Mark Udall

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I cannot support this resolution. I am not in support of burning the flag. But I am even more opposed to weakening the first amendment, one of the most important things for which the flag itself stands. As the Denver Post put it just last month, The American flag represents freedom. Many men and women fought and died for this country and its constitutional freedoms under the flag. They didn't give their lives for the flag; they died for this country and the freedom it guarantees under the Bill of Rights. Those who choose to desecrate the flag can't take away its meaning. In fact, it is our constitutional freedoms that allow them their reprehensible activity. I completely agree. So, like Secretary of State Colin Powell, former Senator John Glenn, and others who have testified against it, I will oppose this resolution. For the benefit of our colleagues, I am attaching the Denver Post's editorial on this subject: Flag Amendment Should Die Monday, June 25, 2001.--Although a proposed constitutional amendment to ban desecration of the American flag continues to lose steam, it nonetheless is once again being considered in the U.S. House. The amendment, one of the most contentious free speech issues before Congress, would allow penalties to be imposed on individuals or groups who burn or otherwise desecrate the flag. In past years, the amendment has succeeded in passing the House only to be killed, righteously, on the Senate floor. The American flag represents freedom. Many men and women fought and died for this country and its constitutional freedoms under the flag. They didn't give their lives for the flag; they died for this country and the freedom it guarantees under the Bill of Rights. Those who choose to desecrate the flag can't take away its meaning. In fact, it is our constitutional freedoms that allow them their reprehensible activity. American war heroes like Secretary of State Colin Powell and former Sen. John Glenn strongly oppose this amendment. Glenn has warned that ``it would be a hollow victory indeed if we preserved the symbol of freedoms by chopping away at those fundamental freedoms themselves.'' In addition, the Supreme Court has ruled that desecration of the flag should be protected as free speech. Actual desecration of the flag is, in fact, a rare occurrence and hardly a threat. There have been only a handful of flag-burnings in the last decade. It's not a national problem. What separates our country from authoritarian regimes is the guarantee of freed speech and expression. It would lessen the meaning of those protections to amend our Constitution in this way. The amendment is scheduled to go before the House this week, although if it passes it would still have to face a much tougher audience in the Senate. The good news is that House support of the amendment has been shrinking in recent years. It is possible that if that trend continues, the amendment could not only die this year but fail to return in subsequent years. We urge House lawmakers to let this issue go.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor former Colorado State Representative Marcy Morrison for her tireless efforts in improving health care for all Coloradans. This week, the American Medical Association is presenting Rep. Morrison with a Dr. Nathan Davis Award for Outstanding Government Service, Member of a State Legislature, for her significant achievements in advancing public health. Throughout her two-decade career, Marcy has fought to help Coloradans gain greater access to health care. Her efforts include passing legislation to provide health insurance parity for mental health, to guarantee 48 hour extended hospital stays for maternity care, and to make it possible for children up to five years old to receive speech therapy and physical therapy each year for development delay. In addition, Marcy has helped form a task to evaluate the management of chronic intractable pain in Colorado and she served on the Legislative Task Force on Health Care. When I served with Marcy in the State Legislature, I always admired her for her courage and tenacity. Nearly every piece of major health care legislation that passed the General Assembly and went on to become law had Marcy's mark on it. Coloradans owe a great deal of thanks to Rep. Morrison for helping us get the health care services we need and for helping us stay healthier and happier longer. So today, Mr. Speaker, I honor Rep. Marcy Morrison and congratulate her for being the recipient of this prestigious award. I hope that her efforts thus far are only the tip of the iceberg.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Gilchrest/Olver amendment. The amendment would strike the language that was inserted in the bill to ensure that the Kyoto Protocol is not implemented prior to its ratification in the Senate. This language has been added over the past several years ago to numerous appropriations bills. As I understand it, the reason what that some were concerned that President Clinton was moving too fast to address global warming. It's important to note that the Inspector Generals of the EPA, the Department of Energy, and the Department of State all agreed that the Clinton Administration was not trying to prematurely implement the Kyoto Protocol. But that's all beside the point now. We have a new President who has made it clear that he intends to do nothing about global warming, except study it. He has pronounced the Kyoto Protocol fundamentally flawed and ``dead,'' and he has reversed his campaign promise to regulate carbon dioxide. As it stands, this bill seems to say we still need to restrain any federal efforts to address global warming. But if there is ever a time NOT to send cautionary messages about acting too fast to address global warming, it's now. The danger we face today is in acting far too slowly. Last year, efforts on the floor to amend the Kyoto language were successful. I urge my colleagues to send the same good message that we sent last year--this anti-Kyoto language wasn't necessary in past years, and it's not necessary now. There is now a scientific consensus that global warming is real, and it is time for Congress to confront it.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, in the State of Colorado we had that debate, and our Governor was very involved. If memory serves me right, we directed a significant amount of money into the very programs that have been created in New Mexico, and we have directed some into literacy programs and other programs which have been designated as worthy. I have mixed feelings. I think a strong case could be made that all of the money ought to be used in the way the gentleman has suggested, where the principal is taken, and it generates a return, and all that can be done over a period of time is done to not only begin to reduce smoking, but eventually reach a point where none of our children start smoking at an age before they really understand the consequences. Mr. Speaker, if an adult wants to utilize tobacco at some point, that is his or her right to do that. But as the gentleman points out, the statistics are staggering as to how many children start. They then carry that habit and addiction on into their adult years. I was noting, too, the Attorney General mentioned that he had a concern that it would be a big government travesty to use the tragedy of tobacco as a smoke screen to cover the expansion of the nanny state. Mr. Speaker, I guess I would beg to differ with him, and I think many Americans would, that this is an appropriate place for government regulation. This is an appropriate place for all of us through our government to come together and make sure that our children are not exposed to the great dangers of tobacco. Abraham Lincoln, the founder of the Republican Party, suggested that we do together through government what cannot be done solely as individuals. It is clear that the power and the resources of the tobacco companies are enormous, and that the role that government can play in providing a counterbalance is crucial. Our free enterprise system provides for a lot of freedom, but it also asks corporations and large entities to act responsibly. I think that is the purpose at the heart of the litigation that has been brought, and I think that is again why I share the concerns that the Justice Department needs to look for a broader-based approach. It needs to involve other constituencies on a bipartisan basis in its pursuit of the important lawsuit that we have been discussing tonight.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, so the gentleman is suggesting to treat it as an endowment for our children's future, and direct the return and the interest off the endowment into these efforts, and it would be a very conservative way to proceed, and that would ensure that those monies were there into perpetuity for use of citizens in the gentleman's home State?

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Again asking my colleague to yield, I would note that the President certainly is a proponent of Federalism. He certainly has taken the position in many cases that the States ought to have an important role in a lot of the decisions that are made in our country, and this suggestion that my colleague has brought up in his letter, I think, fits his philosophical approach, and bringing in the experts to work on behalf of all of the Americans and the attorney generals as my colleague suggests, Democrat, Republican, covering the whole political ideological spectrum, I think the gentleman mentioned 45 of them joined this case. I would just urge the President to again look at the gentleman's letter. I am hopeful that we will have a response from him sooner rather than later. If I might, since we were talking about the costs, I might touch on that one more time. It is easy to say these are other people's problems. It is easy to say we are all adults, and if one decides to smoke, they should bear some of the responsibility. There is some truth in both of those statements, but we are talking about doing all we can to make sure that children are not targeted. Children who begin smoking are much more likely to remain smokers throughout their lives. Even if we feel there is some responsibility that adults have, and we do have those responsibilities, the costs that are incurred we all have to bear. We can acknowledge those costs or turn a blind eye to those costs. The tobacco industry spent over $8 billion in 1999 on advertising and promotional campaigns. That is $22 million a day spent on these campaigns. Now there is $89 billion in total annual private and public health care expenditures caused by tobacco use; $17 billion annual Federal and State Medicaid payments directly caused by tobacco use; $20.5 billion Federal Government Medicare expenditures each year that are attributed to tobacco use; and $8 billion other Federal Government tobacco-caused health care costs in particular through our Veterans Administration health care. There is $2.1 billion in addition annual expenditures through Social Security survivors insurance, the SSI program, for kids who have lost one or both parents through smoking-caused death. Mr. Speaker, one that really catches my attention, $1.4 billion to $4 billion in additional annual expenditures for health and developmental problems of infants caused by mothers who smoke and for those infants who were exposed to secondhand smoke after they were born and, of course, during pregnancy. These are very significant costs that we all bear as a society, and this is why I think it is very important that we continue to pursue the resolution of this situation. We ask the tobacco companies to carry their fair share. I was curious to hear a little more, if it fits the rest of the gentleman's comments, about what the State of New Mexico has done about the monies from the settlement. You talked about California, but I am interested in how we can reduce the size of these statistics that I have just shared.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. If the gentleman will yield, that is so true. And in any contest you do not tell the other team before you take the field or take the court or arrive at the golf course that you have a weakened game that day and your team is not really prepared to compete. And that is what lawsuits are. They are often the last resort option that you have; but in many cases in our society, the judicial system has proven to be an important place to play out further the debate that is necessary in our society. I was interested to also hear the comments about the Attorney General saying there was not enough money to pursue the case. Well, the number I have heard is about $23 million. That is real money. But when we look at the cost of the lives and the cost that we have incurred societally in Medicare and Medicaid and all of our private health systems, that is a small amount of money to invest in doing right in all the areas the gentleman has suggested. I also find it interesting that perhaps it was suggested that there was not any money available to pursue these lawsuits. But the Attorney General himself is in charge of putting together his budget. So it is a bit like saying I do not have any money, even though I am in charge of how the money is allocated. How you spend money gives a sense of your priorities. This clearly is not a priority for the Attorney General and potentially, by extension, the President. I think it is a priority for the American people. That is why we are here tonight is to point out that there are thousands of American citizens who think this lawsuit ought to be pursued and that, in the end, this is not about lawsuits, it is not about money, it is not about even keeping score, it is about our children in particular and about the costs that tobacco use imposes on our society.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. If the gentleman will further yield, the Attorney General is welcome to his own opinions. That is what makes this country so great, the first amendment and all the other traditions we have in our law and in our culture that encourages people to speak out on their point of view. But I would suggest that that particular set of sentiments is not held by the American people; that we have decided as a country that tobacco should be regulated, just like we regulate alcohol and other controlled substances. That again points out the need to create an unbiased and bipartisan group who would oversee the Federal Government's activities in regards to this lawsuit. And this is not, incidentally, about Democrats or Republicans. There are people who have contracted these diseases and these problems in the 400,000 people the gentleman mentioned who are Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Green Party. I am sure there are even some anarchists in this group of people. This is not about partisan advantage, but this is about doing the right thing and representing or reflecting where the American people reside I think on this issue, which is that there is more to be done.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. If the gentleman will continue to yield. Did now Attorney General Ashcroft, but then Senator Ashcroft, propose a different system or did he just suggest we throw open the gates and everybody have at it? I cannot imagine where we would be if we had that kind of system up until this point, when after many years we have been able to gather information and data that suggested the addictive qualities and the detrimental qualities of nicotine and other substances. It strikes me that this is a very illustrative comment, also one that causes me great concern.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from the State of New Mexico, for yielding to me and providing me some time to talk about this very important issue tonight. I also wanted to applaud his efforts as attorney general of the State of New Mexico, and now as Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. As I was listening to the gentleman, I was thinking about all of the viewers tonight who have children, and particularly daughters. I have an 11-year-old daughter, a soon to be 11-year-old daughter. She is a very important part of my life. When I looked at the statistics that the gentleman has shared with us in general, and then broke them down into the statistics that apply to women and girls, I thought it was very striking. I want to share a few of those with the Members tonight, and then talk a little bit about the lawsuit situation, as well. It is stunning to think of some of these statistics and what they really mean. Smoking prevalence is higher among women with 9 to 11 years of education than women with 13 to 15 years of education, and three times higher than women with 16 or more years of education. Smoking among girls and women has increased dramatically in the 1990s. From 1991 to 1999, smoking among high school girls increased from 27 percent to 34 percent. A report published in the American Journal of Public Health shows that girls have an easier time buying cigarettes than boys, even at the youngest ages. Now come the tragic statistics. In 1997, nearly 165,000 women died of smoking-related diseases. Since the Surgeon General's Report on Women and Smoking was released in 1980, about 3 million women in the U.S. have died prematurely. Three million women have died prematurely of smoking-related diseases. As with men, smoking is related to heart disease and lung cancer, but women smokers also face increased risks of cervical cancer and osteoporosis. In the 1980s, lung cancer overtook breast cancer as the leading cause of cancer death in women. Since 1950, lung cancer mortality rates for women have increased 600 percent. Cigarette smoking doubles the risk of coronary heart disease, and accounts for more than 80 percent of lung cancers in women. Women also have a more difficult time when they want to quit smoking. They have lower cessation rates, and girls and women aged 12 to 24 are much more likely to report being able to cut down on smoking than men and boys of those same ages. Females are significantly more likely than boys to report feeling dependent on cigarettes, and are more likely to report feeling sad, blue, or depressed during attempts to quit smoking. I would remind the viewers that cigarette companies first began targeting women in the 1920s. Up to that point, smoking among women was not particularly socially acceptable, but they were savvy. They equated smoking with freedom and emancipation. Women continue to be a target of the cigarette companies. Cigarette advertising and promotions use themes of empowerment and sophistication. The cigarette companies, and I think my colleague, the gentleman from New Mexico, touched on this, but they spent more than $8 billion in advertising and promotion in 1999, a 22 percent increase over the $6.7 billion spent in 1998. This is the largest increase in dollar terms since the Federal Trade Commission began tracking industry sales in advertising in 1970. Clearly, this points out that we have a real public health challenge, and that it is one that we cannot turn our backs on. The gentleman from New Mexico talked a little bit about the history of the lawsuits brought by the States that was then taken up by the Federal Government. I, too, want to express my concern that Attorney General Ashcroft, given his past skepticism about the tobacco settlement bill, and indeed, his work to stop the tobacco settlement bill, is now heading up these efforts at the Federal level. I, too, want to lend my voice to the calls for the Attorney General to establish a neutral and independent review board to provide oversight of any proposed settlement. I think such a review board could be composed of a bipartisan slate of attorneys general from the States who could act as neutral arbitrators. I would hope that the Attorney General would recuse himself, at a minimum, from the negotiation process. This widespread use of tobacco is eating away at our society's physical and financial health. We cannot bear, I think, to wait another day before we continue these efforts to point out the dangers of this real epidemic to our public health. I have been pleased to join my colleague, and at this point would yield back to him for further comments.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, I would appeal to all of our colleagues in the House, all 435 of us, to weigh in with the President, request that he consider what I thought was a very thoughtful request on the part of the gentleman from New Mexico, and I think other colleagues would join the gentleman if they knew the extent to which this is an important issue facing us. Mr. Speaker, it is an opportunity. It is arguably a health care crisis, but it also presents us with a real opportunity. I hope colleagues who have been here and have listened to our special order tonight would consider also making their own pitch to the President that this is a worthy undertaking and one that will be remembered not just in the near future if we do it right, but will be remembered for decades to come; that we got ahold of this public health problem and that we did something about it when it was appropriate and when our kids are really what are at risk here. So I want to commend the gentleman for providing the leadership in this important area, and for after 8 years as attorney general and now 3 years in this body is continuing the good work on behalf of our children.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for yielding me this time, and I too rise in strong support of this motion to instruct, especially its support for payments under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or as it is known, RECA. The people covered by RECA include uranium miners and millers and others who worked to support our nuclear weapons program and those people who were exposed to fallout unknowingly from our program. Because of that exposure, they are sick, sick with cancers and other serious diseases. Many of them are residents of Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah, people like Merle and Richard Leavell of Cortez, Colorado, or Eugene Cox of Montrose. When Congress enacted this law, we promised to pay compensation for these illnesses, but we have not kept that promise. We have not appropriated enough money to pay everyone who is entitled to be paid. The Department of Justice tells me that on July 6, the end of last week, they had sent 438 people letters that are basically IOUs. Those people should have gotten checks that would have totaled $31 million. In Colorado, 51 Coloradoans have received these IOU letters. They should have been paid $5 million. What the letters say is that the payment must wait for further appropriations. What the letters mean is that we in the Congress have failed to meet a solemn obligation. Now, the Senate put the $84 million back in the bill for these RECA payments. So it is important that the House accept that addition. That is all this motion to instruct says that should happen and that is why we must approve this motion today. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I remember sitting and listening to these workers in the State of Colorado and looking into their eyes and hearing them speak about how important it was not just for the money but for the principle of this. This is an apology, and this is also an affirmation that the work that they did is work that has not been done in vain. We need to acknowledge the debt we owe to these Americans that put their lives on the line.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Distributed Power Hybrid Energy Act. This bill would direct the Secretary of Energy to develop and implement a strategy for research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of distributed power hybrid energy systems. Distributed power is modular electric generation or storage located close to the point of use, well suited for the use of renewable energy technologies such as wind turbines and photovoltaics, and also of clean, efficient, fossil-fuel technologies such as gas turbines and fuel cells. Distributed power avoids the need for and cost of additional transmission lines and pipelines, reduces associated delivery losses, and increases energy efficiency. In addition, distributed power can provide insurance against energy disruptions and expand the available energy service choices for consumers. By their very nature, renewable resources are distributed. Our ability to cost-effectively take advantage of our renewable, indigenous resources can be greatly advanced through systems that minimize the intermittency of these resources. Distributed power hybrid systems can help accomplish this. ``Hybridizing'' distributed power systems--combining two renewable sources or a renewable and a fossil source--enables us to offset the weaknesses of one technology with the strengths of another. For example, in a hybrid system, the intermittency of wind power can be offset by the reliability and affordability of power generated by a microturbine. My bill would direct the Secretary of Energy to develop a distributed power hybrid systems strategy identifying opportunities for and barriers to such systems, technology gaps that need to be closed, and system integration tools that are necessary to plan, design, build and operate such systems. Mr. Speaker, distributed generation represents the most significant technological change in the electric industry in decades. Knowing this, it makes sense to focus our R&D priorities on distributed power hybrid systems that can both help improve power reliability and affordability and bring more efficiency and cleaner energy resources into the mix. My bill would help us do this. I look forward to working with Members of the House to move forward with this important initiative.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Remote Sensing Applications Act of 2001. This bill would help communities grow more smartly by giving them greater access to geospatial data-- information from analysis of data from orbiting satellites and airborne platforms--from federal agencies such as NASA and commercial sources. I am pleased that my colleague Representative Jim Greenwood is joining me as an original cosponsor of this bill. Many of our cities, in Colorado and across the country, are experiencing problems with unchecked and unplanned growth--otherwise known as sprawl. Planning for growth is primarily the job of state and local government. But the federal government also has an important role to play--whether through funding transportation, infrastructure, schools, and the like; establishing federal tax incentives and disincentives for private development; or puffing in place federal permits and licenses that may contribute to or restrain sprawl. The federal government can also help to provide information to help towns and cities grow in a smarter and more sustainable way. Wise community planning and management cannot happen if communities do not have information to make sound decisions. The federal government can bring valuable--and powerful informational planning resources to the table. One new space-age tool is the use of satellites to provide images of the Earth's surface. We now have technology using geospatial data from satellites--that can produce very accurate maps that show information about vegetation, wildlife habitat, flood plains, transportation corridors, soil types, and many other things. Satellite imagery and remote sensing, when combined with Geographic Information System (GIS) and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) system information, can be invaluable tools for use in such areas as land-use planning, transportation, emergency response planning, and environmental planning. Getting this integrated geospatial data to local communities would give planners important information they could use to avoid problems and help communities grow more smartly. As a member of the House Science Committee and the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, I have learned about the technological opportunities available from federal agency activities and capabilities. The bill I am introducing would establish a program that will demonstrate the effectiveness of the use of integrated geospatial data to other governmental sectors. The bill would establish in NASA a program of grants for competitively awarded pilot projects to explore the integrated use of sources of remote sensing and other geospatial information to address state, local, regional, and tribal agency needs. This proposed legislation would build on and complement an applications program that NASA's Office of Earth Science announced earlier this year. Like NASA's program, the Remote Sensing Applications Act would seek to translate scientific and technical capabilities in Earth science into practical tools to help public and private sector decisionmakers solve practical problems at the state and local levels. The Remote Sensing Applications Act has the potential to begin to bridge the gap between established and emerging technology solutions and the problems and challenges that state and local communities face regarding growth management and other issues. I look forward to working with Rep. Greenwood and other Members of the House to move forward with this important initiative.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in general support of the bill. I want to in particular touch on three issues briefly. I want to thank the committee, thank this House for continuing to fund the nuclear facilities closure projects across the country, but in particular the one in my district at Rocky Flats. Rocky Flats is close to the center of my congressional district. It is just a few miles from population centers that exceed 2 million people. This is a very important project to clean up and close this facility. I also thank the committee for the inclusion in the bill of initial funding for a small flood control project in Arvada, Colorado. There has been an important partnership there along Van Bibber Creek, and these are important moneys that will begin to put this capital project in place. Finally, I want to emphasize my support for the committee's work in increasing the levels of funding for DOE's renewable energy programs. Initially the administration slashed these important budget items by $138 million, almost 36 percent, and I think this was shortsighted; but we have worked hard over the last 2 years to boost funding for these programs, and I want to acknowledge the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp) on the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus for the good work the gentleman has done. In general, Mr. Speaker, although no bill is perfect, this one is awful close, and I very much appreciate the opportunity to speak today in support of it.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time. As a Rocky Mountain westerner, I rise in support of this amendment and I share the sentiments of the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson) that we do love these lands in the West. I have been dismayed, though, to some extent to hear my colleagues describe these lands as sagebrush and rolling hills and nothing but black lava rock. But as we know, those lands provide us with solitude and great viewscapes, clean air, and clean water. They are God's creation. We should set them aside in perpetuity as President Clinton had the wisdom to do. In our State, rapid population growth is putting increased pressure on all our Federal lands. We have become aware of the need to preserve and protect those lands. That is simply what President Clinton has done. But President Bush seems to be going the other way. In fact, I am tempted to borrow an old phrase and suggest that maybe we are on the verge of a ``war on the West.'' Unless we restore some balance, this energy policy will be a war on wilderness, a war on wildlife, a war on our open spaces, and ultimately a war on our economy which is dependent now on these open spaces and the clean air and the clean water. This amendment will limit the potential of that potential attack. I hope it will be unnecessary. I hope that the President will pull back and not open our national monuments to drilling, but let us be safe rather than sorry. I urge support of this important amendment by the gentleman from West Virginia.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I regret that I cannot support this bill today. I am not saying the bill's provisions are all bad. While I think some things in it are questionable, it does include some very good things. For example, it would add $100 million for essential environmental restoration and waste management at Savannah River, Hanford, and other sites in the DOE complex and to acquire additional containers for shipping wastes to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. These are important for Colorado, because our ability to have the Rocky Flats site cleaned up and closed by 2006 depends on the ability of other sites in the complex to play their roles in that process. So, I am very appreciative that the appropriations committee has responded to these needs. Similarly, the additional $300 million for low-income home energy assistance will enable that important program to provide much needed assistance this year, even if it will not meet all needs. And the bill includes other good and important provisions as well. But for me all the good things in the bill are outweighed by one glaring omission--the total absence of any funds to pay already- approved claims under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or ``RECA.'' RECA provides for payments to individuals who contracted certain cancers and other serious diseases because of exposure to radiation released during above-ground nuclear weapons tests or as a result of their exposure to radiation during employment in underground uranium mines. Some of my constituents are covered by RECA, as are hundreds of other Coloradans and residents of New Mexico and other states. Last year, the Congress amended RECA to cover more people and to make other important modifications. I supported those changes. But there was one needed change that was not made--we did not make the payments automatic. Unless and until we make that change, the RECA payments can only be made when Congress appropriates money for that purpose. And the undeniable fact is that we in the Congress have not appropriated enough money to pay everyone who is entitled to be paid under RECA. As a result, people who should be getting checks are instead getting letters from the Justice Department. Those letters--IOUs, you could call them--say that payments must await further appropriations. What they mean is that we in the Congress have failed to meet a solemn obligation. We failed to meet it when we passed the regular appropriations bill for the Justice Department--and we are failing to meet it again today. In February, along with other Members, I wrote President Bush about the problem of RECA payments. I wanted him to be aware of the problem and hoped that he would ask Congress to promptly provide additional funds so that people would not have to wait much longer for payments. I greatly regret that the President did not see fit to make that request--but I regret even more that the appropriations committee has not stepped up to the challenge and has not included RECA funds in this bill. We need to do better. We should change the law so that future RECA payments will not depend on annual appropriations, but instead will be paid automatically in the way that we now have provided for payments under the new compensation program for certain nuclear-weapons workers made sick by exposure to radiation, beryllium, and other hazards. I have joined in sponsoring legislation to make that change. But right now, today, we need to provide all the funds needed to pay the claims that have already been approved and all the ones that will be approved during the rest of the fiscal year. To fail to do that is to continue what the Denver Post has correctly described as a ``betrayal'' of sick and dying people that is ``disgusting and dishonorable.'' This bill, as it now stands, would continue that betrayal, and so I cannot support it.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an environmental champion and respected leader--John Wade. On Thursday, May 17, 2001, John passed away from injuries he sustained from a fall during a hiking trip in the mountains of Colorado. He was 81. All those in Colorado who respect the natural world and our duties to the environment will greatly miss John and his passion for people and the landscape. John was a Presbyterian pastor and a university counselor. He had a pastorate in Utah and Colorado. During his time as a university counselor in Utah, he provided guidance to young men during the Vietnam War and organized the first Earth Day celebration on the University of Utah campus. After that, John returned to his native state of Colorado where he became director of the San Luis Valley Christian Community Services in Alamosa. He retired to Pueblo, Colorado in 1984 and later moved to Denver. But he never slowed down, not even in retirement. John carried his strong spirit of public service and his belief in the spiritual component of environmentalism into his retirement. He was the living embodiment of the connection between spiritual growth and caring and respect for the natural environment. He understood that these two concepts and ways of acting are complimentary and in fact work in concert. He made it his mission to help others understand this connection and take action to fulfill man's obligations to the natural world. As a result, he joined local Colorado chapters of the Sierra Club where he volunteered vast amounts of his time and energies. In so doing, he became a leader in conservation work for the Sierra Club in Colorado. John also was a member of the Presbyterians for Restoring Creation, a national group which, among other things, works to place environmental educators in each of the nation's 175 Presbyterian leadership groups. It was John's goal to see this accomplished. John himself described the importance of this goal, not only for Presbyterians but all faiths, when he said, ``Conservation is an integral part of Christian discipleship, and the scriptures teach us to both till and keep the earth.'' In keeping with these beliefs, John was also chair of the Colorado Council of Churches' Environmental Commission, which continues to help instill greater awareness of the preservation of the environment as a spiritual obligation in denominations throughout Colorado. In addition to his work with the Sierra Club and religious groups on environmental efforts, John's strong sense of civic responsibility was demonstrated in other ways. He was outspoken on social justice issues through his work on university campuses throughout the Southwest. He jointed marches for labor and human rights--especially as those issues arise in connection with the growing, interconnected global economy. He was concerned about urban sprawl and growth and its attendant impacts to the environment and communities. In addition, he served on a panel, created by Governor Roy Romer in 1994, to address issues related to the grazing of livestock on the federal public lands. His work here, along with the other members of the group, helped steer a new course on these issues and led to the successful creation of public advisory boards which provide input to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management on resource management issues. He did all of this and more in retirement. Especially impressive was John's energy and vigor. He climbed 32 of Colorado's 54 fourteen thousand-foot peaks. He continued to hike, march and contribute right up until his unfortunate accident. His robust condition and positive outlook clearly helped shape his views and helped inspire many to join his causes. John died doing what he loved--enjoying the splendor and beauty of the natural world. His legacy rests with those who knew him, shared his beliefs and were influenced by his teachings, inspiration and leadership. In the heated debates over environmental polices and issues, the underlying--and overarching--principle of stewardship and our spiritual relationship to the Earth is too often overlooked. John understood this spiritual connection implicitly. He understood that the health, sustainability and stewardship of the environment not only sustains and enriches our lives, but brings us closer to our obligations under religious teaching to care for and not squander the natural bounty that has been entrusted unto us. John's life stands as a reminder that we cannot forget the importance of our place in the world and our obligations to it and to provide an enhanced environment for future generations to inherit.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the men and women of the James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club. The James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club is a Denver-based outdoor organization that works with and exposes urban youth to the outdoors through a number of education programs. The group takes inner city children to national parks and wilderness areas to allow them to experience first hand the joys and the challenges of nature. This experience teachers them an appreciation for the natural world that they might not otherwise ever gain. Those of us fortunate enough to grow up experiencing the outdoors know the invaluable education that can be obtained through these adventures. As director of the Colorado Outward Bound School, I have been fortunate enough to see directly the benefits that young people can take away from their outdoor experiences. The challenges that they face in these types of programs can provide them with the self-respect and sense of accomplishment that are antidotes for much of the anger and frustration that all too often erupts in violence. Groups like the Beckwourth Mountain Club are instrumental in ensuring that our urban youth are exposed to more positive, character-building experiences. The James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club is part of the Rocky Mountain National Park's Corps of Discovery Program. This program has allowed the group to develop a close, working relationship with the park where numerous youths have participated in hikes, snowshoe walks, and camping trips. As a result of their outstanding work and their on-going partnership with the national park, the James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club recently was awarded the ``Shoulder-to-Shoulder Award'' by the National Park Service. Mr. Speaker, I ask today that my colleagues join me in applauding the efforts of the James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club. At a time when our children are bombarded with images of violence, the James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club strives to replace those images with traits that will allow our children to peacefully coexist with one another. Mr. Speaker, I am attaching a copy of the National Park Service's press materials about this award and the Club. National Park Service Presents ``Shoulder-to-Shoulder Award'' to the James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club Denver. On May 16, 2001, Ms. Cheryl Armstrong, Executive Director, and Mr. Michael Richardson, Program Director with The James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club, were presented a ``Shoulder-to-Shoulder Award'' in recognition for their valued partnership with the National Park Service. The James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club is a Denver-based outdoor organization named in honor of famed 19th century trapper and trader, James P. Beckwourth. Born in 1798 in Virginia, the son of a slavewoman in the early 1800's, Beckwourth was unwilling to accept the confines of slavery. Instead he set out to make a small place in history for himself. Beckwourth went west into the wilderness of the Rocky Mountains and joined a western expedition led by General William H. Ashley. This was the beginning of his fantastic career as an explorer, Indian scout, fur trapper, prospector, and War Chief of the Crow Indian Nation. His name is memorialized in California where he pioneered a trail in the Sierra Nevada range known as Beckwourth Pass. The James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club works with and exposes urban youth to the outdoors through a number of programs including educational opportunities and field trips. The Club opened The James P. Beckwourth Outdoor Education Center in 1998. As part of Rocky Mountain National Park's Corps of Discovery Program, The James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club has developed and maintained a close working relationship with Rocky Mountain National Park, where a number of youth and adults have participated in numerous field trips, hikes, snowshoe walks, and camping trips in the park. As a result of this program, children of Denver's African American neighborhoods have had the opportunity to enjoy our national parks, and have gained a good understanding of life and history of James P. Beckwourth. ``I am proud to recognize The James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club as a valued partner of the National Park Service as well as for their hard work in breaking new trails for our children and helping us keep national parks meaningful and relevant to a new generation of Americans,'' stated Regional Director Karen Wade. The ``Shoulder-to-Shoulder Award'' was presented to Ms. Cheryl Armstrong and Mr. Michael Richardson, on behalf of The James P. Beckwourth Mountain Club in Keystone, Colorado, where leaders and managers of the National Park Service met with partners, tribal representatives, sister agencies of the federal and state government, cooperating associations, foundation and university representatives, and private citizens during the Intermountain Region's General Conference entitled ``Stewardships: The Art of Collaboration.'' Awards were presented to a number of individuals and partners who have worked long and hard with the National Park Service towards accomplishing the common goals of preservation and protection of natural and cultural resources within our national parks.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the service of Matt Patrick, former Executive Director of the Boulder County AIDS Project (BCAP). After having served the people of Boulder for nearly six years, Matt has left BCAP to become Program Officer for the Gill Foundation, based in Denver. With him serving as director, BCAP experienced an evolution of philosophy. Under Matt's guidance, the BCAP budget doubled to nearly $1 million and the staff grew by 50 percent. Importantly, during his time as Executive Director, BCAP expanded its outreach programs to target the workplace as well as Latino/a communities. Further, BCAP was selected as the best non-profit in Boulder County three times under Matt's direction and received numerous other awards. Matt was also instrumental in the evolution of BCAP as a multiculturally proficient organization. As Executive Director, Matt incorporated policies and procedures to enhance the diverse nature of BCAP. Now there is multicultural training, a diversity coordinator and an agency wide multicultural staff. During his tenure with BCAP, Matt and his staff gave much thought as to whom the agency's clients were--whom it was BCAP should be serving. According to Matt, ``To me the reality of our mission is twofold--to serve people living with HIV and to slow the spread of HIV infection in the community.'' Simply considering those infected with HIV as clients of BCAP was not enough for Matt; it was only half the mission. In fact, in the year 2000, BCAP had 35,000 educational contacts as where six years ago this number was around 10,000. By expanding educational and outreach programs, Matt Patrick served his community, the community of Boulder, Colorado as few have. I recognize his service and pay him honor.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great Coloradan and a dedicated public servant. This summer, Charles Bedford will be leaving as the director of the Colorado State Land Board. For the last four years Charles has successfully directed the Land Board through a period of major and significant reform. It was a period of transition that was ushered in by our state's rapid population growth and corresponding increase in the awareness of the importance of preserving our state open lands for their beauty and contribution to our public schools. The Colorado State Land Board oversees the over 3 million acres of state school trust lands that were given to the state at statehood for the generation of revenue for public schools, among other things. Over the years, the Land Board has managed the state trust lands in order to secure the highest return to our public schools. Although this history has been commendable, the other public and environmental values that these lands can provide to the people of Colorado were in some cases being overlooked. That awareness led to the passage of a Constitutional Amendment that made some significant changes in the way that state trust lands were to be managed and administered. One of the more significant reforms was the establishment of a ``stewardship trust'' which required that ten percent of the state trust lands be set aside and withheld from development to preserve their important open space, natural and community values. Charles became the director of the Land Board shortly after the passage of this Constitutional Amendment. Such dramatic change was not without difficulty and conflict. Yet Charles ably helped steer the Land Board through these changes and controversies and helped achieve a successful transition to a new era. As with many other Coloradans, Charles realized the important role these state lands could play in providing the scenic open space that we have all come to enjoy while at the same time contributing to the long- term financing for our public schools. While many in the state were skeptical concerning the new direction the Land Board was embarking on, Charles was able to successfully bring the different sides together. Among many of his and the Land Board's accomplishments has been the designation of 300,000 acres in the Stewardship Trust. These great lands are now protected for all Coloradans to enjoy while continuing to make important contributions for the financial benefit of our schools. Charles has also initiated new partnerships with local communities to utilize state lands to benefit the communities as well as raise money. These partnerships have enabled communities to acquire additional tracts of open space for the continued use and enjoyment of their citizens. Charles Bedford is leaving the Land Board to take the position of Associate Director of Nature Conservancy Colorado. In this new role, which his dedicated years of public service have prepared him well for, he will continue to work toward protecting valuable land for the enjoyment of future generations. I wish Charles the very best of luck in his new endeavor and look forward to continuing to work in partnership with him for the benefit of all Coloradans. I very sincerely thank him for his service to the people of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I am attaching a recent column from the Denver Post that further acknowledges Charles's accomplishments at the Land Board. I want to personally thank Charles Bedford for his years of dedicated service. Uncovering Hidden Lands (By Joanne Ditmer) Sunday, April 22, 2001.--When Colorado became a state in 1876, the federal government gave land to the new state to raise funds for eight trusts, the largest being K-12 education. The state Land Board owns 3 million acres and manages an additional 1.5 million acres of mineral rights. These are ``hidden lands,'' for few of us know how they or the money they generate are managed. Many have grazing leases, giving us the ``country'' look we value while they bring in dollars. Charles Bedford, a fourth-generation Coloradan, is resigning after four years as Land Board director. A highly capable and competent administrator, he's given considerable thought to what changes could improve the management and benefits of those state lands. The past decade, Colorado's citizens have become aware that state lands have additional value beyond their revenue; they are even more precious when development covers other landscapes. Decisions on state lands made solely for money, for one-time gain, frequently are disasters. With this new perception, in November 1997 voters passed Amendment 16, which provided that a portion of those state lands must be put into permanent stewardship. Generally, the sites were chosen for their value as natural resources and open space, and were not to be sold for development. In 1998, 200,000 acres were designated for the Stewardship Trust; another 100,000 acres were added in 2000. Bedford recalled that implementing the Stewardship Trust meant overcoming much suspicion; ranchers and farmers thought it was an attack on agricultural lands; school systems feared a cut in income; and environmentalists charged it wasn't what was promised. Other accomplishments since then, Bedford said, included the partnerships forged with local communities to utilize state lands in ways that benefit the communities as well as raise money. These include the purchase by Routt County and Steamboat Springs of Emerald Mountain; the 400 acres sold to Larimer County Open Space; convening neighboring ranchers and natural-resource experts to help design a plan for the 85,000-acre Chico Basin Ranch in Pueblo and El Paso counties; and other innovative ideas that address the public's desire for open space while raising money for education. Bedford recommends his successor continue to work to achieve local government priorities, perhaps by pushing legislation that would allow the Land Board to sell property directly to local governments or other state agencies for its appraised value, instead of pitting them in a bidding war against developers. The Land Board produces between $30 million and $40 million per year, or less than one-half of one percent of the total state school appropriation for education (and that appropriation is itself about half the total expenditures on education, with local funding making up the balance). Amendment 16 mandated that money generated by the Land Board be ``in addition to'' funds appropriated to education through the School Finance Act, but the Legislature has not changed the method through which board funds are distributed. Bedford believes legislation should be supported that more clearly channels funds directly to schools and implements the ``in addition to'' language of Amendment 16. Finally, Bedford said the Land Board is ``unconscionably'' understaffed, with the lowest staff-to-acreage ratio of any comparable land board in the West. That means there can't possibly be adequate and thoughtful management of these valuable and irreplaceable lands. ``We own about 4 percent of the surface area of the state,'' Bedford concluded. ``It's a huge asset, worth a lot of money, worth a lot of thinking. It's been on the back burner for much too long.'' Bedford served Gov. Roy Romer as Natural Resources Policy analyst for two years and as legal counsel for one year. On June 1, he becomes associate director of the Nature Conservancy of Colorado, where his dedication and expertise will continue to benefit the state. The international non-profit conservation organization preserves ecologically significant landscapes for future generations. In Colorado, it protects more than 425,000 acres of the state's Last Great Places.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to both honor and thank Ms. Joy Fisher for her astounding dedication to her volunteer work. Over the past decade, Ms. Fisher has spent many hours volunteering at the Colorado Bureau of Land Management, the Seniors' Resource Center and the Library of the Blind. The time she has dedicated to the BLM, alone, totals more than 15,600 hours. Beyond the numerous hours Ms. Fisher has donated, this 89-year old woman deserves credit for her courtesy, professionalism, optimism and her love of life. She has earned the respect of those who know her and made all those whom she has helped feel welcome. Her dedication and hard work should serve as an inspiration to us all. Ms. Fisher's selfless commitment to volunteerism, her passion for life and her dedication to those organizations she works for is admirable. Mr. Speaker, I would again, like to thank her on behalf of the people of Colorado.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the International Environmental Defense Act of 2001. The purpose of this bill is to clarify the authority of the Secretary of Defense to respond to environmental emergencies. It is cosponsored by my colleague from Colorado, Representative Joel Hefley. I greatly appreciate his support. In times of natural disaster or other emergencies, the United States for decades has come to the aid of those in need--whether the crisis is the result of an earthquake in Turkey, an erupting volcano in South America, or deadly floods in some other part of the world. When the need arises, the U.S. government provides humanitarian assistance through the U.S. Agency for International Development, the State Department, the Defense Department, and other federal agencies. It also contracts with private voluntary agencies to provide such assistance and coordinates the U.S. response with that of other countries. The American military has an outstanding record of participation in these activities. All Americans take pride in the humanitarian assistance provided by the men and women of our armed services. I strongly support this policy. It is the right thing to do, and in the best interests of our country as well as of people everywhere. Humanitarian assistance is critical to help communities or regions or whole countries recover from devastating natural or man-made events. But global emergencies come in other forms as well--including environmental emergencies such as oil or chemical spills or other similar occurrences. They may not have the immediate impact on people of homes destroyed in an earthquake or of crops lost to drought. But by polluting waterways, killing fish or other species, or contaminating the air, water, or land, environmental disasters can have devastating effects on the health and well-being of people, wildlife, and ecosystems. So, wherever they occur, environmental emergencies have the potential to affect the national interests of the United States. And our government--including our military forces--should have the same ability to respond as in the case of other emergencies. Current law authorizes the Department of Defense to use its funds for the transport of humanitarian relief, allowing U.S. military personnel to help provide foreign countries with emergency assistance such as helicopter transport, temporary water supplies, and road and bridge repair. For example, U.S. military personnel were part of the U.S. response to Hurricane Mitch in Central America and to this year's earthquakes in El Salvador and India. But when it comes to environmental emergencies, under current law the military now has less ability to help. Those are the situations that are addressed by the bill I am introducing today. The International Environmental Defense Act would fill a gap in current law so U.S. military transport could be used not only for humanitarian, but also for environmental emergencies. The bill does not require that this be done--but it would authorize the Defense Department to do so, just as current law authorizes but does not require the transport of humanitarian assistance to respond to other emergencies. As an illustration of the limitations of the current law, consider a recent case about which I have first-hand knowledge. Earlier this year, as all our colleagues will recall, there was a very serious oil spill in the Pacific Ocean that threatened to contaminate the Galapagos Islands. The government of Ecuador and people everywhere were very concerned that this could imperil the world-famous wildlife of the islands and the rest of that unique ecosystem. They hastened to organize a response. As part of that response, the Ecuadoran government was in contact with a company in Colorado that makes a product to absorb oil from sea water. But complications arose, and the company contacted my office to see if we could help resolve them. As we explored the situation, we learned that while the government of Ecuador was interested in acquiring the Colorado company's product, they also wanted to arrange for the United States to transport it to Ecuador by military aircraft, because that would be quicker and cheaper than other alternatives. But when we contacted the Defense Department to see if there was a possibility that it could be arranged, we learned about the limitations of current law. In short, we learned that while military transport might be possible to provide humanitarian relief, that option was not available to respond to an environmental emergency. The bill I am introducing today would change that--not by requiring the military to provide transport in such a case, but by providing that option in case the U.S. government should decide it would be appropriate. So, Mr. Speaker, this is not a far-reaching bill. But I think it would provide useful authority for our country to respond to environmental problems that, ultimately, can affect us and the rest of the world.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the service of Laurie Matthews. For the past decade Laurie has directed the Colorado State Parks through a period of transition that has resulted in the system becoming a ``national model.'' Overseeing forty state parks with an annual budget of $40 million, Laurie has become one of the most valued leaders in outdoor recreation in the nation. When Laurie took charge of the state parks system, it consisted of 190,000 acres with a maintenance backlog that experts said would take over forty years to clear up. Under her leadership the state park system in Colorado expanded by 25,000 acres worth $54 million and completely erased the maintenance backlog. Her dedication to the outdoors showed in her bolstering of environmental education and interpretation by adding 19 new visitor centers and 30 new seasonal interpreters to better assist the public. Laurie also serves on the Board of Directors for the National Association of State Park Directors, Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado, and Leave No Trace. She has been highly praised for her dedicated service to the state of Colorado by Gov. Bill Owens and the Executive Director of the Department of Natural Resources, Greg Walcher. Today I would like to add my voice to this praise. Laurie's service to the people and the lands of Colorado has been outstanding. The quality of life in our state has been enhanced by her commitment. She leaves Colorado to join her husband in the Himalayan Dental Relief Project in Nepal. During my travels and mountain climbing experiences in that country, I have come to know and appreciate the people of Nepal and I know that Laurie will be of tremendous service to them. I wish Laurie and her husband the best possible luck there. If she has even a fraction of the amount of success there that she has had in Colorado then the people of Nepal will indeed be extremely fortunate. Mr. Speaker, I am attaching a recent article and editorial from the Denver Post, and want to personally thank Laurie Matthews for her years of dedicated service. [From the Denver Post] Head of Colorado State Parks to Step Down (By Theo Stein) Tuesday, April 17, 2001.--Ten years ago, Laurie Matthews inherited a Colorado State Parks system that had 190,000 acres, a $6 million annual budget and a maintenance program so far behind that officials said it would take 44 years to catch up. On Monday, Matthews announced she is leaving her position as director after a decade that saw park officials erase the maintenance backlog and add 25,000 acres of new holdings to a system that now counts 11 million visitors a year. Under her tenure, sought-after lands were added under the park system's ``crown jewel'' initiative, and acquisitions around three urban-area parks, Castlewood, Roxborough and Barr Lake, provided important buffers. ``State parks have flourished under her leadership, and we will miss her greatly,'' said Edward Callaway, parks board chairman. ``I have absolutely the highest regard for that woman.'' Matthews said she's resigning effective June 20 to spend several months in Nepal helping her husband, dentist Andrew Holeck, with the nonprofit Himalayan Dental Relief project they co-founded. ``For five years, we've gone over to Nepal and gradually have done more and more of the clinics,'' she said. While she's excited about the challenge, Matthews also said she has mixed feelings about leaving. ``It's been a wonderful 10 years, the system is positioned beautifully, but, yeah, it's difficult,'' said Matthews. ``What I'll miss most are the wonderful people who work for Colorado State Parks.'' Matthews said three developments provided the footing necessary to make the gains of the past 10 years. First came the legislation enabling Great Outdoors Colorado, which earmarked state lottery money to help parks and recreation. Second was a bill championed by the state's congressional delegation that allowed federal agencies to join cost sharing partnerships with states to renovate aging parks. Finally, the state legislature approved park fee increases. Matthews also focused on environmental education in the parks, adding 19 new visitor centers and 30 seasonal interpreters to assist the public.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to two teachers, Jack Ganse and Micheal Matassa of Superior, Colorado. Jack and Michael are eighth grade science and math teachers at Eldorado K-8 school. They have initiated a program in which their classes will work together to study how the tremendous population growth Superior has experienced effects the quality of the air, land, and water. In this program, Jack and Michael have found a way to engage our children in a meaningful educational experience. This experience will engage the students in an issue that our civic leaders must wrestle with on a continuous basis. It will be an education in math and science and civics all at the same time. As in many parts of the country, urban sprawl has become a great concern to the citizens of Colorado. Superior has grown from a small, rural town of 250 residents in the mid-1980's to a community of nearly 9,000 residents according to the 2000 census. It holds the title of Colorado's fastest growing town. Jack and Michael and their students are going to investigate the effects of this growth on everything from wildlife to possible local climate change from all the new concrete. In addition to posting their findings on the school's web site, the classes will also provide the information to the town board, so that it can then be used to assist in municipal decisions. Jack and Michael are two of only 55 pairs of teachers nation wide to earn a $15,000 grant from Verizon to fund their project. This project will continue each year with each succeeding class picking it up and adding to the database. At a time when unchecked growth is having detrimental impacts on our natural resources and environment, these two individuals are connecting our students' energies and knowledge to a pressing community need. They are teaching them that their studies can have a practical application, an application that will benefit the entire community. Mr. Speaker, I would like to personally thank Jack Ganse and Michael Matassa for their selfless dedication to their community and to the education of the students to whom we entrust to them.