October 3, 2008 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E2221 

contained many provisions to improve the security clearance process. The law called for 

uniform policies and unity of responsibility for 

security clearances across the Federal Government. It required that security clearances 

issued by one agency be accepted by all 

agencies. To make that possible, it called for 

an integrated data base and for the evaluation 

of available information technologies. Finally, it 

set forth specific targets for the length of time 

that security clearance processes should take, 

and required annual progress reports. 

During this Congress, our subcommittee has 

undertaken a thorough review of the process. 

We had round-table meetings with representatives of industry and with representatives of 

the Intelligence Community agencies. We 

carefully reviewed all reports submitted in response to the Intelligence Reform Act as well 

as GAO reports on security clearance reform 

in the Department of Defense. We held a series of open hearings with Administration witnesses and GAO to discuss accomplishments 

and areas where progress was lacking. 

We found that though the Act has resulted 

in significant improvements in the clearance 

timelines, significant work remains to be done. 

The law requires full reciprocity of clearance 

investigations and adjudications, but provides 

no tools for measuring the implementation and 

success of such measures. The clearance 

data as it is reported to Congress does not 

provide adequate insight into the improvements that have been made. Aggregated data 

covers up poor performance by averaging it 

with excellent performance. 

We provided the results of our oversight in 

an ICM Subcommittee Report which will be 

filed with the House. I’m pleased that all members of the Subcommittee were supportive of 

the Report, and it was reported out of committee on a unanimous voice vote. 

This provision is designed to remedy the 

shortcomings we discovered in our report. It 

takes a new approach to reform, by requiring 

agencies to report to Congress annually on 

certain key metrics related to the security 

clearance process. These metrics would enable Congress and HPSCI to perform effective 

oversight over the security clearance process, 

would allow both branches to track improvements from year to year, and would allow 

agencies to judge the effectiveness of each 

other’s security clearance process, improving. 

confidence in the system. In a few areas 

where adequate metrics have not been developed, the Administration is required to propose metrics to Congress. 

I hope that we will move this legislation as 

soon as possible, given the strong bipartisan 

support that it enjoys. It will improve our insight into the security clearance process, and 

by doing so, improve the process itself. 

The security clearance process is key to our 

national security establishment and we must 

make sure that it works as efficiently as possible. An effective security clearance system 

keeps out those who pose a security risk, 

while quickly identifying those who are trustworthy to work in the system. For too long it 

has been a troubled system and I’m hopeful 

that it is getting back on track and this legislation would allow us to know for sure. 

ACTION ON SEX ED 

HON. JANE HARMAN OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Friday, October 3, 2008 

Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I’ve seen 

my home state of California struggle with the 

Nation’s highest teen pregnancy rate—the sad 

result being thousands of young women dealing with the catastrophic effects pregnancy 

can impose on their lives. They often lose out 

on the opportunity to obtain a high school diploma, a college degree or a promising career. For too many, dreams like these are lost 

at an early age. 

In the early 1990s, California took on the 

challenge to fight this epidemic and focused 

hard on prevention. After a decade of implementing robust initiatives, the state had lowered the rate by nearly 40 percent. Much of 

the success is credited to better and more accurate comprehensive sex education. 

Results like this are worth fighting for and 

this is why initiatives like Planned Parenthood’s campaign—Sex Ed Week of Action—is 

vital to raise awareness about safe practices 

within our communities. These are tough, personal issues for all parents and families but as 

a mother and grandmother, I agree that they 

must be addressed. 

California is making strides, but there is 

much more to be done nationwide. As a longtime champion of comprehensive sex education, I’ve voiced my opposition against 

unproven abstinence-only education here in 

Congress. It is an outrage that since 1996, the 

Federal Government has pursued an ideological and myopic path, investing more than a 

$1 billion in abstinence-only programs. This 

has been a huge waste—and the studies 

prove it. 

A report commissioned by the Department 

of Health and Human Services concludes that 

students receiving abstinence-only education 

are no more likely to abstain or delay sexual 

activity than students not receiving such instruction. 

California also recognized that this is a bad 

investment for our teens and took a commendable step forward by rejecting these 

funds from the Federal Government. The medical community agrees too. According to the 

American Medical Association, the American 

Public Health Association and the American 

School Health Association, scientifically sound 

comprehensive sex education is the only approach that produces results—not more unwanted pregnancies. 

Empowering teens to make smart choices 

requires education that is proven to work—logical, right? The evidence is clear, comprehensive sex education is the best path to reducing 

unintended pregnancy, which is the goal we 

all share. We can’t fail our teens by letting politics and ideology interfere with this basic right 

to information. 

f 

HONORING HOWARD BAKER 

HON. NORMAN D. DICKS OF WASHINGTON

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Friday, October 3, 2008 

Mr. DICKS. Madam Speaker, on September 

24th I was pleased to attend a ceremony 

sponsored by the U.S. Capitol Historical Society at which the 2008 Freedom Award was 

presented to former Senate Majority Leader 

Howard Baker, who served in the United 

States Senate for 18 years. Each year the Society presents this prestigious award to recognize the work that is done under the Capitol 

dome to defend freedom and preserve the institution of Congress as a representative body. 

At the start of each Congress, all of us as 

Members of Congress take an oath to support 

and defend the Constitution in our role, as the 

Founders intended, as defenders of the peoples’ freedom. As a means of reminding the 

Congress of this solemn responsibility, the 

U.S. Capitol Historical Society bestows the 

Freedom Award annually upon a Member who 

personifies this spirit and who has demonstrated throughout his or her career a dedication to the institution of Congress and to the 

cause of freedom. Senator Baker’s remarks at 

the ceremony were particularly relevant and 

moving, and I would like to take this opportunity to share his speech with my colleagues 

by entering his remarks into the RECORD: 

REMARKS OF HOWARD H. BAKER, JR., U.S. 

CAPITOL HISTORICAL SOCIETY FREEDOM

AWARD, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

It is a great honor to be with you this 

evening, and it is an especially great honor 

to have been introduced by my dear friend 

and former colleague Bob Byrd. 

In an unusual—perhaps even unprecedented—set of circumstances, Senator Byrd 

and I served as each other’s majority and minority leaders for 8 very eventful years in 

the late 1970s and early 80s. 

And while there are some things Senator 

Byrd and I disagree on, one thing on which 

we’re in absolute agreement is that being 

majority leader is better. 

My service in the Senate leadership was 

the culmination of three terms in the United 

States Senate. For much of my adult career 

I have served in Congress, or my family has, 

so some would describe me as a congressional brat—if so I am proud of it. 

Having walked the halls of Congress with 

so many of its legendary figures—most definitely including Robert C. Byrd—and having 

worked on so many momentous issues with 

them, I have a special appreciation for the 

history of the Capitol that this Society does 

so much to preserve and protect and disseminate to an interested public. 

And so it is particularly meaningful to me 

to be honored by the Capitol Historical Society this evening. 

President Lincoln—who also served in Congress, though not, as you may suspect, with 

me—once wrote in a Message to Congress in 

the depths of the Civil War, ‘‘We cannot escape history. The fiery trial through which 

we pass will light us down in honor or dishonor to the last generation.’’ 

The genius of our system of government is 

not that it requires a race of supermen to 

run it but that ordinary people can do extraordinary things for their fellow citizens 

when they have to. This very week, the Congress, in particular must face a new challenge on policy and legislation to stabilize 

and rescue our country’s economic system. 

To succeed it must be in the finest traditions of our legislative process, worthy of 

Webster and Clay, Johnson and Dirksen, 

Kennedy and Kassebaum, maybe even Baker 

and Byrd. 

In earlier times, we dealt with Vietnam, 

Watergate, civil rights, the first environmental protection laws, Social Security reform, the cold war and much else on similar 

terms and with ultimate success. 

I am sure that the men and women of the 

110th Congress—Democrats, Republicans, 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REMARKS
E2222 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks October 3, 2008 

and Independents—will rise to the challenge 

of the moment and validate our powerful 

claim to the value of bipartisanship when it 

must serve the public interest. 

Senator Byrd and I engaged in partisan 

warfare more than either of us would like to 

acknowledge today, but even in the midst of 

such warfare, we knew we were serving an 

important political purpose: giving voice to 

the full range of public opinion on matters of 

national importance. 

That is the basis for the Senate’s claim to 

being the ‘‘world’s greatest deliberative 

body.’’ America’s Founders did not design 

the Senate as a model of efficiency but as a 

vessel of democracy, into which the Nation’s 

passions could be poured to cool, and from 

which the Nation’s collective wisdom could 

be discerned. 

The two-party system, which the Founders 

did not design and from which many of them 

would have recoiled, has had a similarly 

steadying influence on our national life. 

Two broad-based political parties have 

over the centuries become very effective 

means of communicating the public’s views 

to their government, particularly through 

the legislative branch. 

Partisanship has its place—and it is an 

honorable and useful place—in public life, 

and those who disdain it often do not understand its value in venting the full expression 

of our citizens’ demands and dissents. 

But the greatest of America’s Founders— 

George Washington—feared ‘‘factions’’ above 

all, and I share his fear that political hostility can overcome the better angels of our 

nature in some future hour of national peril. 

Too often in today’s Washington, I see a 

refusal to hear, much less respect, a differing 

point of view. I see a refusal to even try to 

understand the other person’s argument. 

This is new, in my experience, and it is not 

healthy. 

Robert Kennedy was a young lawyer who 

served as minority council in the ArmyMcCarthy hearings. I was chosen by Ray 

Jenkins, a great Tennessee trial lawyer, to 

assist him in the hearings. By the way, my 

principal responsibility was reading the 

daily transcripts! Robert Kennedy and I became quick friends because we had much in 

common—we were within days of each other 

in age, had World War II experience, and we 

shared an enthusiasm for convertibles, although his Cadillac put my Ford to shame. 

When we returned to Washington years 

later as Senators ourselves, just after the assassination of President Kennedy and in the 

early years of the Vietnam war, we and our 

colleagues—including Bob Byrd—knew that 

some things were more important than partisanship. 

Having served in the waning days of World 

War II, we knew that the capacity for calamity in human affairs was almost limitless— 

and we knew how much the rest of the world 

looked to the United States for leadership 

and example. 

The men and women of today’s Congress 

know about war, and terror, and now you 

know how quickly a strong economy can spiral out of control without constant vigilance. 

These are sobering events in momentous 

times, and it is useful for the ordinary men 

and women serving in this Capitol today to 

know that others before them rose to similar 

extraordinary challenges and rescued their 

country from harm. 

‘‘What is past is prologue,’’ the National 

Archives reminds us. ‘‘Study the past.’’ That 

is what the United States Capitol Historical 

Society has been encouraging us and enabling us to do for many years. 

I thank you for that valuable service. I am 

humbled by your tribute. And I am honored 

to be in your company tonight. 

HONORING LOUIS DE LA PARTE 

HON. KATHY CASTOR 

OF FLORIDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Friday, October 3, 2008 

Ms. CASTOR. Madam Speaker, I rise today 

to praise the lifetime achievements of distinguished Tampa lawyer and Florida legislator 

Louis de la Parte. Mr. de la Parte was honored for his unselfish compassion and courage 

to voice his beliefs on causes, even against 

popular opposition. He was a noble public 

servant and lived to help his family, friends, 

and community. 

Mr. de la Parte was born in Ybor City, 

Tampa, and grew up with his mother, a homemaker, and his father, who ran a men’s clothing store, whom Louis helped out during the 

summer. His grandmother lived in public housing in Tampa, and his large family came from 

a modest background. He used his experience 

growing up around people less fortunate than 

he to help out his community and voice the 

opinions of those who could not be heard. He 

graduated from Jesuit High School in Tampa 

in 1946 and received his bachelor of arts degree in psychology from Emory University in 

1950. His articulate leadership and natural 

ability for persuasion led him to earn his juris 

doctor from the University of Florida. 

After law school he joined the Air Force and 

started a family. He worked as a prosecutor 

but soon discovered that many of the problems that he was prosecuting could be avoided through science and the more effective delivery of mental health services. This revelation led Mr. de la Parte to run for public office. 

He served as a Democratic member of the 

Florida House of Representatives from 1962 

through 1966 and the Senate from 1966 

through 1974. He served his final year in the 

legislature as senate president. 

During his time in office, he built the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services to 

assist the poor, mentally disabled, elderly, and 

sick. He avidly promoted environmental legislation and educational programs in prisons. 

A dedicated family man, Mr. de la Parte was 

deeply loved by his family. His wife and two 

children would follow him to work sometimes, 

carrying his briefcase for him. Mr. de la Parte 

loved to have big family dinners on Sundays, 

and to take his family on travels all around the 

world, particularly to those places he had been 

while serving in the Air Force. The de la Parte 

family is a Tampa treasure. 

Mr. de la Parte worked in private practice 

with his son for 4 years. He retired in 1990, 

when he began to develop the early symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease. To congratulate 

his dedication to progress in the area of mental health, in 1996 the Florida Mental Health 

Institute at the University of South Florida was 

named after Mr. de la Parte. 

Madam Speaker, Louis de la Parte was a 

man of the highest regard who dedicated his 

life to the public good. He will be greatly 

missed by the State of Florida. My thoughts 

are with his wife, Helen, his children, Peggy 

and L. David, and the entire de la Parte family. 

HONORING THE KIWANIS CLUB OF 

ASTORIA—LONG ISLAND CITY 

HON. CAROLYN B. MALONEY OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Friday, October 3, 2008 

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam 

Speaker, it is my pleasure to pay tribute to the 

Kiwanis of Astoria—Long Island City for its 

outstanding work in supporting philanthropic 

and community organizations serving the people of western Queens. 

This year, the Kiwanis Club named as its 

Man of the Year Panagiotis Manolas, M.D., 

Chief of Surgery at Mount Sinai Hospital of 

Queens. Born and educated in Greece, Dr. 

Manolas immigrated to America to complete 

his studies. Certified by the American Board of 

Surgery, he has developed a highly successful 

multi-specialty practice in general, breast and 

laparoscopic surgery. Named a ‘‘New York 

Super Doctor’’ and one of the ‘‘Best Doctors in 

New York’’, he is devoted to his patients, often 

providing his services pro bono or on a sliding 

scale. 

The Kiwanis Club is naming as its Women 

of the Year several deserving honorees. 

These include: Rose Anne Alafogiannis, past 

president of the Kiwanis Club and member of 

Queens Community Board #1, the Astoria 

Civic Association, SHAREing & CAREing, and 

a Lector for the Immaculate Conception parish; 

Donna Furey, an Astoria native, Kiwanis 

Club member, and attorney specializing in 

elder law who who serves as a member of the 

board of St. John’s University School of Law 

Alumni Association and the Queens County 

Women’s Bar Association and who has dedicated herself to helping local seniors; 

Roberta Gualtieri, a life-long Astoria resident 

who has served countless hours as a volunteer at the Steinway Senior Center, the 

Kiwanis Club, the 114th Police Precinct, Our 

Lady of Mt. Carmel Roman Catholic Church, 

St. John’s Hospital emergency room, and with 

literacy programs for underprivileged youth; 

Laura Jean Hawkins, a longtime community 

activist and lecturer who served for many 

years as Chief of Staff to former Assemblyman Denis Butler and advocate for non-profit 

groups like SHAREing & CAREing, a breast 

and ovarian cancer support group; 

Teresa Jarnich, a member of the Kiwanis 

Club of Astoria—Long Island City and a volunteer with its Christmas Auction and Anti-Crime 

programs; 

Christine Lolas, an Athens native who immigrated to the U.S. to launch her career in the 

banking industry. She is active in the Kiwanis 

Club, the 30th Avenue Business Association, 

and serves on the Advisory Board of 

SHAREing & CAREing; 

Anna Kril, the founder of SHAREing & 

CAREing, Inc. She serves on the Board of Directors of the New York City Health & Hospitals Corporation, on the Executive Board of 

the Community Advisory Board of Elmhurst 

Hospital Center, as Chairperson of the Health 

Committee of Queens Community Board #1 in 

Queens, and as a member of the Kiwanis 

Club; 

Vera Martucci, who, although widowed at an 

early age, still devoted herself to serving others by volunteering to assist immigrants 

through the International Ladies Garment 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REMARKS