Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, it is with profound sorrow and sympathy that I join my colleagues to condemn the horrific acts of terrorism yesterday in New York City and here in our own Nation's capital. On behalf of the people of Marin and Sonoma Counties, I extend condolences and prayers to those who lost family, friends, and co- workers. To those in our Bay Area community who are grieving for their own losses in yesterday's terrorist attacks, we stand ready to offer our support and console. To those who selflessly and bravely offered themselves in our Nation's greatest time of need, we thank you. Mr. Speaker, we send a message to those guilty of those disastrous acts. Our message is that their acts of destroying the World Trade Center, damaging the Pentagon, and using U.S. airlines to carry out their brutal deeds of death, those actions fully intending to destroy our democracy through terror, death, and disability will not succeed. This Nation's steadfast determination to support democracy will not bow to terrorism. We will instead reach out, reach out to the victims and their families. We will rebuild our cities and we will rebuild our confidence. We will not let the forces of evil prevail or go unpunished. Yet, as we try to make sense of yesterday's senseless activities, we will remember that our Nation's response to these acts will also leave an indelible mark on the American people. Determining an appropriate response and bringing those responsible for the attacks to justice means that we must temper our absolute resolve with wisdom, and Mr. Speaker, I have complete confidence that America will rise to the challenge.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor those who worked on Christo's ``Running Fence'' on the occasion of its 25th anniversary. A project of the internationally renowned artist Christo and his wife Jeanne-Claude, the ``Running Fence'' was completed in Sonoma and Marin Counties on September 10, 1976, after 42 months of collaborative efforts. These efforts included participation of the affected ranchers, 18 public hearings, three sessions at the Superior Courts of California, the drafting of a 450 page Environmental Impact Report, and the temporary use of the hills, sky, and ocean. The ``Running Fence'' was 18 feet high and its 24.5 miles in length crossed 14 roads, 59 ranches, and the town of Valley Ford. It extended from near Freeway 101 in Sonoma County to the Pacific Ocean at Bodega Bay. As promised, the project was removed 14 days after its completion and all the materials given to the ranchers. The beauty of the ``Running Fence'', constructed of 240,000 square yards of white nylon, and the beauty of the California countryside complemented each other perfectly to create a breathtaking artistic vision. Mr. Speaker, although the ``Running Fence'' was designed to be temporary, Christo's project will live forever in the imaginations of those who saw it and in its identification with the landscape of Sonoma and Marin Counties.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday during rollcall vote No. 312, I inadvertently recorded my vote as ``aye.'' My intention had been to vote ``no'' on the green amendment. I ask that my statement be inserted in the Record at the appropriate place. Thank you.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, late in the evening, one of the authors of the bipartisan patients' bill of rights, a bill that the majority of the House of Representatives supports and the President does not support, the author of that legislation turned the good bill, under the pressure of the White House, into a patients' bill of wrongs. Today, we will be voting on the President's idea of an insurance bill of rights, a bill that will kill the bill in the first place by putting impossible roadblocks in the way of patients getting effective care in a timely manner. This patients' bill of wrongs would also roll back protections already provided by States right here in this country today. Do not vote for the patients' bill of wrongs.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and I thank the gentleman for getting the pronunciation of my name right. As the ranking member on the Committee on Science's Subcommittee on Energy, I was pleased that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) led the way so that the Committee on Science was able to report out a bill that accomplishes much of what I consider important to bring our country's energy policy into the 21st century. In fact, the Committee on Science bill reflects my push for aggressive R&D goals and funding levels for all renewable energy sources. I appreciate the chairman working with me on this shared priority. Unfortunately, this bipartisan model did not take root in the final bill. It is no surprise to me that in this Chamber we have a variety of visions on what our energy future should look like, but there are points where the people of this country know what is best. And we ought to look at them to be our leaders. For example, many in my district share in the Nation's opposition to drilling for oil in ANWR. They consider it outrageous that drilling in this area is even included in this legislation. Americans around the country also cringe when they learn that this bill lines the pockets of the fossil fuel and nuclear industries, making these industries, as this bill reflects, our number one priority. It is not appropriate that these industries should be our number one priority, when we know that our focus must be to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and expensive, dangerous nuclear energy. Instead, we should be investing in renewable, safe, and efficient energy sources. Despite massive financial and scientific investments--not to mention a new PR campaign--the facts about nuclear power are unchanged. It's dangerous, expensive and has not delivered on decades-old promises of energy security and independence. While the nuclear industry claims that nuclear power is safe, the fact remains that people are skeptical--especially if a plant or disposal site is in their backyard, or nuclear waste is transported through their community. Americans want, need and deserve a smart energy policy that will take us into the 21st century--not a bill that continues down the path we've traveled for the last 100 years--a path that has led to global warming because of our overdependence on fossil fuels. That's why I can't vote for this energy bill.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, so here is the question for all of us: If, in fact, the U.S. auto industry suffers from increased CAFE standards, then what is the effect and how much does the industry suffer and how much does our economy suffer when Americans import fuel-efficient automobiles from other countries? Because with the high cost of fuel, the detrimental effect on our environment, and the interest of American consumers to be independent of foreign oil, we will be purchasing fuel- efficient autos, domestic or foreign.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1858, the National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act. I would like to commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) for their very successful effort to bring this bill together in a true bipartisan manner. That is what makes serving on the Committee on Science such a joy. I thank you both very much. This bill is a clear blueprint to further science, math, and technology education in our country. As a member of both the House Committee on Education and Workforce and Committee on Science, I am very aware of the challenges that our students and schools face in educating for a highly technical workforce. We know that having a well- educated workforce in the math and science fields is a major priority of employers across this Nation, especially in the high-tech arena. Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that the United States will not have a technically competent workforce until females, the majority of our students, study science, math, and engineering or technology in the same numbers as their male counterparts. That is why I am glad that we were able to work together on this committee to ensure that this bill addresses the important issue of girls and young women and technology. The science enrichment programs for girls included in this bill, which is based on a bill I authored, Go Girl, H.R. 1536, will authorize NSF to fund programs in elementary and secondary schools that encourage the ongoing interests of girls in science, math, engineering, and technology. The bill, H.R. 1858, will provide a way for girls to gain both the practical advice and the vision they need to pursue undergraduate and graduate studies or careers in these technical fields. It will help create a bold new workforce of energized young women, meaning that employers, public and private, will be able to hire the workers they need right here in America, because the 50 percent of our population that now is turning away from careers in science, math, engineering, and technology will actually seek and receive the education they need to fill those jobs, jobs that pay a very good salary, by the way. This important provision is one of the reasons I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this bill.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to rise in support of this amendment offered by my friend and colleague, Ms. Pelosi. As many of my colleagues know, I am a relatively new grandmother. My grandson, Teddy, is eighteen months old--old enough to sit at the table with his parents and eat many of the things they eat. But Teddy is, of course, much smaller than his parents and his vital systems are not fully developed. According to a report by the National Academy of Sciences, that means that Teddy, and all other children, are ``more susceptible to permanent damage'' from exposure to pesticides and other chemicals in foods. That landmark National Science Report, ``pesticides in the diets of infants and children'' was the main reason that Congress passed the food quality protection act in 1996 with strong bipartisan support. This was the first law to require that the standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency for pesticide traces in our foods take into account the special vulnerabilities of growing children. Members from both sides of the aisle agreed that we wanted the food our children--and grandchildren--eat to be as safe as possible. That's why I was shocked to learn that H.R. 2620 will make it impossible for the Environmental Protection Agency to develop these standards. And it does this in a really sneaky way. Section 421 of this Bill prohibits the EPA from issuing the final rule to increase the user fee that the pesticide industry pays to help finance pesticide tolerance studies. OMB has estimated that increasing the user fee would give EPA an additional $50 million dollars that the EPA needs, in order to find out what levels of pesticides children can safely tolerate. Section 421 makes it impossible for EPA to collect that money. The Pelosi Amendment strikes Section 421, giving EPA the authority it needs to begin collecting increased user fees from the pesticide industry. I can't imagine that there is a parent or a grandparent, or anyone in this house who cares about the health of a young child, who doesn't want to make sure that the food that child eats is safe from dangerous levels of pesticides. that's what the Pelosi Amendment does, it protects the foods our children eat, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Roemer amendment to cap funding for the International Space Station. I rise to thank our good friend, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) for his leadership on this issue and many other very important issues here in the House of Representatives. He will be missed. When I came here 9 years ago, the gentleman was leading the effort in proving the point that the Space Station was too costly for what we were going to get out of it for this Nation. I was with him then, and I am as convinced today as I was 9 years ago that the gentleman is absolutely right on this issue. I am a member of the House Committee on Science. It is hard to be a member of the House Committee on Science and not support the Space Station. But I can say as a member, I am respectful of the very valuable work that NASA does to push the envelope of technology for the aeronautical field and for understanding our universe in general. I support the Romer amendment, however, because I believe one NASA project, the Space Station, has cast too large a shadow over our Federal budget. When the Space Station was proposed in 1984, the estimated price tag was about $8 billion. Can we all imagine $8 billion? Now the construction price alone has quadrupled the original price tag. On the Committee on Science we are still holding periodic hearings that discuss the continuing cost overruns for the Space Station. Mr. Chairman, I suggest we can do better by our budget and we can do better by our children. By voting to cap the construction and launch costs for the Space Station, we can invest this money in as worthy but more reliable programs, both at NASA and other areas of our Federal budget. In this time of tight Federal funding, I believe now is the time to put the reigns on the Space Station. Invest in our country.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, the Corporation for National Service changes lives. It gets people of all ages to volunteer, and, as they volunteer, to improve the lives of others. While they are doing that, they improve their own lives. At the same time, the corporation volunteer program fills unmet local community needs. In my district, the sixth district of California, AmeriCorps volunteers are reading tutors in Larkspur; students from Sonoma State University volunteer for a Vista program in Rohnert Park; AmeriCorps sponsors a multi-cultural alliance and teacher fellowship program in Ross, California; and seniors in Sonoma County donate their time and wisdom through the local Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, RSVP. We have been lucky to get assistance also from California Statewide AmeriCorps programs. Last summer, AmeriCorps volunteers from Los Angeles came to my district and spent a week clearing the property around the historic Carrillo Adobe. They have done so much. They contribute so much. Forty other volunteers assisted at the Redwood Empire Food Bank. But the Corporation for National Service and AmeriCorps aren't important only for the good they do in our communities, or for the experiences of the individual volunteers. At a time when too many Americans are defined by their differences, the Corporation for National Service, and AmeriCorps, give thousands of volunteers, and the communities where they serve, an opportunity to meet across the barriers of education, race, and income, to work together for a common good. The corporation for National Service is one of this Nation's best investments in a future of good citizens, and we should be supporting it, not trying to eliminate it. Mr. Chairman, I was glad to hear the chairman agree with the sponsor of this amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, the Sonoma County People for Economic Opportunity in Santa Rosa, California, my district, operates a successful YouthBuild program, one that could actually be set up as a model across this Nation. I am absolutely pleased and proud to stand in strong support of this amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) to increase funding for YouthBuild. In fact, if I had my way, we would set a path in this Nation so that every single year we would increase the YouthBuild program by at least 17 percent. While building and remodeling homes for low-income families, YouthBuild-Santa Rosa participants literally rebuild their own lives. YouthBuild participants, who are unemployed young people between the ages of 16 and 24, learn construction skills that start them down a career path to a lifetime of well-paid jobs, jobs they can actually afford to raise a family on. If a participant does not have a high school diploma, it is possible, encouraged and mandated that they complete their education, with strong support from mentors, tutors and learning labs. YouthBuild programs help young people to develop personal and family living skills as they develop their life goals and their life plans. We know they do a good job, because 85 percent of the participants who completed their YouthBuild program went on to either attend college or to take good jobs. With the tools and skills they learn at YouthBuild, young people take control over their future. They do not become a burden to their communities. They do become contributors to their communities and to our country. YouthBuild programs are great investments. I urge my colleagues to support the Velazquez amendment; and I urge that we increase the funding for YouthBuild, not just this year but every year in the future.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Evans amendment. Forcing military retirees to choose between VA or DOD TRICARE is wrong. Our country owes an enormous debt to the men and women who served in the Armed Forces. It is because of their vigilance and dedication that we can enjoy the freedom that is cherished by every American. In exchange for their service to our country, we promised them medical care for life. Without this amendment we will be taking a step backwards from this promise. This issue is of the utmost importance to the military retirees in Marin and Sonoma counties. Our community is fortunate to have the leadership of colonel Jack Potter, who works tirelessly to ensure that retired veterans have full access to both VA and DOD's TRICARE health care services. Mr. Chairman, military retirees have earned their right to participate in both plans. If older retirees want to use tricare services for routine care, they should not then be forced to give up access to VA health care services. The sixty-five thousand retired veterans in my district who are both medicare-eligible and enrolled in the VA Health Care System should not be the scapegoats for the Veterans' Administration's funding problems. As colonel Potter points out, more than two-thirds of veterans who are enrolled in the VA health care system have disabilities. If they want TRICARE for routine care, but are denied access to the VA's highly respected specialty care services, disabled veterans may not be able to get comparable care through other military or private health care systems. Many will be referred back to the VA for this specialized care at their own expense--that's an unacceptable financial burden to place on these retirees. Another important consideration for our older military retirees is access to no-cost services, such as hearing aids. These services will not be free under TRICARE. As you can see Mr. Chairman, the plan proposed in the appropriations bill will cost our veterans more money for fewer medical care options. I ask my colleagues to support the Evans amendment and correct the wrong that will be done to our deserving veterans.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, after fighting for 5 years, we finally have an opportunity to pass real managed care reform in the House of Representatives. The American people are demanding health care, and it is time for us to stand up and deliver. By passing the Ganske-Dingell Patients' Protection Act, patients will have access to emergency care, women will be able to see their OB-GYN without health plan interference, and children will have timely access to pediatric specialists. Mr. Speaker, make no mistake: the Ganske bill is comprehensive, quality health care; a positive step toward improving Americans' health care, putting health care ahead of profits. When it is time to vote for managed care, I urge my colleagues to vote for the reform that has an option that puts patients and doctors back in charge of their health care.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Leach amendment. This amendment proposes a smart shifting of funds. It moves foreign military funds to an HIV/AIDS initiative that will affect positive changes in people's lives around the world. HIV/AIDS affects more than 10 million young people around the world, making it the largest health crisis children face. As bad or worse is that this horrific virus has made orphans of millions of uninfected children whose parents have died from HIV/AIDS. How bad does it have to get before this Congress realizes that we need to take immediate and effective action against the global AIDS epidemic? As yet, our response as a nation to this global pandemic has not kept pace with the enormous growth in this deadly disease. The countries hit hardest remain ill-equipped and unable to respond adequately. AIDS is no longer only a health matter. It is a matter of social stability. It is a matter of economic development. It is a matter of international security. Increasing the World Bank's HIV/AIDS Trust Fund by $60 million will help to reduce the rate of new infections. It will extend the lives of people living with HIV and provide care and support for children and families impacted by the disease. The availability of this funding will make the difference between death and a healthy future. By passing this amendment, the United States will make a practical investment and a necessary investment in those across the globe who need our help, help they need now. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Family Immigration Sponsor Act. In fact, a family in my district with a tragic story has become a well-known example of exactly why this bill is necessary. Mrs. Zhenfu Ge, a 73-year-old Chinese national, came to the United States in 1998 to help care for her dying daughter and her daughter's two children. Her daughter, my constituent, Yanyu Wong, requested that her mother be able to stay in America to take care of her grandchildren after the mother died. Following INS rules, my constituent immediately submitted the appropriate paperwork to sponsor her mother's petition for a green card so she could stay in the United States. But, tragically, on April 15 of this year, my constituent lost her life to cancer. This was only 11 days before the INS was scheduled to grant Mrs. Ge permanent resident status. In a desperate attempt to keep his mother-in-law in the country, my constituent's husband petitioned to be Mrs. Ge's new sponsor. However, INS law mandates the sponsor be an adult blood relative. Without an adult blood relative left alive to sponsor her, Mrs. Ge must go back to China and restart the process. Realizing the devastating results of these circumstances, I introduced H.R. 2011, a private bill to allow Mrs. Ge to remain legally in the United States while she completes the process for legal status. Forcing Mrs. Ge to abandon her family during this time would only add to the tragedy her 3-year-old granddaughter and 12-year-old grandson were already experiencing. Allowing Mrs. Ge to stay in the country would give the children a living link to their mother and to their mother's culture, something they would be denied forever if their grandmother is deported. With the passage of the Family Immigration Sponsor Act, authored by the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), Mrs. Ge can stay in America and take care of her daughter's children while she completes the immigration process. Then she can keep her promise to her daughter. Madam Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote for the Family Immigration Sponsor Act to help relieve some of the pain that families like Mrs. Ge's have endured.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Elsie Rich. As we prepare to celebrate Elsie's one hundredth birthday, we can be inspired by a life that embraces joyful energy, thoughtful discussion, and a positive approach to overcoming obstacles. Born Elsa Shiffman in Vienna Austria in August, 1901, Elsie was one of five children in a Jewish family that owned a textile factory. In 1932 she married Henry Reich (later Rich), and the two lived in Vienna until 1938. After hearing Hitler announce his plans to exterminate all the Jews in Europe, Elsie and Henry applied for visas to America. They left a few months after Hitler's troops invaded Austria, sending many Jews to concentration camps. In America, the Rich family lived in New York before moving to Santa Rosa, California, in 1943. They eventually bought a ranch and became U.S. citizens. ``Coming to America was the best thing that ever happened to me,'' according to Elsie. ``We should enjoy the freedom, because we need to remember that we are lucky to live in such a wonderful nation.'' Since arriving in Santa Rosa, Elsie Rich has been an active member and generous financial supporter of Congregation Beth Ami and the entire Jewish community. She is a woman of active participation and strong faith who always attends weekly services. Since Henry's death in 1976, Elsie's life has also included exercise classes, reading, cooking, discussing world affairs, using public transportation, and enjoying nearby casinos. For the last two years, she has been the oldest person to attend the Sonoma County Fair. Her upbeat energy and resilience have continued to inspire those around her. Mr. Speaker, Elsie Rich's one hundredth birthday is a fitting occasion to remember, in her words, that ``life is like a river. You have to go with your best stream and pick out what's best for you.'' Elsie has truly exemplified that approach.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of revoking China's normal trade relations status. It has to be clear to all of us that granting China special trade status has not persuaded them to conform to standards of decency and fairness. Instead, their record of human rights abuses has worsened and trade imbalances have actually increased. Today, U.S. companies import 36 percent of all Chinese exports, but the presence of U.S. purchasing power has done nothing to improve Chinese workers' lives. What is most alarming is that many of the products the U.S. imports are made by young children, children who work more than 12 hours a day and more than 6 days a week. If the mere possibility of cheaper goods made by children, slaves and prisoners is worth all the human rights violations, the religious persecution, more forced abortions and sterilizations, then I do not think this country stands for what we know we believe in. Of course, we do not stand for that. It is long overdue for U.S. trade policy to address human rights, workers' rights, and the environment. Trade is not free, trade is not fair, when there is no freedom and no fairness for the citizens of the country involved. Yet, year after year, this Congress grants special trade status to China. This time, right now, tonight, let us have the courage to lever our economic strength and real reform and vote yes on this resolution.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis).

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of H.R. 1, and I compliment the chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), and the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller). Good job. This was not easy to do. But I want to talk about something we left out in the House that we cannot wait another year to cover, and that is fully funding special education and IDEA. I would ask that the conference committee include the Senate provisions regarding funding IDEA. When I meet with parents in my district who have children with special needs, I hear how frantic they are about getting the services their children need in their schools. They think the schools are giving them the runaround. While, when I talk to the school administrators and the educators, they tell me they are worried sick about not having enough money to fully meet the needs of special education programs. And parents of students without special needs are fearful that their children will not receive enough resources so that they can get the education that they need. This cannot continue. We need not wait another year. We must fully fund IDEA, because we are pitting one important education program against another. Students against students, parents against parents, and parents against schools. It is time for Congress to honor the commitment made to parents and educators over 26 years ago. We can do that by adopting the Senate provision in the Leave No Child Behind Act and fully fund IDEA over 10 years. It is the right thing to do, and I urge my colleagues and the conferees to stand behind funding IDEA as we committed over 25 years ago.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy).

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens). (Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the DeGette amendment. For women in prison, this amendment projects their constitutional right to reproductive services, including abortion. Without this amendment, women in prison are denied the right to health care benefits that every other woman has available to them. We are not saying women in prison cannot choose to have a child, we are simply saying they have a right to choose not to have a child. Once again, the anti-choice movement is targeting their efforts on women who have limited options. Most women in prison have few resources and little outside support. Denying abortion coverage to women in Federal prisons is just another direct assault on the right of all women to have reproductive choice. Mr. Chairman, it is time to honor the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade and acknowledge that every woman has a right to have access to safe, reliable abortion services. We must stop these piecemeal attempts to roll back women's reproductive freedom and we must provide the education and the resources needed to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues, vote for the DeGette amendment and protect a woman's right to reproductive choice.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I stand in strong opposition to this rule. In fact, it amazes me that we would even consider such a convoluted attempt to sabotage true campaign finance reform. Mr. Speaker, I represent a district that has an 83 to 85 percent voter turnout. So my colleagues know that the people I work for care very much about our Nation. They care about our Constitution, and they care about the campaign process. Mr. Speaker, my constituents and people all over this Nation want campaign finance reform like the Shays-Meehan bill that will take big money out of the process. And like all people, they want young people in particular to feel that they belong to the process, that they want to be involved, that they are proud to be voters, that they are proud to be part of the democratic process. The people I represent in Marin and Sonoma Counties know that our democracy depends on getting everybody involved in our electoral system. We must defeat this bill so we can start over.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of stem cell research. It is time for people on all points of the political spectrum to come together, support efforts to make stem cell research safe, legal and ethical. Stem cell research has the potential to unlock the door to medical knowledge for a host of diseases. We cannot allow America's health to be held hostage to politics, while medical research stagnates. For people suffering from Alzheimer's or Parkinson's, or for those who have loved ones with these diseases, including cancer and juvenile diabetes, stem cell research represents hope for a cure. Yet by banning this research, either adult or embryonic research, we foreclose the possibility of improving or saving many, many lives. And who will pay the price? A mother fighting Parkinson's or a child battling juvenile diabetes. That is why I strongly urge my colleagues to put politics aside, support the promising scientific research of stem cell research.