Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I submit the following letters.

House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and

Government Reform,

Washington, DC, April 25, 2012.

Hon. Ralph M. Hall,

Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding the

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology's jurisdictional

interest in H.R. 4257, the Federal Information Security

Amendments Act of 2012, and your willingness to forego

consideration of H.R. 4257 by your committee.

I agree that the Committee on Science, Space, and

Technology has a valid jurisdictional interest in certain

provisions of H.R. 4257 and that the Committee's jurisdiction

will not be adversely affected by your decision not to

request a sequential referral of H.R. 4257. As you have

requested, I will support your request for an appropriate

appointment of outside conferees from your Committee in the

event of a House-Senate conference on this or similar

legislation should such a conference be convened.

Finally, I will include a copy of your letter and this

response in the Committee Report and in the Congressional

Record during the floor consideration of this bill. Thank you

again for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Darrell Issa,

Chairman.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. Hopefully there will be time left over also for Mr. Chaffetz, who has worked hard on this amendment.

I want to thank the chairman for working with our committee on this amendment that clarifies in the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act that FOIA, the Freedom of Information Access Act, is in fact clearly in effect for the vast majority of this information.

We understand that companies--I will just take an example--such as electric utility companies may share their very vulnerabilities as a part of a process to reduce or eliminate these vulnerabilities. We certainly understand that that's not FOIAable. National security is not FOIAable. However, we, in this amendment, ensure that everything is at least possibly FOIAable whenever it would be appropriate, and then the only question is does it stand for one of the exclusions. So by making it narrow, we tell the American people that the Freedom of Information Act is in effect on cybersecurity and will not be unreasonably withheld.

I think this is critical at a time when greater transparency is the promise and there is a great deal of concern about cybersecurity somehow being something that would take away America's freedoms. Just the opposite is true. Our freedom of the Internet, our freedom to have an effective and efficient system on which to build our infrastructure both for electricity and other utilities, but also for our everyday life, essentially requires the kind of cooperation that we anticipate.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4257) to amend chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, to revise requirements relating to Federal information security, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, cybersecurity threats represent one of the most serious national security and economic challenges we face as a Nation. Whether it's criminal hackers, organized crime, terrorist networks or national states, our Nation is under siege from dangerous cybersecurity threats that grow daily in frequency and sophistication.

It is critical that the Federal Government address cybersecurity threats in a manner that keeps pace with the Nation's growing dependence on technology. The President himself recently stated: ``Cybersecurity is a challenge that we as a government or as a country are not adequately prepared to counter.''

Madam Speaker, it is essential that we, in fact, change that here today.

Current law does not adequately address the nature of today's cybersecurity threats. Since the enactment in 2002 of the Federal Information Security Management Act, or FISMA, it

has become a check-the-box compliance activity that all too often has little to do with minimizing security threats, and yet the Government Accountability Office recently found that security incidents among 24 key agencies increased more than 650 percent during the last 5 years.

To address the rising challenge posed by cyberthreats, Ranking Member Cummings and I introduced H.R. 4257, the Federal Information Security Amendments Act of 2012. The bill aims to harness the last decade of technological innovation in securing the Federal information systems. It amends FISMA to move beyond the check-the-box compliance mentality. It enhances the current framework for securing Federal information technology systems.

Our bill calls for automated and continuous monitoring of government information systems. And it ensures that control monitoring finally incorporates regular threat assessment and--Madam Speaker, this is the most important part of what we do--continuous monitoring and constant threat assessments so that never again will we find that the incidents are going up double digits every month in some cases.

The bill also reaffirms the role of the Office of Management and Budget, or OMB, with respect to FISMA, recognizing that the budgetary leverage of the Executive Office of the President is necessary to ensure agencies are focused on effective security of its IT systems.

While our bill does not include new requirements, restrictions, or mandates on private or non-Federal computer systems, H.R. 4257 does highlight the need for stronger public-private partnerships. Through our Web site, keepthewebopen.com, our bill has been vetted by the American people. It has also received strong support from cybersecurity experts and industry, including the Information Technology Industry Council and the Business Software Alliance.

I'd like to thank my ranking member, Mr. Cummings, for a one-on-one equal partnership with me in the efforts to address the growing threat for cybersecurity. He has led the way on his side of the aisle, and I have been honored to serve on my side. We have encouraged all Members to support this timely legislation. We recognize that some things are too important to be partisan. This certainly is one of them.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, we have a speaker on the other side for a colloquy, so I'd reserve at this time to allow him to go next.

I thank the gentleman. I do share those concerns and appreciate the gentleman's work on this.

Proper organization of the executive branch is essential to the successful long-term management of technology, and particularly cybersecurity.

This policy is going to require additional work. FISMA is not the end but, in fact, a starting point; and I look forward to working with the gentleman to make sure that as we work with the executive branch, including OMB, that we get it right and we keep the focus where it needs to be on all the agencies and bringing them together.

I thank the gentleman. And yes, we did. Your leadership on cybersecurity matters, including FISMA reform, have been essential.

When you and I served on the Select Intelligence Committee, I recognized that you put more time and effort into the behind-the-door work than any of us. And, in fact, you and I share some of the challenges that we faced with the DNI and other earlier organizations.

But I share with you that your suggestions on how we can, in fact, find single-point accountability in future legislation, in concert with this administration, is essential. I look forward to working with you on exactly that. I know of no other partner I could have on the other side of the aisle that is more prepared to do it, and I thank the gentleman.

I couldn't agree with the gentleman more. Your work with our staff has been essential. I look forward to doing exactly that, and I think we have to have that ongoing effort to get to there.

I saw the ranking member's head also shaking. I know that we will both look forward to working with you on a bipartisan basis.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz), the chairman of the subcommittee that has done so much on, in fact, cybersecurity.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) who coordinated so much of the work that we're doing today from multiple committees.

Madam Speaker, at this time I have no other speakers, and I'm prepared to close.

Madam Speaker, in closing, I urge all Members to support the passage of this bill, H.R. 4257, as amended. I want to make one closing statement.

Often we talk about cybersecurity, and people think just about the Internet. We sit here in a room that is essentially windowless. I've been in this room when the lights are out. It is very, very dark. We would have a hard time finding our way out. Yet the very essence of keeping the grid up requires computers to talk to each other. Our phone systems, our lights, our power, our sewage, our water all depend today on interoperable computer systems that span the entire country and, in many cases, the entire world.

So, as people realize the government-to-government relationship and, particularly, the public-private partnerships that this bill encourages and asks the Office of Management and Budget to assure occur, we are doing so, of course, in order to maintain a reliable Internet; but much more importantly, the fundamentals of the very electricity that powers the Internet must be maintained and protected. I believe we've gone a long way today in the passage of this bill. I urge its passage.

I thank the gentleman from Maryland for his leadership on this important matter.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to take note of something that occurred in this body, the other body, and on June 16 will occur in Arizona.

Brian Terry died more than a year ago as a border patrol agent serving his country on the Arizona border. He was shot and killed by smugglers with weapons that ultimately came from the United States and went across the border under the Operation Fast and Furious program. That's controversial.

But there is no controversy that Brian Terry lived and exemplified the American spirit in serving his country in the military and then as a border patrol agent.

On June 16, that border patrol station will open. On June 16, thanks to action here in the House weeks ago and in the Senate today, we will in fact name it after Brian Terry.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2146) to amend title 31, United States Code, to require accountability and transparency in Federal spending, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The American people have a right to know that taxpayer dollars are well spent. We have a responsibility to stay up with the times. As government has grown, waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement have increased. Today, however, the technology is before us, if we simply embrace it, to do a far better job of accounting for every dollar spent on behalf of the American people. That's not just the American dollars that are spent by the Federal Government, but dollars passed on to the private sector, to the States, to public entities, and to nonprofits.

Today, as those trillions of dollars are put out, we find that we don't know where they're spent. At best, we know the first place they went to. Under the Recovery Act, often called the ``stimulus,'' we can all disagree or agree on how the money was spent; but unlike previous appropriations, under that act, we found a way to do a better job of tracing the dollars, of tracing the dollars through recipient reporting--a system that, although costing a little bit to do, ultimately once set up saves money.

The DATA Act before us today will literally track those trillions of dollars in a way not done outside of the Recovery Act. Quite frankly, we owe a debt of gratitude to the Recovery Board for showing us an effective system on which we could build.

Just a few days ago, our committee, on a very bipartisan basis, evaluated the GSA's lavish spending. They explained to us that part of the way they spent $830,000-plus was, in fact, to cobble together, as they put it, multiple baskets of money--meaning, if you didn't know or couldn't trace how they'd spent their money, you wouldn't know that it was spent on a mind reader and a clown. You wouldn't know that those 10 trips, essentially, were publicly funded trips so that key executives could have family vacations.

With the DATA Act, we expect that and many other wasteful practices to be brought to an end. Some of them will be brought to an end by the ranking member and our work on the committee, but a great many of them will be brought to bear by the American people being able to search online and learn what they currently cannot learn.

The DATA Act has been a bill that has been, unlike many, completely bipartisan. The minority and the majority have worked hand in hand. We come to you today with a bill that has been agreed to and that will save--I repeat, save--billions of dollars. Additionally, we do, in fact, amend some of the abuses under the GSA scandal and do so based on the good work of Representative Dennis Ross of Florida, who introduced strong language to do exactly what we're doing today.

Before we go on, let me just say that I want to thank the ranking member, because the work on this bill and the reason this bill is before us on suspension is that we've been able to work hand in hand with members of the majority and minority and with key staff on both sides to make sure that we have a bill that will pass the House, hopefully, on a unanimous basis, and clearly, we'll see the Senate send a message that it's time for accountability generated from bipartisan work in the House.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would now like to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Ross), the author of many of the reforms in this bill.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the expression we often hear about success and failure is that success has many fathers, while, in fact, failure is an orphan. This bill will not be an orphan. In fact, the work of Ranking Member Cummings, along with Representative Maloney, Representative Sherman, Representative Collin Peterson, and the former chairman of the full committee, Ed Towns, on just one side, have been critical in getting this done. The support of Jason Chaffetz, Dan Burton, Blake Farenthold, the gentleman who spoke a minute ago, James Lankford, Mike Kelly, Tom Latham, Patrick McHenry, and Dennis Ross all have been critical in this process.

But perhaps less often heard, as the ranking member referred, former Inspector General and chairman of the Recovery Board, Earl Devaney, has been critical to shepherding the process that has gone over two Congresses, and I want to thank him personally while he's enjoying his well-earned retirement. Along with him was Vice President Joe Biden, who has been supportive and helped us in this process and held numerous meetings at the White House on behalf of it. In the Senate, Mark Warner of Virginia has championed and introduced the companion product, making it bipartisan in both Houses.

Additionally, as I think the ranking member alluded to, the Sunlight Foundation, the Project on Government Oversight, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the Americans for Tax Reform, the Data

Transparency Coalition, and XPRL US have all been critical. The last one I mentioned is particularly critical because the need for standards that ultimately are set that allow for this transparency are going to come not from us in government but from organizations who have open and transparent capability that we will leverage. All of these and more are to be thanked today.

I want to close by saying the winners of this effort will be the American people. It will be the American people because when this is fully implemented, the American people, who are used to Googling for information outside of government, will find it possible to get meaningful information on where their hard-earned tax dollars are being spent just as quickly. And that's the goal of our committee: to recognize that the hundred-or-so staff and members on both sides of the aisle of the Oversight Committee cannot protect the American people alone. The 12,000-or-so members of the Inspector General's staff throughout government cannot protect the American people alone. But with data transparency and more access and sunlight available more broadly, we believe that these organizations can, in fact, have the kind of whistle-blowers and information providers that will allow us to scrub the balance sheet to wrench out waste, fraud, and abuse in our government at any level.

So I join with the ranking member in urging its unanimous support and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the military service of Colonel Nicholas F. Marano on the occasion of his retirement from the United States Marine Corps. I commend Colonel Marano's career and offer my sincerest thanks for his 32 years of dedicated service in protecting our nation.

Colonel Marano enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve in March of 1980 and served as a rifleman in the 2nd Battalion, the 25th Marines prior to graduation from St. Joseph's University. In January 1985, he was commissioned a Second Lieutenant and designated an infantry officer assigned to 3d Battalion, 9th Marines on board Camp Pendleton, California. There he served as a Platoon Commander, Company Executive Officer, and Company Commander. In September 1988, he transferred to 1st Reconnaissance (Recon) Battalion where he served as a Reconnaissance Marine and graduated as an Officer Honor Graduate at the U.S. Army Ranger School (Class 10 89). Throughout his career he has been deployed to Germany, Republic of Georgia, Kosovo, Albania, Italy, and several times to Iraq in support of combat operations.

Colonel Marano retires from his post of Commanding Officer of Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton California. As Commanding Officer of MCB CamPen, Colonel Marano was in charge of overseeing the operational and logistical responsibility of supporting more than 72,067 scheduled training events in the mobilization and deployment of numerous Camp Pendleton based operating force units to include the 1st Marine Division, the 1st Marine Logistics Group, and the 3rd Marine Air Wing occupying over 125,000 acres of land. Colonel Marano's hard work and dedication aided the Corps in providing continuous, uninterrupted support, in a time of war, to Marines and Sailors of the First Marine Expeditionary Force (I MEF).

The legacy that Colonel Marano has left behind is a true testament to his commitment to the United States Marine Corps and to our country and will have lasting impact on MCB CamPen.

I offer Colonel Marano my warmest congratulations and hope that he enjoys a rich and rewarding retirement knowing that his years of service will not be forgotten by those he led.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the military service of Colonel Michael G. Naylor on the occasion of his retirement from the United States Marine Corps. I commend Colonel Naylor's career and offer my sincerest thanks for his 30 years of dedicated service in protecting our nation.

Beginning his military career in 1982, Colonel Naylor entered Officer Candidate School where he was commissioned a Second Lieutenant and designated a Naval Aviator in September 1983. This was just the start to a long and commendable career in the United States Marine Corps.

Colonel Naylor retires from his post as the Deputy Commander of Marine Corps Installations West (MCIWEST), located at Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton. As Deputy Commander, Colonel Naylor helped oversee seven bases with stations occupying over 160,000 acres throughout California, Nevada, and Arizona. Colonel Naylor's hard work and dedication aided Corps in providing continuous, uninterrupted service support, in a time of war, to Marines and Sailors of the First Marine Expeditionary Force (I MEF).

As a Naval Aviator he has accumulated over 4900 total flight hours in various rotary wing, tilt-rotor, and fixed wing aircraft to include the first two operational tests of the V 22. He was also tasked with flying the President, Vice President, and dignitaries while assigned to Marine One (HMX 1). Colonel Naylor commanded the Marine Medium Helicopter Training Squadron 164 (HMMT 164) where his leadership and commitment provided well trained, organized, and combat ready expeditionary aviation forces capable of short notice world wide deployment to Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF), fleet and unified commanders.

His personal decorations include the Defense Superior Service Medal, Legion of Merit with Gold Star, Meritorious Service Medal with Gold Star, Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal, Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, the Presidential Service badge as well as numerous campaign medals and unit awards.

These recognitions are a testament of Colonel Naylor's strong leadership and unwavering commitment to our country.

I offer Colonel Naylor my congratulations and hope that he enjoys rewarding retirement knowing that his years of service will not be forgotten by those he led.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3902) to amend the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to revise the timing of special elections for local office in the District of Columbia, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I'll be brief.

Today we're doing a small and technical change to everyone except the people of the District of Columbia, who consistently have to live under a rule that costs the voters and the residents of the District of Columbia to expend enormous additional dollars to have special elections rather than having the ordinary flexibility to try to combine their votes at a time in which it would be less expensive.

The bill, which is, if you will, an omission under the Home Rule Act, provides for the District of Columbia to fill vacancies on the first Tuesday 114 days after the date of such vacancy occurring. Unfortunately, this does not provide the flexibility necessary to time special elections concurrently with other general and primary elections. Therefore, this small--and yet not small to the District of Columbia--change will allow them to place the election on a Tuesday occurring between 70 and 174 days of the vacancy. Understand, Mr. Speaker, if there is an ordinary election occurring within that process, this will cause us to have the election on that date.

The bill has been carefully considered and passed unanimously by the committee. Additionally, it's supported by the entire city council-- we'll soon hear from the delegate from the District of Columbia--by the Mayor and his administration.

I want to take just a quick moment to thank the gentlelady from the District of Columbia. It has been, in fact, her work with the committee that made this technical change one that we can all live with for the benefit of the people who host us in the Federal city.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, seeing that there are no further speakers, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

I reserve the balance of my time, but I am prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, I urge immediate support for this important reform for the District of Columbia, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer the following statement along with my colleague from New York and the original cosponsor of H.R. 3699, Representative Carolyn B. Maloney:

The introduction of H.R. 3699 has spurred a robust, expansive debate on the topics of scientific and scholarly publishing, intellectual property protection, and public access to federally funded research. Since its introduction, we have heard from numerous stakeholders and interested parties on both sides of this important issue.

As the costs of publishing continue to be driven down by new technology, we will continue to see a growth in open access publishers. This new and innovative model appears to be the wave of the future. The transition must be collaborative, and must respect copyright law and the principles of open access. The American people deserve to have access to research for which they have paid. This conversation needs to continue and we have come to the conclusion that the Research Works Act has exhausted the useful role it can play in the debate. As such, we want Americans concerned about access to research and other participants in this debate to know we will not be taking legislative action on H.R. 3699, the Research Works Act. We do intend to remain involved in efforts to examine and study the protection of intellectual property rights and open access to publicly funded research.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 290, the ``War Memorial Protection Act,'' of which I am a proud cosponsor.

H.R. 290 will allow religious symbols to be included as part of a military memorial established or acquired by the U.S. government. This follows past legislation which led to the federal government's acquisition of Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial from the city of San Diego in 2006.

First erected in 1913, the cross on top of Mount Soledad has been a fixture of San Diego for nearly a century. In 1954 the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial was rebuilt and dedicated as a lasting memorial to the dead of the two world wars and the Korean conflict. It is a symbol of the community's respect and honor for those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of their nation and liberty.

I am a proud defender of the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial. Our Founding Fathers made sure the government did not impose one religion on all people. They also believed religion plays an important role in public life and individuals should be able to freely practice what they believe.

That is why it is so important to pass the War Memorial Protection Act. This bill does not favor one religion over another and it does not make any exclusions. This bill seeks to ensure that religious symbols can also be part of war memorials honoring our fallen heroes.

Mr. Speaker, again I urge passage of H.R. 290.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, the Committee on Oversight and Government

Reform filed a report to accompany H.R. 3029, the Reducing the Size of the Federal Government Through Attrition Act of 2011. The purpose of the legislation is to reduce the size of the federal civilian workforce by ten percent through attrition. The bill also makes the federal government subject to a hiring freeze if the size of the workforce exceeds ninety percent of its size as of September 30, 2011. The legislation requires tough, but necessary, choices to control government spending.

As discussed in the committee report, H.R. 3029 provides the President, acting through the Office of Management and Budget and in consultation with the Office of Personnel Management, broad flexibility to achieve the necessary reduction in the size of the federal civilian workforce and to prioritize staffing needs across the federal government. The Committee cites federal law enforcement as an occupational category that meets the requirements for an exemption from both the required workforce reduction and the hiring freeze.

The Committee recognizes that the federal government's law enforcement responsibilities have expanded in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The national security and homeland security challenges our nation faces are increasingly complex, and require a dedicated workforce of federal civilian employees. In exercising the waiver authority provided in the bill, the Committee believes the President should give every consideration to members of the federal law enforcement community whose duties include (1) the investigation, apprehension, or detention of individuals suspected or convicted of offenses against the criminal laws of the United States; (2) the protection of officials of the United States against threats to personal safety; or (3) the protection of life and property, such as government institutions performing emergency work involving the safety of human life or the protection of property.

The Committee will carefully monitor implementation of H.R. 3029 to ensure the federal government's law enforcement mission is appropriately protected.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the following letter regarding S. 384:

Committee on Energy and Commerce,

Washington, DC, December 13, 2011.

Hon. Darrell Issa,

Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Issa: I am writing concerning S. 384, to

amend title 39, United States Code, to extend the authority

of the United States Postal Service to issue a semipostal to

raise funds for breast cancer research. I wanted to notify

you that the Committee on Energy and Commerce will forgo

action on S. 384 so that it may proceed expeditiously to the

House floor for consideration.

This is done with the understanding that the Committee on

Energy and Commerce is not waiving any of its jurisdiction,

and the Committee will not in any way be prejudiced with

respect to the appointment of conferees or its jurisdictional

prerogatives on this or similar legislation.

I would appreciate your response confirming this

understanding with respect to S. 384 and ask that a copy of

our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the

Congressional Record during consideration of the bill on the

House floor.

Sincerely,

Fred Upton,

Chairman.

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 929 due to Whip activities, I missed this vote but would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 384) to amend title 39, United States Code, to extend the authority of the United States Postal Service to issue a semipostal to raise funds for breast cancer research.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, Senate bill 384, introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein from the great State of California, would extend the authority of the United States Postal Service to issue semipostal stamps to raise funds for breast cancer research. The bill enjoys cosponsorship on both sides of the aisle; 66 Senators have cosponsored it, and my committee has voted it out unanimously. Senate bill 384 is very simple yet important that we pass, and pass before the end of the year. Senate bill 384 will allow the United States Postal Service to continue to sell special postage stamps that generate funds used for breast cancer research.

In 1997 President Clinton signed Public Law 105-41, known as the Stamp Out Breast Cancer Act. The law authorizes the Postal Service to sell, for the first time, a special semipostal stamp for first-class mail. Under the law, the United States Postal Service sells this stamp at a price that is above the standard first-class mail rate. Buyers willingly buy this, knowing that this is helping stamp out breast cancer.

After accounting for administrative costs, the Postal Service then transfers surplus funds to the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defense for breast cancer research. Today the sale of each 55 cent stamp generates 11 cents to go toward breast cancer research. Since being offered to the public in 1998, nearly 925 million--that's right, 1 billion--of these stamps have been sold, and over $74 million of proceeds have been transferred to the NIH and the Department of Defense for breast cancer research.

I would like to thank my colleague, the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Cummings, and my colleague here today, Mr. Clay, for championing this bill and its reauthorization. I would also like to thank Senator Feinstein for her work in moving this bill in the other Chamber in a timely fashion.

The authorization for this stamp expires on December 31. Mr. Speaker, it is important that we act and act today if we are, in fact, going to continue to help the more than 2.5 million women currently living with breast cancer nationwide and the over 200,000 women diagnosed with this disease each year in our country. The funds generated from this stamp are greatly needed. Each dollar raised for research increases the likelihood that more people will become cancer survivors rather than cancer statistics.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote for the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3220) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 170 Evergreen Square SW in Pine City, Minnesota, as the ``Master Sergeant Daniel L. Fedder Post Office''.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

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

H.R. 3220, introduced by the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Cravaack), would designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 170 Evergreen Square SW in Pine City, Minnesota, as the Master Sergeant Daniel L. Fedder Post Office. The bill is cosponsored by the entire Minnesota State delegation and has been favorably reported from committee.

Master Sergeant Fedder died tragically in August of last year while he was based out of Camp Pendleton within my district and was serving honorably in our theater of operation.

Mr. Speaker, the postal naming is something that our committee takes seriously. We require that all post offices have unanimous support in order to be named. And under this year's rules, we require that it be for individuals befitting of the honor of having a post office named after them, and virtually every postal naming this year has been after one of our fallen heroes.

With that, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Cravaack).

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

In brief, no individual is to be honored more than one who knowingly walks up to a piece of explosive that can kill them surrounded by hostiles who can kill them. When others stand back, our EOD technicians go forward. And no organization has paid more of a

price than Marine EOD and Army EOD during this conflict.

So as we honor Master Sergeant Fedder, hopefully we will recognize that he didn't come home, many other EOD technicians didn't come home, and many who came home came home injured because, in fact, you cannot expect these IEDs not to be set off as you walk up to them.

Only a week ago, I was at the Kennedy Center where they honored a countless number of individuals who had been wounded warriors. Disproportionately, I saw the badge of the EOD technician on many of these individuals. They were operating from wheelchairs, and they were operating with terrible, terrible scars.

The master sergeant did not come home, and that is tragic. But let's understand this post office naming is being named after those men and women who serve day in and day out in Iraq, Afghanistan and here at home, to disarm explosives that most people would simply run away from.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

In closing, I join my colleague in this bipartisan effort to name the post office after Master Sergeant Daniel L. Fedder, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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