Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I also do want to thank my friend from Arizona (Mr. Flake), and he is indeed a friend, but I also want to thank him for giving me this opportunity to fully vet and disclose this particular project on the campus of Moravian College in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, specifically on the Priscilla Payne Hurd campus, and we are speaking today about the Payne Gallery. I think it is very important that we have this kind of discourse in a very open and transparent manner.

But let's first understand and explain the purpose of the Saving America's Treasures program. The purpose is to preserve nationally significant, historic properties that are threatened or endangered. The projects must mitigate the threat, have a clear public benefit, and there has to be a non-Federal match. That is certainly the case here.

I should let everybody know too the historic significance of Moravian College. It is America's sixth oldest college, sixth oldest. It is located within the City of Bethlehem, which is really the site, and it is perhaps arguable, but we claim where I live in the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania, it is really the birthplace of the America Industrial Revolution, and the Moravians were a key driver in that industrialization process in the 18th century.

There is a very strong industrial and cultural heritage. The Moravians were

not only industrialists; they were people of faith. They came from Germany and other parts of Central Europe.

The Priscilla Payne Hurd campus is significant to the story of the City of Bethlehem and to the college. The Payne Gallery is nationally significant. It exhibits collections from the Smithsonian National Museum of American History and the Smithsonian Institute of Libraries.

This historic property is certainly threatened. This funding will mitigate the threat. There is a clear public benefit. This gallery will be used and enjoyed by countless visitors to Bethlehem, the Christmas City. We enjoy numerous visitors from around the world every year to be in Bethlehem during Christmas to participate in the Moravian tradition, culture and heritage of the community.

There is certainly a non-Federal match. It will be $205,000. The total project cost is $350,000. The amount of funding in the bill is $150,000 of Federal money.

Just coincidentally, there was an article today in one of the local newspapers back home: ``Moravian College gets $130,000 historic grant. The Getty Foundation cash focuses on preserving classic architecture.''

I am just going to restate and read briefly a few things said in the local paper today about this campus about which I am speaking. Moravian College again is the sixth oldest college in the country. It has 11 buildings in the National Register of Historic Places, all of the them in the Priscilla Payne Hurd campus downtown. They include the Brethren House, built in 1748, which the Getty Foundation called ``one of the best examples of colonial German architecture in the country.''

That is what a group of philanthropists in California said about this particular campus in the City of Bethlehem. This is historically significant, and this grant will support a comprehensive evaluation of the college's buildings and form the basis of an historic preservation plan.

One of the stated goals of the project is to ``develop strategies for using, preserving, and enhancing historic structures.''

The president of the college just said today that he is proud of the continuous use of its oldest structures: ``Our students study music and practice Bach in the very rooms in which so many remarkable young students did nearly two centuries ago. Moravian's historic structures are alive and vital, the past in the continuous present.''

That is what the president of the college said.

I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman.

I did want to say that, again, this campus, this gallery, and by the way, Priscilla Payne Hurd is alive and well, she is in her eighties, a wonderful matriarch of the community, philanthropist, has contributed so much to this community in preserving the culture and the heritage of America. This is not simply about my hometown. This is about American history and culture and, frankly, faith. Faith. The Moravians were people of great faith.

Again, every year people come to Bethlehem in great numbers to hear Bach. They come here to hear Bach. Moravian is such a integral part of that. You really can't separate the Moravians from the City of Bethlehem, again, the Christmas City. We are very proud of what they do there.

I believe this project fits precisely into the definition of the Saving America's Treasures program. You couldn't find a better fit.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I want to make four points about this amendment that I'm offering here today. First, the expansion of Indian or tribal gambling, particularly off-reservation casino gambling, has gone far beyond what was intended by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988.

Twenty years ago, there were no tribal casinos. Today, there are approximately 406 Indian casinos in 29 States.

Revenue from Indian gambling has gone from $0 to $19 billion in 20 years. These extraordinary profits have caused casino interests to form alliances with tribes in order to establish more profitable casinos in locations far removed from existing reservations.

The second point I want to make, and there are very specific examples of ``reservation shopping,'' as we like to refer to this. One, the St. Regis Bank of Mohawk Indians is trying to build a casino 350 miles from its reservation.

The Bad River Band of Lake Superior and St. Croix Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin are trying to build a casino in Michigan, over 300 miles from its existing reservation.

The Pueblo of Jemez of New Mexico are trying to build a casino in Anthony, New Mexico, over 290 miles from its reservation.

The Mohegan Tribe of Connecticut, along with the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin, is trying to build the largest casino between New Jersey and Las Vegas in Kenosha, Wisconsin, over 1,000 miles from the Mohegan lands in Connecticut.

As of May 2006, there were some 40 applications to approve new casino operations pending at the Bureau of Indian Affairs, casinos that are, for the most part, destined for off-reservation sites.

The third point I want to make is that the expansion of tribal gambling has had a corrupting influence on the political system and has forced local municipalities and homeowners to go to court to essentially protect their properties from casino interests anxious to seize their lands.

Tribal casino profits are high, and regulation of tribal gaming profits is minimal. As a result, Jack Abramoff was able to take an estimated $85 million from the Mississippi Choctaw and other tribes. He was able to use some of this money to bribe entities within the political system, sometimes to further the interest of one client as against those of another.

Casino interests have also allied with local Indian tribes to sue municipalities and landowners. In the 15th District of Pennsylvania, which I represent, the Delaware Nation, which is actually based in Oklahoma, filed in Federal court to establish title to a 315-acre tract of land in Northampton County, Pennsylvania, near Easton, so that it could build a gambling facility. Its claim was based in part on a conveyance that ostensibly occurred in 1737, well before the establishment of our country.

More than 25 families live on this property, and it is also home of the Crayola Company, which makes the much beloved Crayola crayons that our children all enjoy.

Although the suit was ultimately resolved in favor of the homeowners and the plaintiffs lost in every courtroom, the deep-pocketed interests behind this lawsuit were able to fund this litigation all the way to the United States Supreme Court, causing no small amount of apprehension among the innocent home owners and business owners here.

Tribal organizations do recognize that there are problems with this expansion. Several support meaningful limitations on off-reservation tribal gambling.

And the fourth and final point that I would like to make about this amendment, Mr. Chairman, is that the time has come for Congress to step in. This amendment is the first step towards reforming a system that has simply spun out of control.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs published proposed regulations on October 5, 2006, but these regulations are weak and do not adopt meaningful criteria or standards.

The Congress must step in and reassert its regulatory authority over off-reservation gambling by enacting comprehensive reform of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988. Until that's done, we need to have a moratorium on off-reservation gambling, which this amendment will, in effect, accomplish.

The amendment directs specifically that no funds shall be expended to process any applications for off-reservation casinos under section 20(b)(1) of IGRA of fiscal year 2008.

The amendment will have no impact, and let me repeat this: The amendment will have no impact on existing on-or off-reservation casino operations, as they have already gone through the BIA approval process. This will not impact any tribal casino that is currently operating on- or off-reservation.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to point out the fact that this problem has simply spun out of control in this country. Last session, we attempted to deal with this in a bill that would restrict off-site. Off-reservation tribal gambling was defeated. I think we need to try this again.

The regulations that were mentioned are simply weak and not meaningful enough, in my view, and I think we need the proposed regulations.

I would strongly urge that Congress reassert itself and take control over

this issue. I don't believe that the authors of the Indian Gaming Act of 1988 intended that we would have a situation in this country today where 29 States would now have casinos, 406 tribal casinos in 29 States. I don't think that was the intent. I haven't met anybody who voted for that law who thought that was what they were voting for at the time, but that is what we have now.

In my district, there has been great hardship. I mean, a 1737 land conveyance, a 1737 land conveyance, going back to William Penn and the Walking Purchase. That is what we are talking about here, taking land of homeowners, a crayon factory, a much beloved crayon factory, and I think it is time for us to act. It is time for this Congress to act. We have had a lot of time to deal with this issue. We have not done so.

And with that, again, I respectfully ask all my colleagues, and I understand the process that we are engaged in here, but we need this type of a moratorium. It is absolutely essential. I think it will send a message to the authorizing committees, to the Department of Interior that we are serious about this issue, that we have had enough. Enough is enough. Too many people are being displaced or potentially displaced, clouds over the properties to their titles, again, in my case, over a 1737 land conveyance. Again, these were big developers working in concert with the tribes and spending enormous amounts of money and people having to defend themselves. And it really has gotten to the point of being outrageous, and I think we need to act once again. And I respectfully ask for the support of everyone here.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Offered By: Mr. Dent

Amendment No. 13: Page 111, after line 17, insert the

following:

Madam Speaker, it is with great enthusiasm that I share with my colleagues an article prepared by Mr. Myron Yoder, the Social Studies Curriculum Coordinator for the Allentown School District in Allentown, Pennsylvania, regarding the School Violence Prevention Demonstration Program.

The School Violence Prevention Demonstration Program is administered by the Center for Civic Education through the U.S. Department of Education. The program explores how civic education can be used as a strategy to foster civic engagement, law-abiding behavior, the peaceful management of conflict, and the prevention of violence in schools. Currently, the program is being implemented at grades 4 through 12 in urban, suburban, rural, and Native American school districts at 24 sites in 19 States across the Nation. The article is below.

Civic Education To Be Celebrated in ASD Schools June 5: A Call to the

Allentown Community. Join Us

(By Myron Yoder)

Good civics--practice and recognition--is a concern and

part of the fabric of every healthy community. To a school,

civics is a fundamental part of instruction; to a diverse

society, it is an imperative to maintain and grow our

civilized way of life. The Allentown School District has been

involved in a federal grant administered through the Center

for Civic Education called the School Violence Prevention

Demonstration Program, or SVPDP, for short. This civics-based

curricular program has become ASD's elementary civics

component for social studies in grades K-5. The goal behind

the program is essential to our society: If you build good

civics practices with students in school communities, then

you proactively deal with issues of student attitudes,

behavior and, theoretically, head off school violence by more

students. This year, the Allentown School District civics

program is in over 400 classrooms and reaches over 8,000

students.

The many planned ``culminating'' activities at the end of

students' studies this spring are deliberately performance-

based not only to allow for creativity and self-expression by

our students and teachers but also to provide a means to

integrate learning and foster even stronger academic growth.

Many parents notice students discussing issues at home with

them as well as noticing a desire to become involved in

issues our community faces. These culminating activities are

occurring in many of our schools over the months of May and

June. You can check with your neighborhood school for when

these events are planned. We invite you to observe our

students showcasing their learning this year.

Best of all, the SVPDP program helps ASD students become

citizens of our community, our state and our nation. Further,

we see a difference in many of our students, not only

academically but also with attitudes and behaviors that we

believe will proactively prevent school violence in many of

our students.

The time has come to recognize, celebrate and thank our

staff and students for this very committed effort on their

part. On June 5, 2007 there will be a ``Civic Celebration''

lunch served by ASD's Child Nutrition Services department to

celebrate SVPDP efforts in the schools and to recognize the

work of our students and staff in this program.

Many schools will have culminating activities going on,

community service activities, award ceremonies, school clean

up, community awareness or simply taking a moment over lunch

to say thank you to the staff and students for their efforts.

Each school will be doing something different that day, but

all will celebrate civic participation with the lunch.

Citizens of Allentown, here are some of the expressions of

understanding and change that ASD children and their teachers

are experiencing with this program:

``Because I was a bully, I had a little bit of friends.

Most of them were bullies, too. The responsibility book

helped me stop being a bully. And now I have friends cause I

am not a bully. Bullying is not for me!''--Fourth grader,

Jackson ES.

``I ask the children what they have learned through the

stories and plays and they say: Be fair to others so that

they will be fair to you; There are consequences for our

actions; Share with other people; Don't be a bully; Be nice

to your friends; Be helpful to other people; Obey the

laws.''--Lou Ann Hein, Teacher, 2nd Grade, Dodd ES.

``I just wanted to tell you how much I have enjoyed

teaching SVPDP and how much my students enjoyed it and

learned from it. It covers so many issues students need in

order to be good citizens and addresses issues they often

don't understand. It has always been difficult to fit social

studies into first grade but the journal coordinated exactly

with what I was teaching in reading and writing, so there was

plenty of time for social studies!''--Elizabeth Harting,

Teacher, 1st Grade, Cleveland ES.

Allentown School District has a clear and dedicated

commitment to teaching the qualities and values important to

our society. We ask parents and the Allentown Community to

join us in educating for America's future by celebrating

civics on June 5, 2007.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

I rise today to offer this amendment to help the United States Secret Service meet its protection obligations.

This Homeland Security appropriations bill funds the Secret Service to the tune of $1.39 billion. The plain language of the bill does not specify how these moneys should be allocated as between the Secret Service's protection and investigative operations. However, the committee report provides that $849.6 million should go to protective missions, while approximately $314.5 million is allocated to investigations.

While I sincerely commend the Appropriations Committee for providing these funds to the Secret Service, I would respectfully submit that the committee has underestimated the demands placed upon the Service's protection mission during this Presidential election cycle. Accordingly, my amendment would add approximately $4 million to that protection function from those moneys that would otherwise go to investigations.

This funding upgrade is required because of the increased responsibilities

thrust upon the Secret Service's protection component within the last few years. Before 9/11, the Secret Service had 20 protectees. Since 9/ 11, that number has increased to 54. Just last month, the number of protectees reached 55 when a Presidential hopeful was given Secret Service protection, at an estimated cost of about $44,000 per day. This additional expenditure was never considered in the President's budget request.

Now is not the time to strip $4 million from the Service's protective missions, particularly when the cost to protect Senator Obama for just the first 4 months of fiscal year 2008 are estimated at $5.456 million. This amendment ensures that the Secret Service is not bound by the report language which would transfer $4 million from the Joint Operations Center relocation to the field investigations account.

I believe that the actions by the committee have made sure that the Secret Service will still be able to perform its investigatory functions with its usual skill and alacrity. In that regard, the committee had the foresight to provide the field investigation units of the Secret Service a plus-up of $10.4 million over and above the amount the President requested for investigations.

On May 29, 2007, just a few weeks ago, the Washington Post reported that the Secret Service was transferring agents from investigations to security details and borrowing law enforcement officers from other Federal agencies in order to meet its protection obligations. Faced with wartime security needs, the threat of terrorism, and a field of 20 Presidential contenders, the Washington Post continued that the Service was ``showing signs of strain'' even before the Department of Homeland Security ordered protection for Senator Obama. It is my hope that this amendment will help to ease that strain and allow this dedicated group of professionals to keep performing at the high level to which we have all become accustomed.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Offered By: Mr. Dent

Amendment No. 102: Page 33, line 15, after ``of which''

insert the following: ``$853,690,000 is for protective

missions and''.

Mr. Speaker, we have come to the floor many times over the past few years to discuss the advancement of various forms of stem cell research: adult, cord blood, amniotic, embryonic. We have had discussions about the science and about our moral obligations and about ethics. These discussions have been passionate and heartfelt. We have all come to the floor with the best of intentions.

For some of us, our feelings on these issues have been colored by personal experiences with our own families. For all of us, our stance has been informed by the conversations we have had with our constituents.

I have had countless discussions with my constituents about embryonic stem cell research. In particular, there are two families from my district whose personal stories have made a profound impact on my thinking about this issue, the Sheaffers from Kempton, Pennsylvania, and the Pitts from Nazareth.

I am very happy that the Pitts family, Melissa and Jeff and their sons, Ryan and Alex, are able to be with us today. I first met Melissa and the boys in 2005. Ryan and Alex are energetic 6-year-old twin boys. You could not tell them apart if not for the fact that Alex is in a wheelchair. Alex suffered a spinal cord injury at birth and has been paralyzed since. Melissa has told me that the promise of embryonic stem cell research gives her hope, hope that advances will allow her son, Alex, to live the same kind of independent life that Ryan will enjoy.

Every day that goes by while we play politics with science is a day that we could have gotten one step closer to finding therapies for kids like Alex. I urge my colleagues to support S. 5. This is an important bill which will ensure that researchers adhere to the highest possible principles of scientific inquiry and respect critical ethical boundaries while advancing some of the most important research of our time.

Madam Speaker, today I will introduce legislation to designate the third week of October as ``National Teen Driver Safety Week.''

Unfortunately, roughly 7,500 teenage drivers were involved in fatal car crashes in 2005. The time has come for us to recognize this terrible problem and consider effective interventions that will help reduce the number of accidents involving teens.

On Monday, January 22, 2007, following a tragic accident that claimed the lives of two Pennsylvania high school students, the Morning Call compiled a report of fatal crashes involving teens that had occurred in the Lehigh Valley region since 2001. This report indicated that there were a total of 13 fatalities between 2001 and 2006, with alcohol involved in two of the seven accidents reported. Other contributing factors included racing and reckless behavior. Sadly, it appears these events could have been prevented, enabling these children to reach their destinations safely.

To address this troubling issue, the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia is currently conducting research that will help develop the best interventions to reduce the risk of crash injury for teen drivers and travelers sharing the road with them. The alliance of CHOP and State Farm Insurance Company, its partner in this initiative, is nationally recognized for its research and outreach involving child passenger safety. However, this year they have expanded their agenda from the car seat to the driver's seat in an effort to address the cause of motor vehicle crashes, the leading cause of death among American teenagers. Together, CHOP and State Farm have conducted research indicating that teens often drive while distracted and fatigued. I believe this alliance between CHOP and State Farm brings together a wide range of expertise in research and outreach-- translating scientific evidence into actions that will help save lives.

It is important that Congress supports efforts to effectively educate teens and families about ways to address these problems. This resolution will support the goals and ideals of a week in which intensive programming will be used to encourage teens to drive more safely. By perhaps delaying exposure to risky driving conditions until they have enough supervised driving experience, managing peer-to-peer interactions around driving, and reinforcing the need to detect and react to hazards more appropriately, teens will be better prepared to drive responsibly.

Madam Speaker, teens are dying in crashes at a rate of four times that of adult drivers and we must act now to prevent future tragedies.

I too want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Inglis) for working together so well to bring this important piece of legislation to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I was proud to join 415 of my colleagues in supporting this bill last Congress, and I am pleased that the H-Prize Act has been brought up again so that we can have an opportunity to enact this important legislation into law.

I rise in strong support of H.R. 632, the H-Prize Act. The Constitution of the United States provides that Congress has the power to promote the progress of science and the useful arts. We, in Congress, have an opportunity and obligation to promote scientific advancement today. For more than a century, America's industry, transportation, and households have been heavily reliant on foreign oil. We must now face newer realities.

Petroleum is a finite resource. No matter how much we explore and discover, we will one day run out and booming worldwide demand is burning up resources and driving up prices. We must search for alternatives to wean us off our addiction to foreign sources of oil. The drive to produce energy economically can be advanced to American innovation and competition.

Fossil fuel technology was the impetus for 20th century industrial development. Today, hydrogen holds a promise of being the driver for the economy of the future and ushering in a new generation of an American energy independence.

Hydrogen makes up 98 percent of the known universe, and it is the third most abundant element of the earth's surface. It is the lightest of all gases, the coldest of all liquids, next to helium. As a component of water, minerals and acids, it makes up a fundamental part of all hydrocarbons and organic substances. Hydrogen is renewable, abundant, efficient and clean. Unlike carbon-based fuels, it does not create fumes or other harmful emissions.

In fact, using hydrogen in fuel cells produces only electricity and pure water. By awarding prizes in three of the most critical areas of technological development, the H-Prize Act will incentivize the realization of scientific advancements that will break down the obstacles that stand in the way of the hydrogen economy.

Specifically, H-Prize will promote technological advancements in hydrogen production, storage, distribution and utilization. Prizes will be awarded for the development of hydrogen vehicle prototypes that meet ambitious performance goals. Finally, the bill will award the implementation of critical transformational technologies.

We are not that far away from making hydrogen a functional source of energy. H.R. 632 will speed the development of breakthrough technologies that will make hydrogen a practical alternative to oil in our transportation sector and set our Nation on a path toward energy independence. I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 632.

Again, I do want to commend the two gentlemen, Mr. Lipinski of Illinois and Mr. Inglis of South Carolina, for their strong advocacy on this critical issue.

Thank you so much, Congressman Israel and Congressman Bishop, for helping to organize this Special Order tonight. I think the American people expect this much of us, that they like to see this type of civil, controlled dialogue where we are trying to rally around, I think, some shared principles that we can pretty much agree to, that we are talking about this in a proper tone, keeping the temperature down, so to speak. And I think that that is what the public expects instead of all the sometimes hot air and noise and at times excessive partisanship that seems to be the public perception of how this institution operates far too often.

And I just want to take a couple of moments to commend you, Congressman Israel, on something that you have shared with many of us who participate in the Center Aisle Caucus, and that is the idea of a Status of Forces Agreement and how such an agreement might be of benefit to us in Iraq.

And for purposes of this discussion, that Status of Forces Agreement is an agreement that is worked out between our government and the foreign country that delineates the legal partnership between the troops who are deployed to that country and the host government. And that is a very significant issue.

In the civil side of the law, for example, a Status of Forces Agreement can spell out proceedings under which nationals of the host country may file claims against the United States for damage to property of these nationals that has been inadvertently caused by the United States Armed Forces. An agreement is also important because it can be used to spell out jurisdictional issues with regard to criminal offenses. For example, these agreements are often used to make sure that American servicemembers who commit offenses overseas and are tried by U.S. military courts-martial rather than local courts. They can also delineate the conditions under which U.S. servicemembers charged with crimes within the boundaries of the host country are treated. A Status of Forces Agreement can specify, for example, that a servicemember accused of a crime in violation of local laws must be detained on board a ship or some other U.S. installation rather than await trial in a local jail.

We have never had a Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqi government. I know that is something that you have been strongly advocating, and I believe it is high time that we implement one for a few reasons. First, a Status of Forces Agreement is an agreement between two sovereign nations. By executing such an agreement, we would be affirming sovereignty of the Maliki government and the right, as well as the obligation, of that government to exercise control over its own territory.

Second, a Status of Forces Agreement would send a clear message both to the Iraqis and to other countries in the region that we do not intend to establish permanent bases in Iraq, I think something that many of us on both sides of the aisle agree. And this agreement is usually negotiated for a fixed period of time, and it can be renewed or not, as was the case with the old Subic Bay naval base in the Republic of the Philippines.

The Philippines example is instructive, I think, in this instance. There

the Aquino government asserted its sovereign rights over Subic Bay by refusing to renew a prior agreement and other related treaties with our government in 1992. Thus the world was made to know that even though the U.S. had a presence in Subic Bay and a neighboring city for more than 90 years prior to that time, that presence was not permanent and was subject to an agreement that had to be agreed to by both nations. And third, as described a few moments ago, this agreement, if properly negotiated, can protect U.S. forces from being tried by foreign courts or prevent them from being detained in Iraqi facilities if charged with a crime under foreign law. This kind of measure is necessary to make sure that Americans operating overseas have the fullest protections afforded to them by Federal jurisprudence.

I also really want to thank you again for organizing this, and I think these shared principles you have outlined here are really a basis upon which we can have further dialogue. And a little later in this Special Order, I might want to talk about the Iraq Study Group recommendations, the Baker-Hamilton report, that I think many of us on both sides of the aisle have a good feeling about, and there is legislation that has been proposed and recently introduced, and I will get into that a little later.

At this time I would like to yield to one of our other colleagues, the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), who has been to Iraq 17 times now.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to endorse the gentleman from Connecticut's idea about reconstituting the Iraq Study Group and sending them back over to Iraq at some point to help give us an update of this very useful report. I think we all can agree that many of us in this country, and I suspect in Iraq too, are frustrated by this slow pace of reconciliation that is ongoing in Iraq.

But, again, another point about this report, and I think this gathering tonight, I think this helps us as Americans try to reconcile our differences. We talk about Iraqi reconciliation, but I think in many respects we need a little reconciliation of our own.

Well, it is a very fair point in many respects. I just want to point out something. When I first read this report back in December when it was first released, I had some concerns too, like many people, about some of the recommendations, particularly the recommendation about directly engaging Iran, for all the reasons we have identified. Ahmadinejad is a virulent anti-Semite. He has made such inflammatory comments. I think we all agree he is a menace.

After listening to Jim Baker and Lee Hamilton talk about the issue, I don't think any of us expect there to be any real process in a dialogue with Iran at a sub-cabinet level, but I think we also realize that you need to have that kind of a conversation initially and let the Iranians be an obstruction themselves, so we can then isolate them internationally and also perhaps drive a wedge between the Iranian Government and the Syrian Government.

I think it makes absolutely no sense for the Syrians to be engaged in destructive behavior in Iraq, given the fact that they have more than 1 million refugees, primarily Sunni, who are in Syria. Of course, Syria is ruled by Allawites, who represent about 10 percent of that country. So it is clearly not in Syria's interest to have protracted instability in Iraq.

So, again, I just wanted to thank the gentleman from Connecticut for his thoughtful idea about getting the Iraq Study Group back over there, perhaps hearing what General Petraeus says and make some recommendations on what he has said, and maybe give us a bipartisan way for us to move forward.

I think Americans want a solution. They don't want an issue in Iraq, but they want a solution. I think that is one of the great things about this dialogue tonight.

I yield back to the gentleman from New York.

I too want to commend the gentleman from New York for organizing this event tonight, this special order. We need to see a little bit more of this type of activity in this Congress, and I hope the American people who are watching this exercise tonight maybe find this a little bit different or maybe a little bit more refreshing than what they are accustomed to during special orders. I just want to thank you for putting this together.

One final point. I think Mr. Gilchrest made the point about interaction with Syria on a commercial basis in this country. A constituent called just the other day who imports various food products from Syria, because I have a large Middle Eastern community in my district. And just some of the challenges, they just want to go about life as they normally would.

I thought it was interesting. It kind of brings back home the point that people want to coexist peacefully. That the challenges and the stakes are very high in Iraq, and I think all of us want to make sure that whatever policy is pursued, particularly after September, it is one that is responsible and one that will make us all safer and hopefully the region more stable.

So, again, thank you, Mr. Israel, for putting this on. It is much appreciated.

Mr. Speaker, I do want to take a moment today to thank my colleague from Missouri, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Skelton, for providing this opportunity today to honor an American hero.

I rise today to discuss H. Res. 171, a bill to recognize the 250th anniversary of the birth of the Marquis de Lafayette.

On September 6, 2007, our Nation will celebrate the 250th birthday of one of the truly outstanding and extraordinary people in our country's history, the Marquis de Lafayette.

Born in the Auvergne section of France, Lafayette did not become an honorary American citizen until 2002, some 168 years after his death. He was commissioned with the rank of major general in the Continental Army just shy of his 20th birthday, and he soon became one of George Washington's closest confidants. The first foreign dignitary to address the House of Representatives, Lafayette was a steadfast supporter of liberty, loyalty and democracy.

You have heard many of my colleagues speak to Lafayette's legacy as a military leader. I rise today to offer a different perspective as to Lafayette's influence on our Nation's history.

Lafayette College, located in my district in eastern Pennsylvania, was founded in 1826 by the citizens of Easton. And I am here once again to commemorate this auspicious occasion and ask that my colleagues join me in this celebration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the distinguished Bach choir of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, our Nation's oldest choir dedicated to the performance and celebration of musical masterpieces composed by Johann Sebastian Bach. Founded in 1898 under the direction of J. Fred Wolle, the organist of the Bethlehem Moravian Church, the choir is celebrating the 100th anniversary of the annual Bach Festival this month.

In 1900, the Bach choir presented their first performance of ``The Mass in B Minor'' in the Moravian Church in Bethlehem during the Bach Festival. Although the next Bach Festival was not held again until 1912, the Festival has blossomed into a long-standing cultural tradition in Bethlehem, attracting visitors from all around the Nation and the world each year. During the festival, the choir will once again breathe life into Bach's Mass in B Minor.

Since its inception, the choir has been a shining star in the city of Bethlehem. Today, the choir is comprised of 95 volunteer members and performs under the leadership and direction of Greg Funfgeld. This unique ensemble has gained international acclaim for their artistry. The choir has been welcomed to perform on some of the most renowned stages in the world, including the Kennedy Center, Carnegie Hall, Munich's Royal Residence, as well as London's Royal Albert Hall as part of a concert tour in the United Kingdom.

Furthermore, countless listeners have tuned in across the globe to listen to the choir on National Public Radio and the BBC World Service. The discipline and talent that ushers this choir around the world is also shared with children and the young musicians in Lehigh Valley through music education programs.

I would just like to commend all the good people at the Bach choir and congratulate them on this 100th anniversary of the Bach Festival.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on the Homeland Security authorization bill, H.R. 1684.

The stated purpose of H.R. 1684 is to enhance homeland security. Unfortunately, the restricted rule enacted at the behest of the majority excludes certain measures that would have increased our domestic security. One such provision is my amendment on the Automated Targeting System for Passengers, or ATS-P. ATS-P coordinates information already available from sources and allows Customs and Border Protection to perform risk assessments of people entering the United States. In this way CBP can identify a person of interest and question that individual before, let me repeat, before that person gains formal admission into this country.

This amendment would have been a positive step towards improving border security.

ATS-P is a system that is already deployed and that has already had some notable successes. It would have fulfilled a 9/11 Commission recommendation. And yet the majority remains opposed to it and made sure that it was not made in order. The motive behind that exclusion remains a mystery.

The mystery deepens when one considers what was made in order today, specifically one portion of the manager's amendment. During committee proceedings at my request, we inserted language authorizing funding for the United States Secret Service. The Secret Service, once an entity of the Treasury Department, now falls within the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security. The Secret Service plays an important function in safeguarding the citizens of this country. The amendment I offered would have fully funded the President's request for the Secret Service's protection missions. It also would have provided over $322 million for Investigations and Field Operations, the unit within the Secret Service that investigates and prosecutes counterfeiting, fraud and identity theft.

Mr. Chairman, I will insert a copy of a letter into the Record from the National Fraternal Order of Police endorsing the inclusion of Secret Service funding within the Homeland Security authorization bill.

Fraternal Order of Police,

Washington, DC, May 8, 2007.

Hon. Bennie Thompson,

Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, Washington, DC.

Hon. Peter King,

Ranking Member, Committee on Homeland Security, Washington,

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

I am in its present form.

Mr. Speaker, if this Congress is serious, truly serious about implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, Members should vote in favor of this motion to recommit.

The 9/11 Commission told us that we needed to develop a better border security system. And, let me repeat. This amendment implements a key 9/ 11 Commission recommendation.

Specifically, the 9/11 Commission advised the President to direct the Department of Homeland Security to design a comprehensive screening system that would target particular identifiable suspects or indicators of risk and give border officials the resources to establish that people are who they say they are, intercept identifiable suspects and disrupt terrorist operations. They went on to say and conclude that targeting travel is at least as powerful a weapon against terrorists as targeting their money, and that is the 9/11 Commission Report, recommendation 14, page 385, and recommended that a terrorist travel intelligence collection and analysis program which had produced disproportionately useful results should be expanded.

The Automated Targeting System for Passengers is such a system, and this motion would reinforce our intention to see ATS-P utilized at all of our Nation's international border crossing points.

ATS-P is nothing new. It is already being utilized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, or CBP. It has been authorized in several appropriations bills, and the Department of Homeland Security has testified before Congress about the program several times.

ATS-P does not violate anyone's constitutional rights. It is deployed only at the border. And Federal courts have said time and time again that screening people who are trying to enter our country at a port of entry is perfectly permissible under the fourth amendment.

All ATS-P does is collect information from available sources, the Treasury Enforcement Communications System, or TECS, and the Passenger Name Record databases, so that CBP can perform risk assessments of people trying to enter the United States.

ATS-P addresses a major software issue that had previously hampered border control efforts. TECS has existed since the 1970s but was written in a cumbersome programming language that was difficult for Border Patrol agents to access. ATS-P just makes it easier for CBP to make inquiries into this database.

The bottom line here is that ATS-P, after factoring in the available information, indicates to the Customs and Border Protection officer whether an international traveler should be flagged for additional screening or questioning. That CBP officer retains the discretion to do with that information as he or she pleases. But by giving advance notice of an investigatory lead, ATS-P allows the officer and the agency to operate more effectively, to engage in screening that is risk-based. It is not surprising, then, that CBP considers ATS-P to be the cornerstone of its targeting efforts at the border.

ATS-P has had notable successes. It has been credited with identifying persons of interest to border security officials in Atlanta, Minneapolis and Boston.

For all of us here in the Congress who are serious about border security, this motion, which supports the already existing ATS-P program, is an absolute no-brainer: It follows the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. It provides needed information to CBP officers. It does not violate anyone's civil or constitutional rights. And, most importantly, it works. For all the reasons I have just stated, I ask respectfully that you vote in favor of the motion to recommit.

At this time, I yield to the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, Mr. King of New York.

Will the gentlelady yield?

Would the gentleman yield?

I would like to thank the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for arranging this opportunity to come to the floor to raise awareness of the ongoing effects of 9/11.

I am proud to say that so many from Pennsylvania answered the first call very, very quickly, among some of the first there after the New Yorkers, who helped deal with the aftermath of those horrible attacks.

As we all know, September 11, 2001, was one of the darkest days in American history. Nearly 3,000 innocent people were killed in separate incidents in

New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia. These attacks were intended to instill fear in our hearts and minds and to shake our American spirit.

They did not have that desired effect. Instead, they unified a Nation and strengthened the resolve of the American people. I neglected to mention that one of my own relatives was in the North Tower and, thankfully, made it out. He was on the 91st floor, made it out. All of his colleagues did, too, but nobody above them did. So this issue has touched us all in many ways.

September 11, and the long days that followed, bore witness to inspiring acts of heroism and self-sacrifice. As rescue and recovery efforts unfolded, we saw Americans reaching out to one another, united in a determination to make the country whole again.

Whether it was neighbor helping neighbor or stranger helping stranger, Americans from across the country simply gave of themselves, and operating at the front lines of this effort were local first responders. I would like to take this opportunity to talk about one of those first responders, a selfless and heroic individual by the name of Ryan McCormick.

Ryan, a native of Bethlehem Township in my district, has led a life of service that we should all try to emulate. An Eagle Scout of the Minsi Trails Council, Ryan committed himself to public service at a very young age. Whether he was volunteering at the Bethlehem Township Volunteer Fire Company, performing search and rescue operations with the Civil Air Patrol, or defending our Nation as an 8-year veteran of the United States Army Reserve, Ryan has always been concerned about the well-being of others.

Taking the Boy Scout motto of ``Be Prepared'' to heart, Ryan was, indeed, prepared and acted without hesitation on that fateful Tuesday, Tuesday morning of September 11. Ryan was working as a paramedic in Newark, New Jersey, when his unit was dispatched to the terrorist attacks. Relying on his years of preparation and experience and firmly committed to helping others, Ryan worked tirelessly from September 11 to September 13. The work was hard, dirty and dangerous and heartbreaking. But Ryan persisted. For him, duty came first.

But Ryan McCormick paid a terrible price for his determination and resolve. In late 2002, Ryan started to become sick. In the spring of 2003, he was diagnosed with Hodgkin's disease, a cancer of the lymphatic system. He has undergone consistent treatment for over 4 years, including a stem cell transplant. He is still fighting valiantly against his cancer and soon hopes to be well enough for another stem cell transplant.

But Ryan is not alone. Many of the first responders who worked to ease the suffering of the innocent are now suffering life-threatening illnesses. Fortunately, Ryan, like the rest of his first responder colleagues, is a fighter. And I am proud to let you know that Ryan has joined us tonight and is seated in the Gallery.

Ryan continues to battle this cancer while continuing his service to others. Ryan is the director of emergency management for New Jersey's largest health care system, serves as the Essex County emergency management deputy EMS coordinator and is a lieutenant for the Verona, New Jersey, rescue squad.

In addition, Ryan has started a nonprofit corporation that raises money to buy iPods for cancer patients undergoing cancer treatment. This organization is named Project Turtle Pods, and more information about this endeavor can be found at www.projectturtlepods.com. Ryan, the House of Representatives welcomes you and thanks you for your courageous service on September 11th. You exemplify all that is great about the American spirit.

As ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee's Subcommittee on Emergency Communications, Preparedness and Response, I am very well aware of the sacrifices our country's first responders make to ensure the safety of others. In turn, we in Congress must take on the responsibility of protecting those who sacrifice to protect us. That is why I have agreed to cosponsor Representative Maloney's bill, House Resolution 128, which urges the Department of Health and Human Services to prepare a long-term, comprehensive plan to medically monitor all individuals who were exposed to the toxins of Ground Zero.

Of all the lessons we learned from the terrorist attacks of 9/11, there is one first and foremost that stands out: We must not forget those individuals who continue to suffer in the aftermath of these events. The spirit found in Ryan McCormick is fundamentally American. It is this can-do attitude that assures us that we as a Nation can rise to meet any challenge that we encounter. Let us follow the example that Ryan has set for us and help those who are suffering from afflictions precipitated by their involvement in the 9/11 rescue, recovery and cleanup efforts. The people who gave so much to us at that site deserve nothing less.

Again, I want to thank the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for tonight's opportunity to speak on this important issue and her commitment to our Nation's first responders. I want to thank her for her friendship and her leadership on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.