Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I too am in opposition to this martial law rule because it fails to bring attention to the hardworking families that are struggling every day in this Nation to meet their needs and to take care of their children. The economy is letting them down. The economy continues to suffer. The job market is weak. These families are why we must absolutely extend the unemployment benefits and why we must do it now. Not later, but now. Mr. Speaker, families must have the means to be healthy, they must be safe when their jobs are no longer secure, and that is why we must extend these unemployment benefits before we adjourn Congress this year, before we leave here for our holidays. We are highly paid. We are employed. Yet we are going to leave and enjoy our holidays, and it will be absolutely irresponsible if we do not extend the unemployment benefits. If it is not irresponsible, Mr. Speaker, it is certainly hardhearted, because we need 26 weeks' more extension for those who have already lost their jobs or who are going to lose their jobs or for those who have unemployment benefits that have lapsed. If we do not give unemployed workers the help they need today, an estimated 500,000 or 900,000, over half a million of the Nation's jobless, will be without benefits by the time we return from our holidays in January; holidays that we have been able to enjoy because we are highly paid and we are employed, until at least November of every other year. Why are we not taking care of those who do not have the benefits that we have? I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the extension of benefits and vote against the martial law rule.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, today I am submitting for the Record resolutions in support of H.R. 2656 from cities in the California Bay Area. The resolutions are regarding the planned casino in my congressional district. The communities surrounding the proposed site are doing all they can to ensure that their voices are heard on this controversial issue and it is extremely important that all sides of the issue are given a platform to do so. I hope that H.R. 2656 is brought before the House for a vote in the near future. Resolution No. 2003-220 N.C.S. Whereas, the Petaluma City Council respects the rights of Native Americans to establish and have recognized tribal sovereignty, and to secure lands under their jurisdiction; and, Whereas, under the existing federal legislative requirements, there is no provision for coordination of gaming proposals or associated major tribal enterprises with established and approved off-reservation local or regional planning law and General Plans in any timely and meaningful way; and, Whereas, developments of great magnitude are being proposed which are dependent upon local and regional public infrastructure, including highways, streets, transit systems, water, wastewater and energy systems and resources, affordable housing, and emergency services, both built and yet to be built; and, Whereas, without appropriate mitigation, the developments proposed are very likely to have substantial negative impacts and place substantial burdens on the public infrastructure with a substantial burden falling upon existing and future taxpayers, residents, visitors and businesses; and, Whereas, with the rapid construction of tribal gaming facilities, local governments are experiencing serious, adverse impacts related to off-reservation economic, environmental, health and safety issues; and, Whereas, the current conditions placed on Indian gaming to achieve and preserve the environmental, public safety, and public health objectives of both state and local government have been insufficient to prevent such adverse impacts; and, Whereas, when California voters approved Proposition 1A (Indian Gaming) in March of 2004 as a means of supporting the laudable goal of Indian economic development and self- sufficiency, they were not aware that such approval would allow Nevada developers to seize prized off-reservation environmental resources for intense development without regard to locally approved general plans or any meaningful environmental review or protection; and, Whereas, under the provisions of Proposition 1A and the Tribal-State Compact, local communities have not been granted effective input into the development of proposed tribal casinos that threaten their rights and the State appears to have no effective redress for significant environmental impacts these gambling casinos impose on local communities; and, Whereas, on February 6, 2003, the California State Association of Counties has adopted a policy document that includes seven principles of critical concern to counties, including a principle that tribes and local governments enter into binding and enforceable local agreements for the mitigation of off-reservation impacts that arise from a local gaming project; and, Whereas, approximately 360 acres of prime agricultural lands west of Rohnert Park are presently in imminent danger of being withdrawn from County land use control and placed into trust for the purposes of casino development--including an extensive gaming complex, with a 300 room hotel, spas, restaurants, a 2000 seat entertainment venue, parking and other support services, by Station Casinos, a Las Vegas-based developer and the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria (Graton Tribe); and, Whereas, Station Casino and the Graton Tribe's gaming proposal will have substantial negative impacts upon the federal highway system (US Highway 101), upon which it is dependent for bringing its customers into and out of the region; on local and regional roads; to the Santa Rosa Plain groundwater aquifer, to water quality, along with unknown local and regional fiscal impacts; and, Whereas, the proposed Graton Tribe casino site is proposed on property whose zoning is inconsistent with the Sonoma County General Plan (on prime agricultural land, in the community separators and outside Rohnert Park's Urban Growth Boundary), within the Laguna de Santa Rosa's flood plain and within critical wetland habitat for several federally endangered species; and, Whereas, the proposed Graton Tribe casino proposal is not subject to a thorough CEQA-like process that identifies fiscal and environmental impacts then to be mitigated by the Graton Tribe, nor is administrative consideration by the Department of the Interior required to determine if the use of this land, sought for gaming, will have significant detrimental impacts on the neighboring communities which outweigh the benefits to the tribe; and, Whereas, the Graton Tribe was restored in 2000 based, in part, on its promise not to engage its Indian casino gaming: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Petaluma City Council strongly supports the revisions in federal legislation [HR 2656/S1342] introduced by Representative Woolsey and Senator Feinstein. The Petaluma City Council also urges all members of the Senate and House of Representatives to support these important statutory changes and immediately move for their passage; and be it further Resolved, That the Petaluma City Council supports the California State Association of Counties policy document regarding compact negotiations for Indian Gaming; and requests that the Graton Tribe follow the principles contained therein; and be it further Resolved, That the Petaluma City Council, based on the information currently available, strongly opposes the creation of a gambling casino resort on any site that is inconsistent with the local land use planning and zoning policies; and be it further Resolved, That the Petaluma City Council calls on the Board of Supervisors of the County of Sonoma, in all negotiations with the Tribe concerning creation of a gambling casino resort, to safeguard the vital and legitimate interests of all Sonoma County citizens by requiring that the following minimum standards be included in a binding, legally- enforceable Memorandum of Understanding with the Tribe: 1. The proposed casino/resort project must be subject, at a minimum, to the same level of environmental review as would be required by the pending Federal legislation; and 2. The proposed casino/resort project must be subject to the principles of the California State Association of Counties policy document regarding compact negotiations for Indian Gaming; and 3. Even though the pending federal legislation does not require environmental mitigation, in order to ensure that the citizens of Sonoma County do not bear the costs associated with the impacts of the casino/resort, the Tribe must agree to mitigate, and must in fact mitigate, all environmental impacts caused by its project; and 4. In order to prevent Sonoma County cities from having land within their jurisdiction exempted from local land use control by reason of future acquisition by the Graton Tribe, the Tribe must agree that it will take NO OTHER LAND anywhere in Sonoma County or in any adjacent county into tribal trust

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise against this sham Republican prescription drug bill that will harm, not help, elderly women. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my profound disappointment at the Medicare Conference Report and this squandered opportunity to help seniors afford the increasing cost of prescription drugs. I want to make one thing abundantly clear to everyone here today: This debate is not about prescription drugs. Instead, the majority has taken this opportunity to advance a plan that will undermine the future of Medicare. Seniors may think this final bill will help them with some of their prescription drug costs. While it will save some seniors a small amount of money after they pay an unspecified premium, this bill will give them little more than a false sense of security. Seniors will read the newspaper headlines and believe that we have passed a drug benefit that will alleviate all of their financial hardships. They'll mistakenly think that they no longer have to choose between paying for groceries and paying for their prescriptions. But imagine their surprise when they read the fine print. Our seniors need immediate help. Many will be shocked to learn that this bill won't give them a prescription drug benefit until 2006. If this is such a great plan, why must seniors wait 3 more years to reap its supposed benefits? They'll find that their out of pocket costs are still enormous. Imagine their outrage, as they dutifully write a check to pay their monthly premium, even though they aren't receiving any drug coverage, because they have fallen into the ``donut hole'' coverage gap. Seniors who currently enjoy quality prescription drug coverage many think this doesn't impact them, but they too are in for a rude shock. As many as 2 million will watch their prescription drug benefit provided by their former employer vanish into thin air. Others will find their previously generous benefit slashed to the bare bones level of Medicare, complete with high deductibles, premiums, and a ``donut hole'' coverage gap. That's because employers will be eligible for subsidies if they provide any type of coverage--even if it's less than what they promised their employees. But this bill is about far more than prescription drugs. This is the biggest bait and switch operation I've seen in quite some time. The majority is saving one thing and doing quite another. They'll talk all they want about providing prescription drugs. But their actions will ruin the Medicare program that for decades has so effectively provided seniors with access to health care. You won't hear them talking about their large subsidies to private health plans. They won't talk about the voucher scheme that will begin in 2010. They'll employ the euphemism ``demonstration project'', instead of speaking honestly to seniors about their real goal: privatization. They won't talk about the catastrophic impact this legislation will have on the poorest of the poor. By imposing an assets test on poor seniors who need additional help, this legislation could force a widow living only on her social security benefit to choose between selling her wedding ring and qualifying for an additional subsidy. She could be disqualified from receiving the help she needs because she has purchased a burial plot next to her husband's. This is tragic--and you won't hear about it from the majority. They also won't talk about the ways in which they are helping their friends in the pharmaceutical industry. By continuing a long standing restriction on the reimportation of prescription drugs, and by prohibiting Medicare from negotiating lower prescription drug prices, the majority is assuring that seniors will continue to pay astronomically high prices for the medicines they need. Our seniors deserve an honest and complete explanation of what this bill will do to Medicare. Seniors deserve a prescription drug bill that is actually about prescription drugs. Our seniors need a comprehensive benefit, not a false sense of security. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this bait and switch proposal.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my profound disappointment with the squandered opportunity we have right now, an opportunity to provide our seniors with the prescription drug coverage they need and they deserve. But I am just as concerned about the decision made by AARP, the American Association of Retired People, to endorse these misguided policies. I have long been proud of my membership in AARP, but now they have sold out seniors. Now I understand why AARP no longer stands for American Association of Retired People. Perhaps they would like to be known as the American Association of the Republican Party. They no longer represent retirees. They are more concerned about the interests of large drug companies. I want no part of an organization that is willing to sacrifice its principles for short-term political gain or favors from the majority party, and neither do more than 65 of my colleagues. Today we will surrender our AARP membership, and I urge all of my colleagues who truly care about the needs of seniors to do the same.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, the Bush administration has openly demonstrated its dissatisfaction with the stories that the major media has chosen to broadcast about Iraq, saying that the news media too often covers the negative events that occur in Iraq but rarely reports the positive happenings there. In fact, in their peak in order to achieve its desired results, the administration has regularly pressured reporters to find the so-called good news in Iraq or lose access. Perhaps the reason reporters have been focusing on the so-called negative stories about Iraq has something to do with the fact that since the start of the war in March, over 412 soldiers have been killed in action, in fact, two more today. Over 2,000 have been wounded and at least 7,000 have been evacuated to hospitals for noncombat medical conditions, not to mention that approximately 4,000 unarmed Iraqis have perished since the war began. You have to agree, it is a bit easier to understand the media's decision about which stories to report when those tragic numbers are considered. Still, the White House wants reporters to focus on the supposedly good news, but intimidating reporters into writing stories that make President Bush look good is not enough for the White House. Instead of just spinning the news, Bush's people want nothing short of controlling the information that comes back to the United States from Iraq. They want to have final say as to what gets reported and what does not, what the American public actually knows and what is spoken only in faded whispers halfway around the world. So they decided to do what any autocratic, propaganda-loving dictator like Saddam Hussein himself would have done, bypass the media entirely. The Coalition Provisional Authority, which runs Iraq and was created by the Bush administration, plans to create its own broadcast operation which will broadcast live to the United States 24 hours a day from Iraq, and one of the worst parts about this project is that the money to pay for it comes from the $87 billion in emergency supplemental funds that Congress recently approved to continue military operations in Iraq. That means that the U.S. taxpayers are paying for Bush's propaganda campaign that attempts to falsify and falsely mold their perceptions about the increasingly unsustainable situation in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the Bush administration has dared to control the media. Fearing that support for his Iraq policy would fade if Americans caught sight of U.S. soldiers returning home in flag-draped caskets, the Bush administration banned all news coverage and photography of dead soldiers' homecomings on all military bases. This new, government-run propaganda operation, which is informally referred to within the administration as C-SPAN Baghdad, represents a new low even for the Bush administration. Influencing the media is one thing; controlling it is something entirely different. Mr. Speaker, we must stay on top of this.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I would like the gentleman from Georgia to know he is going to have to continue doing the math and subtraction because the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) is not alone in resigning her membership today. I resigned mine, and I also circulated a letter here on the House floor, and within 30 minutes I had over 50 Members sign a letter to Mr. Novelli saying they were resigning their membership because of his change in his positions with AARP determining that it is more important to protect their insurance industry and their own insurance company than protecting the membership of AARP. I want Members to know each time one of us announces that we have resigned and our constituents hear of it, we get calls back saying oh, I am resigning, too. I want to tell Members when the seniors in this country catch on to what the other side of the aisle are doing to them, they are going to want to resign.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this conference report. While my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are calling this a jobs bill, let's call this what it really is--billions of dollars in pay-offs to republican campaign contributors. . . . Today, we have given up an opportunity to do the right thing for our energy future; for our environmental future and for true national security. We have missed an important opportunity to make our Nation more secure. This could have been an opportunity to decrease our reliance on foreign oil and to relieve the burden on our power grid by investing in efficient and renewable energy sources. Instead the republican conferees, excluding democrats from the conference, have delivered a conference report that will allow large companies to pollute our air, contaminate our water, and all the while giving pork to big business. The majority party has only paid lip service to renewable energy. Instead of focusing on the benefits of solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources, this bill contains billions of dollars of pork for ethanol producers. And, apparently they ran out of pork because they have even included some turkey because I guess they really got into Thanksgiving because they included a $95 million tax credit is in the bill that will help a single plant dispose of turkey carcasses. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this conference report and asking the conferees to send us back something that will really help our national security.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell), the author of this resolution.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez).

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green). (Mr. GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 379. This resolution honors the Rice University Owls baseball team for winning the NCAA baseball championship. This summer the Rice University Owls captured the national championship in their fourth trip to the College World Series in the past 7 years. College fans, student athletes, and the general public were treated to an exciting 14 to 2 win in the final game of the year's College World Series. I want to extend my hearty congratulations to the Owls' head coach, Wayne Graham. His leadership over the past 12 years has taken baseball at Rice University from obscurity to national prominence. Rice University's student athletes also deserve our congratulations. We are on the floor today because of their hard work, their determination, and their winning ways. I would be remiss if I did not also recognize the outstanding play by Stanford University's student athletes in the College World Series. Both teams are to be congratulated for their excellent play. Winning a championship has brought national acclaim to Rice University. I hope the Owls fans and their community treasure this moment for many years to come. And in closing, Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, the Coalition Provisional Authority which is the title of the American authority overseeing the reconstruction of Iraq, and the Bush administration which created it, are openly dissatisfied with the stories the media has chosen to broadcast regarding the United States' role in Iraq. In fact, they say the news media too often covers the negative events that occur in Iraq, but rarely reports any positive happenings there. They even pressured reporters to find the so-called good news in Iraq or lose access in an attempt to manipulate the stories coming out of Iraq. Let us keep in mind that over 400 American soldiers have died in Iraq since the start of the war in March. That is more than 11 brave young men and women killed each week. It is hard to find the good news when our sons and daughters keep coming home in body bags. And it is exceptionally insulting to the families of these victims to complain about media bias at the same time four helicopters have been destroyed by enemy fire over the last 2 weeks. The situation in Iraq is getting less safe for our troops, not safer. In addition to the 404 troops killed in action, over 2,000 have been wounded and another 7,000 have been evacuated for noncombat medical conditions. And yet, the President continues to complain about media bias. So what has the White House decided to do about the quote/unquote ``unfair reporting'' by the media? Why, bypass that very media, of course. The President's handlers plan to influence public perception by creating a government-run broadcast operation to provide American news agencies unfettered access to the real stories in Iraq. This broadcasting system which the administration unofficially refers to as C-SPAN Bagdad will run via satellite 24 hours a day. C-SPAN Bagdad. More like American Al-Jazeera, the media giant that reports to the Arab world in a very biased fashion. The White House is increasingly aware, of course, that President Bush's fate in the upcoming 2004 election is directly linked to the progress of the war in Iraq. So bypassing the third-party national media allows the Bush administration to mold public perception of the war effort. I think our country's founders would be ashamed to know that at the same time hundreds of our soldiers and thousands of Iraqi civilians are dying, President Bush is thinking about the chances for reelection. That is nothing short of appalling. But equally appalling is that the American taxpayer will finance this shameful propaganda machine. That is right. The administration is directing money from the $87 billion emergency supplemental spending bill that Congress approved last month to help pay for the new Bush media machine. This is not emergency spending. This is campaign spending. This is propaganda spending. Instead of trying to win the hearts and minds of Americans through propaganda, President Bush should be trying to win the hearts and minds of the insurgents who are making Iraq less stable. He should show them a United States to which burgeoning democracies like Iraq can aspire, a United States that would be a democratic model for the rest of the world. I daresay an autocratic state-sponsored propaganda campaign is not a part of this model.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 438. This resolution honors John Gagliardi, the football coach at St. Johns University. Coach Gagliardi is the winningest coach in college football history. This month he overtook the legendary Eddie Robinson by winning the 409th football game of his career. This record puts Coach Gagliardi at the very top of his profession. It should come as no surprise that the students, the student athletes, the faculty and fans of St. John's University greatly admire Coach Gagliardi. Fortunately, we are not only honoring Coach Gagliardi for his winning ways but also his commitment to his school, his team and, most importantly, his players and their education. Coach Gagliardi has coached over 5,000 players during his 50 years at St. John's. Over that time, none of his players have failed to graduate and most have graduated within 4 years. This is an amazing feat in today's world of college athletes. Coach Gagliardi more than deserves the honor we are bestowing on him today. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members of the House to support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner) for offering this motion to instruct the energy bill conferees. Rather than working on an energy bill that will work to solve our Nation's energy crisis, it appears that the Republicans are using this bill to wage a tax on our national resources, on our air, on our water. The provision that was passed in the House without committee action would permanently exempt the oil and gas industry from the Clean Water Act's requirement to control stormwater runoff from construction activities at their exploration or production sites. Contaminated runoff would certainly impair the health of our Nation's streams, our lakes, our rivers, the waters, Mr. Speaker, where anglers fish, children swim. And we must not forget where our drinking water comes from. Why are we rolling back the good progress that the Clean Water Act has made? Why are we doing this without a single hearing in the committee of jurisdiction and without the benefit of the EPA's years of work? It is time for the GOP gas/oil/petroleum group and their leadership to stop putting the interests of big oil and gas companies ahead, ahead of what is best for the American people. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the gentleman's motion to instruct.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for organizing today's effort. And I rise to support H. Res. 425 and to honor the memory of firefighter Steve Rucker, a resident of Novato, California, and to wish the speedy recovery of three other Novato firefighters, Captain Doug McDonald, Shawn Kreps, and Barrett Smith. These four men were among the dozens of firefighters from my district who sped to southern California to fight the recent fires, fires that burned hundreds of thousands of acres. The day before yesterday, I stood alongside Steve's colleagues, firefighters, and police officers and watched the mile-long precession that carried his casket from the airport in Santa Rosa to his beloved city of Novato. My heart was filled with emotion as I watched the great sadness this community felt, the sadness and the grief that come with the death from within the family. But lingering in this grief, there was also pride, pride in recalling the time and heroism of one of their own, these four firefighters served the Novato Fire Protection District. Novato is a prosperous place, a family town that touches San Francisco Bay and reaches into the golden coastal hills. But the warm sun of Indian summer never lulls Novato firefighters. They know that the days before the rains come are the most dangerous times of the year. They also know that firefighters throughout the State are members of a large community and when help is needed anywhere, they are honored to help. So it was with that and without any contractual obligation but out of compassion and comradeship that Shawn Kreps drove Novato fire engine 6162 all night a week ago Monday to join the fire lines at the Cedar fire, more than 400 miles from Novato. And so it was that Steve Rucker, Doug McDonald, Shawn Kreps, and Barrett Smith found themselves Wednesday on a back road, 5 miles from the rural village of Julian, fighting to protect a scattering of homes. Fire can be a fierce and swift enemy, and when flames suddenly threatened to engulf the men, all they could do is run for their lives. Steve Rucker did not make it. Apparently the intense heat of the fire seared his lungs. And when Captain McDonald went out to look for his friend, he was critically burned. Fortunately, Kreps and Smith suffered minor injuries, and I expect they will have many fires to fight in the future. Captain McDonald, however, remains hospitalized with serious burns, the wounds of a hero, and my prayers go out to him and his family. It was too soon for 38-year-old Steve Rucker to leave this earth. He left behind a loving wife, Cathy, a 7-year-old daughter Kerstin, and a 3-year-old son Wesley, in a home he had just built. His friends in the department knew Steve as ``The Ruckster,'' a cheerful, enthusiastic man ready to joke, ready to laugh, a man they could counted on to be a calm and competent firefighter and paramedic. A man who loved his job. He was, according to his friends and colleagues, a firefighter's firefighter. In fact, they told me just the other day that Steve was the ``go-to guy'' during times of tragedy like now, and that his loss was felt even greater because they really needed him to help them get through their pain. Twelve thousand firefighters battled the flames that threatened to burn from southern California to the Pacific Ocean. Steve Rucker was the only firefighter to die in this historical battle. In this, he receives a measure of immortality. He also stands for all of those brave men and women who unselfishly risked their lives to save others, whether facing a wall of flames on a rural back road or the billowing smoke of the World Trade Center. Mr. Speaker, Steve Rucker was an irreplaceable man, but his family must go on without him. I wish them consolation in knowing that this man, son, husband, father, died giving the gift of himself.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the DeLauro motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 2660 to fully fund the Federal commitment to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA. What an idea, taking the funding out of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans, not funding this program from other deserving programs. Whenever I talk to educators or school administrators in my district, the very first thing they bring up is IDEA, special education. The first thing they say about IDEA is that we need to have it funded. The Federal Government must meet its commitment for 40 percent of the cost. In fact, if the Federal Government fully funded its share of IDEA, schools in Sonoma County, in my congressional district, would have received almost $20 million to help educate students with disabilities, students with special education needs. Instead, Sonoma County schools received just under $6 million, or about 15 percent of their costs. Every Member here could tell the same story about their school districts. If the Federal Government fully funded its share of IDEA, schools nationwide would receive almost $20 billion to help pay for the cost of educating students with special needs. H.R. 2660 falls far short of this needed funding; and when we do not fully fund IDEA, we do not just take needed resources from students with disabilities. We shortchange all students. If school districts had their full share of IDEA funds, they would be able to use their own funds for improvements that benefit all students such as increasing teachers' salaries, reducing class size, building new schools, renovating old schools. When we underfund IDEA, we pit children with disabilities against other children, schools against parents, parents against parents. We must fully fund the Federal share of IDEA. Vote for the DeLauro motion to instruct conferees to include full funding in the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill to cover the Federal share of IDEA.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to honor the memory of firefighter Steve Rucker, a resident of Novato, California, and to wish the speedy recovery of three other Novato firefighters: Captain Doug McDonald, Shawn Kreps, and Barrett Smith. These four men were among the dozens of firefighters from my district who sped to Southern California to fight the recent fires that burned hundreds of thousands of acres. Yesterday I stood alongside Officer Rucker's colleagues, firefighters and police officers, and watched the mile-long procession that carried his casket down Highway 101 from the airport in Santa Rosa to his beloved city of Novato. My heart was filled with emotion as I watched the great sadness this community felt, the sadness and grief that comes with the death of a family member. But lingering in this grief, there was also pride, pride in recalling the life and heroism of one of their own. These four firefighters served the Novato fire protection district. Novato is a prosperous place, a family town that touches San Francisco and reaches into the golden coastal hills. But the warm sun of Indian summer never lulls Novato firefighters. They know that the days before the rains come are the most dangerous time of the year throughout all of California. They also know that firefighters throughout the State are members of one large community, and when help is needed anywhere, they respond. So it was that without any contractual obligation, but out of compassion and comradeship that Shawn Kreps drove Novato fire engine 6162 all night a week ago Monday to join the fire lines at the Cedar fire more than 400 miles away. And so it was that Steve Rucker, Doug McDonald, Shawn Kreps, and Barrett Smith found themselves Wednesday on a back road 5 miles from the rural village of Julian, fighting to protect a scattering of homes. Fire can be a fierce and swift enemy, and when flames suddenly threatened to engulf the men, all they could do was run for their lives. Steve Rucker did not make it. Apparently the intense heat of the fire seared his lungs, and when Captain McDonald went out to look for his friend, he too was critically burned. Fortunately, Kreps and Smith suffered minor injuries, and I expect they will have many fires to fight in the future. Captain McDonald, however, remains hospitalized with serious burns, the wounds of a hero. My prayers go out to him and to his family. It was too soon for 38-year-old Steve Rucker to leave this earth. He left behind a loving wife, Cathy; a 7-year-old daughter, Kirsten, a 3- year-old son, Wesley, and a home he had just built. His friends in the department knew Steve as ``the Ruckster,'' a cheerful, enthusiastic man ready to joke and laugh, a man they could count on to be a calm and competent firefighter and paramedic, a man who loved his job. He was, according to his friend and colleague Tom Gaulke, ``a firefighter's firefighter.'' And yesterday when I stood with Steve's firefighting companions, they told me that Steve was the go-to person when they needed somebody in times like this. They needed his counsel yesterday and his support during their sorrow, but he was gone, and that is why they have such sorrow. Twelve thousand firefighters battled the armies of flames that once threatened to burn from Southern California's mountains to the Pacific ocean. Steve Rucker was the only firefighter to die in this historical battle. In this he receives a measure of immortality. He stands for all of the brave men and women who unselfishly risk their lives to save others, whether facing a wall of flames on a rural back road or the billowing smoke of the World Trade Center. Mr. Speaker, Steve Rucker was an irreplaceable man, but his family must go on with life without him. I wish them consolation in knowing that this man, son, husband, and father, died giving the gift of himself.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, in the San Francisco Bay area, especially in Marin County in my congressional district, we have some of the highest rates of breast cancer in the Nation. While the toll on Bay area residents has been enormous and heart-breaking, community activists and local health officials are meeting this challenge, providing support to patients and survivors and working to find causes of this epidemic. Women feel powerless when confronted with the increasing likelihood of contracting breast cancer; but as the Marin County breast cancer community has demonstrated through prevention and research, with hard work and dedication, we will beat this disease. In memory of those who have died of breast cancer and in support of those fighting this terrible disease, and with hope that our daughters and granddaughters will not face this epidemic, I urge all women to acknowledge Breast Cancer Awareness Month by taking care of their own health and joining with others to win the war against breast cancer.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Texas for offering this Motion to Instruct Energy Bill Conferees. Instead of working on an Energy Bill that will work to solve our nation's energy crisis, the Republicans are holding a conference without any Democrats and now they are trying to add in riders to weaken the Clean Air Act. What will they think of next? This rider allows polluters to further delay establishing clean air controls--contributing to air pollution that bellows out of giant smokestacks and puffs out of tailpipes. This air pollution has led to a record number of people with asthma, particularly in our cities. By trying to attach this rider to the Energy Bill, the Republicans are showing once again that they do not value clean air or the health of Americans. And the sad fact is that children are the most vulnerable to air pollution. They spend more time outdoors, they inhale more pollutant per body weight, and their bodies, lungs and immune systems are still developing. Children are particularly vulnerable to smog and soot-- continued exposure can scar and severely damage children's lungs. Instead of weakening the Clean Air Act, the Republicans should be using this opportunity to develop and use new technologies and to cut our reliance on dirty energy fuels. Unfortunately, in the Energy Conference, the Republicans have chosen the interests of big business over the health of the American people. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this motion to instruct.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the 352nd and 353rd American servicemembers were killed since the start of the war in Iraq. That means almost twice as many soldiers have died since the President declared an end to major fighting operations than during the 2 months of actual war. Something is drastically wrong here. We are not adequately showing our gratitude to those who have sacrificed for us. As a result, 353 of our soldiers have lost their lives, which speaks to the administration's haphazard planning for the postconflict phase in Iraq, costing those 353 Americans their lives and thousands who have been wounded. We must support our brave men and women stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we must also make a commitment to support the widows and widowers of those soldiers who are killed halfway around the world. And we can do that by passing H.R. 3365, doubling the amount paid to survivors of service men and women killed on the battlefield from $6,000 to $12,000, at the same time making this benefit completely tax free. After all, taxing families of patriots does not seem very patriotic to me. It appears this bill has strong bipartisan support, and yet we have not always been so dedicated to our soldiers. On October 20, here in this House, less than 2 weeks ago, this body voted on an amendment to the $87 billion supplemental bill that would have added $1,500 as a bonus for troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, this amendment failed by a vote of 213 to 213, with most Democrats voting in favor of the bonus and most Republicans voting against the bonus. The Republican administration thrust upon us this budget-busting $87 billion supplemental spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan, and then the House had the audacity to vote against the bonus for our troops; our troops who are in harm's way; our troops who have been wounded, and whose lives will be changed and altered forever; and our troops who have given up their lives for this country. We must support our troops. We must compensate them for their service to this country should disaster strike. As any pundit would have predicted, and which has happened 353 times to date in Iraq in the last 7 months, we must support the families of those who make the ultimate sacrifice. Mr. Speaker, this is the very least we can do. To that end, I am proud to support H.R. 3365.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of Mr. Obey's motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 2660 to increase funding for the No Child Left Behind Act to the highest possible amount. As we near the end of the second year since No Child Left Behind became law, schools all over America are crying out for more funding in order to meet the new accountability benchmarks. When I voted for the No Child Left Behind Act almost 2 years ago, I did so with reservations about the new testing requirements. But, I and all of the Members, were assured that while we were going to be asking much more of our schools, we would also be giving our schools increased support. But that is not what happened. H.R. 2660 underfunds the No Child Left behind Act by $8 billion. It falls $244 million short of the $3.2 billion that was promised to the States to make sure that there would be a highly qualified teacher in every classroom. It underfunds after school programs by $750 million, serving one million children less than was promised in No Child Left Behind. It denies eligible children the title I supplemental education services that they need to succeed in school. States and schools all across America are doing their part to raise test scores and improve teacher quality. Congress needs to do its part by providing the promised funding. We need to fund programs under the No Child Left Behind Act at the very highest level possible.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am pleased to join the chairman, the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), in urging passage of H.R. 3232 to ensure that the authority for important child nutrition programs does not expire before the House leadership makes the time to debate these most important issues in the committee and on the floor. I do hope, however, that when the time comes for the real reauthorization of child nutrition, we can work together in this same bipartisan way to make sure every eligible infant and child in this Nation has access to nutritious food: at home, through the WIC program; in child care, through the Child and Adult Food program; in school, through the School Breakfast and Lunch programs; during out-of-school time, through After-School and Summer programs; and in homeless and domestic violence shelters. Even modest investments in the child nutrition programs will reduce hunger and improve children's health, their well-being, and their educational success. Healthy children are the best investment we can make in this Nation's future. Unfortunately, too many children in America are hungry. The 2003 key national indicators of children's well-being reports that nearly 46 percent of American children who live in poverty were in food-insecure households, households that reported difficulty in obtaining enough food and increased use of emergency food sources resulting in reduced food intake and resulting in hunger. At the same time, too many American children are at risk because they are obese. Childhood obesity rates in America have tripled over the past 20 years, resulting in children suffering from the early onset of such traditional adult diseases as hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease. This week, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and I, as well as other Democratic members of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, will be introducing a bill that increases access to the child nutrition programs and sets the stage for improving the nutritional quality of the foods available to children during the school day. Our bill establishes a Federal policy of ``do no harm'' to ensure that no eligible children are pushed off school food programs. It also eliminates the reduced-price category and increases direct certification so that more children are eligible for free school meals. The Democratic childs nutrition bill also makes it easier for new moms and their babies to participate in the WIC program. By calling on experts from the Institute of Medicine to develop nutrition standards for the foods sold in competition with school meals, the Democratic child nutrition meal will make it easier for schools to offer students healthy foods everywhere on school grounds. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have other ideas on child nutrition reauthorization as well. The money is there to fund all of these ideas if the administration and the Congress want to do it. If we can afford to reconstruct Iraq, if we can afford tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and tax breaks to offshore corporations, we can afford to feed hungry American children and help them eat healthy food. I look forward to working with the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) and all of my colleagues to expand and improve the child nutrition programs. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).