potential catastrophic event. In the case of Port Richmond, we must thoroughly examine the economic and safety variables before allowing LNG tankers to travel up the Delaware River, under Benjamin Franklin Bridge, and passing alongside Center City Philadelphia while carrying 200,000 meters of LNG. A vulnerability assessment will ensure that all elements of the proposal are examined and weighed so we can determine what is best to ensure public safety as well as meet the region's energy demands. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) for so willingly working across party lines to do what is best for our region and for his continued leadership on issues concerning the Delaware River. I also thank his staff for working with us throughout the drafting process. I urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 889.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, the last time Congress enacted an energy bill was in 1992--13 years ago. Since that time, Republicans and Democrats alike have made clear that as a part of our national homeland security strategy, we must wean the country off of foreign oil. Yet, the bill before us would not achieve that goal. For that reason Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the Energy Policy Act of 2005. There is no doubt that the final House-Senate energy bill is vastly better than the House-passed bill. It extends the renewable electricity production tax credit and provides tax credits for energy efficiency, which, together, will catalyze investment and usage of the next generation of energy technology. It also would re-fund the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, which provided $42 million to clean-up the Delaware River after the November 2004 oil spill and was on track to be depleted by 2009. I hope no other region in the country experiences a similar incident; we must be prepared to adequately respond if it does. Additionally, the bill does not include unnecessary liability protections for the manufacturers of the gasoline additive known as MTBE or allow for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge-- authorities that would have put our precious natural resources at-risk while doing very little to reduce our dependence on imported oil. While I am pleased with these improvements in the bill, I do not support investing $14.6 billion in taxpayer funding on energy policies that ultimately will not reduce our dependence on and usage of foreign oil over the next 11 years. My colleagues, the bill fails to include a renewable energy portfolio standard of 10 percent by 2020. It fails to adequately invest in renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies by only providing 26 percent of the bill's tax incentives for the development of cleaner, less expensive energy sources under our control; while allocating $2.6 billion in tax benefits for oil and gas industry. Industries that are already profiting from record high oil prices, which are currently over $60 per barrel. It fails to increase to automotive efficiency standards--a policy that would save up to 67 billion barrels of oil over the next 40 years, which is 10 to 20 times greater than the potential oil supply that could be extracted from the Artic National Wildlife Refuge. Mr. Speaker, the bill fails to send us in a new direction, and that is unacceptable. We cannot leave ourselves positioned to return years from now and still be searching for ways to end our reliance on foreign oil. With nations like India and China rapidly increasing their consumption of oil we must set the nation on a course to energy independence. That requires a balanced energy policy that aids domestic production but, more importantly, sends us in a new direction by investing in renewable and energy efficient technologies. This conference report failed to accomplish this goal. I urge a ``no'' vote on H.R. 6.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Water Resources Development Act. I want to acknowledge the wonderful work, important work of the chairman and ranking member for their efforts and the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for their leadership in bringing this much needed bill to the floor today. It has been 5 years since Congress has passed a water resources bill, legislation that is significant in recognizing the Federal Government's commitment to improving the navigational safety of our waterways and upgrading our local water infrastructure. My colleagues, we cannot take the safety and security of our water for granted. Many of the sewer and drinking water pipes in our Nation today were installed 50 to 100 years ago. Those pipes are showing their age, leaking, cracking, breaking. By passing this legislation, we reaffirm Congress's commitment to providing clean and safe water in communities across the Nation. The bill also contains an important provision that compliments the-- recently passed in the House--bill, called the Delaware River Protection Act, legislation crafted by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) and myself, to respond to the November 2004 oil spill that occurred alongside our districts in the Port of Philadelphia. The oil spill struck at the heart of our region, dumping 265,000 gallons of oil in the Delaware River. Its effect was devastating, temporarily shutting down a nuclear power plant, impeding trade, injuring, killing wildlife and putting the area's drinking water at risk. The Delaware River Protection Act will bolster our ability to better provide for the environmental integrity and economic vitality of the Delaware River and the greater Philadelphia area. Additionally, today's legislation gives the Army Corps of Engineers the authority to remove debris from the riverbed of the Delaware River, an authority we need to keep the river safe for navigation and to prevent a similar incident in the future. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this bill. It is time to let our local and State officials know that we will continue working with them to maintain our water infrastructure, something that is so important to protecting Americans' health.

Mr. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Mr. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the efforts of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) and the opportunity to make a few remarks on this legislation. On November 26, 2004, the ATHOS I oil tanker struck a submerged object near Paulsboro, New Jersey, and spilled 265,000 gallons of oil into the Delaware River. The spill, the largest to occur in the Delaware River in the last 16 years, struck at the heart of our region, occurring in the Port of Philadelphia. Two months after the spill, on my 15th day as a Member of Congress, my 15th day on the job, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) convened a hearing in Philadelphia to examine the damage of the spill, the ongoing cleanup effort, and what else might be needed to be done, either now or in the future. I appreciated the chairman's willingness to have me participate in that hearing as a very new member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. We all found, and we heard from the testimony, that this spill had caused millions of dollars in damages and affected more than 100 miles of shoreline in three States. Moreover, it impeded trade, temporarily shut down a nuclear power plant, put area drinking water at risk, and injured and killed wildlife. Unfortunately, many regional environmental experts testified that the impact of the oil spill would continue to linger, further damaging critical species such as oysters and horseshoe crabs. The devastating multiplier effect of the spill and the expert testimonies made clear that action was needed, not just for the cleanup, but for prevention. As a consequence of what we found, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo), the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) and I coauthored this bill, a bill that would protect the environmental integrity and economic vitality of the Delaware River and the greater Philadelphia area. Mr. Speaker, the Delaware River Protection Act will take several very important steps to help prevent future oil spills. It will require mandatory reporting to the Coast Guard of overboard objects in order to facilitate their recovery and will impose civil or criminal penalties for those who fail to give prompt notification. It will encourage shippers to use double-hull tankers, which are safer and less susceptible to the damage caused by the single hull tankers. It will hold shippers accountable for damages caused by a spill by phasing in an increased liability standard, the first increase since 1990. And it will establish a River and Bay Advisory Committee which will be comprised of representatives from shipping, oil, labor, environment, and the general public to report to Congress on how best to prevent and respond to future incidences along the Delaware River. I also want to note that in addition to these actions, the Water Resources Development Act, which will be considered by the full House later this week, includes a key provision that was originally part of this legislation. Specifically, it will provide the Army Corps of Engineers with the authority to remove debris along the Delaware River, a vital authority as we increase efforts to keep our waterways clear of dangerous debris. It is my hope that the Water Resources Development Act will be received in an equally bipartisan manner. Mr. Speaker, the Delaware River Protection Act represents a true collaborative effort. I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) for his leadership on this bill, as well as his office staff, Geoff Gosselin, and the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation staff John Cullather, Eric Nagel and John Rayfield for their hard work on this important issue and working so closely with my staff. Undoubtedly, implementation of this legislation will help to prevent future oil spills along the river, while also preserving the Port of Philadelphia as the regional resource that it is. That is why I urge my colleagues to support passage of this legislation.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule under consideration. Yesterday, I asked the Committee on Rules to provide a waiver so that the House could consider my amendment to create the energy technology to power the 21st century initiative which would provide $250 million to accelerate the research, development, demonstration and deployment of new energy technologies and make our Nation less reliant on foreign energy. Unfortunately, my request was denied along party lines. Mr. Speaker, there is no question much of our energy supply is controlled by foreign nations. Just as we are trying to improve national security, we have failed to complement these efforts with the energy policies that would move us towards greater energy independence. The recently passed Energy Policy Act failed to adequately invest in renewable energy and conservation, directing $600 million to these efforts while allocating more than 40 percent of the bill's $8.1 billion in tax cuts, that is, $3.2 billion, toward the oil and gas industries, the same traditional resources that in large part we depend on foreign countries for. Mr. Speaker, if we do not change our focus, our country's consumption of oil will only increase. By 2025, oil usage will increase to 28.3 million barrels per day, with imports accounting for 19.68 million of those barrels. Leaving our energy security in the hands of international oil barons is a foolish and dangerous approach. That is why I wanted to offer an amendment to the fiscal year 2006 Energy and Water Appropriations Act that would provide the Department of Energy with $250 million to accelerate the research, development, demonstration, and deployment of new energy technologies. Mr. Speaker, the benefits of controlling our own energy sources are enormous. A down payment of $250 million would spur much-needed work in the emerging sector of energy technology. We could bring to bear reliable and successful methods of wind, solar, biomass, hydrogen, and other forms of energy. It could bring new ways to bring cleaner, safer, and more efficient energy with more traditional sources, including coal and oil. It would put the United States on a course to energy independence, something we all talk about. It would also help maintain our standing as a world leader with regard to scientific discovery by establishing a 21st-century engine to discover new, more efficient, cleaner energy sources for the future. We would help to create new, high-paying jobs and keep the United States on the cutting edge of science and technology. With appropriate investments, consumers as well as businesses will have greater, rather than fewer, and less expensive options. In the end, shifting our energy economy means improved national security, more American jobs, a stronger economy, and a cleaner environment. It is time to demand action on policy initiatives that will set the United States free from its reliance on imported oil. I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on Yom Ha'atzmaut to congratulate the Israeli people for a remarkable history and to celebrate the strength of the U.S.-Israel relationship. In just 57 years, a land mainly comprised of desert has been transformed into fertile farmland, thriving communities and world-class cities. Industry and technology have boomed and most significantly, millions of Jews have returned to live in their ancestral homeland. A robust democracy has developed around the ideals of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, fair elections and an independent justice system. In fact, it is the only nation in the region to accomplish this. Brave soldiers have fought to defend their brethren and innocent civilians have courageously endured the constant threat of attack--all to live freely in their homeland. And, despite this constant threat, the Israeli people remain committed to a peaceful coexistence with their neighbors--a testament to their resolute and compassionate spirit. As remarkable as Israel's short history is, we must not take its existence for granted. While recent events have sparked new optimism in the peace process, radical terrorist organizations, such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, emboldened by Iranian and Syrian support, are as committed as ever to their core goal: the eradication of Israel. And by now, we are all too familiar with the daunting task of protecting innocent people from suicide bombers. Despite this reality, Prime Minister Sharon and the Israeli people plan to move forward with an historic and courageous plan to withdraw from Gaza and parts of the West Bank this summer. As Israel moves forward with efforts to live with its neighbors in peace and security, it is crucial that we continue to stand by her. We must defend Israel's right to engage in legitimate acts of self- defense to prevent terrorist attacks in Israel; We must stand up for Israel when our international allies and other members of the international community unfairly criticize her; We must hold Syria, Iran, and any other country that aid and harbor terrorists, accountable; and We must push President Abbas and the Palestinian leadership to match Prime Minister Sharon's courage by taking steps to end corruption, crack down on terrorist organizations and end the media incitement that encourages hatred and violence. Support for Israel has been one issue consistently agreed upon by both Republicans and Democrats, through many different administrations and many different times. I am proud that this support remains so strong today. Mr. Speaker, it is truly an honor to stand by Israel and I know my colleagues join me in expressing Mazel Tov for a remarkable 57 years.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), ranking member on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. (Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this event needs little introduction. 2005 marks the 38th anniversary of the District Special Olympics. The torch relay event is a traditional part of the opening ceremonies for the Special Olympics, which will take place at Gallaudet University in the District of Columbia. This event has become a highlight on Capitol Hill and is an integral part of the Special Olympics. In the early 1960s, Eunice Kennedy Shriver started a day camp for people with mental retardation, and the Special Olympics were born. The games help mentally challenged individuals gain confidence and self- esteem through friendly competition in a supportive environment. Today, more than 1 million children and adults with special needs participate in the Special Olympics programs worldwide. Here in our Nation's capital, approximately 2,500 Special Olympians compete in dozens of events each year, and they are cheered on by their family members and friends. This inspirational event is due in large part to the efforts of thousands of volunteers from the greater Washington, D.C. area. And these individuals deserve our thanks and our assistance. I enthusiastically support this resolution and the very worthwhile endeavor of the Special Olympics. I urge support for House Concurrent Resolution 135. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 136 authorizes the use of the Capitol grounds for the 24th annual National Peace Officers' Memorial Service, a most solemn and respectful public event honoring our Nation's brave civil servants. The event, scheduled for May 15, will be coordinated by the Office of the Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Hill Police. This is a fitting tribute to the Federal, State, and local police officers who gave their lives while protecting our families, our homes, and our places of work. This year, 153 names will be added to the memorial wall, including nine women who were killed in the line of duty. These fallen heroes served an average of 12 years in law enforcement, with some serving as many as 40 years. Others, like one 20-year-old officer, had only just begun what he had hoped would be years of service to his community. On average, one officer is killed in this country every other day, and approximately 23,000 are injured every year. And thousands more are assaulted while on duty. In 2004, seven law enforcement officers from the State of Pennsylvania were killed in the line of duty. In the early morning hours of March 19, Philadelphia City Pretrial Warrant Supervisor Joseph LeClaire was shot and killed while serving an arrest warrant in West Germantown to a man who had failed to appear in court during two trials, one for a drug charge, the second for a rape case. Officers Vincent Disandra and Carlo Delborrello were also shot and wounded during the encounter. Shortly after 11 a.m. on March 31 in Bradford County, Deputy Sheriffs Christopher Burgert, who was 30, and Michael Vankuren, 36, were shot and killed while trying to serve two warrants to a man living in Wells Township. In the early morning of April 20, Sergeant James Miller, a 28-year veteran of the Upper Dublin Police Department, died when his police vehicle rolled over during an accident. And Police Chief Douglas Shertzer, a 23-year veteran of his department, was killed in a motorcycle accident on the morning of May 11 while en route to begin his patrol. Patrolman Michael Wise II of Reading City Police Department was shot in the line of duty on the night of June 5 while searching for a murder suspect. And, finally, Elk Lick Township Police Chief Sheridan Caton, 60, was killed in a head-on collision while responding to a request for a backup from a neighboring police department. The driver of the second vehicle was charged with driving while under the influence. These public servants are sorely missed; and they deserve our deepest respect, and their families have our most sincere sympathies. In October, 1962, President Kennedy declared May 15 as National Peace Officers' Memorial Day so that we could come together to honor the service and sacrifice of our Nation's law enforcement officers. This year's ceremony is the 24th anniversary of this memorial service. Consistent with all Capitol Hill events, the memorial service will be free and open to the public. I support the resolution and urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this tribute to our fallen police officers and peace officers.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to stand here on behalf of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure that has jurisdiction over this legislation. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the sponsor of this legislation who, each year, has offered this resolution and has been a strong supporter of the soap box derby.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am delighted to join with the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) in support of House Concurrent Resolution 86. In particular, I do want to acknowledge the efforts of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) who has consistently been a champion for his constituents in ensuring that this event take place each year. House Concurrent Resolution 86 authorizes the use of the Capitol Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby. On June 18, 2005, youngsters from the greater Washington area who are between 9 and 16 will test the principles of aerodynamics as they race down Constitution Avenue in their soap box vehicles that they have designed and constructed. Madam Speaker, many hundreds of volunteers donate considerable time supporting the event and providing families with a fun-filled day, which is quickly becoming a tradition in the Washington, D.C., area. The event has grown in popularity, and Washington is now known as one of the outstanding race cities in the Nation. Consistent with all events using the Capitol Grounds, this event is open to the public and free of charge. The organizers will work with the Capitol Hill Police and the Office of the Architect. I support House Concurrent Resolution 86 and urge support of this resolution. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the ranking member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. (Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, since coming to Congress, I have been struck by the majority party's spending policies. Under their watch, the Nation's debt has grown by $2.2 trillion over the last 4 years. The annual deficit is averaging more than $200 billion and this year's budget is no different, spending more than we are bringing in and increasing the Nation's debt. In fact, this budget will allow for $412 billion in deficit spending, increasing the interest that we are paying on our Nation's debts, interest that already totals more than we are spending on education, the environment and veterans. I was proud to join my Democratic colleagues in putting forward better ways to refocus our spending and investments on the priorities that matter to everyday lives of Americans: keeping and creating new jobs, lowering the cost of health care, and providing for a safe and secure homeland. We put forward an alternative budget that would have balanced the Federal Government's checkbook by 2012, something the Republican budget fails to do, while meeting our basic obligations to hardworking Americans. These efforts were, unfortunately, rejected along party lines. Mr. Speaker, the time has come for us to lead not just with words, but in deeds. This means enacting a spending plan that will meet basic budgetary principles of meeting our obligations, working within our resources, and making smart investments. I urge a ``no'' vote on this resolution so we can return to negotiations and return to fiscal discipline. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the resolution. Two weeks ago, the House passed legislation aimed at promoting and encouraging personal financial responsibility. Yet, we are on the cusp of enacting a fiscal year 2006 budget that is fiscally-unsound. It is a budget that prioritizes tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and largest corporations at the expense of creating opportunities for hard-working Americans and helping people meet their responsibilities. It is a budget that puts political expediency over honest budgeting by failing to acknowledge future increases in the deficit and neglecting to live within available revenues. It is a budget that will allow the government to increase spending and implement new tax cuts without finding a way to pay for the associated costs. Mr. Speaker, I supported the bankruptcy bill because I believe people who have the means available have an obligation to meet their financial obligations. However, just as we are asking individual Americans to take responsibility for their spending decisions, so must the Federal Government. Since coming to Congress, I've been struck by the majority party's spending policies. Under their watch, the nation's debt has grown by $2.2 trillion over the last four years, with annual deficits averaging more than $200 billion. And this year's budget is no different; spending more that we are bringing in and increasing the Nation's debt. In fact, this budget will allow for $412 billion in deficit spending. Increasing the interest we are paying on our Nation's debt; interest that already totals more than we are spending on education, the environment or our veterans. My colleagues, our decisions have consequences, and the consequences of this budget will be felt by every American. Our first-responders will go without equipment needed to keep communities, and themselves, safe from harm. Our veterans will be subjected to health care fees or reduced benefits. Our best and brightest will continue to struggle to afford a college degree. And some of our Nation's disabled and sickest citizens will continue to go without needed medical care and services unless our State and local governments pick up the costs. During committee consideration of the budget resolution, I was proud to join my Democratic colleagues in putting forward better ways to re- focus our spending and investments on the priorities that matter to the everyday lives of Americans--keeping and creating new jobs, lowering the costs of health care and providing for a safe and secure homeland. We put forward an alternative budget, one that would have balanced the Federal Government's checkbook by 2012--something the Republican budget fails to do--while better meeting our obligations to hard-working Americans. These efforts were, unfortunately, rejected along party lines. Mr. Speaker, the time has come for us to lead not just in words, but in deeds. That means enacting a spending plan that meets basic budgetary principles of meeting one's obligations, working within the resources you have and making smart investments that will ensure the Nation's current and future fiscal well-being. I urge a ``no'' vote on this resolution so that we can return to the negotiating table and find a better way; one that represents a true commitment to sound budgetary principles and fiscal responsibility. One that funds the right priorities, makes the right investments and in so doing builds a Nation that is strengthened rather than weakened by the decisions we make today.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Madam Chairman, this bill represents a lost opportunity. Now, more than ever, we need an energy bill that will wean the Nation off of foreign oil. We need to do this so hard-working Americans are no longer subjected to the ever-rising costs of gasoline and we have to do this for the safety and security of our Nation. In my home district, the average price for a gallon of regular unleaded is $2.22 compared to $1.76 just one year ago. Yet, the bill before us will do nothing to relieve Americans from the skyrocketing costs of gas. My colleagues, even the Bush Administration recognizes this; with the Energy Information Administration saying that the bill would actually increase gas prices rather than reduce them. What's worse is that while the bill does nothing to relieve Americans of their burden at the gas pump, it also takes an additional $7.5 billion out of their pockets as a tax giveaway to oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries--industries that are earning record profits--without setting a course towards energy independence. The President himself said, just last week, ``With $55 oil we don't need incentives for oil and gas companies to explore. There are plenty of incentives.'' This Congress needs to establish an energy policy that sets America free from its dependence on imported oil. Yet, only seven percent of the tax incentives in this bill will go towards renewable energy and energy efficiency--leaving us to be reliant on the same old energy sources. H.R. 6 is, unfortunately, par for the course for the Republican Leadership, which has turned a blind eye to scientific discovery--be it medical, physical, or otherwise. America cannot continue to be a world leader with regard to scientific discovery unless we invest and provide incentives, including for energy sources of the future. In addition to its misdirected energy priorities, the bill contains several dirty little footnotes. It will pollute our air and water and exploit our federal lands. It exempts MTBE manufacturers from cleaning up the groundwater they polluted--violating our Nation's longstanding polluter pay policy. It will let oil and gas companies off the hook from the Safe Water Drinking Act--allowing them to skirt water standards. Mr. Speaker, we cannot continue to go down the same worn out path. We must set the Nation on a course to energy independence which means promoting cleaner, less expensive energy that we control. That requires a balanced energy policy that aids domestic production but, more importantly, sends us in a new direction by investing in renewable and energy efficient technologies. Unfortunately, H.R. 6 does not meet this goal, leaving our Senate colleagues to find a better way. Hopefully, they will be able to craft a bill that achieves a better balance than this legislation. I urge a ``no'' vote on H.R. 6.

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania

Ms. SCHWARTZ of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, 2005 marks Ken-Crest Centers' centennial celebration. For the past 100 years, this faith- based, non-profit organization, which was started by the Lutheran Church in Plymouth Meeting, PA, has been dedicated to the concept of bringing ability to life. Throughout its history, Ken-Crest has pioneered services for the most vulnerable, including the terminally-ill, the abandoned, and the disabled. Ken-Crest began its work in 1905, leading the fight against tuberculosis in the Kensington section of Philadelphia by providing the children of infected families with a safe refuge. As a former social worker, I am inspired by the story of Sister Maria Roeck, a Lutheran Church deaconess and German immigrant, who founded Ken-Crest, originally called the Kensington Dispensary. Sister Roeck was called to action by the loss of loved ones to tuberculosis. She passionately battled the so-called ``white plague'' that decimated her beloved Kensington; abiding by the motto ``to cure sometimes, to relieve often, to comfort always.'' In the 1950s, as tuberculosis became better contained, Ken-Crest took on a new mission--providing for the mentally retarded and those with developmental disabilities. Its success has made it the largest community-based provider of assistance to people with disabilities in the Philadelphia region, serving more than 6,400 people at 350 locations. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues join me in congratulating Ken-Crest on more than 100 years of outstanding service. I know their good work and mission will continue for many years to come.