Fred Upton

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the good State of California (Mr. Ose).

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the good State of Indiana (Mr. Buyer), a member of the subcommittee, a cosponsor of the bill, and a very helpful force in getting this bill to the floor.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to support this legislation this morning. This legislation actually appeared on my radar screen last year as we began to set our agenda for 2004. I introduced the legislation in early January, held our first hearing on the legislation before the Super Bowl, and the administration supports our bill. They sent us a statement that they supported our bill in committee, and I will include that Statement of Administration Policy as part of the Record in support of this legislation today. Statement of Administration Policy The Administration strongly supports House passage of H.R. 3717. This legislation will make broadcast television and radio more suitable for family viewing by giving the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority to impose meaningful penalties on broadcasters that air obscene or indecent material over the public airwaves. In particular, the Administration applauds the inclusion in the bill of its proposal to require that the FCC consider whether inappropriate material has been aired during children's television programming in determining the fine to be imposed for violations of the law. The Administration looks forward to continuing to work with the Congress to make appropriate adjustments to the language of the bill as it moves through the legislative process. I remember a speech well by Michael Powell, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, where he said the fines under current law are peanuts. It is a cost of doing business. They are not high enough. In fact, in the hearings that we held, we discovered that by the time you saddle up some of those attorneys at the Department of Justice and send them out to file a claim in Federal Court to go after the dollars that the FCC might have fined, they are not going to recoup their costs. The Upton-Markey-Tauzin-Dingell-Barton bill has been cosponsored by more than 140 Members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats. Chairman Powell and his four other commissioners, two Republicans and two Democrats, when you look at their statements in support of this legislation, when you look at their statements as they imposed fines on broadcasters who cross that line, every one of them, Republican or Democrat, has lamented the fact that they cannot raise the fines higher than they are under current law, a maximum of only $27,500. Because of the legislation we pursued on a strong bipartisan basis, and again, I commend my colleagues on the other side, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), we were able to pass this legislation out of the Committee on Energy and Commerce last week on a recorded vote of 49 to 1. The other body is beginning to move as well. They passed their legislation out 34 to 0. Our bill was strengthened in the full committee markup. We added a provision on three-strikes-and-you-are-out. That is, if you are a repeat offender, a broadcaster, and you go through three series of fines violating the current standard, there is set up an automatic revocation hearing to take away that license. We established a ``shot clock'' so that the FCC has to act on complaints within a certain number of days. We protected affiliated broadcasters. They do not always know what is coming down the pike in terms of what they are broadcasting. We raised the fine from the initial bill as I introduced it of $275,000 for the maximum fine to $500,000. We added a provision asking for the National Association of Broadcasters to make part of their code a Broadcast Decency Code, something they had years ago and was struck under antitrust violations. We also added a provision making the performers, the talent, liable for their own words. You cannot tell me that they do not know what the standards are. I have heard them whine, I have heard them take out that violin and whine about what this bill will do. Well, guess what, Mr. Chairman? It is time to take away that violin and give them the fork. They are done. This ought to stop. Guess what? Our bill does nothing to change existing standards. Zero. Nada. Not a thing. I would note that the 1927 Radio Act has held up in the courts for more than 75 years. The FCC has the authority to punish those who air obscene, indecent or profane language. It has been upheld by the Supreme Court, who ruled in 1978 that the government does have the right to regulate indecent broadcasts and to, in fact, establish a definition of indecency that remains the FCC's guiding principle. There is language, material, that describes sexual or excretory material or organs, and it is deemed patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards. In the mid 1990s, the court limited the ban on indecent airing between the hours of 6:00 in the morning and 10:00 at night, when kids are most likely to be watching or listening. This legislation pertains only to broadcast radio or TV. Why is that? Because it is the public airwaves, that is why. And for those that challenge the standards that are out there and do not realize what some of these broadcasters have said, I would ask them to come see me during the next couple of hours of debate on the floor, because with me I have a notebook, and in that notebook we have the specific language that broadcasters have used in defiance of the law. You cannot tell me that this stuff should be on the air. It should not be. We need to make sure we stop it, and we do, in its tracks.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3717.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Curious Kids' Museum of St. Joseph, Michigan, which will celebrate its 1,000,000th visitor this year, as well as its 15th anniversary. This great educational museum is a treasure for the children of southwest Michigan, and I am very proud of the wonderful work it has accomplished over the years. The Curious Kids' Museum began in 1987 as an idea shared by several local residents interested in alternative approaches to science education. Today it has over 100 hands-on educational exhibits and programs dedicated to stimulating the curiosity of children. The great many visitors of all ages that have had the fortunate opportunity to visit this museum have explored and gained awareness in the areas of science and technology, history, culture, and human perception. The goal of the Museum's founders' was to establish a place where ``children and families pursue their natural curiosity about the world through exploration and hands-on interactive exhibits, making learning fun and increasing self-esteem.'' I for one would like to say, and I know I am not alone, mission accomplished and surpassed. It pleases me to honor this great museum, and I know the next million visitors will be just as moved and inspired as the first.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the girls of Brownie Troop 139 of South Haven, Michigan, who have over the last few months sent numerous care packages to our troops serving in Iraq. These young ladies have shown remarkable dedication and devotion to our troops, and I am confident that this great project has been received with gratitude and appreciation from those overseas. Since the troop began their project, they have collected more than $1,200 worth of items totaling 345 pounds. Some of the items these generous girls have sent include granola bars, playing cards, batteries, hand lotion, boot laces, and of course Girl Scout cookies. Over the holidays, the girls put together special packages to give our troops a sense of home. Brownie Troop 139 is comprised of Jeanne Lyon, leader of Troop 139; Marilyn Shaefer, co-leader; Stephanie Balke; Maggie Filbrandt; Jessica Overholser; Hannah Lyon; Shelby Murphy; Erin Cooper; and Lauren Montgomery. The magnificent work this troop has done to encourage morale and give support to our troops has been inspiring. It greatly pleases me to honor the great charity these girls have done, and I find their patriotism and selflessness to be deeply moving.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Kalamazoo County Sheriff, Tom Edmonds, who is closing a chapter in a long and distinguished career of public service. A dedicated and selfless individual, Tom has served five terms as Sheriff after being appointed to the Office in 1984. Over his tenure as Sheriff, Tom served the citizens of Kalamazoo in a number of capacities, all with great distinction. Since 1975, Sheriff Edmonds' contributions to our community have been tremendous. From post to post, he consistently received accolades and recognition. In addition to his remarkable service as Sheriff, highlights of his storied career include being Adjunct Professor of criminal law and procedure at Western Michigan University, Chair of the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards, Brigadier General for the Michigan Air National Guard, and recipient of Citation and Medal for Professional Service from the Michigan's Sheriffs' Association. Many words come to mind as one reflects upon Tom's public service to our community. He is selfless, brave, generous, giving, caring, humble . . . the list goes on. Tom is widely known for his extensive charity and dedication to local individuals, businesses, universities, and the community as a whole. He spent a career devoted to the protection and safety of the citizens of Kalamazoo, and for this the county is forever in his debt. There is no question that Tom's dedication and contributions to the county will be missed. Our community is in debt to Sheriff Edmonds for his continued public service since 1975. I wish him and his family all the best in retirement. Tom's contributions to our community have been many, and we are all better off from his service. He will be truly missed by the folks in southwest Michigan. I'm certainly glad he's remaining in our corner of Michigan.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, today on the heels of our recent efforts to ensure that the do-not-call list was implemented, we are taking yet another major step forward in our efforts to protect consumers from unwanted commercial solicitations. With passage of this bill tonight, we are one more step closer to giving American consumers a Federal law which will for the first time allow them to just say no to unwanted commercial e-mails, otherwise known as spam. And we back it up with strong enforcement by the FTC, State attorneys general, and Internet service providers as well. As the father of two young kids, I am particularly pleased that this bill requires warning labels on commercial e-mails which contain sexually oriented material, and it protects our kids from being unwittingly exposed to such garbage that might pop up in the family's inbox. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, I am particularly pleased to have worked with my colleagues on this, particularly the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey); the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell); certainly the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr); and my chairman, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), on provisions which direct the Federal Communications Commission to implement added protections against spam for cell phones and other wireless devices. What a nightmare ready to happen. On our staff I want to particularly thank Will Nordwind, who spent countless hours as we negotiated this the last number of months. Mr. Speaker, I want to relate a small family story. When my dad came back from World War II, my mom fixed his first dinner. It was Spam. Dad said, no way. Battle of the Bulge, we had enough of that. No more are we going to have that junk. My family thankfully was spared that for 50 years. Sadly, American consumers have not been spared from that awful stuff called spam because this is spam on the Internet. I can remember when e-mails came first off, everyone loved to get an e-mail. I thought we were finally making some headway. But lo and behold, my wife was out of town, and I did not realize she was deleting it. Every morning she would get up at 5:30 or 6 in the morning. She has been gone all week. Today just from last night, I had 150 spams. Pass this bill. End this stuff. I cannot call it what I really think. God bless America.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to focus on one misconception about this plan that we are debating today and set the record straight. I have heard from a lot of retirees who have been led to believe that enacting the conference agreement will cause them to lose their employer-provided prescription drug and health care coverage. That is not true. First, it is important to note that under current law, employers who provide solid retiree health care benefits receive no assistance at all from the Federal Government. And even in the absence of a Medicare prescription drug plan, many of these same employers under increasing pressure from rising prescription drug and other related health care costs are already cutting back or entirely dropping their coverage that they provide to their retirees today. Under this plan if we pass it today, the Federal Government will partner with employers who maintain or improve their current health care retiree health plans. They will receive a subsidy of up to 28 percent of their retiree drug costs between $250 and $5,000 and the subsidy will not be subject to taxation. So the reality is if we do not enact this plan, there will be no incentives for those employers to maintain or improve their current retiree coverage. Thousands of retirees will wind up with no help with their prescription drug costs, and we most likely will continue to see those retiree benefits continue to be slashed. With this plan, they will have an incentive to keep it. I also remember back to the days when we passed a catastrophic health care plan, back in the early nineties. It was mandatory. Guess what? We repealed it because it was mandatory. This is voluntary. You can participate if you want; and if you do not want, you do not have to participate. I also remember a woman that came up to me at my son's little league game. Her mom had just had a stroke, $600 in additional costs that she was going to face every month. She said, Mr. Upton, will this plan help my mom? Yes, it will help her a lot. It will in fact save her family thousands of dollars, provide her with some quality of life that her family expects and the plan will help. I urge my colleagues to vote for this plan this morning.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good chairman who has been instrumental in getting this important piece of legislation to the floor. Again, he has done yeoman's work with so many others here in this body. Mr. Speaker, as the lead sponsor of the bipartisan House version of the Poison Control Center Enhancement and Awareness Act Amendments of 2003, it is my pleasure to help manage this bill, S. 686, the Senate version of the legislation on the floor today. What we are doing today is taking up the Senate-passed bill and inserting updated language from our bill. We are doing so because we determined that it was the best way to expedite the final passage of this much-needed legislation reauthorizing and strengthening our Federal commitment to ensuring that our Nation's poison control centers can continue to provide life-saving services to all of our constituents, particularly in these last throes of this session of the Congress. I want to take this opportunity to particularly acknowledge Senator DeWine's tremendous leadership on this legislation in the other body and to thank our original cosponsor and colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns), who is on the floor; the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), committee chairman; and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking member; the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), the House subcommittee chairman; the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the ranking member; and also for the many staff who have helped. I am grateful for their hard work, particularly Cheryl Jaeger and John Ford, and for the assistance that we have received from the American Association of Poison Control Centers and Jane Williams on my staff who helped shepherd this through so many juggernauts; and if we had a parking place for the staff member of the month in front of the Capitol, her name would be the first inscribed on that plate. Mr. Speaker, poison control centers provide vital, very cost- effective services to the American public. Each year, more than 2 million poisonings are reported to poison control centers throughout this country. More than 90 percent of these poisonings occur in the home, and 50 percent of poisoning victims are children under the age of 6. For every dollar spent on poison control services, we save $7 in medical costs. We prevent a nightmare from happening in virtually any house that uses the phone number and uses these particular facilities. The horrific events of 9/11 and the anthrax cases the next month brought home the vital role that our Nation's poison control centers must be prepared to play in the event of further terrorist attacks. The 2001 Presidential Task Force on Citizen Preparedness in the War on Terrorism recommended that poison control centers be used as a source of public information and public education regarding potential biological, chemical, and nuclear domestic terrorism. Mr. Speaker, the passage and enactment of this bill will ensure that our Nation's poison control centers have the resources that they need to fulfill their vital mission as the first line of defense against accidental poisonings and the response to biological, chemical, and nuclear terrorism. I ask that all of the Members join us in voting for this legislation. It will indeed save lives for many Americans.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).

Mr. UPTON. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to engage in a colloquy with the distinguished chairman of our committee today and also with my colleague, the gentleman from Michigan from my neighboring district (Mr. Hoekstra). Mr. Speaker, section 970 of title IX of the conference report includes a demonstration project that is designed to address the effect of ozone transport in southwest Michigan where projected nonattainment is the result of transported ozone across Lake Michigan. This project will assess the difficulties due to transported ozone across the lake to determine the extent of ozone transport and develop alternatives to achieve compliance apart from local controls. I just want to be sure that the purpose and intent of the committee in this legislation is clear. Am I correct in saying that the counties in particularly our two districts in southwest Michigan, Cass County, Berrien, Van Buren, Kalamazoo, Allegan, that are not in attainment for the ozone standards due to ozone transport are included in the provision and will be eligible for the demonstration project?

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I just want to say that our two districts in southwest Michigan share a boundary. We are a victim of transient air coming from Milwaukee, from Chicago, and Gary, Indiana. Our problem is not with the clean air. We want those communities to have clean air and to have transient clean air so that we do not have a problem on our side of the State. We are a victim. We would have to impose literally a fan to send this air someplace else without this legislation to avoid some type of sanction that will cost tens of millions of dollars.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a dedicated and selfless individual on the eve of his retirement from public service, Kalamazoo's Al Heilman. Since 1968, Al has served with great distinction the citizens of Kalamazoo in a number of capacities--from being first elected to the County Board in 1968 to having served as City Commissioner since 1995. Many words come to mind as one reflects upon Al Heilman's public service to our community. He is selfless, generous, giving, caring, humble . . . the list goes on. Al is widely known for his extensive charitable gestures, often giving both money and time to local individuals, businesses, universities, and the community as a whole. There is no question that Al's dedication and contributions to the city will be missed. Now, Al can ``retire'' to pleasing folks with his other trade--as owner and operator of Heilman's Nuts and Confections. As a member of the business community, Al Heilman will continue to be a part of our everyday lives. Our community is in debt to Al Heilman for his continued public service since 1968. 1 wish him and his family all the best as he departs public service. Al's contributions to our community have been many, and we are all better off from his service. For those that know him, his name alone helps define public service. All those that have met him, like him. All those that know him, love him.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 313) to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to establish a program of fees relating to animal drugs, as amended.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on the Senate bill.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as the lead sponsor of the House-passed version of the Animal Drug User Fee Act of 2003, it is my pleasure today to manage S. 313, the Senate version of the same legislation on the floor. What we are doing today is taking up the Senate-passed version of the Animal Drug User Fee Act and inserting the updated House language from H.R. 1260, which was approved by this body by voice last month. We are doing so because we determined that it was the best way to expedite the final passage of this much-needed legislation giving the FDA the authority to begin collecting the user fees this fiscal year needed to substantially beef up the new animal drug development and review process. I would like to take the opportunity again to acknowledge and thank the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), my original cosponsor; the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), our committee chairman; the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), ranking member; the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), Health Subcommittee chairman; and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), ranking member; and the Members on both sides of the aisle who have cosponsored the bill. I am grateful too for the hard work of our committee staff, Brent Delmonte, Pat Ronan, John Ford, and for the assistance that we have received from the FDA and the Animal Health Alliance. And also Jane Williams, my health care expert, deserves special merit as well. Closely modeled after the very successful Prescription Drug User Fee Act of 1992 for human drugs, the Animal Drug User Fee Act is designed to give the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Veterinary Medicine the right resources and incentives needed to significantly improve the animal drug review process. The bill is supported by a broad coalition of veterinary and producer groups, including the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Farm Bureau. The legislation is sorely needed. Despite a statutory review time of 180 days, the average new animal drug application review currently takes about 1\1/2\ years and sometimes may drag on for even several years. This slowdown in review time is jeopardizing the supply of the new, safe, and effective animal drugs needed to keep our pets, flocks, and herds healthy and to provide American consumers with a safe and wholesome food supply. Under this proposal, the additional revenues generated from fees paid by the pioneer animal drug industry would be dedicated for use in expediting the testing and review of new animal drugs in accordance with the performance goals that have been mutually agreed upon by the FDA and the animal drug industry. As FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan has noted, a faster, more predictable review process is expected to spur more spending on research and development by the industry, promoting animal health by increasing the availability and diversity of new, safe, and effective products. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to vote for this much-needed bipartisan bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just in closing, I want to again thank the lead authors. They have both been real players on our subcommittee all year long. I have appreciated their active participation on so many issues. We have worked on a bipartisan basis on virtually everything, and as we look at the end of this legislative calendar year, this is certainly a major success, and I can remember our first hearings when we began this journey to get this legislation done, virtually every single Member, Republican and Democrat, personally had made a E-911 call from their cell phone. We had all had different experiences as we thought about the calls we made in our district. All of us know our district like a blanket. We could tell exactly where we were. But when we are in somebody else's district, whether it be here in Washington, D.C. or I remember the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), who is also very active on this, when he talked about going from Nebraska to Colorado, he had no clue where he was on that highway, wherever it was, and we all felt very frustrated as we saw these accidents literally appear before us. So this is legislation that perhaps some in the industry were not supportive of at the beginning. We pushed them along. They are now fully on board. We have sent a message to the States: They are collecting money from us in our bills to make sure that this legislation is coming through. Spend it the right way, and if they do not, then they do not participate in this program. I think, too, the session that we had at the FCC, where the gentleman from Illinois and other Members on both sides of the aisle were there, we embarrassed some of the States that are using the money for other purposes. Let us get this money spent for the reason it is being collected, for the right cause so that we will save the lives that all of us want to save. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2898. This legislation is desperately needed to ensure the rollout of E-911 across the country. I want to thank my colleagues Anna Eshoo and John Shimkus on the House Energy and Commerce Committee for their work on this issue and moving this to the floor as quickly as possible. Improving public safety is a constant struggle, as I have learned working on improving 911 services for the Houston area and the entire state of Texas as a state legislator. Enhanced 911, which will allow folks in trouble to be located by rescue crews and police just by dialing three simple numbers, is a necessary next step. It is critical because many times when a wireless caller calls 911, they either cannot talk or they do not know where they are. The technology exists to help people in danger--I saw successful demonstration at the FCC just last week. And this legislation addresses the technical issues for industry, local government, and regional concerns, so no further delay is justified. While lives are being saved in my area of Harris County where we are Phase Two complete for E-911, lives are still being needlessly lost in other areas where compliance is lagging. Unfortunately, many other jurisdictions, including many in large rural areas of Texas do not have the resources necessary to upgrade their 911 systems. We are not all safe when we travel on the roads until E-911 is up and running nationwide. Public safety should be a top priority. States moving E-911 funds to other purposes deceives wireless consumers who saw that E-911 funding on their cell phone bills. Coming from Texas, I know what it means to children and families hit by huge budget cuts, but E-911 is necessary--it is a proven life-saver. This legislation brings funding, accountability, and sensitivity to rural areas to the process and deserves strong support.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I submit three letters for printing in the Congressional Record: one from the CTIA, another from APCO, and the remaining one from the National Emergency Number Association in support of the legislation. Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association, Washington, DC, October 27, 2003. Hon. Billy Tauzin, Chairman, Hon. John Dingell, Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Tauzin and Congressman Dingell: On behalf of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA), I would like to express our support for H.R. 2898, the E9-1-1 Implementation Act of 2003. CTIA represents more than 400 member companies, including both wireless carriers and manufacturers of wireless telecommunications equipment. Once in place, E9-1-1 location technology will speed delivery of emergency services to people in need. Unfortunately, too often, states and localities have diverted E9-1-1 funds collected by carries from wireless consumers to fund unrelated activities. This legislation will protect E9- 1-1 funds while simultaneously strengthening statewide coordination and cooperation among local phone companies, wireless carriers, and public safety. The wireless industry has made important strides in developing and implementing E9- 1-1 location technology. H.R. 2898 will help ensure that states and localities develop the necessary ``best practices'' to efficiently and effectively deploy location technology. The wireless industry remains committed to implementing this vital technology and applauds your leadership on this important issue. Sincerely, Steven K. Berry.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 2898.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the chairman of the full committee.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today we consider H.R. 2898, the E-911 Implementation Act of 2003, bipartisan legislation introduced by two members of the Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo). As chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, I am a proud original sponsor of this legislation as well. Mr. Speaker, what many of our constituents may not realize is that when they make a 911 call from their cell phones, many emergency dispatch centers, otherwise known as public service answering points or PSAPs, cannot automatically locate where that call is coming from, unlike when such calls are made from landlines. All too often, we have heard horrific stories of how first responders could not get to a cell phone 911 caller quickly enough, or maybe not even at all, because they could not automatically locate where that caller was, and the circumstances were such that the caller was not able to tell the first responder where they were calling from. In such emergencies, time is of the essence. Seconds in such emergency responses can literally mean the difference between life and death. For a number of years, our Nation's wireless carriers and PSAPs have been in the midst of deploying Phase II E-911, which would, in fact, provide PSAPs with the automatic location information of cell phone callers who dial 9-1-1. While our Nation's wireless carriers have been deploying the technology and the infrastructure to achieve Phase II E- 911, our Nations PSAPs have been confronted by enormous challenges in getting their piece of the puzzle in place. Our Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held a number of hearings on how we could overcome these challenges, and we arrived at a number of conclusions which form the basis of this legislation, H.R. 2898. First and foremost, we need to help our Nation's PSAPs cope with the financial demands of becoming Phase II ready. This bill answers the call by providing a significant grant program in the amount of $100 million a year for 5 years, with a 50 percent non-Federal match requirement to States and municipalities to help them procure their Phase II equipment as well as their training. Second, we need to ensure coordination and information sharing at all levels of government and with the other stakeholders as they continue to sort through the maze of challenges that lay ahead. This bill answers that call, too, by not only incentivizing States to have statewide E-911 coordinators, but also establishing a new Federal E-911 Coordination Office that will be a joint program office between NHTSA and the NTIA. Third, we heard that some States have raided their E-911 surcharge monies collected from wireless customers for things completely unrelated to E-911. This is nothing more than picking the pockets of consumers and stealing the funds which should be going toward deployment of this life-saving technology. This bill answers that call by creating disincentives to States who raid those E-911 funds. More to the point, no entity will be eligible for grant monies under this bill if they reside in a State that is raiding those E-911 surcharge accounts. This bill has been favorably and unanimously reported out of our subcommittee and the full committee as well. Also, I would note it has been endorsed by two major public safety communications associations: The National Emergency Numbering Association and the Association of Public Safety Communications Officers, not to mention the Cellular Telecommunication and Internet Association. I commend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), who will be speaking later, as well as the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) who will control the time for the other side for their bipartisan leadership on this important issue. I also thank the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin); the ranking member on the full committee, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell); and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the subcommittee ranking member, for their cooperation and teamwork. Finally, I want to thank the staff who have committed so much time and effort to the legislation, including Howard Waltzman and Will Nordwind from the majority committee and subcommittee staffs; Pete Filon and Colin Crowell from the minority committee and subcommittee staffs; and Courtney Anderson and Eric Olson for the sponsors' staff. Mr. Speaker, getting Phase II E-911 deployed will save lives, so passage of this bill is of the utmost importance. I would urge Members to support this important piece of legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2898) to improve homeland security, public safety and citizen activated emergency response capabilities through the use of enhanced 911 wireless services, and for other purposes, as amended.