Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H. Res. 576.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Anthony Battista, a man who possesses the qualities that are present in the very best personnel in our national government in full measure. Tony was the research and development director of the House Armed Services Committee for many years. His engineering background and ability to ignore political pressure brought him down on the right side of many important decisions that ushered in dominant U.S. military technology during the 1980s and 1990s.

To succeed, our country needs stand-up, intelligent, honest brokers in key decision making positions. Tony Battista was all that in his service to the House of Representatives and America. I extend my heartfelt gratitude for his honesty, brilliance, and unfailingly dedication to Americans in uniform. I ask my fellow colleagues to join me in recognizing Tony's service to our government, our military, and our nation.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment transfers $5 million from

the Coast Guard's Operating Expenses account to its Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation account. The intent is to support sea trials for a Jones Act compliant icebreaker so the Coast Guard can determine whether a leased vessel can meet its immediate needs in fulfilling its 11 statutory missions around the globe.

I am going to stop my diatribe here. Steve Scalise has a statement. He is in his rehabilitation center, but he actually cared enough to write this. I am going to speak here, and these are his words, not mine:

``I support this amendment that will improve America's strategic, economic, and national security interests in the Arctic. As other countries are advancing their interests in the Arctic, the U.S. continues to lag behind. This amendment makes clear that Congress supports moving forward in identifying options for icebreaking capabilities in the Arctic.

``The Coast Guard has repeatedly stated we need a fleet of icebreakers to maintain the presence necessary in the Arctic and Antarctic to meet and protect U.S. sovereign interests and protect life and property at sea. Currently, the U.S. has two icebreakers--one of which is our Nation's only heavy icebreaker and is over 40 years old. Russia has more than 40 icebreakers, with more under construction.

``As the Arctic becomes increasingly accessible to maritime traffic, tourism, and energy exploration, we cannot continue to defer this much- needed capability--especially at a time when China and Russia are increasing their presence in the Arctic, expanding their icebreaker fleets, and encroaching over the extended U.S. continental shelf.

``I urge support for this amendment that will address this immediate and necessary investment and protect U.S. national security interests.''

That is from Steve Scalise. Now back to my words.

To help narrow this capability gap between America and our peer competitors, the Coast Guard should examine the lease of icebreakers that could be deployed in the near term.

My subcommittee has held countless hearings on this issue, and I am convinced that a short-term lease of an existing icebreaker is one of the best chances to ensure the Coast Guard can meet its near-term and urgent mission objectives in the Arctic.

Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, how much time is remaining?

Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter), the chairman.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Texas. The gentlewoman brought up some points about a ship, which I didn't name.

The Coast Guard hasn't built an icebreaker in almost 50 years. We only have one. There is only one Jones Act ship in the entire country. It is the Aiviq, but there is only one. All we say here is that it has to got to be an American-made ship. That is what the Jones Act is.

If we are going to build an icebreaker with U.S. taxpayer dollars, we are going to use an American-made, and American-crewed, and American- steel ship.

Mr. Garamendi, the ranking member on my subcommittee, has voted for amendments like this in the past, and he supports amendments like this going forward. Anything that puts Americans to work, that gives us more than the one icebreaker that works for 6 months out of the year, this is a step in that direction.

This is simply for sea trials. This is so that the Coast Guard, because they haven't made an icebreaker in 50 years, they can take one out besides the Healy, which is a medium icebreaker that they operate and ask: Hey, what do we need here? Do we need to expand the bow, expand the stern? How could we make this what we want?

That is all we are doing here, and it is $5 million.

This is a step in the right direction. Otherwise, we are never going to have an icebreaker. We are not going to be able to compete in the Arctic. It will be energy exploration for Russia and China, and not us because we are not going to be there unless we start right now in this appropriations bill.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2825 includes H.R. 2518, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2017, in division E. The Coast Guard Authorization Act is a product of bipartisan efforts of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, specifically through Chairman Shuster's leadership and the efforts of Ranking Member DeFazio and Ranking Member Garamendi and our great staff, Dave Jansen and John Clark Rayfield.

The Coast Guard Authorization Act includes an authorization of funding for fiscal years 2018 and 2019 to support the Coast Guard and its servicemembers. It is important to remember the Coast Guard is one of the five Armed Forces, and even though it is outside of the Department of Defense, the service plays a critical role in protecting our country. It is unique in being the only armed force with law enforcement authorities, and this combination allows the service to perform its multitude of missions.

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has been overseeing the Coast Guard for more than two decades and moved legislation to support the service in each Congress since 1995. The text of the Coast Guard Authorization Act is a product of hearings, discussions with the Coast Guard, and regulated industries.

The bill does four main things:

Clarifies acquisition authorities to be used by the Coast Guard;

Updates certain service authorities to provide them parity with the other Armed Forces;

Amends a variety of Coast Guard regulatory authorities; and

Provides regulatory relief for fishing and maritime transportation industries.

The Coast Guard Authorization Act is a great bill. I urge Members to support it and the passage of the broader bill, H.R. 2825.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, this important amendment would help safeguard U.S. courts against crowding of court dockets by foreign maritime crewmembers. It simply clarifies where the claim must be brought when the case has no meaningful connection to the United States.

Specifically, the amendment limits the ability of foreign crewmembers working on foreign ships in foreign waters to sue in U.S. courts when a remedy is available in their home countries or the country of the ship on which they served. If no such remedy is available abroad, the amendment would allow those crewmembers to file suit in the United States, assuming they could meet the same burden needed to file any other suit.

To be clear, again, this amendment in no way restricts a foreign crewmember's access to judicial relief if they are injured or suffer some other damage as a result of working on a foreign vessel. It simply says that they need to seek relief in their home country or the home country of the vessel on which they served before seeking relief in U.S. courts.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wilson).

Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.

This amendment limits the ability of foreign crewmembers working on foreign ships in foreign waters to sue in U.S. courts when a remedy is available in their home country or the country of the ship on which they serve. That is it.

They can still sue. Trial lawyers around the world can rejoice because these crewmembers can come back to their home countries and they can sue and sue and sue. They just can't do it in the U.S. if it didn't happen in U.S. waters. It is that simple.

Again, a foreign mariner operating on a foreign ship in foreign or international waters should avail themselves of the courts in their home country or the vessel's home country before using U.S. courts. That is it.

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

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time.

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the minority leader's words. I did three tours as a U.S. marine.

This is the silliest opposition to this amendment that I have ever heard. You are joining the U.S. military. Choose what gender you are before you join. We are not saying that transgender people can't serve, but if you are going to take the big step of serving in the U.S. military, figure out whether you are a man or a woman before you join up.

We are not stopping transgender people from joining. We are saying taxpayers in this country right now are not going to foot the bill for it.

This is a silly thing. It is time to put this to bed. I support the gentlewoman's amendment. Let's Make America Great Again.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1726) to amend title 14, United States Code, to improve the organization of such title and to incorporate certain transfers and modifications into such title, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks, and to include any extraneous material on H.R. 1726.

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

After 68 years, H.R. 1726, the Coast Guard Improvement and Reform Act will reorganize and modernize title 14, Coast Guard, United States Code. Title I of the bill reorganizes existing sections of the code within the title to provide a more uniformed, logical structure. It makes no substantive changes to the reorganized sections.

Title II includes amendments to title 14. The Coast Guard requested uniformity in how its advisory committees operate. Title II transfers the advisory committees to title 14 from title 46 and includes changes to ensure uniformity in committee operations.

Title II also transfers sections in title 33 and 50, dealing with port safety into title 14, to colocate them with similar authorities. In 2002, port security provisions were similarly reorganized, and this follows that pattern. No substantive changes were made to those sections either. The transfer allows for better organization of the code and makes it easier for the public and the Congress to find the governing laws of the Coast Guard.

Lastly, the title also amends the primary duties of the Coast Guard to clarify their defense readiness status, and it repeals an unused authority.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to associate myself with the gentleman's remarks and thank him for all of his hard work, and especially Dave Jansen and John Rayfield, the two Coast Guard savants of the staff on the Transportation Committee. Those are the gentlemen who did this, who really understand this code, and who made it better for future Congress and future staff, so they can actually see what is going on with the Coast Guard, and maybe the Coast Guard might understand what is going on with the Coast Guard a little bit better.

I would like to reiterate that H.R. 1726 is a straightforward bill. It reorganizes title 14 and does not make any substantive changes.

Madam Speaker, I urge Members to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mariachi Legend Oscar Amezcua who, from his humble beginnings in Jalisco, Mexico, immigrated to San Diego in 1945 and quickly became an icon in Hispanic culture. Oscar's skills earned him a spot on the renowned Mariachi Vargas de Tecalitlan, which was just the start of his distinguished career. Oscar would go on to establish his own group, Mariachi Guadalajara, all while raising his three sons Carlos, Oscar, Alex, and his daughter Lucia with his wonderful wife Gloria.

Oscar Amezcua has dedicated his life to creating and providing us with music that has made significant contributions to San Diego's music and culture and is credited by many with bringing Mariachi music to San Diego. Recently, at the age of 87, Oscar celebrated this past Cinco de Mayo celebration by performing at a special concert in San Diego's famous Balboa Park and was recognized by San Diego Mayor Kevin Falconer, who declared May 5, 2017, as ``Oscar Amezcua Day--The Father of San Diego Mariachi Music.''

I ask my fellow colleagues to join me in recognizing Oscar's contributions to San Diego's music and Hispanic culture and I look forward to his continued involvement for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, each of us that serve in this distinguished body has the deepest and most profound respect for the men and women who serve in America's Armed Forces. It's because of their service and sacrifice that this great nation is able to carry the banner of freedom across the globe and the American people sleep safe at night.

Throughout history, Americans have faithfully answered the nation's call through periods of conflict and peace--and each of the service branches have earned their place as pillars of America's defense shield. That shield first and foremost starts at America's shores and it's the Coast Guard that is the nation's first line of protection against criminals and contraband entering the country through the seas.

The Coast Guard's backbone is its personnel and I've had the great honor of serving as Chairman of the House Subcommittee with direct purview over this great organization, which has afforded me the privilege to observe our Coast Guard in action. But on this specific occasion, I want to recognize one Coast Guardsman in particular who's had not only an immense impact on the organization itself, but also this entire institution.

Commander JoAnn Burdian has led the Congressional Affairs office for the Coast Guard for the last several years and today marks her last day serving in a capacity that has made us wiser and even more appreciative of the immense work shouldered by the Coast Guard each and every day. Her career in the Coast Guard will continue in her new assignment in Seattle, Washington, but her departure no doubt is a great loss for the entire Congress.

Even so, our loss here is the Coast Guard's gain--and I have all the confidence that Commander Burdian's exemplary leadership and talents will provide tremendous value to the next generation of leaders that will continue serving the nation's interest as members of the Coast Guard. And when I think of the type of leader that this nation depends on to lead America's men and women in uniform, Commander Burdian is the example to follow. Her reputation has been forged through years of operational experience and leadership, and her sense of commitment to service and country has always defined her approach to representing the best interests of the Coast Guard.

Commander Burdian is a relentless advocate for her service. Her pioneering spirit and deep understanding of Coast Guard programs and priorities have informed me and others in our collective work and the Coast Guard is on better footing today thanks to her immense contributions.

I'm honored to have served with such an outstanding patriot and I want to wish Commander Burdian the best of luck as she endeavors on a new assignment and the next chapter of her life. She's a Coast Guardsman at heart--but I'm also proud to call her a friend. And I ask today that we all recognize this great American for all the work she's done and will continue doing on behalf of the nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and celebrate the service of Lieutenant Commander John J. Parma, who will retire from the United States Navy this month after 21 years of distinguished and faithful service to our nation.

Since graduating from class 214 of Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training, LCDR Parma has participated in numerous combat missions around the world. His service has taken him from West Africa to Bosnia. Additionally, he has executed many combat special reconnaissance missions behind enemy lines in Afghanistan and sensitive site exploitations in Iraq, which have earned him numerous awards and accolades.

By his side throughout his successful career and arduous deployments have been his wife, Megan, and their children Madison, Brooklyn, Dominic, and Kennedy. Their love and support has aided and strengthened LCDR Parma throughout his service, and I congratulate them as well on this special occasion. I am proud to share in the celebration of LCDR Parma's military career, and as he and his family move to this next chapter of his life, I wish LCDR Parma fair winds and following seas as he embarks on his future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 84.

Here is what I think this is about. We feel slighted. We in Congress feel slighted that the Trump administration did not deign to have General Mattis come and speak to us, the House, which is not required by any law, not required by any statute. We feel slighted.

I do feel the same way that the ranking member feels, in terms of how the administration is treating the House of Representatives and this body.

But it is times like this where we need to rise above the slights from the future Trump administration. I think there are going to be a few more. I think this future administration does not hold this body in the highest regard. That is going to become evident over the next 4 years.

I think we are going to have to take things like that as a body and do what is best for this Nation. That is why they argue with the process and that the House was slighted by the future President. I understand it. I feel that as well. But it is time for us to say: hey, we need to be above that. This is about the future of our Nation, it is about our men and women who are serving in conflict right now, under fire, and they need General Mattis as their Secretary of Defense.

For those who assert that the Marshall prohibition, which bars, in the absence of a waiver, a general from becoming Secretary of Defense, a glance at the operational chain of command is in order.

Under the U.S. Constitution and statute, the command of the Armed Forces flows from the President to the Secretary of Defense to the combatant commanders around the world. The idea that a link in the chain of commanding operations--namely, the Secretary of Defense-- cannot be a military leader is nonsensical. General Mattis will bring insight to a job that no background in academia or business could ever provide.

Lastly, when I met General Mattis for the very first time, I was going to Iraq from Kuwait. We got ambushed by machine gun. I got shot in the arm. He drops into my Humvee. We pull out of the ambush area.

My convoy gets up to Dewaniya where Jim Mattis is. I had never met him. I had heard of him a little bit. I was a lieutenant in the Marine Corps. I didn't know much about much at that point. There is General Mattis in the operation center.

He turns to me and he says: Lieutenant Hunter, good to see you. I said: good to see you, sir. I was already sweating and shaking, speaking to a one-star general officer. For a lieutenant, that could be very trying.

He said: Did you kill him? I said: Kill who, sir? He said: the guys who ambushed you. I said: no, sir. We followed procedure and drove out of the ambush area. He said: next time, son, you need to kill them.

Hearts of every single man and woman in the U.S. Armed Forces will be filled with pride when John Mattis is sworn in as the next Secretary of Defense.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (S. 2444) to authorize appropriations for the Coast Guard for fiscal year 2015, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 2651) to repeal certain mandates of the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on S. 2651.

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

S. 2651, the DHS OIG Mandates Revision Act of 2014, repeals three reports the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General is required to conduct and submit annually to Congress. The reports include evaluations of the cargo inspection targeting system for international intermodal cargo containers, Coast Guard mission performance, and certain Department of Homeland Security grants.

Without a mandate, the Department's Office of Inspector General can continue to conduct these audits periodically, but at its own discretion. CBO estimates repeal of these mandates will save nearly $2 million to the taxpayers annually.

I reserve the balance of my time.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Homeland Security,

Washington, DC, December 10, 2014.

Hon. Bill Shuster,

Chairman, House Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Shuster: I write to you regarding the

jurisdictional interest of the

Committee on Homeland Security in S. 2651, the ``DHS OIG

Mandates Revision Act of 2014''. The measure passed the

Senate by unanimous consent on September 17, 2014 and was

additionally referred to the Committee on Homeland Security.

In the interest of permitting the Committee on

Transportation and Infrastructure to proceed expeditiously to

the House floor, I will forgo further consideration of S.

2651. However, I do so with the following reservation. By

eliminating mandates of Inspector General investigations,

Congress lessens its voice in oversight of the Department of

Homeland Security. Under this lawless Administration,

Congress should have more of a voice, not less, in what the

Office of Inspector General investigates.

In addition, I will forgo consideration with the mutual

understanding that the jurisdiction of the Committee on

Homeland Security is in no way diminished. I further request

that you urge the Speaker to name Members of this Committee

to any conference committee that is named to consider such

provisions.

Finally, I request you include this letter and your

response into the Congressional Record during consideration

of S. 2651 on the House floor. Thank your for your

cooperation.

Sincerely,

Michael T. McCaul,

Chairman.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5769) to authorize appropriations for the Coast Guard for fiscal year 2015, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5769.

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

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5769, the Howard Coble Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2014, reauthorizes funding for the Coast Guard through fiscal year 2015 at levels that are fiscally responsible and that will reverse the misguided cuts proposed by the current administration.

The President proposed to slash the service's acquisition budget by over 20 percent, reduce the number of servicemembers by over 1,300, undermine readiness by cutting program hours for aircraft, and jeopardize the success of the

search-and-rescue mission by taking fixed-wing air aircraft crews off alert status. The President's budget request will only worsen the Coast Guard's growing gaps in mission performance, increase acquisition delays, drive up the cost of new assets, and deny our servicemembers the critical resources needed to perform their duties.

H.R. 5769 authorizes sufficient funding to ensure these cuts do not happen and the service has what it needs to successfully conduct its missions. The bill also makes several reforms to the Coast Guard authorities, as well as laws governing shipping and navigation.

Specifically, H.R. 5769 supports Coast Guard servicemembers by ensuring the members of the Coast Guard are offered the same benefits available to members of the other armed services. It improves Coast Guard mission effectiveness by replacing and modernizing Coast Guard assets in a cost-effective manner.

It enhances oversight of the Coast Guard, reduces inefficient operations, and saves taxpayer dollars by making commonsense reforms to Coast Guard missions and administration. It helps veterans make the transition from service in the military to good-paying jobs in the maritime industry.

It includes an Arctic maritime transportation title, which provides the Coast Guard the authorities it needs to successfully carry out missions in the Arctic, as well as prepare for the safe operation of commercial vessels and increased human activity in the region.

It encourages job growth in the maritime sector by conducting regulatory burdens on job creators, and lastly, it reauthorizes and reforms the structure and operations of the FMC.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to section 323 of the bill, it is the committee's intent that the Department of Transportation use the Web site currently operated by the Coast Guard to the greatest extent possible. The data presented on the Web site should be limited only to that required by statute and shown in a simple, easily used format.

The committee does not intend to use anything other than commercial off-the-shelf technology to establish the Web site or independently develop new software or acquire new hardware in operating the site.

H.R. 5769 presents a strong bipartisan and bicameral agreement. I want to thank Senators Rockefeller, Thune, Begich, and Rubio for working with us on this important legislation. I also want to thank Ranking Member Rahall and the subcommittee ranking member, Representative Garamendi, for their efforts, and Chairman Shuster for his leadership.

Finally, I want to take a minute to point out that this will be the last Coast Guard authorization bill that will benefit from the advice and support of the only Member of Congress with service in the Coast Guard, our colleague and friend, Howard Coble.

Howard is a Korean war veteran with 5 years of active duty in the Coast Guard and another 18 years in the Coast Guard Reserve. He is the founder of the Congressional Coast Guard Caucus, as well as an active member and former chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.

Throughout his career in Congress, Howard has been a tireless advocate for the men and women of the Coast Guard. I thank and commend him for this service to our Nation and for his contributions to this and past Coast Guard authorizations.

I reserve the balance of my time.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Homeland Security,

Washington, DC, December 3, 2014.

Hon. Bill Shuster,

Chairman, House Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Shuster: I write to you regarding the

jurisdictional interest of the Committee on Homeland Security

in H.R. 5769, the ``Howard Coble Coast Guard and Maritime

Transportation Act of 2014.'' The bill contains certain

provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the

Committee.

In the interest of permitting the Committee on

Transportation and Infrastructure to proceed expeditiously to

the House floor, I will not seek a sequential referral of

H.R. 5769. However, I do so only with the mutual

understanding that the jurisdiction of the Committee on

Homeland Security over matters concerning the United States

Coast Guard in this or similar legislation is in no way

diminished. I further request that you urge the Speaker to

name Members of this Committee to any conference committee

that is named to consider such provisions.

Finally, I request you include this letter and your

response into the Congressional Record during consideration

of H.R. 5769 on the House floor. Thank you for your

cooperation.

Sincerely,

Michael T. McCaul,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, there are a few people I want to thank, too. I want to thank John and Jeff, who are here in this room, for the work that they have put into this. I want to thank Victoria Middleton, who is my chief of staff. This will be her last year. This is her first Coast Guard bill that we are getting done here. They have put in so much work and so much time.

For myself, this is my first piece of legislation that I am going to be passing in this Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee with Mr. Garamendi. It has been a great time working with everybody.

I want to thank, lastly, the men and women of the Coast Guard. They have been fantastic. They have really opened up their arms to us. We have been able to see what they do, how they do it, and what they have to do, day in and day out, for the people of this country and, frankly, people of every country.

If you are on the open seas and something bad happens to you, it is going to be the U.S. Coast Guard that comes and saves you. If you are a bad guy running drugs from South America up to Florida, it is going to be a U.S. Coast Guard vessel that interdicts.

I just want to thank the U.S. Coast Guard for what they do for this Nation because they are kind of the redheaded stepchild. They are a military service, but they are also a law enforcement entity. They get to do both things, and that is one of the things that makes them such a great organization.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

Mr. Speaker, this bill would not have happened without the leadership of Mr. Rahall and the full committee chairman, Bill Shuster from Pennsylvania. They did a lot of work on this bill.

I am honored to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), my good friend and colleague and the full committee chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Again, I want to thank the gentleman from West Virginia and my colleague from California (Mr. Garamendi) and the great staffs that spent time on this and, of course, the great Howard Coble, who said in one of his elections probably about 10 years ago when he was down by a few hundred votes, I called him up on it election night and his answer was, ``Look good, feel good.'' That is the great Howard Coble.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute the career of a distinguished servant of Congress in the area of national defense-- David Burrelli, Ph.D. In early January, Dave will retire from the Congressional Research Service after 30 years of faithful service to the legislative branch.

Dave joined CRS in 1985 while a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Chicago. In the years that followed, he's contributed enormously to discussions in the national defense arena, supplying a thoughtful and rational voice on tough issues. One of Dave's many contributions involved helping me write into federal law the definition of gender neutral standards for women in ground combat assignments. His comprehensive knowledge on the issue was impressive and his guidance and steady hand, on something that no doubt was viewed by some as polarizing, produced a bipartisan product that is certain to have a beneficial impact on our military. Most importantly, the provision will ensure we maintain an effective fighting force--which Dave knows something about as a graduate of Marine Officer Candidate School in July 1978.

Dave's time in the Marine Corps was just the start of a long, distinguished record of service. He graduated from the University of Maryland in 1979 and received his Master's degree from Maryland in 1981. In 1986, he received his Ph.D. and his dissertation ``Evaluation of the Program to Recruit College-Bound Youth into the Army'' helped the Army to develop a program which eventually became The New GI Bill. Dave's formal education did not end there. He is a proud 1996 graduate of the National War College where he received a Master of Science degree in National Security Strategy.

As a CRS specialist in military manpower policy, Dave worked on military force structure, compensation, health care, and variety of military social issues such HIV/AIDS, and sexual assault to name but a few. Dave also became CRS's resident expert on military medals and awards and provided exemplary support to Congress on this important aspect of military service.

In March 1993, Dave was a leading witness for the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on ``Policy Concerning Homosexuals in the Armed Forces.'' In a letter to the Director of CRS, Senator Sam Nunn, the committee chairman, noted ``During one of the longest hearings we have ever held during my 20 years on the Committee, he consistently provided clear answers to extremely difficult questions about military life and the relationship between the military and civilian society. Dr. Burrelli has assisted the Committee in developing [an] authoritative foundation for the Committee's hearings on this most difficult issue. In doing so, he has performed an important public service.'' In recognition of Dave's recognized ability to handle difficult and sensitive topics, he continued to serve as the service's lead specialist on a variety of highly sensitive and important military social issues until his retirement. Dave also provided distinguished service to CRS as a supervisor of the CRS intern program for five years and as a Library of Congress docent for ten years. In his capacity as a docent, he was often asked to provide library tours to a variety of distinguished visitors.

And if all of this didn't keep Dave busy enough, his friends and colleagues tell me he's also an accomplished musician and has played in over 125 area theater productions as a bassist.

Dr. David Burrelli leaves behind him not only a distinguished public service career but a legacy of leadership and mentorship to colleagues, congressional staff, and defense policy analysts alike. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing our deepest gratitude and appreciation to him for his 30 years of service to Congress and our nation.