Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, due to a family emergency I was not in attendance in the House between June 12th and June 14th, and during that time I missed a number of roll call votes.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall votes 250 through 262, 270, 273, 283, 286 and 287, and I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall votes 263 through 269, 271, 272, 274 through 282, 284 and 285.

I ask unanimous consent that this be entered into the Record in the appropriate place.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution declares to the world the resolve of America to fight and to win the global war on terror, including in its central front in Iraq.

We have heard a great deal during this debate about mistakes that may have been made in the lead up to the war and during its execution, and they may be somewhat correct.

But the facts that cannot be debated are that Saddam Hussein had brutally repressed his own people, that he had used chemical weapons against his own people, that he had sanctioned the rape and murder of his own citizens with rape rooms and mass graves standing as a testament to that fact, that he had harbored terrorists within his borders and supported terrorist organizations throughout the region and the entire world, that he defied the world continually by violating 17 United Nations Security Council resolutions. Saddam Hussein was a threat to world peace and security, and it was a correct decision to go in and remove him from power.

And now we must complete the mission to bring freedom to the Iraqi people. And freedom is taking root. We have seen recently the completion of the freely elected Iraqi unity government serving under a Constitution written by the Iraqi people and approved by the Iraqi people. And last week American forces, with the cooperation of Iraqi citizens and security forces, eliminated al Zarqawi, the terrorist leader. And according to the Iraqi national security advisor, the elimination of Zarqawi has delivered his government, he said, a huge treasure of information on the terrorist operation. And we have already seen the results with raids across Iraq where hundreds of terrorists have been killed or captured. The Iraqi national security advisor also said that he thought the security situation in the country was improving enough to allow a large number of U.S. forces to leave Iraq by the end of this year.

Mr. Speaker, everyone in this House, every American, we all want our troops to come home. Lord knows our troops have performed brilliantly and have sacrificed greatly, as American soldiers have done throughout our history when defending our freedom. But they do not want to come home before their mission is complete.

And simply put, you cannot say that you support the troops without allowing them to complete their mission.

This resolution declares the United States is committed to the completion

of that mission to create a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq.

I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present for votes on June 6, 2006, I would have voted ``yes'' on roll call votes numbered 223, 224, 225, and 226.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly all know that American consumers are facing an energy crisis. The high cost of energy to heat and power our homes and to run our automobiles is sapping family budgets across the Nation, and hurting the bottom line of businesses across the Nation as well. We need to do more to make our Nation energy independent and to reduce energy costs for our consumers. We need to focus on alternatives to oil and other fossil fuels as well by turning to alternatives like ethanol or biodiesel or nuclear power, solar, wind power.

Just as it is wise to diversify your economic portfolio, we must diversify our energy options, and we need to do more to incentivize the production and distribution and use of alternative sources of energy. And I am confident that we will, we can.

But while we work toward alternatives, we must also deal with the reality of the current situation. We have too few refineries, and those we do have are in areas that are vulnerable to natural disasters such as the entire world recognized last year with Hurricane Katrina.

We have not built a new refinery in America since the 1970s. In that time, of course, demand for gasoline has absolutely skyrocketed. The lack of new refineries limits the supply of gas at a time of high demand and it drives up costs for our consumers.

Too many on the other side of this debate look solely at conservation or alternatives, and they ignore the law of supply and demand. The brutal reality is that the greatest victims of this approach are the lowest income Americans who are dependent on older, less fuel-efficient vehicles. But they need help.

As well, energy security equals national security and that fundamental caveat needs to be the impetus for this debate today. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation that will serve as a bridge to a more energy-independent America.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Marshall) for offering this amendment, which I am proud to cosponsor.

Very simply, Mr. Chairman, this amendment would increase funding for the Employment Eligibility Verification Program. It is a very important program. It requires employers to verify the employment eligibility and identity documents presented to the employer and record the document information.

This program is a very important piece in our efforts to get control of our borders. One of the primary reasons so many immigrants, of course, come here illegally is to find work. That incentive only exists if jobs are available.

The vast majority of businesses do want to comply with the law and hire only those in the country legally. But because of a lack of a reliable verification system, they are unable to be certain that those that they seek to hire are actually here legally.

There are still other businesses that knowingly break the law in order to exploit cheap labor, and that has to be stopped. We are a Nation of laws, and the American people expect those laws to be followed. They have had enough of the current broken system, and we need to take action to ensure that only those that are in our country legally are able to find work.

This program is key to ensuring that businesses are complying with the labor and immigration laws of our Nation. The President has requested $110 million for this program in his fiscal year 2007 budget proposal.

As it stands, the legislation only provides for $90 million. And while I certainly understand and appreciate the chairman and the committee having very, very difficult decisions to make, I do believe the funding for this program is one of the most important things that we can do to cut down on

the flood of immigrants who are here illegally crossing our border.

Mr. Chairman, I think it is absolutely essential that we get control of our borders, and increased funding for employment eligibility verification will help us to do this.

Mr. Speaker, let me take you back to another time, 1986, and at that time, America had a problem with illegal immigration. They said we had about 3 million illegals here in the country. And in that debate, many people said that we needed to provide amnesty to those who were working here because we couldn't deport all of them and our country needed the labor.

In exchange for granting amnesty, Congress and the American people were promised that the Federal Government would vigorously enforce our border. The illegal aliens got amnesty all right, and many became citizens, even though they violated the law to get here. But the Federal Government did not secure our border. The results of that action? An estimated 12 million more illegal aliens in our country today.

Some are again calling for amnesty with a promise for stronger border controls. But the American people are not buying it again, and neither is a majority of this House. The American people and a majority of this House are demanding border security first.

And as the Who said, ``We won't be fooled again!''

No amnesty.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. I thank all of the members of the Rules Committee for bringing the rule to the floor today.

As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud of the bill that we have brought to the floor here today, and I certainly want to congratulate and thank Chairman Duncan Hunter as well for his outstanding leadership and his dedication to a strong national defense and particularly to our troops.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most important parts of this bill, I think, is that we do recognize that the most important asset in our entire arsenal is really not our incredible weapons or vehicles or ships, it is the men and women who bravely wear the uniform. That is why this bill has put such a strong focus once again on supporting our troops.

The bill will provide for an across-the-board increase of 2.7 percent in the base pay for our troops, as has been mentioned numerous times already. It blocks increases in fees for those who are enrolled in TRICARE prime and standard.

It also allows full TRICARE coverage for select Reserve personnel. It provides enhanced pharmacy services for nearly every military beneficiary. In addition, we forcefully attack the persistent problem of improvised explosive devices, or IEDs as they are commonly called, which have caused so many terrible problems for our troops.

The enemy knows that they cannot defeat our forces on the battlefield, so they are resorting to planting bombs along the roadside. This bill authorizes over $100 million for radio signal jamming devices to prevent the detonation of IEDs.

It also provides for another $100 million for 10 or more surveillance aircraft to patrol those areas where the IED activity is most deadly, and we must do certainly more to protect our troops from IEDs so that we can limit the amount, the number of casualties in battle. But in addition we need to learn better really how to defeat these terrible weapons, because, guess what, they could soon be finding their way to our streets here within our own borders in America.

The American people and our troops can rest assured that we understand the problem of IEDs, and with this bill, again, we are taking very forceful action to defeat them.

When we take the oath of office, we swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States, whose preamble actually requires for us to provide for the national defense. This bill not only allows us to live up to our constitutional responsibilities to provide for that defense, it ensures that our Armed Forces will remain the best trained, the best equipped and the most lethal fighting force the world has ever known.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in very strong opposition to this amendment. I voted against this amendment in the House Armed Services Committee just last week where it was overwhelmingly defeated, and I intend to vote against it today as well.

The health care professionals who serve our brave men and women in uniform in the military health system are dedicated to preserving life, and I have visited many military hospitals and witnessed the heroic efforts to preserve the lives of those wounded in battle, and we honor their service, we honor their dedication.

This amendment would allow these great lifesaving medical facilities to be used as abortion clinics, and abortion is not the mission of the military health system. The mission is to save lives, not destroy innocent human lives.

Mr. Chairman, I applaud the great service and the sacrifice of the dedicated health care professionals serving our military. These men and women face great challenges in healing those who have been wounded in battle, and through their efforts we have seen dramatic drops in the number of troops who die from these wounds. Their efforts have truly been heroic.

Let them continue to focus on saving the lives of our men and women in uniform, and not taking the most innocent of human lives.

I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 627) congratulating Chris Carpenter on being named the Cy Young Award winner for the National League for the 2005 Major League Baseball season.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 627 offered by the distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Carnahan).

This resolution would congratulate Chris Carpenter on being named the Cy Young Award winner for the National League in 2005.

After missing the 2003 season while rehabilitating his injured shoulder, Chris Carpenter made a miraculous recovery to win the 2005 Cy Young Award. He went 21-5 with a 2.83 ERA for the St. Louis Cardinals, receiving 19 of 32 first place votes and finishing with 132 points in balloting by the Baseball Writers Association of America.

Carpenter began his career with Toronto. After compiling a 49-50 record in his first six seasons, Carpenter had surgery in September of 2002 to repair a tear in his pitching shoulder and the Blue Jays contemplated sending him back to the minors. He refused the assignment and chose to become a free agent before signing with St. Louis.

Finally healthy in 2004, Carpenter went 15-5 with a 3.45 ERA to earn National League's comeback player of the year honors from his peers. In 2005, Carpenter won 13 straight decisions from June 14 through September 8, helping the Cardinals to the best record in baseball at 100 wins and 62 losses. He struck out 213 batters and got the best of several aces around the league.

I would urge all Members to come together and honor the perseverance and dedication of Chris Carpenter, the winner of one of Major League Baseball's most prestigious awards, by adopting House Resolution 627.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would urge all Members to support the adoption of House Resolution 627. I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, during this time of conflict, we have seen so many examples of heroism exhibited by the men and women of our armed services.

Every day these great heroes are on the front line of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and throughout the entire world, defending our liberty and freedom and democracy. And most Americans, thank goodness, support their efforts and their mission; and the vast majority honor their service and sacrifice.

But some do not and have expressed their objections in a variety of ways that have been articulated on this floor today. Some are protesting the Congress or the President, and that is fine because we are the policy-makers and we are the correct targets for indicating support or opposition to the war.

But some have taken their objections to places where they simply do not belong. Many have begun to protest our fallen heroes as they are being laid to rest by their loved ones. Groups like the Patriot Guard, God bless them, have stood up and shielded families from this obscene type of protest, but we need to do more.

No fallen soldier, sailor, airman or marine's family should ever be subjected to such trauma at a time of such great grief. Instead, our fallen heroes should be afforded the honor and dignity befitting their sacrifice.

I urge my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation.

Mr. Chairman, whatever the merits of the recent controversy surrounding the proposed acquisition of American port terminals by Dubai Ports World, one very good thing came out of that controversy, and that was an enhanced focus on the needs to better defend America's ports.

We recognize that the incredible amount of cargo that passes through our ports could serve as an entry point to be used by terrorists to smuggle in weapons to harm Americans. Of particular concern are nuclear or radiological substances or devices.

During the DP World debate, many came to the erroneous conclusion that we were actually outsourcing port security. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Let me just tell you about a company in my district called Burtek. This is an American company and American workers who are doing great work to enhance our port security.

Burtek is producing something called Mobile Radiation Portal Monitors, the first of which they delivered to the Customs and Border Protection Agency just last week. These devices will be placed at our ports and allow CBP to scan containers quickly and efficiently for any radioactive cargo.

An American company and skilled American workers supplying a very important device to American security personnel to protect America's ports. We are not outsourcing this job to anyone, Mr. Chairman, and the great workers of my district are doing their part to defend our Nation.

I urge my colleagues to support this very important legislation and to continue the effort to better secure our Nation's ports.

Mr. Speaker, the situation at our porous borders is absolutely in a state of emergency. We are all hearing this message from our constituents in a variety of ways. This morning, I wanted to share a very clear message that I received from one of my constituents.

A constituent of mine actually sent me this brick in the mail. On this brick it says, ``Since the U.S. Government seems to be struggling with the illegal immigration problem, I thought I would send you the means to begin solving the problem. This brick is sent to support stronger border security.''

Mr. Speaker, the American people are demanding action. Last December, this House passed a very good border security bill that would in fact put this brick to very good use in building a security fence on our southern border.

The debate in the other body is now turning toward amnesty for those who have come here illegally, and that is the wrong direction for America. We cannot offer amnesty or expanded opportunities for guest workers until we deal with the problem at hand.

I urge the U.S. Senate to listen to the people, to look at the bill that was passed by this House in December and, as this brick says, support stronger border security.

Madam Speaker, as a member of the House Democracy Assistance Commission, I was honored this past week to host a delegation of Parliamentarians from the Republic of Macedonia, in my home State of Michigan.

The Macedonia delegation was immersed in many factors important to the development of a democratic society. They visited our State capitol, as well as visiting one of our major daily newspapers, understanding that a free press is critical to a thriving democracy.

They met with State elections officials to talk about how to run free and fair elections, a fundamental caveat of a thriving democracy. They visited the University of Michigan's famed Center for Russian and Eastern European Studies. They visited our courts to get a better understanding of our system of justice, and we enjoyed each other's fellowship at a banquet held in their honor at our local Macedonian cultural center.

This week we welcome them to Washington D.C. The Republic of Macedonia is a great emerging democracy, and its leaders are committed to the cause of freedom and liberty for every individual.

Da zivee slobodna, Makedonia.

Long live freedom and democracy in Macedonia.

Mr. Speaker, this week the Senate is continuing to debate immigration reform which, of course, is badly needed.

I would urge the Senate to look to the legislation that was passed by this House in December when crafting their legislation. America needs the House immigration and border security bill to protect our borders.

The legislation that we passed ends the catch-and-release program, it gets tough on repeat offenders, promotes cooperation amongst local law enforcement as well, and it installs requirements to ensure that those who are here illegally in our country do not take jobs from American citizens.

Some say that these illegals just take the jobs that Americans won't do, but I received a letter just the other day from one of my constituents who urged me to push for tougher immigration laws because he can't find work as a drywaller because of illegal foreign workers.

This is considered a very good job from where I come from, the type of job that has built our middle class.

Now we hear the Senate has cut a deal on providing amnesty for some illegal aliens, and I would have a message for the distinguished Senators on the other side of this building: amnesty has no chance of passage in this House. Look to the House bill if you want to see real immigration reform.

Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to thank the gentleman for yielding. I wish to associate myself with his comments and his remarks. I certainly want to commend him for his remarkable leadership on the budget.

Mr. Chairman, what an interesting debate that we have witnessed today, really a fascinating exchange here on the floor today. And let me say that the Budget Committee has certainly performed its very difficult duty I think extraordinarily well. Is the budget we are going to vote on absolutely perfect? Probably not. But is it a step in the right direction, a huge step in the right direction? Absolutely, yes.

I find the Democrats' rhetoric today really difficult to understand. Been following the debate today. I do find it very difficult to understand. First of all, they don't support the budget because the deficit is too large. But yet they also don't support the budget because we don't spend enough. So which is it? Not sure you can have it both ways.

And what would their answer be? Well, bigger government, that is for sure. That would be part of their answer. And dramatically higher taxes. That is for certain as well. And do you think that families who are struggling to pay for education or child care or home heating bills or gasoline can afford a tax hike? Do you think that seniors who are living on a fixed income can afford a tax increase?

Well now, they say they only want to raise taxes only on the rich. We have just heard that rhetoric. But if past experience means anything at all, the Democrats' idea of rich is anybody who gets a paycheck. Absolutely anybody who gets a paycheck is rich, in their views. Or anyone who is getting a Social Security check. Because we can all remember that the last time the Democrats had control of this House they actually raised taxes on seniors' Social Security. Yes, that is right. If you are getting a Social Security check, the Democrats think that you are rich and they want to raise your taxes.

Well, Mr. Chairman, we absolutely have to get spending under control, and this budget is a start but we do need to do more. The American people are demanding it. We have to keep taxes low because hard-working families simply cannot afford a tax increase. And I would urge my colleagues to support the budget resolution and to reject the tax and spend alternative of the Democrats.