Tom Udall

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to pararescueman Jason Cunningham--one of America and New Mexico's true heroes. Jason was one of our six brave soldiers killed during a shoot-out in the mountainous Gardez area of Afghanistan on Monday, March 4th. Jason participated in the insertion of Special Forces in the area when the helicopter he was a passenger in was brought down by machine-gun fire and a rocket propelled grenade. Jason and his six crewmembers were trying to rescue a Navy SEAL who had fallen out of the helicopter. Jason grew up in New Mexico, spending most of his childhood in the southern part of the state, but he attended high school in Farmington and his parents currently reside in my district in Gallup, New Mexico. Following graduation, Jason joined the Navy, finished his four years, and re-entered the armed forces, this time joining the Air Force and attending Pararescue School, from which he graduated in June of 2001. It was in February of this year that Jason was sent to Afghanistan to join the front lines in the war against terror and left behind his loved ones for the call of duty. Last week, Jason received a deserved heroes burial in Arlington National Cemetery where he took his place among the men and women who have, like Jason, courageously answered their country's call. Douglas MacArthur once said, ``the soldier above all people, prays for peace for he or she must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war.'' However, I am sure that Jason's family, and the families of the other brave men and women who have died in service to their country also deeply feel the scars of war. Let us keep all the families with sons and daughters on the front lines in the war against terror in our thoughts and prayers.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for S. 1857, Encourage the Negotiated Settlement of Tribal Claims bill. I would like to begin by commending my friend and Co-Chair of the Native American Caucus, Representative Kildee for introducing the companion bill H.R. 3851 and my friend Nick Rahall, our ranking member of the Resources Committee for his dedication and work on this issue. Through treaties, statutes and executive orders American Indians and Alaskan Natives (Al/AN) have entered into a trust relationship with the federal government. As part of this relationship Al/AN agreed to entrust the federal government with their resources such as land, natural resources, enterprises, judgement awards and investment income. Under the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) has been given the authority by the federal government to manage Indian resources and other assets. Unfortunately, the BIA has not honored this trust relationship. Instead, they have managed to ``mismanage'' the trust accounts of 315 Indian tribes with over 1,400 accounts worth over $2.6 billion for many years. S. 1857 will expand the current statute of limitations until 2005 allowing Indian tribes to postpone filing claims against the U.S. relating to the management of their trust fund accounts. It will enable the trust account holders the time necessary to identify where their money is going. This legislation will hold the BIA accountable for their mismanagement and squandering of Indian people's money. This past December my constituents of the Navajo Nation, Jicarilla Apache and Pueblos (over 40,000 people) did not receive their royalty checks, money they greatly depend on for rent, clothing, food and other basic necessities. Today, the Congress has the opportunity to honor and enforce its trust responsibility to Al/AN people. I fully support S. 1857 and encourage my fellow colleagues to do the same. We must make the BIA accountable for their actions.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I wish to insert into the Record a March 5, 2001 BusinessWeek article that highlights the work of the Delta-Montrose Electrical Association (DMEA), a rural energy cooperative in southwestern Colorado. The DMEA has been around since 1938, yet it is reinventing itself to be able to address 21st century challenges of deregulation and technological change. Its investments in research and development have resulted in innovative services it can offer its customers in the way of combined heating and cooling and fuel cell power for rural areas. In the near future, DMEA hopes to use Internet connectivity to optimize customers' energy use and reduce costs. As the article points out, instead of trying to dominate the market, DMEA's co-op culture means that DMEA shares what it knows with other cooperatives around the country. I hope DMEA's good ideas and hard work get the attention they deserve. Cutting Edge in Rural Colorado? (By Hal Clifford) In 5 or 10 years, your relationship with your electrical utility may be different from what it is now. For a fixed fee, the power company might heat and cool your home with a geothermal heat pump it has buried in your backyard. Or your utility may offer to sell you electricity from a superclean fuel cell it installs in your garage, then buy back any excess juice you don't consume. The power company might even link itself via the Internet to your most energy-hungry appliances--maybe your air conditioner or water heater--so that it can switch them to a power-saver mode when necessary. You might expect these sorts of high-tech innovations to pop up in energy-starved Silicon Valley, the brainchild of some tech-savvy venture capitalist. You'd be wrong. First out of the gate is the Delta-Montrose Electrical Assn. (DMEA), a 64-year old rural energy cooperative in southwestern Colorado. Any many of the new options are quickly gaining popularity with the co-op's 28,000 members. By focusing on energy services such as heating and cooling, rather than straightforward power generation, DMEA is transforming its once-quiet business. Faster than most power players, DMEA is plugging into new technologies. In some cases, it's also forming partnerships with companies developing promising technologies--an unusual step for a once-unadventurous co-op. ``I think they're one of the most innovative co-ops in the country,'' says Peggy Plate, an energy services manager for the Energy Dept.'s Western Area Power Administration. If these strategies pay off, big utilities may soon find themselves looking to DMEA for tips on how to prosper in a new era of energy deregulation.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to final passage of H.R. 2341, laughingly called the Class Action Fairness Act. I say ``laughingly'' because there is nothing fair about this bill, unless your idea of fair means changing the tort system to benefit corporate polluters, monopolistic enterprises, and irresponsible groups at the expense of everyday Americans. If enacted, this bill will change the rules to make it easier than ever for corporations to move important class action lawsuits from state courts--the courts that are most in touch with and responsible to our constitutents--to federal courts. While this change may not sound like a very big change at first, the impact will actually be enormous. Every corporate defender in this country knows that federal courts are the most desirable venue in which to try class action cases because federal court rules disadvantage plaintiffs and ordinary citizens. As they attempt to defend their wealthy clients, corporate lawyers try every trick in the book to have important cases moved from local courts to federal courts, and this bill will only make their job easier! I cannot imagine why we would want to make the enormous challenges faced by the plaintiffs in class actions cases even harder, but the leadership of this body had made it a priority! At a time when our armed forces are defending this country across the ocean, when millions of Americans are out of work, and when we face serious threats to Social Security and Medicare, it is amazing to me that this body would decide to address the issue of class action ``fairness'' instead of addressing the most serious issues facing this country. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this bill and ask that this body move forward in addressing real problems.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, clearly, this administration and the Congress have done a good job at tackling the issue of terrorism, but there are many other important issues which need our attention, and one of these is Social Security. Last May, this administration was giving us a different message on Social Security. We were told we could have a tax cut, save the Social Security surpluses, pay down the debt, and fund other urgent national priorities. Today, we are in a far different situation. We are not saving any of the surpluses; in fact, we are spending them. Mr. Speaker, $1.5 trillion over 10 years of Social Security surpluses are going to be spent under the current budget plans. We are not paying down the debt. We are, in fact, increasing the debt, unlike the predictions that were made. Plans are under way to increase the national debt ceiling, so we are headed into more debt, rather than as it was promised earlier we were going to be out of debt in 10 years. Why is the erasing the debt important? It is important because by paying down debt, we are freeing up resources to help save Social Security. At points in our history in dealing with this debt, 25 cents of every tax dollar that comes in has been spent on just servicing the debt. So if we lower that debt amount, that 25 cents, then we are freeing up resources, current resources that are coming in to protect Social Security. That means we are going to have Social Security there for the long term. Last year, all of us repeatedly promised to protect the Social Security and Medicare trust fund surpluses and promoted a series of lock box proposals as evidence of their commitment. Now, however, this administration's budget diverts $1.5 trillion of the Social Security Trust Fund surpluses for day-to-day government operations for the next 10 years and beyond. Even taking the administration's optimistic numbers at face value, according to the CBO this administration's budget spends hundreds of billions of dollars from the Social Security trust fund. Moreover, the Social Security surpluses that the budget depletes are needed to finance the benefits promised under existing law. Strengthening these programs to prepare for the baby boom's retirement or adding even the administration's inadequate prescription drug benefit requires resources outside of these surpluses. Since the budget does not provide such resources, these programs will require benefit cuts or even more borrowing to remain sound for the long term, as noted in the recent report of the President's hand-picked Social Security Commission. The administration proposes a budget with a $1.5 trillion on-budget deficit over the next 10 years. Two weeks ago, the Congressional Budget Office confirmed that the enacted tax cut was the largest single factor in the $4 trillion deterioration of the budget. Now, the administration proposes to undermine the fiscal outlook with about an additional $600 billion in tax cuts. Every penny of these additional tax cuts comes out of Social Security and Medicare trust fund surpluses. In addition to this assault on the Social Security surplus, the Social Security Commission marks further danger to this highly successful program. To nobody's surprise, the commission is a strong advocate to create individually controlled, voluntary personal retirement accounts. I supported the establishment of USA accounts, which would exist as a separate retirement vehicle outside of Social Security and would include Federal matching funds to encourage Americans to save. However, this administration's plan, through this commission, would divert $1 trillion out of the Social Security system and into private accounts. This will double Social Security's shortfall and deplete the trust fund by 2003, 15 years earlier than currently projected. Moreover, under President Bush's plan, seniors will be forced to rely on private accounts that rise and fall with the stock market, thereby leaving their retirement security vulnerable to fluctuations in the market. This program is too important to gamble with a volatile stock market, and Social Security must continue to be a vital safety net in the future. We must do everything possible to ensure it survives to provide benefits for all Americans.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today in support of a worker assistance measure that will finally benefit the men and women who need it the most--the unemployed. I am also happy to see that we were finally able to work in a bipartisan fashion to get important legislation crafted for individuals strongly in need of help. I cannot tell you, Mr. Speaker, how many phone calls my office received from people who were nearing the end of their unemployment benefits, and were still struggling to find employment despite constant efforts to do so. Unfortunately, since last fall, Republicans have been playing nothing more than dirty pool by pushing so-called stimulus packages with accelerated tax cuts, corporate AMT refunds running back to 1986, and poorly conceived health insurance tax credits. Nevertheless, as the old adage goes, ``it's better late than never.'' And, although Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan is on the Hill today proclaiming that economic recovery is ``well under way,'' there are thousands of Americans, and many of New Mexicans who are still not seeing the benefits of a recovering economy. That is why I am glad the majority finally decided to do what is right and bring forth a real, meaningful worker assistance bill without controversial tax breaks. I am pleased to support this legislation and urge my colleagues to do the same. Worker assistance is long overdue.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, we all know of those local elected leaders from our states who, because of their tenure in office, accomplishments, dedication, and hard work, seem to define the term `public servant.' These are the ones who do not seek headlines, but whose satisfaction comes from doing good things for their communities. I know of no other leader who fits this definition and style of public service more aptly than Rio Rancho Mayor John Jennings. Mayor Jennings will be leaving his post in March, after an exciting term in the history of this special city. He deserves immense credit for the success and growth of New Mexico's fastest-growing city. Mayor Jennings came to office in 1998 from a career in banking, serving Sunwest Bank for 23 years. He also served as a president of the Rio Rancho Chamber of Commerce. He used this experience to begin the demanding task of governing. Mayor Jennings has served at a time of amazing expansion for the City of Vision. Building a city that can sustain such rapid growth has required patience, careful planning and effort, but those who live there feel they have finally created a community with its own identity, one that will continue to grow and thrive. Mayor Jennings has done a remarkable job in this regard. A number of challenging issues face the City of Vision. Whether it be water, planning, revenue, or any issue that looms before our nation's mayors, John has capably acted on behalf of his city to address them. His leadership has been effective, and he leaves the city better than he found it. As the U.S. Representative for the Third Congressional District, I hear from a number of the elected officials that I represent. However, Mayor Jennings has always made sure that I was aware of the matters that affected our dual constituents. Mayor Jennings leaves office with a number of important accomplishments that will aid Rio Rancho for years to come. He fought to attract new industry to the city, which is critical to expanding the city's tax base. He worked on a number of transportation and infrastructure issues. He was also a major voice in the Vision 2020 Integrated Comprehensive Plan, which is a blueprint for dealing with growth-associated problems. In addition, Rio Rancho is the second safest city in New Mexico and has one of the best school systems. However, I believe that the true legacy of Mayor Jennings is the emphasis he placed on the quality of life in Rio Rancho. He told a reporter once that he wanted children in Rio Rancho to have the same things he had growing up in Roswell: good libraries, free schooling, a safe environment. Therefore, many of his priorities were not surprising: adding park space and open space, correcting infrastructure deficiencies, such as adding sewer lines, repairing and upgrading roads, and adding to libraries; and maintaining the Department of Public Safety at its current level to keep its excellent safety record. Without a doubt, he has succeeded in many of these initiatives. Mayor Jennings is from a family in New Mexico devoted to public service. From Rio Rancho to Roswell, the Jennings family has left a legacy of making government work for our citizens. His brother Tom is a former mayor of Roswell, and his brother Tim serves in the New Mexico State Senate. I am pleased that John has chosen to follow his family in this endeavor and he has done a remarkable job. More important than all of that is the indelible mark he continues to make on our minds as a man of true integrity, character, and kindness, a true gentleman who never speaks ill of a soul and one whose friendship is of the highest quality and value. I hope that Mayor Jennings leaves his post with fond memories of his mayoral tenure and a sense of accomplishment for his efforts. Knowing John, upon his retirement, he is going to pursue endeavors that will be interesting and challenging; and no matter what he undertakes, I am sure that he will enjoy great success. On behalf of Rio Rancho, the state of New Mexico, and this nation, I ask that my colleagues join me in thanking Mayor John Jennings for his service.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1542 and urge my colleagues to support the Cannon-Conyers amendment which ensures fair competition and consumer protection. Proponents who have visited with me have claimed that the Bell's hands, including Qwest, are tied when it comes to the deployment of broadband to rural and urban places. That's not necessarily true in my state or my rural district. In fact, currently, Qwest Communications is not precluded from offering broadband services to its customers. The N.M. State Public Regulation Commission in 2001 approved an Alternative Form of Regulation agreement, which requires Qwest to provide high-speed data services to both urban and rural areas. H.R. 1542 as written will not improve access to services in New Mexico and could possibly hurt the Bell Operating Companies' incentive to open their markets to competition as required in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Without this needed amendment--H.R. 1542 will reward the bad behavior of these telephone companies who have done very little to encourage the development of competition or the deployment of broadband. We shouldn't reward them now with the passage of H.R. 1542 without the safeguards of Cannon-Conyers. Preserving a competitive marketplace is the best way to spur affordable broadband deployment in urban, suburban, and rural communities like the ones I represent. Competition, wherever it has occurred, in the telecommunication and other industry markets, has virtually always brought about better service, greater investment, more options, and lower prices for consumers. Support the Cannon-Conyers Amendment which will preserve competition, protect state authority, and safeguard consumers.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a recently lost New Mexican who was a devoted Native American educator, artist, and entrepreneur. Lloyd Kiva New had intuition and visionary skills that made him a successful business man; however, more importantly, his humble heart and ambition drove him to aide young Native American students to strive for excellence at the Institute of American Indian Arts. The Native American community has lost a prolific humanitarian, who devoted much of his time to encourage young students to climb to a higher level of education. Investing much of his time and energy, aside from his reputation as a renowned artist and entrepreneur, he developed a school intended to teach the values of individuality and excellence among the Native American community. Not only in Santa Fe but also throughout the nation's Native American communities, New was well respected and admired. Fellow colleagues, family members, and friends will moum the death of a great public servant. May we remember and keep in our hearts the generosity and accomplishments of Lloyd Kiva New and those whom he left behind. Those who will continue his legacy are his wife Aysen New, his son Jeff New, and his daughter Nancy Sandroff. Mr. Speaker, Lloyd Kiva New will be deeply missed, but not forgotten.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support this amendment because I think it brings fairness to this process. Mr. Chairman, today, as we debate this critical legislation, it is important to remember how we got here. In the aftermath of the Watergate scandal, our nation began looking for a way to address the major problems facing our political system. Congress led the way to reform by amending the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) in the hope that we could clean up our politics and diminish the influence of big money in campaigns and elections. After Watergate, we heard stories of bags of cash used to corrupt our politics. Those bags of cash were the Soft Money of their day. Then we had soft money in cash--today we have soft money checks. And the amounts are astronomical. Almost 30 years later, we are faced with a system that, while certainly better than it was in the early 1970's, remains riddled with loopholes that allow wealthy special interests to exert too much influence. In the resulting flood of cash, the average voter isn't heard. The 1970's campaign finance reforms were intended to clean up our system. Yet the well-intentioned efforts failed to imagine how corporations, unions and individuals would exploit loopholes and find ways to inject their money into the political system. It is legitimate to ask: why ban soft money. What do political parties and interest groups do with their money other than advocate for the election of their candidates? They do very important party building work such as registering voters and encouraging them to vote, but too much of their money is spent buying attack ads paid for with soft money. Shays-Meehan will still allow these real and important party- building activities, but we can take a step in the right direction today to end sham issues ads. Campaign finance reform goes even deeper than today's debate. All legislation we debate is affected. If we are to finally achieve what our predecessors sought over a quarter century ago, we much put an end to the soft money that makes a mockery of our current campaign finance laws. What is at stake is nothing less than our democracy. The principle of one man, one vote is consistently undermined by the ability of wealthy individuals and interests to purchase political power. I am often asked why Congress has not been able to pass legislation such as a patient's bill of rights or a Medicare prescription drug benefit for the nation's seniors. I have to say that we in Congress must fight against a powerful tide of money as we try to protect the public interest against the interests of a privileged few. The ubiquitous and pernicious influence of money in Washington mocks our best efforts to protect the underprivileged. Campaign finance reform is especially important because it will allow us to serve those who need our help the most, the average citizens who can't afford to give hundreds of thousands in soft money. The time for change is now. I traveled all across my district in January conducting town hall meetings at every stop. My constituents were outraged by the Enron scandal and what it really means. My constituents detected the corrupting connection between money and politics and so do yours. In the aftermath of Enron, many in the halls of government and across the country are taking a new look at the role that soft money plays in politics. The true outrage of Enron is not that they broke the rules, it is that they were able to use their money and influence to make the rules in the first place. Enron got the best regulations money can buy, and their workers and shareholders paid the price. The case of Enron only proved what most people already know about our campaign finance system. Even before Enron, 75 percent of Americans supported campaign finance reform. But, if the American people so overwhelming support it, why has this government failed to enact meaningful reform? It is because for years, opponents of reform have found a way to kill reform proposals quietly, ensuring that they would never have to take a stand against such popular measures. This year, opponents of reform will yet again attempt to kill reform through dishonesty and subterfuge. We will see amendment after amendment aimed at sending Shays-Meehan, the most comprehensive reform bill currently on the table, to conference committee, where its opponents predict it will die a slow but silent death. These amendments will no doubt seem reform-oriented on the surface, but beneath their shell they are poison pills, designed to kill our efforts for reform. That's what poison does . . . it kills. We must stand together against these poison pills. If we hold our united front on these tough amendments, we will have a final product that we can send to the other body and to President Bush for his signature. If the American people are to participate in and respect the electoral process, they must see that the influence of the voter is not outweighed by the purchased influence of wealthy special interests. We must restore dignity to the process by putting people ahead of money. Shays-Meehan, although it is not the end of the road, is a real step towards a political system of, by and for the people, without the corrupting influence of enormous amounts of soft money. I hope you will join me in passing Shays-Meehan, free of poison pill amendments, so that we may take yet another step toward a more representative democracy and a more perfect union. In closing, I want to congratulate and thank my colleagues, Mr. Shays and Mr. Meehan, for their leadership on this issue. I am proud to associate myself with their hard work on this important legislation and look forward to its passage. I urge my colleagues to vote no on these sham poison pill amendments and vote yes on final passage. It's the best option for honest campaign reform we have had in a generation.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the Wamp amendment. Putting more big money into the system is not the solution. We should be trying to encourage candidates to raise dollars in smaller amounts, not increasing the contribution amount to $2,000. This debate reminds me of the discussion between the candidate and the contributor. The contributor asked the candidate, what do I get if I contribute $500 to your campaign? The candidate says, you get good government. The contributor says, well, what do I get if I contribute $1,000 to your campaign? The candidate says, you get good government. Well, how about $2,000? The answer is, you get any kind of government you want. We do not want to go down that road. Keep the $1,000 maximum contribution limit. Vote no on the Wamp amendment.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me this time. I support the rule. Opponents of campaign finance reform are spreading erroneous information about Shays-Meehan. The opponents say Shays-Meehan violates the first amendment because it prohibits free speech. In order to reach this conclusion, one must assume money equals speech. Therefore, the rich man's wallet overwhelms the poor man's soap box. Not so in America. Shays-Meehan simply says that special interest television commercials must play by the same rules as Federal candidates. Corporate dollars, union dues, and unlimited dollars from wealthy individuals are prohibited, but groups are allowed to purchase and run television so long as they disclose the hard-dollar contributions. I urge my colleagues to support Shays-Meehan. It protects our first amendment rights. It protects our democracy.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, February 2, 1848, marks the anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. This is a treaty between Mexico and the United States which guaranteed Mexican citizens who remained in the United States certain property rights. One of the promises was to secure and protect the property rights of Mexican and Spanish citizens that have been granted land grants from Spanish and Mexican Governments. The U.S. violated these promises. The General Accounting Office is looking into this historic wrong, and I have introduced a bill to remedy the situation and to correct these injustices. I urge my colleagues to help me in this effort. Please review my legislation and take a good hard look at it.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 335 that honors the contributions of Catholic Schools throughout our country. Whatever our religious affiliations we can all admit that for many generations our parochial schools have achieved positive results in providing an excellent education. The graduation rate of Catholic school students is 95 percent, 83 percent of Catholic high school graduates go on to college, and only 3 percent of Catholic high school students drop out of school. The Catholic schools throughout New Mexico have mirrored these national statistics by providing a high standard of excellence in the way they educate their students. For example, the LaSallian Christian Brothers founded St. Michael's High School, in my Congressional District, in 1859. One hundred and forty-three years later, St. Michael's continues to provide many of the families of northern New Mexico with a parochial education that emphasizes both its religious, academic, and social goals. Catholic schools, such as St. Michael's, promote positive values, a sense of spirit and support by educating each student in the spirit of faith and of academic excellence. I encourage my colleagues to support this resolution that honors the contributions Catholic schools have made to our society.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, today, the House is considering H.R. 3295, the ``Help America Vote Act of 2001,'' an election reform proposal that seeks to address many of the problems with our national electoral system. It has been over a year since the 2000 Presidential Election, which brought many of these problems to light. Although it is not perfect, this legislation is long over-due, and I urge my colleagues to support its passage. I won't rehash the events of the 2000 Campaign, as we are all too familiar with hanging chads, the flawed butterfly ballot, and the countless ballots in Florida--and elsewhere--that were discarded and not tallied. That was a national tragedy. We've had a year to do something here in the House, and I am glad we are finally acting. I hope we can use this important legislation to address many of the shortcomings of our national voting system. H.R. 3295 is just a first step in our ongoing effort to restore our constituents' trust in the system of how we conduct our elected officials. Our constituents deserve to have that trust restored. This bill authorizes $400 million for one-time payments to states or counties to replace punch card voting systems in time for the November 2002 general election. These are the infamous ballots used in Florida and elsewhere. H.R. 3295 also creates a bipartisan Election Assistance Commission, which is intended to be a national clearinghouse for information and to review the procedures used for Federal elections. It authorizes $2.25 billion to help states improve their voting systems. Specifically, this bill will help states establish and maintain accurate voter lists; encourage voters to get out and vote; improve voting equipment; improve the processes for verification and identification of voters; recruit and train poll workers; improve access for voters with disabilities; and finally, educate voters about their rights and responsibilities. Most importantly, H.R. 3295 will establish minimum federal standards for state election systems regarding voter registration systems, provisional voting, the maintenance of accuracy of voter registration records; overseas absentee voting procedures, permitting voters with disabilities to cast a secret ballot, and allow voters an opportunity to correct errors. Now, as I said earlier, this bill is not perfect. In fact many well- respected organizations in the civil rights community oppose this legislation. I understand and share some of their frustrations. However, I believe that by passing this bill today, we can move the process forward in hopes that the bill that comes back from the Senate will have many improvements. I commend my colleagues Mr. Ney of Ohio and Mr. Hoyer of Maryland for their hard work in crafting this legislation. I encourage them, however, to work with Mr. Conyers of Michigan and Senator Dodd to ensure that if there is a conference on this bill, we can vote for an even better bill. Vote yes on H.R. 3295.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking Chairman Tauzin for allowing S. 1741, introduced by my good friend Senator Jeff Bingaman, to be considered by the House. I have appreciated working with him to bring S. 1741 to the floor and know that the issue of early detection and prevention holds a personal closeness to the both of us and to other members of this body. On April 3, 2001, I introduced H.R. 1383, the companion to S. 1741, along with Representatives Watts, Hayworth, Sherrod Brown, Camp, DeLauro, Kennedy, Kildee and over one hundred bi-partisan co-sponsors. The consideration of this legislation today represents the diligent and bi-partisan work over the last month and within the past few weeks and hours, by several Members of Congress and their staffs. The work of these individuals ensures that a simple but very important technical correction to the Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment and Prevention Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-354) will allow coverage of breast and cervical cancer treatment to Native American women. Mr. Speaker because of a technical definition in P.L. 106-345, American Indian and Native Alaskan women were and currently are excluded from this law's eligibility for treatment. And, as states determine whether to expand their Medicaid programs to provide breast and cervical cancer treatment as an optional benefit, passage of this legislation will ensure Native American and Alaskan Women are included to receive treatment. It is estimated that during 2001, almost 50,000 women are expected to die from breast or cervical cancer in the United States despite the fact that early detection and treatment of these diseases could substantially decrease this mortality. While passage of last year's bill made significant strides to address this problem, it failed to do so for Native American women and that is why we are here today. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues, especially Representatives Watts, Sherrod Brown, Waxman, Camp, and Hayworth for working with me to bringing S. 1741 to the floor today. I especially want to thank Jack Horner of Representative J.C. Watt's Republican Conference staff, Tim Westmoreland of Henry Waxman's office, Katie Porter of Sherrod Brown's office, and Tony Martinez and Mike Collins of my office for their vigilant and diligent work to ensure that this legislation did not fall victim to the end-of-the-year crunch. Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this bi-partisan and important legislation so that we may send it to the President for his signature to ensure that Native American and Native Alaskan women are not denied life-saving breast and cervical cancer treatment.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong opposition to this legislation being brought forth under the guise of a stimulus for a sluggish economy. Once again, just like H.R. 3090, this sham of a stimulus bill is geared toward providing tax breaks to the wealthiest individuals and corporations in our country. Extending for an additional 5 years a tax break for multinational financial corporations? Cutting the 27 percent income tax rate to 25 percent? How many of the men and women who have lost their jobs because of the economic slowdown are going to benefit from these provisions? Instead of discussing ways to make sure that these individuals are able to afford health insurance for themselves and their families, we are talking, once again, about retroactive corporate tax cuts. We are talking about a tax cut that leaves out 75 percent of all Americans because they don't have high enough income to be in the 27 percent tax bracket. It was recently announced by the National Bureau of Economic Research that the recession began in March, yet since that time, the House of Representatives has not passed any legislation or committed one dime for worker relief. I urge my colleagues to oppose this shameful legislation that benefits only the wealthiest corporations and individuals in this great country; a country, Mr. Speaker, that was built on the hard-working shoulders of the types of men and women who are excluded from this very legislation. Oppose this bill.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 10, the Railroad Retirement and Survivors' Improvements Act of 2001. This critical legislation makes important improvements in the benefit structure for retired railroad workers, especially for widows and widowers. In the early 1900's, the rail industry was the nation's largest employer. With record levels of unemployment, the Federal Government decided to provide economic incentives to encourage the retirement of older employees, thereby creating more jobs for younger workers. ``Railroad Retirement'' was created to provide retirement benefits beginning in 1936 creating retirement incentive for many older railroad employees who otherwise would not have received Social Security benefits until 1942. This program replaced the private railroad pension plans and began to pay benefits in 1936, based on up to 30 years of past untaxed rail service. The system is now $40 billion short of what would be required to pay benefits to all the workers who have yet to retire and their survivors. Congress has a responsibility to provide railroad retirees and their survivors with increased benefits, as well as making necessary changes to update and modernize the railroad employee benefit system. To that end, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 10. More than 670,000 retirees and dependents and 245,000 active rail employees will benefit from the improvements made by the Railroad Retirement and Survivors' Improvement Act of 2001. Please support our nation's railroad workers, rail retirees and spouses by supporting this critical reform package. Vote yes on H.R. 10.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I believe that international trade is very important to improving our nation's economy and would gladly vote for a bill encouraging Fair Trade around the globe. I have been proud to cast pro-trade votes in this House before; however, I cannot support the Thomas bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote no. If given the chance, I would like to have an up or down vote on the Rangel substitute, but the Majority has produced an unfair, undemocratic rule, with little meaningful debate allowed. I support trade agreements that provide important safeguards to protect the rights of American working families as well as the rights of our trading partners' workers. I also support trade agreements that protect the global environment. I cannot, however, support this Fast Track authority because it will weaken our ability to exercise our Constitutional duty to provide oversight of the executive branch. I believe that any special authority granted to the President should be conditioned upon certain basic requirements that the United States only enter into agreements that are mindful of the need to protect the workers in all countries participating in the agreement as well as the global environment. These safeguards must be in the core text of the bill, not promised in future negotiations. I believe, though, that our debate today is about more than H.R. 3005. The Majority Party has failed to provide for our nation's immediate needs. Our country has many pressing, economic needs that remain unmet by the Leadership of this House. We must act now to raise the living standards of workers--both here at home, and abroad. The time to act is long overdue. The Majority Party has done nothing to address many of those needs. It has done nothing to help the thousands of unemployed Americans who have lost their jobs in the Bush recession. It has done nothing to help workers with their emergency health care needs. It has done nothing to pass an economic stimulus that really helps working families. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the Thomas bill, and I urge the Majority to give us a fair vote on a fair trade bill--the Rangel substitute.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3447, the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care Programs Enhancement Act of 2001. This important legislation makes changes to and additions of several important health benefits for our Nation's veterans. I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Mr. Smith and Mr. Evans, and the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Health Subcommittee Mr. Moran and Mr. Filner, and my colleagues on the Committee for their work on this bill. Although there are several important health benefit enhancements in this bill, I would like to speak specifically about the provisions regarding VA nurse retention and recruitment, which are taken from a bill that Representatives Sue Kelly, Carolyn McCarthy, Mike Doyle, and I introduced on October 3, 2001. The legislation we introduced, H.R. 3017 the Department of Veterans Affairs Nurse Recruitment and Retention Enhancement Act of 2001, is companion legislation to S. 1188, which was introduced by Senator Jay Rockefeller on July 17, 2001. S. 1188, H.R. 3017, and now the provisions in H.R. 3347 seek to address the current nursing shortage in the VA health care system, and to ensure that the shortage is not exacerbated. The provisions in H.R. 3347 modify existing scholarship and debt reduction programs for VA nurses, requires the VA to establish staffing standards at VA health care facilities, makes pay more consistent for various VA health professionals, and rectifies unequal retirement policies to improve retention of nurses in the VA health care system. This legislation also requires the VA to report to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs regarding VA nursing issues, including the use of overtime by licensed nursing staff and nursing assistants in each facility in order to help determine what can be done to reduce the amount of mandatory overtime. This legislation is a critical step in addressing the nursing shortage in the VA health care system. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3347 and support our VA nurses and health care system, as well as the men and women who have fought for our country and now receive care at these facilities.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, there are three good reasons we should reject the recent recommendations of the Social Security commission, this commission that has said that we should move in the direction of privatizing Social Security. The first is the commission was stacked with individuals who had a preconceived notion of the outcome. Second, the commission recommends private accounts but does not take into consideration the cost. Many observers believe converting Social Security to private accounts would cost $1 trillion. Where is that money to come from? Out of Social Security, of course. And finally, private accounts invested in the market are risky investments. We only need to look at our recent downturn to see how risky these investments are. Are we going to throw people out on the streets in their golden years because they have lost their retirements in the market? I certainly hope not.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1291, the Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act of 2001. This legislation makes a number of important changes to improve insurance compensation and housing programs for our Nation's veterans. I want to thank the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith); the ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans); the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), and my colleagues on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs for supporting the inclusion of provisions from H.R. 1929, the Native American Veterans Home Loan Act of 2001 into H.R. 1291. Ranking member Evans and 14 other Members and I introduced H.R. 1929 on March 21 of this year to extend the Native American Veterans Home Loan Pilot Program for another 4 years, and expedite the process of obtaining VA home loans for Native American veterans living on tribal and trust lands. This program helps many Native American veterans, who might otherwise be unable to obtain suitable housing. Including the provisions of H.R. 1929 into H.R. 1291 will allow other Native American veterans to take advantage of this important program. The Native American Veteran Home Loan Pilot Program, however, is just one of many VA benefits improved through H.R. 1291. I ask my colleagues to join me in support of these important benefit enhancements for the men and women who have sacrificed so much in defense of liberty and democracy.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2540, the Veterans' Compensation Rate Amendments of 2001. I would first like to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and their staffs, who worked to bring this bill before the House for final passage. This legislation provides an important annual cost-of-living adjustment for disabled veterans, as well as surviving spouses of veteran's who receive dependency and indemnity compensation. Under H.R. 2540, the compensation rate is raised by 2.6 percent, the same percentage as the increase provided to Social Security recipients. As the cost living continues to rise, it is important that the well- deserved benefits received by veterans and their families are not diminished as a result of inflationary costs. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation and ensure that the benefits for the men and women who served our nation keep up with the ever-increasing cost of living.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2716. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this measure and I would like to thank all members and staff who worked to help bring this excellent piece of legislation before the House for passage. I strongly believe that H.R. 2716 will truly benefit our nation's homeless veterans. I would also like to express my regret and disappointment over some of the partisan politics that have surrounded this legislation. For far too long, too many of the men and women who have served in our nation's military have been homeless. It is a sad fact that an estimated 225,000 veterans throughout the United States live on the streets. Delaying action on this bill over partisan politics only hurt the veteran's living on the streets. Nevertheless, I am pleased that the bill is finally ready for passage and I strongly support H.R. 2716, which is a critical step in addressing the shameful situation of homeless veterans in our country. Among several other provisions included in this bill, H.R. 2716 authorizes 2,000 additional HUD Section 8 low-income housing vouchers over four years for homeless veterans, establishes a grant program for homeless veterans with special needs, and establishes a limited dental provision for veterans using VA homeless programs. In addition, H.R. 2716 establishes evaluation centers for programs that serve homeless populations and requires annual program assessments to be submitted to Congress. These are just a few of the many critical provisions in H.R. 2716 that will help eliminate the problem of chronic homelessness among veterans. I ask my colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation for the men and women who have sacrificed so much in defense of liberty and democracy.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor H.R. 2722 to give it my full support and urge my colleagues to join me in passing this important piece of legislation. This bill will improve the lives of countless persons in Africa and around the world. For too long, the diamond trade has been a source of funds for violent rogue leaders and their cronies to purchase the weapons they use to terrorize, dominate, and murder innocent civilians in some of the world's most desperate countries. The illegal diamond trade has also been a significant source of funds for the al Queda terrorist organization and Ossama bin Laden. Wars have been fought and entire populations have been eliminated in pursuit of this dirty money, but today the United States Congress will act to cut off the flow of these ``Conflict Diamonds.'' Today, we take the first step to prohibit the importation of conflict diamonds and their derivatives into the United States. This will have an immediate and major impact on the international diamond market. The United States is a major buyer of diamonds, and our importation policy will immediately begin to end the trade in conflict diamonds and force international diamond brokers to certify that their suppliers do not engage in illegal activities. I am pleased to see that the United States is taking such swift and determined action on this important issue. This is an important day for international human rights, and our actions here today will have a lasting impact on the lives of millions around the world. Please join me in voting ``yes'' on H.R. 2722.