Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, over 200 days ago I started speaking about September 13. That is the day when the assault weapons ban that we have in place now is going to expire.

Over the last couple of years, and then even this week when we saw the tragedy that happened in Russia, we saw what terrorists could do when they put their minds to having destruction. They do not care about human life. We are told that we have terrorists here in this country waiting to do their destruction on us as American citizens. We are told that when they can, they will do as much destruction as possible.

Come September 13, at midnight, your local terrorists, the gangs that are in our streets, the drug dealers, will be able to buy assault weapons at your local gun store.

I do not understand this. We hear the rhetoric all the time that the assault weapons bill has not worked. Well, you talk to the police officers that are coming down here tomorrow to try to convince the President to expand the bill. We have seen a 60 percent drop in killings with the guns that have been banned.

Our local police say they are not prepared for this. The bulletproof vests that we give our police officers are no match to the guns that are going to be back out on the streets. The large-capacity clips, right now we hold it at 15, 10, and yet in our States when our hunters go out shooting for deer or hunting, they are only allowed 6 bullets. But we are going to give people anywhere like the killer today in Ohio that used 50 rounds. Where is the common sense?

We have the majority of the American people wanting to keep this ban in place. We have 56 percent of gun owners, NRA members that say, keep the ban in place. Yet there is total silence here in this House. The bill is not going to be allowed to be brought up even for a vote. But by the way, on Monday there will be a suspension vote to allow guns back into the D.C. area and not to punish anyone that is carrying an unlicensed gun.

Is this where we as Americans want to be? The rhetoric that we hear constantly, as if this is a slippery road, we are out to take away everyone's right to own a gun. Well, that is not the slippery road. We are trying to save lives.

Ten years ago we put this bill in place because too many of our police officers were being killed and outgunned. Come Tuesday morning of next week, September 14, when our kids are going back to school, our police officers are going to be in harm's way once again. The President of the United States has said that he would sign the bill if it got on his desk. Well, you cannot have it two ways, Mr. President. You have to make the phone call here. You have to tell Dennis Hastert, we want the bill up here. And like your father before you, make phone calls to say, get this bill passed, as Ronald Reagan did, as President Carter did, and as President Clinton did.

We cannot save every life. There is no bill in the world that is going to be able to do that. But when we have something in place that has saved lives, why would we just let it go? The NRA, are they that strong? Where are the voices of the American people? Where is this House, and where is this President? Whose side are they going to be on? The police officers that we talk about that are so heroic from 9/11 and through the convention and through all of the terrorist threats that we have, where are the voices that are going to protect those police officers? We are just going to let it go? Who is going to face the families? Who is going to talk to the surviving families when the first police officer is mowed down? Who is going to do that? It always seems that I am the one who has to talk to the victims' families.

We have several days left. We have all of the police and the police chiefs coming in tomorrow. Mr. President, I am begging you, get on the phone. Make this happen. We can pass it in the Senate, and we can pass it here in the House, but we need your help. Mr. President, I am begging of you. You talk about our police officers. How about protecting them now?

Mr. Speaker, at the end of this week, we all take our 6-week break before we come back to the House. That means we only have 9 days left before September 13 when we are going to see the assault weapons ban in this country expire. We have already seen where the gun manufacturers are coming out and saying they cannot wait until this expires, mainly because on September 14 they will be able to supply assault weapons back into the stores so anyone that wants to can buy them.

Mr. Speaker, since I have been here in Washington trying to fight and reduce gun violence in this country, I have always been fair. I have never tried to take away the right of someone to own a gun. But assault weapons go way overboard. Do we want to see our citizens in this country be able to have assault weapons? Assault weapons are the guns that we are seeing every day, unfortunately, in Iraq. Assault weapons are guns that are made to take down as many people as possible in the shortest period of time.

A recent poll by the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence shows that an overwhelming amount of Americans support renewal of the ban, including gun owners around the country and NRA supporters. Voters in key Midwestern States, including Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Missouri, average 72 percent in support of the renewal. In Florida, 81 percent of likely voters support renewing the ban. In rural States, including West Virginia and South Dakota, 68 percent of voters support the renewal. The majority of gun owners in this country support the renewal, mainly because the majority of gun owners in this country are fair, and they know what kinds of guns they need and what kinds of guns we do not need.

In the face of these dramatic numbers in favor of the ban, the issue, unfortunately, remains in a political deadlock. In 2000, the President, President Bush, said that he would sign the bill if it got on his desk. Well, we know that the President has been able to get everything that he has wanted through this House by making some phone calls. It is time the President stands up. It is time the President says, we should have the assault weapons ban certainly renewed, at the least.

Listen, I support our police officers across this country. The police officers across this country want this ban kept in place. Why? Because they have found over the last 10 years fewer and fewer assault weapons are being used in crimes. Fewer and fewer assault weapons are being used to hurt our police officers across this country.

Mr. Speaker, I happen to believe very strongly that one person can make a difference. That is why I came to Congress. But I also know that it takes the American people to wake up, to be able to have their voices heard here; and this is one chance when the American people can come together.

Do not let this time run out. This is where the American people can get involved. Certainly e-mail the Speaker of the House and the President of the United States. Let us keep this promise that the President made back in 2000 a reality. Do we want assault weapons back on our streets? Do we want the possibility of terrorists that are supposedly in this country being able to buy these guns? Do we want the drug lords to be able to have these guns? Think of the shootings that we have had in this country over the last several years. Can we imagine if they had had an assault weapon and how many more people they could have taken down?

I spent my life as a nurse before I came to this great House. My job is to take care of people. My job is to prevent people from being ill, to give them the best quality of life possible. Having assault weapons is deadly for all of us. It is deadly for our children. It is deadly for our police officers. I here in Congress refuse to let this die. That is why I came to Congress, to save lives.

I am asking the American people to get behind this. When we come back in September, over 2,000 people will have died during that time. Two thousand people. Two thousand families, not even counting how many have been wounded. I know this is personal for me, but the rhetoric that we are hearing from the NRA is false.

Ten years ago we heard constantly the only reason we wanted to get this assault weapons ban done is so we could go down that slippery road. Well, let me tell my colleagues something. Second amendment rights, the Constitution, each one of us swears that we will uphold that. I am not out here to take away anyone's right to own a gun.

Please, the American people must become involved in this.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the men and women of the 4th Congressional District of New York in support of this Resolution condemning the July 9th advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which denounces Israel's security fence.

I have long been an ardent and proud supporter of Israel. In recent years, the volatile and unstable history that has underscored Israel's history has become even more bloody and pronounced. We can understand as Americans that Israel has a responsibility to protect its citizens from the grave threat posed against the country from those terrorists that seek to harm it.

The security fence has drastically enhanced Israel's ability to protect itself from terrorists by significantly limiting the ability of terrorists to access Israeli cities. For example, since its construction, suicide bombings along the northern West Bank have decreased by 90 percent. Contention and criticism to the wall lies with the proposed plans to have the wall run through the area of northern Jerusalem. Prior to the ICJ's opinion, efforts were made to change certain aspects of the designated route to limit the impact it could have on localities near and around the wall's course.

Local Palestinian communities, those most directly affected by the wall's construction, have worked with Israel to redirect the wall in certain areas to lessen the impact. The wall's construction is condemned by the Court of Justice because of claims that it violates certain boundary laws. However, the wall is a protection for both Israelis and Palestinians. Their joint effort has not only lessened any undesirable impact for both parties, but proven the possibility for compromise between both areas.

I have long felt that America should not attempt to dictate decisions for Israel. With this resolution, we are simply showing that we are supporting Israel's step toward safeguarding its people. We as Americans must sympathize with the fact that the Israelis are attempting to confront terrorism by erecting a wall to stand as its physical and metaphorical barrier. In condemning the opinion of the International Court of Justice and supporting this resolution, we as a body align ourselves with the best interests of the Israeli people, progress and peace in the Middle East, and in the best interests of all Americans who wish to one day see calm in a section of the world so long divided.

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition of Kimberly S. Jones, Esq., a well-respected attorney whose practice, the Law Firm of Kimberly S. Jones has served the Long Island community proudly. Today I applaud Kimberly and her firm for receiving the 2004 Business of the Year Award of Excellence.

As principle of this very successful law firm, Kimberly has established a strong commitment to the economic development of Long Island. A dedicated advocate for underrepresented members of the population, Kimberly, through the work of her firm, focuses on addressing the needs of women and minority business owners. She also serves as a member of the Advisory Board of the Dowling College Center for Minority Teacher Development and Training, further demonstrating her commitment to the community.

The Law Firm of Kimberly S. Jones, Esq. is actively involved in the local bar associations, as well as the Suffolk County Women's Business Enterprise Coalition, where Kimberly serves as Assistant Director of State and Federal Services. It is Kimberly's involvement in these organizations that establishes her law firm as a successful business, improving the quality of life on Long Island.

Although Kimberly is extremely busy, she still finds time to help the community in other areas. She is a member of the Urban League and is President of the Young Professionals of the Urban League of Long Island. Kimberly is an individual devoted to her community and this is evident through the work of her firm.

I congratulate Kimberly and her firm on receiving this honor and applaud her devotion to helping others. She dedicates herself to improving the lives of others and I thank her for this on behalf of the people of not only the 4th Congressional District but the people of Long Island who benefit from her hard work and dedication.

Mr. Speaker, sixty-years ago today, President Franklin Roosevelt signed into law the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, known thereafter as the GI Bill.

This piece of legislation promised those who served their country an education, aid in finding employment, help toward home ownership, and proper healthcare. What President Roosevelt accomplished in his four terms in office was extraordinary; the effects of which are still felt today. High among this list of accomplishments is the signing into law of the GI Bill, with which President Roosevelt rewarded this country's heroes by educating, aiding and caring for them.

In the six decades since the GI Bill's inception, large numbers of troops have been sent to the beaches of Normandy, the Sea of Japan, Korea, Vietnam, the deserts of the Gulf and the Indian peninsula. What remains is sixty-years of sacrifice and battle scars, each a distinct imprint of the high cost of democracy and independence.

To repay their efforts, we have granted stipends for their college education and doctors for their wounds, offered them aid in housing and provided training for jobs. We have dedicated millions of dollars toward programs geared to enhance their lives through knowledge, healthcare and job growth. Still, the trade-off will forever remain wanting.

Countless young men and women enter into the armed services every year. My state of New York is home to over 1.2 million veterans, with another 26,000 servicemen and women on Reserve and Active duty and over 4,000 enlisted with the National Guard. It is for these honorable adults and those across the nation that we pledge to fund and aid the programs created sixty years ago. These national heroes have defended the freedoms enjoyed by every American citizen from the time of the Revolutionary War. There are millions of men and women who rely upon this, risk life and limb, and make the commitment to our country and fellow citizens.

It is distressing that this occasion be marked with such unfortunate and ironic efforts to lessen the GI Bill. This as a day meant for respectful remembrance, to all that has been and will be accomplished by those who served in combat. I see a tremendous amount to be proud of in this bill, what it stands for and what it means for all Americans. Sixty years ago, this country invested a great deal into this bill. I believe what we received in return can be measured in far more than dollar signs.

Despite our best intentions, we as Americans find ourselves asking for the same sacrifice from our young men and women as our relatives did six decades prior. 1944 was a year worn by war. Sadly, 2004 will be as well. The service men and women earned the title ``greatest generation'', from the sacrifice of World War II. The contributions of today's men and women will one day merit such praise as well; praise that can now be enhanced and aided by the continued emphasis in favor of the same GI Bill that aided to the success of the generations since 1944.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the people of the 4th Congressional District to express my support of the Hoyer-DeLay Israel Resolution, which intends to seek a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I have always been a strong supporter of Israel and I believe the people of Israel have a fundamental right to defend themselves against terrorism and those trying to destroy the freedoms and rights of Israel. As a member of the U.S.-Israel Security Caucus, I believe the United States must assist Israel in its fight against terrorism because it is the only democracy in the Middle East and has proven to be a reliable ally.

The Hoyer-DeLay Israel Resolution begins the process of disengaging from the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank and is a positive step towards peace. I commend Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to begin this process regardless of the absence of a viable Palestinian peace partner with whom to negotiate. The process will only be successful if backed by a democratic ally, the United States. I recognize this resolution as an important initiative that will hopefully reduce tensions with the Palestinians, perhaps revitalizing the seemingly stalled peace process.

The Hoyer-DeLay agreement enunciates a number of principles, which must be appropriately addressed before a lasting peace settlement can be reached. The resolution recognizes the need for Israel to have defensible borders reflecting demographic realities. It also appropriately recognizes the need for Palestinian refuges to understand they will not be returning to Israel and the need for Palestinians to end their campaign of terror. These intentions leave me hopeful in finding a way forward toward a resolution of the dispute.

I have voiced my concerns on numerous occasions that the United States must not dictate Israeli policy, but must encourage Israel to do what it believes is right to protect its people and prevent more Israeli deaths. I am pleased that the work of my colleagues and I is ensuring a steadfast commitment to Israel's security, which includes intentions of securing defensible borders and preserving and strengthening Israel's capacity to defend itself against any threat or possible combination of threats.

Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and extended security is only a vision that can be fully achieved if terrorism is fully defeated. I have always been a strong supporter of Israel and will continue to support efforts of this government to fight for the security of Israel and the best interest of its people.

Madam Speaker, assault weapons go back on to our streets in 84 days. These weapons of war mow down our police officers and destroy families every day.

Just last week, an SKS assault rifle, and this is what it looks like, mowed down three police officers in Alabama and killed them. The SKS can fire up to 35 rounds per minute and pierce police body armor. Montgomery Police Chief John Wilson confirmed that the vests that the officers wore offered almost no protection against this high-powered assault rifle.

Fifty-eight-year-old Carlos Owen, with 26 years on the force and nearing retirement, never had a chance. He and two of his fellow officers died in a hail of bullets.

But that has not stopped the National Rifle Association from engaging in their old dirty tricks. The NRA Web site says data from police experts must be deliberately avoided by those pushing assault weapons bills. Actually, the data is pretty clear on assault weapons. In one of every five police-officer killings, an assault weapon is the choice.

The NRA is so blind to the truth on assault weapons that they are also engaged in a smear campaign against Jim and Sara Brady. The Brady's ``error''? Telling the truth about President Reagan's former support for the assault weapons ban in a television interview. The NRA called their interview ``shameless'' and ``deliberate misinformation.''

As we continue to remember President Reagan, I would like to set the record straight on his contributions to gun safety. The importation of rapid-fire shot guns was first outlawed under President Reagan.

In 1994, he joined former Presidents Ford and Carter in calling on Congress to pass the assault weapons ban.

During the close vote on the assault weapons ban that year, President Reagan made calls to undecided Members urging for a ``yes'' vote.

The ban passed by two votes, and at least one Member said Reagan's call prompted him to vote ``yes.''

President Reagan knew the importance of keeping military-style weapons off our streets and out of our communities.

The assault weapons ban is a commonsense law that almost all Americans, gun owners included, do support. It is unfortunate that the NRA feels more strongly about firing up its membership than telling the truth.

Let me say this: each day that comes closer to having this assault weapons ban expire is each day we come closer to seeing deaths in our communities and on our streets. I have never tried to do anything to take away someone's right to own a gun, but I do know assault weapons do not belong on our streets. That is a responsibility that all Americans, in my opinion, and gun owners should take upon themselves.

The American people can do something about this. They can contact their Congressman, their Senator, and certainly the White House. President Bush has promised to sign the assault weapons ban if it gets on his desk. We know that this Congress has to have the bill up on the floor so we can have a vote on it before it will ever get to the President's desk.

I am asking the President for his help. I am asking him to start calling on the Members of Congress, as President Reagan did, and let us get this assault weapons ban in place. Let us make sure our police officers are not put into more risk than they already have to be in.

When we talk about possible terror cells in this country, do we actually want gangs, drug dealers, possibly terrorists being able to get assault weapons? This is not what America is. Assault weapons belong in the hands of only our military. They are guns that are used to mow down people as fast as possible. Why do we need these guns? Let us not forget the large-capacity clips. Right now, under the ban, clips are only supposed to hold 10 bullets. If this ban goes back to the way it was, we can have 35, we can have 50, we can have 100, whatever the clip will hold. That is not where we want to be.

I strongly urge the American people to get involved in this.

Mr. Speaker, assault weapons go back on to the streets of America in 3 months. Time is running out to protect our police officers, our communities and our children. After September 13, criminals, drug dealers and gangs will be able to go and buy their assault weapons.

In this past week, we certainly brought back memories of President Ronald Reagan. I remember his contributions to gun safety. He understood the dangers of assault weapons, which is why he ushered in one of the first bans on military-style weapons, banning the importation of rapid fire shotguns. In 1989, President George H.W. Bush expanded this list to include 43 other assault weapons.

By 1994, with the country facing, unfortunately, a wave of mass shootings throughout this country, Congress finally banned the production or sale of new assault weapons. In a joint letter to the House Members pushing for passage of the ban, former President Reagan said, ``We urge you to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons.'' As usual, President Reagan said it best.

Renewing the assault weapon ban is about the safety of our police, our children and our communities. Congress only has 28 more working days in which to renew the assault weapon ban.

Let me say this: When you think about the American people, when you think about police throughout this country, who are now lobbying the Members of Congress and the Senate to have this bill come up on the floor for a vote, and yet we still hear nothing. President Bush today has actually said that he would sign the bill if it gets on his desk.

Let me say this: This House needs to bring the bill up on to the floor for a vote so that it can go to the President's desk. The American people have to get involved in this issue. They have to contact their Members of Congress in the House and Senate.

We need to talk about what assault weapons can do. We need to talk about what the health care costs will be from the damage done if assault weapons are back on our streets. We need to talk about how many of our police in the past have been killed because they were outgunned because of assault weapons. We need to remember our history to know why we passed the assault weapon ban 10 years ago.

We cannot allow this to sunset. We must make sure the assault weapon ban is kept in place. It is for the safety of our communities, our children, our police officers. The American people are always saying they have no part in government. You can have a part in government, but you have to become involved. You have to have your voices heard.

I will stand here every Tuesday, Monday, whenever, to make sure that the American people hear this message.

Today, June 14, is my son's birthday. Going back 10 years ago, when a mad man came onto a train and shot and killed my husband and shot my son in the head, we never thought Kevin would live. The criminal at that time had large capacity clips which could hold 14 bullets.

Some say it would not have made any difference on the Long Island massacre. Well, with the ban that is in place, even though it is 10 bullets in a clip, if you could talk to the people at the end of the train that lost their lives, if we had the 10-bullet ban in place, if we had the assault weapon ban in place, maybe we would have had a few of our people that would have lived that day.

I celebrate my son's birthday. It is a miracle that he is alive. That is why I came to Congress, to reduce gun violence in this country. I started my career by lobbying to make sure the assault weapon ban got in place here in Congress. I will continue to fight to make sure the assault weapon ban stays in place.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate my friends Carol and Jerry Berman as they celebrate their sixtieth wedding anniversary. Carol Berman met Jerry Berman at the University of Michigan, in 1941. Their surname was the same. In 1943 they became engaged. Jerry enlisted in the Air Force, and Carol graduated from college. They were married in 1944 and after a brief honeymoon, Carol traveled with Jerry to thirteen different Air Force installations where he was an airman, and she worked on various newspapers and magazines.

After the war they returned to Ann Arbor where Jerry received his degree in mechanical engineering, thanks to the GI Bill, and Carol worked as an Editor. After a while they moved back to New York and set up housekeeping in Lynbrook, Long Island. Jerry worked as an engineer, and Carol worked for a public relations firm. Their daughter Elizabeth was born followed by their son, Charles. They then moved to their present home in Lawrence, Long Island

Carol devoted much of her time to the school, serving as President of two PTA's and then elected to the Lawrence-Cedarhurst Board of Education. While Carol was busy with this, Jerry, who now was in the family's insurance business, served in many capacities at his beloved Beth Sholom Synagogue, serving as Chairman of the Board for two terms.

Carol and Jerry also became politically active in the Democratic Party. Carol ran campaigns for many candidates and then the local offices for Assemblyman Eli Wager and Congressman Herbert Tenzer. She became a Vice Chair of the Nassau County Democratic Party. Carol was elected to the State Senate in 1978, serving for three terms, and is still the only Democrat elected to that body from a district solely in Nassau County. Her public service continued when she was appointed by Governor Cuomo to the State Division of Housing, to the Lobby Commission, and to the State Board of Elections, where she is still Commissioner.

Because of her political expertise, the community drafted her to head their fight against the SST Concorde landing at Kennedy Airport. That fight made history and just recently ended with the complete demise of the Concorde.

Terry was Democratic Leader of Lawrence-Cedarhurst, and President of the Five Towns Democratic Club, and was a close political associate of both Congressman Herbert Tenzer and Jim Scheuer. During the Vietnam War, he was appointed to the Draft Board, where he served for fifteen years. In that capacity, he accompanied Rabbi Edward Sandrow on a visit to General William Hershey, which resulted in a history making decision that enabled servicemen of other than the Quaker faith to claim Conscientious Objector status.

In addition, Jerry and Carol have donated much time to civic endeavors: among them the building of St. John's Hospital. They have been honored by the Hospital, UJA-Federation, Israel Bonds, Congregation Beth Sholom, the Five Towns Democratic Club, Cancer Care, Nassau County Democratic Party, the Village of Lawrence and Carol by NOW and The Nassau Coalition Against Domestic Violence, as well as many other civic associations.

The greatest joy and love in their lives are their children: Elizabeth married to David; and Charles, married to Lisa; and their beloved grandchildren, Sarah, Jeremy, Rebecca and Ben.

Jerry and Carol emulate the ideals of citizenship in our country, through their concern for others, their service to the community and active participation in our government. I wish to congratulate and thank my good friends, Carol and Jerry, for all that they have done for my district, their community, the State, our Country, and me.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize Francis (Frank) A. DeMita on his retirement from the Board of Directors of the National Association of Federal Credit Unions (NAFCU). Mr. DeMita has devoted much of his life to the credit union, with more than 50 years' experience as a volunteer in the credit union community. There is no doubt in my mind that our good friends at NAFCU will feel a great void once Mr. DeMita departs.

Mr. DeMita's devotion to the credit union community was evidenced by his service as Chairman of the Board of the Nassau Educators Federal Credit Union for over 30 years. A retired teacher himself, Mr. DeMita has not only been active in the credit union movement, but also with many charitable organizations and causes on Long Island. For the last six years, Mr. DeMita has balanced his time as NAFCU Board Member in addition to his leadership at the Nassau Educators Federal Credit Union and in the Long Island community. However, one element has remained constant--Frank has always given selflessly of his time to promote and enhance the lives of credit union members in the great state of New York, as well as across the nation. But he also has remained committed to the educational background that he came from. Mr. DeMita helped start a scholarship program in 1990 that has awarded 75 scholarships every year since to outstanding high school seniors in Nassau County. To date, the program has provided over $300,000 to help these students attend college.

As a member of the NAFCU Board of Directors, Mr. DeMita worked tirelessly to enhance the federal credit union charter by working with Congress for regulatory relief legislation for credit unions. His work has helped maintain NAFCU's status as a leading credit union trade association.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Mr. Frank DeMita on all of his fine work throughout his illustrious tenure as a Board Member of NAFCU. I have worked with Mr. DeMita on issues that are important to the credit union community in the past and I am committed to continuing to do so. Congratulations on your retirement from the NAFCU Board, Mr. DeMita.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank the Tuskegee Airmen for their service, sacrifice and dedication for our country during World War II.

The National Airman's Association, an organization comprised of African-American pilots,

along with then Senator Harry Truman worked to allow Black pilots to serve in the Civilian Pilot Training Program. This laid the foundation of the forming of the Tuskegee Airmen. The Tuskegee Airmen were the first African-American pilots in any military branch. Prior to their arrival blacks were continuously excluded from aviation training programs in the military. But they proved to be the equal of white pilots.

Under the command of Col. Benjamin O. Davis, Jr., who later became the Air Force's first Black General, the Tuskegee Airmen fought in the aerial war over North Africa, Sicily and Europe. Tuskegee pilots received hundreds of Air Medals, and more than 150 Distinguished Flying Crosses. More importantly, and most impressively, none of the bombers they escorted was lost to enemy fighters. Their lasting legacy of the Tuskegee Airmen is the desegregation of the Air Force.

By the end of the war, 992 men had graduated from pilot training at Tuskegee, 450 of whom were sent overseas for combat assignment. During the same period, approximately 150 lost their lives while in training or on combat flights.

When we remember the ``Greatest Generation'' and recall with appreciation the sacrifice they made to preserve our freedoms and guarantee our rights, we must include the Tuskegee Airmen. It is important to remember our history and they played a large part creating it. Without them it would have been more difficult for the United States, and our allies, to be victorious and because of this we owe them a large debt of gratitude.

Mr. Speaker, as we come back from our Memorial Day break, there are less than 100 days before the assault weapons ban will expire here in this Congress. We have just 100 days to save a law that has saved so many lives. We only have 100 days before we can make sure our police officers are not put at risk. We only have 100 days before we make sure that our communities are not faced once again with assault weapons in their midst.

As we draw close to September 13, when the ban expires, law enforcement officers from all over the country are getting together to make sure that their voices are heard, to make sure that the assault weapons ban stays in place. Just last week, the Police Chief in Raleigh, North Carolina, Jane Perlov, demanded renewal of the ban. She was participating in a Million Mom March event that is going around the country and said, ``Clearly a continued ban on assault weapons will make us safer without affecting our rights to possess other rifles, pistols, and shotguns for legitimate purposes.''

This week, the Million Mom March's ``Halt the Assault Tour'' will be in St. Louis, Missouri, and rolling on to Texas. I think it is appropriate that this Saturday the tour will be in Texas, the adopted home State of President Bush. In 2000, then Governor Bush said he would sign an assault weapons ban.

During the President's first 100 days, here in Congress everybody does everything they can to make sure that they are pushing through his agenda. Well, here we are coming down to the last 100 days before the assault weapons ban expires, and I think it would be very nice if the President kept his word and actually put it into his agenda for the last 100 days before it expires.

Ten years ago, we fought very hard here in these halls to make sure the assault weapons ban was passed. Ten years ago, I sat up there as a citizen and was down here lobbying to make sure the assault weapons ban was passed. I find it so hard to believe that now I am standing here as a Congressperson again fighting to make sure assault weapons are not put back on to our streets.

These are the guns we see every single night that our men and women in the service in Iraq are using to fight for the democracy of the Iraqi people, but, unfortunately, we may be opening up the floodgates to allow criminals, drug lords, and gangs to be able to walk into any gun store and to be able to buy assault weapons and the large capacity clips. People keep forgetting about the large capacity clips, that they will be allowed back on the streets.

I am asking for the involvement of the American people. I hear constantly that they feel they are not part of the government. They have an opportunity to be part of the government, but we have to hear their voices. Are you out there? Do you actually want assault weapons back on the streets in 100 days? Your Members of Congress, your Members of the Senate, the White House needs to hear your voices. Today you can e-mail. Today you can make a phone call. Let your Member know how you feel about this. You have an opportunity to do something.

When we talk about terrorists possibly being in this Nation, and we are spending so much money on homeland security, which we should be doing, when we talk about the safety on

trains, the safety on planes, we should not make it easier for the terrorists to be able to get these guns, whether it is at a gun show or a gun store. They can get false I.D. We know that. Why would we give them this opportunity to make it easier for them?

Again, it comes down to this. Why did we pass an assault weapons ban 10 years ago? Because these guns were used rampantly to kill so many of our police officers. That is why we passed the bill. Why should we go back 10 years? We know it works. I happen to think we should make the bill stronger. I think it should be made permanent so we are not having this debate every 10 years.

I happen to think that gun manufacturers have a responsibility to not make copycats of these assault weapons, which they have been doing. Think about the D.C. snipers. That was a knock-off of that type of gun. I ask the American people, Mr. Speaker, to have their voices heard. We can do this, but we need your help.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in honoring the brave men and women who have fallen in service in Iraq and Afghanistan. They gave the ultimate sacrifice to guarantee the freedoms and rights we hold so dear and to help the oppressed and give a voice to those who do not have one.

Army Sergeant Gregory Wahl, a constituent of mine from Valley Stream, NY, was one of the brave men who gave his life in Iraq. He was riding in a vehicle that flipped over in a canal during a combat patrol. Gregory, according to his father, wanted to be there and he knew what it was all about. He was confident in his mission and proud of his military career, which spanned over 11 years. Gregory is survived by his wife, Maricela, who together spent many hours enjoying their love of cooking, and his daughter, Alexis, who inherited her father's blue eyes. He loved his country and entered into combat with a lot of courage and ambition for his future, the future of Maricela and Alexis, and the future of the people he was fighting for, both Americans and Iraqis. But Gregory is only one of many. We have lost many brave men and women and it is important to remember their valor and dedication to our country.

I would also like to honor and extend my sorrow to the families of those who have fallen. While we get to go on with our daily lives, parents, spouses, and children will have to adapt and learn to live without their loved one. And for this they and the men and women of the Armed Forces will always be in my prayers.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2731.

Mr. Speaker, no one should be fooled by what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have named this bill. This is not a bill about safety and health or access to justice. This bill is about turning Federal law on its head and restricting an employee's due process and access to justice.

This misguided bill would require OSHA to pay attorney's fees and costs in any case in which it did not prevail, regardless of why the agency did not prevail, and even if OSHA is justified in bringing the action.

Normally, fees and costs are awarded to the prevailing party defending against a frivolous claim. This bill awards fees to employers, even if the claims of their failure to protect their employees has merit. I think this, personally, is disgraceful.

Placing the burden on OSHA to pay attorney's fees for any case they lose would be a great incentive for OSHA to stop bringing claims all together. We see now the reason the other side brought this bill up. Do you see, Mr. Speaker? This means OSHA will be paralyzed to do its job.

American workers will be the ones to suffer, through injuries on the job or even through death. In the year 2000, the last year we had these statistics, 4.7 million injuries happened in this country. We had over 5,500 deaths. And these are added to that.

This bill places a higher priority on the compensation of employees than protecting American workers. In Federal law, we normally award fees and costs to those defending against frivolous lawsuits.

The reason is we want to discourage cases without merit from having a day in court. This bill aims to discourage cases with merit from having their day in court. This is an assault on not just the American worker but the American system of due process and justice as well.

Those on the other side want to eliminate OSHA's enforcement powers by making them pay fees and costs. What is next, Mr. Speaker? Will the other side create a private right of action and ask injured employees to pay fees and costs in valid claims themselves?

Mr. Speaker, will it be, Congratulations, you were right, here is your award for your injury, but you have to pay the employer who injured you for the costs of showing up? I worry about even saying this, out of concern the other side will take me up on it.

This is a bad bill. It ties OSHA's hands and American's workers lose their due process and day in court. This is not limited to small businesses. H.R. 2731, despite its stated intent to apply to small businesses, achieves broad coverage in employer requirements. The Bureau of Statistics data for the first quarter of 1998 showed that there were over 6.5 million private sector establishments with 99 or fewer employees, employing 55 million workers, 54 percent of the private sector workforce. So even though we are saying we are doing this for small businesses, it is over 54 percent of our workforce.

Mr. Speaker, we can do better. We must do better. We have to make sure that our workers of this country are protected. We care about our small businesses. Everyone cares about small businesses, but going the way we are going now on tying OSHA's hands to prosecute those that are, in my opinion, having unsafe workplaces is not right. We should defeat this bill. I ask for a ``no'' vote on H.R. 2731.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind everybody there are only 119 days before the assault weapons ban goes back on our streets. As the Million Mom March begins its Halt the Assault tour beginning tomorrow, I think it is important to remember the support the assault weapons ban has across this country.

I want to remind people that in California, KSBW television said recently, ``We call on the Congress to keep assault weapons where they belong, with our military and with our police.'' On the other side of the country, the Worcester Telegraph and Herald says, ``Banning assault weapons in no way limits individuals' ability to buy, own, or sell legitimate sporting firearms.'' In the South, the New Orleans editorialized, ``There's no justification for legalizing the 19 military-style weapons covered by the ban.'' In the Midwest, the Springfield Illinois State Journal-Register wrote, ``No reasonable gun owner should oppose the Federal assault weapons ban.''

All across the country, the Nation's leading newspapers are reflecting the opinion of the American people. They want the assault weapons ban renewed. Strip away the rhetoric and the polls and the focus groups, and gun violence is about destroying lives. How many more lives will we destroy by putting assault weapons back on our streets?

Each week, I get up and I say to the American people, you can make a difference. Each week, I get up and remind people that we need to have the assault weapons ban renewed. September 13 is coming up soon.

When you start talking to our police officers across the country and how involved they are in this issue, people have to remember why we passed the assault weapons ban in the first place, because our police officers were being mowed down. Assault weapons were used in killings in our schools.

We can stop this, but we need the American people's help. You can make a difference. You can make a difference. I have always said one person can make a difference, because first it is one, and then two, and it multiplies across this Nation. But we need to hear your voices. We need to have you contact your Members of Congress, the Members of the Senate.

We need to hear your voices. That is the only way we are going to get that bill up here on the House floor. The President has promised to sign the bill if it gets on his desk. We have to make sure that the bill is passed here through the House. We know we can pass it in the Senate and have it put on the President's desk.

I personally believe it should be made permanent. I also believe that copycats of the guns that were used, say in the D.C. sniper shooting, which was the Bushmaster, should not be allowed to be copycat. I saw in the paper the other day that one of our gun manufacturers just got a very large contract for the military so that the people in Iraq, their soldiers, will have our guns. So I think we can see where the guns are going for war.

Let me remind people: AK-47s and Uzis, these are the guns you see every night on TV; these are the guns we see our young men and women use to go fight the war in Iraq. And that is where they belong, in a war, not on our streets. They should not be allowed on our streets. They should not be allowed in our communities. They certainly should not be allowed to be bought and sold by the drug gangs we have throughout this country today.

This is what we need to do. I am asking the American people for help. I will do my part here in Washington, but I need your voices across the country to make sure we have the bill come up for a vote. That will be your job: contact your representatives. Do your part. Do not always say, let them do it; you have to get involved in this issue.