Floor Statements

Madam Chair, parliamentary inquiry.

Is it proper for the gentleman who this amendment belongs to to object to debate on his own amendment?

Even to their own, which they should want to discuss, Madam Chair?

Madam Speaker, I rise before the House today to remember the American heroes of the 2nd Air Division of the 8th Army Air Force, and the designers and manufacturers of the B-24 Liberator whom served our country so honorably during WWII.

The 8th Air Force--known better as the ``Mighty Eighth''--was part of the largest air strike force in history, flying bombing missions over Europe from November 1942 to April 1945. While pilots and crewmen were trained in Pueblo, Colorado, their aircraft--the B-24 Liberator--had its manufacturing headquarters in San Diego.

In the peak of the wartime efforts, 11 Liberators were built a day, and more Liberators were produced than any other four-engine bomber in World War II, including the famous B-17 bomber. Over 18,000 bombers were made by Consolidated Aircraft Corporation in San Diego between the years of 1939 and 1945, and over 45,000 San Diegans helped in the manufacturing process.

The B-24 Liberator carried a crew of 8 to 10 men, and was powered by four 1,200 horsepower engines and carried 2,750 gallons of fuel. Many of the B-24 missions were round trips of 1,500 miles, and the planes were not pressurized or heated; crewmen wore oxygen masks on high altitude missions and were exposed to temperatures that could reach minus 50 degrees Fahrenheit. Despite these conditions, the 2nd Air Division dropped over 630,000 tons of bombs and destroyed thousands of enemy aircraft.

In San Diego, we honor their service at the Veterans Memorial Garden in the Air Garden, which is the first city park to honor the ground and flight crews of the bomber, along with the citizens of San Diego who helped build it.

Madam Speaker, we will never forget the bravery displayed by the men of the 2nd Air Division, 8th Air Force. We will remember their sacrifice and patriotism, especially as the remaining members meet on June 5th for their annual reunion. So, as we remember the contributions made by the members of the 2nd Air Division, 8th Air Force, we shall never forget that the freedoms we enjoy today are because of the courage and valor displayed by those who fought to protect them. As a veteran myself, I take great pride in recognizing the 2nd Air Division and the San Diego community for their contributions and tireless efforts that were so critical to our success and ultimate victory in World War II.

Madam Speaker, today I rise before the House of Representatives to remember Colonel Bob Dingeman.

If you are lucky enough to visit the San Diego, California neighborhood of Scripps Ranch, you are likely to find Colonel Bob Dingeman everywhere. Colonel Dingeman has been a member, and usually the chair, of virtually every community benefit organization in the 40 year history of Scripps Ranch.

His service to country and community began as an enlisted private and served at Hawaii's Schofield Barracks when it came under attack on December 7, 1941. Following the end of World War II, Colonel Dingeman attended the United States Military Academy at West Point, then served in the Philippines, Korea and Vietnam. He flew helicopters with the call sign ``Smiling Tiger,'' and retired as a highly decorated United States Army Colonel.

Colonel Dingeman, and his wife Gaye, have been married for 65 years and moved to Scripps Ranch in 1976. They have two grown children and several grand and great grandchildren and they are proud of each and every one.

Very seldom does an individual devote such an extended depth and breadth of commitment and expertise to a community. Colonel Dingeman devotes hours of tireless effort to creating and maintaining schools, clean parks and safe streets. He has been honored by Scripps Ranch with a namesake public school--an honor rarely given by any school district to someone still living.

Colonel Dingeman has been a mentor to many community volunteers. With his sage ``do-able solutions'' advice, he has helped forged new community, business and political leaders who will eventually shape the quality of life for future generations in Scripps Ranch.

Of all his civic accomplishments, Colonel Dingeman takes particular pride in the hundreds of immigrants he has prepared for United States citizenship. He believes that America is the greatest democracy on earth.

Madam Speaker, Colonel Bob Dingeman has been Citizen of the Year in Scripps on multiple occasions and was the initial inductee into the Volunteer Hall of Fame. On the 40th Anniversary of Scripps Ranch, I would like the House of Representatives to join me and honor this outstanding man who is an example to all of us in San Diego on what we can do for our fellow man.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas, a great prosecutor and judge in his own right.

Mr. Speaker, we are all familiar with the dangerous duties undertaken by the men and women of the Drug Enforcement Administration. Oftentimes, their accomplishments go unnoticed, but these agents continue making significant contributions to the seemingly unending effort to protect our communities from drug crime and addiction.

This is a responsibility that DEA agent Enrique ``Kiki'' Camarena took seriously over the course of his career in law enforcement. It was 25 years ago this March that agent Camarena's body was discovered after he was kidnapped by armed men in front of the U.S. consulate in Guadalajara, Mexico. He had been severely tortured by his captors. More than two dozen people, including Mexican Government officials, cartel leaders, and associates were convicted for Agent Camarena's murder. Still, his memory has not been forgotten.

The circumstances surrounding his death are a vivid reminder of the violence and danger attributable to illegal drugs, whether it is directly along our borders, in our neighborhoods, or within the homes of families facing the struggles of addiction.

Today, Agent Camarena is perhaps the best-known hero of the war on drugs, and his story continues to inspire millions of Americans to lead drug-free lives. In fact, shortly after his death, Camarena Clubs were launched throughout southern California. Hundreds of club members wore red ribbons and pledged to lead drug-free lives in honor of Agent Camarena and others who gave their lives for the same purpose. In 1985, club members presented a proclamation to First Lady Nancy Reagan which brought the club national recognition, and ultimately prompted thousands of schools, communities, and States to recognize Red Ribbon Week, now celebrated during the last week of October.

So on this anniversary of Agent Camarena's death, let us take time to honor the contribution and profound dedication and public service of Enrique ``Kiki'' Camarena on the 25th anniversary of his death.

I would like to offer my deepest sympathy and appreciation to his wife, Geneva, and his three children--Enrique, who is a prosecutor, Daniel and Erik--and the entire family, friends, and former colleagues at the Drug Enforcement Administration.

It is important that we focus on securing and enforcing our southern border so that these past sacrifices and future endeavors by those in the DEA are not in vain. Mr. Speaker, we in San Diego are honored to be home to this legacy of ``Kiki'' Camarena and his family.

I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for yielding.

I speak to you today, Madam Speaker, not just as a United States Congressman but as a United States marine. That's what my ballot title says

in San Diego. It reads: ``U.S. Representative/Marine.''

I've served in Iraq twice. I've served in Afghanistan once. I was part of the 1st Marine Division. I, for one, don't appreciate being lectured to, especially from a gentleman like the one from Florida who just spoke, about how I'm brain-injured, about how I might have PTSD, about how I'm less of a person because I've served overseas.

This is an ill-conceived resolution. It is a resolution that is hurtful to our troops on the ground who are fighting now, and it is a resolution that is hurtful to their families. If we had passed a similar resolution about Iraq, we wouldn't have been victorious in Iraq now. We wouldn't have less than 1,000 marines in Iraq now. They have all pulled out. Why did they pull out? Because we've won. Iraq is no longer a threat.

I've had friends give their lives for this great Nation in both Iraq and Afghanistan. A vote for this resolution is sending a message to their families that their sacrifices and willingness to stand in the gap against the forces of tyranny and destruction and radical Islam were false errands.

This is the wrong message to send. Our message should be one of support and encouragement. As congressional Representatives, we should be standing side by side with our troops in the field, not abandoning our cause when our military needs us the most. If we were to pull out of Afghanistan, we would be inviting those terrorists and al Qaeda to attack us here again on American soil. We don't need another 9/11.

This resolution could well be named ``the retreat and abandonment of our military resolution.'' I don't believe the purpose of this resolution is to protect our men and women serving in harm's way. The point of this resolution, I think, would be to make America weaker.

I'll tell you why I believe this: Unlike any other Member of Congress, I have served both in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, not any person who is in favor of this resolution has ever come and talked to me. The gentleman from Florida never came to me and asked me what I thought about it.

This isn't about the military. This is about a political ideology to make America weak and to lose our strength as a great Nation.

I would appreciate it if maybe I could be listened to next time. If we are going to work in a bipartisan fashion and if this resolution is truly for the men and women of the military, I've been here for 15 months, and I've never talked to anybody about it.

We need to make sure that we support our troops and their families and that we not allow al Qaeda to become stronger by passing this resolution.

Once again, I've raised my right hand like every other Member of Congress here to support and defend the U.S. Constitution, but I also did that as a United States marine in one of the first officer candidate classes after 9/11. I graduated in March 2002. I deployed in 2003 to Iraq, in 2004 to the battle of Fallujah, and in 2007 to Afghanistan.

My wife and three kids have lived at Camp Pendleton. They've lived on the base. I know what families in the military live like. I know what marines on the ground are going through right now.

I know what victory costs. I know what victory takes. What it doesn't take is a misrepresenting resolution that is going to hurt our military when it needs us the most.

Did I enjoy going overseas? Did I enjoy leaving my three small kids and family behind? Did I enjoy leaving steak and all the great comforts of this Nation behind? No.

It was worth it because I know, in my heart, that what we are doing in Afghanistan is going to make my children not have to go over and fight the same Islamofascists that we are over there fighting now. I know that we are going to have a safer country because of me, because of people like me, and because of people who are over there serving now. Because they are over there, fighting, my kids aren't going to have to.

So was it fun going to war? No. Was it worth it? Yes.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution.

Madam Speaker, today I rise in recognition of Mr. Morrill Worcester of Harrington, Maine. Morrill is President of the Worcester Wreath Company, and he and his company have provided Christmas wreaths for Arlington National Cemetery since 1992.

Morrill Worcester's story begins in 1962 when at the age of 12 he won a trip to Washington, DC, from his local paper. After visiting Arlington National Cemetery, he was awe-struck by the enormity of the cemetery and its perfectly aligned rows of headstones representing the thousands who have died in service to this country. The powerful imagery of Arlington left a lasting impression on Morrill, one that would stay with him long after he began his business selling Christmas wreaths.

In 1992, the Worcester Wreath Company had an overstock of Christmas wreaths. Unwilling to simply throw the extra wreaths away, and with the image of Arlington still a treasured memory, Morrill was inspired. With the help of volunteers, he spent 6 hours in the rain placing a wreath at each headstone. For 18 years, Morrill has taken time out of his busiest season to deliver handmade wreaths to Arlington National Cemetery and lead volunteers in laying them on the headstones.

When word of his efforts spread around the Internet, hundreds more Americans from across the country began to ask how they could get involved and show their respect for our fallen. Morrill soon expanded the project into Wreaths Across America, allowing anyone to donate a wreath to honor the fallen. As a result, Wreaths Across America have laid over 100,000 wreaths at numerous national cemeteries. Congress has recognized his work by declaring December 13, 2008 as ``Wreaths Across America Day.''

Madam Speaker, this gentleman's dedication and actions directly reflect his selfless resolve to honor and remember our Nation's fallen. Individuals like Morrill and the volunteers of Wreaths Across America embody the great respect that we as a nation have for those who have died defending our freedom. On the second Saturday of December this year, and hopefully for many more Decembers to come, Morrill will be at Arlington National Cemetery in solemn remembrance to lay more wreaths.

Mr. Morrill Worcester, thank you for remembering those who have given so much for our freedom, and thank you for sharing your passion to honor these brave men and women with the American people.

Madam Speaker, today I rise in honor of a man who dedicated his life to helping others, Mr. John Gaffaney of San Diego, California. Tragically, John was killed on November 5, 2009, a victim of the horrible events at Fort Hood.

John was a man of sacrifice and devotion who spent his life counseling others. After 15 years in the Army National Guard, he went on to work for the San Diego County Department of Health and Human Services. After spending the last 22 years investigating cases of elderly abuse and neglect for San Diego County, John once again answered the call of duty and re-enlisted in the Army Reserves. He arrived at Fort Hood only a few short weeks ago to prepare for deployment to Afghanistan to help other soldiers cope with the trauma of war.

Madam Speaker, John Gaffaney was a man of integrity and will be greatly missed by all of San Diego, especially his wife Christine and son Matthew. I ask that this body honor John and the rest of the fallen at Fort Hood for their dedication and sacrifice to this country.

Madam Speaker, today I rise in recognition of Lieutenant Florence Bacong Choe of San Diego, California. Lt. Choe was a victim of a tragic shooting that occurred at Forward Operating Base Shaheen in Afghanistan's Northern Balkh province on March 27, 2009.

According to friends and family, Lt. Choe was all Navy. She was born at San Diego Naval Hospital and grew up in San Diego, where she graduated from Monte Vista High School in 1991. After graduating from the University of California, San Diego with a degree in Biology in 1997, she continued her education and received a Masters degree in Public Health Care Administration from San Diego State University in 2001. Following the events of September 11, 2001, Lt. Choe visited the San Diego Navy recruitment office and enlisted as a Lieutenant Junior Grade in the U.S. Navy Medical Service Corps.

While serving in her capacity as Healthcare Administrator for Medical and Surgical Services at the National Navy Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland, she met her future husband, Lieutenant Commander Chong ``Jay'' Choe. They were married on June 21, 2004 and in 2006, they welcomed the birth of their daughter, Kristin Bacong Choe.

A dedicated service member, Lt. Choe fulfilled various duties in the Navy Medical Corps in Japan and San Diego before deploying to Afghanistan in May of 2008. It was during this deployment where she made the ultimate sacrifice after a shooter, disguised as an Afghan Army soldier, opened fire and killed Lt. Choe and Lt. J.G. Francis L. Toner IV.

Madam Speaker, for Lt. Choe it was never about self, but about family, friends and country. She dedicated her extensive knowledge about the medical field to provide quality care for the men and women of the U.S. Navy. For her, and the thousands of others who have given their lives in the name of freedom and democracy, I ask that this body continue to do its best to ensure their deaths were not in vain. May God continue to watch over the family and friends of Lt. Florence Bacong Choe as her memory, passion and dedication to our country continue to live on as we moved forward to a better tomorrow.

Madam Speaker, many years ago on a high mountain lake, two young boys were catching trout from a small rowboat, using corn kernels for bait. The ``captain'' of this ten-foot boat was a wiry, older guy with an ageless face and a direct manner. He was all business.

``Keep your rod tip up. You're hooked into a monster,'' he commanded. The boy let out a whoop as the ``monster,'' a twelve-inch rainbow trout, broke the surface of the lake.

That boy was me. The other boy was my brother Sam, who is now serving in Iraq.

The captain of the rowboat was Bill Poole who, on this and other occasions, made life very exciting for us. Sadly, Bill lost his battle with cancer last month.

After our first experience together, I would learn that Bill was a legendary outdoorsman and sport fishing captain, whose ``monsters'' were fish that weighed in at hundreds of pounds, whose fishing trips were 1,000 mile sojourns, and whose boats were the standard for the sport fishing industry.

But on that day, Bill was exhibiting the quality that made so many San Diegans and outdoorsmen from around the world want to be near him. He radiated outdoor excitement and anticipation. Bill Poole was fun. For us kids, his mock sternness would half-frighten us and then melt into a big smile as he showed us ``the right way to do it.''

Bill represented the fabulous outdoor dimension of our San Diego community. Early on he recognized the treasure that the fishing grounds of California and Baja California offered to outdoorsmen who wanted their fishing trip to be a real adventure. He was the father of long- range sport fishing in San Diego. His talent for finding big fish was legendary. His integrity was stainless, and his personality pulled people of all ages to him like a giant magnet.

One of those people was his wife Ingrid. A combination of beauty and purpose, she shared Bill's life on a thousand outdoor adventures around the world. Together, and with thousands of adventurous San Diego friends, they made the Safari Club a wellspring of conservation and outdoor fun.

When the Hunter family was going on a hunting trip, Dad would always make a swing by Bill's house to ``borrow'' equipment. Bill would ladle out gear and advice on our upcoming outing, interspersed with comments like ``I'll never see this again.'' Then he and Dad would laugh. The gear would eventually make it back to Bill's garage.

A new generation is charged with stewardship of the magnificent outdoors resource that we call America. It's our job to keep our waters and land full of game and fish. As important, it's our job to keep our wonderful resource open for enjoyment by our citizens and their kids. Let's remember that enjoying that resource was Bill's legacy, so that a hundred years from now, a small boy can bring in a 12-inch ``monster'' rainbow trout under of the encouragement of people just like Bill Poole.

Mr. Speaker, the amazing thing with this whole insurance health care reform debate is we could fix health care. We could do it in this country. It is not that complicated. We could make it so we could buy health care across State lines. We could make it competitive and bring down prices and make sure that everybody has access to health care. But the health care problems in this country that are fixable are like a leaky faucet in somebody's house. This Congress could fix that leaky faucet, but we're not going to do that. The Pelosi health care bill says, let's burn down the house. Let's just burn it down. Forget about fixing it. Let's tear it down and we will replace it with some monstrosity that will not resemble a house like what we had prior to it.

We don't need to burn down the house. We need to fix that leaky faucet. We could fix health care in this country. We could make health care affordable, accessible, and cheap. We don't need to burn down the house, which is what the Pelosi health care bill does.

The Republicans will have a much better alternative to this which is being unveiled today. That is what we need to vote for.

This is an interesting debate about health care. The interesting thing about this is that Congress could fix it. We could increase portability. We could make it so there aren't any more frivolous lawsuits. We could make it so there is more access, so it is cheaper, and there are more tax incentives for health care. But we aren't doing that.

What we have with health care in this country is a leaky faucet, and liberal Democrats want to tear down the entire house for that one leaky faucet. We could fix the faucet without a 1,200-page bill that is so complex that 90 percent of the American people can't understand it.

We could fix health care and do it responsibly, and we could do it gradually. Unfortunately, it looks like we will be voting to tear down the entire house. I say we just fix the leaky faucet, reform health insurance in this country, and fix things one at a time.

You know, we're at a turning point right now in the war on terrorism. We talked about Afghanistan today, Madam Speaker. But first as we do this, I would like to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida, an Army veteran and a member of the House Armed Services Committee, Tom Rooney

I thank the gentleman from Florida for his service in the Army as well as his service now to the Nation in Congress. He's really living up to those Army ideals. You know, now that this security situation in Iraq is under control and U.S. forces are beginning to rotate out of that region, we're confronted with a new challenge of equal significance in Afghanistan.

By all accounts, the combat mission in Afghanistan has reached an important crossroad. In March, President Obama unveiled a new approach to achieve this victory in Afghanistan, reminding all Americans of the necessity to disrupt, and I quote from President Obama, disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda, in Pakistan and Afghanistan and to prevent their return to either country.

Leading the mission in Afghanistan is General Stanley McChrystal who was appointed by the President and Secretary Gates to evaluate the situation on the ground and provide a resource request detailing the needs to achieve his victory. The President now has General McChrystal's request in hand, which includes adding another 40,000 combat troops, minimum, to the region.

As the President considers what course to take, the security situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating. The insurgency is gaining strength, and U.S. soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen, as well as our allies, are being increasingly targeted by ambushes and roadside bomb attacks. To prevent mission failure and to protect those troops already there, the President must act quickly to fulfill General McChrystal's request for more combat resources.

Only until recently the collective commitment to this new strategy has come into question. Some in Congress have raised opposition to any type of troop surge whatsoever, even if it means defeat. They instead prefer to maintain or draw down our combat forces, focus on training local security, and rely on targeted air strikes and drone strikes. While a scaled back strategy might be attractive to some people, it would inevitably constrain resources already in short supply in Afghanistan, unnecessarily putting our mission and the safety of the coalition forces at risk.

General McChrystal has made it clear that a small footprint counterinsurgency strategy will not work in Afghanistan. What's more, General McChrystal has clearly defined our objectives and the metrics for achieving victory against a resurgent Taliban and possibly al Qaeda. This entails our ground forces working to stand up Afghanistan's security and police forces as we did in Iraq and substantively weaken the stronghold of al Qaeda and the Taliban to the point where these local forces can effectively take control.

Madam Speaker, this is nothing new. We had almost the exact same challenges in Iraq and we were told 2 or 3 years ago we were going to lose in Iraq, the surge wouldn't work; there was no way we could win. It was a quagmire. We were going to be stuck there, and Iraq was another Vietnam. Well, guess what? You can walk up to any soldier, marine, sailor or airman who has served over there and don't just say, thanks for serving, you can say thanks for victory, because we're now rotating home out of Iraq in victory, not defeat because of General Petraeus, General Odierno and the almost exact same strategy of surging to provide security so that we could stand up the Iraqi forces, stand up the Iraqi military and the Iraqi police and the Iraqi Government so that we can leave.

Afghanistan is not Iraq, true, but that counterinsurgency strategy still stands. It still works. The more troops we send over to Afghanistan, the more secure we can make Afghanistan and the quicker we can leave Afghanistan victoriously. We truly are at a vital turning point in Afghanistan, and the President does have a very difficult decision to make. To quote General McChrystal: time matters. We must act now to reverse the negative trends and demonstrate progress.

President Obama himself, in March, said that the counterinsurgency strategy, also known as COIN, is the way to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan and to defeat al Qaeda. The strategy presented by the President and his national security team would require, quote by the President, executing and resourcing an integrated civilian, military counterinsurgency strategy.

But now, the President, instead of listening to the general he appointed who is the resident expert in Afghanistan, who's on the ground in Afghanistan, and who the President had not even met with face to face until he took his Olympic sightseeing tour to Denmark when he finally deigned to meet General McChrystal face to face, he's now listening to possibly Vice President Biden. So he's going to listen to Vice President Biden's advice on Afghanistan instead of the four-star general who he put in charge in Afghanistan.

In mid-April, Chairman Mullen and Secretary of Defense Gates actually replaced General McKiernan with General McChrystal because he specialized in counterterrorism. Counterterrorism. That's what Vice President Biden wants to do. McChrystal, even after being an expert in counterterrorism, came back and said, counterterrorism is not going to work. It's got to be counterinsurgency. So to have this counterterrorism expert come out and say counterterrorism's not going to work, we need a COIN strategy, the counterinsurgency strategy, we need to get the Afghan people on our side and the only way to do that is to secure the area, that's pretty phenomenal.

As we speak right now, Madam Speaker, the Iraqi troop levels are going down. Equipment and resources are coming back over here to the U.S., and they're also going to Afghanistan. We have won in Iraq, and we can win in Afghanistan; and we can bring civility to the Afghan Government so that we can leave.

But here's what we have to do. We have to have enough boots on the ground to provide security needed to properly train and equip the Afghan security forces, both police and army. You'll see many people saying that it's impossible in Afghanistan because Afghanistan's a much larger land area than Iraq is. That is true.

Afghanistan has more area than Iraq does. But it's got much smaller concentrated population centers. There's only two really. There's RC South. This is the Helman province. Kandajar's there. That's where the marines are at this point in time. Then you have Kabul and RC East. That's where the Army focuses on. Pakistan's over there to the east. This is that mountainous range where you have drug runners coming across, you have people bringing weapons across, you have Taliban, al Qaeda and general bad guys coming across with that far arrow. Then you have RC South here where those marines are in Kandajar.

Those are the two main population centers. That's what we're focusing on. When it comes to IEDs going off, those are improvised explosive devices, the roadside bombs, the 155 rounds put underground by the bad guys to blow us up.

In Iraq we had a very complex road system. There were towns all over, cities all over, bases all over. We had to run resupply routes going everywhere. In Afghanistan you don't have that. You have one main road that rings the entire country. It's called Ring Road because it's a big round road. The only

places we have to stop these IEDs from going off are between those two arrows. That's it. These IED casualties that we see coming back, which is 85 percent of our casualties in Afghanistan right now, are improvised explosive device casualties.

If we stop those, we will stop sustaining major casualties so we can move on to this security phase. We have to stop the IEDs and we can do it just like we did in Iraq; and it's actually easier to do it in Afghanistan. The Department of State needs to work on the Afghan government structure. I won't argue with anybody who says that the Afghan Government right now is almost completely corrupt. There are many charges leveled against President Karzai who says he's corrupt.

And the Afghan government system that we have set up right now over there does not represent the thousands of the years of the Afghan tribal set-up that they've had that the Afghan people are used to. That's going to be a major challenge. Getting the Afghan people to trust in their government so that they actually go out and vote and they actually tell us where these improvised explosive devices are being implanted, that's a counterinsurgency problem.

We need to work on the Afghan Government. We need to make sure that it's not corrupt. Right now I am a Congressman from San Diego, California. I was voted in by the people of San Diego. In Afghanistan you don't have that. In Afghanistan, President Karzai appoints who the different representatives are. So that's like President Obama saying, You aren't allowed to elect Duncan Hunter. What I'm going to do is I'm going to tell you who your Representative's going to be. That's how this government's set up in Afghanistan, and it does not properly represent the way that the Afghan people want to be governed nor need to be governed.

Just as important as our military and security mission in Afghanistan, it's just important that we work with Pakistan so that Pakistan is not a safe haven to al Qaeda and to the Taliban. I want to read a few quotes here. This is President Obama talking about Afghanistan. He says, and I believe this, Afghanistan has to be our central focus, the central front on our battle against terrorism. President Obama said, Troop levels must increase in Afghanistan. And as little as 2\1/2\ months ago, he said, For at least a year now, I have called for two additional brigades, perhaps three.

The President obviously knows what needs to be done in Afghanistan because he's called for it. In his campaign he said, Afghanistan is the central fight against terrorism. When he became President he said Afghanistan is the central fight against terrorism. And now that it looks like it's difficult politically, he's stepping back from that assessment and he's saying, Well, we have to wait and see here. We have to look at this.

I don't think that shows good leadership. What I would like to see the President do is listen to the head general who he appointed, who he put in place, and who is the smartest person possibly in the entire United States military on Afghanistan and knows how to win this fight.

I would like to yield such time as he may consume now to the honorable gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Thad McCotter.

I thank the gentleman from Michigan for his words so well put. You can see that he understands what is at stake in Afghanistan.

What interests me about Representative McCotter's words, we just want the President to do the right thing. And we believe that he knows what the right thing is, because it was his idea. He brought up the counterinsurgency strategy. He said that Afghanistan

should be the main focus in the war on terror.

He knows what the right decision is because he has already made that decision in his mind months ago. He put in General McChrystal because he knew that General McChrystal was the right guy at the right time to lead us to victory in Afghanistan.

The President knows all of this, and we can only pray that he makes the right decision in Afghanistan or America will be a much less safe place than it is now.

What happens if we don't win in Afghanistan? What happens if we keep the troop levels the same or we incrementally escalate our troop levels over there that is not a surge but we add a few thousand troops at a time, what's going to happen in Afghanistan?

First, Afghanistan will become once again a petri dish for terrorists. Al Qaeda will return to Afghanistan. There's already networks there. One is the Hakani network. They're in touch with al Qaeda all the time.

Al Qaeda will be back in Afghanistan. We won't be there anymore. The Taliban will have control of Afghanistan because they have shadow governments set up throughout the entire country.

This is not like in Iraq where there would be a car bomb going off for no reason other than to hurt people. A car bomb in Iraq is not an alternative form of government.

The Taliban in Afghanistan is an alternative form of government. They want to take over this fledgling, possibly corrupt, democracy parliamentary system that we have set up in Afghanistan. As bad as it is now, this Afghanistan Government that they have set up, the Taliban would be much, much worse.

So what if we don't win? Afghanistan will become a breeding ground for terrorism. Pakistan, which has nuclear weapons, will be destabilized, completely destabilized.

I will tell you right now what is going on in talks in Pakistan and with different Taliban people--not because I've heard this from anybody; just because I know because this happened in Iraq. The Taliban is telling the Afghan people right now: America's going to leave. Look how indecisive they are. Their President, even after he said that they're going to surge in Afghanistan to have this counterinsurgency strategy, they can't make a decision. And the people of Afghanistan are listening.

Why would the people in Afghanistan not go with the Taliban forces if they think that we're going to leave? Because if we leave, they're going to be slaughtered. There will be reprisal attacks against those Afghans who dared help America; who dared tell us where the IEDs were being planted at; who dared say, These guys over here are bad guys, Sergeant. Could you go get them for me?

The people of Afghanistan are going to stop working with us if we keep being indecisive on what we're going to do over there, so Pakistan could possibly become destabilized.

Out of all of the bad things happening in this world--Mexico imploding because of its narcotics trade and its gang war, North Korea shooting off nuclear missiles, Iran shooting off nuclear missiles, getting that fissile nuclear material there--all of these things could happen.

This world is a very dangerous world. We all know that. One of the most likely, though, and one of the absolute scariest, is the destabilization of Pakistan; it's Pakistan going away and the Taliban getting their hands on their nuclear weapons. I don't think we would want to think about what would happen if the Taliban or al Qaeda got their hands on Pakistan's nuclear weapons. This entire area would be destabilized, and I guarantee you they would be gunning for another 9/ 11. And it would be that much easier for them because we're not there anymore.

And I understand we've been at war in Afghanistan since 9/11. We've been over there a long time, over 7 years. And I understand, Mr. Speaker, that the American people are tired of war. I was in the Marine Corps. I joined after 9/11. I did two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan in 2007. I was in the Battle of Fallujah in Iraq. I was in Diwaniyah. I was in Babylon.

I'm tired of war, too. But what I want to make sure of is that our country stays safe, it stays secure, and it stays free, and we don't turn our backs on a people who we promised aid to. If we lose in Afghanistan, it will embolden al Qaeda, it will embolden all of our enemies, and we will see increased attacks.

This is not a scare tactic, Mr. Speaker; this is simple fact. If we're not there, if America does not lead, our allies will not lead themselves. America is the leader in Afghanistan and our allies are following them.

I served with the British, Canadians, Australians, the Poles, Czechs, the Italians, Spaniards, French. I served with a whole lot of people, other countries that are in Afghanistan, and they're following us. We are the leaders for this war.

We are providing that leadership role and we're the economic pillar for this war, too. And it is an expensive war. Wars are extremely expensive. Afghanistan, with its tribal layout, its mountainous regions, its desert, its terrain is more complicated than Iraq is.

This is not easy. We aren't saying that this is easy. We're saying this is going to be very, very difficult. But we have the willpower, and I think we have the ability. We have the leader in General McChrystal. We sure as heck have the men and women who want to serve and win in Afghanistan. We can do this.

So, consistent with General McChrystal's recommendation, the initial strategy outlined by the President almost 7 months ago constitutes the best way towards accomplishing all of these goals. My hope and Mr. Rooney's hope, and it should be every America's hope, is that a favorable decision is reached promptly so that our military, this Congress, and the administration can begin doing everything they can do to provide the full resources necessary to execute a counterinsurgency strategy.

We have to know here in Congress what the President wants to do. We need to know what his decision is so we can get the men and women serving over there right now, the ones getting shot at, the ones getting IEDs, the ones getting rocketed, we want to get them what they need.

One of the things they need is the support of the American people. Until President Obama comes out, makes his decision, lets Congress know about it so we can inform our constituents and we can tell them why it's important that we win in Afghanistan, our men and women overseas right now are suffering.

You don't think that the privates, sergeants, corporals, staff sergeants at the officer corps in Afghanistan are looking back right now, watching C-SPAN watching CNN, and saying, Our main General, General McChrystal, the man who we're following, the man who's asked us to fight, the man who's asked us to drive these dangerous roads, the man who's asked us to kill the enemy for our country and our lives are put in danger, he's asking for 40,000 troops, and the administration in D.C., in Washington, is not giving them to him right now, they're thinking about it.

We've had enough time to think about it. It's been 7 years. Was our strategy in Afghanistan under President Bush the right one? No, it probably wasn't. It probably was not the right one. We were focused on Iraq, and frankly I think that's a good thing, too, because we have won over there now. But we need to shift focus to Afghanistan. That's what this President said he would do. Experience tells us that wars must be run by our military leaders, not politicians or bureaucrats back here in D.C. I don't want to create strategy for Afghanistan. That's not my job. My job, as a congressman, is to give the military men and women the support that they need to get the job done for whatever the President, who's Commander in Chief, sets out as their strategy and their goals. You don't want me running a war. You don't want Vice President Biden running a war, either. That's why General McChrystal is there. That's why General Petraeus is there. That's why General Odierno is there. They are the resident experts.

The President rightly recognizes the importance of defeating al Qaeda and the Taliban, but in order to do so, he must stay clear of political currents and do what is right. And once more, I

truly believe that he knows what is right. Because what General McChrystal, once more, has brought to the President in his resource request was what the President asked him to do.

On two occasions over the last few years, I have been to Afghanistan, both as a Member of Congress and as a Marine. While there, I served alongside and shared experiences with the best that this country has to offer. They are truly the greatest generation. People that have so much opportunity, young men and women, they could go to college, they could pretty much do whatever they wanted to do. Instead, they went and served. I have had the awesome opportunity of serving with them. And they have dutifully undertaken their mission to protect our Nation and the Afghan people. I have also spoken to many civilian leaders and military leaders outside of Afghanistan, and they know what the right thing to do is. Our goals in Afghanistan will become further out of reach. In fact, they become more out of reach every single day that we dally here at home and not give them what they have asked for.

If we significantly reduce our military presence right now, at this critical time, the war in Afghanistan will be lost. Understanding this risk, I sincerely hope that President Obama, as Commander in Chief, will follow the recommendation of his appointed military commander and commit his full support to this important mission.

I thank the gentleman.

The liberals in this Congress and in the Senate did a despicable thing today. There is usually one bill in this Congress that gets passed that's nonpartisan. It's bipartisan. It's the authorization bill to get our military what it needs. And it has never been so important as it has been during this time of war. This is beans, band-aids, bullets, trucks, armor, and flak jackets. Everything that we need to win these wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is in this authorization bill that was being voted on today. I voted ``yes'' on it. Many voted ``no,'' and they were in the right as well as I was in the right. And here is why. To attach a hate crimes bill, a thought crimes bill, which is wrong in and of its own, but has nothing to do with the military, nothing whatsoever, but the Democrat Congress knew that we would not vote against the military. That's the hand that they played. So they put one of the worst and most rotten bills that has been passed by this Congress on top. They piggy-backed it on top of our defense authorization bill because who's going to vote against the troops?

That was their slant today. And as a marine and as a congressman, it is one of the most despicable things that I have ever seen done by this body. Some of us voted for it. Some of us voted against it. Each of us voted our own conscience on this, and both votes were right. We do have to get our military what it needs on one hand, but on the other hand, we are not going to be ridden roughshod over by a liberal Congress that thinks that they can attach absolutely despicable bills to important things like the defense authorization bill. That's why voting ``no'' on this bill today was also the right choice. So I thank the gentleman for his conscientious vote today, and I appreciate it.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of San Diego Power Surge 96 for its championship victory in the Amateur Softball Association's 2009 Girls National Fastpitch Tournament. The girls of Power Surge 96 competed against some of the most talented and formidable teams in the country--and they did not disappoint their fans. Their national championship victory represents a great accomplishment for not only each team member, but also for the San Diego community.

Over the course of the tournament, Power Surge 96 won a total of nine games to compliment the team's overall and quite impressive record of 92 wins, 7 losses and 1 tie. The team's final matchup turned into a heroic test of endurance and skill after falling behind to their opponent, the SoCal Jynx, early in the game. In the seventh inning, Power Surge 96 tied the score at three, forcing the game into extra innings where they eventually took the lead and never looked back.

On their way to the top, the girls of Power Surge 96 prevailed through a qualifying tournament that included several tough opponents. That tournament, the ASA Southern California State Championship, was the first qualifying victory for any Power Surge team since forming in 1992 and competing at the national level.

In 2009, Power Surge 96 competed in a total of nine tournaments. The team won six of those tournaments outright, sharing a seventh as co- champion. Altogether, 2009 was a great year for the girls of Power Surge 96, highlighted by their national championship victory. Surely, their victory will help motivate them to reach the same level of achievement next year, when they resume competitive play and prepare to defend their national championship.

The girls of Power Surge 96 deserve great credit and recognition for their success and remarkable accomplishment. Their national championship victory, as well as the time they have shared together and hours invested in practice and preparation, is an experience they will always remember. It is an experience that will stay with them well into their adult lives and, hopefully one day, be shared with their children to encourage and inspire them to reach new heights.

Madam Speaker, it is an honor to rise in recognition of Power Surge 96 and I ask that my colleagues join me in paying tribute to this team of talented girls. Next year's national championship tournament will not be easy but if there is any group up to the challenge, it is the girls of Power Surge 96.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3226, Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010:

I received $3,000,000 for Trex Enterprises at 10455 Pacific Center Court, San Diego, CA 92121. Funding for this program will be used to complete development, flight testing and integration of the Brownout MMW Sensor that will reduce aircraft accident risk and allow aircrew visibility through the full range of landing and take-off operations in otherwise extremely hazardous flight conditions. ``Brownout'' is a situation Army aviators experience in combat operations daily in Iraq and Afghanistan. Created by helicopter rotor downwash, it continues to cause aircraft accidents and remains a high risk to flight safety.

Specifically, as aircraft approach the ground, a thick plume of brown desert dust, dirt and sand disturbed by high velocity winds from rotor systems engulf the aircraft, causing a complete loss of the pilot's visual reference to the ground. The Brownout Situational Awareness Sensor, BSAS, is a cockpit display system capable of providing the aircrew visibility through the blowing sand and dust. This technology will greatly reduce the loss of aviator lives, loss of aircraft and reduce the amount of maintenance requirements resulting in damages from Brownout situations. Brownout is among the biggest hazards to rotary- wing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, contributing to more than 71 U.S. helicopter accidents. Providing this capability is critical to aircrew safety and combat readiness.

I also received $2,000,000 for CHI Systems at 12860 Danielson Court, Suite A, Poway, CA 92064. There is currently insufficient training provided to soldiers on the most crucial battlefield lifesaving situations. Medics and soldiers, in many instances, lack the experience to act swiftly and effectively in combat casualty situation. By combining instrumented manikin parts that support hands-on practice with computer based scenario training, this funding will complete the HapMed Combat Medic Trainer development and provide medics and soldiers

the ability to practice critical lifesaving tasks. In addition to providing realistic training scenarios, HapMed is also portable, so soldiers can continue to train while they are deployed. This system has received high praise in its ability to train soldiers for medical treatment on the battlefield. According to a Science and Technology Manager for the Army, ``New technologies such as HapMed are needed to provide medics with greater opportunities to develop and test their decision making and technical medical skills.''

New Army recruits must receive training in Buddy Aid or as Combat Life Savers (CLS). Currently, insufficient training is provided to help soldiers and medics acquire and maintain some of the crucial battlefield lifesaving skills such as tourniquet application, needle chest decompression, and emergency cricothyrotomy, addressing, respectively, the top three causes of preventable death on the battlefield. In order to perform these lifesaving functions under battlefield conditions, military personnel must have the awareness and confidence to act swiftly and effectively.

Further, I received $1,500,000 for General Atomics Aeronautical Systems at 14200 Kirkham Way, Poway, CA 92064. The Predator C has been designed and developed as the next generation aircraft in the extremely successful Predator series Unmanned Aircraft System. Predator C was designed in order to make the airplane more survivable in higher threat areas and to provide the U.S. Air Force with an armed reconnaissance capability that will be able to fly into many areas around the world undetected.

Predator C is slightly larger than Predator B and is capable of carrying 2000 pounds of the same mix of weapons as Predator B. Predator C will provide the U.S. Air Force with additional covert capability, enhanced by much higher operational and transit speeds for quick response and quick repositioning for improved mission flexibility and survivability. This system also provides variations in signature reduction technologies. Furthermore, Predator C means more jobs contributing to San Diego's local economy while providing the men and women on the ground the resources they need to accomplish their mission.