Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this motion to instruct, and I commend my colleague, Congressman Miller, for filing this motion and bringing the pressing issue of worker and executive parity to the floor for debate.

Under the pension reform bill passed by the House, a pension plan that is less than 80 percent funded would not be allowed to increase benefits or establish new benefits for its workers, regardless of the reason for the underfunding. But as has been pointed out by Mr. Miller and Mr. Andrews, while worker pensions are held stagnant, executive pensions remain unrestricted until the plan is less than 60 percent funded. This is patently unfair to workers.

The American people can understand that when workers are being treated in a way that diverges from the people who run the companies and when the game is fixed to make sure that the CEOs receive incredible pensions, well, the workers are cheated. People can understand that.

Pension plans are administered and funded by companies, not workers. Yet, under H.R. 2830, the workers are punished for faulty management of plans. This restriction undermines workers' retirement security, and it is contrary to the purpose of ERISA.

The past decade is littered with examples of increasing executive pay and pensions while workers' pensions were underfunded or even terminated. In 2002, for example, U.S. Airways CEO Stephen Wolf received a lump sum pension of $15 million. Six months following that executive payout, U.S. Airways filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy. One eventual outcome of that bankruptcy was the termination of the pilots' pension plan. The CEO, $15 million; the workers, their pension plan is terminated.

Stories with a similar theme can be shared about United Airlines and Delta: executive receives a protected pension benefit or extra stock options while workers are left with terminated pension plans and a cut in benefits.

As has been said before, ExxonMobil's outgoing CEO, the same ExxonMobil that is gouging people at the pump, their CEO is going to get $98 million in a lump sum pension payment while the company's overall funding for workers and retirees remains only 72 percent funded. It is time for these disparities to end.

Although this motion to instruct is not going to be able to restore the pensions of those workers already harmed by executive abuse, it will make a difference to others. Pensions are not just investments to a worker. To a worker, a pension is a vital piece of retirement security.

Pension plans do not belong to the companies; they belong to the workers. They are the workers' money. They are the workers' futures. They are the property of the workers. We have a duty to ensure that workers' pensions are not subject to unfair restrictions while those controlling the plans receive bonuses.

Millions of American families are watching this debate, and they are wondering, whose side are we on?

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and remembrance of Joseph L. Fortuna, devoted family man, United States Veteran, business leader, and friend and mentor to many.

As the founder of Fortuna Funeral Home on Fleet Avenue in Cleveland, Mr. Fortuna served the citizens of Slavic Village, Newburgh Heights and communities beyond with great care, compassion and professionalism, for more than 50 years. He grew up near Union Avenue, and held a lifelong commitment to family, faith and to the residents of southeast Cleveland that reflected throughout his lifetime.

Mr. Fortuna's generous spirit, kindness of heart and sense of civic responsibility had a positive impact on the lives of countless individuals and families. He was a lifelong member and leader at his parish, St. John Nepomucene, past President of the Laurentian Athletic Club, and remained proudly connected to his Slovenian heritage through his involvement with various Slovenian organizations. Mr. Fortuna was honored many times for his significant contribution to our community and was named ``Man of the Year'' in 1975 by the Slovenian National Home of Cleveland.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of my friend, Joseph L. Fortuna, whose kindness, compassion and generosity has served to uplift the people of Fleet Avenue and miles beyond. I offer my deepest condolences to Mr. Fortuna's beloved wife, Virginia; to his beloved children, Joseph; Mary Ann (Jim), John (Roberta), and Jane (Phillip); and to his grandchildren and extended family and many friends. Mr. Fortuna's life, framed by love and kindness, will always remain in the hearts and memories of his family and his community, and he will never be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of six bills I introduced today that will provide a comprehensive regulatory framework for all genetically engineered plants, animals, bacteria, and other organisms. The bills will protect our food, environment, and health. They are a common sense precaution to ensure genetically engineered foods do no harm.

Genetic engineering is having a serious impact on the food we eat, on the environment, and on farmers. To ensure we can maximize benefits and minimize hazards, Congress must provide a comprehensive regulatory framework for all genetically engineered products.

Current laws, such as our food safety and environmental laws, were not written with this technology in mind. Clearer laws are necessary to ensure that these new scientific capabilities and the associated impacts are closely monitored.

The six bills include the Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act of 2006, which requires food companies to label all foods that contain or are produced with genetically engineered materials and instructs the Food and Drug Administration to conduct periodic tests to ensure compliance. This is a basic consumer rights and consumer safety issue. People have a right to know what is in the food they are eating, and that the food is safe.

Combined, these bills would ensure that consumers are protected, increase food safety, protect farmers rights, make biotech companies liable for their products, and help developing nations resolve hunger concerns

Summary of Genetically Engineered Food Legislation

The Genetically Engineered Food Right To Know Act

Consumers wish to know whether the food they purchase and

consume is a genetically engineered food. Concerns include

the potential transfer of allergens into food and other

health risks, potential environmental risks associated with

the genetic engineering of crops, and religiously and

ethically based dietary restrictions. Adoption and

implementation of mandatory labeling requirements for

genetically engineered food produced in the United States

would facilitate international trade. It would allow American

farmers and companies to export and appropriately market

their products--both genetically engineered and non-

genetically engineered--to foreign customers. This bill

acknowledges consumers have a right to know what

genetically engineered foods they are eating:

Requires food companies to label all foods that contain or

are produced with genetically engineered material and

requires the FDA to periodically test products to ensure

compliance.

Voluntary, non-GE food labels are authorized.

A legal framework is established to ensure the accuracy of

labeling without creating significant economic hardship on

the food production system.

The Genetically Engineered Food Safety Act

Given the consensus among the scientific community that

genetic engineering can potentially introduce hazards, such

as allergens or toxins, genetically engineered foods need to

be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and cannot be presumed

to be generally recognized as safe. The possibility of such

hazards dictates a cautious approach to genetically

engineered food approvals. However, FDA has glossed over the

food safety concerns of genetically engineered foods and not

taken steps to ensure the safety of these genetically

engineered foods. This bill requires that all genetically

engineered foods follow a strenuous food safety review

process:

Requires FDA to screen all genetically engineered foods

through the current food additive process to ensure they are

safe for human consumption, yet continues FDA discretion in

applying the safety factors that are generally recognized as

appropriate.

Requires that unique concerns be explicitly examined in the

review process, a phase out of antibiotic resistance markers,

and a prohibition on known allergens.

Requires the FDA to conduct a public comment period of at

least 30 days

The Genetically Engineered Crop and Animal Farmer Protection Act

Agribusiness and biotechnology companies have rapidly

consolidated market power at the same time as the average

farmer's profits and viability have significantly declined.

Policies promoted by biotech corporations have systematically

acted to remove basic farmer rights enjoyed since the

beginning of agriculture. These policies include unreasonable

seed contracts, the intrusion into everyday farm operations,

and liability burdens. The introduction of genetically

engineered crops has also created obstacles for farmers,

including the loss of markets and increased liability

concerns. To mitigate the abuses upon farmers, a clear set of

farmer rights must be established. This bill provides several

farmer rights and protections to maintain the opportunity to

farm:

Farmers may save seeds and seek compensation for failed

genetically engineered crops.

Biotech companies may not: shift liability to farmers; nor

require access to farmer's property; nor mandate arbitration;

nor mandate court of jurisdiction; nor require damages beyond

actual fees; nor charge more to American farmers for use of

this technology, than they charge farmers in other nations,

or any other unfair condition.

Seed companies must: ensure seeds labeled non-GE are

accurate; provide clear instructions to reduce cross-

pollination, which contaminates other fields; and inform

fanners of the risks of using genetically engineered

crops.

The EPA is required to evaluate the concern of Bt resistant

pests and take actions necessary to prevent resistance to Bt,

an important organic pesticide.

The bill prohibits genetic engineering designed to produce

sterile seeds and loan discrimination based on the choice of

seeds an agricultural producer uses.

The Genetically Engineered Organism Liability Act

Biotech companies are selling a technology that is being

commercialized far in advance of the new and unknown science

of genetic engineering. Farmers may suffer from crop

failures, neighboring farmers may suffer from cross

pollination, increased insect resistance, and unwanted

``volunteer'' genetically engineered plants, and consumers

may suffer from health and environmental impacts. Therefore,

biotech companies should be found liable for the failures of

genetically engineered crops. This bill ensures that the

creator of the technology assumes all liability:

The bill places all liability from negative impacts of

genetically engineered organisms squarely upon the

biotechnology companies that created the genetically

engineered organism.

Farmers are granted indemnification to protect them from

the liabilities of biotech companies.

The bill prohibits any transfer of liability away from the

biotechnology companies that created the genetically

engineered organism.

Real Solutions to World Hunger Act

The demand for mandatory labeling, safety testing, and

farmer protections do not constitute obstacles to the

cessation of world hunger. Economics remain the significant

barrier to a consistent food supply, and the development of

expensive genetically engineered foods may only exacerbate

this trend. Almost all research funding for the development

of genetically engineered food target the developed nation's

agriculture and consumers. However, agroecological

interventions have had significantly more success in helping

developing nations feed themselves with higher yields and

improved environmental practices, all within reasonable costs

for developing countries. This bill offers several new

initiatives and protections to help developing nations

resolve their hunger concerns:

To protect developing nations, genetically engineered

exports are restricted to those already approved in the U.S.

and approved by the importing nation.

The bill creates an international research fund for

sustainable agriculture research paid for the Sustainable

Agriculture Trust Fund, a small tax on biotechnology company

profits.

The Genetically Engineered Pharmaceutical and Industrial Crop Safety

Act

A pharmaceutical crop or industrial crop is a plant that

has been genetically engineered to produce a medical or

industrial product, including human and veterinary drugs.

Many of the novel substances produced in pharmaceutical crops

and industrial crops are for particular medical or industrial

purposes only. These substances are not intended to be

incorporated in food or to be spread into the environment.

That would be equivalent to allowing a prescription drug in

the food supply. Experts acknowledge that contamination of

human food and animal feed is inevitable due to the inherent

imprecision of biological and agricultural systems. This

contamination by pharmaceutical crops and industrial crops

pose substantial liability and other economic risks to

farmers, grain handlers, and food companies. This bill

attempts to prevent contamination of our food supply by

pharmaceutical crops and industrial crops.

The bill places a temporary moratorium on pharmaceutical

crops and industrial crops until all regulations required in

this bill are in effect.

The bill places a permanent moratorium on pharmaceutical

crops and industrial crops grown in an open-air environment

and on pharmaceutical crops and industrial crops grown in a

commonly used food source.

The United States Department of Agriculture shall establish

a tracking system to regulate the growing, handling,

transportation, and disposal of all pharmaceutical and

industrial crops and their byproducts to prevent

contamination.

The National Academy of Sciences shall submit to Congress a

report that explores alternatives methods to produce

pharmaceuticals or industrial chemicals that have the

advantage of being conducted in controlled production

facilities and do not present the risk of contamination.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) whose Cleveland office is hosting its 4th Annual Banquet and Fundraiser on Sunday, April 30, 2006. CAIR is a nonprofit, grassroots civil rights and advocacy group and the nation's largest Islamic civil liberties organization, with regional offices nationwide and in Canada. Since its establishment in 1994, CAIR has worked to promote a positive image of Islam and Muslims in America. Through media relations, lobbying, education and advocacy, CAIR puts forth an Islamic perspective to ensure the Muslim voice is represented.

Through its promotion of civil rights, research, education, conferences, seminars, internships, and public events such as the Cleveland chapter's 4th annual banquet, CAIR seeks to empower the American Muslim community and encourage its participation in political and social activism.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that CAIR is working nationwide and locally in the Greater Cleveland community to promote civil rights, civil liberties, and free speech and is able to educate the public about these issues by bringing such an outstanding program to the people of Northeast Ohio for their 4th annual banquet.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and remembrance of Betty Friedan, devoted social activist and writer, whose bestseller served to greatly benefit the women's movement. Ms. Friedan was a beloved sister, mother, grandmother, friend and mentor to many, whose activism, talent, and dedication changed the lives of women and sparked one of America's greatest social movements.

After graduating summa cum laude from Smith College in 1942, Ms. Friedan studied psychology for a year at the University of California at Berkeley. Frustrated with inequality in the workplace and women's accepted role as wife and mother, Ms. Friedan directed her passion and energy into her 1963 bestseller ``The Feminine Mystique.'' Her commanding voice and passionate words opened the minds of women and led to substantial positive changes to define their status.

In 1966, Ms. Friedan co-founded the U.S. National Organization for Women, and became its first president. Her strong influence, beliefs, and wisdom laid the foundation for the organization that has grown exponentially to the size it is today. In addition to her vital work with NOW, she was essential in advancing women's rights to privacy, choice, and political participation. In 1979 she led an effort which resulted in women gaining half the delegate strength at the Democratic Party's nominating convention.

Mr. Speaker and colleagues please join me in honor and remembrance of Betty Friedan, whose enthusiasm, devotion, and ability to affect the world with her writing, has served to improve the status and lives of women everywhere. I extend my deepest condolences to

her family members and many friends. Betty Friedan's unwavering commitment to change and equality has served to make a difference within the lives of countless individuals, and on history itself. Betty Friedan's legacy of service and revolution will be honored and remembered for all time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the Old Brooklyn Community Development Corporation (OBCDC), whose leaders, staff and members have uplifted, restored and energized all aspects of Cleveland's Old Brooklyn and Brooklyn Centre neighborhoods for thirty-one years.

The OBCDC, a non-profit community organization, was formed in 1975 by a small group of concerned citizens and business owners who set out to protect their neighborhood from falling into decline. The initial vision and effort, one that spans 31 years, was a united one, bringing together civic, religious, government and neighborhood and private business leaders to the table to begin the work of uplifting a neighborhood.

Beyond historic preservation, neighborhood revitalization and housing and commercial redevelopment programs and projects, the OBCDC has initiated numerous programs and services for residents and business owners, including the Old Brooklyn News. This award-winning monthly newspaper was established by the OBCDC in 1978 and still exists as a vital instrument of communication throughout the neighborhood. Another significant agency that sprung from the early work of the OBCDC includes Senior Citizen Resources, Inc. (SCR), a senior support organization that evolved from senior services provided by the OBCDC. The treasure of the neighborhood, the Benjamin Franklin Community Gardens, managed by the OBCDC, has attracted gardeners from all over the county for the past 26 growing seasons.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of the members, staff and leaders, past and present, of the Old Brooklyn Community Development Corporation. Their collective dedication, vision, volunteerism and work on behalf of all residents has served to preserve the historic integrity of the neighborhood, promote new commercial growth and maintain a healthy living environment for residents, young and old, throughout Old Brooklyn and Brooklyn Centre, thereby strengthening the foundation of our entire Cleveland community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance and recognition of the 31st Anniversary of the Fall of Saigon. This historical date commemorates the end of the Vietnam War, and represents the beginning of a new life for tens of thousands of Vietnamese people, as they began their hopeful journey to America.

On April 30, 1975, the ancient city of Saigon fell to the conquest of communist troops. This action solidified the communist takeover of South Vietnam. Thirty-one years later, I rise to honor the memory and sacrifice of the hundreds of thousands of American soldiers, South Vietnamese soldiers and civilians who made the ultimate sacrifice in the name of liberty.

Despite the takeover and the Communist rule that followed, the culture, spirit and hope reflected by the Vietnamese people remained steadfast. After the fall of Saigon, thousands of Vietnamese, determined to rebuild their lives, began a treacherous exodus out of Vietnam. Their daring escape was on foot, through thick jungles and over jagged mountains. They escaped by boat, through snake-infested rivers and across turbulent seas. They became refugees in many nations, including America, with nothing more than the clothes on their backs and the hope for freedom in their hearts.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me to honor and remember the hundreds of thousands of men and women who struggle for peace and freedom, then and now. We also honor agencies and churches such as The Vietnamese Community of Greater Cleveland and St. Helena Catholic Church, which offer a haven of support, services and hope to immigrants from all over the world. The Vietnamese culture, through the care and commitment of its people, has flourished in Cleveland and across America, yet remains forever connected to its ancient cultural and historical traditions that spiral back throughout the centuries, connecting the old world to the new, spanning oceans and borders in the ageless quest for peace--from Vietnam to America.

Madam Speaker, Congress must break the hold which the oil companies have on the politics of our country.

The American people are demanding action. The price of gasoline has climbed to over $3 a gallon, headed towards $4, maybe $5 a gallon. But listen to this: since 2001, the five largest oil companies have made over $280 billion in profits. ExxonMobil alone made $36 billion in profits last year.

There is only one way to stop the oil companies from an endless series of increases in the price of gasoline.

Nearly 50 Members of Congress have now signed on to my bill, H.R. 2070, which calls for a 100 percent excess profits tax on the oil company profiteering. This act does not tax the price of gasoline so it will not increase the cost. However, by taxing excessive profits, it puts the breaks on price gouging and will lower the price of gasoline.

Congress must not stand by while the oil companies are stealing from the American people.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for the point that he made that is well taken.

With all due respect to my colleagues who may have a difference of opinion about this bill, I think that most American people know that this administration has already made a mess of international relations with respect to the illegal and unwarranted invasion of Iraq.

We now know that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, that Iraq was not cooperating with al Qaeda with respect to 9/11, that Iraq had neither the intention nor the capability of attacking the United States, and yet we took steps, starting with the policy of regime change, that took us into a war against Iraq that we clearly did not have to initiate, and we clearly should not be there.

Now, if you love the steps which took this country into a war in Iraq, then you are going to like this bill because it does the same thing, which is why I rise in opposition to it. This bill sounds a lot like the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, which many Members voted for in good faith, not knowing later on it would be evoked as a cause for the prosecution of war against Iraq.

Overall this bill seriously inhibits the ability of the United States Government to use diplomacy, and diplomacy is the strongest and most rational tool we have to resolve the situation regarding Iran's nuclear program.

Instead I submit that this bill sets our country on a path to war with Iran. You can be sure the Government of Iran will view this bill in this way. First, the bill makes it official U.S. policy to impose international sanctions through the U.N. Security Council for Iran's ``repeated breaches'' of its nuclear nonproliferation obligations.

Now, this sounds eerily familiar to actions pursued in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, and which, as we know, were for appearances only. Similarly, advocating international sanctions against Iran through the Security Council is for appearances only. This administration has apparently made up its mind it wants to attack Iran. There is evidence that the U.S.

military is already inside Iran, and I ask to include at this point in the debate an article from the New Yorker by Seymour Hirsch which asserts just that.

Including this section in the bill that I just referred to is simply an attempt to cover the President's slap in the face of the international community with respect to Iran.

Second, H.R. 282 also promotes regime change in Iran as opposed to behavior change, regime change as a solution to the stand-off regarding Iran's nuclear program. By advocating regime change, we indicate our priority is not, in fact, to encourage Iran to adhere to its nonproliferation treaty obligation, but to remove the leadership in Iran even if it were to make some concessions.

This communicates to the world community that, to the U.S., Iran has passed the point of no return, which completely undermines any efforts towards diplomacy and negotiations. Furthermore, while this bill makes the point of so-called not authorizing the use of force against Iran, be assured this is a stepping stone to the use of force, the same way that the Iraq Liberation Act was used as a stepping stone.

Third, H.R. 282 supports antigovernment advocates in Iran promoting regime change. Now this is highly problematic. While an important amendment offered by my friend Congressman Blumenauer was adopted in this bill during markup to prohibit U.S. assistance to groups that are on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations or have been on the list for the last 4 years, there are ways around this.

For example, according to a Newsweek article from February 14, 2005 that the U.S. has been recruiting individuals from the MEK, a group currently labeled as terrorists by the State Department, who have agreed to form a new group with the same mission as the MEK, regime change in Iraq.

I will insert this article from Newsweek in the Record at this point.

[From Newsweek, Feb. 14, 2006]

Looking for a Few Good Spies

(By Christopher Dickey, Mark Hosenball and Michael Hirsh)

This is a terrorist cultleader? Maryam Rajavi is dressed in

a Chanel-style suit with her skirt at midcalf, lilac colored

pumps and a matching headscarf. Over a dinner of kebab, rice

and French pastries, Rajavi smiles often and laughs easily.

She's at once colorful and demure, like many an educated

woman in the Middle East. Indeed if George W. Bush--who

relies on powerful females for counsel--were pressed to

identify a Muslim model of womanhood, this 51-year-old

Iranian would look very much the part.

But of course that's exactly the impression Rajavi seeks to

give. Behind her smile is a saleswoman's savvy--and a

revolutionary's zeal to prove that she and her mysterious

husband, Massoud Rajavi, are neither cultists nor terrorists.

Maryam Rajavi is demanding that the exile groups they lead

together, centered on the Mujahedin-e Khalq (People's Holy

Warriors) or MEK for short, should be taken off the State

Department's list of terrorist organizations, their assets

unfrozen and their energies unleashed. The MEK, Rajavi says,

is the answer to American prayers as Tehran continues to

dabble defiantly in both terrorism and nuclear arms. ``I

believe increasingly the Americans have come to realize that

the solution is an Iranian force that is able to get rid of

the Islamic fundamentalists in power in Iran,'' she told

Newsweek in a rare interview at her organization's compound

in the quiet French village of Auvers sur Oise. The group's

own former role in terrorist attacks dating back to its

support for the U.S. Embassy takeover in 1979, Rajavi

insists, is ancient history. And the MEK is not a Jim Jones-

like cult as critics allege, with forced separation between

men and women and indoctrination for children, all overseen

by the Rajavis' autocratic style. Instead, she insists, it is

``a democratic force.''

Whatever Rajavi's true colors, Newsweek has learned that

her role may be growing in the calculations of Bush

administration hard-liners. At a camp south of Baghdad--it's

called Ashraf, after Massoud Rajavi's assassinated first

wife--3,850 MEK members have been confined but gently treated

by U.S. forces since the invasion of Iraq (once they were

allies of Saddam against their own country in the 1980s Iran-

Iraq war). Now the administration is seeking to cull useful

MEK members as operatives for use against Tehran, all while

insisting that it does not deal with the MEK as a group,

American government sources say.

Some Pentagon civilians and intelligence planners are

hoping a corps of informants can be picked from among the MEK

prisoners, then split away from the movement and given

training as spies, U.S. officials say. After that, the

thinking goes, they will be sent back to their native Iran to

gather intelligence on the Iranian clerical regime,

particularly its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Some

hawks also hope they could help to reawaken the democratic

reform movement in Iran, which the mullahs have silenced.

``They [want] to make us mercenaries,'' one MEK official told

Newsweek.

These individuals have been conducting military activity in Iran with United States support. I just wanted to remind everyone that the MEK was the group responsible for the U.S. Embassy takeover in Tehran in 1979. This group also had a camp in Iraq where Osama bin Laden's first fighters were reportedly trained. The MEK also trained and supported Taliban fighters. Now we are recruiting help from members of the MEK which makes a total mockery of the so-called war on terror.

Fourth, H.R. 282 states that it is U.S. policy to focus attention to stopping cooperation, stopping cooperation, between Iran, Russia, China and Pakistan. Considering Russia and China have the strongest leverage with Iran, yet are also opposed to Iran's violations of the Nonproliferation Treaty obligations, the U.S. should try to work with Russia and China to try to find a path to diplomacy, not to isolate Russia and China.

In the end we are only isolating ourselves and setting our country on another unilateral path of war. Our troops are already extended in Iraq, and they are in a vulnerable position. Starting a war in Iran is the last thing we should be doing.

I urge a vote against this dangerous bill. Stop this unilateralism. Work with diplomacy and work towards peace.

I want to thank the gentleman from Texas for his very calm and patient approach to this. I don't think the American people want our Nation set on a path of war with Iran, and I believe the American people are very concerned about the steps which set us on a path to war against Iraq. There are questions that have to be answered by this administration before Congress should rightfully even vote on this.

You know, it has been reported recently that U.S. troops are conducting military operations in Iran. In Iran. Now, if that is true, then apparently the administration has made a decision to commit U.S. military forces to a unilateral conflict with Iran, even before direct or indirect negotiations with the Government of Iran have been attempted, without U.N. support and without authorization from this Congress.

First things first here. Where are we right now? Are we already inside Iran? According to Seymour Hersh, in the New Yorker, there is evidence that suggests that we are. The presence of U.S. troops in Iran would constitute a hostile act against that country.

Now, put that in the context of this particular bill. At a time when diplomacy is urgently needed, this bill would escalate an international crisis that is already percolating by the probability or at least the possibility that this administration has already committed troops to Iran. What we are seeing here is an undermining of any attempt to negotiate with the Government of Iran, and we are seeing the undermining of any diplomatic efforts at the U.N.

I said this before and I will say it again. Any kind of saber rattling against Iran puts our troops in Iraq at jeopardy. The achievement of stability in transition to Iraqi security control will be compromised, reversing any progress that has been cited by the administration.

I am sure that many Americans are saying, you know, it is hard to believe that the United States could have already taken such an imprudent decision as committing troops to Iran, but we have had a number and variety of sources confirming this. Over a week ago Air Force Colonel Sam Gardner related on CNN that the Iranian Ambassador to the IAEA, Aliasghar Soltaniyeh, reported to him that Iranians have captured dissident forces who have confessed to working with U.S. troops in Iran. Earlier that week, Seymour Hersh reported that a U.S. source told him that U.S. Marines were operating in the Baluchi, Azeri and Kurdish regions of Iran.

Now, any kind of military deployment in Iran would and should constitute an urgent matter of national significance. And I think that the administration has an obligation to this Congress, before Congress would vote on this kind of a bill, to tell us exactly what is going on with the activities of American forces with regard to Iran.

Also, there are reports that the U.S. is fomenting opposition and supporting military operations in Iran among insurgent groups and Iranian ethnic minority groups, some of whom are operating from Iraq. The Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan, PEJAK, is one such group, and the other group is called the MEK, the Mujahedin e-Khalq. It is an Iranian antigovernment group which was listed as a terrorist group by the State Department since 1997. An article by Jim Lobe, published in antiwar.com, on February 11, 2005, claims that the Pentagon civilians in Vice President Cheney's office are among those in the U.S. Government who support MEK. We also know from the Hersh article in the New Yorker which confirms that U.S. troops are establishing contact with antigovernment ethnic minority groups in Iran.

Now, U.S. support for insurgent activity in Iran would not be tolerable. The administration has claimed numerous times that the object of the so-called war on terrorism is to target lawless insurgent groups. It would be a breach of trust if the administration is involved in this. Iran does not present an imminent threat. Any setting the stage for an attack on Iran is setting the stage for a unilateral act of war.

I think that this country needs to move very slowly anytime we are setting the stage for conflict with another nation. Don't we have enough problems in Iraq to clean up without setting the stage for another conflict in Iran? We must use diplomacy. We must use our relationships with Russia and China and other nations in order to avert a conflict with Iran.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank all of those who served in gathering intelligence to protect the American people. It is regrettable that intelligence is often reshaped to fit doctrine instead of doctrine being reshaped in the face of the facts of intelligence.

This rule blocks several important amendments that the House should have had the opportunity to debate. I sponsored one of those amendments that would have resolved the concerns of media leaks by intelligence community agents.

Several high-profile classified leaks to the media have emerged in the last few years. These leaks have led to considerable release of information about secret programs related to our intelligence agencies. From these media leaks, we became aware of the efforts to manipulate intelligence, to falsify a cause for war against Iraq.

We became aware of the illegal NSA domestic wiretapping program without a court order. We became aware of the rumored CIA detention centers in Eastern Europe, and the CIA's extraordinary rendition program, used to transport suspects to other nations with less restrictive torture policies.

The House Intelligence Committee report for this bill states that leaks to the media damage our national security. In response, the CIA fired an agent who had unapproved contacts with reporters last week. I understand the concerns raised when intelligence leaks are reported in the media.

However, if this House had conducted effective oversight, we would not have been there in the first place. Our democracy was bolstered by these leaks, and the world is a safer place as a result. Absent these leaks, the current administration would see no limit to its dangerous policies and continue to inflict its failed war on terrorism without limitation.

To resolve this conflict I proposed an amendment that would remove barriers to intelligence agency employees communicating with certain committees of Congress. The purpose was to provide intelligence employees a more appropriate outlet than the media and give Congress better oversight capability.

This amendment provided an obstacle-free path for intelligence employees to report to key Members of Congress their concerns. By providing this outlet, the employees would not feel any need to leak information to the media. So we need to do everything we can to protect these who serve in intelligence who want to get information out to the American people.

They should do it through the Congress, but there is no provision for that in this bill. We need to protect this Nation, but we need to protect it with the truth, not with manipulated intelligence.

Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Madam Speaker, I would ask my good friend from Florida a simple question, that is, what happens when Congress is given false information in these briefings, having signed something that then they cannot disclose what they are told?

See, this is the problem here. I just wanted to respectfully share that with you. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor and congratulate the Association of Ohio Commodores. Celebrating their 40th anniversary this year, the association has traveled the globe as Ohio's preeminent ambassadors to international commerce.

Founded in 1966 by Governor James A. Rhodes in honor of Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry, the hero of the Battle of Lake Erie, the Ohio Commodores have served various missions around the world as official representatives of the State. From the Japanese Ambassador and the Governor of Ohio's sister province in Korea, to the Consul Generals of Canada, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina, they have acted as the official hosts to foreign dignitaries visiting Ohio.

Since its inception, the association has invited over 300 men and women to join the ranks of Commodores. Considered Ohio's ``most distinguished honor,'' government officials, lawmakers, leaders in higher education, and business leaders have all been recognized for their contributions to the economic strength of the State.

Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and congratulation of the Association of Ohio Commodores, which has dedicated the past four decades to honor the finest Ohioans and ensure a bright future for the Buckeye State.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the life of James Anthony Zack, who was truly a champion for the rights of working people in northeast Ohio and a proud and dedicated Teamster.

Jim served for 18 years as a Union Trustee, Vice President, and in June of 1997, was elected President of Teamsters Local #1164. He was constantly working to further his knowledge of the issues and areas of concern to Ohio's working families. In 2002, he received a certificate in labor relations from Cleveland State University.

A 1958 graduate of Elyria High School, Jim had over 25 years in sales at Pepsi Cola of Elyria, close to 23 of which were as a driver salesman. Additionally, Jim owned and operated his own businesses as a distributor for 7-Up and Pepsi.

Well liked by those who knew him, Jim truly brightened and enriched the lives of all those around him. His devotion to the Teamsters and the members he worked so hard to represent was matched only by his love and devotion to his family and faith. My thoughts and prayers are with his wife, Barb, children, Jim Jr. and Debbie, and five grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of the life of James Anthony Zack. His dedication on behalf of working people has served to uplift our entire community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Mr. John ``Jack'' Doxsey and every volunteer who participated this past year in Cleveland Reads, bringing hope and possibility through the gift of literacy to countless children and adults--thereby changing their lives forever. I also rise in recognition of Cleveland Reads Volunteer of the Year Nominees: Jessica Anthony, Andy Evridge, Dorothy Fike, Anita Morgan and Stephen Novak.

Established in 1987, Cleveland Reads, a non-profit organization, has consistently worked to draw individuals, businesses and agencies into their volunteer literacy projects and campaign. Mr. Doxsey, 84 years young, consistently reflects a caring and positive demeanor that gently inspires his students, raising their confidence with every turn of the page.

Twice weekly for the past 6 years, Mr. Doxsey, a tutor with ABLE in Cleveland Heights, volunteers his mornings as a tutor, instructing teachers and college students in English as a Second Language class. Mr. Doxsey has worked with students who hail from countries around the world, spanning five continents. Following the profound loss of his beloved wife, Mr. Doxsey had several options, including moving closer to his adult children, who live outside Ohio. Instead, he chose to move closer to Case Western University, where he has given the gift of language to numerous students struggling to assimilate to their new experience in America.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honoring every Volunteer of the Year nominee, and especially Mr. John ``Jack'' Doxsey, upon being named Cleveland Reads Volunteer of the Year. Mr. Doxsey's patience, kindness and concern for the young people of the world who journey to Cleveland seeking education, serves to build foundation of understanding that transcends language, borders and culture, connecting us all with the gifts of giving, empowering, and humanity.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the parish community of St. Andrew Catholic Church, as members and leaders celebrate 100 years of faith and hope throughout Cleveland's southwest side.

Throughout the past century, St. Andrew parish has served as a spiritual refuge, opening its doors to individuals and families in search of guidance, spirituality and peace.

The ministry of St. Andrew began in 1906, serving immigrant families who settled in Cleveland. Since that time, a number of pastors and parishioners have served as critical guides in the journey of the faithful at St. Andrew Church. Over the years, the parish community has evolved and grown, and has also survived numerous struggles and hardships.

Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of every past and current member and spiritual leader of St. Andrew Catholic Church. Despite hardship and adversity, St. Andrew Catholic Church continues to provide a haven of faith, guidance, renewal and support for hundreds of families and individuals, in the heart Cleveland and far beyond.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the Cleveland Federal Executive Board, for their individual and collective dedication as public servants, all focused on the public good.

The community of federal employees in Cleveland, Ohio, is comprised of nearly 20,000 individuals who contribute their talent, trade and expertise daily within an array of roles, including park rangers, administrators, accountants, clerical employees, attorneys, engineers, military members, mail carriers, scientists, nurses and physicians.

The professional contribution extended daily by federal employees serves as a foundation of support, safety and security throughout our community. Every day, the mail is delivered; veterans receive medical care; the environment is monitored; our national park is preserved; immigrants are guided to citizenship; job services are provided; and astronomers study the mysteries of the universe.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and gratitude of the members of the Cleveland Federal Executive Board and the thousands of federal employers who live and work within our Cleveland community. Their individual and collective commitment to their work continues to preserve, protect and strengthen our entire community.