Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of Anne Burkholder, the Nebraska Cattlemen's Beef Association's Beef Quality Assurance Program Producer of the Year, for her dedication to ensuring Nebraska beef producers, practices ensure safe, wholesome, and quality beef and beef products.

Anne is a wife, mother of three young children, and a cattle feedyard owner and operator with 3,000 head of cattle. Anne grew up in urban West Palm Beach, Florida, before moving to Cozad, Nebraska where she became a key producer in Nebraska's cattle industry.

After she married her husband, Anne went from a neophyte ranch hand to becoming part owner and manager of one of the most progressive cattle feeding operations in Nebraska.

In her work, she has experienced every aspect of the feedyard business--from operating the feed truck, scooping bunks, cattle nutrition plans, vaccinations, you name it. Her determination and dedication to her family, community, and industry are nothing short of impressive.

I look forward to seeing what she will accomplish in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3791, the Fire Grants Reauthorization Act of 2009. This bill reauthorizes both the Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) program and the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) program, which both provide much-needed assistance to fire departments across the Nation.

As we learned through our committee work on this bill, and as I have heard firsthand in discussions with fire chiefs and firefighters in my district, the AFG program is frequently cited as a ``life safer'' and the only means by which many departments can acquire up-to-date equipment and training--which requires a significant portion of their budget--for their firefighters.

This is particularly true in rural areas such as my district in rural Nebraska, where many communities rely upon all-volunteer departments to respond to fires and other emergencies. The equipment needed to fight fires and save lives and property is costly, and required for departments to meet certain minimum response capabilities regardless of whether they are protecting a community of a few hundred people or a large city of a few hundred thousand people. As such, firefighter grants have proven absolutely vital for rural and volunteer fire departments, which have small tax bases and the least ability to acquire such equipment.

The bill before us today makes several modest changes to the AFG and SAFER programs, reflecting a compromise reached by the leading national fire service organizations who worked closely with the Science and Technology Committee to develop this legislation. I support these changes and the underlying reauthorization effort, and I want to call attention to two in particular which I offered as amendments during committee consideration

of this bill. They are intended to support the ability of smaller combination and volunteer departments to successfully compete for and receive AFG grants and to emphasize the AFG program should be a funding priority generally.

The first amendment added language to the bill clarifying in awarding grants competitively, FEMA must consider a broad range of factors related to a fire department's ability to respond to hazards, not just the size of the population a department protects but also other factors such as its geographic response area, hazard vulnerability, or financial situation. This addition does not make any changes to the underlying AFG program but, rather, explicitly codifies FEMA's existing practice.

Second, I was pleased to incorporate amendment language in committee calling attention to the dramatic decline in funding for the AFG program over the last 5 years and emphasize restoring it should be a priority.

The AFG program is authorized in this legislation at $1 billion a year; however, its actual appropriated funding has never reached that amount and, in fact, has steadily declined in recent years. In fiscal year 2003, $750 million was appropriated for AFG. Since this time, funding has steadily declined. Last year it was $565 million, and this year the Obama administration requested only $390 million. This represents a 48 percent decline since fiscal year 2003. Given the importance of AFG to helping fire departments around the country meet minimum response requirements, especially those in rural areas with limited tax bases, this trend is troubling and should be reversed.

I was pleased our colleagues in the majority accepted these amendments, and I appreciate the chairman's work. I thank them for working closely with me and the leading national fire service organizations to develop an agreeable compromise under which we could move this reauthorization forward.

I urge Members to support passage of this bill, and I hope for and expect a continued smooth process as we do go forward.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I would yield 30 seconds more to the Chairman of the Transportation Committee if he wishes to continue.

Mr. Chairman, I would also add briefly that, for right now, that the demands on volunteer fire departments are far greater than the population might reflect, especially when we talk about public lands and the susceptibility to fire in the midst of drought and other things as well.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I would inquire of the committee chairman how much time he is looking to need, perhaps.

I would yield 2 minutes to the chairman if he would wish to use that.

I would reserve the balance of my time.

I would reserve the balance of my time.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be very brief. We were expecting some other Members here. But I will say that I appreciate the process that we have gone through this. It involved quite a bit of discussion early on at the subcommittee level and full committee level. I'm grateful that the chairman considered amendments from our side so that we can meet the public safety needs of our country. It's not just about my district, it's not just about certain districts, but the entire country. I'm grateful to be a part of this process, and I will say it does work.

With that, I would yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

This amendment, as the sponsor indicated, would allow grant funds under the AFG program to require equipment designed to reduce the amount of water used in firefighting or training. This amendment certainly makes sense, particularly in arid regions, which may be prone to fires and where water sources are often scarce.

I support this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment, although I do not oppose it.

I would like to ask the gentleman from Colorado to enter into a colloquy regarding his amendment--a clarification.

Thank you. I appreciate that. I thank the gentleman for offering the amendment to assess fire department readiness through a survey of compliance with national voluntary consensus standards for staffing, training, equipment, and other factors important to a department's ability to respond to hazards. I do support the amendment but would like to seek clarification for the Record regarding the gentleman's intent on two aspects of this amendment.

First, I recognize the value of improved data regarding fire department compliance with response standards, and I agree that we should aspire to help the fire service achieve higher compliance rates. However, I think it is important to note that a lack of compliance with these standards does not necessarily indicate a problem on the part of the department or local municipality.

There are over 25,000 fire departments in the United States, all working under unique circumstances with respect to local hazards, populations, mutual aid agreements, operating budgets, and so on. In many cases, it simply does not make sense for departments to be in full compliance with what the Federal Government would consider full compliance with these standards based on their individual circumstances, particularly in rural areas where resources are very limited.

For these reasons, I would hope that the task force established by this amendment considers these practical barriers to standards compliance in making recommendations to Congress regarding how best to improve standards compliance. I would just ask the gentleman if he would agree with this interpretation.

I thank the gentleman from Colorado. Second, while the cost of the study called for in the gentleman's amendment is not precisely known at this time, it may be a significant undertaking. Accordingly, I hope that it is the gentleman's intent that the funding for this study, which is authorized by the Secretary of Homeland Security, not come out of the core budget for either of these grant programs or the budget of the U.S. Fire Administration.

Does the gentleman agree with this interpretation?

I thank the gentleman from Colorado for his graciousness, with I guess just one exception. But I appreciate the confidence he shows in his college football team.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. The Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG) and SAFER grant program have not been subject to earmarking and, instead, have been awarded to the applicants which are determined to have the greatest need. This process of awarding grants based on merit has proven effective for this program. Allowing these funds to be allocated through earmarking would pit those districts in need against those with the most powerful Members of Congress. I believe this would be a disservice to the American taxpayer. Mr. Flake's amendment will ensure that the funding, which we are authorizing here today for the grant programs for firefighters, continues to be allocated through a competitive process based on need.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would simply clarify that river rescue organizations will be eligible to apply for a grant under the program authorized by the bill. I have no objections to this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment. Although I am not necessarily opposed to this, I do have some concerns.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This amendment would require that local unemployment rates be considered as a factor in awarding grants to fire departments. While I understand the current state of the economy should make this a concern in bills we consider, the Fire grant program has, since its inception 8 years ago, awarded grants competitively based upon the potential of the applicant's proposal to enhance a fire department's ability to respond to fires and related hazards. I am somewhat concerned that this change may result in an upset in the delicate balance of consideration that has been achieved over the years.

The factors used by FEMA in evaluating these proposals have been carefully developed and refined in consultation with national fire service organizations. They include, for example, a department's geographic response area, its population served, unique hazard vulnerabilities, and its budgetary situation. All of these factors directly impact the department's ability to respond to hazards and, thus, are appropriate criteria.

I believe the gentleman's amendment is well intentioned, but I am concerned that the unemployment rate of the locality a department protects is simply not directly related to fire hazards or the department's ability to respond to them. While a fire department's operating budget could potentially be indirectly impacted by a poor local economy that impacts tax revenues, this factor is already explicitly noted in the legislation based on need.

Further, I would caution generally against the practice of Congress dictating the specific criteria to be used by FEMA in making awards. This bill codifies consideration of high-level factors that were developed by the fire service and are currently used by FEMA, but it does not attempt to incorporate new ones based on particular interests. If we begin to open up this program to congressional direction of this sort, we risk adding a level of prescription that could transform the current highly competitive process to one driven by interests unrelated to the needs of the fire service.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to be sensitive to the economic conditions that hit some parts of the country harder than others, and I want to be mindful of the wise use of resources at the Federal level. I don't want to get into other policies that might impact our economy in any a very negative way. I don't have enough time to do that right now. But I certainly hope that we can arrive at good policy decisions today and down the road so that we don't stand in the way of the wise use of government and taxpayer resources.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Republican health care bill. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the Republican alternative will decrease health insurance premiums up to 10 percent. Compare that to Speaker Pelosi's government-controlled health insurance plan, which CBO estimates will have higher premiums than those currently available in the private health insurance market. Higher premiums than currently available.

The medical liability reform Republicans are offering will reduce health care costs for Americans by $54 billion over 10 years by reducing junk lawsuits. This, again, according to the CBO. What's more, the Republican alternative will reduce the deficit by $68 billion without increasing taxes by one red cent. We have a clear choice--$700 billion in new taxes, 118 new bureaucracies and higher health care costs or the Republican bill which will take meaningful steps toward the true health care reform that we know we need.

Mr. Speaker, millions of Americans are concerned with spending; and the spending contained in this bill and the more than 3,000 references to the word ``shall'' concerns Americans, especially as it relates to their tax dollars. This tax on medical devices, in my reading of the bill, looks like the sicker you are, the greater the tax you will pay. That is a huge concern to me.

When I look at the challenges that we face with needing to streamline government, with needing to first streamline Medicare and Medicaid and find this fraud that's out there first before we go about depending on the money that we find, we can make a lot of progress, rather than implementing 111 new agencies, commissions and bureaucracies in general. Mr. Speaker, we owe Americans better than this; and we can do better.

Madam Speaker, as we consider health care reform, we have a responsibility to protect the best interests of our nation's seniors and ensure we do not harm the health care they already receive.

Included in the current government takeover of health care are massive cuts to Medicare Advantage which will result in a loss of health care for millions of seniors.

For seniors living on fixed incomes, the prospect of being forced to pay more for health care is truly frightening.

But the Congressional Budget Office has reported the Democrat plan will increase seniors' Medicare prescription drug premiums by 20 percent over the next decade.

Medicare finances are rapidly deteriorating and we should be working on real solutions which ensure the long-term financial stability of Medicare.

Madam Speaker, a government-run health care system is not the answer to our health care problems, and it certainly is not the answer when it is paid for on the backs of our nation's seniors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today thankful we're talking about energy. Far too often, it seems, Washington is working on efforts to stop energy development right here in America. This bill at least makes an effort to tap into our domestic energy potential. However, I am concerned about the cost, and I am concerned the bill actually doesn't go far enough.

As a member of the Science Committee, I am familiar with the efforts to spur energy research, and as a member of the Natural Resources Committee, I am familiar with the rich resources our Nation has to generate more domestic energy. At a time when we are facing an annual deficit which is larger than the deficits from the last 4 years combined, we are here today to spend another $2 billion without any way to pay for it.

Energy policy is about choices, and the leadership of this Congress and of this new administration has made the choice not to promote the most economic and energy-rich forms of domestic energy resources, including oil and gas. In contrast, Republicans have chosen to support American energy production through an all-of-the-above energy plan. We support the development of solar energy all across America, and we also support wind, nuclear, hydropower, biofuels, and oil and gas development--domestic sources of energy.

America does not need just one choice on energy. We need access to all of the domestic energy resources we can develop. The American Energy Act would clean up the environment, lower energy costs, and create more American jobs than the bill before us today. In fact, the American Energy Act has four main objectives:

Increasing the production of American-made energy in an environmentally responsible and sound manner; promoting new, clean and renewable sources of energy such as nuclear, hydropower, clean-coal technology, wind and solar energy; encouraging greater efficiency and conservation by extending tax incentives for energy efficiency and rewarding development of greater conservation techniques and new energy resources; and cutting redtape and reducing frivolous litigation.

America needs energy development, and America needs jobs. While today's bill will promote some energy development and some new jobs, it's only one piece of the puzzle. America needs an all-of-the-above energy policy to develop many new energy resources and to create a lot of jobs.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans stand ready to help you promote increased domestic energy development. It's time that Congress not pick winners and losers in energy. It's time for all of the above.

Mr. Speaker, for generations, America's small businesses have been the engines driving our economy, and they remain one of our brightest hopes for economic recovery.

These entrepreneurs represent more than 99 percent of all businesses in the country and create more than 72 percent of the new jobs. Yet, under the guise of health care reform, Congress is set to punish these innovators by leveling more than $200 billion in new taxes. Those are taxes. The result of these new taxes will be the loss of an estimated 5.5 million jobs.

Our economy is in a precarious situation, the Federal deficit stands at $1.42 trillion, and 263,000 jobs were lost in September alone. Why would we want to push a government takeover of health care inflicting further harm on small businesses--the very strength of our economy?

Mr. Speaker, in the next few weeks, the House of Representatives will be taking up health care reform legislation.

A report released Monday by PricewaterhouseCoopers showed the Senate Finance Committee's version of the health care bill will impose stiff costs to the American people. According to the report, a family paying $12,300 currently for their health insurance policy would find themselves paying nearly $26,000, on average, by 2019 under this bill. Premiums for a single person would go up by $600 a year.

Mr. Speaker, Americans want reform which expands access to affordable health care and gives families the freedom to choose the policy which fits their needs. Americans want meaningful medical liability reform to help deter frivolous lawsuits, and they also want to be able to buy health insurance across State lines.

Republicans are willing to work with our colleagues to find bipartisan solutions to the hurdles standing in the way of health care reform.

Mr. Speaker, in October 2008, just a year ago, Congress lifted the decades-long ban on energy exploration off America's coasts, clearing the way for expanded domestic oil and gas exploration. Unfortunately, instead of moving forward with a plan to explore the Outer Continental Shelf, this administration has stopped progress by instituting an extended 6-month public comment period.

Now the Obama administration has indicated offshore exploration may not happen until 2012, meaning what was a mere 6-month delay for comments has now become 3-year ban or could become a 3-year ban on offshore drilling.

Mr. Speaker, Americans are still waiting for expanded oil and gas exploration. With unemployment nearing 10 percent and our Nation's deficit topping $9 trillion, it is simply irresponsible to continue this de facto ban on American energy protection. We need to take an all-of-the-above approach when it comes to our energy portfolio, an approach which includes developing American offshore energy resources.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss an issue not at the forefront of debate here in Washington but which will impact many areas of our country and many aspects of our lives. I am referring to the need for skilled veterinarians in many communities across America. This may not be a topic which makes its way to the House floor very often, but I assure you, it is an issue for many areas of our country.

Our food animal veterinary workforce is on the front lines of food safety, public health and animal health. This vital profession, however, is facing a critical shortage in the public, private, industrial and academic sectors. To make matters worse, the problem is on the rise. Large animal veterinarians, in particular, are integral to small rural communities. But in many of these communities, communities with few people but large numbers of animals, we are seeing a very distressing trend.

Let me show you. This map is a geographic display of total food animals by county in the United States. The dark gold areas have particularly high concentrations of animals per county, more than 250,000. As you can see, States such as Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, Texas and California all have extremely high concentrations of counties with 250,000 or more food animals.

Now let's take a look at a map showing total food animal veterinarians by county. The areas of dark green indicate counties with 35 or more food animal veterinarians by county, certainly quite a difference.

Finally, let's take a look at a map showing food animal concentration per veterinarian. I want to draw your attention to the red flags that dot the map. We all know that red flags mean danger or a hazard ahead. The red flags on this map indicate counties without one single food animal veterinarian but which have more than 25,000 food animals, several counties across the country.

According to the most recent data from the USDA, Cherry County, one county in my district, has 145,000 food animals per veterinarian. Fillmore County, also in Nebraska, has 112,000 food animals but not one food animal veterinarian. It's absolutely necessary for the farmers, ranchers, hobbyists--not lobbyists but hobbyists--and even animal lovers to have access to qualified local veterinary clinics.

To this end, Mr. Speaker, I have introduced H.R. 3519, the Veterinarian Services Investment Act. The legislation authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to award competitive grants to help develop, implement and sustain veterinary services, especially in underserved areas. These grants may be used to support a wide array of activities based on the needs of an area, such as veterinarian and veterinary technician recruitment; expanding and establishing practices in high- need areas; surveillance of food animal disease and the utilization of veterinary services; establishing mobile/portable clinics and tele-vet services; and accredited veterinary education programs, including continuing education, distance education and faculty recruitment.

Under my bill, eligible applicants must carry out programs or activities which will substantially relieve the veterinary shortages throughout our country, as indicated on a geographical basis. These include entities such as veterinary clinics located in underserved or rural areas; veterinary practices which meet food animal protection needs; State, national, allied or regional veterinary organizations and specialty boards; colleges or schools of veterinary medicine; and State, local or tribal veterinary agencies.

I am proud to say that more than 30 of my colleagues, Democrat and Republican, have joined me as cosponsors of H.R. 3519. It has been endorsed by, among others, the American Veterinary Medical Association, the South Dakota Veterinary Medical Association, the Iowa Veterinary Medical Association, Nebraska and Minnesota as well, the Farm Bureau, the Animal Health Institute, the National Association of Federal Veterinarians and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.

Veterinarians make a difference every day. They understand animals and are integral parts of our rural communities. Unfortunately, too many rural communities don't have this necessary support. The Veterinary Services Investment Act will go a long way in this direction.

Madam Speaker, the Natural Resources Committee has the responsibility not only to take steps to encourage more nuclear, solar, hydropower, and wind energy but also to increase the production of domestic oil and gas. Such an all-of-the-above approach will lead to lower energy costs and to more jobs for American citizens while also serving to make our country safer.

Later today, the Natural Resources Committee will be holding a hearing on H.R. 3534, a bill which will simply erect more obstacles to job creation and energy production. This bill creates new levels of bureaucracy, which inevitably will slow new development of American sources of energy. Now is not the time to further delay the advancement of American energy.

Madam Speaker, it is simple: more roadblocks to energy development mean less energy for Americans.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. John Manganaro upon his retirement after 17 years serving as head baseball coach at Wayne State College.

Manganaro came to Wayne State as an assistant in 1990 and took the helm in 1993, inheriting a sport with less than one scholarship and a $12,000 budget. He built Wayne State into one of the top programs in NCAA Division II, winning the last six Northern Sun Conference regular season titles while guiding the Wildcats to six straight NCAA tournament appearances.

Manganaro tallied a 506-309-1 record and was 198-54 in Northern Sun Conference games. Manganaro is a four-time Northern Sun Conference Coach of Year award recipient and led Wayne State to five Northern Sun Conference Tournament titles. Manganaro produced All Americans in six of the last seven seasons and had two players selected in the Major League Baseball Draft over the past three seasons.

In July of this year, the Omaha World Herald selected John Manganaro as the 2009 Midlands College Coach of the Year for men's sports. This was a fitting award for a coach that built a baseball program from scratch and turned it into the 12th winningest team this decade in NCAA Division II baseball.

Many of my constituents have been members of his teams through the years and they have all benefited from the experience. He is a credit to his sport, his college, and all of Nebraska.

I wish John Manganaro, his wife Janice, and their six children and two grandchildren all the best in their future endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to remember a friend and a colleague, Nebraska State Senator Ron Raikes. Ron was a dedicated public servant, who will be remembered as an honorable, hardworking senator who took pride in representing his constituency and all of Nebraska.

Raikes was born and raised in Nebraska. He attended Iowa State University and worked there as a professor after receiving a doctorate in agricultural economics from the University of California-Davis.

Raikes was appointed to the Nebraska Legislature in 1997, elected in 1998 and reelected in 2000 and 2004. I will always remember him as a well-liked and deeply respected colleague.

He was a mentor to the younger generation and an avid farmer. He ran a large cattle operation, a soil conservation business, and grew corn, soybeans and wheat. More than that, he was a tireless advocate for what he believed in and always challenged his colleagues.

He will be missed.

My heart goes out to his wife, his children and his grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3165, the Wind Energy Research and Development Act of 2009.

My home State of Nebraska is sixth in the Nation in wind energy potential, yet lacks in transmission capacity and development for additional generation. As this legislation made its way through the Science and Technology Committee, we adopted my amendment, which will allow for research and development into ways to efficiently and cost effectively create high-voltage transmission for renewable energy.

America needs a comprehensive national energy plan. An all-of-the- above approach to our energy policy, one which includes offshore oil and gas production, as well as the advancement of technologies to develop alternative sources of energy such as wind power, needs to be on the table.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor ten individuals, organizations and businesses from Nebraska for receiving the 2009 Third District Excellence in Economic Development Award.

Nebraska, like many rural states, unfortunately has seen a ``brain drain'' in recent years and, now more than ever, needs entrepreneurs and innovators.

In May, I called for nominations for individuals, businesses, and organizations which have helped strengthen Nebraska communities. These entrepreneurs do more than just build successful businesses. They host charity events, serve on local chambers of commerce, and shape the character of our towns and cities.

The nominations came from many different people, from a teenager starting his own lawn-mowing business to a mainstay in the Nebraska business community. All of the nominees have shown they are striving to help their home towns succeed into the future.

Steve Brown, of Thedford, began an entrepreneurial scholarship for graduating seniors if they return to the community and begin a business, which was matched by the Custer County Chief He is also the president of the Thedford Area Community Foundation board. The TACF has held a banquet for the past 5 years and has brought in close to $25,000 every year. They then have given up to $15,000 back to the community for repairs and improvements.

Since 1977 Adam Broughton has helped promote the City of York, saved jobs, and established and expanded a number of businesses. He has served with the York Chamber of Commerce, the York County Development Corporation, and Sertoma. He was instrumental in obtaining two $500,000 grants for the community of York, one for Gerber Foods Corporation and the other for Great West Teeuwissen Corporation. Those grants have helped keep over 40 jobs and the businesses in York. Adam helped to start Crystal Lake Foods, which processes food products for the United States and Asian Rim countries.

In less than 4 years, Clark Swihart of Columbus has built a company employing 14 Nebraskans and is a rapidly growing e-commerce company, specializing in unique promotional products--such as custom silicone wristbands, t-shirts, and more. He has created a unique service, jobs, and revenue.

Began as a combined effort of Twin Valleys Public Power District in Cambridge, Southwest Nebraska RC&D in Cambridge, and Trail Blazers RC&D in Red Cloud, the Furnas/Harlan Partnership of Arapahoe is striving to build a unified vision for economic development in Furnas and Harlan counties. The Partnership works with individual communities to help promote the surrounding communities and educate residents to help further their careers.

GROW Nebraska of Holbrook is a non-profit organization which has helped hundreds of small businesses and entrepreneurs in Nebraska for more than 10 years. From training sessions to networking and access to new markets through cooperative ads, GROW has helped Nebraska business grow and succeed. Recently GROW Nebraska was selected as a finalist for the eBay Seller's Challenge. GROW has also introduced a Flavors Project. The project gives people ``GROW bucks'' and allows them to use them at various participating locations just like cash.

Rich and Kellie Patterson, owners and operators of Hometown Hardware in Kimball, have made a name for themselves through their dedication to customer service and devotion to community. The young couple have been described as an ``anchor of our downtown'' and in just 2 years have already expanded their store.

Though only in high school, Ryan Grossnicklaus of Aurora owns and operates a lawn mowing company in Aurora and was recently awarded a scholarship by the National Federation of Independent Business Young Entrepreneur Foundation.

Todd Messing of Columbus started his own business, Messinc, in 2004. Todd is involved in the New Neighborhoods Initiative grant process to provide affordable housing to those with low to moderate income. His main goal is to provide assistance to community and economic development using education and volunteerism while keeping a profitable and environmentally-friendly business process.

Finally, Xpanxion LLC of Kearney is an international software development company which has placed a priority on hiring Nebraskans, has opened a quality assurance center in Kearney, and has focused on working closely with the University of Nebraska-Kearney. Xpanxion's has already created 16 full-time jobs and 4 part-time positions, and plan to add more jobs in the future. Xpanxion has helped curb the ``brain drain'' by hiring employees back to rural Nebraska from places outside of Nebraska.

I am proud to be able to recognize all of the honorees today and I thank them for their service to Nebraska.