Floor Statements

I thank my colleague for yielding time to me.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support this short-term authorization for the FAA because we simply cannot allow our transportation system to fail. However, I believe this country and its airspace would be better served by the FAA if this legislation demanded greater accountability and responsiveness from this agency.

We need to continue to invest in our air transportation system to make it safer and more efficient. Airline passenger volume continues to increase, and the percentage of flights delayed 15 minutes or more in 2007 is close to surpassing the record set in 2000.

Many business travelers are rightfully frustrated by the long delays and inefficiencies at these airports. However, I am opposed to the FAA's implementation of its preferred Integrated Airspace Alternative, which will redesign the New York, New Jersey and Philadelphia airspace to mitigate air traffic congestion. Furthermore, the arrogance I have experienced in working with the FAA to mitigate airline congestion and improve efficiency at some of our Nation's most congested airports, like LaGuardia, Kennedy and Newark, is palpable.

In deciding to move forward with its Integrated Airspace Alternative, the FAA had three other alternatives to choose from, but selected the congestion mitigation plan that would shift the approach for flights to LaGuardia to the north, which would reroute significant air traffic over previously unaffected populated areas. The FAA has refused to consider other market-based measures that could be equally as effective and less extreme than redesigning the airspace.

I am particularly disappointed the FAA has not implemented any noise mitigation strategies in the district I represent, or many districts throughout the northeast, despite the wide swath of land over the Fourth District that will be adversely impacted by planes flying as low as 4,000 feet. I believe if the FAA was required to take quality of life concerns into consideration, it would not have decided to implement its preferred Integrated Airspace Alternative.

Time and again I have shared my concerns and the concerns of my constituents with the FAA and emphasized

the fact that the plan would bring countless more planes into the region at the expense of the region's quality of life. It seems to many of us there are other solutions that need to be considered before implementing such a radical alternative that negatively affects so many thousands of residents throughout the northeast.

Even though there is no mandate to consider quality of life issues, the FAA simply must not ignore the hugely negative impacts of air noise in this process.

In closing, it is my hope that in the long term we can address the need to upgrade and improve our air transportation system and demand greater accountability from the FAA.

Mr. Speaker, as cochair of the Congressional Friends of Animals Caucus, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 350, which states that the United States, through the International Whaling Commission, IWC, should use all appropriate measures to end commercial whaling in all its forms, and seek to strengthen whale conservation.

In 1986, the IWC instituted a moratorium on the commercial killing of whales. In spite of this, some countries continue to hunt whales under the guise of scientific research.

For example, in November 2007, the Japanese whaling fleet set out for the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary with plans to kill over

1,000 whales. Whale meat and blubber are sold commercially, yet Japan continues to insist that this is permissible under the scientific research provision of the IWC.

Not only has Japan increased the number of whales it plans to kill this year, it has also declared it will kill 50 endangered humpback whales. Since 1960, humpbacks have been fully protected from commercial whaling by the IWC.

The Japanese whaling fleet's continued circumvention of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling is truly an outrage. The IWC has repeatedly condemned this hunt, urging an end to this needless and brutal slaughter. The U.S. delegation to the IWC must stand firmly opposed to this shameful practice, and reaffirm its commitment to protecting whales from commercial hunting. I urge support of H. Con. Res. 350.

Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the Congressional Friends of Animals Caucus, I

rise in support of H.R. 2964, the Captive Primate Safety Act, which prohibits the sale of nonhuman primates such as chimpanzees, monkeys, and lemurs.

I am concerned about both the public health and animal welfare implications of nonhuman primate ownership, which this legislation addresses. For example, nonhuman primates can spread disease and inflict serious injury on their owners. They require a special diet and large habitats, two things most pet owners are unable to provide, particularly as these animals grow in size and strength.

Federal health regulations currently prohibit importing primates into the U.S. as pets, and many States prohibit pet ownership of primates as well. In spite of this, an estimated 15,000 primates are owned by private individuals, and are available for purchase around the country.

The bottom line is, the average pet owner does not have the ability to properly care for these animals and, because of this, both they and their pets are at risk.

It is appropriate we protect nonhuman primates, man's closest animal relative, by prohibiting pet ownership of this kind. I strongly support adoption of H.R. 2964.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 1237, which recognizes the historic significance of Juneteenth Independence Day and encourages its continued celebration so all Americans can learn more about our country's past.

The resolution also rightly expresses the sense of Congress that knowing our history helps us solve challenges we face in the future, and that the celebration of the end of slavery is an important part of the history and heritage of the United States.

Madam Speaker, Juneteenth has long been recognized as the day to celebrate the end of slavery in the United States. Juneteenth is the traditional celebration of the day on which the last slaves in America learned they had been freed.

Although slavery was abolished officially in 1863, it took over 2 years for news of freedom to spread to slaves. On June 19th, 1865, U.S. General Gordon Granger rode into Galveston, Texas and announced that the State's 200,000 slaves were free. Vowing never to forget the date, the former slaves coined the nickname Juneteenth, a blend of the words June and 19th. This holiday originated in the Southwest, but today it is celebrated throughout the Nation.

H. Res. 1237 underscores that the observance of Juneteenth Independence Day is an opportunity for all Americans to learn more about our common past and to better understand the experiences that have shaped our great Nation. I urge my colleagues to support this important resolution.

Madam Speaker, in compliance with Republican Conference earmark disclosure requirements, I would like to submit the following statement for the record.

Bill Number: H.R. 2645.

Account: Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force.

Line 8, 0602102.

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: United Technologies Corporation (UTC).

Address of Requesting Entity: 411 Silver Lane; M/S 129-88, East Hartford, CT 06108.

Description of Request: I received an earmark of $5M to develop and demonstrate high temperature gas turbine airfoils using fiber- reinforced ceramic matrix composite (CMC) technology, for advanced military gas turbine engines for F135 (JSF Growth). With the funding, UTC will accelerate the development of this new class of materials with significant potential DoD benefits. Recent studies have shown that CMC 3rd blades in the F135 growth engine have the potential to save more than 42 pounds of engine weight and lead to consequent cooling air savings of 1.67%, leading to significant performance improvement and fuel savings. As this is a research and development project, which is not yet under contract, a detailed budget breakdown is not yet available. Nearly all of the funding would be dedicated to engineering work.

Madam Speaker, in compliance with Republican Conference earmark disclosure requirements, I would like to submit the following statement for the Record.

Bill Number: H.R. 2645.

Account: Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army Line 179, 0708045A.

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: United Technologies Corporation (UTC).

Address of Requesting Entity: 411 Silver Lane; M/S 129--88, East Hartford, CT 06108.

Description of Request: I received an earmark of $3 million to develop a vehicle wide scaled armor protection system for cargo and troop transport helicopters to reduce their vulnerability to small arms fire. With the funding, UTC will accelerate a statistical design system based on battlefield experience that can be used to guide the placement and scaling of new armor systems. Light weight ballistic material systems, based on novel ceramic materials, can be appropriately and selectively scaled and integrated into the helicopter to significantly decrease the vulnerability while minimizing the impact on payload and mission. The solution needs to include sensitivity to direction, stand off distance, obliquity and type of threat. The armor could then be customized and integrated to provide effective ballistic protection. This solution would limit the weight impact of reduced vulnerability while maintaining the mission capability of the vehicle.

As this is a research and development project, which is not yet under contract, a detailed budget breakdown is not yet available. Nearly all of the funding would be dedicated to engineering work.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate my colleague, Mr. Mica, yielding to me.

I rise in support today of H.R. 6003, the Passenger Rail Investment Improvement Act, because we can't afford our Nation's rail service to fail. Our economy depends on it, and the September 11 terrorist attacks made clear that our country can't rely on one mode of interstate public transportation.

Amtrak hasn't succeeded because it is underfunded, its line serves too many areas which don't need service, its customer service is poor, and it lacks imagination and creativity.

I am pleased this legislation begins to address Amtrak's funding needs by providing more funding for capital improvements in operations and encouraging private sector participation, which I think is huge.

I do, however, have concerns about writing Amtrak a check with no strings attached. Increased financial reports must be linked to the reforms. We must take a hard look at profitable lines across the country, and we must have a clearer sense of Amtrak's business plan.

Mr. Chairman, the inconvenient truth is the transportation infrastructure in our country is broken. We have not maintained our commitment to our roads and highways and public transportation systems, and as a result, our transportation system, particularly rail, is failing. Making passenger rail a viable option for commuters will get cars off our congested highways, reduce the stress on our aging roads, and decrease oil consumption.

Another inconvenient truth is the rising cost of oil which is driving the cost of gasoline to new highs on a daily basis. Investing in energy efficient rail reduces our reliance on foreign oil and is a step in the direction towards energy independence, a step we should have been taking after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

It is critical we conserve our fuel and develop the resources and technologies that will make us energy independent.

We are at a crossroads regarding our transportation infrastructure. I believe the time is right for an increased commitment to efficiency, on our highways, in our public transportation systems, and in our consumption of oil and the use of energy.

It's kind of a mouthful to hear this is a bipartisan bill when 42 amendments go to Democrats and 14 go to Republicans. That's one Republican amendment for every three Democratic amendments. But it's a bipartisan bill?

It's kind of amazing for me to hear Democrats who talk about the war and talk about the need for Iraqis to start to cover their own expenses, and then they don't allow an amendment that says, when we train their security, we pay. The Iraqis don't have to pay the bill. In this legislation if we use our $1 billion that's in the section provided the Iraqis don't have to pay us back. Our amendment would treat it as a loan.

This amendment is not being allowed on the floor today. Why not? Why not have a debate about whether the Iraqis should have to pay for their own expenditures, for their own security, when they have amassed over $40 billion in a separate fund that they're not spending, and they have over $15 billion in their checking account which continues to grow each and every day.

Why wasn't our amendment allowed? There's a simple reason. It would have passed.

What a fraud to say you want Iraqis to pay, and you won't even allow an amendment to be offered on the floor of the House that would require them to pay.

Mr. Speaker, there is no reason not to have this debate. There is no reason not to educate ourselves about the dollars that the Iraqis have that they're not spending. This is not a bipartisan debate. This is a partisan debate.

Anything to deal with Iraq, if you have Republicans who wanted to be part of the solution, you say, No way. It's just going to be our way or the highway.

I oppose this rule. It is a fraud to say it's bipartisan.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 334, which expresses support for National Military Appreciation Month. I introduced this resolution to pay tribute to the men and women who serve in our Armed Forces.

This May is the 10th National Military Appreciation Month. As we approach Memorial Day, I believe it is an appropriate time to thank our service men and women for their service to our country. The men and women who serve our country and defend freedom deserve to be treated with nothing less than the highest level of dignity and respect.

Our country is at war and the brave men and women of our military deserve the full support of every American. We need to provide them with every resource they will need in the difficult months and years to come, starting with our gratitude and respect.

I am grateful for this resolution being brought to the floor, and support its adoption.

I thank the gentleman very much. When I hear how partisan some of my colleagues have gotten on the other side of the aisle, it really astonishes me that somehow it is the President's fault. The clear fact is that we had better find a way to work together, because in my judgment, we have a challenge because we are not working together, Republicans or Democrats. We all have our fingers on this. And we need to deal with it.

It seems to me we need to conserve and not use so much energy to reduce demand. We also need to increase production. It is going to include alternative fuels, renewable fuel. It is going to include mining the outer slope of the continental shelf. It may include nuclear power. It is going to require increasing production and reducing demand.

I think this legislation, while it is a drop in the bucket, it is a step that we need to take. But it will have minimal impact. But in the end, we can fight as much as we want to about this issue, and we are going to fool no one.

There are basic laws of supply and demand that are coming into play here. And we don't seem to want to address it. When I vote not to mine ANWR, I know I am not adding to production. I am not voting to do that for a variety of reasons because I want us to conserve more. But when we conserve more, then we are going to have to look at other ways to increase the supply. T. Boone Pickens is saying we basically consume about 86 million barrels, and we are producing just about that level. We are going to have to produce more and consume less.

So I would just make this concluding point. My Democratic colleagues won this Congress. And you are in charge. And I have seen prices continue to climb. It is not necessarily your fault. But you have your fingers on this as much as anyone else.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, when there were the great debates on TV between Vice President Nixon and then-Senator John F. Kennedy, while my family were Republicans and, as a young person in 8th grade, John F. Kennedy spoke to me when he talked about serving our country and the world by being a Peace Corps volunteer. I thought, wouldn't it be amazing to go to college and afterwards join the Peace Corps; and that's what I did with my wife. And that experience changed my life. That experience had a tremendous impact on my life. In fact, Peace Corps volunteers will tell you it was the greatest time of their life, not that the rest of our lives hasn't been good.

And when President Clinton, building on what President Bush 41 had done on national service, said, We need to create AmeriCorps, his administration reached out to Republicans; and it was an amazing experience to work with President Clinton and his administration because they said they wanted this to be a bipartisan effort, and they listened to Republicans.

Instead of a one-size-fits-all national program, they did something Republicans really like, and that is they made it a local and State effort. And the problem with that is that you could not only have really great programs, you might have some that weren't so good. And it would give people an opportunity to criticize AmeriCorps, as some critics did, because there were literally hundreds and hundreds of various programs meeting local and State needs.

But to President Clinton's credit and to his people who were bringing this program forward, in spite of the fact a majority of Republicans did not support it, they still allowed us to have significant input.

I have nothing but respect for AmeriCorps, nothing but respect for the fact that we are talking, in some cases, young people who have never had a work experience, and we're giving them experience with individuals who can tutor them, in nongovernment organizations. What a wonderful way for these young people to begin to become adults and experience the incredible fulfillment that comes from being of service to others.

I have never understood why some Republicans have criticized AmeriCorps because they said you get paid. Well, Peace Corps volunteers had a living wage. We were able to feed ourselves and we were provided housing. It's something that you don't have under AmeriCorps. There it's a minimum wage, but no housing. They have a stipend for education. Republicans tend to think that you should earn what you get, and this is a program where you earn what you get. You can't pocket the money. You have to put it into bettering yourself with education, which is a very logical thing to do. Frankly, it's something that most Republicans would have argued for: not being given something; earning it.

So these AmeriCorps individuals, which we call volunteers, are getting the best of the best. They are growing up with a meaningful job, not a long-term job, they're earning educational credits, they're getting an education, and they're, for the rest of their lives, going to have that incredible memory of service that I think only strengthens individuals and our country.

So I'm really grateful that we can recognize AmeriCorps for what it is, an outstanding program initiated by President Clinton to his credit, and to his credit, still working with Republicans in spite of the fact they didn't deliver a majority of the votes.

Mr. Speaker, rather than my making a statement, I would like to yield to the sponsor of the resolution, our very distinguished veteran, Mr. Young from Alaska, and just advise him I am going to yield him such time as he may consume, letting him know that the former chairman of the Rules Committee would like some time as well.

(Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the former chairman of the Rules Committee, now its ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).

(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time we have left.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of this resolution honoring the life of one of the great American personalities in the century, the late Charlton Heston.

Truly, a man of legends, whether from his epic contributions as an actor, to his passionate and momentous involvement in our politics and society, Mr. Heston touched us all.

Born in 1923 in Evanston, Illinois, John Charles Carter spent his childhood in Michigan. Following his parents' divorce in the 1930s, his mother remarried to Chester Heston, and the family moved to the Chicago suburb of Winnetka. It was here that his acting career took flight.

After enrolling in the theater program at his new high school, he earned a drama scholarship to attend Northwestern University. It was here that he met another aspiring thespian, future wife, and ``the queen of his heart,'' Lydia Clarke.

Enlisting in the Army Air Forces in 1942, he spent 2 years serving as a radio gunner in the Aleutian Islands during World War II.

After experiencing limited success on Broadway after the war, Heston emerged on the big screen in 1950. He captivated audiences with his statuesque appearance and his historic epic roles. He scaled Mt. Sinai as Moses in the 10 Commandments, rebelled against the Romans in his Oscar winning performance in Ben Hur, remained loyal to his king at all costs in El Cid, and masterfully decorated the Sistine Chapel as Michelangelo.

Who can forget his gritty performance in such noir classics as Touch of Evil, and groundbreaking science fiction classics like Planet of the Apes?

Though he spent more than 60 years on camera and appeared in over 100 movies, he is also known by many for his passion for politics and commitment to a life outside of Hollywood.

A staunch supporter of civil rights in the early 1960s, Heston called Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the ``20th century Moses for his people.''

A vocal participant in a number of marches and protests, he demonstrated his support long before Hollywood found it fashionable.

Like his friend, Ronald Reagan, Heston's political views gradually began to align more with the Republican Party, and by the late 1980s, he had become a prominent orator on behalf of conservative politicians and against the debasement of American culture.

In 1998, the passionate Heston, well in his 70s, was elected president and spokesman of the NRA, a position he held until his resignation in 2003.

After a bout with prostate cancer, Heston announced in August 2002 he had been diagnosed with symptoms

consistent with Alzheimer's. On April 5, 2008, at the age of 84, Charlton Heston passed away.

He once joked, ``I have played three presidents, three saints, and two geniuses. If that does not create an ego problem, nothing does.'' But arrogance does not describe this humble man, who pursued life as he did each of his roles, a constant pursuit of unattainable perfection.

Despite numerous accolades, including an Oscar, a Kennedy Center Lifetime Achievement Award, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the loving husband, devoted father of two and grandfather of three, believed that his family was his proudest achievement.

In his August 2002 announcement regarding his declining health, he emotionally stated that, ``For an actor there is no greater loss than his audience. I can part the Red Sea, but I can't part with you.''

Though he may have left us in body, his spirit and legacy live on, a lifetime of passionate commitment to freedom in the truest sense.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution honoring a man who was as much a hero on the big screen as he was a hero in life.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to prove to my mother that I am a better son than the gentleman that I need to yield to, given that it's his resolution, Mr. Fortenberry. So he gets the prize of being the best son in the Chamber.

I yield the gentleman from Nebraska such time as he may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume and rise in support of H. Res 1113 supporting the goals and ideals of Mother's Day and to celebrate its 100th anniversary.

This Sunday, May 11, many Americans will take a moment to remember the estimated 82 million mothers for their immeasurable contributions towards building strong families, thriving communities, and frankly, a strong country.

The first Mother's Day was celebrated in Grafton, West Virginia, on May 10, 1908. From there, the custom caught on, quickly spreading to 45 other States. In 1914, President Woodrow Wilson declared the first national Mother's Day as a day for American citizens to show the flag in honor of those mothers whose sons had died in war.

Today, this holiday has grown to include all mothers in times of war and peace. Traditionally, mothers have represented the backbone of families in every culture throughout the world. Mothers are called upon to nurture, teach, and provide guidance to those that have been entrusted in their care. It is their responsibility to raise productive citizens of their communities and ultimately, the world.

As Washington Irving said, ``A mother is the truest friend we have, when trials heavy and sudden, fall upon us; when adversity takes the place of prosperity; when friends who rejoice with us in our sunshine desert us; when trouble thickens around us, still will she cling to us, and endeavor by her kind precepts and counsels to dissipate the clouds of darkness, and cause peace to return to our hearts.''

It is that very peace in our hearts which brings us to honor the women we hold dear and to show steadfast support of our mother's love that helps shape us throughout our lives.

For this reason, I urge the passage of H. Res 1113. I thank all mothers, and I thank my mother, Margaret Oliver Shays.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, we've heard from the Democratic sponsor of the bill. I would like to yield to the Republican sponsor of the bill, Mr. Roskam, who is from Illinois and close to Chicago, such time as he may consume.