Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, the President is famous for saying that he is the decider, but earlier this week we found out that when it comes to Iraq the American people want Congress to be the decider. A poll conducted by ABC News and the Washington Post found that 62 percent of the American people say that Congress, and not the White House, should have the final word as to when to bring our troops home. The poll also found that 78 percent of the American people believe that the President is not willing enough to change course in Iraq. Nearly 60 percent favor withdrawal of our troops, and nearly two-thirds believe that the troop surge will not make things better. And perhaps the saddest thing of all about this, Mr. Speaker, is that the great majority of Americans who have served in Iraq, or who have had a close friend or relative serve there, disapprove of the way the occupation has been handled. These findings represent a complete repudiation of the President's policies and leadership, but it also poses a great challenge to Members of Congress. The American people are looking for us to lead. But so far, we've let them down. We haven't done what the American people sent here us here to do: end the occupation and bring the troops home. Yes, it's true that this House voted earlier this month to begin withdrawing our troops within 120 days. That was an important step forward, but it doesn't force the President's hand because there aren't enough votes in this House, yet, to make the bill veto-proof. I know that my colleagues across the aisle are waiting for General Petraeus to issue his report of the surge in September before they decide what to do about Iraq, but I don't know why we're waiting for a report when the report that really matters has already been issued, the National Intelligence Estimate, which we received last week. It showed beyond a shadow of a doubt that al Qaeda is the greatest threat to America, and it is operating out of Pakistan, not Iraq. By getting caught in the crossfire of a civil war in Iraq, we have been fighting the wrong enemy in the wrong place at the wrong time. But despite all logic, the administration keeps digging us in even deeper. The press is reporting today that the American command in Iraq has developed a new plan that will keep us fighting and dying there for years more, and at least 2 years more. This is the worst possible action to take, Mr. Speaker, because it sends the message that our involvement is open-ended. It says to the Iraqi government, you don't have to lift a finger to take responsibility for your country's security because Americans will do the job for you. Six-and-a-half years later, this administration has pursued an arrogant, go-it-alone foreign policy. It told our allies and the rest of the world to get lost. So it's not surprising that it wants Congress to get lost, too. But we are a coequal branch. We have a clear mandate from the American people. The American people are telling us, the President is driving us over the cliff. So it's up to the Congress to take the wheel. Our duty is clear, Mr. Speaker. We must act now to put our country and the world on a better and safer course. We must bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Amy Zigler, of Santa Rosa, CA, who exemplifies the dedication of many teachers in our Nation, teachers who put in countless hours to secure the best educational opportunities for their students. Amy Zigler led the effort at Windsor High School to obtain a competitive grant--one of only 130 awarded nationwide--to utilize technology in mathematics classrooms. With a team of five teachers, Amy helped secure $35,000 from Hewlett-Packard to train teachers in integration of new technology and to purchase equipment that will enable them to record class lessons and create Power Points for students' home use. Students will also be able to review lessons in detail on-line, which will be particularly helpful to those who have missed class. Windsor High School will receive almost $300,000 in additional school funding due to efforts of teachers and officials dedicated to securing resources for their students. Other grants will assist the school in developing a pre-med core health program, digital design classes, and a vineyard academy as well as work on sustainable energy. Madam Speaker, we are fortunate to have teachers like Amy in our schools. She understands that our children are our most important resource for the future, and we must do all we can to provide them with the best opportunities. I am proud to honor Amy Zigler and all the teachers who make our country a better place.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr, a Presbyterian minister committed to justice for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans gender community. A self-described lesbian and feminist, Janie is retiring after 33 years. Born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, with her twin sister Joanie to Chet and Susanna Adams, Janie was ordained a Presbyterian Minister in December 1974, to the Hazelwood Presbyterian Church in Pittsburgh. From 1975-1979 she served as Assistant Pastor of First Presbyterian in San Rafael, California, and in 1979-1980 was the Executive Director of Oakland Council of Presbyterian Churches where she was encouraged to resign after coming out as a lesbian. Janie began her ``out'' liberation work with and for LGBT people as the Minister of Pastoral Care in the Castro area of Metropolitan Community Church in San Francisco from 1980-1982. In 1982, this ``lesbyterian'' founded the Ministry of Light, which later became the Spectrum Center for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns. She served for 10 years as the Executive Director of Spectrum. In 1991, Rev. Spahr was called to serve as a co-pastor at the Downtown United Presbyterian Church in Rochester, New York, marking the first time a Presbyterian Church had chosen an ``out'' pastor. The call, however, was challenged, and the Judicial Commission of the Presbyterian Church refused to allow Rev. Spahr to assume the coposition. In response to the ruling Janie was hired by The Downtown United Presbyterian Church and the Westminster Presbyterian Church in Tiburon, California, who formed the ``That All May Freely Serve'' project. She was employed to work within the denomination to end discrimination and increase inclusiveness for all people. In 2006, Rev. Spahr made national headlines when the Commission of the Presbytery of the Redwoods ruled she acted within her ``right of conscience'' as a Christian when she performed commitment ceremonies for two lesbian couples. The Presbyterian Church's highest court ruled in 2000 that ministers could ``bless'' same-sex unions but not preside over them or call them marriages. Janie challenged the church's constitution and won a victory for justice and inclusion, but the battle is not yet over as the Prosecuting Committee has filed an appeal. During her undergraduate years at Penn State, Jane met Jim Spahr whom she later married and had two sons, Jim and Chet. Jim now fondly refers to Janie as his ``wife emerita'' and the ``sister-in-Iove'' of Jackie Spahr (Jim's partner) and Bill Fenton (her sister Joanie's partner). Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to honor Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr whose courageous passion for justice and inclusion for LGBT people has left a legacy that is paving the way to a better future. Rev. Spahr has touched so many lives as a minister, and though she is retiring she will remain a mentor and role model to all.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my concerns over the continuing human rights violations perpetrated by the International Law Enforcement Academy (ILEA) stationed in San Salvador, El Salvador. We cannot expect to promote stable democratic institutions in El Salvador by funneling military aid through ILEA to support local police forces engaging in repressive tactics. Since President Clinton called for the establishment of the ILEA in 1995, the United States and participating nations have founded ILEAs in Hungary, Thailand, Botswana, El Salvador, and the United States. Through ILEA, the U.S. has continued to provide military aid, training, and arms sales to participating countries, which threatens to aggravate regional conflicts and sideline programs designed to halt human rights abuses. The use of excessive force by police and security forces in El Salvador when targeting activists and their failure to protect workers rights to organize and bargain collectively has been at worse exacerbated and at best unchecked by ILEA's presence in the country. Furthermore, the government's failure to investigate human rights abuses calls into question the need for ILEA to provide security forces with more tools that can be used to repress those working toward a truly representative democracy in El Salvador. Madam Speaker, the Congress must take a hard and serious look at whether we should continue funding ILEA. We should not support programs that claim to fight public corruption and provide opportunities for the global law enforcement community to share their expertise and training when, in fact, they further the oppression of social and labor activists and do nothing to end a country's human rights violations.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 716. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Rahall for his leadership in bringing H.R. 716, the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse bill, to the floor. The Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse bill is a huge step in the right direction for the City of Santa Rosa. It will help the city increase its reuse of wastewater as an alternative to releasing the water into the Russian River, where my district receives the great majority of our drinking water. The project is especially important in a region that remains arid for 6 months of the year and where droughts pose a genuine threat to humans and endangered species. Under the reuse plan, the City of Santa Rosa will use recycled water for landscape irrigation, allowing the city to conserve valuable water for human consumption and for watershed preservation and enhancement. It is essential that we find new ways to reuse wastewater and prevent further discharge into nearby waterways. This project can help the City of Santa Rosa by making great strides in its water reuse program and give the city an opportunity to help endangered species, and at the same time protect the Russian River from further discharge. Mr. Speaker, I ask for support of H.R. 1716, the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse bill.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, last week this House voted to end the occupation of Iraq. Some of those who opposed that action argued that bringing our troops home out of Iraq will increase the violence there and perhaps even lead to a humanitarian catastrophe. But what they forget, or choose to ignore, is that a humanitarian catastrophe has already occurred in Iraq. It is getting worse every day. That catastrophe includes the refugee crisis in that devastated nation. Last week the United States Committee for Refugees reported that the number of refugees in the world rose last year to its highest level since 2001. One of the main reasons was the great exodus from Iraq. All told, more than 2 million Iraqis have been forced to flee their country. Close to 2 million more have been displaced internally. That is a total, Mr. Speaker, of 4 million refugees, 50 percent of whom are children, and tens of thousands more are leaving every single month. Many of the refugees are in dire straits. Recently United Nations inspectors visited one refugee camp and found more than 2,000 people living in tents. They had no clothes except for the clothes on their backs. They had no medical care. They had no drinkable water. They had no toilets. Many of the children had typhoid and other illnesses and were living among snakes and scorpions. Sweden, to its great credit, is accepting more than 1,000 refugees every month. The population of Sweden is only 9 million people. The United States, with a population of 300 million, accepted only 202 last year. Not 202,000, but 202. We have accepted only somewhere around 700 since our occupation of Iraq began. That is a disgraceful record. Every Member of this House should feel ashamed. That goes for all of us; those who support the war and those who oppose it. We may disagree about policy, but surely we can agree that we have a moral obligation to do more about a terrible refugee problem that our occupation has created. After all, many of the refugees have had to flee because they cooperated with our troops in the first place, or they cooperated with American contractors. We can't turn our backs on them now. That is why I am urging all of my colleagues to support H.R. 2265, the Responsibility to Iraq Refugees Act of 2007, sponsored by Representative Blumenauer along with Representative Shays and Representative Schakowsky. I especially challenge those Members who want our occupation of Iraq to continue to support this bill. Don't just warn us about a humanitarian crisis. Do something about the one that already exists. The bill would provide special immigrant status to 15,000 Iraqis every year for 4 years. The bill would also provide a safe haven for at least 20,000 more Iraqis, including children, who have been left all alone in the world. Giving these young people a chance in life is not only honorable, it is smart because these impoverished children could become prime targets for recruitment by terrorists. To me, this bill represents the true heart of America, the good and caring heart that has compassion for the people of the world. But our leaders do not seem to share this compassion. Recently, for example, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton denied that the United States has any responsibility for the refugee crisis. He said, ``Our obligation was to give the Iraqis new institutions and provide security. We have fulfilled that obligation. I don't think we have an obligation to compensate for the hardships of war.'' This is the kind of arrogance, Mr. Speaker, that has destroyed America's reputation and credibility around the world. We must reclaim our moral leadership. We can start by helping the Iraqi refugees. It's the right thing to do. It's the right thing to do as we bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the 35th anniversary of the Marin Community Clinic. The Marin Community Clinic has consistently provided high quality primary care to the residents of the community since 1972. Originally established as a free clinic in a Mill Valley Community Church, Marin Community Clinic has grown to become a federally qualified health center serving as a critical source of health care for all residents across Marin County who cannot afford medical insurance. Throughout my district and across the Nation, the need for health care services among low income and uninsured residents continues to grow. Many residents who cannot afford care turn to hospital emergency rooms as their only health care option. Not only does this fail to meet the needs of patients, it also dramatically increases the costs of health care for everyone. Designed to offer a more cost-effective and affordable option than emergency rooms for non-emergency care, Marin Community Clinic receives at least 5-15 referrals from hospitals every day. Marin Community Clinic also serves as a medical home to over 13,000 patients each year, 95 percent of whom live within 200 percent of the Federal poverty level. Between 1991 and 2007, patient visits have increased from 5,000 to nearly 50,000 annually, representing a 9-fold increase. Currently, 75 percent of the Clinic's patients are women and children. Today, Marin Community Clinic operates one clinic on the grounds of Marin General Hospital in Greenbrae and another clinic in Novato for residents of northern Marin. Next year, the organization plans to open a third clinic in San Rafael to respond to the growing community need for health care and dental services in the community. As the clinic has grown, the organization has also developed a unique model of care that integrates physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurses, mental health clinicians, and case workers to deliver high quality, compassionate care. In addition, Marin Community Clinic also provides preventive health education for early breast cancer detection and for patients with chronic conditions like asthma, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Marin Community Clinic also operates a ``Reach Out and Read'' literacy program for children. I commend Marin Community Clinic for their dedication, commitment and outstanding service for the citizens of Marin County during the last 35 years and I look forward to their continued success in meeting the health care needs with quality care for many more years to come.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, despite the backlog of passport applications and the lack of sufficient staff to accommodate the workload, passport agency personnel have done a remarkable job of assisting my constituents in getting passports. The National Passport Information Center, the Washington, DC, Passport Agency, and the San Francisco Passport Agency, in particular, have been extremely helpful. The men and women in the State Department who are meeting this administrative crisis should be acknowledged for the extra effort they have been making to ensure U.S. citizens are able to travel abroad to work, vacation, participate in church and service projects, and attend educational programs. I rise in support of S. 966 and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the bill.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Patsy T. Mink Fellowships Act. This bill continues the legacy of our dear colleague from Hawaii and is in honor of her work on behalf of equal opportunities in education. Patsy Mink faced many challenges as a woman in higher education and she was a leader promoting equal opportunities for all women. The situation is better today, but there is still a long way to go. Thirty-two percent of doctoral-age Americans are African-American or Hispanic, but only 11 percent of doctoral degrees awarded to Americans are awarded to African-Americans or Hispanics. In such critical fields as engineering and science, that number is nine percent. Women earn only about one-quarter of doctoral degrees in math and physical sciences and only one-sixth in engineering. Only 38 percent of full time faculty are women, and that percent decreases as women seek advancement. For example, only 30 percent of tenured faculty and 21 percent of full professors are women. In engineering, math, and physics, only about five percent of full professors are women. Similarly, African-Americans represent only four percent of full or associate professors and Hispanics represent only two percent. The Woodrow Wilson Fellowship Foundation recently cited fewer institutional fellowships for minority students as a primary reason for the decline in the number of minority students pursuing doctorates. The lack of minority and women professors, especially in math, science, and engineering, is the result of fewer of these individuals studying those subjects in high school, college, and graduate school. The Patsy T. Mink Fellowships will increase diversity among college professors by authorizing fellowships for minorities and women doctoral students who agree to teach in higher education for one year for each year of their fellowship. I ask my colleagues to support the Patsy T. Mink Fellowships Act, both to keep America's promise of equal educational opportunity and to protect our economic and national security.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Chairman, over 20,000 people have died from AIDS in the San Francisco-Bay Area, and AIDS continues to be the second leading cause of premature death in our area. In addition, and it is because of improved treatments, because of programs like the Ryan White AIDS program, nearly 23,000 individuals are currently living with HIV/ AIDS, more than at any point in the history of the epidemic. Therefore, it is not the right time for the people in the San Francisco-Bay Area to have any cuts in their AIDS/HIV programs, because it is starting to work but it isn't working well enough, including my own county of Marin County north of San Francisco and the county of San Mateo south of San Francisco. Our communities have the third largest cumulative number of AIDS cases in the entire country. This amendment will recklessly and irresponsibly put the lives of many of our constituents at risk. The very idea truly astounds me, the very idea that these lifesaving programs would be cut, that there would even be an offer to cut them while we are spending $10 billion a month to occupy Iraq just is beyond my comprehension. I have to wonder, what are some people thinking about? What are their priorities? I can tell you my priorities are with the health and the well-being of our constituents. Treatments and support programs and systems for HIV/AIDS have come a long way. Now is not the time to pull the rug out from under the programs that are working and to stop supporting those who are living with AIDS and HIV, particularly in the most affected areas such as San Francisco and Newark, New Jersey. Therefore, I urge my colleagues, please oppose this misguided amendment. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Lantos for the time and Chairman Skelton for bringing this important resolution to the House floor. Mr. Speaker, the American people have called for bold action to bring our troops home, and today we are debating a first step, setting a date certain to bring them home. Over the next weeks, we will vote to prohibit permanent bases in Iraq. We will continue the drumbeat to fund the safe and complete withdrawal of our troops. But, Mr. Speaker, despite calls--no, actually pleas--from the American people, some at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue and many right here in the House are just fine with staying the course. In fact, they are once again changing the conversation. They are trying to focus on gut feelings about an upcoming terrorist attack. But the American people will not stand for changing the conversation, and they will not stand for staying the course, nor should we in this Congress. The costs are just too high: $10 billion a month, and worst of all, the deadliest 3-month period since the escalation; 3,600 troops dead; at least 26,000 wounded; and tens of thousands of Iraqi refugees leaving Iraq every day. This is not only unacceptable; it is immoral. Today, the Congress must take a bold step to bring our troops home. We must stand up today with the American people. We must say, enough is enough. End the occupation, bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, every single American, no matter what circumstances he or she comes from, deserves the opportunity to earn a college degree, but this opportunity should not come at the cost of years of crippling financial debt. That's why the time has come for this Congress to ease the education burden by increasing Pell Grants, reducing interest rates and closing the gap between college costs and financial aid. For the fifth time in 6 years, the college system in California raised tuition. In fact, this fall, students at Sonoma State University in my district will be required to pay nearly $3,000 more a year in tuition. That's a 10 percent increase from their current tuition. We need to do better. We need to work with our colleges to keep costs low. We need to invest in financial aid, and today, we are finally doing that. And it's going to cost $18 billion to help this financial aid increase; $18 billion, about the same as 6 weeks of our occupation in Iraq.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, President Bush delivered a speech in Cleveland yesterday in which he said that ``Congress ought to wait.'' That is what he said; Congress ought to wait for General Petraeus and his report on the surge in September before deciding what to do about Iraq. When I heard that remark, I thought to myself, I wonder what the President would like us to do while we are waiting? Does he think we should take up knitting? Should we empty out our committee rooms and use them for ballroom dancing lessons? Should we have a sign on the door of the House of Representatives that says, ``Gone Fishin' ''? The President's remark was, of course, outrageous. The American people did not send us to Washington to wait and to do nothing. They sent us here to take action, to end the occupation of Iraq, and that is what we must do. We cannot wait, because American troops continue to die. More than 600 have died since the troop surge began last winter. We cannot wait, because at least 13,500 Iraqi civilians have died since the escalation began, and that is according to very conservative estimates. We cannot wait, because the war is costing a staggering $10 billion every single month, more than $60 billion since the escalation began. We cannot wait, because the violence in Iraq is forcing tens of thousands of new refugees to flee their homes every single month. And we cannot wait, because the escalation has only escalated the violence. April, May and June produced more American military deaths than any other 3-month period since the war began in Iraq. Instead of telling the Congress to wait, the administration should be saying to the Iraqi government, stop waiting. Stop waiting, and start working on the political solutions to Iraq's problems. Our troops have done their part, but the Iraqi government has been either unwilling or unable to do its part, and our leaders seem to refuse to hold them accountable. So we cannot allow the administration to sing that old tune, ``See You in September,'' because the American people have made it clear: They want this occupation to end, and since the administration won't do it, then Congress must. The House will consider a troop redeployment bill this week. I introduced a bill, H.R. 508, way back in January when the escalation first began, to end the occupation. H.R. 508 calls for fully funding the safe, orderly and responsible withdrawal and redeployment of our troops within 6 months, and it guarantees full funding for the healthcare needs of our veterans. The bill also includes provisions to help the Iraqi people get back on their feet, maintain stability and prevent a worsening of the civil war. It would accelerate multinational assistance to Iraq for reconstruction and reconciliation in that shattered land. And because our involvement in Iraq has taught us that we must take a new approach to foreign policy, my bill absolutely rejects preemptive war, which clearly doesn't work. Instead, it calls for diplomatic efforts to help Iraq and help its neighbors to achieve political, not military, solutions to regional problems. Mr. Speaker, the administration has abrogated its responsibilities, and Congress has waited in the wings too long. Now it is time for us to take the stage of history and put America on a new and better course. It is past time to bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, we are back from our Fourth of July district work period, but our homecoming has not been a particularly happy one because we have received even more bad news from the occupation in Iraq. Yesterday the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service reported that the cost of the occupation has soared to $10 billion a month, which will add up to half a trillion dollars, thanks to the administration's decision to send more troops and escalate the occupation. Ten billion dollars a month. I pulled out my calculator. I did some division and found that $10 billion translates into $23 million per month per congressional district. Yes, the President is sending a bill to our constituents in every district every month that says you owe $24 million and you had better pay up because if you don't, I will borrow the money and stick your children and your grandchildren with the bill plus plenty of interest. And I am going to send you another bill just like this one every single month from here on. Now, some people call the spending on the war the ``burn rate.'' But America doesn't have money to burn. Not when we have critically important investments to make in places that really make a difference for our country, like education; health care; the environment; energy independence; and homeland security, including better security at our ports, at our airports and giving first responders the tools they need to keep our communities safe. And here is what disturbs me the very most about this burn rate: while the administration throws good money after bad in Iraq, it wants to roll back health coverage for kids right here in America. Those are the wrong priorities. They are the wrong values. Let's ask ourselves what are we getting for our $10 billion a month. We are getting an Iraq Government that isn't meeting any of the benchmarks. We are contributing to a refugee crisis that has already forced at least 4 million Iraqis out of their homes with tens of thousands leaving every month. And we are stretching our military to the breaking point. Today, the Army announced that in June it missed its recruitment goal for the second month in a row. It appears that parents, alarmed about the bloodshed and never-ending nature of this occupation, are discouraging their children from signing up. Isn't it ironic that our involvement in Iraq is turning out to be a bad recruiting tool for the United States but a great recruiting tool for al Qaeda and other terrorist groups? I am encouraged, however, that a growing number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are turning against the occupation. But at the same time, the President gave a speech today in Cleveland that showed he isn't budging an inch from his failed escalation strategy. He said that Congress ``should wait'' for General Petraeus's report on the surge in September before making any decision about Iraq, while admitting at the same time that September is a meaningless goal. That is outrageous. The American people didn't send us to Congress to sit around and wait to do nothing. They sent us here to end the occupation, and that is what we must do. I have proposed a bill that would achieve that, H.R. 508. It would fully fund bringing our troops home safely and soon. It would accelerate international assistance for reconstruction and reconciliation in order to keep Iraq as peaceful as possible. And it would use diplomacy. It would use diplomacy, not war, to achieve political solutions to regional problems. We will have a golden opportunity in the days and weeks ahead to chart a new course. I urge my colleagues to heed the call and listen to history and listen to the American people and to bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, in the current issue of the ``New Yorker'' magazine, veteran reporter Seymour Hersh lays out the shame that was Abu Ghraib and the efforts at the highest levels to sweep it under the carpet. Former Army General Antonio Taguba takes this very brave step to share details of his meetings with former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and other administration officials in the wake of the prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. In May, 2004, photos of abuse at the American-run prison were made public by CBS and other media outlets. We can all recall the inhumane treatment and degradation depicted. What was included in the photos and videos were not interrogations. They were humiliating and often horrible acts of violence. Months earlier, before the photos emerged, General Taguba had filed a report outlining the ``numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses that were inflicted on several detainees and systemic and illegal abuse.'' In fact, the first report sent to senior Pentagon officials came in January of that year. The response? A senior general in Iraq brushed off the report saying that the victims were ``only Iraqis.'' According to the article, General Taguba found that Lieutenant General Sanchez, the Army commander in Iraq who had visited the prison several times, knew exactly what was going on. Despite many reports contradicting him, Secretary Rumsfeld himself clung to the claim that he saw the photos and video of the abuse only days before testifying before Congress. He said he first learned of the problem in late January or early February. His memory seems to be a little fuzzy in this regard. And in response, who did he send to oversee prison in Iraq? Major General Jeffrey Miller, the commander at Guantanamo. If this were a movie plot, Mr. Speaker, it would seem ludicrous. Unfortunately, this is part of our real history in the occupation of Iraq. And our commander-in-chief? It is unclear when he first learned of the situation at Abu Ghraib, but by most accounts it was months before the notorious pictures hit the airwaves. This is absolutely disgraceful. It appears that the administration has no shame when it comes to the continuing abuse of human rights abroad and at home right here in America. Is this the legacy we want to leave in the Middle East? A preemptive strike against a nation which did not have weapons of mass destruction? A civil war that is tearing a nation apart? Our standing in the world at an all-time low? The loss of over 3,500 brave service members? This did not have to happen. The administration willingly misled this Nation into an occupation that cannot be won. The acts at Abu Ghraib could have besmirched the honor and reputation of all of the troops who serve each day with distinction and courage, but thankfully it did not, because the American people know and understand that the acts of the few and of the top leadership who endorse those acts should not be visited on those who so bravely and selflessly serve. Our troops have shown great valor in the face of unbelievable challenges. This Congress honors them and the sacrifices they have made. That said, it is well past time that this Congress stands up and says, enough is enough from this administration. The American people are frustrated with the lack of progress on ending the occupation and bringing our troops home, and rightfully so. This fight may be difficult, but it is our obligation. I ask my colleagues to demand that not another day goes by without a real effort to bring our troops home and to return the sovereignty of Iraq to its people.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution honoring Title IX and the woman who played a key role in its passage, Congresswoman Patsy Mink. I was privileged to serve with Patsy on the Education and Labor Committee from the time I started serving in 1993. She took me under her wing and was a true mentor to me, inspiring me with her example. There has been no stronger voice in Congress for girls, women, and minorities than Patsy's. Her work here has touched countless women's lives. Women today don't have to face the barriers and discrimination that Patsy faced when applying to graduate school. Her firsthand experience with gender discrimination--being denied admission to medical school as a promising young science student--did not discourage her or break her spirit, but sparked her desire for change. Most importantly, when she overcame gender and racial barriers to climb the ladder of success, she did not kick that ladder aside for other women; instead, she led the way and supported their upward rise, most importantly, paving the way with legislation such as Title IX. She never gave up the struggle to give every child access to a quality education. Her memory continues to be an inspiration for me on the Education and Labor committee and in the legislation that I introduce and cosponsor. This Congress, I will again introduce legislation to start a Patsy Mink fellowship program to help more women and minorities earn graduate degrees and become college professors. A lot more work remains to be done to give women more educational opportunities: women are still underrepresented in math, science, and engineering-related fields. Thanks in large part to Patsy's work, a majority of people agree that women should be allowed to apply to college and graduate programs without facing discriminatory admissions policies, sexual harassment in schools when they do get in, or even a lack of athletic opportunities. We are well served by Patsy's legacy, a true guiding star.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, maybe, just maybe, if a woman has access to contraceptives, abortion will be prevented. What is wrong with you people? Where do you come from? Oh, that's right, you come from the United States of America, where all women are allowed, rich or poor, to have access to and choices over family planning. Lucky us. There are many choices for preventing unwanted pregnancies, and let us not forget prevention of HIV/AIDS. If you are against abortion, at least support prevention. If you are concerned about HIV/AIDS, support contraception. Our Nation has a long history of generosity and caring. That should not end today. What are we doing? We are up here with the Lowey amendment ensuring that women in the poorest villages in the poorest countries have access to contraceptives. We are doing that by providing medically approved and necessary contraceptives to women who would otherwise have no other means to prevent unwanted pregnancies and/or to prevent HIV/AIDS. Unintended pregnancies and illegal abortions have been on the rise in areas where access to family planning has been denied. Chairwoman Lowey's provision is just plain common sense. Let's put women's health above politics and vote ``no'' on the Smith-Stupak amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, we have a solemn responsibility to honor the promises we've made to our veterans. Boldly heeding the call to duty, brave men and women from across America have served with distinction in defense of our Nation. They have dedicated their lives to safeguarding the promise and potential of our country, and we have an obligation to repay their commitment. The veterans of California's 6th District understand that our obligation to our service men and women does not end when they return home. The importance of providing our veterans with the benefits they need and deserve does not abate just because our troops are no longer serving in the field. Our support for troops is a lifelong commitment. The substandard care, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and deplorable conditions exposed at Walter Reed Military Hospital underscore broken promises to our Nation's veterans. We cannot allow the Bush administration's failure to become the hallmark of our country's commitment to our veterans. Our veterans deserve much better. The Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2008 is a resolute step toward fulfilling the promises to our veterans that the Republican-controlled Congress neglected during the past 12 years. This bill increases the VA's budget by $6.7 billion above fiscal year 2007 funding levels, providing the greatest single increase in funding for veterans health care in the 77-year history of the VA and, for the first time, exceeding the budget requests of independent veterans service groups. Additionally, this legislation confronts the 400,000 claims backlog from veterans awaiting decisions on the status of their disability benefits by adding more than 1,100 new claims processors. By allocating critical funding to help repair veteran's health care facilities, establish eight new centers to care for veterans suffering from Traumatic Brain Injuries, and facilitate the transition from the Defense Department to the VA, this appropriations bill will go a long way toward fixing the problems that the Bush administration has allowed to fester. The veterans' community needs our reinvestment in their health care and benefits system. Our service members have proved courage and patriotism, and it's our turn to prove that we can keep our promise to them. This Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs Appropriations bill shows that we can provide our veterans with medical care, benefits and social support in a timely manner. By passing this bill, we can start to repay them for the bravery they have shown.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I have come down to this floor more than 200 times to hold the administration accountable for its actions in Iraq. Since then, we have seen it all, from freedom fries to ``the surge.'' During these dog days of summer, however, we can't relent. We have to join together as never before because this administration is moving in new and even more dangerous directions in foreign policy. Let me give you an example. Several weeks ago, the administration confirmed what I had been saying for the last 3 or 4 years; namely, that they are determined to maintain tens of thousands of American troops on permanent military bases in Iraq for many decades to come. To support this position, they draw an absurd comparison between the situation in Iraq and the situation in South Korea. South Korea, where U.S. troops have been stationed for more than 50 years. And then White House spokesman Tony Snow said U.S. troops may have to stay in Iraq indefinitely to perform what he called an over-the-horizon support role. Over-the-horizon support role. George Orwell couldn't have said it any better. Call it what it really is, Tony: Occupation. Ever since the administration took us into Iraq, I have tried to get at the heart of what is wrong with this foreign policy, and I believe the answer is this: The administration's foreign policy has failed. It has failed because it sells America short. The administration believes that the only weapon we have to fight terrorism is military power, but by relying on military power alone and ignoring our many other strengths, they have made America much weaker, not stronger. There is another answer: A much different look at diplomacy and foreign policy. First, we must reestablish our moral leadership and regain our standing in the global community by using diplomacy as our first and best resort, and war only as our last resort. President Roosevelt said that the Presidency is preeminently a place of moral leadership, and that is something this administration must learn. Second, we must rebuild our international alliances. We may be a Superpower, but we don't have super powers like Spiderman. So, we need the help of other nations. International cooperation is by far the best way to dismantle terrorist networks, manage globalization, stop the spread of disease and global warming, and fight the poverty that is the breeding ground of terrorism. Third, Mr. Speaker, we must stop using fear as an excuse to justify immoral wars, or as a bludgeon to crush dissent and trash our Constitution. Again, quoting President Roosevelt, the only thing we have to fear, he said, is fear itself. Well, this administration believes that without fear, they can't move their agenda. Fourth, we must end our addiction to foreign oil that pumps billions of dollars into autocratic regimes and props them up. Let's get serious about sustainable energy. And let's export green technology instead of war. Next, we must renew our commitment to nuclear nonproliferation. It is sheer hypocrisy to demand that Iran and North Korea halt their nuclear programs while we talk about developing new nuclear weapons of our very own. And finally, we must take the money we are investing in war and reinvest it in what makes us truly strong: education, health care, jobs, child care, the environment, and nonviolent problem solving. I have offered a national security plan myself which rests on these broad principles. It's called SMART, which stands for Sensible Multilateral American Response to Terrorism. SMART, H. Res. 227, is deadly serious about stopping acts of terrorism. It would beef-up our intelligence capabilities. It would enhance our efforts to cut off financing for terrorist organizations.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to share with my colleagues the recent selection of Santa Rosa, California, the largest city in my district, as a 2007 All-America City. The honor was recently bestowed upon Santa Rosa by the National Civic League, and is considered to be the most prestigious community recognition competition in the United States today. Santa Rosa was honored for its exemplary community vision, collaborative problem- solving and the ability to meet local challenges. I have represented Santa Rosa for the past 14 years and these characteristics are just the beginning. In order to win this prestigious award, a broad and diverse delegation of Santa Rosa public officials and business and community leaders represented Santa Rosa against 20 other community finalists from across the country. The delegation presented not only their innovative programs, but the local solutions they have implemented, before to a jury of their peers from across the United States. The delegation from Santa Rosa included the following members of the community: Bob Blanchard, Mayor, City of Santa Rosa; Jane Bender, Councilmember, City of Santa Rosa; Jeff Kolin, City Manager, City of Santa Rosa; Michael Frank, Assistant City Manager/Administrative Services, City of Santa Rosa; Patricia Fruiht, Assistant to the City Manager, City of Santa Rosa; Mark Ihde, Retired Sonoma County Sheriff & President and CEO of Goodwill Industries--Redwood Empire; Rhuenette Alums, Area Director, AT&T; Roberta Atha, Administrative Technician, City of Santa Rosa; Neil Brady, Senior Maintenance Worker, City of Santa Rosa; Judy Daugherty, Risk Management Analyst, City of Santa Rosa; Michael Friedenberg, President, Arts Council of Sonoma County; Jesse Guerrero, Artstart Apprentice; Vince Harper, Director, Youth & Neighborhood Services, Community Action Partnership; Mo McElroy, Director, Santa Rosa Convention & Visitors Bureau; Juan Meza, After-School Program Participant; Ernesto Olivares, Police Lieutenant and Manager, Gang Prevention & Intervention Services, City of Santa Rosa; Rosie Rojas, After-School Program Participant; Crystal Tsutsui, After-School Programs Volunteer/Chaperone; Mario Uribe, Creative Director, Artstart; Steve Velasquez, Program Director, Hope Works Santa Rosa; Patricia Wilburn, Production Specialist, Community Media Center Chandra Woodworth, Artstart Apprentice; Donna Zapata, Operations Manager, Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. During their presentation the delegation was able to share the achievements of three Santa Rosa's programs that serve as outstanding examples of public-private partnership to solve address community concerns: Santa Rosa Downtown Arts Program The Santa Rosa Downtown Arts Program brings a wide range of arts and cultural programming into the downtown area to strengthen the community's image and sense of place, increase cultural unity and stimulate economic development. The program creates an arts hub that draws people downtown to live, work, and play, which encourages development and increases downtown business. The Downtown Arts Program has a three-prong approach: (1) Physical Environment--Artists design sculptures, informational kiosks, benches, light poles and news racks. Art facilities, studios, galleries, and exhibition spaces are a priority. (2) Cultural Programming includes diverse music, dance, theater, film, and literary arts. (3) Sustainable Resources--Leadership and funding from public and private sector guarantee the program's strength and growth. Measure O Public Safety Quarter-Cent Sales Tax Measure A quarter-cent public safety sales tax measure was placed on the November 2004 ballot, which came to be known as Measure O. The measure generates approximately $7 million per year for Police, Fire, and Gang Prevention and Intervention efforts. The ordinance set up a citizen oversight committee and has strict rules preventing any ``supplanting'' of existing services or funding in the General Fund. This project has allowed significant progress to be made in vital areas at a time when core public safety was threatened. Mayor's Gang Prevention Task Force Four years ago, the city of Santa Rosa took aggressive steps to address the rise of local gangs. The city began with a public outreach campaign to educate the community on the growing threat, and followed that up with trips to other cities where staff and policy leaders were able to learn from their programs. In addition, the Mayor became actively involved by establishing the Gang Prevention Task Force in order to confront the issues and the risk to youth. The Task Force consists of policy leaders from throughout Sonoma County, school officials, law enforcement and officials from non-profit and social service organizations. In addition the move was not a drain on existing public resources, and was primarily funded by a quarter-cent sales tax measure that dedicates 20 percent to gang prevention and intervention measures. While the Santa Rosa delegation brought home the top honors, every member of the delegation was able to learn from the other finalists. As a result they have returned to Santa Rosa, not only energized, but armed with fresh ideas to improve their community. I am very proud of their achievement, Madam Speaker, and invite all of my colleagues to visit this lovely community in the Sonoma County wine country just north of San Francisco.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, last month, despite my objections and many of my colleagues, Congress passed a bill to continue funding the occupation of Iraq. Now everyone is waiting for the next big event in the war, General Petraeus's report on whether the escalation, the surge, is succeeding. This report is due in September. But with our brave American troops and innocent Iraqis continuing to die, we are remiss if we twiddle our thumbs and wait for September. We need to hold this administration accountable for its actions in Iraq, and we need to do it today, not 3 months from now. So I want to go back to January 10 of this year, the night that the President announced his new surge policy in a speech to the Nation, to see if he is delivering on what he promised. On that night, he said, ``America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.'' But here we are, Mr. Speaker, 6 months later, and the Iraqi government has made virtually no progress on any of it's benchmarks. Even Lieutenant General Douglas Lute, our new war czar, expressed frustration about this in his Senate confirmation hearing. General Lute said, ``My assessment would be that the Iraqis have shown very little progress.'' Mr. Speaker, back on January 10, we were told that the surge would help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence. But the Pentagon's own report on the current situation, which was released last Wednesday, said that the violence continues to be driven by sectarianism. In other words, we've sent our troops to fight a civil war that has nothing to do with protecting America from terrorism. Also, back on January 10, the escalation speech included these words: ``Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders.'' Yet, Mr. Speaker, in the Senate hearing I mentioned a moment ago, Senator Evan Bayh quoted a top CIA expert in saying that the American presence in Iraq is creating more members of al Qaeda than we are killing. The President claims that he has the power to grab people off the streets of America, declare them enemy combatants and order the military to hold them indefinitely. But last week, a Federal Appeals Court ruled that, ``to sanction such authority would have disastrous consequences for the Constitution and for the country.'' The President says that he is a strict constructionist when it comes to the Constitution. But he has shown that he is not a strict constructionist, not a loose constructionist, but a non constructionist who simply ignores the Constitution. It is time, Mr. Speaker, for a new policy in Iraq. We must fully fund the safe redeployment of our troops. We must guarantee the very best health care for our veterans. We must work with the Iraqi people and the international community to provide for the reconstruction of Iraq. We must look to diplomacy, not preemptive war, to help Iraq and its neighbors to achieve political solutions to the region's problems, and there must be no permanent American military bases in Iraq. And America must rely, once again, on our most powerful weapons in the fight against terrorism, our Constitution and our democratic values. And, Mr. Speaker, we must bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, today marks over 1,500 days of the occupation of Iraq. Since that time, over 3,500 brave men and women have given their lives and at least 2,600 have been injured. We have spent nearly half a trillion dollars, but this occupation is about more than just numbers. It is about the lives, both American and Iraqi, that will be changed forever. So many brave men and women heeded the call of the Commander in Chief to rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. One could say many of these troops were misled with false or at the very least faulty intelligence. They deserve so much more for their sacrifice and their service. Last month, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, a newspaper in my district, carried a story titled, ``GIs Voice Disillusionment With the War.'' It outlined the frustrations of our troops, some on their first tour, others who have served again and again. One account exemplifies the frustration, and I will read it. ``In 2003, 2004, 100 percent of the soldiers wanted to be here to fight this war,'' said Sergeant First Class David Moore, a self-described ``conservative Texas Republican'' and platoon sergeant who strongly advises an American withdrawal. ``Now,'' he says, ``95 percent of my platoon agrees with me.'' Mr. Speaker, that is directly from the front. This is not something that has been run through the administration's spin machine. This is the unvarnished truth from the troops in the trenches. One more account comes from Staff Sergeant David Safstrom. According the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Staff Sergeant Safstrom does not regret his previous tours in Iraq, not even a difficult second stint when two comrades were killed while trying to capture insurgents. He said, ``In Mosul, in 2003, it felt like we were making the city a better place. There was no sectarian violence. Saddam was gone. We were tracking down the bad guys. It felt awesome.'' But now, Mr. Speaker, on this third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb. When they searched the bomber's body, they found identification showing him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army. ``I thought,'' he said, ``'What are we doing here? Why are we still here?''', said Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the 1st battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. He had changed his mind. Mr. Speaker, let me be clear, I and every one of my colleagues support the troops. We honor their bravery and we commit to ensuring that they receive all of the promised benefits as a result of their service to our Nation. I believe that the best way we can stand up for our troops is to bring them home. It is past time for a fully funded and safe redeployment. We will not back out of our commitment to the Iraqi people. We will work with them to increase their security forces and to help in reconstruction. But we must face the facts. The situation on the ground may be worse than it ever has been before. Military leaders are conceding that the so-called surge is not working, and it may never. The administration has even said that we needed to look at the situation in Iraq like that of Korea, and we have been there half a century. That is simply not an option. Let's do the right thing. Let's do the sensible thing. Let's bring our troops home. We owe it to them and we owe it to our Nation.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I am introducing legislation today that will require the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to issue an emergency interim final standard, and after 2 years, a final standard to protect workers against a butter flavoring chemical called diacetyl. Exposure to diacetyl has been found to cause a devastating lung disease known as bronchiolitis obliterans, or ``popcorn lung.'' Diacetyl has been described by NIOSH as causing ``astonishingly grotesque'' effects in workers' lungs--often in a very short time period. Dozens of workers at microwave popcorn factories or factories where flavors are produced have become sick, and several have died. Others are awaiting lung transplants. Thousands more workers are exposed at factories that make or use flavorings throughout the country. The Workplace Protections Subcommittee held a hearing in April on OSHA's failure to issue health and safety standards. Eric Peoples, a former employee of a Missouri popcorn plant who is awaiting a double lung transplant, testified that he was never informed of the hazards of diacetyl while working at the plant. ``I played by the rules. I worked to support my family. This unregulated industry virtually destroyed my life. Don't let it destroy the lives of others,'' Peoples asked the committee. The interim final standard will apply to the food flavorings industry and the microwave popcorn production and packaging industry. This bill will also require OSHA to issue a final diacetyl standard within 2 years of issuing the interim final standard. The final standard will apply to all locations where diacetyl is processed or used. Although we are expecting OSHA to follow the normal administrative procedures for issuing the final standard, we expect the agency to do whatever is necessary and allowed by the various procedural laws and regulations to ensure that the final standard can be issued within the 2-year deadline. In any case, the interim final standard will remain in effect until the final standard is issued. It is with some reluctance that I offer this legislation. Over 35 years ago, Congress gave OSHA the authority to address workplace hazards, and gave the agency the ability to issue emergency standards. But OSHA has not acted. OSHA has known that diacetyl causes bronchiolitis obliterans or popcorn lung for over 5 years ever since the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health published evidence in 2002 linking diacetyl to bronchiolitis obliterans, yet OSHA has not even issued an information bulletin. Last year, House Democrats urged the Labor Department to address this serious health hazard. OSHA has not responded. Also last year, two labor unions, supported by a letter signed by 42 of the Nation's leading occupational health scientists and physicians, petitioned the agency for an emergency standard. OSHA has still not responded to that petition. The measures required by the bill are feasible and affordable. In fact, they are the same measures already recommended by the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association, the main industry association for the flavorings industry, in 2004. The association has voted to support this legislation and the issuance of an OSHA standard. The measures mandated by this bill are also consistent with recommendations from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH, and we expect OSHA to work closely with NIOSH to ensure that the final standard is fully protective and completed by the deadline set by this bill. It is clear that an emergency exists and that this hazard presents a grave danger and significant risk of life-threatening illness to exposed workers. If OSHA will not act, then Congress must act.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise with my colleague Representative Mike Thompson with great pleasure to honor Helga Lemke on her 18 years of service with Community Action Partnership of Sonoma County. Since 1989, when she was hired as the agency's executive director, Helga has shown a steadfast commitment to increasing opportunities for low income residents of Sonoma County to gain self-sufficiency and contribute to their communities. We have found Helga to be fiercely focused on fighting poverty, wonderfully competent in running this large, multi- program agency, and yet very down-to-earth and authentic. Helga has spent her entire career helping others, from her internship with the National Community Action Foundation nearly 40 years ago through her work at the United Nations to the present. One of the tenets she holds so dearly, says colleague John Way, is making a difference. He notes, ``I have heard her often say that one of the most enriching things about her work is having someone tell her, `What you've done has changed my life.' '' Helga's well-earned appointment to director of programs for the California Department of Community Services reminds us how much she has accomplished for our community. For one, she transformed a struggling nonprofit into one of the largest and most respected agencies in the county. She also initiated an award-winning staff diversity training program and a community-acclaimed annual conference on poverty, at the same time leading a staff of 225 at more than 20 sites with an annual budget of more than $11 million. Despite all this, Helga has still made time for public service. The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors appointed her to the Workforce Investment Board and Youth Council; the Santa Rosa City Mayor has appointed her to the Mayor's Task Force on Gangs; and she has also served on numerous boards, including Roseland University Prep School. She has also testified before Congress on Head Start issues where her expertise was valued. Madam Speaker, we have appreciated working with Director Lemke on the many issues faced by the Sonoma community and thank her for her dedicated service. Her passion and energy are an inspiration to all of us who work with families. Congratulations on your appointment, Helga.