Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I say to the gentleman, ``I don't want you to die at all. I appreciate your consideration of this, and I know you will fight hard for it.'' Mr. Chairman, we were on a roll; I think it ended.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, with AIDS now the leading killer of Americans between the ages of 25 and 44, it is more important than ever that we move forward, and do not retreat, in the fight against AIDS. To that end, swift reauthorization of the Ryan White CARE Act is crucial. The district I represent in California, Marin and Sonoma Counties, is one of the hardest hit by the AIDS epidemic. In fact, it has one of the highest incidence of HIV infection for a suburban/rural area in the country. While communities in my district have developed HIV/AIDS care and prevention systems that are a model for the Nation, they simply cannot do it on their own. That is why the care and services funded under the Ryan White CARE Act are essential to the men, women, children, and families living with HIV and AIDS in Marin and Sonoma Counties, CA, and in every community in this Nation. The CARE Act has proven to be highly successful at delivering quality AIDS-related care in cost-effective home and community-based settings, rather than in expensive emergency rooms and acute care hospital settings. It keeps people healthy, and lets them live and die with dignity in their homes, thus reducing the amount that State and Federal Governments spend on Medicaid. Mr. Speaker, any way you look at it, the Ryan White CARE Act is a wise national investment that must be continued. I urge the House to renew its commitment to the fight against AIDS by giving the Ryan White CARE Act reauthorization the widespread and bipartisan support it deserves.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, for those of you who might not be familiar with the Presidio, it is the southern anchorage of the Golden Gate Bridge and the centerpiece of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area--the most visited national park in the entire National Park System. The entire Presidio was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1962. It is a showcase of architectural styles dating from the Civil War. It contains 876 structures, over half of which are of historic or cultural significance. In addition, the Presidio is the only United Nations designated International Biosphere in an urban area. It is home to 21 rare and endangered species and 10 rare plant communities that have disappeared in the rest of San Francisco. It encompasses 300 acres of historic forest planted by the U.S. Army over 100 years ago. Sites throughout the Presidio provide spectacular views of the Pacific Ocean, the Golden Gate Bridge, Marin headlands, San Francisco Bay, and the skyline of San Francisco. It is adjacent to the largest marine sanctuary chain in the world. The Presidio is unique in its historical, cultural, and natural reach. If you have not seen it, you should. It is a dramatic site that you will never forget. H.R. 1296 protects these resources, through a Presidio Trust, while requiring cost-effective management of the Presidio. Vote for H.R. 1296.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Frank amendment to the 1996 Intelligence authorization bill. My friends, once again I am here to remind you, the cold war is over. We won! It is time for the Defense and Intelligence budgets to reflect this reality. The Frank amendment is a reasonable amendment to the Intelligence budget. The CIA and other parts of the intelligence apparatus can certainly stand a 3-percent cut. This is a modest cut, a fair cut. Do not forget, this week the Republican majority is going to ask our seniors to take a bigger cut in their Medicare coverage. Don't forget that we are asking our school children to take a bigger cut in education funding. We're asking college students; working families; and the elderly to cope with all kinds of cuts, in lots of important programs. Three percent? That's not much. That's reasonable. Let's cut the bloated intelligence budget. Let's ask the CIA to sacrifice for a change. Pass the Frank amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1594 is a totally unnecessary bill. Can someone tell me how does this bill protect pensions? Not by providing funds for the Department of Labor's pension and welfare benefits administration, that's for sure. In fact, this bill cuts funds for this office, which does protect workers' pensions against underfunding and fraud. You may hear that this bill protects pensions by prohibiting the Department of Labor from promoting economically targeted investments, or ETI's. But how do ETI's place pensions at risk? After all, we already have a law on the books, the Employment Retirement Income Security Act, better known as ERISA, that requires pension plan investors to act solely in the interest of their beneficiaries when making investment decisions. So if a pension fund does choose to invest in an ETI, it must put the financial interests of the pension beneficiaries first. And, I ask, what's wrong with investing American workers' money in America's infrastructure; America's jobs; and America's economy. Since when is America a bad investment? If this bill passes something very real will happen. Pension funds that have invested in local economic growth and in our communities will begin investing overseas. Because H.R. 1594 prohibits the Department of Labor from providing information on ETI's, and rescinds the bulletin which provides guidelines on ETI investments, it will be safer for pension funds to invest overseas, where there will be absolutely no confusion about the legality of the investment. Every day, Mr. Chairman, American workers invest their time and skills for a better America. ETI's give them another opportunity to invest in this Nation. ETI's are safe American investments. Let's not pass H.R. 1594 and send American workers' pension funds overseas.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, throughout the month of August, senior citizens, working families, and health care providers told me the majority's huge Medicare cuts would have devastating effects on them. Local hospitals in my district, which are already the most efficient in the Nation, said they would be forced to cut back crucial services or possibly close. In fact, one hospital administrator said, ``They would just mail the keys in.'' And, outraged seniors, looking at $3,600 more in out-of-pocket expenses under the Gingrich Medicare plan, told me that they just could not afford any additional medical expenses. Why? They repeatedly asked me would the majority make these huge cuts in Medicare? And, I told them, over and over again, that the majority was taking an axe to Medicare, instead of a scalpel, for one reason, and for one reason only; to pay for one of the most outrageous, counterproductive, and unfair tax giveaways in American history.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, first of all, I thank my colleague from Connecticut for organizing this special order and giving us the opportunity to speak about the most important priority this country should have, and that is education. Mr. Speaker, it is really hard for me to believe that it was just last year when I convinced this body to approve a landmark resolution which put us on our way to making our schools the best in the world. Yes, it's true. Last year, the House approved my resolution which called on Congress to increase our investment in education by 1 percent a year, until the education budget accounts for 10 percent of the budget in 2002. At the time, I said that the resolution would send a clear message to those who decide how our Federal dollars are spent, the appropriators, that this Congress was serious about improving education. Well, guess what, folks? Times have changed. We've got a new majority in Congress, and, instead of going forward, we're going backwards. Fast. The new Republican majority in the House blatantly ignored the pledge we made last year to our children's education, and passed one of the worst bills I have ever seen--the Labor, HHS, and Education appropriations bill. [[Page H 8785]] This bill cuts: Head Start, Chapter One, Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Goals 2000, School-to-Work, vocational and adult education, and college aid. In all, this bill cuts education by 13 percent in 1 year alone. Thirteen percent. I repeat, that is the wrong direction, and that's not the way we are supposed to be taking care of our children. You see, I believe, as do my colleagues here tonight, that our Nation's greatest, greatest responsibility is to provide a quality education for everybody in this country. I believe this because education is absolutely central to solving the problems facing our Nation. When we strengthen education, we prepare our children and workers for jobs that pay a livable wage. When we strengthen education, we get people off welfare and, for heaven's sake, we prevent people from having to go on welfare in the first place. When we strengthen education, we actually prevent crime and violence in our communities. And, when we strengthen education, we increase respect for our health, our environment, and for each other. Speaking of welfare, Mr. Speaker, having been a single working mother on welfare 28 years ago, I am absolutely certain that, if it had not been for the fact that I was educated--I had 2 years of college--I would not have been able to work myself off welfare to the degree that I did, and have the successes that came to me, nor would I be a Member of the House of Representatives today. That is why, for the life of me, I cannot understand why the new majority wants to cut and gut our education system. In fact, if they do not stop, there is going to be a triple feature playing down at our theaters in the very near future, and that is going to be called, ``Dumb and Dumber, Sick and Sicker, and Poor and Poorer,'' and let me tell you it is not going to be a bargain matinee. Mr. Speaker, it is time to stop this assault on education. It is time to make our Nation's No. 1 special interest our children and not the fat cats and lobbyists in Washington.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, today's entire debate seems to be an exercise in delusion. For those who have not been following events in the world, let me repeat something that doesn't seem to be getting through: The cold war is over. And now that the cold war is over, what in the world are we doing increasing the intelligence budget? We simply have no business doing this at a time when we are slashing funds for Medicare, student aid, and child nutrition. And, we have no business doing this at a time when the threat we are facing in this world is much reduced. Mr. Chairman, it's time for this Congress to wake up and snap out of it. The cold war is over. It's time to cut the intelligence budget. This cut is fair, this cut is needed, and this cut should be passed. The Sanders-Owens amendment saves over 1.5 billion. It needs our support.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, once again I am here to get this body to do something that the National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government Waste, the Council for a Livable World, and Members on both sides of the aisle believe should have been long ago: Stop wasting money on the Trident nuclear missiles. At a time when this Congress is making cuts in education, student aid, and Medicare, I am outraged that we are even talking about investing $3 billion over the next 7 years in this cold war relic, especially when the Navy didn't even request it. Backfitting 4 Trident submarines that now carry C-4 missiles with expensive D-5 missiles would give us a total of 14 subs carrying D-5 missiles; 4 more than the Navy originally planned. My amendment does not do away with D-5 missiles; it simply cancels the backfit, limits the Navy to 10 subs with D-5 missiles, and saves taxpayers $3 billion over 7 years. That is a reasonable request. It is a reasonable request because the D-5 missile was designed to hit targets in the Soviet Union. Well, guess what folks. The Soviet Union no longer exists. If 10 D-5 subs were enough to stop the Soviet threat during the height of the cold war, then 10 D-5 subs are certainly enough to stop today's smaller threat from the former Soviet Union. And if my colleagues are concerned about threats from rogue nations like North Korea and Iran, my answer is simple: One Trident submarine, loaded with 24 D-5 missiles, would be more than enough to stop a threat from these nations. And let us not get into a debate about this amendment damaging military readiness. If military readiness is a problem, it is not because we have not pumped enough money into the military budget. Rather, it is because the Pentagon has some seriously misplaced spending priorities. With soldiers on food stamps, we cannot afford to be wasting billions of precious dollars on this wasteful and expendable program. But really when it comes down to it, the Woolsey amendment is not about spending priorities within the military; it is about spending priorities, period. We cannot balance the budget on the backs of children, on the backs of working families, and on the backs of seniors, while allowing the Pentagon's budget to balloon. Let us hold this Congress and the Pentagon accountable. Let us make it clear that spending an additional $3 billion on the Trident force is a wasteful and ill-advised mistake. It is time to put any further spending on this cold war relic where it belongs: in the history books.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to respond to the issue of there being no money in the bill for the backfit. The Navy is currently planning how to accomplish the backfit and funds in this bill will be used for this planning. My amendment says that this planning will not occur and will forgo the backfit. It makes an important policy statement and it sets precedent for future appropriations bills that will contain funds expressly for the backfit. Even though there is no money right now for backfit, there is certainly money in the bill for planning that backfit.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, today women from around the globe are meeting in Beijing. The U.N. Fourth World Conference on Women, despite all of its problems, is turning out to be a testament to the will and determination of women who seek to create a better world for one-half of the world's population. Women today, in Beijing, are taking a stand for women. Today, in these Chambers, I am asking my colleagues in the House of Representatives to take a stand for women. Today, I am introducing a resolution to urge the Senate to ratify the U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, also known as CEDAW. I hope that the next century will be the first century in the history of humanity where women are not faced with Government sanctioned discrimination. My resolution will be a step in that direction. I look forward to the Congress of the United States approving my resolution.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the DeLauro amendment. I would like to remind this Congress that the Constitution applies to all Americans, including members of the Armed Forces. Women soldiers who serve our country overseas have access to a full range of reproductive services. The DeLauro amendment allows them to use their own money in overseas hospitals. Pass the DeLauro amendment. Protect a military woman's right to choose.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the 75th anniversary of the enactment of the 19th amendment by paying tribute to some very important women's organizations that not only worked to get women the right to vote 75 years ago, but that continue to be leaders in enabling women to fully participate in the political process. There are numerous organizations in California's Marin and Sonoma Counties that deserve recognition as we celebrate this Diamond Jubilee of Women's Suffrage. Their work spans many decades of service to our community. The League of Women Voters is one such group, leading the way for the past 75 years. In the 6th congressional district, we are fortunate to have two active and longstanding chapters--with the League of Marin County serving the community for 59 years, and the League of Sonoma for 42 years. I want to express my gratitude to these two remarkable leagues for their significant contributions to the political and cultural well-being of our local community. They truly reflect the vision of the suffrage movement and work to inform and engage women fully in the democratic process. Even though securing the vote for women was a major breakthrough, the work of numerous individuals and groups continue the pursuit of women's rights and equality. In the congressional district that I am privileged to represent, there are two Commissions on the Status of Women, which were initiated in 1974 with the Marin County Commission, and then in 1975 when the Sonoma County Commission began. The Sonoma Commission is celebrating its 20th anniversary on August 26, 1995, which is also the 75th anniversary of women's suffrage, with a special event to signify the connection between the past and present effort for women's equality. Mr. Speaker, this is of particular note to me because I was privileged to serve for 4 years as a commissioner during the formative stages of the Sonoma County Commission. Over these 20 years, 126 women have served as commissioners who have provided the vision and energy for numberious worthwhile projects including: creating the Women of Color Humanitatian Award, publishing the Women's Health Directory, sponsoring Domestic Violence Awareness Month, establishing a County Affirmative Action Officer, and initiating a Community Task Force on Violence Against Women. I congratulate the commission for their ongoing commitment to the women and children of Sonoma County and know that they will continue to challenge all of us to build a society that respects the rights and dignity of every person. One of the commission's more notable projects, which eventually became a national movement, was the countywide declaration of Women's History Week in 1978, and then Women's History Month in 1979. The commissioners recognized that until women are put back into our history, and our children learn about women's contributions to society, there can be no true recognition and appreciation of women's equality. In 1981, Congress declared the week of March 8 as National Women's History Week. In 1987, Congress designated March as National Women's History Month and used the exact wording from Sonoma County's declaration 8 years earlier. I salute the National Women's History Project, incorporated in 1980 and still located in Sonoma County, for their continued leadership across this Nation. In particular, they encourage our schools to put women back into history so our children can learn the whole story. It gives me a great sense of pride that the 6th congressional district has been leaders in our national commitment to improve the quality of life for girls and women, and thereby our entire communities. Raising the public's consciousness of important issues, and working toward solutions for society's problems, requires the dedication of numerous women's organizations that have multiplied in recent years. The National Women's Political Caucus [NWPC], the National Organization of Women [NOW], the National Abortion Rights Action League [NARAL], the National Federation of Business and Professional Women [BPW], and the Soroptimist Club are all excellent examples of the work that women are doing all over our country to improve the lives of us all. I am extremely proud to have active affiliates and members of these organizations in the 6th congressional district. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to give special recognition to a group of women who have been a positive force in our community long before any of the aforementioned groups. The Petaluma Women's Club formed in 1895, when this region was developing into a major agricultural region. This amazing group of women has not only been an essential support base for one another but their positive influence has been felt throughout our community for a century. I know that they will continue this legacy for years to come. I commend all the individuals and organizations who have participated in the shaping of our country, and continue to make major contributions to this Nation. It has been an honor to work with them, and I look forward to continue working closely with them in the years ahead.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Sonoma County Sheriff Deputy Frank Trejo, who lost his life in the line of duty. In March 1995, Sonoma County Sheriff's Deputy Frank Trejo made a supreme sacrifice while serving of the community of Sebastopol, CA, which is located within the congressional district I am privileged to represent. Deputy Trejo was far more than a deputy. He was a dedicated peace officer who deeply cared about people, and in turn was well respected by the entire community. Deputy Trejo joined the Sonoma County Sheriff's Department in 1980 and served Sebastopol area residents on the graveyard shift for the last 4 years. Deputy Trejo was a devoted family man who loved his job. His tranquil and sincere manner of performing his job was admired by all of his colleagues, and is already missed in the department. Without a doubt, the tragic loss of Deputy Trejo will resonate in the community for many years to come. I commend the Latino Peace Officers Association of Sonoma County for establishing a memorial scholarship in his honor. The scholarship, called ``Forever and a Day,'' will be announced and celebrated on August 19, 1995, and will continue to provide scholarships for Latino students interested in law enforcement. The Sonoma County chapter of the Latino Peace Officers Association, started only 4 years ago, is part of a national organization whose goals are to encourage Latinos to enter into law enforcement professions, to provide scholarships for these candidates, and to work with our youth to prevent crime and provide alternatives to gang association. Mr. Speaker, Deputy Trejo was a superb example of the excellence and dedication of our Sonoma County Sheriff Deputies who are on the front line everyday fighting to help make our communities a safer place to live. It is appropriate that we offer sincere thanks to the Sonoma County Latino Peace Officers Association for their dedication and commitment to the community and for establishing this fine memorial scholarship entitled ``Forever and a Day'' in memory of Frank Trejo.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, most of my colleagues would think that Green Thumb would be a garden club or an environmental group. But if they know someone whose life has been changed through Green Thumb, they know that it is a unique employment training program for low-income seniors. In fact, this chart shows the typical participant. There is a Green Thumb program in my hometown of Petaluma, CA, and one woman in my county whose life has been changed by Green Thumb is Lynn Gibbs. Lynn Gibbs is a 62-year-old graduate. A few years back, Lynn lost her successful business and was left living on an income below the poverty level. Thanks to Green Thumb and the training and job placement assistance program, Lynn is now working at a local boys' and girls' club. I will bet that almost every one of my colleagues knows someone who has worked hard, played by the rules, but who found they needed a helping hand in their older years. Last year, Green Thumb placed more than 19,000 seniors in jobs and community service projects.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, this Congress has passed some awful legislation, but this bill is worse than I ever thought possible. Mr. Chairman, this bill signals the beginning of the end of the Federal Government having any responsibility whatsoever, in helping middle income and low income students get a college education. Mr. Chairman, I know first hand the importance of education, because, 27 years ago, I was a single, working mother receiving no child support. I was forced to go on welfare, even though I was working, in order to give my three small children the health care, child care, and food they needed. Fortunately, I had advantages that many mothers on welfare do not. You see, I had an education. I had some college and I had good job skills. But, just because I made it off welfare, I will never, not for 1 minute, think that so can others with fewer advantages--those with less education, or no education at all. That is why, for the life of me, I cannot understand why some Members who used student aid, the G.I. bill, as a ladder to make a better life for themselves now want to pull that ladder up behind them. This righteous attitude of ``I did it, so why can't you'' has no place in this body. It has no place because it leads to elitist and dangerous policy like the drastic cuts in student loans we are considering today. These cuts make it clear that the Gingrich Republicans would rather invest in a tax break for the fat cats, then student loans for low and middle income families. Mr friends, I could go on and on about the other faults of this bill, but they are much too numerous to mention. But, one thing is for sure. This bill will go down in history as a declaration of war on our children, our working families, and seniors. I urge all Americans who care about the education of their children to tell their Representatives to oppose this bill.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my colleagues, the gentlewoman from Hawaii [Mrs. Mink] and the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Mrs. Johnson] and in support of title IX. I would just like to say that I have very athletic children. In fact, my youngest son is an Honorable Mention All-American college football player. I know how important that experience was to him. He also has a brother that is an athlete and a sister that is an athlete. It was equally important for them to have athletic experience. It gave them a grounding that we cannot overlook, and it taught all of them, boys and girls alike in my family, teamwork, taught them individual competitiveness, and it taught them self-assurance and self-respect. We must, must support title IX, and we cannot ever take away from that program. As a matter of fact, I do not suggest that we cut men's sports. I suggest we expand our contribution to all sports.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, a few weeks ago, military women, who are stationed overseas lost their right to use their own money to find a safe and legal abortion in a military hospital. Then, Federal employees were denied their right to receive safe and legal abortions through their own insurance plans. Now, rape and incest victims, will be victimized again by this appropriations bill. Today, Medicaid recipients are losing their right to make decisions about their own reproductive health care, unless my colleagues stand up now, before it is too late, before the right to choose rings hollow for most American women. Support the Lowey-Morella-Kolbe amendment, support a woman's right to choose.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I compliment the leader, the ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations, for all she has done on this. If this bill passes, Mr. Chairman, the Gingrich Republicans will be showing a triple feature down at your local movie theater. It will be ``Dumb and Dumber,'' with sick and sicker and poor and poorer, and let me tell you, folks, it is not going to be a bargain matinee. No doubt about it, this sweeping and radical legislation is going to cost us dearly in the long run. My colleagues, I could go on and on about the other faults of this bill. It is antichoice, antifamily planning, it is antiwoman, all of the provisions that are much too much and numerous to mention. But one thing is for sure. This bill will go down in history as the declaration of war on our children, on women, on the poor, on working families, and on seniors. Mr. Chairman, I urge all Americans who care about education, the well-being, health, and safety of their loved ones, to tell their Representatives to oppose this bill. My friends, this Congress has passed some bad legislation, but this bill is worse than I ever thought possible. It is the epitome of the us-versus-them mentality which plagues the legislation and the debate of the 104th Congress. This divisiveness has no place in a national dialogue. It has no place, because, it leads to elitist and dangerous policy, never more clear than in the bill we are debating today. We must defeat the Labor-HHS bill because it abdicates this Government's greatest responsibility: to make life better for those who are uneducated, untrained, poor, sick, or disabled. It signals the end of the Federal Government having any obligation, whatsoever, in the education, training, and health and safety of our people. Make no mistake, this is sweeping and radical legislation. It guts our education and training system. It makes a mockery of our efforts to get families off welfare. And, it puts the health and safety of all American workers at serious risk. First and foremost, this bill flies in the fact of the American people's belief that education must be our Nation's No. 1 priority. It cuts Head Start for 5 year olds; safe and drug free schools for 10 year olds; summer jobs and vocational education for 15 year olds; and financial aid for students of all ages. Is this any way to take care of our Nation's most important special interest: Our children? Absolutely not. And, what about all the talk we hear from both sides of the aisle about getting families off welfare? Well, combined with the harsh Republican welfare plan passed earlier this year, this bill makes it next to impossible for a mother to get a job and get off welfare. While the Republican welfare plan shredded the safety net, this bill burns the ladder to self-sufficiency--effectively trapping families in permanent poverty. And, what about families who are working hard every day in our Nation's factories, plants, and mines. As a member of the Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee, I have heard loud and clear from these families that they are frightened by the new majority's efforts to weaken workplace health and safety rules. Over and over again, spouses, parents, and children tell me that they are willing to see some of their taxes go toward enforcing health and safety rules, so they can be assured that their loved ones will come home from work at night safe and sound. That's a reasonable tradeoff for our families, and that's a sound investment for our Nation. The majority, however, does not see it that way. The Labor-HHS bill makes it clear that the Gingrich Republicans would rather invest in a tax break for the fat cats, than the education, training, and health and safety of American workers. In fact, if this bill passes, the Gingrich Republicans will be showing a triple feature down at your local movie theatre: It will be ``Dumb and Dumber''; with ``Sick and Sicker''; and ``Poor and Poorer.'' And, let me tell you folks, it is not going to be a bargain matinee. No doubt about it, this sweeping and radical legislation is going to cost us all dearly in the long run. My friends, I could go on and on about the other faults of this bill. It is antichoice; antifamily planning; and antiwomen provisions--but they are much too numerous to mention. But, one thing is for sure, this bill will go down in the history as a declaration of war on our children; women; the poor; working families; and seniors. I urge all Americans who care about the education; well-being; health and safety of their loved ones to tell their representatives to oppose this abomination of a bill.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues, do they not know that before Congress passed the school-to-work program last Congress, America was the only industrialized country that did not have a national program to prepare young people to go directly from school into a job? That is why last Congress we crafted a bipartisan plan to give students who are not going to college the knowledge and skills they need to move directly from high school to high-skills, high-wage careers. The school-to-work program gives all young people the chance to support themselves and their families, and to be able to participate in the American dream. The school-to-work program is a sound investment in the future of our youth and of our country. I urge my colleagues to support the Stokes amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, this Congress has passed some bad legislation, but this bill is worse than I ever thought possible. It actually signals the end of the Federal Government's obligation, to protect the health and safety of the workers of our Nation. I am a member of the Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee, a committee I call the Opportunity to Cut Everything Committee and working families from across this country have told me they are frightened by the new majority's efforts to gut workplace health and safety rules and support. These workers' families tell me they are willing to see some of their taxes go toward enforcing health and safety rules, so that their loved ones come home at night from work safe and sound. Mr. Chairman, that's a reasonable tradeoff for our working families, and that's a sound investment for our Nation. This bill, however, makes it clear that the Gingrich Republicans would rather invest in a tax break for the fat cats, than invest in the health and safety of American workers. I urge all Americans who care about the health and safety of their loved ones to tell their representatives to oppose this bill.