Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and accomplishments of Marge Sweeney, whose I tremendous dedication to her family, friends and community serves as a shining example for all who have been blessed by her presence and care.

Back in the mid-sixties, Marge started her career as a bookkeeper, but by the mid-seventies she had already worked her way up to the position of Principal's Secretary at St. Stephen's Elementary and Junior High School. In 1982 she was appointed Recreation Instructor, and since has progressively earned promotions, until she became Manager of Halloran Rink--a position she held for over twenty-five years.

Throughout her career, Marge had an enormous impact on local programs and organizations in the community, including: Cuyahoga Counties' Juvenile Court Victim-Aid Restitution Program; the Westtown Community Development Corporations' Night Out Against Crime; the Metro Parks Youth Programs; and many more. She has also been honored by the Mayor's Office on Volunteerism, City of Cleveland; the First District Police Community Relations

Program; and the National Park and Recreation Association, with a `Commemorative Citiation' in recognition of outstanding leadership and volunteerism to the parks and recreation movement and to advancing the quality of life in her community.

Furthermore, Marge has been a key figure in the formation of the Halloran Advisory Board--a board that contains both community and civic minded individuals, who share the interest of the positive delivery of services to the community of Halloran Skating Rink.

Along with this tremendous work, and being a wife to the late Dennis Sweeney, Marge has taken great pride in raising her eight lovely children; Dennis, Patty, Brian, Jimmy, Kevin, Shawn, Kelly, and Annie.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Marge Sweeney for her thirty years of public service to the residents of Cleveland, and for her kindness and generosity that have and will continue to inspire all who cross paths with her.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary life and achievements of Sergeant Major Joseph J. Ellis, the true definition of an American hero. Throughout his life, Sergeant Major Ellis displayed the highest qualities of sacrifice, patriotism, and service.

Sgt. Maj. Ellis enlisted in the Marines in 1984 and moved up in rank, mostly in reconnaissance units, and trained as a radio operator. In 1985, he was elevated to the rank of corporal and, 2 years later, joined the 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion in Okinawa, Japan, where he served as team communicator and radio supervisor in the battalion communications platoon. Later Ellis was called to Camp Pendleton, California for duty with the School of Infantry, and served as radio supervisor in the communications platoon.

When his country needed his service, Ellis answered the call and was deployed to Saudi Arabia with the 1st Force Reconnaissance Company from Camp Pendleton in 1990 for Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm.

In late 2003, Ellis again answered the call of his country and was sent to Iraq as first sergeant for the Headquarters and Service Company. Ellis was promoted to sergeant major in 2004, making him the top enlisted man with a Camp Pendleton, California-based infantry battalion.

Adlai Stevenson once said, ``Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime.'' Sgt. Maj. Ellis' dedication to patriotism was a lifelong commitment, which he displayed by devoting over 20 years of service to the Marine Corps. Among his many honors and decorations, Ellis was awarded the Meritorious Service Ribbon, the Navy and Marine Corp Commendation Medal with one gold star, the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal with one gold star, and the Combat Action Ribbon with one gold star. Sgt. Maj. Ellis' devotion to our country and the protection of our freedoms and values deserve our most sincere appreciation.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Sgt. Maj. Ellis, who gave the ultimate sacrifice for his country on February 7, 2007. May his actions and deeds never be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, rather than announce a diplomatic initiative similar to North Korea to resolve the stalemate over Iran's nuclear ambitions, yesterday the President said that the Iranian Government is supplying deadly weapons to fighters in Iraq, even though he cannot prove the orders came from the highest levels in Tehran.

Why is he maintaining this? I believe he is maintaining it to satisfy section 2C of the 1973 War Powers Resolution which reads in part: ``The constitutional powers of the President as Commander in Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances and are exercised pursuant to a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions or its Armed Forces.''

So what is going on here is that the administration is seeking a justification for a military conflict with Iran. That is why the administration is changing its emphasis. Its justification now is to protect U.S. troops in Iraq. Very significantly this justification could relieve the President of needing congressional authorization

Contrary to his assertion, the President has been provoking Iran. The President has given U.S. military the authority to kill or capture Iranian operatives inside Iraq, but fails to present credible evidence that explosives used in Iraq have come from Iran.

He is laying the groundwork for an attack on Iran and appears to be preparing to bypass congressional authorization for a military strike against Iran.

In light of the House of Representatives' action to disapprove of the President's escalation in Iraq and the mounting opposition to the war in Iraq, the President has advanced a new justification that could be used to bypass congressional approval for a military conflict of war.

President Bush was able to exercise new flexibility to reach an agreement with North Korea to shut down its nuclear facility. This offers proof that he could negotiate with Iran as well regarding their alleged nuclear weapons program.

Mr. Speaker, the United States illegally attacked and invaded Iraq in a war based on lies. Now those same lies are being used to tell the American people we must escalate and continue to fund the war in the name of the troops. Now, where does this logic end?

The war could go on endlessly as we profess our support for the troops. It is time to stop using the troops as pawns. It is time to stop using the presence of the troops in Iraq as a reason to keep funding the war. It is time to use the money we have now to bring the troops home. And when they come home, it is time to take care of our veterans.

I have presented this Congress with a 12-point plan to bring our troops home, end the occupation, and stabilize Iraq. Yes, we should stop the escalation, but we should also end the occupation by ending funding for the war.

Mr. Speaker, I want to agree with my colleague from Ohio that we need a course correction in international and domestic policy.

As Congress prepares to debate a nonbinding resolution on Iraq, this administration is already on its way to the next war against Iran. We are losing our democracy to war and to debt. We are borrowing money from China, from Korea and Japan to fight a war in Baghdad and to prepare for war against Iran.

Meanwhile here at home, there are so many people that lack access to adequate health care, who do not have money for housing or education. We do not have money for job creation, but we have money for war. It is time to stand up for the American people. It is time for Congress to assume its full power under the Constitution. It is time to impose some discipline on this administration. It is time for Congress to truly be a coequal branch of government and to do the work for the American people.

Madam Speaker, as we debate this nonbinding resolution on Iraq, the administration is preparing for the next war in Iran. We are losing our democracy to war, massive debt, fear and fraud. The American people need Congress to surge towards the Constitution, surge towards the truth.

Now, some call this resolution a first step. I would like to believe that Congress will respond to the will of the American people expressed in the November election. They expect us to take real action to assert our constitutional power, to take America out of Iraq by refusing to provide any more funding for the war. That is our right. That is our duty. We have a duty to restrain an administration which is conducting an illegal war. We have a duty to hold to a constitutional accounting a President and a Vice President who led us into a war based on lies.

I led the effort against the Iraq war resolution.

Madam Speaker, I ask to include into the Record an analysis of the President's war resolution which was given to Members of Congress back in October of 2002. It pointed out that there is no proof that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, anything to do with 9/11, anything to do with al Qaeda's role in 9/11. It is not as if Congress had no idea the war was based on untruths.

Now we must tell the truth, not just about the escalation, but about the occupation. We are illegally occupying Iraq. We attacked a nation which did not attack us. We must recognize the wrong that has been done and move to right it.

Instead of debating the end of the war, Congress is ironically preparing to give the war a new beginning. Some have made it clear long before this particular resolution that they will continue to fund the war by approving the upcoming supplemental appropriation, even though money exists to bring the troops home now.

When we equate funding the war with supporting the troops, we are dooming thousands of young Americans who are valiantly following the orders of their Commander in Chief. If we truly cared about the troops, we would not leave them in the middle of a civil war. If we truly cared about the troops, we would not leave them in a conflict for which there is no military solution.

The war is binding. The resolution is not. This resolution will not end the war. It will not bring our beloved troops home. It will not even stop the administration from sending more troops. That is because this resolution is nonbinding.

The war is binding. The resolution is not; 3,100 U.S. troops are bound in death; 650,000 innocent Iraqi civilians are bound in death.

The war is binding. The resolution is not. American taxpayers are bound in debt. The war could cost $2 trillion. We are borrowing money from Beijing to fight a war in Baghdad. Worse, each and every time Congress votes to fund the war, it votes to reauthorize the war. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but there are weapons of mass destruction at home. Poverty is a weapon of mass disruption. Lack of education is a weapon of mass destruction. Poor health care is a weapon of mass destruction. We must find and disarm those weapons of mass destruction which threaten the security of our own Nation. But Congress must first take responsibility.

The Federal Court has made it abundantly clear that once a war is well underway, Congress' real power is to cut off funds. Funding the war is approval of the war.

The American people are waiting for us to provide real leadership to show the way out of Iraq. My 12-point plan responds to that demand. This plan, drafted with the help of experts in international peacekeeping, specialists with U.N. experience and veteran military advisors, creates a peace process which will enable our troops to come home and stabilize Iraq.

Here are the elements of the Kucinich plan.

First, Congress must deny any more funds for the war.

Second, the President will have to call the troops home, close the bases and end the occupation.

Third, a parallel peace process which brings in international peacekeepers must begin. That is third.

Fourth, move in the international peacekeeping and security force and move out U.S. troops. Peacekeepers will stay until the Iraqis are able to handle their own security.

Fifth, order U.S. contractors out of Iraq.

Sixth, fund an honest process of reconstruction.

Seventh, protect the economic position of the Iraqi people by stabilizing

prices in Iraq, including those for food and energy.

Eighth, create a process which gives the Iraqi people control over their economic destiny without the structural adjustment policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Ninth, give the Iraqi people full control over their oil assets, with no mandatory privatization.

Tenth, fund a process of reconciliation between the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.

Eleventh, the U.S. must refrain from any more covert operations in Iraq.

And twelfth, the U.S. must begin a process of truth and reconciliation between our Nation and the people of Iraq.

There is a way out. Congress should stand for that. And we will have an opportunity to do it once again in about 6 weeks

Analysis of Joint Resolution on Iraq

(By Dennis J. Kucinich)

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression

against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States

forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its

people in order to defend the national security of the United

States and enforce United Nations Security Council

resolutions relating to Iraq;

Key Issue: In the Persian Gulf war there was an

international coalition. World support was for protecting

Kuwait. There is no world support for invading Iraq.

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq

entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement

pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other

things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical

weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them,

and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors,

United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led

to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical

weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and

that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program

that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than

intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Key Issue: UN inspection teams identified and destroyed

nearly all such weapons. A lead inspector, Scott Ritter, said

that he believes that nearly all other weapons not found were

destroyed in the Gulf War. Furthermore, according to a

published report in the Washington Post, the Central

Intelligence Agency has no up to date accurate report on

Iraq's WMD capabilities.

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the

cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons

inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass

destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which

finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on

October 31, 1998;

Key Issues: Iraqi deceptions always failed. The inspectors

always figured out what Iraq was doing. It was the United

States that withdrew from the inspections in 1998. And the

United States then launched a cruise missile attack against

Iraq 48 hours after the inspectors left. In advance of a

military strike, the U.S. continues to thwart (the

Administration's word) weapons inspections.

Whereas in 1998 Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing

weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United

States interests and international peace and security,

declared Iraq to be in ``material and unacceptable breach of

its international obligations'' and urged the President ``to

take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution

and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into

compliance with its international obligations'' (Public Law

105-235);

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national

security of the United States and international peace and

security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material

and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by,

among other things, continuing to possess and develop a

significant chemical and biological weapons capability,

actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting

and harboring terrorist organizations;

Key Issues: There is no proof that Iraq represents an

imminent or immediate threat to the United States. A

``continuing'' threat does not constitute a sufficient cause

for war. The Administration has refused to provide the

Congress with credible intelligence that proves that Iraq is

a serious threat to the United States and is continuing to

possess and develop chemical and biological and nuclear

weapons. Furthermore there is no credible intelligence

connecting Iraq to Al Qaida and 9/11.

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the

United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in

brutal repression of its civilian population thereby

threatening international peace and security in the region,

by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi

citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American

serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully

seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Key Issue: This language is so broad that it would allow

the President to order an attack against Iraq even when there

is no material threat to the United States. Since this

resolution authorizes the use of force for all Iraq related

violations of the UN Security Council directives, and since

the resolution cites Iraq's imprisonment of non-Iraqi

prisoners, this resolution would authorize the President to

attack Iraq in order to liberate Kuwaiti citizens who may or

may not be in Iraqi prisons, even if Iraq met compliance with

all requests to destroy any weapons of mass destruction.

Though in 2002 at the Arab Summit, Iraq and Kuwait agreed to

bilateral negotiations to work out all claims relating

to stolen property and prisoners of war. This use-of-force

resolution enables the President to commit U.S. troops to

recover Kuwaiti property.

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its

capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction

against other nations and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its

continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the

United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate

former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of

occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged

in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security

Council;

Key Issue: The Iraqi regime has never attacked nor does it

have the capability to attack the United States. The ``no

fly'' zone was not the result of a UN Security Council

directive. It was illegally imposed by the United States,

Great Britain and France and is not specifically sanctioned

by any Security Council resolution.

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing

responsibility for attacks on the United States, its

citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred

on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Key Issue: There is no credible intelligence that connects

Iraq to the events of 9/11 or to participation in those

events by assisting Al Qaida.

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other

international terrorist organizations, including

organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American

citizens;

Key Issue: Any connection between Iraq support of terrorist

groups in Middle East, is an argument for focusing great

resources on resolving the conflict between Israel and the

Palestinians. It is not sufficient reason for the U.S. to

launch a unilateral preemptive strike against Iraq.

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11,

2001 underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the

acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international

terrorist organizations;

Key Issue: There is no connection between Iraq and the

events of 9/11.

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to

use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current

Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a

surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces

or provide them to international terrorists who would do so,

and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the

United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine

to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Key Issue: There is no credible evidence that Iraq

possesses weapons of mass destruction. If Iraq has

successfully concealed the production of such weapons since

1998, there is no credible evidence that Iraq has the

capability to reach the United States with such weapons. In

the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq had a demonstrated capability of

biological and chemical weapons, but did not have the

willingness to use them against the United States Armed

Forces. Congress has not been provided with any credible

information which proves that Iraq has provided international

terrorists with weapons of mass destruction.

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678

authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United

Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and subsequent

relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain

activities that threaten international peace and security,

including the development of weapons of mass destruction and

refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections

in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution

687, repression of its civilian population in violation of

United Nations Security Council Resolution 688, and

threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in

Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council

Resolution 949;

Key Issue: The UN Charter forbids all member nations,

including the United States, from unilaterally enforcing UN

resolutions.

Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military

Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has

authorized the President ``to use United States Armed Forces

pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678

(1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council

Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674,

and 677'';

Key Issue: The UN Charter forbids all member nations,

including the United States, from unilaterally enforcing UN

resolutions with military force.

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that

it ``supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the

goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as

being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military

Force Against Iraq

Resolution (Public Law 102-1),'' that Iraq's repression of

its civilian population violates United Nations Security

Council Resolution 688 and ``constitutes a continuing threat

to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf

region,'' and that Congress, ``supports the use of all

necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations

Security Council Resolution 688'';

Key Issue: This clause demonstrates the proper chronology

of the international process, and contrasts the current march

to war. In 1991, the UN Security Council passed a resolution

asking for enforcement of its resolution. Member countries

authorized their troops to participate in a UN-led coalition

to enforce the UN resolutions. Now the President is asking

Congress to authorize a unilateral first strike before the UN

Security Council has asked its member states to enforce UN

resolutions.

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338)

expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy

of the United States to support efforts to remove from power

the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a

democratic government to replace that regime;

Key Issue: This ``Sense of Congress'' resolution was not

binding. Furthermore, while Congress supported democratic

means of removing Saddam Hussein it clearly did not endorse

the use of force contemplated in this resolution, nor did it

endorse assassination as a policy.

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the

United States to ``work with the United Nations Security

Council to meet our common challenge'' posed by Iraq and to

``work for the necessary resolutions,'' while also making

clear that ``the Security Council resolutions will be

enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be

met, or action will be unavoidable'';

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the

war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international

terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of

mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under

the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council

resolutions make clear that it is in the national security

interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war

on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security

Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of

force if necessary;

Key Issue: Unilateral action against Iraq will cost the

United States the support of the world community, adversely

affecting the war on terrorism. No credible intelligence

exists which connects Iraq to the events of 9/11 or to those

terrorists who perpetrated 9/11. Under international law, the

United States does not have the authority to unilaterally

order military action to enforce U.N. Security Council

resolutions.

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the

war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and

funding requested by the President to take the necessary

actions against international terrorists and terrorist

organizations, including those nations, organizations or

persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the

terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 or

harbored such persons or organizations;

Key Issue: The Administration has not provided Congress

with any proof that Iraq is in any way connected to the

events of 9/11.

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to

continue to take all appropriate actions against

international terrorists and terrorist organizations,

including those nations, organizations or persons who

planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks

that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons

or organizations;

Key Issue: The Administration has not provided Congress

with any proof that Iraq is in any way connected to the

events of 9/11. Furthermore, there is no credible evidence

that Iraq has harbored those who were responsible for

planning, authorizing or committing the attacks of 9/11.

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution

to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of

international terrorism against the United States, as

Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization

for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Key Issue: This resolution was specific to

9/11. It was limited to a response to 9/11.

Whereas it is in the national security of the United States

to restore international peace and security to the Persian

Gulf region;

Key Issue: If by the ``national security interests'' of the

United States, the Administration means oil, it ought to

communicate such to the Congress. A unilateral attack on Iraq

by the United States will cause instability and chaos in the

region and sow the seeds of future conflicts all other the

world.

Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled,

The House will soon entertain a resolution relating to the surge. It is a nonbinding resolution. The war, however, is binding.

The supplemental resolution relating to funding will give Congress an opportunity to take some binding action related to the war. Congress' real power is to cut off funds.

Money is there right now to bring the troops home, and money to bring the troops home is part of a plan that involves bringing in international peacekeepers while our troops leave.

I have a 12-point plan which I have circulated among Members of Congress as to how we can get out of Iraq. The American people will not tolerate nonbinding resolutions as being an excuse for strong and substantive action to end the war as quickly as possible.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Judge Diane Karpinski of Ohio's 8th District Court of Appeals who is retiring after a long and illustrious career. Actually, Judge Karpinski has had two careers. After earning both bachelor's and master's degrees in English from Ohio State University, she taught for 19 years, first at Ohio State and later at Cleveland State University. Then, upon graduation from Cleveland-Marshall College of Law in 1980, Judge Karpinski worked for thirteen years as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Ohio, trying more than 1600 cases at the trial level and practicing extensively in the appellate courts of five different districts in northern Ohio and at the Ohio Supreme Court. She was elected in 1995 to a six-year term as judge in the Court of Appeals of the 8th District of Ohio and subsequently re-elected to a second term. She was appointed as a visiting judge on the Ohio Supreme Court for a series of significant cases on automatic license suspension.

Judge Karpinski has demonstrated a strong commitment to her professions, first as a teacher and also as an attorney. Active in the Cuyahoga County Bar Association, she served on its Certified Grievance and the Court of Appeals Committees. Since 1998 she has been a Trustee of the Cuyahoga Bar. She is also a member of the Cleveland Bar Appellate Court Committee. In 2001, she was the first to chair a new committee of the Ohio State Bar Association: On the Independent Judiciary and Unjust Criticism of Judges. Because of her dual professions, she is often invited to lecture on appellate writing.

Judge Karpinski values her community and her Polish ethnic heritage. With her two sisters, Mercedes Spotts and Gloria Joy Battisti, she was a founding trustee of the East Side Catholic Shelter for the Homeless. For years she has sung in Our Lady of Peace Church Choir, and for one summer was its interim organist. After studying Polish at the Alliance of Poles for three years, she joined a team of teachers who traveled to Gdansk to teach English in the summer of 1993. Continuing her mother's interest in ethnic affairs, especially in the Cleveland Cultural Garden Federation, Judge Karpinski volunteered her services as its counsel. She was a long-time member of the American Polish Women's Club, has chaired the Budget and By-Laws Committees at Alliance of Poles Conventions, and served as Treasurer of Group 88 of the Polish Women's Alliance. For two years she was a judge for the Polonia Foundation Scholarship Committee and currently is a member of the Foundation Board.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in recognizing the great accomplishments of Judge Diane Karpinski and her tremendous commitment to the people of Northeast Ohio. Let us wish her tremendous success in her

upcoming third career as retired citizen, where she is sure to continue serving the people with energy, distinction, and talent.

Mr. Speaker, we are sacrificing our entire domestic agenda for an illegal war in Iraq.

When you look at the President's budget, reductions in education and health care over a period of time will cause many necessary programs to be cut for the American people. Meanwhile, the White House is discussing whether or not to bring refugees from Iraq to the United States.

Now, think about it a minute. We are prosecuting an illegal war in Iraq, we are illegally occupying the country, we are building permanent bases in Iraq, and now we are talking about bringing refugees here. The real humanitarian thing to do would be to end the war by ending the occupation, closing the bases and bringing our troops home.

That is exactly what my 12-point plan would do. I reached it with the help of people from the international community, the U.N., people who have experience in peacekeeping. They say we can bring in an international security force once we get agreement from the countries in the region, and we can bring our troops home.

We have to stop this disaster in Iraq, bring our troops home, end the occupation.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday a bill was introduced into the House of Representatives that gives

the promise of transforming our country and the world. H.R. 808 creates a Department of Peace and Nonviolence. It is now supported by 52 Members of the House of Representatives, and it is supported by groups who yesterday came to Washington representing 45 States. Last night, nearly 1,000 people came to the George Washington University campus to hear about the Department of Peace and the hope that it brings for America.

Mr. Speaker, if you were to look at this clerk's desk, just around the corner you will see engraved right into the desk of the clerk of the House of Representatives the word ``peace.'' Peace is a foundational principle of this Congress and of this country, and the bill gives it a chance to have an animating power in our civic life by addressing the issues of domestic violence, spousal abuse, child abuse, violence in the schools, racial violence, all of those concerns we have both domestically and internationally.

Peace.

Madam Speaker, I gave the attached statement, in opposition to the Administration's interference in Climate Change science on January 30, 2007.

Hearing on ``Political Interference with Science: Global Warming'' January 30, 2007.

I want to first thank the Chairman for holding this hearing that, like so many other hearings we will be having, is long overdue. Global warming will be a defining issue of this generation and of many to come.

There is substantial scientific certainty around climate change. Scientists are confident that global warming is happening. Similarly, the vast majority of experts on the issue agree that human activities are to blame. If that was not obvious already, it will be after this week when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change releases its long awaited report.

The only uncertainty to be debated is the pace and intensity of warming that will face us. Will the pace of warming remain steady or accelerate predictably? Or can we expect

more abrupt changes as enormous stores of methane hydrate, a gas with several times the heat retention capacity of carbon dioxide, is released from the ocean floor and expanses of permafrost? These gases are released as the natural mechanisms keeping them sequestered are broken down by warming. Permafrost melts. Ocean temperature and acidity rise. The historical record contains strong evidence that abrupt climate change has corresponded with a single release of vast stores of methane hydrate.

This uncertainty is real. It stands in stark contrast to the alleged uncertainties that have been manufactured by those who stand to profit by perpetuating the status quo as long as possible.

To resolve and manage the real uncertainty, we must have the best scientific information possible at our fingertips in order to weigh risks and benefits of all available policy responses. That is only one of the reasons that the casualness with which this Administration sends unqualified political appointees to edit scientific findings is so pernicious. It is also destructive because accurate information is the bedrock of any democratic society. Without it, citizens cannot hold their leaders accountable for their actions, or in this case, inactions.

Sadly, such distortion of the truth has a proven track record of effectiveness. Indeed an entire industry has been created to manufacture scientific doubt where there is none. It is a technique that was mainstreamed by the tobacco industry and refined by others who stand to profit from scientific obfuscation like the chemical industry and the pharmaceutical industry. In fact, an entire industry that specializes in creating scientific uncertainty has taken root. It consists of PR agencies, pseudo scientific consultants and well paid think tanks. The strategy not only works, but is profitable.

Making matters worse, today we will see evidence that the taxpayers have been subsidizing the distortion of the findings of world class scientists on the topic. At best, it is corporate welfare. At worst, it undermines democracy and puts the delicate ecosystems on which we all intimately depend, at risk. My hope is that this hearing marks the beginning of the end of this practice.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Julius Storti, upon his retirement from Transformer Engineering Corporation (TEC). His tenure at TEC spans sixty-three years, and is framed by integrity, innovation, excellence, friendship and unwavering loyalty and dedication.

Mr. Storti began working at TEC in the summer of 1943, while still in high school. His interest in electrical work was sparked while a student at Lincoln High School, where he assisted a teacher with an electrical course. At TEC, Mr. Storti became highly skilled in all areas, yet his primary work and expertise focused on hand & multiple winding, an area in which he is considered an expert.

A devoted family man, Mr. Storti was also surrounded by family and friends at TEC. He met his wife, Dorothy at TEC, and lovingly cared for her until her recent passing. Together they raised their daughter, Anne. He also worked alongside his childhood friend, George Kolsenicky, and his brother-in-law, the late Paul Yachanin. Mr. Storti's kind and humble nature consistently shone through at TEC, and his professional integrity and strong work ethic never wavered. Although a talented and dedicated employee, the center of Mr. Storti's life continues to be his family and close friends.

Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and celebration of Mr. Julius Storti, whose sixty-three year tenure at Transformer Engineering Corporation is defined by kindness, patience, expertise and willingness to extend a helping hand to anyone in need. Mr. Storti created bonds of friendship at TEC that will never be broken, and he will be deeply missed by all. I wish Mr. Storti and his family an abundance of health, peace and happiness as he journeys onward from here.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of Neighborhood Housing Services of Greater Cleveland (NHSGC), which is celebrating its 30th Annual Luncheon on January 25, 2007, at the Bohemian National Hall in Cleveland's Slavic Village neighborhood.

Neighborhood housing has created homeownership and built communities for over 30 years. NHSGC, a trusted not-for-profit organization, has provided families in Northeast Ohio with the housing education and home repair loans they need to buy, improve and keep their homes. NHSGC was incorporated in July 1975 to revitalize Cleveland neighborhoods by providing programs and services that improve the communities and enhance the quality of life of residents. Realizing its primary market niche was providing a comprehensive service package to clients interested in homeownership, NHSGC is also one of the leading providers of rehab services and loan products. This experience has led NHSGC to expand its focus from traditional ``neighborhood based'' market to the entire City of Cleveland, while also expanding throughout Cuyahoga County and other strategic locations. NHSGC partners with both public and private institutions to help more than 1,300 people each year. In its efforts to build strong communities, NHSGC is led by local residents and guided by local needs.

As a chartered member of Neighbor-Works', one of nearly 245 organizations working in nearly 4,400 urban, suburbs and rural communities nationwide, NHSGC is certified to meet a high standard of fiscal integrity and service to help residents in developing leadership, improving their neighborhoods, and securing decent housing that is affordable. Its link to this powerful and unique nationwide network of community development organizations adds great value to what it is able to accomplish in Northeast Ohio.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in recognizing the great accomplishments of Neighborhood Housing Services of Greater Cleveland as it celebrates its 30th Annual Luncheon on January 25, and in committing ourselves to joining with this nonprofit organization in rebuilding our nation's great cities like Cleveland.

Madam Speaker, during a hearing today in the Committee on Education and Labor entitled ``Strengthening America's Middle Class: Evaluating the Economic Squeeze on America's Families,'' I offered the following statement on the economic issues facing workers and families in America.

As we will hear from today's witnesses, families across the Nation are experiencing increased financial pressures and too often failing to reap the rewards of their own productivity. Many middle class workers who have labored tirelessly to support their family are now faced with job insecurity and financial concerns. Too often, the overriding themes of many workers' lives have become themes of increasing debts and diminishing protections. The pressure they now face largely stems from circumstances beyond their control, circumstances that we as Members of Congress must work to rectify.

Many families of middle class workers now teeter on the edge of economic stability. Every American can attest to the growing costs of necessities such as home heating oil, child care, and healthcare. As wages have failed to keep pace, many workers are placed in a precarious financial situation. Forced increasingly

to rely upon loans and credit cards to make ends meet, families can find themselves one extended hospital stay or temporary job loss away from bankruptcy. The system designed to protect families in these situations is broken, and must be mended by this Congress.

Outsourcing, once primarily a concern for manufacturing jobs, is now a growing concern for white collar jobs as well. Workers in my home state of Ohio have long known the consequences for workers when jobs are shipped overseas. The effects of trade policies such as NAFTA have led Ohio to post the sixth highest unemployment rate in the Nation in the most recent numbers reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Workers and their families are left in an insecure world, with diminishing protections and in need of a helping hand.

No longer can our Nation turn a blind eye to the effects of lax enforcement of labor laws, inadequate social support systems and faulty trade policies. This Congress must take the necessary steps to ensure that workers and their families are on stable economic ground. We have the ability to better protect and aid our constituents, and we must move towards the goal of security for workers as we begin this new Congress.

Mr. Speaker, today Congress is considering a long-term continuing appropriations bill to fund large portions of the Federal Government through the end of fiscal year 2007. This legislation is necessary because Congress did not complete the appropriations process last year.

There are many reasons to support this bill. For example, the bill increases Pell Grant funding to make college more affordable, IDEA funding by $200 million to help our neediest students, and Head Start funding by $100 million to give our youngest kids the opportunity to learn. Funding for housing opportunities is increased by $1.4 billion. Without the increase HUD would be forced to deny approximately 220,000 voucher renewals.

The bill also boosts funding for local law enforcement by increasing funding for both the COPS program and the Byrne Justice Assistance Grants which directly impact funding for local law enforcement efforts.

NASA aeronautics funding, vital to the Cleveland economy, was increased by $166 million over the president's budget request. Furthermore, the bill contained an extension of the layoff ban, and prevents the NASA Administrator from gutting NASA Glenn.

I also support the $3.6 billion increase in veterans healthcare funding that provides service for an anticipated increase of at least 325,000 patients and to meet rising healthcare costs. In the same vein, Defense Health Programs are increased by $1.2 billion to provide care for service members and their families--including treating service members wounded in action in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Our Nation is facing a crisis in healthcare. The bill provides necessary relief for the Community Health Center to finance over 300 new

or expanded health centers, serving an estimated 1.2 million new patients. The bill boosts funding for the Ryan White CARE Grants, the National Institutes of Health and the Indian Health Service.

The bill adds $1.3 billion to expand efforts to combat HIV/AIDS and TB. At the same time, $248 million was added to the Agency for International Development Malaria Programs to expand its bilateral global malaria initiative activities.

The bill adds considerable funding for the protection of the environment by adding $197.1 million for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund. The revolving fund is distributed by formula and will fund additional water and wastewater infrastructure projects in every state, including Ohio.

The bill adds $100 million to cover operational shortfalls for parks, refuges, forests and other public lands; including facilities in northeastern Ohio.

The bill adds $1.5 billion for the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Resources program to accelerate research and development activities for renewable energy and energy efficiency programs.

Finally, the bill forces greater transparency in the activities of the World Bank, requiring them to report public disclosure of loan agreements between World Bank and its borrowers. This sunshine rule will help ensure the World Bank loans are not destructive to third world nations.

Unfortunately, this bill includes over $6 billion in nuclear weapons funding that I oppose. I have voted against the Energy and Water Appropriations bill, which contains funding for nuclear weapons, since 2002. I cannot bring myself to vote for any legislation that further endangers the world. I regret not being able to vote for all the positive aspects of this bill, but my conscience and my concerns about the threat which nuclear weapons pose to the world matter more.

Furthermore, I am concerned about the potential loss of jobs in Cleveland relating to the BRAC process. I appreciate that the bill contains additional funds for the BRAC process. I urge the Committee on Appropriations to fully fund the BRAC process as soon as possible to ensure the additional DFAS jobs can be transferred to Cleveland as previously scheduled.