Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, this week tropical storm Alberto marked the first challenge of hurricane season for Florida residents. Florida residents again demonstrated their experience and level of preparedness. My district stood in Alberto's path, but the performance of emergency services and utilities proved exemplary, and the storm's disruption proved minimal.

In fact, a silver lining might even be found. Yesterday's rain extinguished 18 wildfires. I applaud Governor Bush for his strong leadership in ordering an evacuation of low-lying areas and declaring a state of emergency. As we learned in the tragedy of Katrina, the threat of tropical weather must be taken seriously.

While Alberto will certainly not be the greatest challenge we will face this hurricane season, we can be proud of our reaction in our State. Dunnellon Police Chief Bob Jackson, in central Florida, demonstrated the right attitude when he said we cannot control the weather, but we can certainly react in a proactive way.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to call the attention of the House to an anniversary that should not pass without reflection. My colleagues, 19 years ago, President Reagan stood in a divided Berlin at the Brandenburg Gate and challenged Mikhail Gorbachev to ``tear down this wall.'' Today, as our brave men and women in the Armed Forces fight the global war on terror, we should remember the determination of President Reagan as he spoke those words in a divided city and the inspiration he brought to the people of Berlin and to the world.

Asked how he felt about the wall, President Reagan called it, quote, an ugly scar on the face of Berlin, a city of culture and history which was celebrating its 750th anniversary when Reagan visited it.

Today we recognize that the ideology of terror is an ugly scar on the face of Islam, and in our struggle against it we should bear in mind the lessons of the Cold War, a struggle that bears a deep resemblance and relevance to the global war on terror we wage today. Like the Cold War and the global war on terror, we face an ideology rather than a hostile state. Like communism, the creed of terror is expansionist, uncompromising, and poses a threat to freedom loving people everywhere.

In waging war against such an ideology, victory cannot be found on a single battlefield. The Cold War stretched from Asia to Africa to the very heart of Europe, just as our struggle today reaches from the Philippines to the mountains of Afghanistan to, as we recently saw, our neighbor Canada. Terrorism will strike wherever freedom reigns, from London to Madrid, to a quiet field in Pennsylvania.

The Cold War proved to be a generational conflict, spanning decades, and the global war on terror may prove an equally daunting task. But as in the Cold War, the fanaticism of our foes leaves no room for negotiation or compromise. The global war on terror is a fight we must win. The stakes are far too high to fail.

At the time of his speech in Berlin, the Soviet news agency called President Reagan's words openly provocative and warmongering, while some sources in the American news media were no kinder. When President Reagan called the Soviet Union an evil empire, many criticized him for his black and white point of view.

These criticisms sound familiar today, but the verdict of history is in. Within a decade of President Reagan's provocative speech, the Cold War ended with freedom's triumph.

Today, each news report of a bombing in which Iraqi women and children are slaughtered is a glimpse of a new evil empire of terror, reminding us that evil is alive in the world and must be opposed, the words of Edmund Burke ring true: ``The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.''

I am proud to say that, as a Nation, we are meeting that challenge, not leaving evil unopposed. Last week we won a major victory with the death of the terrorist mastermind Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Our Armed Forces and intelligence services deserve congratulations for their fine work, along with the first responders, border agents, and other heroes at home who stand ever vigilant hoping their services will never be called into need.

My colleagues, in a generational struggle like the one we face, we should remember that we are the strongest when we stand together. Fortunately, we do not stand alone. We stand with allies from across the world, including many who have come face to face with terror. As President Reagan addressed his remarks in Brandenburg to the people of Eastern Europe, let us remember that those living under oppression or fear of terrorism will be heartened by the determination we show in this fight.

During his visit to Berlin 19 years ago, President Reagan was struck by the words of a young Berliner who had spray painted on the wall that divided the city: ``This wall will fall. Beliefs become reality.''

America has always been a beacon of hope, a living example of the transformative power of freedom. As the people of Berlin took up sledgehammers against the infamous wall and broke Communist's grip on the city, Americans know that as freedom and democracies take root in the new Iraq, when we see ink-stained fingers raised in defiance of threats, the people of the Middle East and the world will demolish terror with their ballots, and freedom will again triumph.

Mr. Speaker, the assessment of member dues at the United Nations has always been something of a joke. Japan pays 19.5 percent of the U.N. budget and does not even get a chance to sit on the Security Council. By contrast, Security Council members Russia and China contribute only 1 percent and 2 percent respectively to the U.N.'s multibillion dollar budget. We pay over 22 percent.

Currently, the U.N. bases assessments on gross national income figures, the proper measure of which cannot be taken when currencies are not convertible. The United States recently proposed that assessments be calculated the World Bank way, using data on purchasing power parity, to better reflect what states can afford. This would raise Russia's share of the budget to about 2.5 percent, China's to 13.7 percent, leaving America's mostly unchanged.

Should they not want this recognition, under the new accounting method, China's share of world gross domestic product rises to second place from seventh, just as Russia's rises to 10th place from 16th?

Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 245 I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Amendment Offered by Mr. Kucinich

Mr. Speaker, last night, at 6:15 p.m local time, our special operation forces, using Iraqi tips and intelligence, executed the most wanted terrorist in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Mary Anne Weaver, a reporter for Atlantic magazine, traveled to Zarqawi's hometown and spoke with the people who watched him grow up. ``Everyone that I spoke with readily acknowledged that as a teenager al-Zarqawi had been a bully and a thug, a bootlegger and a heavy drinker, and even, allegedly, a pimp in Zarqa's underworld. He was disruptive, constantly involved in brawls. When he was fifteen, . . . he participated in a robbery of a relative's home, during which the relative was killed.''

Moving from street thug with an arrest record for violence and imprisonment for sexual assault into a profession, Zarqawi obtained a job as a video-store clerk, from which he was quickly fired. After losing this job, he undertook his first of many trips into Afghanistan, where he found justification and an outlet for his violent nature through Islamic jihad. In 1994, Zarqawi was imprisoned for possession of grenades in the basement of his home. It was during his fifteen year imprisonment that he built his following, and after his release he commenced his litany of terror acts.

To see the most compelling evidence of this man's evil, look at the record of his actions.

Beginning in 2003:

October 28th, Lawrence Foley, United States diplomat and administrator of aid programs in Jordan, is gunned down outside his home; August 19th, top U.N. envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello and 23 others are killed in a truck bombing of the U.N. headquarters in Iraq;

And then in 2004:

March 2nd, He orders coordinated explosions at Shiite mosques in Karbala and Baghdad, killing 181 people; May 11th, Zarqawi beheads Nicholas Berg, a Pennsylvania engineer; June 22nd, South Korean hostage Kim Sun-il is beheaded; June 29th, Georgi Lazov, 30 years old, and Ivaylo Kepov, 32 years old, are kidnapped and beheaded; August 2nd, Murat Yuce of Turkey is executed on video; September 13th, Durmus Kumdereli is beheaded; September 14th, 47 Iraqis waiting in lines for jobs are killed by a Zarqawi car bomb attack; September 16th, Kenneth Bigley, Jack Hensley, and Eugene Armstrong are kidnapped and beheaded; September 30th, 35 children and seven adults are murdered by Zarqawi's bombs as U.S. soldiers hand out candy at the opening of a new sewage treatment plant in Baghdad; October 30th, Shosei Koda, 24 years old, is beheaded.

In 2005:

February 28th, 125 Iraqi National Guard recruits are murdered by a Zarqawi follower in a suicide attack; November 9th, Zarqawi coordinates three suicide bombings of hotels in Amman, Jordan, killing 60 people, including a wedding party.

Zarqawi received judgment for his actions last night, and his reign of terror and violence is over. Yet, while we are pleased that this man's murderous influence in Iraq is over, we must not view his death as a moment to rest in our efforts, or as a sign that our job in Iraq is finished. According to the article in Atlantic magazine this week, Mary Weaver's contact, a high level Jordanian intelligence official, ``If Zarqawi is captured or killed, the Iraq insurgency will go on.'' Mary Weaver also interviewed a man who had witnessed the fervor of support among a radical fringe in Iraq. ``He [a young boy] was from Saudi Arabia and had just turned thirteen. I noticed him in the crowd at a recruiting center near the Syrian- Iraqi frontier. People would come and register in the morning, then cross the border in the afternoon by bus. I first saw him at the registration desk. The recruiters refused to take him because he was so young, and he started to cry. I went back later in the day, and this same small guy had sneaked aboard the bus. When they discovered him, he started to shout `Allahu Akhbar!'--`God is most great!' They carried, him off. He had $12,000 in his pocket--expense money his family had given him before he set off. `Take it all,' he pleaded. `Please, just let me do jihad.' ''

In this war on terror, unlike a traditional state to state war, we must accept that the death of a leader does not end the conflict. On the contrary, the death of such a high profile figure could provoke isolated terror cells to increase violent attacks. We may well see a rise in insurgent attacks in the coming weeks, and we must continue our intelligence efforts in the area to locate and put pressure on these cells, and support our military as they pursue and eliminate them. Persistent hearts will achieve this victory, and I encourage the American people to steel themselves for this continued battle with evil, and to support our military as they bring about a free and stable Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I am deeply concerned that nearly 27 million veterans could be affected by a data security breach of record proportions that could compromise sensitive personal information, and every day we learn more.

Tuesday we learned that names, dates of birth and Social Security numbers for as many as 1.1 million active duty U.S. military personnel, 430,000 National Guard members, 645,000 Reserve members, may also have been included.

This elevates the concern for personal financial security of some veterans to national security for all. This data could be used to identify where servicemembers live, demographics that a lot of our enemies would like to know.

Unfortunately, data breaches like this highlight the need for legislation I have authored, H.R. 4127, the Data Accountability and Trust Act. This bill, which the Energy and Commerce Committee has passed by a huge bipartisan vote, goes to the heart of this problem of the critical need to protect consumers' personal information.

Mr. Speaker, let's pass H.R. 4127 as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I would say to Ms. Slaughter that as Mr. Diaz-Balart has mentioned, the bill in question passed 42 to 12 in committee. Only rarely do you see a bill pass with only 20 percent in opposition to the bill. And during this extensive markup, there were plenty of amendments that were offered, many of them were defeated. And a lot of these amendments, particularly the Markey amendment, are going to be offered today. So the main concern that you have is a vote on net neutrality, and we are going to have that today. So I really think what you are complaining about is not of concern to members in general.

The current requirement for new entrants into competitive cable service as has been pointed out are overly burdensome and serve as a barrier to entry. Because of the tireless work of Chairman Barton and also Mr. Upton, we have this bill before us, the Communication Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act, or we call COPE. So the requirement to negotiate local franchise fees as well as obligations of local franchising authorities, what they impose are delaying such entry and blocking the consumer benefits that such entry would provide.

More competition would lead to lower prices, better service and greater innovation, and all of these benefits are positive for our constituents. The COPE Act creates a national framework for the regulation of cable services while striking the proper balance by preserving local government enforcement of local rights of way regulation and national consumer protection rules are in the bill.

The bill also preserves local franchise fees and provides additional financial support for and carriage of educational, public and governmental programming. It is all there. In addition, the COPE Act also includes stricter net neutrality enforcement provisions. These folks against the bill will say there is nothing in the bill for compliance of net neutrality but they are wrong. In the bill it establishes penalties of up to half a million dollars for broadband providers that block lawful content. Mr. Speaker, the FCC would have explicit power to go after companies that violate the network neutrality issues for the first time in this bill.

The FCC now has the ability to enforce their broadband policy statements and the principles included therein. Under this Act, the FCC can act swiftly to punish those who simply violate these principles.

So free and open Internet is crucial to formulating an effective policy. We must not lose site of the fact that if the network providers really do act badly in the future, Congress can and I hope will, step in and legislate through tough rules. But for now the strict, strong enforcement provisions that are in this bill are a tough deterrent to anyone who would act to change the free and open nature of the Internet.

I urge support of the rule. I urge support of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I missed the following vote due to a personal reason.

On rollcall vote No. 162 to H. Res. 795, Condemning in the strongest terms the terrorist attacks in Dahab and Northern Sinai, Egypt, on April 24 and 26, 2006, had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

Offered By: Mr. Stearns

Amendment No. 4: Page 14, line 6, after the dollar amount,

insert the following: ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

Page 28, line 9, after the first dollar amount, insert the

following: ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I had an amendment that I was going to offer and then withdraw it. So I think all I am going to do today is place my statement in the Record and speak briefly in a colloquy with the chairman about this.

Mr. Chairman, I want to bring to my colleagues' attention a very important site called Fort King, which is in Florida. It is in my hometown of Ocala. It is a very prominent place in American history. Fort King is a site where Chief Osceola fought against the United States in the chapter of American history, the Second Seminole War. This is from 1835 to 1842.

This site in Ocala, Florida is represented by my good friend, Congressman Keller, who also supports the idea of making Fort King part of a National Historic Landmark, because it played such a distinct role in the founding of our wonderful State of Florida.

Secretary of the Interior Gail Norton designated Fort King a National Historic Landmark on February 24, 2004, and we were greatly pleased. Then in November, 2005, Fort King entered a draft special resource study and environmental impact statement public comment period.

This continued, Mr. Chairman, and we look forward to moving Fort King along in the process, and so now I am working toward preserving Fort King in perpetuity as a National Park.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to bring this to your attention. We have put in a request to fund it, and I think my only purpose today is to bring it to the chairman and his staff's attention how important it is to the history of Florida and its founding, and then if you in the future would consider it, that would be utmost appreciated.

Mr. Chairman, I would be glad to yield to Chairman Taylor.

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

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to talk about an important site called Fort King, Florida, a site prominent in American history. Specifically, Fort King is the site where Chief Osceola fought against the United States, in a chapter of American history, the Second Seminole War from 1835-1842.

My home (and Representative Ric Keller's), Ocala, Florida, is home to Fort King. This Fort played a direct role in the founding of Florida as a State.

Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton designated Fort King a National Historic Landmark on February 24, 2004, to our great delight. Then, in November 2005, Fort King entered a Draft Special Resource Study and Environmental Impact Statement public comment period. This continues, and we look forward to moving Fort King along in the process of preservation. And now, I am working towards preserving Fort King in perpetuity as a National Park. My good friend and colleague in the neighboring District, the Honorable Ric Keller, who also represents Ocala, has collaborated with me on this effort.

Historic sites are a vital link between current and future generations of Americans and those who came before us. These landmarks give context to the national experience and help us understand our past so that we can envision our future.

What happened at Fort King? It is a very long story, about which I will elaborate longer on another occasion. The abbreviated story is that on December 28, 1835, Fort King was the site of an outbreak of hostilities between the United States Government and the Seminole Indians. The Seminoles were led in this attack by Chief Osceola. This attack began the Second Seminole War, which lasted longer than any other United States armed conflict, except for the Vietnam War.

Chief Osceola's first appearance to the world was at Fort King in October 1834. The defiant young war chief rejected the U.S. orders to leave Florida and threatened war unless the Seminoles were left alone. There was no trust left between the U.S. Army and the Seminoles. Then came the fateful day of December 28, 1835. That morning 40 miles to the south along the Fort King Road, the Seminoles ambushed and annihilated two companies of U.S. Army regulars in route to Fort King. That afternoon, Osceola shot and killed the Indian Agent Wiley Thompson outside the walls of Fort King. The Second Seminole War had begun.

During the 7 year guerrilla war that followed, every major general and every regiment of the U.S. Army was stationed at or passed through Fort King: men who would gain fame in the Mexican and Civil Wars. And here stood the enlisted men: Bemrose, Clarke, and hundreds of others who served in the Florida War.

Following the initial series of engagements, most of which the Seminoles won, U.S. forces withdrew from the interior of Florida abandoning Fort King in May 1836. The Seminoles stood victorious, and. burned the hated Fort King to the ground. But it would be a short lived victory, when the Army returned a year later and rebuilt Fort King.

When it finally ended in 1842, most of the Seminoles had been killed or captured and relocated to Indian Territory in Oklahoma. These native Americans constitute the Seminole Nation of today. An unconquered and defiant few

withdrew to the vastness of the Florida Everglades and survived to the present as the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

In March 1843, Fort King was abandoned by the U.S. Army for the last time and transferred to the people of Marion County. The Fort was used as the County's first courthouse and public building. In 1846, it was dismantled by the citizens of Marion County for its lumber. The great pines had done their job.

Fort King and the surrounding area contain artifacts used in the attack and in the life of the Seminole Indians. Preserving our past for our children and grandchildren is imperative. Fort King is a historical gem that should be accessible to all. This site is significant, not only in Florida's history, but to the history of the Nation. I have been working on advancing Fort King through National Historic Landmark status towards hopeful, eventual National Park Service status, for the past several years, and am looking forward to see this project come to fruition. Representative Keller and I hope that I can count on the Chairman's support to preserve this unique historic site for future generations.

Fort King History

Fort King was originally constructed in 1827 to implement

the conditions of the Treaty of Moultrie Creek, which

restricted Florida Indians to specified reservation

boundaries and prohibited all but authorized persons from

entering the reservation. The fort, which was located at the

edge of the Seminole Reservation, provided protection and

security to the inhabitants of Florida.

On December 28, 1835 a band or Seminoles led by Osceola

attacked and killed the Seminole Indian Agent Wiley Thompson

and several others at Fort King. Simultaneously, a force of

Seminole and Black Seminoles attacked 100 federal troops

making their way to Fort King from Fort Brooke. Only one

soldier survived the attack. Most scholars consider these two

events as the beginning of the Second Seminole War.

Fort King played an important military role throughout the

Second Seminole War by serving as a council site for

negotiations between Seminole and the U.S. Government and as

headquarters for the U.S. Army of the South.

Chronology of Endeavors to Save the Fort King Site

The Ocala Chapter of the Daughters of the American

Revolution purchased one acre of land that was thought to

have the Fort King cemetery located on it in the 1930s.

Hurricane Gladys blew over a pine tree in 1968, exposing a

cellar from a building associated with Fort King.

1988--1991: Ocala received matching grants from the Florida

Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, for

archaeological auger surveys to find the location of Fort

King. The grants totaled $56,000. Ground penetrating radar

was used and foundations from structures were recorded on the

high ground.

In August 1991, the Marion County Board of County

Commissioners voted to proceed with the attempt to purchase

the Fort King site, using funds from the ``Pennies for

Parks'' program.

The Marion County Commission with the help of the McCall

family, City of Ocala, Bureau of Historic Preservation and

Trust for Public Lands pursued the acquisition of the site

from 1988 to 2001.

In 2001 the County, City, and State purchased the entire

Fort King site with the City agreeing to maintain and protect

the site.

On June 12, 2003 the National Park System Advisory Board

unanimously recommended Fort King for National Landmark

status.

On February 24, 2004 Fort King was designated as a National

Landmark.

Why a National Park?

Since the early 1900s local citizens recognized the

historical value of this site not only to our community but

to the nation,

On a national level, Fort King played a key role in the

Second Seminole War and is strongly associated with the

broader national themes of Indian Removal and Jacksonian

Democracy, Manifest Destiny and Westward Expansion. The fort

also had strong ties to persons, such as the famous Seminole

Indian leader Osceola and General Wiley Thompson, who are

significant in the history of our country. Most of the West

Point graduates during this time period served at Fort King.

Compared to other Second Seminole War sites, Fort King

contains the greatest wealth of intact subsurface features

and artifacts presently documented. Archaeologists have also

found that the site contains several pre-contact American

Indian components, which with further research could answer

important questions as to the transition between the Archaic

(circa 2300-500BC) and Cades Pond (circa AD100-600) periods.

Archaeological studies have already identified structural and

artifactual features that relate to the early post-military

use of Fort King. This site has the potential to provide

important information about the establishment, early

settlement and expansion of the Florida peninsula.

The City of Ocala and Marion County were politically and

geographically established because of Fort King. This

nationally significant historical resource fundamentally

defines our sense of place, who we are as citizens and our

role in our Nation's history.

Significance of a National Park

The designation of Fort King as a National Park will

provide citizens the opportunity to experience the

interpretive and educational benefits that the site has to

offer. It will also create a new recreational opportunity,

which is currently unavailable within the region, A National

Park will attract visitors not only to this region but to the

State of Florida.

Most importantly, the citizens of Ocala/Marion County are

very proud of their heritage and have gone to great lengths

to continually try to preserve it for future generations. The

City of Ocala, Marion County, the Historic Ocala Preservation

Society, the Marion County Black Archives, the Marion Country

Historical Commission, the Marion County Museum of History,

the Seminole War Foundation and many individuals have worked

tirelessly to save buildings, sites and historic information

as well as to create local preservation laws. These

preservation efforts would not have been possible were it not

for the continuous help and support from the State of

Florida.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Putnam-Capps amendment to H.R. 5386. This amendment, which has broad bi-partisan support, would remove the provisions in the underlying bill that lifts three long-standing moratoriums on offshore natural gas leasing.

This provision will not provide the relief its supports claim it will. It will merely hinder our efforts to get a real and permanent solution to this problem.

The repeal of the congressional moratorium will limit States' ability to safeguard their natural resources and would set current OCS policy badly adrift. The prohibition of OCS drilling has been a national priority for over 20 years. Congress led the way by passing the first moratorium on OCS leasing in 1982, which was soon extended to waters throughout much of our nation's coastal areas. Dismantling this 25-year congressional moratorium in an appropriations bill is an unwise approach to our nation's energy needs.

Comprehensive legislative is needed to deal with the many complex oil and gas issues on the OCS. For the past few months, I have been working with some of my Florida colleagues on a comprehensive solution to this

issue, not a patchwork of legislative initiatives. We have worked with Chairman Pombo on legislation that would give the states the final authority to decide whether or not to allow drilling or leasing off its shores.

It is imperative to empower all coastal states to determine their own future, putting decisions regarding offshore development in the hands of our state elected officials instead of the federal government. The bill would have put a 125-mile buffer permanently under state control for purposes of oil and gas leasing.

Mr. Speaker, the city of Patara in Turkey sports a fantastic beach that sprawls for more than 11 miles. It recently rated number one on the London Sunday Times' list of the world's best beaches. But Patara is worth our attention for more than sand and surf. An archeological team led by Akdeniz University Professors Fahri Isik and Havva Iskan Isik recently unearthed an ancient parliament building in Patara--the meeting place of the first federal republic in recorded human history. The building, called the Bouleuterion, housed at least twenty-three city-states of the Lycian League, which existed along the Mediterranean coast of Turkey from about 167 BC until 400 AD.

The Lycian League's republican governing system, utilizing proportional representation, was unparalleled in the ancient world, and fascinated the pioneering philosophers of the Enlightenment, particularly Montesquieu. Depending on the size of the member cities, each elected one, two or three representatives to the Lycian parliament. When cities were too small, two or three banded together to share one representative vote. The six largest cities in the League had the right to three votes. The parliament elected a president, called the ``Lyciarch,'' which at various times served as the League's religious, military, and political leader. Although it is contested, there is evidence to suggest that women could be, and in fact were, Lyciarch.

In Book IX of Montesquieu's Spirit of the Laws, after charting the highs and lows of the earliest republics, he stresses the utility of a confederacy. He cites the Lycian League as an example: ``It is unlikely that states that associate will be of the same size and have equal power. . . . If one had to propose a model of a fine federal republic, I would choose the republic of Lycia.''

Montesquieu's interest in the Lycian way of government would prove central to our founding. Thanks to his writings, in the debates about our own Constitution, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison cited the Lycian League as a model for our own system of government.

As well, in literal linkage, the semi-circular configuration of seats in this House of Representatives is exactly the same seating arrangement as in the Bouleuterion in Patara. The Bouleuterion's throne-like perch, where the elected Lyciarch sat, is much the same as the seat of the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

On June 30, 1787, at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, James Madison appealed to the delegates' understanding of the Lycian League. The Convention had just rejected the ``New Jersey Plan'', which called for a rather modest revision of our Nation's first constitutional framework, the failed Articles of Confederation. The delegates resolved to come up with a new constitution, but had few notions in common of how it should proceed.

A delegate from Connecticut, Oliver Ellsworth, had just finished arguing for the Articles

of Confederation's principle that every State should be equal in the national arena. He specifically asked, ``Where is or was a confederation ever formed, where equality of voices was not a fundamental principle?''

James Madison replied that the Lycian League was different, according representation in reflection of actual size. His Virginia plan provided for a bicameral legislature, with both houses' representation based on States' population. He eventually had to accept a compromise, with a people's house of proportional representation, our House of Representatives, in tandem with a Senate of equal State representation.

Hamilton and Madison also cited the Lycian League in defense of representative democracy. While direct rule usually resulted in either tyranny or anarchy, the two founders felt that delegation of authority to elected representatives would allow the government to function properly.

The ideas and debates of our founding fathers may seem archaic to our modem times, but we face questions of federalism every day in this Congress. A federalist system of government divides power between a central authority (the Federal Government) and constituent political units (the States and localities). The delineation of that power comes into question particularly often on the Energy & Commerce Committee, of which I am a Subcommittee Chairman, whether we are debating the proper authority over electricity transmission across State lines, the regulation of hazardous waste, or the transmission of information through our telecommunications infrastructure.

Meanwhile, whether we are helping Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries develop representative democratic systems, or providing advice to the burgeoning democracies of post-Soviet Eastern Europe, we effectively reenact the Constitutional Convention's debates about the Lycian League and the nature of democracy around the world. We are doing what we can to help spread freedom and democracy, in our own image. Unfortunately, while it is relatively easy to conceive of the best model of government--as our founding fathers did, and Montesquieu did before them--the diversity of the real world, in geography, ethnicity, religion, and history, makes applying that best model quite difficult in practice.

The British archeologist George Bean highlighted some of the unique features of the Lycian League--features not dissimilar to our own country's: ``Among the various races of Anatolia, the Lycians always held a distinctive place. Locked away in their mountainous country, they had a fierce love of freedom and independence, and resisted strongly all attempts at outside domination; they were the last in Asia Minor to be incorporated as a province into the Roman Empire.''

Our experience so far in guiding the nascent democracy in Iraq should certainly illustrate that representative democracy may not be perfectly replicable, at least overnight.

Fifteen years ago, all a visitor to Patara would have noticed were the tops of a few old stones. Today, the excavations at Patara have unearthed the remains of an entire city. The archeological team has rescued numerous buildings and items from the sand and scrub brush, besides the Bouleuterion parliament building, including: a large necropolis; a Roman bath; a sizeable semicircular theater; a sprawling main avenue leading to the market square; a Byzantine basilica (one of 22 churches once packed into Patara); one of the world's oldest lighthouses; and a fortified wall.

I would encourage everyone to visit Patara, for its beauty and for its archeological significance. The excavation site is 10-15 minutes from the glorious beach, and will be opened to the public in 2007. While we wait, one of Turkey's largest museums, the Antalya Archaeological Museum, displays many of the finds from Patara and the surrounding area.

We owe a great debt to Turkey's Ministry of Culture and the Akdeniz University in Antalya for their dedication of time and money to bringing the ancient ruins of Patara out of the dust and back into our lives.

In closing, I would like to thank: Dr. Gul Isin, Associate Professor of Archeology at Akdeniz Antalya in Turkey, who has been diligently working with Dr. Fahri Isik and Dr. Havva Iskan Isik to uncover the mysteries of the Patara site; Professor James W. Muller of the University of Alaska, Anchorage, who dissected how the Lycian League affected the founding fathers; and the American Friends of Turkey, the Friends of Patara, and former Representatives Stephen Solarz and Robert Livingston, who graciously introduced me to the archeological findings at Patara, and the important work of Professors Isin and Muller.

Mr. Speaker, the city of Patara in Turkey sports a fantastic beach that sprawls for more than 11 miles. It recently rated number one, on the London Sunday Times' list of the world's best beaches. But Patara is worth our attention for more than sand and surf. An archeological team led by Akdeniz University Professors Fahri Isik and Havva Iskan Isik recently unearthed an ancient parliament building in Patara--the meeting place of the first federal republic in recorded human history. The building, called the Bouletarion, housed at least twenty-three city-states of the Lycian League, which existed along the Mediterranean coast of Turkey from about 167 BC until 400 AD.

The Lycian League's republican governing system, utilizing proportional representation, was unparalleled in the ancient world, and fascinated the pioneering intellectuals of the Enlightenment, particularly Montesquieu. Depending on the size of the member cities, each elected one, two or three representatives to the Lycian parliament. When cities were too small, two or three banded together to share one representative vote. The six largest cities in the League had the right to three votes. The parliament elected a president, called the ``Lycearch,'' which at various times served as

the League's religious, military, and political leader. Although it is contested, there is evidence to suggest that women could be and in fact were Lycearch.

In Book IX of Montesquieu's Spirit of the Law, after charting the highs and lows of the earliest republics, he stresses the utility of a confederacy. He cites the Lycian League as an example: ``It is unlikely that states that associate will be of the same size and have equal power. . . . If one had to propose a model of a fine federal republic, I would choose the republic of Lycia.''

Montesquieu's interest in the Lycian way of government would prove central to our founding. Thanks to his writings, in the debates about our own Constitution, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison cited the Lycian League as a model for our own system of government.

As well, in literal linkage, the semi-circular configuration of seats in this House of Representatives is exactly the same seating arrangement as in the Bouletarion in Patara. The Bouletarion's throne- like perch, where the elected Lycearch sat, is much the same as the seat of the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

On June 30, 1787, at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, James Madison appealed to the delegates' understanding of the Lycian League. The Convention had just rejected the ``New Jersey Plan'', which called for a rather modest revision of our nation's first constitutional framework, the failed Articles of Confederation. The delegates resolved to come up with a new constitution, but had few notions in common of how it should proceed.

A delegate from Connecticut, Oliver Ellsworth, had just finished arguing for the Articles of Confederation's principle that every state should be equal in the national arena. He specifically asked, ``Where is or was a confederation ever formed, where equality of voices was not a fundamental principle?''

James Madison replied that the Lycian League was different, according representation in reflection of actual size. His Virginia plan provided for a bicameral legislature, with both houses' representation based on states' population. He eventually had to accept a compromise, with a people's house of proportional representation, our House of Representatives, in tandem with a Senate of equal state representation.

Hamilton and Madison also cited the Lycian League in defense of representative democracy. While direct rule usually resulted in either tyranny or anarchy, the two founders felt that delegation of authority to elected representatives would allow the government to function properly.

In addition, the Lycian League was. used in defense of individual rights and a strong national government, two notions the original Articles of Confederation conspicuously avoided. In Federalist number 15, Hamilton called the Articles' avoidance of individual rights in favor of state rights the ``radical vice'' of our nation's first governing system.

The ideas and debates of our founding fathers may seem archaic to our modem times, but we face questions of federalism every day in this Congress. A federalist system of government divides power between a central authority (the federal government) and constituent political units (the states and localities). The delineation of that power comes into question particularly often on the Energy & Commerce Committee, of which I am a Subcommittee Chairman, whether we are debating the proper authority over electricity transmission across state lines., the regulation of hazardous waste, or the transmission of information through our telecommunications infrastructure.

Meanwhile, whether we are helping Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries develop representative democratic systems, or providing advice to the burgeoning democracies of post-Soviet Eastern Europe, we effectively reenact the Constitutional Convention's debates about the Lycian League and the nature of democracy around the world. We are doing what we can to help spread freedom and democracy, in our own image. Unfortunately, while it is relatively easy to conceive of the best model of government--as our founding fathers did, and Montesquieu did before them--the diversity of the real world, in geography, ethnicity, religion, and history, makes applying that best model quite difficult in practice.

The British archeologist George Bean highlighted some of the unique features of the Lycian League--features not dissimilar to our own country's: ``Among the various races of Anatolia, the Lycians always. held a distinctive place. Locked away in .their mountainous country, they had a fierce love of freedom and independence, and resisted strongly all attempts at outside domination; they were the last in Asia Minor to be incorporated as a province into the Roman Empire.''

Our experience so far in guiding the nascent democracy in Iraq should certainly illustrate that representative democracy may not be perfectly replicable, at least overnight.

Fifteen years ago, all a visitor to Patara would have noticed were the tops of a few old stones. Today, the excavations at Patara have unearthed the remains of an entire city. The archeological team has rescued numerous buildings and items from the sand and scrub brush, besides the Bouletarion parliament building, including: a large necropolis; a Roman bath; a sizeable semicircular theater; a sprawling main avenue leading to the market square; a Byzantine basilica (one of 22 churches once packed into Patara); one of the world's oldest lighthouses; and a fortified wall.

I would encourage everyone to visit Patara, for its beauty and for its archeological significance. The excavation site is 10-15 minutes from the glorious beach, and will be opened to the public in 2007. While we wait, one of Turkey's largest museums, the Antalya Archaeological Museum, displays many of the finds from Patara and the surrounding area.

We owe a great debt to Turkey's Ministry of Culture and the Akdeniz University in Antalya for their dedication of time and money to bringing the ancient ruins of Patara out of the dust and back into our lives.

In closing, I would like to thank: Dr. Gul Isin, Associated Professor of Archeology at Akdeniz Antalya in Turkey, who has been diligently working with Dr. Fahri Isik and Dr. Havva Iskan Isik to uncover the mysteries of the Patara site; Professor James W. Muller of the University of Alaska, Anchorage, who dissected how the Lycian League impacted the founding fathers; and the American Friends of Turkey, the Friends of Patara, and former Representatives Stephen Solarz and Robert Livingston, who graciously introduced me to the archeological findings at Patara, and the important work of Professors Isin and Miller.

La Ladrillera, a brickyard in Sasabe, Mexico, is the last gathering place where coyotes deliver final words of advice before smuggling their human cargo across the border into the United States. Each illegal immigrant pays anywhere from $1,500 to $2,000 to these opportunists to be guided on their 3-day journey across the desert into their ideal of a promised land, the United States.

My colleagues, let us be clear on the nature of these smugglers. They are not generous humanitarians aiding their fellow man. Many of these illegal immigrants are beaten, robbed and even raped before they even reach the Mexico-U.S. border. Yet they keep paying the coyotes enough money so that these smugglers have access to sophisticated arms, weapons, GPS equipment and high quality mobile radios. Many of them have better equipment than our own Border Patrol agents.

In today's Washington Times, Gilbert Reyes, one of these smugglers, or successful local businessmen, describes the situation of these immigrants: ``They want to get into the United States, and they are willing to do almost anything, even walk for mile after mile in the desert. They think they can go into America and get a pay to stay permanently. Maybe they can. Maybe they can't.''

His assertion about the immigrants' belief rings true as we look at the facts on immigration. In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act granted amnesty to 2.7 million illegal immigrants, and now today we have 11 to 12 million illegal immigrants seeking amnesty. Two years ago, President Bush first announced his guest worker program, and illegal immigrant numbers have risen steadily since. A survey conducted by the Border Patrol in 2004 revealed that of those illegal aliens in custody of the Border Patrol, 45 percent were influenced to come to the U.S. by the promise of amnesty. The immigration bill we passed in the House directly strengthened legal recourse against these coyotes and focused on securing our borders, increasing the number of Border Patrol agents, and enforcing the immigration laws that we currently have. These are essential steps that must be taken before any form of immigration reform has a hope of succeeding. And the American people agree. In a recent Zogby poll, 64 percent of respondents preferred the House bill's approach of enforcement first and only 30 percent preferred the Senate's approach of amnesty. Additionally, 73 percent of respondents had little or no confidence in the ability of our government to screen out terrorists or criminals if there is a mass amnesty for those 12 million illegals already in this country.

And yet the pressure is mounting in favor of this unpopular and impractical proposal. There are some journalistic groups that have even begun to object to the use of the word ``illegal'' when referring to these immigrants. We are supposed to refer to these individuals as, quote, undocumented or even the other extreme proposal, to call them economic refugees. But calling breaking the law by any other name does not make it less of a crime. According to the Immigration and Nationality Act, it is illegal to enter the United States illegally. It is illegal to smuggle human beings into the United States for a price. And it is illegal to knowingly hire and aid a person you know entered our country illegally.

Another central issue with immigration reform is to ensure that those waiting and hoping to enter this country will be treated fairly. Many of them have undergone grueling ordeals to be able to enter the United States. I have heard from one couple in my district that had to undergo multiple in-depth interviews at the embassy before getting their permits. The embassy was a 3-hour commute away for them. As they had no transportation, they had to walk. But they told me they were happy to do so for the simple chance to come into the United States. Many legal immigrants have to wait 5, 10, sometimes 15 years before they get their final approval to immigrate. To allow those who bypassed all the rules and snuck into the U.S. amnesty and a path to citizenship is an egregious slap in the face to all those immigrants who sacrificed to respect our laws and enter legally.

My colleagues, we are a nation of immigrants. Immigrants have vitalized our society, brought new life to our democracy and strengthened our communities simply by their contributions. However, we are also a nation of laws, and those whose first action is to willfully break them should be held accountable, not given preferential treatment.

Mr. Speaker, as every American knows, fuel prices around the country have begun to rise with the beginning of the summer driving season, when demand is at its peak, and during a time when growing economies like China and India are consuming more and more of the world's available petroleum supply. To make matters worse, nuclear ambitions in Iran, the fourth largest oil producer, and tensions in Nigeria, the twelfth, have created the perfect storm for a precipitous rise in gasoline and other fuel prices. Our problem back home is how to manage those global issues so that they have as little impact at home on the average American who just wants to take his family on that planned vacation under tight budget or maintain his delivery business without taking out an additional loan. I am very happy that we are taking up H.R. 5253, the ``Federal Energy Price Protection Act of 2006.'' This bill deals directly and aggressively with the need to stabilize the price of fuel in an uncertain world market and ensure that greed and opportunism don't worsen those challenges by gouging the customer at the pump. H.R. 5253, for the first time, allows the FTC, at any time, to prosecute price gouging. This bill takes aim at those in the wholesale and retail markets for gasoline, diesel fuel, crude oil, home heating oil, and biofuels who prey on their customers for their own unjust enrichment. The FTC is directed to define what price gouging actually is. And a very important point--this legal recourse and its enforcement provisions against gouging are always available, not just in times of natural or energy emergency. Mr. Speaker, this bill's hammer is triggered by consumer rip-offs, not bureaucratic proclamations. In addition, state attorneys general will be empowered to bring cases under the federal law and those cases can lead to extremely strong civil and criminal penalties in the multiple millions of dollars and the possibility of a visit to the nearest correctional facility. This is a very aggressive piece of legislation targeted at a problem that weakens this country not only in dollars but in what it does to the every day lives of all Americans--vacations missed, budgets broken, and business stretched thin. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 5253, the Federal Energy Price Protection Act of 2006 and once and for all make it clear that we are serious about solving our energy challenges at home so we can be more successful in solving them abroad. This bill will serve us and our children well.