David Wu

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Class sizes are way too large and we all know that, but it is not right to pit teacher training against class size reduction or any other education priority. The reason that we cannot do both class size reduction and teacher quality enhancement, and all of our other education priorities, is because of the trillion dollar tax cuts which have been proposed in this House. If we jettisoned these irresponsible trillion dollar tax cuts, we could do both class size reduction and teacher quality enhancement and all of our other educational priorities. We need to take a more common sense approach to our budget to achieve our education priorities: Reducing class size and enhancing teacher quality. These are all things that can be done if we jettison these irresponsible tax cut proposals.

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 4577, the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education bill for Fiscal Year 2001. This is an irresponsible bill that cuts critical funding to our nation's elementary and secondary education programs and severely limits the ability for students to receive a quality education. The bill cuts $600 million from the Administration's request for Head-Start. This would mean that 56,000 children would be denied Head- Start services. As I have traveled throughout Oregon, I have seen first-hand the positive impact that Head Start has on children in building a positive foundation. My wife Michelle taught Head-Start teacher in Portland. Through her work, I have seen that Head-Start is a life transforming educational experience. Yet, only 26.7 percent of eligible children ages 0 to 5 can be served in Oregon. Nationally, this figure is as low as 14.4 percent. Significant research has shown the importance of brain development in young children and an increased focus on intervening in a young child's life during the most sensitive of years is vitally important. We must work toward serving 100 percent of these children. The Education and the Workforce Committee spent a great deal of time considering the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Members of Congress from both parties agreed that we need to do more for our nation's schoolchildren even though we may come from different viewpoints on how to achieve this goal. One step in the right direction is reducing class size. Studies have shown that if you reduce class sizes in the early years the results last a lifetime. In classes with fewer students, children receive individualized attention that leads to a solid foundation in learning. The legislation we are considering today repeals our promise to students by gutting the class size initiative. For two years, this program has funded nearly 29,000 teachers and Oregon schoolchildren, their parents and teachers are seeing the benefit of smaller classes. As more and more schools are hooking up to the internet with the e- rate as well as learning on-line with donated computers, we need to ensure that computers aren't merely a box on the desk but that teachers are able to fully integrate technology into the curriculum and our classrooms. In Oregon, public and private efforts empower students and teachers. They incorporate information technology into learning and teaching, at home and at school. I am proud of the innovative work done in Oregon as well as in other states. However, we must continue to foster these types of relationships to ensure that students are using technology in all of their classes. Earlier this year, I introduced the Next Generation Technology Innovation Grants Act of 2000 with bipartisan support. This program combines the Star School program and Technology Innovation Challenge Grants to develop and expand cutting edge technologies that deliver new applications for teaching and learning. Building on the successes of private/public partnerships, grants are made to a consortium of school districts, states, higher education institutions, nonprofit institutions and businesses. The grant-funded projects would create models for effective use of educational technology including the development of distance learning networks, software, and online learning resources. Unfortunately, the Committee provided zero funding for this program. On a positive note, I would like to commend the Appropriations Committee for recognizing the need to raise the maximum Pell Grant award to $3,500. Today, the real value of the Pell Grant award has declined by 18 percent since 1975. To restore the value of the grant in current dollars, however, the maximum grant would need to be set at $4,300. Mr. Chairman, this is a bad bill for our nation's children, schools, and parents. I urge defeat of this bill so that we can go back to the drawing board and come back with a common sense, bipartisan bill that will truly make a positive impact on our students. The bill fails to provide adequate funding for crucial education programs such as the Class-Size Initiative, school construction, and teacher quality programs is rooted in the drive to cut taxes by $1-$2 trillion. More modest tax cuts would permit us to address our most pressing education needs.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, as I tried to make my case earlier that this trade agreement is just not in fundamental American interests, I would like to restate that argument very briefly. If we both, America and China, dropped our trade quotas, dropped our tariffs to zero, we would lose control over imports and China would not. China has a nonconvertible currency. They have a second level of control, because you cannot get the foreign currency to buy goods and bring it here. We have heard many, many arguments today also about the salutary effect of business. When I was young, I believed in the Tooth Fairy, I believed in Santa Claus, and I believed that all these good things just came sort of naturally. Later on I figured out that my parents made deep, deep sacrifices and worked hard to put things on the table so that we could have things in our family. The problem here is that we would like to believe that trade will automatically change everything, that it has this wonderful transformative effect. But the truth is that generations before us made deep, deep sacrifices. They knew that it was more than about business, that the business of America must be more than business alone. They made broad sacrifices. They did not see their business as business alone. They saw the business of America as pressing hard on a broad set of human values, of human rights, of civil liberties, of the rule of law. We must stand in that tradition today. About 2,500 years ago, in a space not much larger than this, 300 Spartans stood tall against 100,000 Persians. With typical candor, our Republican friends have said that this vote would not be called a moment before there were 218 votes. We do not need 300 Spartans today to keep the forces of darkness back. We only need 217 others to stand in this space. History is focused upon this Chamber. As Abraham Lincoln said in sending the Emancipation Proclamation forth, ``Let our actions be judged by beneficent history and a just God.'' And if each and every one of you can say that you are willing to be judged by history and by God based on your actions today, then I will be comfortable with your actions. Do what is right. Do what is right today in this Chamber.

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, that I can address you from this well today is a tribute to the courage, the perseverance and the sacrifice of my parents. My father left for America when I was 4 months old, and I did not see him again until I was 7. I could only recognize him from photographs. My parents endured 7 years of separation so that they could bring our family to this place of freedom and of opportunity. People have said to me, ``You're a trade lawyer. You've got to like this agreement. You represent a trade-dependent district. You have to support this agreement. If you have to vote your conscience, just vote and walk away.'' I refuse to do that because I will refuse to turn my back on the sacrifice of my parents and countless other Americans who have stood and fought in the cause of freedom. This is a bad trade agreement. This is bad policy, and this is counter to fundamental American values. It is a bad agreement because the basic concept is wrong. Let us take the WTO proponents' arguments at their face value. America is a market economy. China is not. America has an exchangeable currency. China does not. If we both dropped our tariffs to absolute zero, we would lose control over our imports and China would not. Through their command and control economy they can still determine how much to buy and exactly from whom to buy. This is a flawed agreement. This is bad policy because the day after we vote to give China permanent most favored nation trading status, hard-liners in Beijing will say, We thumbed our noses at the Americans with respect to nuclear weapons, we thumbed our noses at the Americans with respect to missile proliferation, we thumbed our noses at the Americans with respect to human rights, we thumbed our noses at the Americans with respect to saber rattling in the Taiwan Strait, we thumbed our noses at the Americans with respect to all these things and yet they still gave us the central goal of our foreign policy for the last 12 years. Why should we ever listen to what the Americans have to say? But the most important reason for voting no is to keep our commitment to American values and the sacrifices of countless families like mine and every other American family today.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, today I support H.R. 4475, the Transportation Appropriations bill and commend Chairman Wolf and ranking member Sabo for their hard work on bringing this bipartisan bill to the floor so quickly. I am especially pleased today to support the bill because it includes a common sense project for Washington and Clackamas Counties in Oregon to assist Oregonians in their commute. The Wilsonville to Beaverton Commuter Rail line is an innovative project that utilizes existing infrastructure to create a commuter rail line. This line will run from Wilsonville, which is to the south of Portland to Beaverton, which is to the west of Portland. I had the opportunity to participate in a demonstration ride last spring. I look forward to riding the full length of the track when this project is complete and working with the committee to fulfill that goal. The million dollars that is included in this bill is important to complete preliminary engineering and builds upon the Federal commitment last year of $500,000 for alternative analysis. Computer rail is a regional priority and will make the Portland area, a long-time leader in smart transportation, even a better place to live. Mr. Chairman, I am looking forward to working with Senators Smith and Wyden in ensuring that this funding is included in the other body's bill. Again, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Mr. Wolf and Mr. Sabo for their hard work and urge my colleagues to support this important and responsible bill.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to Taiwanese Americans across the United States. As you may know, May 7-14 is designated as Taiwanese American Heritage Week. Today, there are more than one half-million Taiwanese Americans across the United States. From science and education, to politics, Taiwanese Americans have made profound contributions to the strength and diversity of this great nation. Like many immigrant communities, Taiwanese Americans have maintained a close relationship with their original homeland. Exchanges between Taiwan and the United States have resulted in an ever-closer relationship in trade, culture, and values. As we witnessed in the March 18th, 2000 Taiwanese Presidential election, the people of Taiwan and the United States share a bond in their adherence to the principles of freedom, democracy, and human rights. That bond is made stronger each day by the Taiwanese American community here in the United States. Today, as the first member of the U.S. House of Representatives born in Taiwan, I am proud to pay tribute to Taiwanese Americans. During the occasion of Taiwanese American Heritage Week, I urge all my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives, and indeed all Americans, to celebrate the diversity Taiwanese Americans have contributed to the United States.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that last week I was able to spend time with some very talented students from Lincoln High School in Portland, Oregon. These students were in Washington, D.C. along with more than 1200 students from across the United States to compete in national finals of the We the People * * * The Citizen and the Constitution program. I am proud to announce that the class from Lincoln High School won an honorable mention a this national event. These young scholars have worked diligently to reach the national finals and through their experience have gained a deep knowledge and understanding of the fundamental principles and values of our constitutional democracy. The names of the students are: Erika Acheson, Louis Baer, Victoria Demchak, Ann Denison, Timothy Fitzgerald, Sarah Hopkins, Lisa Humes- Schulz, Krista Ingebretson, Joey Katz, Ian Krajbich, Emily Lande, Sarah Larson, Teresa Lau, Devon McCurdy, Benjamin O'Glasser, Caleb Oken-Berg, Julie Ota, Tawny Paul, Mariruth Petzing, Shauna Puhl, Maximilian Pyko, Wayne Saxe, John Schaub, Elizabeth Sheets, Lindsay Simmons, Carrie Steeves, Brigitte Streckert, Thomas Wilson, Karen Wolfgantg, and Jenny Zou. I would also like to recognize their teacher, Hal Hart, the district coordinator, Susie Marcus, and the state coordinator, Marilyn Cover, for their hard work and dedication to the students. The We the People * * * The Citizen and the Constitution program is the most extensive educational program in the country developed specifically to educate young people about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The three-day national competition is modeled after hearings in the United States Congress. These hearings consist of oral presentations by high school students before a panel of adult judges. The students testify as constitutional experts before a panel of judges representing various regions of the country and a variety of appropriate professional fields. The students' testimony is followed by a period of questioning by the simulated congressional committee. The judges probe students for their depth of understanding and ability to apply their constitutional knowledge. Columnist David Broder described the national finals as ``the place to have your faith in the younger generation restored''. Administered by the Center for Civic Education, the We the People * * * program has provided curricular materials at upper elementary, middle, and high school levels for more than 26.5 million students nationwide. The program provides students with a working knowledge of our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the principles of democratic government. Members of Congress and their staff enhance the program by discussing current constitutional issues with students and teachers and by participating in other educational activities.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor of H.R. 1237. This bipartisan bill has great benefits to the people in my home State and I urge my colleagues to support it. H.R. 1237 reauthorizes the National Estuary Program, or NEP, which in turn provides desperately needed grants to improve the habitat, water quality and diverse plant and wildlife that depend on our Nation's estuaries. In Oregon, the NEP has included the Lower Columbia River Estuary. Because of the NEP; the citizens businesses and governments of Oregon have been able to focus on the 146 miles of tidally influenced waters below the Bonneville Dam. The NEP requires the estuaries to create a management plan. The Columbia River plan defines specific actions for habitat, land use, and conventional and toxic pollutants. This common sense measure will serve fish and wildlife habitat and water quality in three important ways: prevention of further loss, protection and enhancement of existing resources, and restoration where damage has already occurred. Mr. Speaker, one-in-six jobs in Oregon depends on the Columbia River. This magnificent river is home to many diverse animals and plants. In the Northwest we are faced with the challenge in ensuring that several of these species of plants and animals do not go extinct. Furthermore, in many of these resource-based communities, it is additionally challenging to ensure that the economies are developed and have a voice in the protection of their estuary. With participation in the NEP, the Lower Columbia River Estuary Program has analyzed the problems with the estuary and has developed recommendations for dealing with them. Whether it is preserving the biological integrity of the estuary, mitigating the impacts of human activity and growth, controlling the entrance of conventional and toxic pollutants or engaging in public awareness, the NEP assists Oregon and other communities like it around the Nation. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1237.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) for yielding me the time. I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) for his premature recognition. To further discuss what the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) and the gentleman from Ohio mentioned, it is obvious that it was not anatomy that got me here. It was a sound consideration of policy, a measured approach to fiscal responsibility, and basically being responsible and exercising common sense. Now, I do not like the current Tax Code. I do not know anyone who does. But to toss it out without a replacement is absolutely irresponsible. The business uncertainty that it injects into the economy alone, that uncertainty alone should get this bill tossed. Even worse, the likely replacement for this, the likely replacement for the current system is a national sales tax. I would like to say two things about a national sales tax, first of all, its devastating effect on e-commerce. E-commerce is burgeoning right now. It cannot stand the projected 50 percent tax. It would choke e-commerce in its infancy. It would consign e-commerce to an early crib death. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly to me and to a few other folks, my home State of Oregon does not have a sales tax. We have voted on it several times, and we have repeatedly rejected a sales tax. Alaska does not have a State sales tax. Delaware does not have a State sales tax. Montana does not have a State sales Tax. New Hampshire does not have a State sales tax. My dear State of Oregon does not have a State sales tax. I will be darned if I will see a Federal Government impose a form of taxation on my State that my constituents have repeatedly rejected.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3671, the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000. This common sense bill will prevent dollars paid by sportsmen and sportswomen from being spent in ways that do not help wildlife, sport fish and related restoration efforts, and it will send more money to the states for them to use for conservation projects. Currently, Oregon receives a little over $4.6 million under the Pittman-Robertson Act, and just under $5.5 million under the Dingell- Johnson Act. These dollars go to support important programs such as stocking fish, improving habitat, resource education, fisheries research for sports-fishing and building boat ramps and infrastructure to support the sports fishing industry. As an avid hunter and fisherman, I strongly support these two programs. My colleagues on the Resources Committee held several hearings on these bills. Unfortunately, it was revealed through the hearings that the funds withheld by the Fish and Wildlife Service to administer and execute the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Acts were used to fund unrelated expenses. In addition, funds that were used for true administration of these programs were not used responsibly. I commend the committee for working with the Fish and Wildlife Service in coming to a bipartisan, common sense solution that uses more dollars for fish and wildlife and less on administration. Mr. Chairman, programs that assist recreation and conservation are good for Oregon and good for the United States. Doing this in a way that decreases waste is even better. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of H.R. 3671. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my opposition to H.R. 3660, the so-called Partial Birth Abortion Ban. This legislation is a direct attack on a woman's right to choose and an effort to undermine support for reproductive choice. H.R. 3660 endangers women's health by failing to include a constitutionally mandated exception to protect the health of women. The Supreme Court requires that a woman's life and health be protected throughout pregnancy and at no point can a state compel a woman to sacrifice herself. I believe that a woman's health--including her future fertility and mental health--should be protected. H.R. 3660 is vague, broadly written and will not restrict just one method of abortion but rather, it prohibits procedures which are used in first and second trimester abortions. This is a blatant attempt to legislate health care procedures. This bill restricts a woman's right to choose and lets politicians rather than women and their families make health decisions. Restricting options for women makes a tragic situation even worse for a woman and her family. Women and their doctors, not state legislators or Members of Congress, should be deciding the best medical procedure. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 2660 and vote ``no.''

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I understand that there were monies in the appropriation bill last year for studies. The challenge that we face is a continuation of studies and a failure to act. I appreciate the gentleman's offer to work with me on this issue. Do I have the chairman's assurance that this is an assurance to cooperate in action and not study alone?

Mr. WU. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, last night we appeared before the Committee on Rules in order to attempt to make a bipartisan common sense approach in order due to a real emergency and a real disaster. The emergency aid involves West Coast fishermen and owners of small fishing boats. This is a real emergency caused by a precipitous decline in fish population and bad Federal policy. It affects the entire West Coast. Simply put, there are too many fishing boats, too few fish, and too many Federal fishing restrictions based on spotty data. This bipartisan common sense amendment offered by myself, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), and the gentleman from California (Mr. Kuykendall), two Democrats and two Republicans, would have addressed these challenges by bringing better science and better fish counting to the problem, a boat buy-back program and financial aid to affected families. This common sense bipartisan amendment was not made in order, and I would inquire of the chairman on behalf of myself and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) about the prospects of providing assistance to the hard-hit West Coast fishing industry when this bill is conferenced with the Senate. I understand that a number of issues not in the House bill may be considered at that conference, and I would like to know whether the chairman would consider at that time providing assistance for West Coast fisheries, which are dependent on ground fish.

Mr. WU. I thank the chairman.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, the House today will take up a supplemental appropriations bill which shows tremendous disrespect for hard-working rural coastal community families on the West Coast of the United States. There is a groundfish disaster occurring on the West Coast because a Federal agency has basically shut down groundfishing on the West Coast, causing several thousand families hardship. There were funds in this bill which have been removed, and despite a bipartisan amendment proposed to restore those funds sponsored by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden) and I, by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Kuykendall), this amendment was not made in order. I intend to bring this amendment to the floor of the House today. I ask the support of my fellow Members to address this groundfish disaster that is drastically affecting West Coast hard-working rural community fishing families. It is a commonsense bipartisan proposal to address a true emergency that is occurring today.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote against the rule today. We appeared before the Committee on Rules late last night with a bipartisan, commonsense approach to a real emergency, a real disaster: emergency aid to West Coast fishers and owners of small fishing boats. This real emergency is caused by a fish population decline and by bad Federal policy. It affects the entire West Coast. Simply put, there are too many fishing boats, too few fish, and too many Federal fishing restrictions based on spotty data. The bipartisan commonsense amendment we offered, offered by me, by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), and by the gentleman from California (Mr. Kuykendall), that is two Democrats and two Republicans, would have addressed these challenges with better science and better fish counting, with a buy-back of boats to reduce fishing capacity, and financial aid to affected families. Mr. Speaker, this commonsense, bipartisan amendment was rejected by the Committee on Rules in the dead of night. I guess it is easy for common sense and compassion to die late at night. I ask my colleagues who care about hard-working fishing families to vote against this rule.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the people of Taiwan on the successful March 18th, 2000 presidential election. Taiwan's decades-long political transformation and the recent election are indeed great examples of Taiwan's commitment to a government of the people, by the people and for the people. As the first member of the United States Congress born in Taiwan, I observed with great interest Taiwan's extremely competitive presidential campaign. The open process is a tribute to the people of Taiwan, and to the island's real, working democratic process. Taiwan has indeed achieved democracy under adversity and joined the great democracies of the world. Once again, I would like to congratulate the people of Taiwan on their courage and commitment to forming a more democratic and complete society. In addition, I would also like to congratulate all the candidates, especially President-elect Chen Shui-bian and Vice President-elect Annette Lu, for a very open and competitive campaign. I wish the Taiwanese people well and hope to work together with all people in the region for a peaceful and prosperous future.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor of H.R. 5, the Senior Citizens' Freedom to Work Act. Under current law, seniors who earn more than $17,000 per year are penalized $1 for every $3 of additional earnings. This is wrong. We should not penalize hard work. It makes no sense to penalize seniors who are participating in our work force, especially at a time when we cannot find enough workers to fill a burgeoning economy. I have heard from many small businesses in my district that are very excited about the possibility of hiring additional workers, workers who have solid work values, who are responsible, experienced and eager to fill the positions which are currently available. As we vote on this important bipartisan legislation today, I want to encourage my colleagues to continue work in assisting our seniors to retire so they are not forced to work. However, I strongly believe that those who choose to work should not be penalized. And this bill solves that. I urge my colleagues to support this long-needed legislation.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, the research link between these institutions will provide access to unique laboratories and equipment located at each of these schools. At Oregon Health Sciences University this means access to information from the Museum of Health in Medicine to reconstruct hearts in order to find gene defects. ``Collaboration'' is the keyword to research in this bill and in this amendment. The new resources made available by this amendment will make a significant contribution to strengthening NSF's role as the lead agency for Federal multi-agency and information technology research efforts. This research encompasses advances in software design, wireless networking, high-end computing and mathematics. In addition, it will enable application of computing and networking and technology in many fields of science and engineering that would not be possible with current technology. It will train the scientists and engineers needed to sustain the economic growth fueled by information technology. This investment will deliver tools and capabilities that will benefit every field of science and society broadly. The resources made available by the amendment will be used by NSF for several focused efforts. Foremost, the funding will be used to support fundamental, long-term, high-risk research. This work will encompass investigation of computer system architectures, information storage and retrieval, scalable networks, and totally new approaches to computation. Another particularly important use of the new funding will be for education programs in information technology. These include scholarships and fellowships, support for undergraduate participation, and research projects and development of new curriculum. New graduate students will obtain the skills necessary for future generations of researchers that are in high demand in the postindustrial economy. At home, NSF-funded research provides support for important projects at Oregon's Urban University, Portland State University. The school has received nearly $5 million for funding for NSF projects this year that involve undergraduate and graduate students in research. Much of this research relates to community needs and priorities, including training American workers to fill high-tech, high-wage jobs. High-tech companies now constitute Oregon's largest private sector employer. Finally, the increase in NSF funding will be used to establish a second terascale computing facility to support the academic research community. NSF is the principal access to high-performance computing for the academic research community. Access to the most powerful computers is essentially for leading-edge research, as well as educating the next generation of computer and computational scientists.

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), the ranking member, and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) for working with me on this amendment, or allowing me to work with them on this amendment, which would increase for fiscal year 2001 the NSF funding by $176 million and increase the outyear funding levels in conformance with that percentage increase. I believe that this adjustment enjoys bipartisan support, and it is also supported by the administration. I am in receipt of a letter from the administration stating that the administration supports the amendment to be offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall) and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu) that would increase authorizations for FY 2001 for the National Science Foundation to the administration's budget request. A few weeks ago, I had the opportunity to travel throughout my district with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner). We visited research universities, including Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland State University, and several high-tech companies where we were able to see firsthand the benefit of NSF grants. At Portland State University, we learned about a unique collaboration between Oregon Health Sciences University, Oregon Graduate Institute, and the University of Washington to develop the State's highest speed access to Internet to facilitate research in areas such as biotechnology and medicine.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 764, the Senate Amendments to Child Abuse Prevention and Enforcement Act. This is a solid piece of legislation that will help to prevent child abuse, provide assistance to victims, and help states to improve the reporting of unidentified and missing persons. As the Health and Human Service Department (HHS) recently documented, there was nearly one million documented cases of child abuse and neglect in the United States in 1997. This number only reflect the cases that were reported and detected by the authorities. In the most advanced economy in the world, I strongly believe that children should be allowed to grow up as children: To attend schools, to learn and play and enjoy their childhood. No child should be subjected to abuse and neglect. I believe this bill provides a sensible approach to prevent child abuse and to provide much-needed assistance to the victims of abuse. H.R. 764 would authorize the release of additional funding from the Crime Victims Fund to be set aside for child abuse and domestic assistance program. The bill also expands the allowable uses of grant money to protect abused children from further trauma by testifying in court through electronic means, and authorized $6 million through FY 2000-2002 for states to improve the reporting of missing and unidentified persons. Mr. Speaker, I believe this is a strong and sound piece of legislation that will help protect our nation's children and I strongly support H.R. 764.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I was at home at the Verboort Sausage Festival this past weekend. It is a wonderful community event. I had the privilege of sitting next to Don and Lois Tayler. Lois Tayler's grandfather owned 100 acres on part of which Findley Elementary School now sits. As Oregon pioneers, the Findleys understood the value of education. And Don and Lois, who are schoolteachers now, know that that school has 900 kids in it, but it was built for 700. This Congress has the ability to help with that situation, with school modernization and class size reduction, and we should not go home until we get those jobs done to keep faith with people like the Findleys, like the Taylers, and other Oregonians who made investments in their day for their children. We should be making similar investments in our day for our children.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado. I would like to thank my good friend for bringing this important amendment to the floor. I believe that this amendment will improve H.R. 2389. The Udall amendment helps bring decision making closer to home. Under the proposed bill, any county, which receives over $100,000 in safety net payments, will be required to use 20 percent for ``projects on federal lands.'' Those counties, which receive less than $100,000 in safety net payments, have the choice to use the entire payment for schools and roads or elect to use 20 percent for ``projects on federal lands.'' The federal government will in effect be mandating to counties, which receive over $100,000, how to spend 20 percent of the assistance. Madam Chairman, by mandating that 20 percent of the revenue be used for purposes other than education and transportation, we, the U.S. Congress, are tying the hands of local decision-makers about local priorities. The Udall amendment allows the affected county to make the decision. The Udall amendment allows local officials to decide if smaller class size is more important than a new Search and Rescue unit, whether new books for third graders are needed more than forest management. These are the difficult choices that need to be left in the hands of the people who are most affected by them, local communities.