Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding me this time.

Mr. Chairman, our Nation's Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, guaranteed the people of America the fundamental right to keep and to bear arms in the second amendment of our Constitution. This right allows Americans to keep and own firearms for the protection of themselves, their families, and their property. This right has helped to guarantee freedom for every American citizen for over 214 years. Unfortunately, there are many people in our Nation who will do anything to destroy this freedom; and as a Member of Congress, I am fighting to uphold this basic right.

Opponents of the second amendment have tried for years to pass laws to restrict the people's access to firearms. In that effort they have been successful in making the firearms industry one of the most regulated industries in America, but that is not enough for the antifirearm fanatics. Now they are attempting to sue domestic manufacturers of firearms with the express purpose of putting them out of business; and if these efforts are successful, not only would it destroy jobs and companies that produce a product that the Constitution itself protects our citizens' right to own, they would do serious damage to our homeland and our national security.

Currently there are lawsuits attempting to punish companies that make firearms because of the actions of criminals. These lawsuits threaten the viability of these firms; and if successful, they would not keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, but they would potentially keep them out of the hands of those who protect our freedom. Take, for instance, the Colt Company, which is the target of one of these lawsuits. This company not only produces small arms, but it is also the sole provider of the M-16 rifle that is being used so ably by our troops in Operation Iraqi Freedom and by our soldiers fighting the war on terror worldwide. If this company is destroyed, where will our soldiers get the arms that they need to protect our freedoms? From France? From Germany?

What about the Beretta USA Company, another target of these lawsuits? This company supplies the standard sidearm for all branches of the Armed Forces and provides firearms to countless law enforcement agencies across our Nation. If this company is destroyed, where will soldiers and law enforcement officers get the arms to protect our freedom and to keep our streets safe?

Take the Sig Arms Company, another target of these lawsuits. This company makes a sidearm of choice carried by the men and women who protect the President of the United States, as well as the official sidearm of the Navy SEALS.

The aim of such suits is clear, to destroy our American firearms industry, in a blatant attempt to deny law-abiding citizens access to firearms and to stop them from exercising their constitutional right to keep and to bear arms. Not only are the rights of American citizens at stake but so is our national security. The men and women in

the armed services and the men and women in law enforcement need to have the best possible firearms to protect our freedom, to defeat terrorists, and to safeguard our streets. We must protect freedom. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

The Postal Civil Service Retirement System Funding Reform Act of 2003 is a very, very long name, but appropriately so, because it addresses reform that is certainly very long overdue. The Postal Service, in fact, has not seen any real reform since 1971 when the Congress passed the Postal Reorganization Act. Since then, of course, the Postal Service has dramatically expanded.

Consider some rather startling numbers. Today, the mailing industry accounts for 9 million jobs, $900 billion in commerce, and 9 percent of the United States gross domestic product. S. 380, as approved by the Senate, is really nearly identical to H.R. 735 which was passed by the Committee on Government Reform under the extraordinary leadership of our great chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis).

The purpose of this legislation is to change the manner in which the Postal Service pays into the Civil Service Retirement System.

This legislation is so very necessary because under current law, the Postal

Service will overpay its obligations to the Civil Service Retirement System by more than $70 billion. In effect, the Postal Service would be forced to subsidize the retirement obligations of other Federal agencies.

The net result is that the Postal Service has to continually implement rate increases which would otherwise be unnecessary.

S. 380 does not affect the payment of retiree benefits. It has no negative impact on retirees. It simply addresses how those benefits are funded.

The anticipated savings from this bill would be utilized in two ways: first of all, to pay down the total debt that the Postal Service currently has with the Department of the Treasury; and secondly, to delay any rate increases on consumer and commercial mailings until fiscal year 2006.

Certainly, for most of us if one has a postal rate increase, it might just be a nuisance, just 1 cent or 2 cents. That kind of an increase might not mean too much if you send only a few letters per month. However, if you are a business who is sending literally millions of pieces of mail, this is a tremendous increase in your costs, and we can just think about the impact that a postal rate increase has on the mail order catalog businesses or on magazine businesses or so many businesses that rely on the United States Postal Service to conduct their business.

If the 108th Congress does not act on this legislation, it will necessitate a postal rate increase, and we will, in effect, be levying an unfair tax increase on the American consumer.

Passage of this bill would be very much the first stage of substantial postal reform that will bring the service into the 21st century. I think it is important that this Congress demonstrate to the citizens of our Nation that it will be committed to improving the cost- effectiveness and the efficiency certainly of government, and this legislation is an excellent first step in that direction.

No other governmental entity serves its customers more directly than the Postal Service. Almost every citizen of our Nation is impacted at varying degrees by the Postal Service. Customer service should not be a novel concept within the Federal Government. It should be an operative phrase for us.

S. 380 will allow post offices to better serve their customers and, by voting in favor of this legislation, Congress will be voting to fix a wrong that has hampered the Postal Service for years. I certainly urge my colleagues to vote in favor of S. 380.

Madam Speaker, our forces have been in action in Iraq for 2 weeks. In that time, they have achieved great success. They have moved hundreds of miles and are beginning to encircle Baghdad and the regime of Saddam Hussein.

They have begun to distribute humanitarian aid to the long-suffering people of Iraq. They have weakened the enemy forces significantly. They have fought off groups of Saddam's thugs who are desperate to hold on to power. In short, the plan is going forward in an undaunted fashion.

As President Bush had stated time and time again, we may not know the duration of this war, but we do know its outcome: Our forces will disarm Iraq and will force the tyrannical regime of Saddam Hussein from power. The day of liberation for the people of Iraq is near, and they will be free. We will not tire, and we will not stop until we achieve our goals. I have no doubt that our forces are up to the task.

I urge every American to keep the men and women of our Armed Forces in their thoughts and in their prayers. We must support our troops as they fight to protect freedom and to defeat the forces of terror.

Mr. Speaker, many have questioned whether or not a war with Iraq is just and if the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein is a threat to the world. Well, certainly the events of the last few days have shown just how brutal and how uncaring of human life Saddam and his gang of thugs actually are.

The Geneva Convention requires that prisoners of war be treated with dignity and protected at all times from torture and public humiliation. Just as Saddam has not followed the mandates imposed upon his regime by the cease-fire agreement of 1991 and the United Nations Security Council resolutions, he has now disregarded the Geneva Convention.

The need for our intervention in Iraq is now clearer than ever. If Saddam would so brutally violate international protocol with regard to prisoners of war, just think how badly he has repressed his own people.

This dictator, like countless others before him, will earn his fate.

Now there are reports of a popular uprising of the Iraqi people in Basra against Saddam's tyrannical regime.

I say to the people of Iraq, rise up and join our coalition fighting to secure your freedom. Rise up and embrace your liberation.

Liberation Day is coming soon to the Iraqi people.

Mr. Speaker, since 1980 consumer bankruptcy filings in America have absolutely quadrupled. Think about that. They have quadrupled, and why is that? Because bankruptcy used to be a term that made people shudder in their boots. Nobody wanted that black mark on their record. No one wanted that stigma. But today too many individuals think that filing for bankruptcy will erase their debt with little or no consequence, and it is high time for Americans to take financial responsibility for the debts that they have acquired.

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2003 holds people accountable for their personal spending habits. If a person has debts and dissolves under Chapter 7, but have sufficient funds to pay off their debt, then clearly they should be required to pay it off, not to have their debt whisked painlessly away by just filing bankruptcy.

In my opinion, the Federal Government should not be in the business of bailing people out of their debt. We should instead be encouraging people to spend within their means and make logical and responsible financial choices, and this bill does just that.

This bill is about being held accountable, and it comes at just the right time. This is common-sense legislation. Bankruptcy abuse needs to stop, and this legislation is a step in the right direction.

Mr. Speaker, we are at a defining moment in the history of our Nation and of the world. Last night the President of the United States stood up for the security our Nation, of our allies, and the world. He said that no longer will tyrannical dictators be allowed to flaunt international will and hold the world hostage with weapons of mass destruction and perhaps give those horrible weapons to terrorists who would not hesitate to use them against innocent civilians. The President has gone the extra mile to achieve a diplomatic solution to the crises in Iraq. The President has worked to build a larger international coalition of the willing to finally end Iraq's refusal to disarm. Our coalition is strong. It is prepared for the task at hand, and it will be victorious.

Our Army is not an Army of conquest, but one of liberation; and as the President said last night, the day of liberation for the Iraqi people is close at hand.

I urge my fellow Americans to keep the men and women of our Armed Forces in their thoughts and prayers as they fight to make America and the world safer.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 54) expressing the sense of the Congress that there should be established an annual National Visiting Nurse Association Week.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the concurrent resolution under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 54, introduced by my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), expresses the sense of the Congress that there should be established an annual National Visiting Nurse Association Week.

Mr. Speaker, visiting nurses provide an invaluable medical service to countless people across our great country. For more than 120 years, these admirable citizens have helped to promote health and to prevent disease by providing skilled nursing care in the homes of millions of sick Americans each and every year. These caring nurses treat illnesses of all varieties, from the initial symptoms of the common cold and flu to the gravest stages of heart disease, of AIDS, and of cancer.

I would like to just give an example of one such person. Her name is Marcia Nowc, and she lives in my district, the Tenth Congressional District of Michigan; and she truly epitomizes the hard work and selflessness demonstrated by visiting nurses across our great country.

Her profession is nursing, and while she makes her living doing this, she also volunteers for an organization called Neighbors Caring for Neighbors Outreach Clinic. This clinic provides medical services, laboratory tests and x-rays to some of our most vulnerable families and individuals, often free of charge, thanks to the volunteer efforts of visiting nurses, like Mrs. Nowc. Nurse Nowc's volunteer activities are supported by 16 churches in Macomb County, Michigan; and oftentimes visiting nurses, just in their everyday work, truly demonstrate how faith-based initiatives can provide an essential support system within our communities.

Many of these visiting nurses literally work miracles every day because they give so generously of their time and of their spirit and because they recognize the dignity of every citizen and the possibilities of every life. Many times visiting nurses provide care to those that might be considered on the outer fringe. Perhaps they are underinsured; they may be the working poor or may even be homeless.

Visiting nurse associations are nonprofit home health agencies located throughout the United States that aim to enhance the quality of life of all through comprehensive home and community health services. Often, these organizations provide in-home services that are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to Americans in need. It is truly worthwhile for this House to honor the compassion and the sense of obligation exhibited by visiting nurses for well over a century.

It is not an exaggeration to say that America's visiting nurses are some of our Nation's greatest treasures and greatest traditions. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support the adoption of House Concurrent Resolution 54.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson).

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank and appreciate the gentleman from south Florida for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, I am a new Member of Congress, as I know my colleague is as well, and when I thought about what I wanted to do with the rest of my career, I thought about the idea of running for Congress; because I have watched, as I think so many Americans have watched, the political partisanship and the gridlock that has happened in our Nation's Capital. I am sure it has always been there, but it seems to have gotten worse over time. And what is happening to Miguel Estrada is a very vivid demonstration of political gridlock and it must be stopped. It has to be spoken out against, and I am here tonight to try to do so; at least to lend my voice to that as well.

How can we stop the political posturing, how can we break the gridlock? I think one of the charts that my good colleague from south Florida held up here tonight, he titled it ``Diversity Held Hostage,'' has a very vivid demonstration of how long this nomination has been held up. The chart, with just a simple calendar, has the X's as the days and the days go by. The months are going by. Years now are going by on the Miguel Estrada nomination. In fact, President Bush nominated Miguel Estrada to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in May of 2001. 2001. In May of 2001. Nearly 2 years later, Miguel Estrada has yet to be confirmed. I would say that this, by any reasonable standard, is quite outrageous. I believe that to be quite outrageous.

Miguel Estrada, as has been mentioned here tonight by many of my other colleagues, quite frankly is the American dream. We are a Nation of immigrants. I am first generation here, from Scotland. We are all immigrants. We are a Nation of immigrants. We are a Nation that reflects how to build the American dream, and he certainly represents the mainstream American values as well as mainstream American law. If we think about it, from his roots in Honduras, certainly his struggle as an immigrant who came here speaking very little English, Mr. Estrada has literally risen to the very top of the legal profession, of his chosen field, and now he is on the brink of making history in our Nation. If confirmed, Mr. Estrada would be the very

first Hispanic ever, ever to serve on the D.C. Circuit. Many consider this actually to be the second most important Federal court in America. Unfortunately, regrettably, his appointment has been held up, as we say, by the very smallest of causes. And that, I truly believe, sincerely believe, is simply political posturing.

Mr. Estrada should be confirmed because he is highly qualified to serve on the Federal bench, period. He has every possible qualification that would meet any reasonable standard. And let me just reiterate some many have been spoken about previously, but I think it bears speaking again. This is an individual who actually earned his law degree magna cum laud from Harvard Law School, and he did so at the same time he was serving as the editor of the Harvard Law Review. Five years after his graduation, he was clerking for the United States Supreme Court. He served as a clerk for the U.S. Supreme Court. He served as an assistant United States Solicitor General under both President Clinton as well as President George Bush. He has had experience in the Manhattan United States Attorney's office. He has practiced constitutional law extensively. He actually argued, and I find this fact really quite fascinating, he actually argued 15 cases before the Supreme Court before the age of 40. That is really quite remarkable. The American Bar Association has unanimously, unanimously being the operative phrase here, rated Mr. Estrada as well qualified, which is the very highest rating that anyone can possibly achieve. Some Senators actually refer to this as the gold standard. He has very strong bipartisan support. And, again, when we speak about how we break political gridlock, political posturing, he has very high bipartisan support.

Mr. Estrada, as I say, would be the first Hispanic judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Court. So, of course, I am here speaking out in support of him. I do support the President's choice. But, fortunately, it is not just me or the President or the vast majority of Americans who support Mr. Estrada. In fact, there are a number of organizations who have spoken out very publicly in support of Mr. Estrada. And let me just read a couple of quotes, because I think they speak volumes to the background of this individual and why this nomination must proceed and proceed successfully.

These, again, are bipartisan, some of them through the media. This is what the President of the Latino Coalition said about Mr. Estrada. ``To deny Latinos, the Nation's largest minority, the opportunity to have one of our own serve on this court in our Nation's Capital is unforgivable'' .

The chief of staff of former Vice President Al Gore had this to say about Mr. Estrada. ``Miguel is a person of outstanding character, tremendous intellect, and with a deep commitment to the faithful application of precedent. Miguel will rule justly toward all, without showing favor to any group or any individual.''

And this from Seth Waxman, who was a former Solicitor General to President Clinton. ``I have respect both for Mr. Estrada's intellect and for his integrity. In no way did I ever discern that the recommendations Mr. Estrada made or the views that he propounded were colored in any way by his personal views, or indeed that they reflected anything other than the long-term interests of the United States.''

And one other quote as well. The president of the Hispanic National Bar Association said, ``Mr. Estrada's confirmation will break new ground for Hispanics in the Judiciary.''

Clearly, the support for Mr. Estrada lies on both sides of the aisle. He is a role model, and not only for Latinos; all Americans can look to this individual certainly as a role model. I believe holding up this confirmation process is completely unnecessary. I think we need to allow Mr. Estrada to make history. He is well deserving of it. I am not an attorney, never served as a judge, but I am married to a judge, and I am well familiar with the exhaustive background check that goes on before someone is selected to serve on the bench, whatever that bench is. And I also know what is fair. And what is happening here to Mr. Estrada is unfair. In fact, I believe it to be un-American, and I wanted to come here tonight to speak out about this.

As many of my colleagues did, I spent last week, while we were in recess, going around my district and holding town hall meetings, talking to people, and I was amazed on this particular issue how well versed people are. It has really, I believe, caught the attention of the average American because they see the unfairness of this. They see the persecution of this individual, and for no good reason. For absolutely no good reason.

Well, if I might comment on that, the gentleman used the term double, double standard, a double standard. It actually is no longer a double standard. It is not as though there is one standard here and there is another standard here. I think what is happening in this particular case is that they are raising the standard. They are raising the bar so that it could never be achieved by Mr. Estrada. They are going to raise the bar to make sure that there is under no set of circumstances that he will ever be able to rise up to the level that they are setting for this individual.

This is a question of basic fairness. And the American public, if they understand anything, they know what is fair. And they know what is happening to this individual, to this good man, with his background, is unfair.

This whole concept of filibustering, we are here in Washington, again we are new Members, we are trying to understand what all this filibustering means and what is the relevance of it and those kinds of things. What the

American people are saying at home is, give the man a vote. Vote up or vote no on his nomination. Vote yes or vote nay. But they are saying, give the man a vote. That is not happening. That is the kind of comment that I heard back in my town hall meetings.

announcement by the speaker pro tempore

I appreciate that. I will try to exercise the proper decorum here. I am getting a little carried away with it.

Let me just close with one final comment. In one of my town hall meetings, I have five counties in my district, and in one of my counties there are seven county commissioners. One of the commissioners, I will not name his name, but he is a Hispanic gentleman, very well known, well respected in the community, has had an outstanding military background, well thought of by everyone. He and I spoke about this for quite a long time. He is of the opposite party of myself. But he did express his consternation. Again it came to an issue of basic fairness. Basically that is what he expressed to me. He said, if you have anything to say about this nomination at all, let the vote happen. Just let it happen. Let them vote yes or let them vote no. But it is a question of basic fairness.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I speak out today in support of the President's economic plan. This plan is about three things: number one, jobs; number two, jobs; number three, jobs.

If you do not have a job and you want a job, the President's plan is for you. If you do have a job and you want a better job, the President's plan is for you.

Some have said that this plan is only for the rich because it will eliminate double taxation on dividends. They say that because they are stuck in an economic time warp and they refuse to understand the economic realities of today. Double taxation is un-American, and our seniors need this tax break so that that their retirement income can provide them with security and stability.

The President's plan provides an economic stimulus for every American. It enacts tax policy that is pro-growth, pro-opportunity, and, most importantly, pro-family, and I am talking about the American family, every single one of them.

I urge my colleagues not to give in to the hand-wringers and to support this bold plan for America's future.

Mr. Speaker, for more than 100 years, the Bay Mills Indian Community has sought justice for the illegal sale of over 110 acres of Chippewa County lands which, prior to the sale, had been homeland to a large group of the Tribe's ancestors. Today I am introducing legislation that finally brings relief to this group of Michigan's Native people.

The legislation I propose today also brings too-long awaited relief to the non-Indian citizens of Michigan who live within the Tribe's Chippewa county claim area. Because the Indian claim has remained unresolved for many years, innocent homeowners have watched their property values plummet to 90 percent below what that property would otherwise be worth on the open market. This legislation accomplishes these ends by ratifying the Land Settlement Agreement signed by the Bay Mills Indian Community and the State of Michigan on August 23, 2002.

This Land Settlement Agreement is the product of a long and careful negotiation process between the Tribe and the State. It calls for the extinguishment of all of the Tribe's title and right to the Chippewa County disputed lands and in return provides for the Tribe to receive replacement land in Port Huron that will be put into trust (and therefore protected by federal law from illegal sale) by the Secretary of the Interior. Further, the settlement is structured in such a way as to ensure that neither the taxpayers of Michigan nor the taxpayers of the United States will ever be saddled with the cost of paying a monetary damage award, which otherwise could be quite substantial, to the Tribe.

Finally, and of particular importance to my constituents in the 10th District, the settlement agreement will enable the City of Port Huron and the Tribe to engage in desperately needed and mutually beneficial economic development, of a casino. The people of Port Huron approved a June 2001 casino advisory referendum. This legislation is critical in allowing the residents of the Port Huron community to actively participate in its economic recovery through the establishment of a casino approved by the people. The Port Huron community has been brutalized by the loss of thousands of manufacturing jobs, a double- digit unemployment rate that doubles our state and federal average and a Canadian casino located just 500 yards from our border. That casino attracts more than 1 million American visitors per year, which is devastating to our tourism and entertainment business. A casino on the American side of the border would create 3,000 American jobs while providing competition to our Canadian neighbors at the only border crossing with Ontario where we have not responded by having a casino of our own.

Resolution of this land claim is long overdue. In sponsoring this legislation, I am proud to be part of a solution crafted to benefit the Tribe, residents of the claim area, and the taxpayers of Michigan.

I join with the members of the Bay Mills Indian Community, the Charlotte Beach landowners, my constituents in Port Huron, and my distinguished colleague Congressman Don Young in support of this proposed settlement. This legislation provides a fair solution that is long overdue for many Native Americans.