Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), a very important member of the committee. (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson).

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Again, I thank the staff for a bipartisan bill that was unanimously reported out of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. I also thank ASFSA, FRAC, NEA, AFT, the Hispanic Education Coalition, the Food Policy Working Group, the National Association of State WIC Directors, who all played a major role. And to name the staff, Kate Houston, Stephanie Milburn, Krisann Pearce, Julian Baer and Sara Rittling on our side of the aisle; Lynda Theil, Denise Forte and Joe Novotny, on the other side of the aisle. They worked really hard to represent us well, and I thank them so very much. There is something missing in this bill. We all know that if a child enters the classroom having had a nourishing breakfast, that child learns better, has better attendance and better discipline and tests better. But we have not ensured in this bill that every child will enter the classroom having had a nutritious breakfast. We have expanded the breakfast program by making it easier for those who are eligible or who want to participate in the program, making it easier for them to do that. But, Mr. Speaker, some day this country's going to have to step up to the plate, understand children are 25 percent of our population. They are 100 percent of the future of this country, and unless they learn to the best of their ability, we are not going to have the country we want in the future. So, in the future, and my colleagues can count on me, I am going to continue to talk about a universal school breakfast program for every single child in this Nation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise against the Republican budget because it cuts women's education programs.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, exactly 1 year ago the first bombs blasted in Baghdad and the United States christened a shameful new military doctrine, the preemptive war, against a regime that for all its vicious cruelty had not provoked the United States or our allies. We were told by the President that Iraq posed an imminent threat to our national security with a link to al Qaeda, which is fiction. And our own weapons inspector concluded that weapons of mass destruction did not exist. Where was our intelligence? What were we working on? After September 11, countries throughout the world clamored to give the United States support in the global fight against terrorism. But after bombing Iraq without multinational support, the United States lost the moral authority we once enjoyed around the rest of the world. Today, 1 year later, Iraq remains mired in chaos. It is becoming a breeding ground for terrorists, nowhere near ready to assume the responsibility of a democracy. For this we have sacrificed nearly 600 American lives with thousands more wounded; 27 today have already been killed in Baghdad with hundreds injured. If this Congress wants to support the troops, we should work to equip every soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan with the best equipment and supplies available, including hydration water systems. We would ensure them the benefits they have been promised and they deserve when they return home. But we do not talk about that in this resolution. Tomorrow I will introduce a resolution called Smart Security. Smart Security is about prevention, not preemption. It sees war as a last resort to be considered only after every diplomatic solution has been exhausted. It calls for more robust multilateral institutions to prevent terrorism, manages international conflicts and promotes global stability, since smart security is tough, pragmatic, and patriotic. It is smart and it would keep America safe and it supports our troops.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 373, the resolution of the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) which supports and promotes Kids Love a Mystery Program throughout the United States. Under the sponsorship of the Mystery Writers of America organization, this program brings together authors who write for juvenile and young adult readers with children, parents, teachers, and librarians in a nationwide series of events each October to celebrate mystery writing. This year, First Lady Laura Bush will serve as the honorary chair of the Kids Love a Mystery program. H. Con. Res. 373 expresses the sense of Congress that Kids Love a Mystery is a good program that promotes literacy through the creative process and should be encouraged. It underscores our belief that learning to read is the greatest gift one generation can bestow on the next. With this resolution, we encourage the President to issue a proclamation in support of the Kids Love a Mystery Program. This annual program has proven to be a valuable method to encourage literacy, foster deductive reasoning, and enhance critical-thinking skills for our young readers. The Kids Love a Mystery Program was developed by the Mystery Writers of America, a nonprofit entity that serves as the premier organization for mystery writers and other professionals in the mystery field. Through its chapters in all 50 States, the organization has utilized the month of October each year to orchestrate the Kids Love a Mystery Program with particular emphasis on fostering both reading and writing initiatives. Since its inception in 1998, the Kids Love a Mystery Program has involved more than 15,000 young readers in 31 States plus the District of Columbia. Two of the most popular initiatives within the Kids Love a Mystery Program are the presentation of Eddie Awards, certificates that are given to every child who registers with a local participating library, school, bookstore or even on the Internet and reads at least one mystery book in the month of October. In addition, young readers are encouraged to write their own mystery stories in October to earn an Eddie Award. Mr. Speaker, we know that reading is the basis for all learning, and mystery stories have proven to be particularly attractive to young readers. I urge my colleagues to pass this resolution to encourage more young people to read. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor William McGee of Santa Rosa, California, who died Sunday at the age of 79 of injuries suffered in a bicycle accident. Bill was an experienced and avid bicyclist as well as long-distance runner, bread baker, counselor, poet, photographer, philosopher, and retired junior college instructor. This list does not begin to describe the warm, wise, and caring person that Bill was to his wife, Alice Waco, and to all of us who knew him. Friends will long remember the twinkle in his eye and the special comfort brought by the delivery of his own home-baked bread and a few lines of poetry in time of need. Born in Marquette, Michigan, in 1925, Bill, whose father died when he was four, took a bakery job six years later to help support his family. His interest in spiritual matters drew him to attend a Catholic seminary in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He was ordained a Catholic priest in 1956, and spent most of his priesthood at the University of Michigan in Houghton. There he founded the Newman Center to serve Catholic students. Later Bill attended UC Berkeley on a Fulbright theology fellowship, eventually joining St. Benedict's Deaf Center in San Francisco. Bill's life changed dramatically when he met Alice Waco, then a nun at the center. They soon discovered that they were soulmates and both seeking answers outside the church. They married in 1974. That same year, Bill began teaching Latin at Santa Rosa Junior College where he was known for singing Latin chants to his classes. He also earned a master's degree in alcohol studies and coordinated a DUI counseling program at the school until his retirement in 1992. Bill also worked as a substance abuse counselor at the Orenda Center in Santa Rosa, and with his wife Alice, was active in the Sonoma County Peace and Justice Center. Bill used his photography, and especially his poetry, to express his feelings about life. Cards to his friends combined both arts with his own unique humor and spiritual philosophy. One of Bill's poems, To Be An American, exemplifies his view that love and hope help us meet the complexities and challenges of life. It reads in part: To be an American is a place beyond boundaries beyond vision, but a dream a possible dream: when boundaries are dissolved where perfect is growth where imperfection is ours sometimes in a most perfect way. To be an American is a place where everything and everyone is not yet, yet even though our brightest victories applaud sciences of war and peace in the echoes of machinery still making bombs and guns. We are peoples mixed, melted and split with differences that make pork in government, doves and hawks outside of it, and truth come late. To be an American is to grow in confusion of a world inside part of a world called these United States . . . in a milieu of men, women and children. Where differences are different and similarities are never different; that each and everyone needs very little in life; a place to eat, a place to sleep, a place to die, and a lot of loving in between. Bill is survived by his wife Alice Waco, brothers Jim and Chuck McGee, and sisters Alice Tyler and Pat Ley. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to honor William McGee. He was a man whose spirituality was matched by his compassion. He was a unique individual whose life brimmed with kindness and creativity. I join with Bill's family and many friends in grief over his loss and happiness in having known him.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate National Peace Corps Week, which runs from March lst through the 7th. In our currently expanding global community, it is important to recognize the integral role that the Peace Corps has played in our past, as well the vital role it will continue to play in our future. As our interaction and interdependence on many foreign countries continues to show its relevance to our own welfare, it is important that the United States have a network of ambassadors like the Peace Corps Volunteers to connect on a local level with citizens of other nations. With a history dating back to 1961, and a portfolio serving 137 countries, the Peace Corps can boast over 170,000 Peace Corps Volunteers Alumni, who have worked around the globe promoting world peace and friendship. There are currently over 7,500 Volunteers serving in 71 countries, which represents the highest number of Volunteers in the past 28 years. I am proud to say that the 6th Congressional District of California currently has 39 of its own as Peace Corps Volunteers. They are, in alphabetical order and followed by the countries in which they serve: Emily A. Alden, Tanzania; Nicole M. Arnone, Madagascar; Marion Basel, Ghana; Laura Brinkoetter, Bangladesh; Christine Callinan, Micronesia; Jenifer Clover, Uzbekistan; Ryan E. Crew, Swaziland; Janice M. Crowe, Bulgaria; Lindsay C. Culp, Philippines; Kathryn E. Davis, Namibia; Katie M. Delahunty, Nicaragua; Charles S. Dietrich, Paraguay; Keith B. Ebright, Zambia; Jacob E. Fleming, Kyrgyzstan; Jennifer C. Galvin, Samoa; Alexandra, Geary-Stock, Swaziland; Tamara M. Gelvin, Morocco; Marcus A. Hawkins, Ukraine; Andrew B. Huston, Nepal; Joy Jacobs, Dominican Republic; Michael Y. Lee, Samoa; Laura J. Leones, Eastern Caribbean; Nickolette D. Patrick, Ukraine; Andrea R. Rask, Eastern Caribbean; Sara B. Riese, Burkina Faso; Leslie A. Schafer, Kenya; Sarah E. Schumacher, Macedonia; Mairead J. Schwab, Ghana; Jeremy B. Smith, Paraguay; Suzanne D. Smith, Philippines; Visalia T. Stanley, Haiti; Jill M. Talmage, Bulgaria; Eric J. Tawney, Vanuatu; Jenny K. Tegelvik, Honduras; Brian C. Vaughn, Nicaragua; Sarah F. Wiens, Kyrgyzstan; Tami M. Williams, Nicaragua; Heather J. Windom, Macedonia; Kenji A. Wright, Panama. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in commemorating National Peace Corps Week and honoring the men and women who have committed years of their lives to make our world a better place. It is with this sustained dedication, that lives will be changed, terminal diseases defeated, and poverty eradicated for citizens in every corner of the globe. I commend these brave and unselfish Volunteers and the spirit with which they are affecting change.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Reverend Glenda Hope who is receiving the TenderChamp Award from the Central City Hospitality House in San Francisco. Rev. Hope has been a tireless advocate for the poor and homeless and is deservedly being recognized for her unwavering leadership, inspiration, vision and energy. Central City Hospitality House is an organization that serves the homeless community in San Francisco's Tenderloin district. The TenderChamp award has been given out to organizations and individuals for their work in the Tenderloin community since 1986. Glenda is the Executive Director of San Francisco Network Ministries. She, with seven others, founded Network Ministries in 1972 and under her leadership the organization reaches thousands of poor and homeless people through programs that address a wide array of issues related to poverty. San Francisco Network Ministries received the TenderChamp award in 1989 for ``nourishing the spirit of the poor and being their advocate of change.'' It is fitting that Glenda is being individually recognized for the depth and longevity of her work. Rev. Hope attended San Francisco Theological Seminary and after graduating in 1969 she was ordained at Old First Presbyterian Church in San Francisco. She served as their Assistant Pastor from 1969-1972, then as Pastor to Seventh Avenue Presbyterian Church from 1978-1989. Glenda has had a long career in community service, working with Northern California Committee Against More Prisons, Tenderloin AIDS Network, the San Francisco Homeless Task Force and as the Chairperson to the General Assembly's Task Force to Persons in the Armed Forces. Mr. Speaker, Rev. Glenda Hope has been an active and outspoken community leader for her entire life. Her efforts on behalf of the community's less fortunate reflect the heartfelt compassion that infuses her life and her work. I am proud of her and I am honored to be her friend.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor European Air Transport (EAT) Captain Eric Gennotte, a civilian volunteer pilot, for his remarkable heroism while flying in Iraq. Captain Gennotte demonstrated incredible valor on Saturday, November 22, 2003, when he landed his Airbus 300 after it was hit by multiple surface-to-air rockets upon take off from Baghdad Airport. At the time of the incident, Captain Gennotte was returning to a DHL Global Delivery mail distribution center in Europe after delivering mail to U.S. soldiers in Baghdad. Shortly after taking off on November 22, Captain Gennotte's cargo and crew were struck by hostile rocket fire causing the complete loss of hydraulic power to the aircraft. Losing ``stick control'' rendered the aircraft non-navigable under normal circumstances. In a display of immense skill and bravery, Captain Gennotte regained control of the aircraft using the plane's engines as rudders to stabilize and turn the weakened vessel. In order to turn right, Captain Gennotte fired the left engine; to turn left he fired the right engine. After dodging continued missile attacks with failed equipment, Captain Gennotte successfully landed the burning plane with nothing but the two engines, completing a feat that had never before been accomplished in EAT piloting history. Captain Gennotte is already in line to receive a safety award from the Secretary General of the Belgian Cockpit Association. Because of Captain Gennotte's deft skill, his cargo and the crew, which included a British flight engineer and another Belgian pilot, lived through the assault. As peacekeepers continue to come under attack, it is particularly uplifting to hear tales of bravery like that of Captain Gennotte. Heroic stories like this one are prime examples that the best way to combat cowardly acts of terror is to share our own heroic responses to it. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in paying special tribute to EAT Captain Eric Gennotte. Honorable and gallant allies like him risk their lives to help others. I wish him and his family all the best as we pay tribute to one of our Nation's fearless friends.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this bill, and I question how this body could even consider a proposal as dishonest as this one. This bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing, a proposal to undermine reproductive rights dressed up as a bill to punish violent crimes against women. We have really important issues that we should be considering, Mr. Speaker, rather than legislation that will undermine a woman's right to choose. We should be focusing this time today on policies that ensure every woman has a healthy pregnancy. We should promote solutions to the tragedy of domestic violence and the many other heinous offenses against women. If antichoice forces would like to debate whether or not a woman has the right to make her own medical decisions, I am ready for that debate. Our constituents deserve a frank discussion about a woman's right to choose. It is unfair and it is misleading to characterize this bill as anything other than an assault on reproductive freedom in this country. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in the opposition of this misleading base legislation and in favor of the Lofgren substitute that protects the pregnant woman without reducing her own rights.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I stand here today strongly supporting the Lofgren substitute. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) is right, my colleagues and I have considered an unbelievable number of antichoice proposals over the last few years, including 200 since the Republicans took over the House of Representatives. These proposals have troubled me; but this bill, the bill that we are considering today, is perhaps the most disconcerting of them all. Instead of openly admitting what they are attempting to do to a woman's reproductive freedoms, proponents of this bill are exploiting a senseless and tragic crime to make their true intentions hidden. Let me be clear. We all oppose violence against women, and we all understand that a violent attack on a pregnant woman is an especially heinous act that deserves a uniquely harsh punishment. But that is not what the underlying legislation is about. Our constituents deserve an honest debate about this proposal and some very honest information. I am sure that many people assume that this legislation if it were approved would have an impact on the tragic case in California after which this case is named. People also probably assume it would create an effective new tool to prosecute many domestic abusers who harm their pregnant wives or girlfriends. That is simply not true. Women are the victims of violence across the country every day, but rarely does this violence fall in the jurisdiction of Federal courts. Unless a fetus is harmed in the commission of a violent Federal crime, this bill will not apply. Considering that this new law would rarely be applied, you may wonder, then, why are we here today talking about it? We are here to undermine the fundamental protections of Roe v. Wade with platitudes about violence against women thrown on as window dressing. If this bill passes, a 2-hour-old fertilized egg will have the same rights as the woman bearing it. Antichoice forces have been very open and honest about their strategy for turning back the clock on reproductive freedom in this country. In fact, we have heard many of the underlying bill's proponents tell you that the egg is a human. By declaring that even a fertilized egg is a person, proponents are laying the groundwork for undermining women's ability to make their own medical choices and decisions. Thankfully, we have an opportunity to address horrific acts of violence against pregnant women without undermining the woman's ability to control her own body. This ability is through the Lofgren substitute, which establishes appropriately harsh penalties for those who violently harm pregnant women without reducing her rights to that of a fertilized egg. We should not be debating this today. We should be debating and approving policies that will help keep every woman safe in her own home and ensure that every pregnancy is a healthy one. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Lofgren substitute and opposing the underlying bill. This bill is nothing but an exploitive attempt to end reproductive freedom.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Helen Rudee who, on February 20, 2004, will celebrate her eighty-sixth birthday. For all of her adult life, Ms. Rudee has been an outspoken advocate for women, children, health and environmental issues. Helen was raised in North Dakota and moved to California to attend San Francisco Junior College and Stanford University Nursing School. After marrying and having four children, her husband died leaving her to care for them. As a mother, Helen's first priority was raising her children. She was very active with their schools and served as a member of the PTA before serving on the Santa Rosa Board of Education for 10 years. In recognition of all her work, she received the Honorary Service and Continuing Service Awards from the California Congress of Parents and Teachers, Inc. In 1976, Helen was the first woman elected to the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. As a member of the Board of Supervisors for 12 years, she had a reputation for being accessible and for gathering the opinions of as many of her constituents as possible before making a final decision on matters of importance. Throughout her career, Ms. Rudee has been dedicated to bringing more women into political offices. Women often go to her for guidance when considering running for office and she is always generous with her time, knowledge and advice. Despite retiring at age 70, she has remained as active in her retirement as when she was on the Board. Celebrating the 20th Anniversary of Women's History Month, I was proud to honor Helen at the National Women's History Project event, ``Honoring 20th Century Women,'' on March 22, 2000 in Statuary Hall in the Capitol. Throughout my career, Helen has been an inspiration to me and many other women who are in politics and other male-dominated fields. Mr. Speaker, Helen Rudee has been an active and outspoken community leader for many years. She is a trailblazer who has made it better for all women.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I introduced legislation last week that addresses one of the most urgent challenges facing American families. I call it the Balancing Act because it helps to strike the delicate balance between work and family. The Balancing Act, H.R. 3780, acknowledges that many Americans have two full-time jobs, one as employee, the other as parent; and it provides the tools to be both a reliable employee and a responsible parent. Over the last several decades, a socioeconomic revolution has fundamentally altered the American family, Mr. Speaker. When I grew up, we were a Nation of predominantly nuclear families with one breadwinner and one full-time parent. Today, more than two-thirds of all families have two parents or one unmarried parent working outside the home, but our government has not been responsive to these changes. The Balancing Act brings public policy out of the Ozzie and Harriet era and into line with the realities and pressures of modern life. Specifically, the Balancing Act will provide paid family leave after the birth or adoption of a baby or young child; make major investments in child care, training and benefits for providers, construction and renovation of facilities, and expanded child care for infants and disabled children. It will establish voluntary, universal preschool. It will expand the school breakfast program and provide dinners for children in afterschool programs whose parents are working late and make part-time employees eligible for job benefits while encouraging businesses to let more employees telecommute. The Bush administration could not be more hostile to families trying to perform the balancing act. Their tax cuts benefit wealthy Americans, whose lives are already balanced. They think we can afford to rebuild the Iraqi society, but we have to cut vocational education and family literacy right here at home. They even think we can afford a manned mission to Mars, but for life back here on earth, we have to lop $408 million from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The administration does, however, want to help the poor acquire interpersonal skills so that they can promote and strengthen marriage, at a mere cost of $1.5 billion. But, Mr. Speaker, the people I talk to do not want the government to be their family therapist. They want a government that helps create good jobs, flexible workplaces, universal health insurance, affordable child care and safe after-school programs. No amount of counseling, Mr. Speaker, would have saved my marriage to a man who left me alone and destitute with three young children to raise. I was 29 years old. What I needed at that desperate moment in my life was not right wing moralizing but a compassionate safety net, the very social safety net conservatives seem determined to tear down. Although I had a job, I needed public assistance to provide my family with food, health insurance and child care. Only truly compassionate government policies helped me turn my life around. If one is a Republican, however, pro-family means that heterosexual marriage is so indispensable that we must spend $1.5 billion to promote it, but gay and lesbian marriage is so depraved that we ought to consider writing discrimination into our Constitution to prevent it. The Balancing Act offers a real pro-family agenda for all families. It addresses the issues families struggle with at the kitchen table, not the things they do in their bedrooms. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting my legislation.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, in response to the comment of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Isakson) that there is no known discrimination because of the exemption included in the underlying bill, I would like to read a story that I have here, and the story is that in Georgia last fall, Alan Yorker responded to an advertisement in the Atlanta Journal Constitution for a position at the Methodist Children's Home. Mr. Yorker is an exceptionally qualified psychotherapist with over 20 years' experience counseling young people and their families, and over a decade's experience teaching in Emory University professional schools, and a number of appointments to State professional committees. The Home, as the Methodist Children's Home is referred to, has admitted that his credentials placed him among the top candidates for the position. On the strength of these credentials, the Home rushed him in for an interview where he was first required to disclose in an application form his religious affiliation, church and minister. Mr. Yorker, a Jew, supplied the name of his synagogue and rabbi. As his interview was getting under way, the home administrator checked Mr. Yorker's response to this section of the application, noted that Mr. Yorker is Jewish and announced that the home does not hire people of his faith. Alan Yorker was shown the door. The same administrator told another woman in the organization that it is the home's practice to throw the resumes of applicants with Jewish- sounding names in the trash. Only because the administrator had not recognized the name ``Yorker'' as Jewish was he interviewed in the first place. That is what happens, and that is what happened.

Ms. WOOLSEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, my point ought to be taken very seriously by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor). We have all received an action alert in our offices from the Focus on the Family CitizenLink. In the communique they say that on Wednesday we are going to have this debate and we are going to have this amendment to prohibit faith-based organizations from hiring on the basis of religion. As a result, Christian charities interested in accepting Federal funds would be required to ignore religious conviction in hiring even if potential employees practice Islam, Judaism or no religion at all. So the gentleman from Virginia's folks that he quoted would not get hired.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding to me, and I just wish to respond to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), because he repeats over and over that by not allowing faith-based organizations to discriminate using Federal funds, it would have a chilling effect on these organizations. I want to tell him that what would have a chilling effect and does have a chilling effect is allowing the use of Federal tax dollars based on religious hiring. Using Federal tax dollars to discriminate is chilling, and we must not let it happen.

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

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, the Woolsey-Miller-Payne-Andrews-Van Hollen-Frank-Scott-Nadler amendment is a Democratic substitute to H.R. 3030. This Democratic substitute is word for word the same as H.R. 3030 except for one big difference: the Democratic substitute prohibits religious discrimination with Federal CSBG funds. It does this by making just three changes to the underlying bill. First, the Democratic substitute adds the word ``religion'' to the list of protected groups that cannot be discriminated against with CSBG funds. This list now prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex. We want to add religion to that. Second, the substitute does not include the title VII exemption to the Civil Rights Act, which is in current CSBG law, permitting faith- based organizations to discriminate based on religion when hiring with Federal funds. In other words, Mr. Chairman, religious discrimination is not allowed when using Federal funds. Finally, the substitute adds a provision to clarify that while religious organizations are welcome and able to participate in CSBG, they must conduct their activities in a lawful and secular manner when using Federal funds. This language is taken directly from Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion in the Supreme Court case of Bowen v. Kendrick, the case which sets the constitutional requirements for religious organizations that provide government services. Faith-based organizations have a long and successful history of participating in CSBG programs, and we want that participation to continue. We celebrate their contribution. We want faith-based organizations to participate in the same lawful and secular manner as they did prior to the 1998 reauthorization, an authorization that occurred in the middle of the night that allowed faith-based organizations to discriminate when hiring staff with Federal funds. That change was made by tucking a significant anti-civil rights provision into an otherwise sound conference report that was based on a voice vote in the middle of the night on the House floor; and, of course, it passed. With this Democratic substitute, Members have the opportunity to actually vote in the clear light of day on whether or not they want organizations to be able to use Federal funds to further religious discrimination. Mr. Chairman, a vote for the Democratic substitute is a vote for community service block grants. The Democratic substitute funds local community action agencies which sponsor so many important programs that address the needs of low-income families in our communities. Strong community action agencies make for strong families, strong communities, and a stronger Nation. The Democratic substitute gives Members the opportunity to take a clean vote for CSBG, without voting for religious discrimination, and I urge my colleagues to please support it.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, the 1964 Civil Rights Act allows faith-based organizations, religious organizations to use their own funds, and they can discriminate if they choose. That act does not allow faith-based organizations to use Federal funds starting in 1964. The chairman is right. The only difference in this bill is the faith- based discrimination based on religion language. That is what we would like to remove because, Mr. Chairman, this is a sad move on the side of the Republicans to continue to take perfectly good legislation and allow a poison pill to stay in that legislation thinking that the people on this side of the aisle are going to vote yes, that we have no choice. You know what? It is wrong. We do have a choice. It is wrong to allow religious discrimination using Federal dollars, and we are going to vote against it. I support faith-based organizations and the good they are doing in their outreach and their human service programs. I support them totally. The faith-based groups in my district are successful. They tell me, Get that language out of the bill. We do not need it. They agree that the exemption to title VII is useless. It should not be in there and that individual groups should not be able to use Federal tax dollars to discriminate in their hiring policies. If this language remains in the bill, I, for one, will be forced to vote against the underlying bill because I will not vote to use tax dollars for discrimination.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1385, which continues the authorization of the breast cancer research stamp. This stamp has been just one small part of a comprehensive federal effort to combat this horrible disease, and I am pleased that it will continue. It's strange to think that a postage stamp has the ability to save lives, but the breast cancer stamp truly has such potential. With the continuation of this stamp, people around the country will have the opportunity to support research programs at the National Institute of Health and the Department of Defense. These research efforts are playing a critical role in understanding breast cancer, identifying who is at risk, and creating safer and more effective treatments that allow more people to survive and prosper after fighting this disease. Perhaps no one understands the tragedy of breast cancer more than the people of Marin County in my Congressional district. For some reason, Marin has an unusually high rate of breast cancer. Far too many mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters have been lost in our community. We're doing all that we can to find out what is happening in Marin and what we discover will be used to fight breast cancer all over this country. In the face of so much community tragedy and loss, I have had the honor of working with breast cancer survivors and advocates in my community to help understand the causes of this epidemic and support those who are battling cancer. Watching their struggle has underscored the importance of federal efforts just like the creation and extension of the breast cancer stamp. By allowing Americans to give just a little bit every time they mail a card or a letter, we can help fund the research that will save the lives of our daughters and granddaughters. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1385 to help continue the fight against breast cancer.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Jean Schulz, who is stepping down as the National Board President of Canine Companions for Independence after 15 years of dedicated service. Jean Schulz has been committed to developing and enhancing the services that CCI provides, and with her leadership, CCI places twice as many dogs with people with disabilities as they did when she took over as president. The Jean and Charles Schulz Campus, which serves as the National Headquarters and Northwest Regional Center of Canine Companions for Independence, was built due to the efforts of Ms. Schulz and her late husband, Charles M. Schulz, creator of the Peanuts comic strip. In 1997, Jean and Charles M. Schulz were instrumental in creating the Charles M. Schulz Museum and Research Center designed to preserve and educate people about Charles M. Schulz, the Peanutes comic strip and its characters. Ms. Schulz remains an active member on the board of directors of the museum. Dedicated to various environmental, educational and human service organizations over the years, the Schulzes donated $5 million to Sonoma State University to build the Jean and Charles Schulz Information Center that houses a state-of-the-art library, computer labs and an art gallery. This facility has become a hub of student activity. Ms. Schulz's combination of leadership and commitment to her community has earned her many awards and honors. She received a Key to the City from the Santa Rosa City Council, was the recipient of a Leadership Award from the Santa Rosa Chamber of Commerce and received an Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters from the Sonoma State University. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to recognize Jean Schulz for her many contributions to Canine Companions for Independence and the entire community.