Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, as we all know, the Great Lakes have suffered as a result of years of industrial pollution that entered their waters. Through the Clean Water Act and other important measures we have begun the work necessary to reverse that trend.

However, much work needs to be done. The 2007 State of the Great Lakes report recorded the status of the Great Lakes ecosystem as mixed. In other words, the ecosystem displays both good and degraded features. Stopping pollution from entering the water is one thing. Beginning the efforts to restore the ecosystem from the damage it incurred is another.

Undoing that damage will require an extensive amount of work. One of the best tools in our arsenal to achieve that goal is the Great Lakes Legacy Act. This act, which authorizes funds to clean up contaminated sediment sites in U.S. Areas of Concern (AOCs), was spearheaded by my Great Lakes State colleague, Mr. Ehlers.

The projects that are funded under this act are devoted to prevention and remediation of contaminated sediment. As a result of projects done under this act, nearly 800,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments have been removed from AOCs. It is clear that this program has been successful and that is why it has been endorsed by numerous Great Lakes groups.

This program has been very good for the Great Lakes and we need to build on those successes to meet the challenges. While some great work has been done so far, we have only seen one spot de-listed as an Area of Concern; 31 Areas of Concern remain in the U.S. alone and 5 more are split between the U.S. and Canada. For these areas to be dealt with, it will take an incredible investment at the Federal level.

This legislation increases the authorization for this program up to $150 million annually. While I support that, I think we must also do our due diligence on the appropriations side of the ledger. Over the past few years, we seem to have settled at around the $30-35 million level, even though we are currently authorized at $50 million per year.

We also need to make sure that there is sufficient participation at the State and local level to complement Federal efforts. With the economy in Michigan being what it is, State and local governments are barely able in many cases to perform their basic functions, let alone take on ambitious restoration projects. This bill makes some improvements which will help in meeting the non-Federal requirements.

In closing, Madam Speaker, this has been a very successful program. I am glad to see that we are reauthorizing it at a higher level. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the National Silver Alert Act.

As a society we are judged by how we care for our most vulnerable in our community--our young children and our senior citizens.

This legislation, the National Silver Alert Act, is replicating an issue we have had remarkable success with--the Amber Alert for missing children. The Amber Alert for missing children has allowed 420 children to return safely to their homes.

It is time we replicate this success for our seniors.

Sixty percent of people with Alzheimer's or dementia will wander away at some point, and half of those who aren't found in the first 24 hours will be injured or die. This statistic is all too real for those across the Nation who have experienced the fear of losing a loved one first hand.

I know full well about this--last year an elderly man near Green Bay, Wisconsin, got in his car for what was supposed to be a short trip to the convenience store. Nearly 8 hours and 490 miles later, he stopped at a local grocery store in my district, disoriented, and confused. Luckily a Macomb county sheriff located this man's son in Wisconsin and the man returned home safely.

However, for a few frantic hours, his family in Wisconsin had no idea if he was lost, in an accident, or worse.

Just imagine if this system was in place last year. Maybe a motorist or a police officer would have seen this man's car driving along the expressway and got him assistance before he made it all the way to Michigan.

Situations like these happen across America--and it is important that we fund programs like the National Silver Alert act to properly locate our seniors who have gone missing.

By creating a national communications network to assist in efforts to locate missing senior citizens, we are improving the likelihood that they remain free of harm.

As a cosponsor of the National Silver Alert Act, I ask my colleagues to join me in protecting our senior citizens and implementing this very important program.

Madam Speaker, it is difficult to believe that it has been 7 years since that horrific day of September 11, 2001. It is important that today every American take time to pause and reflect upon those who we lost on that day and those whose heroism and bravery vividly showed the indomitable American spirit.

For the last 7 years our Nation has been at war against an enemy that hides in the shadows and preys upon the innocent. An enemy that does not value life or freedom. But that enemy has found that the will of the American people is impossible to defeat. That the vigilance and dedication of those in law enforcement who protect our communities is unending. That the bravery and commitment to the cause of freedom of the American Armed Forces is unmatched in the world.

So on this solemn day it is appropriate to mourn those who were lost. To say a prayer for their memory and for their families. And to give thanks to those who so bravely continue to protect our freedom. May God continue to bless this great Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation, which will put a definite end to this Mexican truck pilot program. Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, this program never should have begun in the first place.

Before coming to Congress, I served for 8 years as the Michigan Secretary of State, with a principal responsibility as the chief motor vehicle administrator, and I was also the Chairman of the Traffic Safety Commission. I was responsible for all the licensing in the State, including of commercial drivers and hazardous material endorsements. Given my background I had immediate concerns about how the Department of Transportation's pilot program might compromise the safety of our roads.

In Mexico, licensing requirements are very poor and fraud in their system runs rampant. In fact, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee heard in testimony from the Department of Transportation's Inspector General that 1 in 5 Mexican driving records contained an error of some kind. If we had a 20 percent error rate in the United States, we would consider it a crisis.

There are also concerns, about the insurance provisions of this program. American trucks must carry expensive insurance policies in the event they are in an accident. What happens if a Mexican truck has an accident somewhere in the U.S.? Good luck to the victims of that accident who will try to collect on damages from a company down in Mexico.

Mexican drivers are allowed to work far longer hours than American workers, resulting in widespread drug use in the profession. Presently, there is no system under which secure testing could take place so to ensure that the drivers coming into our country are drug free.

In response to these concerns, the Congress passed language in the Iraq War supplemental requiring the Department of Transportation to only conduct a pilot program under certain conditions. Subsequently, the House, by a vote of 411-3, the Safe American Roads Act, which placed additional restrictions on these Mexican trucks coming into the country.

Unfortunately, the Department of Transportation has not taken the hint and continues to promote this program without addressing the public's safety concerns about this program.

Hopefully, this legislation will make it clear that Congress does not want this program to continue and that it should be terminated.

Mr. Speaker, the campaign of Barack Obama cannot refute Governor Sarah Palin's record of change and reform as Governor of Alaska. She took on the ``Old Boy Network'' in Alaska and she won. She took on corruption throughout State government and rooted it out. She took on Big Oil and made it serve the interests of her State. She is a true agent of change.

So now the Obama campaign has decided that the way to get at Sarah Palin is through personal attacks and sexist insults. Yesterday, the Associated Press quoted the following: `` `You can put lipstick on a pig,' Obama said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin's joke. `It's still a pig.' ''

Well, Mr. Speaker, Senator Obama might find such jokes funny, but women will only find them insulting. American women also understand that if this is the kind of change that Senator Obama is offering to America, it is really no change at all. Senator Obama owes Governor Palin and the women of America an apology.

Mr. Speaker, over the past 2 weeks, we have seen both parties' commitment to change on full display.

Barack Obama had the opportunity to make an historic choice and choose Hillary Clinton to join his ticket. But, oh, no. The ``Old Boy Network'' won out and Senator Obama went back on his commitment to change and reform by choosing a Senator who has been in Washington for over three decades.

Women understand this because we have seen it before. Sometimes no matter how hard you fight or how much

support you have, someone will always stand in your way, regardless of paying lip service.

Contrast that with the choice made by Senator John McCain. He chose a strong woman to join with him to bring real change to Washington. From the PTA to the city council to the mayor of Wassilla to the Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin has broken down the Old Boy Network, rooted out corruption, cut taxes, reduced spending, and brought real change to government. And now we see Senator Obama and his Democratic allies trying to tear her down and destroy another strong woman.

But the women of America will not be fooled and they will not be held back any longer. John McCain and Sarah Palin will bring change and reform to Washington and will finally shatter that seemingly unbreakable glass ceiling.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in very strong support of this legislation which will ensure that the Federal Government is simply able to meet the commitments that we have already made to both the States and the American people. Specifically, this bill will simply return the $8 billion to the highway trust fund that was taken from it several years ago.

And with rising construction costs and fuel receipts due to Americans driving less, the trust fund is projected to be unable to meet the funding that has been guaranteed to the Departments of Transportation all across our country. These agencies draw up their plans years in advance, and failure by the Federal Government to provide that funding at the very last minute I think is simply irresponsible.

As important as it is to point out why we should pass this legislation, I think we must also be very cognizant of the consequences for failing to act.

In my State of Michigan alone, failure to shore up the trust fund will mean a 34 percent cut in funding, money that the State of Michigan is already counting on. Michigan's Federal highway dollars will be cut actually by $245 million, and would result in a loss of 8,500 jobs, and that is in a State that has the highest unemployment in the Nation already at 8.5 percent.

The impact of this nationally would rival, I think, the impact of the economic downturn that we are already experiencing. Failure to pass this bill would effectively negate any positive impact that came out of the economic stimulus package that this Congress has already passed.

This vote, as well, Madam Speaker, comes at a unique time in history when you have other nations like China and India who understand how important it is for them to invest in their infrastructure. We in the United States cannot afford to be economically disadvantaged as well.

So we have a choice before us. We can vote ``yes'' and make sure that we simply try to keep pace; or we can vote ``no'' and put people out of work, stop construction projects all across the country and put America at a further disadvantage in the global economy.

I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation and vote ``yes.''

Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made in order under the rule.

Madam Chairman, my amendment is very simple, very straightforward. I will just take a few minutes to explain it. But it deals with the issue of how, as our Nation undertakes critical bridge reconstruction, that we make sure to use the very newest and the best technology available in our construction methods.

Specifically, I am talking about carbon fiber, which is a very, very lightweight material. It is sturdier. It is less susceptible to corrosion, and it actually is more durable than steel.

Right now we use steel rerods in bridge construction, and regular steel rerods can take up to 60,000 pounds per square inch. But carbon fiber rods, like this one that I hold in my hand, can actually take up to 240,000 pounds per square inch. That makes it actually four to five times stronger than steel. As well, it is 8 times lighter than steel, making it very much, much easier to transport and install as well.

Also, steel fatigues from the pressure of repetitive use, and carbon fiber does not. By using carbon fiber, in addition to some of the new strength concretes that are out there, I think we could conceivably build a 100-year sustainable structure.

In my home State of Michigan, we have already built one bridge using carbon fiber technology, and we are planning on building and reconstruction of three more bridges during the next 2 years.

Madam Chairman, my amendment directs the Secretary of Transportation to study the cost benefits of using carbon fiber composite materials and that technology. And then it would require the findings of the study to be returned to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, as well as to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee within 180 days of the bill that we are discussing tonight, within 180 days of the enactment of this bill. This would give Congress adequate time to review those findings and to determine if it would be appropriate to incorporate any action related to the findings into next year's highway reauthorization bill.

So I would ask my colleagues to support this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I certainly appreciate the chairman's words.

And in Michigan we like to think we are on the leading edge of all kinds of technology. And carbon fiber is one thing, but as the chairman knows, we also have the first mile of concrete ever laid in the United States, in the city limits of Detroit, about Six Mile Road. So we like to think of ourselves as ahead of the curve.

But I will close by saying that I certainly enjoy serving on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. And one of the principal reasons I enjoy the work so much is because of the leadership and the vision of our chairman. He is certainly internationally recognized as a leader on transportation and infrastructure issues, as well as our ranking member. And so I appreciate that.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I appreciate the gentleman yielding the time.

Mr. Speaker, as was mentioned, actually for 8 years I had the distinct honor and privilege really to serve as Michigan's Secretary of State. And in that role, a principal responsibility of mine was to serve as the State's chief elections officer. And I was blessed with an absolutely outstanding professional staff that helped to ensure that not only were our elections open, free and fair, but also that everyone in Michigan who was eligible and properly registered to vote had an opportunity to vote and that every one of those votes was counted.

After the 2000 election, naturally, the Ford-Carter Commission on National Election Reform cited Michigan's Qualified Voter File, a file that we built in Michigan, as a national model,

a attribute to Michigan's well-run elections. That report also cited the need for each State to establish a uniform voting system, a process that we had already been studying in Michigan. We were prepared with a uniform voting plan as soon as this Congress passed the HAVA Act, the Help America Vote Act.

And as a result, today Michigan has an optical scan uniform voting system, and we have experienced little or no problems with that system. And this was due to careful, long-term planning and professional work by our State elections bureau working in partnership with local election clerks.

And, Mr. Speaker, the bill that we are considering today will provide Federal grants for States to do contingency planning for this year's election. Well, here is our Michigan contingency plan, a plan that I believe is also in place right now by the huge overwhelming majority of the States in our Nation. We require that optical scan ballots be printed for 100 percent of all registered voters. If an optical scan precinct tabulator malfunctions on Election Day, the clerks allow voters to continue, and then they have voters deposit their ballots in the auxiliary bin of the ballot box which they can count later. Plan complete, at no cost to the Federal taxpayers. And as I understand it, this bill actually has a cost associated with it of I believe $75 million.

The proponents of this bill note that they have had some support of the National Council of State Legislatures as well as the National Association of County Officials. And they cite that as good reasons to support this legislation. Well, I would respectfully point out that these officials have no responsibility in the actual administering of elections. And I would note that the National Association of Secretaries of State, of which I was proud to be a member, and now I'm an honorary member, and also the NASS-ED, which is the association of State elections directors, neither of those two national election associations are up here on Capitol Hill advocating for this legislation.

And these are the two groups, as I say, which are totally made up of those who are responsible for the administration of elections in our Nation, and those who also do the contingency planning. If those responsible, Mr. Speaker, for planning and administering elections are not asking for this bill, I would ask why is it being offered?

I would urge my colleagues to defeat this needless bill and allow our elections officials across our Nation to continue their diligent work in preparing for this fall's election.

Mr. Speaker, in spite of the fact that the American people have been begging, literally begging this Congress to act on the energy crisis, all we've heard from the majority are excuses for why we cannot access our own domestic supplies of energy. They say that we cannot drill in the ANWR because it will adversely affect the caribou. This despite the fact that the caribou have literally flourished along the north slope of Alaska since the introduction of the pipeline.

They say we cannot drill offshore because of environmental threats. This despite the fact that offshore platforms in the Gulf of Mexico have survived both Hurricanes Katrina and Rita with very limited or no environmental damage.

The majority continues to offer excuse after excuse but offers nothing to the American consumers who want some relief at the pump. With gas prices crashing through $4 per gallon

now and rising at an alarming rate, the time for excuses is over. It is time for action. Many of us saw this coming and have tried to expand supply here at home.

It is time for the majority to recognize this fact and show more concern for the American consumers than for the caribou.

Madam Speaker, as we approach the Fourth of July holiday, many Americans who would use this long weekend to vacation or to perhaps spend time with their family will have to weigh their options as they struggle with gas prices that have risen to over $4 a gallon. As the worldwide demand for oil has contributed to the rise in prices that affects families all across America, we have actually restricted our supply here at home. America, unfortunately, has become more dependent than ever on more expensive foreign sources of energy, and not taking advantage of our own energy sources is economic suicide.

That is why I am cosponsoring the No More Excuses Energy Act. It would lift the moratorium on exploring for oil on the Outer Continental Shelf, open up the ANWR in Alaska for natural gas exploration and oil exploration, and it would also provide incentives to build more refineries right here at home.

This legislation would provide incentives and tax credits to assist in researching and in using alternative forms of energy like wind power and nuclear energies. This commonsense approach to energy can help our Nation meet the challenges that we face in the future and can hold down the costs to consumers.

It is time to get to work.

I certainly appreciate the gentleman yielding time to me.

This rule allows us to proceed, and I wish to speak in strong support of the underlying bill, and I rise in very strong support of H.R. 2176, which is sponsored by Mr. Bart Stupak of Michigan and cosponsored by myself and also the companion bill, H.R. 4115, sponsored by Mr. Dingell, because these bills impact only three congressional districts in this House, only three, period. And those districts are Mr. Stupak's and my district and Mr. Dingell's.

These bills are offered in the spirit of bipartisanship, and they are offered to settle a land claim that has existed in our State of Michigan, actually, for well over 100 years, about 150 years, when the State literally stole land from the Indians.

And after the Indians spent decades seeking justice, the land claim settlement was negotiated by former Governor John Engler, and here is what he had to say about it, Mr. Speaker.

He said: ``As Governor of Michigan, it was my duty to negotiate the land settlement agreements between the State of Michigan and Bay Mills and the Sault Tribe in 2002 . . . In December of 2002, I signed the agreement with the Sault Tribe. I am proud that every concerned party involved in this settlement supports this agreement. This is a true example of a State and the Tribes promoting cooperation rather than conflict.''

I think it is important to note that these bills are supported by every elected official who represents the City of Port Huron, including the current Governor, Jennifer Granholm, both United States Senators, myself, the State senator there, the State representatives, all of the county commissioners, the entire city council, and most importantly, the citizens themselves who voted ``yes'' on a city-wide referendum.

It is supported by civic groups. It is supported by educational leaders, by labor leaders like the UAW, by every law enforcement officer in the county, including the county sheriff, the county prosecutor, and the police chiefs.

It is about fairness and opportunity for one of the most economically distressed areas in the Nation, where the current unemployment rate, by best estimates, is somewhere between 14 to 16 percent.

And it has been very unfortunate, in my opinion, that the opponents have been so untruthful about their opposition to these bills.

For instance, they say that it is precedent setting, and yet the truth is in this bill. In section 3(b), the bill states the following: ``The provisions contained in the Settlement of Land Claim are unique and shall not be considered precedent for any future agreement between any tribe and State.''

The opponents also say that it allows for off-reservation gaming. Yet the truth is in section 2(a)(2) of the bill. It states: ``The alternative lands shall become part of the Community's reservation immediately upon attaining trust status.''

And they also say it violates a 2004 Michigan referendum.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

The truth is that it actually, the referendum--and as a former Secretary of State, I understand what ballot language actually says--it says, ``Specify that voter approval requirement does not apply to Indian Tribal gaming.''

So clearly, most of the opposition, Mr. Speaker, to these bills comes from those who already have theirs, and they don't want anybody else to have it.

They don't want competition. And I think that is un-American. This bill is about fairness and opportunity for an area that desperately needs it. It is about justice.

The city of Port Huron is home to the Blue Water Bridge, which is the second busiest commercial artery on the Northern Tier. It is the only international crossing where there is a gaming facility on the Canadian side and there is not one on the U.S. side. And if you were a very good golfer--maybe not me, but a good golfer--you could hit a golf ball and hit that Canadian casino facility right now where 80 percent of the revenues comes from America. Those are U.S. dollars and U.S. jobs that are being sent right across the river.

I urge my colleagues to be fair.

I thank the gentleman, my distinguished colleague from Alaska, for yielding and for his complimentary remarks.

Mr. Speaker, this issue has been waiting for a congressional vote for many, many years but not for as long as our Nation's history of sometimes mistreating Native Americans.

This case settles a land claim from over 100 years ago, at a time when our country treated Native Americans terribly and at a time when the State of Michigan, as has been said, literally stole this land from the Indians.

Throughout the decades that followed, Native Americans sought justice. Finally, former Michigan Governor John Engler negotiated a settlement that was agreed to by everyone involved. Let me just read briefly a section from his letter.

``As Governor of Michigan, it was my duty to negotiate the land settlement agreements between the State of Michigan and Bay Mills and the Sault Tribe in 2002 . . . I am proud that every concerned party involved in this settlement supports this agreement. This is a true example of a State and the tribes promoting cooperation rather than conflict.''

This land claim settlement is unique to Michigan, and it does not impact any other congressional district other than the three congressional districts of the people who are supporting it here who have spoken today, as have been mentioned. That is myself, Mr. Stupak, and Mr. Dingell. I would point out that, in a time of hyper partisanship, this is a wonderful example, I believe, of bipartisanship.

I would note that much of the opposition to this bill comes from Members of Congress who already have gaming in their districts, districts like Las Vegas or like the city of Detroit, and that their opposition is not based on ideology but on, rather, their not wanting any honest competition. I reject this on its face because I believe in the free market, and I believe in free market principles.

Some have said that this is stuffing a tribal land claim down the throat of a community that doesn't welcome it. Actually, the opposite is true. This legislation is supported by every elected official who represents the city of Port Huron in any capacity and at any level of government. As has been mentioned, there is the former Governor, John Engler; the current Governor, Jennifer Granholm; both United States Senators; myself, as a Member in the U.S. House here; the State senator; the State representatives; the county commissioners, and the entire city council.

Additionally, it has the support of civic groups, of business groups like the Chamber of Commerce, of educational leaders, and of labor unions like the UAW.

For those who might be concerned about what law enforcement thinks, we have letters here of support from the county sheriff, from the county prosecutor and from all of the police chiefs. Most importantly, it has the support of the citizens of the city, as evidenced by a citywide referendum vote in support.

The opponents of this legislation have said, first of all, that they don't want any competition. Therefore, they hope this bill will die. They have said, even though their communities and their districts have economic development, they need to protect that and that the citizens-- the good Americans of a community like mine--cannot have fairness or economic opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, this is un-American, and I would hope that my fair- minded colleagues would reject that out of hand.

The opponents of this have also stated several outright untruths about this bill. They say that this bill will set a precedent, and that is false. In fact, in section 3(b) of this bill, it states the following: ``The provisions contained in the Settlement of Land Claim are unique and shall not be considered precedent for any future agreement between any tribe and State.''

The opponents also say that this bill will allow for off-reservation gaming. This is also false. In fact, section 2(a)(2) of the bill states the following: ``The alternative lands shall become part of the community's reservation immediately upon attaining trust status.''

In fact, this site was not reservation shopping, as Mr. Stupak has pointed out. It was specifically chosen because it is the only community with an international border crossing where there is already casino gaming on one side and not on the U.S. side.

They have also said that this legislation violates the process under the National Environmental Policy Act, also known as NEPA. Yet the legislation makes it very, very clear that the land cannot be taken into trust until it is determined that the land complies with NEPA.

They also say that this bill would violate the will of the people of Michigan because of a referendum that was passed in 2004, which required statewide voter approval for any expansion of gaming. This is completely false. As a former Secretary of State, I know a little bit about ballot language, and this is what the ballot language actually says: ``Specify that voter approval requirement does not apply to Indian tribal gaming,'' which is exactly what this bill does.

I would offer as proof of this that, since the referendum passed in Michigan, several tribal casinos that are operated by some of the richest tribal opponents of this bill have actually opened facilities. Now, apparently, they didn't violate the will of the voters as long as they could make money. Yet they want to stop our communities, again, from fair competition. I would say please spare me the righteous indignation.

Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that my beautiful State of Michigan, that our beautiful State of Michigan, is suffering terrible, terrible economic challenges. We have the highest unemployment in the Nation. We have the lowest personal income growth in the Nation. We have the highest foreclosure rate in the Nation. We have the largest exodus of our young people. Our population is moving to other States to seek economic opportunity.

The city of Port Huron, that I represent, actually has one of the highest unemployment rates, not only in the State but in the entire Nation.

By the best estimates right now, it's anywhere from 14 to 16 percent. Some have said it could be even higher. And yet we try to pay our taxes. We educate our children. We always legitimately think of ourselves as patriotic Americans. We are proud, and we have never asked for a handout, and today we are only asking for Congress to ratify the compacts of our Governors so that we can help ourselves.

For those who think that a vote today against this bill will stop gaming in this community, let me just point out this photo here behind me, which is of a Canadian casino, which is about 282 yards away. Now, a good golfer, not me, but a good golfer could hit this Canadian casino. It's right across the St. Clair River, a short trip over the Blue Water Bridge, and about 80 percent of all of their revenues comes from American citizens. Mr. Speaker, I would say that those dollars should be spent in an American facility to help Americans get jobs.

This bill is all about fairness and opportunity, and I would urge my colleagues to vote ``yes''; ``yes'' for private property rights, ``yes'' for the rights of States to negotiate in good faith and for the good of their State, and ``yes'' for Americans to have fairness and opportunity to compete with our wonderful Canadian neighbors for jobs in a community where the jobs are desperately needed.

And I would just close on a note: I have heard that there is a number of family values-type groups who are opposed to this. Let me just show you an example of a recent mailing ostensibly from a group called Michigan Family Alert.

This is a so-called Michigan Family Alert, and, of course, it's saying that they are opposed to these casinos, and, if you're a family values person, you had better to be opposed too. And yet from Business Week what they have said is: ``As it turns out, Gambling Watch is a tiny operation financed by MGM Mirage, one of the world's largest gaming companies, locked in a bitter dispute with two Native American Indian tribes that hope to open casinos in Michigan. The Las Vegas company inaugurated a new $800 million casino in downtown Detroit in October and is not in the mood for any competition.''

And I close on that note.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1333, Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Support Act of 2007.

The Civil Air Patrol is comprised completely of volunteers who provide air and ground support for disaster relief, conducts search and rescue missions, perform counter drug missions and aerial damage assessment.

Shortly after being established on December 1, 1941, our Nation was drawn into World War II with the attack at Pearl Harbor. And the Civil Air Patrol began its vital mission patrolling the skies over our great Nation.

Although originally intended to perform only reconnaissance missions, the Civil Air Patrol found themselves carrying depth charges and bombs as the deadly German U-boats attacked U.S. shipping in the Atlantic.

During the war the Civil Air Patrol found 173 German submarines, hitting 10, and sinking 2 of them.

A German commander later confirmed that coastal U-boat operations were withdrawn from the United States ``because of those damned little red and yellow airplanes'' of the Civil Air Patrol.

From this early beginning, the Civil Air Patrol established itself as a provider of critical support in times of crisis and emergency.

Whether the danger comes from hurricanes, downed or missing aircraft, wildfires or other disasters, the Civil Air Patrol can always be counted on to provide the support our Nation needs.

Even today, the Civil Air Patrol continues to serve as a vital source of aerial reconnaissance.

The Midwest continues to be ravaged by flooding and broken levees, and our Civil Air Patrol is working with local first responders, providing digital photographs of flooded areas. These images have been used to assess the extent of the floods and the damage they caused.

In my home State of Michigan, the Civil Air Patrol flies missions from the Selfridge Air National Guard Base where they supported the National Weather Service in the aftermath of tornados and heavy storms last fall.

Shortly after the attack on 9/11, the Civil Air Patrol was the first in the skies over Ground Zero, and assisted in the relief efforts.

So I believe that it is only fitting that we examine using the Civil Air Patrol for Homeland Security Missions as they have already demonstrated their capabilities to provide aerial support during emergencies around the Nation.

I look forward to viewing the final Government Accountability Office, GAO, report and examining the ways that the Civil Air Patrol can assist the Department of Homeland Security, whether that includes assisting in our border security efforts, or utilizing their search-and-rescue capabilities in the aftermath of an act of terrorism or natural disaster.

These brave men and women volunteer their time and deserve our gratitude for the vital work that furthers the security of this great Nation.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth yesterday shocked Michigan when it released its unemployment figures. Michigan's unemployment rate has risen from 6.9 percent in April to 8.5 percent in May. This is the highest rate in our State since October of 1992. Regrettably, we are now one month away from recording our eighth straight year of payroll job losses.

It is in this context that my constituents are hearing the news that Congress is debating providing additional unemployment benefits which are desperately needed by too many working families in my State. Last week this House passed H.R. 5749, the Emergency Extended Unemployment Compensation Act, with nearly \2/3\ of the Members of the House voting in favor. This bill would provide an additional 13 weeks of unemployment benefits to unemployed workers in every State. Unemployed workers in States with exceptionally high unemployment rates, like Michigan, would receive an additional 13 weeks of benefits beyond that. Unfortunately, the provision granting workers in States like Michigan an additional 13 weeks of benefits, which received very strong bipartisan support in the House just last week, is not included in this supplemental appropriations bill.

The unemployment benefits provision in this supplemental provides just 13 additional weeks for every State. It does not provide any extra help for States that need it the most. States like Michigan where the unemployed are having great difficulty finding work because there are so few jobs to be had. Workers have little opportunity to move to other areas to find work because they can't sell their homes, and they are having difficulty driving far distances to try and find a new job because of the high cost of gas. Michigan, with the worst unemployment rate in the Nation, needs extra help. This supplemental does not provide it.

I will be supporting both sections of the supplemental. It provides equipment and pay for our troops in harm's way and educational benefits for them when they return home. And the level of aid to the unemployed all across the country is a good start. However, I am disappointed we have not provided the much needed extra assistance to those who need it most. We must continue to work to help the chronically unemployed to get that additional safety net that will help support countless families in Michigan.