Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, the goal of welfare reform is to move recipients into permanent jobs and make their families stronger. Will the Wisconsin plan do that? How can we know? The Republicans are rushing through these waiver requests without giving the administration or Members of Congress time for review. Even worse, they are not giving the citizens of Wisconsin time to comment on the plan. In the 1 week since the Governor of Wisconsin delivered the request for these waivers to the White House, the administration has received more than 300 letters commenting on the effects of the waivers, letters that will not be considered. I received a letter from the Wisconsin Conference of Churches. Their letter expressed strong opposition to any bill which bypasses the normal 30-day comment period. Could it be that the Governor of Wisconsin and some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle do not feel the Wisconsin plan will hold up under normal scrutiny? Do they share the concern of the Children's Defense Fund, the Wisconsin Conference of Churches and others that a timely review of the Wisconsin welfare plan will reveal that this plan will weaken the safety net for poor children? I do not know the answer to this question. The truth is that no one does. There has not been enough time to review the waiver requests, to fully understand their effect on poor children in Wisconsin.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Skaggs amendment to the foreign operations appropriations bill. If Members believe that women, rich and poor alike, should have the right to choose safe motherhood, they must support the Skaggs amendment. If Members believe that women should have the right to choose how many children they have, they must support the Skaggs amendment. If Members believe that the United States has an obligation to support efforts to slow down the earth's rapid population growth and the misery that comes with it, they must support the Skaggs amendment. Mr. Chairman, family planning programs are key to international self- sufficiency. Let me remind us that today, right now, we are debating a bill which reduces financing for overseas development. We cannot, in good conscience, reduce aid to poor countries and tell them to be more self-reliant, without giving them the tools to do so. I urge my colleagues, support the Skaggs amendment and remove the spending cap on international family planning.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment. Even though Turkey is one of our biggest beneficiaries of American good will, that nation continues to block distribution of American aid to the Republic of Armenia. In other words, Turkey is acting like a big bully against its small neighbors and American aid is being held hostage. Not only is this clearly unfair, but it is illegal, according to the U.S. law. The time has come that we stop making execuses for Turkey. The time has come to quit playing politics with humanitarian aid, aid destined for Armenia. I know that Turkey is a member of NATO, and I acknowledge Turkey's strategic importance, but fair is fair. Human rights must be protected, and no one, not even our military allies, have the right to flaunt the Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act, period. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Visclosky amendment. This is a vote for the people of Armenia and this is a vote for strengthening and upholding the Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, why is Medicare running into financial trouble sooner than we thought? Because the new majority is more interested in raiding Medicare for special interest tax breaks than in buckling down and coming up with a bipartisan plan to keep Medicare solvent. Instead of proposing changes in Medicare that would lead to greater solvency of the trust fund, the Gingrich-Dole majority proposed limiting physician choice, draining the system of healthy participants through medical savings accounts, and eliminating laws against fraud in the health care industry. That is no way to save Medicare. We can avoid the dire predictions of the Medicare trustees. We should work together. Democrats proposed a plan to keep Medicare solvent while maintaining the guarantee of health care for older Americans. Our plan keeps Medicare in the black for years to come without the devastating cuts that make seniors see red. What we need around here is the courage to do what's right. What we don't need are special interest tax breaks paid for by our Nation's seniors.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Representative Pallone for organizing this special order tonight and for his outstanding leadership in protecting Medicare. Mr. Speaker, colleagues, the Gingrich majority just can't keep its hands off of Medicare. For a second year in a row, the new majority is trying to pay for special interest tax breaks by forcing drastic cuts in Medicare. After shutting the Government down twice, after seeing their approval ratings plummet to record-breaking lows, after the near collapse of their legislative agenda you would think they would learn. Well, my friends, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle remain clueless. They remain clueless to the fact that the American people want no part of a scheme to make Medicare ``Wither on the vine,'' as the Speaker suggested. They remain clueless that seniors are not willing to pay more to receive less. The Republican budget cuts $167 billion from Medicare over 6 years, which will mean drastically higher health care costs and fewer health care benefits for our Nation's seniors. They remain clueless about forcing americans into managed care programs without physician choice--the same programs which may force seniors to give up their trusted doctors. And the American people sure don't want to be gouged through excessive copayments, known as balanced billing, which is included in the Republican plan. And Republicans remain clueless to the fact that the American people don't want their local hospitals closed because of a budget plan that cuts the Medicare Hospital Trust Fund by $51 billion over 6 years. Well, I am here, armed with messages from three of my constituents, to help members of the new majority get a clue. Hopefully our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are sitting in their offices, watching C-Span. I urge you to turn up the volume in your office, listen closely, and take note. First, a 65-year-old man wrote me to say (and I quote): ``I worked hard all of my life, raised ten kids, and fought in two wars to live my life in peace. Living on only 801 dollars a month, I need all the help I can get.'' This person deserves better. He fought two wars for our country, and he should not live his golden years in fear of getting sick. With his income, he can't pay more for health care. It is wrong that the new majority is asking people like him to do so. The second message is from Ethel from San Rafael. She wrote to let me know that ``Medicare is only barely sufficient as it is. (She continued that) ``A cut would be a death knell to help as we know it.'' So, I ask you if Medicare is barely sufficient now, what will it be like if the new majority has its way and cuts $167 billion and weakens anti-fraud laws? Finally, an elderly gentleman named Vernon, wants all of us to know that he can't afford to pay more for Medicare. He said, ``The old folks need money for food. Cutting Medicare will take away our food money.'' How much food will Vernon give up, Mr. Speaker, when the new majority cuts Medicare by $167 billion? Does this Congress really intend for people like Vernon to give up food in order to pay for a doctor's visit or to pay for prescription drugs? I hope that our colleagues in the majority listen to the heartfelt pleas of these people. I hope that members of the new majority can open their eyes to the devastation that will occur if their Medicare plan is enacted. So get a clue, my friends. Listen to the American people and stop raiding Medicare for your special interest tax break. Start working with Democrats. I'm proud to say that I voted for the President's budget, which preserves the solvency of the Medicare system without damaging cuts to services. This Democratic alternative prevents outrageous increases in premiums and co-payments, and maintains strong anti-fraud policies. Let's work together to strengthen Medicare, and preserve it for future generations. Again, I want to thank Congressman Frank Pallone for his leadership on this issue. You have done a terrific job of protecting Medicare from cuts, and it is always a pleasure to work with you.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of my district's most dedicated and caring individuals, Ethel Seiderman. Ethel is being honored as a 1996 Educator of the Year. I wish that I could join with her colleagues, friends, and family tonight to celebrate her remarkable accomplishments. In 1973, Ethel founded and served as the first director of the Fairfax San Anselmo Children's Center which soon became a model institution in the field. The center serves 125 children from low and moderate income families between the ages of 3 months to 10 years. In developing innovative programs to serve mildly ill children as well as those with special needs, and with extended hours of care, over 1,000 families have benefited directly from Ethel's vision of accessible and affordable child care. After her tenure as site director, Ethel went on to head the parent services project with the goal of integrating family support components within child care programs. Ethel has secured funding from both private industry and foundations while pursuing the creation of a long term, stable funding base for these model programs. Ethel is also a sought after speaker and consultant for the California State Department of Education, The Family Resource Coalition, and Head Start. Ethel's tireless efforts on behalf of children and families have resulted in an unparalleled partnership between parents, providers, businesses, and government agencies. This coalition has improved the accessibility and elevated the quality of child care in Marin County and serves as a model to the entire Nation. Mr. Speaker, it is my great pleasure to pay tribute to Ethel Seiderman and I extend my hearty congratulations and best wishes to Ethel for continued success in the years to come.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I would have yielded for 10 seconds, believe me. I would like to point out that Medicare is not growing to cover the cost of inflation, nor the cost of the need for the services and the people who will be needing those services. One thing is increasing an amount, the other thing is to increase the amount to cover those who will be using the benefit.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Will the gentleman yield?

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, it is time to increase the minimum wage. It is time to make work pay. It's time to make work pay more than welfare. I know, because over 28 years ago, as a single, working mother, I was earning so little I had to go on welfare to supplement my pay in order to provide my children with the health care, child care and food they needed. Unfortunately, too many American workers face the same situation today. In fact, most minimum wage earners look a lot like I did 28 years ago: 60 percent of minimum wage earners are women. Of that, 72 percent are over 20 years old. And, one-fifth of minimum wage earners are single parents. So, yes, my friends, despite what you've heard from the Republican leadership, families struggling to get by on $4.25 an hour really do exist. What does not exist, however, is a believable commitment by the majority to boost the wages of working Americans. Now, rather than having a clean up-or-down vote on raising the minimum wage, the Republicans are loading the bill up with amendments that will make an increase meaningless. Under the Goodling amendment alone, up to 10 million workers could lose their right to any minimum wage. Mr. Speaker, that's not making work pay. It is taking workers backwards. It is letting businesses off the hook who pay low wages. It is forcing the taxpayers through the welfare system to make up the difference for these low wages. Mr. Speaker, let us pass a minimum wage. No if's, and's or but's. Let's make work pay.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Anna Cherney, one of California's long-time social and peace activists who passed away on April 18, 1996, at the age of 94. Until her death she was active throughout the community as a vigorous worker for civic activities, involved with the peace and labor movements, and supporting the struggle for equality. Anna is well known for giving generously of herself and her finances. Seldom did she withhold her financial support for her beliefs. Anna is attributed with making her community, the city of Sebastopol, CA, a nuclear-free zone. She has helped raise money for student art scholarships at the local Santa Rosa Junior College, the Sonoma County Peace and Justice Center, and continued fund raising activities, rallies, and peace marches until just recently. Her friends call her ``one feisty lady,'' and it is her spirited nature that will be remembered and cherished by her many followers who will pick up the torch and carry it to the generations who follow. Mr. Speaker, Anna Cherney's commitment to her community, her legacy of generosity, and her selflessness serve as an example to all Americans. It is people like Anna, working together in communities throughout America, who make our Nation so great and bring out the best in us. We can celebrate the power of one individual, Anna Cherney, by waking the giants that live within all of us to help our neighbors, our community, and our Nation. Anna Cherney did, and for this, I say thank you, Anna.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, here we go again. As the only Member of this body to have actually been a single, working mother on welfare, I rise, once again, to make it clear that this budget is no kinder or gentler to children and families than the welfare reform plan peddled by Speaker Gingrich and the new majority last year. That should come as no surprise to anyone because this budget is just a rehash of the majority's same old cruel policies and skewed budget priorities that were rejected by the American people last year. They were rejected, my friends, because the American people want real welfare reform--reform that helps families get jobs and stay off welfare for good--reform that expands the earned income tax credit; boosts the minimum wage and invests in education; job training; health care; child care and child support. However, this budget, like all of the majority's welfare reform plans that came before it, tells children in this country: if you're poor, you had better not get sick, don't get hungry, and don't get cold, because the majority doesn't think you're important. It says to families: Republicans in Congress don't want to provide you with a guaranteed level of health care; food; and general assistance for your children. Just by ending the guarantee of Medicaid alone, almost 4.9 million children may lose their health coverage. And, by its cuts to the earned income tax credit and failure to boost the minimum wage, this budget tells working parents that you might as well go on welfare because the majority doesn't think work should pay. In fact, approximately 3 million working families will come out worse thanks to the majority's cuts to the earned income tax credit. Mr. Chairman, this is not the way to be treating our working families, and it is certainly not the way to be treating our children. It's time for the majority to stop recycling it's misplaced priorities and it's extreme policies. It's time for the majority to work with us to pass a balanced budget that moves our Nation forward without leaving behind those who depend on us most--our children, our families, and our seniors.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this Shays- Frank-Gephardt amendment. Ladies and gentlemen, I think the defense hawks need some history lessons. Lesson No. 1: the Second World War ended 50 years ago. Lesson No. 2: the cold war ended 5 years ago. Now, a pop quiz: who won! In case some of you cold warriors forgot-- we did. We defeated fascism and we defeated communism. But this defense bill completely ignores this reality. Right now, many of our European and Asian allies enjoy higher standards of living than our constituents, the American people. Somehow, these nations can support education, health care, child care, and so forth. Because we keep paying their military bills. I don't know about you, but I am sick of Uncle Sam acting like Uncle Sucker. The time has come for our allies to share the burden of their own defense. The time has come for shared responsibility. The time has come for us to reap the benefits of our hard work, and invest in our children, our seniors, and our environment. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to remind this Congress that the Constitution applies to all Americans, including women in the Armed Forces. But, current law prohibits women in the armed services from paying for abortions in military hospitals. This is an assault on the spirit of Roe. Plain and simple. Roe versus Wade is the law of the land. In spite of that, military policy states that if you are a woman, and you need an abortion, but happen to serve our country in the military overseas--tough luck. To all my colleagues, regardless of your position on choice, ask yourself a question. What would you want for your daughter, or your sister, or your wife? If she were stationed overseas, wouldn't you want her to go to the hospital of her choice? Wouldn't you want her to go to an American military hospital? Vote yes on the DeLauro amendment, and cast a vote for women in the military.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of my district's more dedicated and caring individuals, Clara MacNamee. Clara is being honored as Marin County Teacher of the Year for 1996. I wish that I could be with her colleagues, friends and family to celebrate her remarkable accomplishments. Clara began working with the Marin Office of Education in 1976. There, she helped develop a classroom whose sole purpose was to serve students involved with drugs and alcohol. The success of this classroom, which focused on a variety of activities, such as peer coaching, and family involvement, expanded into a charter school called Sobriety High School. Student throughout the county are now attending this school and are being touched by Clara's enthusiasm and love of teaching. Marin County and our Nation, owe a great deal to Clara for her tireless efforts in providing exceptional education to students with special needs. I was not surprised to learn that Clara has been the recipient of many education awards. In 1992, she received the Marin County Golden Bell Award for Academic Excellence, and, in 1993, she was awarded the California State Golden Bell Award for Academic Excellence. I continue to be impressed by Clara's dedication to the students in our community and her vision for their success. In addition to her work in education, Clara has been a committed member of the community. She served as a CPR instructor for the American Heart Association and the Red Cross for over 10 years and was a Braille transcriber for 5 years. Clara also served as a community representative to her local Community Service District for 17 years. Mr. Speaker, it is my great pleasure to pay tribute to Clara MacNamee during this special evening at the Marin Art and Garden Center. I extend my thanks and appreciation and my hearty congratulations and best wishes to Clara for continued success in the years to come.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, today is the sad and solemn day when annually we remember one of the great tragedies of humankind. Today marks the 81st anniversary of the Armenian genocide, the first genocide of the 20th century. I have come to the floor of the House today to acknowledge the atrocities suffered by the Armenian people at the hands of the Ottoman Turks. On April 23, 1915, over 200 Armenian religious, political and intellectual leaders were massacred in Turkey. Little did anyone know that April 23, 1915, would signify the beginning of a Turkish campaign to remove the Armenian people from the face of the earth. Over the following 8 years, 1.5 million Armenians perished, and more than 500,000 were exiled from their homes. Armenian civilization, one of the oldest civilizations, virtually ceased to exist, which, of course, was the Turkish plan. But despite the brutality, Armenian civilization lives on today. It lives on in the new independent republic of Armenia, and it lives on in communities throughout America, particularly in my home State of California. Today we honor the innocent Armenians who barely got a chance to see the 20th century. Today we acknowledge that the Ottoman Turks committed genocide against the Armenian people and we demand that his undeniable fact be acknowledged by the current leaders in Istanbul. I look forward to the day when the world says in one united voice, ``We remember the Armenian genocide.'' Until that date comes, Mr. Speaker, I will continue to stand up with my colleagues to remind the House of Representatives of our responsibility to remember and of our responsibility to speak out against any genocide, past or present.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, we are hearing a lot of excuses from the majority these days about why we do not need to increase the minimum wage. Mr. Speaker, I know firsthand why families need to earn a livable wage. Over 28 years ago I was a single working mother with three small children, receiving no child support. Even though I was working, I was earning so little that I had to go on welfare to take care of my children. I tell my colleagues this, Mr. Speaker, because too many families today face the same situation. In spite of what the majority whip has said about minimum wage and about earning $4.25 an hour, almost 5 million Americans work for at or below minimum wage, and I am not talking about teenagers looking for extra cash. Rather, the average minimum wage earner looks a lot like I did 28 years ago, an adult woman supporting her family by herself. Today that mother is worse off because the purchasing power of the minimum wage has plummeted to a 40-year low. Clearly, it is time to make work pay by increasing the minimum wage now.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, this week we celebrate the wonder and beauty of the Earth. As we celebrate, I feel especially grateful for the area I represent. I am privileged to represent Marin and Sonoma Counties in California, the two counties just north of San Francisco, across the Golden Gate Bridge. The diversity of nature is prominent in this area where the rolling hills, redwood forests, and rugged coastline meet. I am privileged to represent 140 miles of the northern California coastline. Each year, numerous visitors come to Marin and Sonoma Counties to see one of our Nation's most picturesque scenes: Our coasts. It is hard for visitors to the area to even imagine that there are troubled waters off our beautiful coasts, but there are. Due to extensive recreational and commercial use, a serious toll has been taken on our coasts, a toll that threatens the health of our marine resources and of our coastal economies. If California's coast is to be utilized by future generations, Mr. Speaker, as it is today, it must have strong protection now. Passing this legislation to reauthorize the Coastal Zone Management Act will help meet this need and the needs of all America's coasts. Coastal zone management programs offer tremendous opportunities for conserving and maintaining this country's most outstanding marine resources. Mr. Speaker, coastal programs are not only successful, they are also cost effective. H.R. 1965 will assist in the effort to be good stewards of our coasts. Let us pass this bill and continue the vital work of the Coastal Zone Management Act. Let this not be a figleaf. Let this not be a Band-Aid, but let it be a precedent for future meaningful legislation to protect our fragile environment.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, 28 years ago, I was a single working mother with three small children, receiving no child support and earning close to the minimum wage. Even though I was working, I was earning so little that I was forced to go on welfare to provide my children with the child care, the health care, and the food that they needed. Even though I was educated and had good job skills, I still was not earning enough to fully support my children. My story bears repeating tonight, because too many families today are in the same predicament I was 28 years ago. Mr. Speaker, if this Congress is truly serious about reducing dependence on welfare, then let us increase the minimum wage. Let us make work pay, and let us make sure that paying working parents enough to support their families and take care of their children is a priority on our agenda. Mr. Speaker, the minimum wage has not kept up with the increase in the cost of living. Workers these days can put in a full day of work, 40 hours a week, at minimum wage and still live below the poverty line. The new majority in Congress wants to cut the earned income tax credit, kick single moms and their children off welfare, and reduce health benefits for low-income families, but they will not even hold a hearing on increasing the minimum wage. If we want to reduce reliance on public assistance, Mr. Speaker, does it not make sense to make work pay? Should not entry level jobs pay more than public subsistence? In addition to making economic sense, a minimum wage increase is also a matter of basic fairness for millions of working Americans. Mr. Speaker, in 1960, the average pay for a chief executive officer of some of the largest U.S. corporations was 12 times greater than the average wage of their factory workers. Today, those same CEOs receive wages and compensation worth more than 135 times the wages and benefits of their average employee, the average employee at the same corporation. In some instances, Mr. Speaker, the difference is more than 200 times. That is not fair, and it is not fair that about 70 percent of minimum wage earners are women, adult women with children. It is not fair that from 1973 to 1993, real income for working men, men with high school diplomas, dropped by 30 percent. Businesses are doing well, Mr. Speaker. Private business productivity has been increasing. Profits are up, but wages are stagnant. What is wrong with this picture? Is it not time to let American workers share the fruits of their labor? Speaker Gingrich and his allies say they support traditional American values. Let us return to the traditional American value of paying an honest wage for an honest day's work. Let us raise the minimum wage, and let us do it now.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to reject this unfair rule. If we are going to attach unrelated items to this debt limit extension, then I believe the working people of America deserve to know why the Gingrich Republicans will not allow the House to vote on an amendment that would increase the minimum wage. What is the majority so afraid of? Why are they in opposition to paying working parents enough, enough to support their families and enough to take care of their kids? Clearly, Mr. Speaker, the new majority knows that if it came to a vote, it would be next to impossible for Members of this House to deny the fact that the 10 million minimum wage earners in this country deserve a raise. Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that April 1 will mark the 5-year anniversary of the last time this House approved an increase in the minimum wage, the truth is the minimum wage has significantly lost its value and it keeps families in poverty. Mr. Speaker, it is time for this body to do something good for the working families of this country and to make work pay. To my colleagues who care about working people in this country, I urge you to reject this rule and show the new majority that it is high time for an increase in the minimum wage.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Once again, Mr. Speaker, the Gingrich Republicans are standing in the way of meaningful health care reform and it's American families who are going to wind up paying the price. While Speaker Gingrich says his plan may make health insurance more available, it does nothing whatsoever to make it affordable. Thankfully, for the American people, we have another choice before us today. We have the Democratic substitute. The one bill that will extend coverage to 25 million Americans. The one bill that has bipartisan support in the Senate. And the one bill that will be signed into law by the President. To my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Don't use your vote to scuttle significant health care reform this year. Instead, stand up for working families, and support the Democratic substitute.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, how often do we get a clear shot at helping 25 million people? Twenty-five million. Today, we have that chance. We can help them stay healthy. We can help them end their fear. We can help them achieve their dreams. Unfortunately, however, some Members of this body do not want us to have a clear shot with a clean bill. They want to gum up the works with proposals we do not need, proposals that doom this entire bill. Why would they do this? Two words, Mr. Speaker: Special interests. Mr. Speaker, many Democrats agree, many Republicans agree, the President agrees. Do not gum up the works, do not support special interests over our interests. Twenty-five million people are waiting. Do not let them down. Vote against this rule.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1833 and criminalizing late-term abortions. First of all, this conference report is a cruel, a very cruel attempt to make a political point. Make no mistake about it, ladies and gentleman, this conference report, with all of the emotional rhetoric and the exaggerated testimony, is a frontal attack on Roe versus Wade by the Gingrich majority, plain and simple. With the Gingrich majority, what they want is to do away with Roe. The radical rights wants to do away with Roe, and H.R. 183 is a good first step as far as they are concerned. So let us be honest about what this debate is really about. This legislation seeks to prohibit the wide array of medical techniques which are rarely used but are sometimes required in the late stages of pregnancy, like with the Wilson family, in extreme and tragic cases when the life of the mother is in danger, or the fetus is so malformed that it has absolutely no chance of survival; for example, when the fetus has no brain, or the fetus is missing organs or the fetus's spine has grown outside of its body, when the fetus has zero chance of life, when women are forced to carry these malformed fetuses to term, they are in danger of chronic hemorrhaging, permanent infertility, or death. Woman and their doctors need to make these decisions, not the Congress. Like the Wilsons, the family needs to make this decision with their doctors, not the Congress. I urge my colleagues to oppose the conference report on H.R. 1833.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, first of all I would like to thank my colleagues and good friends for organizing this Women of the Year special order as part of our Women's History Month celebration. Madam Speaker, I come to the floor of the House this evening to honor two outstanding women, Helen Rudee and Elizabeth Terwilliger, from the Sixth Congressional District of California. When talking about Helen Rudee, it is hard not to sound repetitive because Helen Rudee was the first in just about everything she has done. Helen was the first woman president of the Santa Rosa Board of Education. She was the first woman on the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. And she was the board's first chairwoman. In addition to her outstanding record in elected office, Helen raised four children and participated in just about every volunteer organization in Sonoma County. This year, Helen is the recipient of the Konocti Girl Scout Council Jewel of a Woman Award for sharing her leadership skills with other young women in our community. It is truly fitting that we recognize Helen during Women's History Month. Helen Rudee is a woman who has made history, and she continues to make history. I am also proud to honor Elizabeth Terwilliger, a real life trail blazer, who in 1991 was the recipient of President George Bush's Points of Light Award. Long before environment became a household word, Elizabeth Terwilliger pioneered environmental education in Marin County. Now in her eighties, she continues to lead children, teachers, parents, and grandparents on hiking, canoeing, and bicycling adventures 6 days a week. Mrs. Terwilliger's tireless commitment to our environment has inspired other volunteers to form the nonprofit Terwilliger Nature Education Center. Where every year, over 65,000 San Francisco Bay Area children enjoy the spectacular beauty of Marin County's trails, marshes, and beaches because of the Terwilliger Center. Again, it is my great honor to recognize Helen Rudee and Elizabeth Terwilliger as 1996 Women of the Year. They have left an indelible mark on Sonoma and Marin Counties, and their legacy will inspire generations to come. Madam Speaker, I yield now to the gentlewoman from New York, Carolyn Maloney. (Mrs. MALONEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, today the House averted another Gingrich Government shutdown by voting to fund the Government for 1 week. That is right, 1 week. In typical inside-the-Beltway lingo the Republican leadership called it a 1-week continuing resolution. But if you ask me, it amounts to nothing more than 1 more week of continuing madness, madness on Capitol Hill, and, more seriously, 1 more week of continuing uncertainty for our Nation's schools. Let us talk about the continuing madness around here. I have been a member of the House Committee on the Budget since coming to Congress in 1993. Two years in a row we did our work, passed the necessary spending guidelines and met our deadlines. On top of that, we managed to cut the deficit in half in the process. We cut it by 50 percent. The new majority, however, wasted the beginning of 1995 trying to pass their Contract With America. As a result, we are halfway into the fiscal year, and the 1996 budget for most domestic programs has still, still not been set by this do-nothing majority. Instead, critical environmental protection, health care, and education programs have been funded on a month-to-month basis at a greatly reduced level. When you change that from a month-to-month to a week-to-week program, as the House did today, the new majority's piecemeal approach to governing means nothing more than continuing uncertainty for our Nation's schools. In fact, today's continuing resolution leaves our schools and teachers with two main ingredients for disaster, too little time and too little money. Right now elementary schools, high schools, and colleges are beginning to plan for the 1996-97 school year, which in case my friends on the other side of the aisle do not understand, begins in September. Schools cannot wait until the new fiscal year to hire teachers, to buy books, and to plan for computers and to repair damaged buildings. They need to start planning now, and they simply cannot do it when the Gingrich Republicans, unlike their Republican colleagues in the other body, refuse to provide a fixed level of adequate education funding for the rest of the year. By leaving our schools in limbo and facing the prospect of receiving 13 percent less in education funds, less than they would normally expect from the Federal Government, elementary and secondary education--elementary schools will not know how many teachers they can afford to hire for the coming school year. Thus, students returning to school next fall could face larger class sizes and fewer teachers. Schools are also faced with the respect of losing funds for crucial education programs because of the deep cuts that are contained in the majority's continuing resolution. For instance, schools in my home State of California would lose over $42 million in Goals 2000 funds. These are funds which help schools train teachers, increase parental involvement and meet higher standards. California schools will also lose $122 million in title I funds, funds for programs for students who need extra help in reading, writing, and math. Finally, programs aimed at protecting our children from crime and drugs and alcohol will be hurt because the Gingrich Republicans have voted to deny California schools $26.5 million in safe and drug-free school funding. My friends, that is not how we should be treating our Nation's schools, that is not how we should be treating our Nation's students. Rather I believe, as the Democrats in the House believe, as the President believes and as a majority of the other body believes, that education must be our Nation's No. 1 priority. Mr. Speaker, we can balance the budget, but it does not have to be on the backs of our children and their education.