Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I want to express my appreciation to the Chairman and to Mr. Pence for the resolution before us. I think it is critical for the House to address the remarkable events that are taking place in Iran.

We are seeing a nation--an entire nation--rise up. What is happening in Iran is an inspiration to all of us who believe that there is such a thing as universal human rights.

We do not want--and we are not attempting--to choose Iran's rulers. Who rules Iran is a question for the people of Iran. And as we expect all nations to respect our sovereignty, so too must we respect the sovereignty of other nations.

But we are not blind. And we must not be mute.

We have seen gunfire and truncheons deployed against peaceful protesters and marches. We have followed the wave of repression against activists, reporters, and all forms of communication. We know about the crackdown and arrests of Iranians who call for freedom and reform. We have watched mobs of thuggish enforcers terrorizing students and citizens in their dorms and homes.

But we have also watched the unbelievable, quiet courage of millions of Iranians marching, and we have watched their numbers growing every day. We have seen them insist on non-violence in the face of provocation and assault. And we have heard their impatient but persistent call for justice.

And this nation knows what that call for justice sounds like. The Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote from the Birmingham jail that ``Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.''

Bound up in the revolutionary documents of our founding, and in our Nation's unique role in the struggle for human freedom, is a special responsibility. We have an obligation that the resolution before us answers. We are all witnesses. And we are bound to support the courageous and decent people in Iran who are struggling for their rights and their freedom.

This resolution is measured and careful, but meaningful. And it deserves the strong support of every Member.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the life of Dale Leon Vincent, Jr., an outstanding father, brother, husband, and a friend to many. Regrettably, Dale passed away earlier this year and left us too soon.

Dale's life was devoted to his family, his country, and his community. These values were instilled in him at an early age. His father, Dale L. Vincent, Sr., was a career officer in the Chemical Corps of the U.S. Army, serving in the European theater during World War II, and assisting U.S. humanitarian efforts after the liberation of Nazi concentration camps. Despite constantly moving from school to school each time his father's orders changed, Dale was a model student who devoted himself to his studies and to serving others. Dale reached the highest level of the Boy Scouts, becoming an Eagle Scout and earning the God and Country award. After graduating with honors from Washington-Lee High School in Arlington, Virginia, where he was a highly ranked member of the wrestling team, Dale attended Duke University and became a member of the Delta Sigma Phi fraternity. At Duke, Dale would meet the love of his life, Kathy Sarah Farmer.

Following his father's example of service, Dale volunteered for service in the U.S. Army and served honorably in Vietnam. Although, like many veterans, Dale did not like to discuss his experiences in Vietnam, he was greatly admired by his family and friends for volunteering to serve his country despite the great risks. Dale was a first lieutenant in the Signal Corps, received an Army Commendation Medal for service as an instructor at Fort Benning, and, later, a Bronze Star for service in Vietnam. Upon returning home, Dale earned an MBA at American University in Washington, DC, and married his college sweetheart, Kathy.

Dale became a successful businessman and entrepreneur in New York City, where he formed a number of companies and displayed a talent for innovation. Over the years, Dale created and ran two successful retail chains, Clubmart and Dress to the Nines. He owned a restaurant in New Hope, Pennsylvania, called ``The Raven,'' managed technology investing at Associated Capital, and was CEO of Mangosoft, a leading software company.

Despite Dale's tremendous success as a businessman, his family was his greatest pride. Dale and Kathy raised and were devoted parents to three children, James, Paul, and David. Dale's younger brothers both so looked up to him that they each became Eagle Scouts, went to Duke University, joined Delta Sigma Phi, and served in the U.S. Armed Forces, as well.

Dale Vincent's impact on those he shared his life with is truly immeasurable, but is apparent in the family and friends that love him so dearly. For his outstanding devotion to family, friends, and country, I ask all my colleagues in the House of Representatives to please join me in honoring Dale Leon Vincent, Jr.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the legislation before us. I want to thank Chairman Berman for allowing me to work closely with him on this bill and, more importantly, for his producing such an excellent piece of legislation.

Some may be surprised that I am an enthusiastic supporter of this bill to assist Pakistan. Over the years, I have been, unashamedly, one of the most persistent and aggressive critics of Pakistan's government and of the previous administration's policies for dealing with it. I remain deeply concerned about much of Islamabad's behavior, ranging from its cozy relations with native terrorist groups to its obsessive belief that India intends to devour Pakistan. None of Pakistan's governments have demonstrated a persuasive commitment to internal political or economic reform or to anything approaching real acceptance of the rule of law.

Pakistan has been, at best, an obstreperous partner on the subject of proliferation, and like many, I fail to understand what possible reason they could have that could justify the stonewalling we've faced regarding the A.Q. Khan proliferation network. I continue to believe that Pakistan's interest in F-16 aircraft is akin to a fetish.

Nevertheless, I am a strong supporter of the bill. Why? Very simply, it is time our partnership with Pakistan connects directly to the Pakistani people. Our previous strategy of depending wholly upon the government of Pakistan to fight a war most of its people detest is not sustainable, and I believe it has contributed significantly to the political instability in that country.

This bill sets the stage for the United States to work with Pakistan to promote long-term development and infrastructure projects in all areas of Pakistan, to establish a real counterinsurgency and counterterrorism strategy and to ensure U.S. access to individuals suspected of engaging in nuclear proliferation. This legislation will help Pakistan gain control of its under-governed areas, and it will ensure accountability for all U.S. assistance to Pakistan.

In addition to requiring the President to develop a real security strategy and to regularly report back to Congress on the effectiveness of our military assistance, the act prohibits such assistance until Pakistan demonstrates its commitment to shared security goals. There are also strong oversight and audit requirements for the State Department and for USAID, and there is a requirement for the U.S. Comptroller General to report independently on the effectiveness of our security assistance.

This bill is a tremendous step forward for us in our efforts to bring peace and stability to South Asia. I would hope that every Member would support this legislation. I thank the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Watson.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

Mr. Speaker, the Ros-Lehtinen substitute is not just a step back in policy; it's a step back in time. It attempts to reinstate the failed Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld model for managing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Under this Congress, it gives the President a massive blank check and then walks away from its responsibility as a co-equal branch of government.

The Ros-Lehtinen substitute strips out all policy from the bill and has no provisions to encourage Pakistan to change its behavior; it has no provisions to ensure U.S. dollars are being effectively accounted for; it has no provisions for keeping Congress involved in the process; and it has no guidance whatsoever for the President about how taxpayer dollars ought to be spent. This is not legislation; this is abdication.

Is Pakistan cooperating with the U.S. to dismantle nuclear supplier networks? Apparently it doesn't matter in the Republican substitute. Is Pakistan ending its support to extremist groups and closing terrorist camps in the Fatah? Judging by the Republican substitute, who cares? Is Pakistan working to prevent cross-border attacks on its neighbors and strengthening its counterterrorism laws? If the Republican substitute is any guide, in the words of Jackie Mason, ``This is not my business.''

We have tried the minority approach. It is completely devoid of policy. It encourages abuse. It doesn't work. But it does have one advantage: it allows Members of Congress to avoid any responsibility for the war in Afghanistan.

Mr. Speaker, it's too late to go back to ``strategery.''

I rise in strong support of H.R. 2410, the Foreign Relations Authorizations Act. And I want to commend our chairman, the gentleman from California, for his commitment to this legislation, which I believe is a reflection of the gentleman's enormous dedication to this institution and its role under the Constitution.

For many years, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act has been held hostage to debates about abortion and family planning, to the inability of the other body to get 60 of their Members to agree to anything, and to a general feeling that it just wasn't essential to do. The result has been an insidious decay of the effectiveness of our diplomatic capabilities and our capacity to influence events around the world.

Some might ask, what does this have to do with my constituents? Isn't that why we have a strong military to protect us? Isn't that their role? The simple answer is that our diplomats and our development professionals are not a luxury, nor a fancy affectation of power. These are not aristocrats sipping tea while wearing striped pants and ascots. These are people who are on the front line of our defense. Not the Army, not the Navy, not the Air Force, the Marines, or the Coast Guard; it is the Foreign Service that lives always full time out in the ugly and dangerous parts of the world representing our interests, building alliances, monitoring and reporting on events that may affect our security, and helping to defuse crises and tensions before they sometimes burst into armed conflict or war.

There is a simple reason that both the Secretary of Defense Gates and Admiral Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have repeatedly and passionately insisted on the necessity of rebuilding and strengthening the State Department. It will save the lives of the people for whom they are responsible. It will allow the Armed Forces to avoid conflict. It will shorten conflicts by allowing our military to focus on security, not negotiations, not governance nor development.

In this respect, the title of the bill may mislead some. The bill is not about foreign relations; it's really about our national security. Our national security. It's about the safety of this Nation and our ability to protect and advance our interests around the world. Military power is essential. The United States would not be the country that it is if we did not have such an extraordinary military. But our Armed Forces exist chiefly to deter and defend. Whatever the last few years may have suggested, we are not a Nation that believes in starting wars to solve problems nor in the use of force to resolve political conflicts. A strong State Department and revitalized U.S. Agency for International Development are not favors that we do for others. These are institutions that are essential to our national security and our national interests. The bill is, in fact, merely a downpayment on a process of rebuilding that should have begun years ago.

So if you want to bring our troops home from Iraq, then you know that Iraqis have to improve their own internal cooperation and performance in their government. Who is supposed to help them with that? If you want to help Afghanistan and get our troops home from there, then you know that that problem is about poppy farming and police corruption that have to be addressed. Who is supposed to help them with that?

If you want to prevent Iran's nuclear program from setting off a chain reaction of proliferation, then you know that we're going to need a broad international coalition to stop them. Who's supposed to put it together and keep it together?

We can no afford a second-rate diplomatic corps any more than we can tolerate troops who are untrained, ships that are rusting or aircraft that are unmaintained. Our national security is a whole. We can't succeed with our military and fail with our diplomacy and development, and then hope to be safe. It doesn't work.

That's what this bill is about: keeping our nation safe. And it deserves the support of every Member.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the Village of Kensington on the occasion of its centennial. As one of New York's most unique and historic communities, Kensington is a quiet treasure on the North Shore of Long Island. With its beautiful green space, stylish architecture, and warm-hearted residents, Kensington has become synonymous with pleasant living.

The original vision for a ``planned colony'' on Long Island which would become Kensington, was the brainchild of the President of Aetna Bank in New York, Charles Finlay, and his partner, E.J. Rickert. With the farmland they purchased, Mr. Finlay and Mr. Rickert envisioned a community of spectacular homes amidst natural beauty, while maintaining proximity to the local railroad station. Their vision became a reality when in February 1909, the Kensington Association was created to organize Village improvements, including roads, landscaping, utilities, pool facilities, and walkways.

Rickert and Finlay built Kensington's famous white gates, modeled from those of London's Kensington Gardens, and named the Village after its new landmark. Improvements to Kensington continued, while honoring Rickert's and Finlay's vision for maintaining the natural beauty of the area. By a unanimous vote of Kensington's residents, Kensington became an incorporated village on November 28, 1921.

While a lot has changed around Kensington since that time, the Village has remained a wonderful community in which to raise a family and live out the American dream. Despite the hustle and bustle of the worlds' greatest metropolis just a few miles away, Kensington continues to be a community of tranquility. Its welcoming white gates will always symbolize the hospitable nature of its residents. I ask all my colleagues in the House of Representatives to please join me in honoring Mayor Susan Lopatkin, Deputy Mayor Gail Strongwater, Trustees Howard Diamond, Alina Hendler, and Gregory Keller, Village Clerk/ Treasurer Arlene Giniger, and all the people of the Village of Kensington on their 100th anniversary.

I rise in support of the amendment which I have at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I offer this simple amendment on behalf of myself and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley). This has to do with safety trumping garbage. It has to do with common sense.

The City of New York Department of Sanitation has proposed a marine transfer station. These are generally built on the shoreline because trash is compacted there and put on barges and then carted away on the Long Island Sound or the East River or the Hudson River.

Of all the shoreline places to build this, would you suspect the one place that would be picked by the Department of Sanitation would be directly opposite one of the biggest active runways, one of the most active runways in the whole United States of America, where planes take off and land approximately every 20 seconds. I'm talking about LaGuardia Airport, the airport with the largest number of flights in New York City.

This is an aerial view of the airport. This is LaGuardia Airport's runway. LaGuardia Airport, most people don't know, has only two runways for all of these great number of flights.

The garbage plant is planned right over here, opposite the runway, 2,000 feet away. The rules and regulations of the FAA, which is what we're asking for in this amendment to be implemented and utilized, say that you should not put a garbage treatment plant anywhere near the runway protection zone which is currently 2,000 feet away. This is 2,000 feet--less than that--according to this map which we downloaded from Google.

There will be a new flight slope plan implemented that the FAA has approved which says it can't be within 2,500 feet. Why would you put a garbage facility, an attractant to birds, less than 2,000 feet away from one of the most active runways?

The gentleman from New York (Mr. Hall) requested of the FAA, they declined, and Secretary of Transportation LaHood overruled them and released the number of bird strikes at airports around the country. Last year there were 87 bird strikes at LaGuardia Airport alone.

Now, our pilots are good. You might have seen a little news report that said they can even land on water. And indeed, that's what happened when one of our jets was struck by birds.

Garbage is an attractant to birds. The FAA rules and recommendations say don't put these things in the runway protection zone. Our amendment simply says to the FAA, you have to follow your own guidelines.

Put it anywhere else. There's a political concern here, and the political concern is not a NIMBY concern. This will most likely be in mine or Mr. Crowley's district. It borders both of our districts right now.

This site is the least politically damaging to us because it's in a commercial area. Any other place that they will move it will cause us some political concerns. But those political concerns that we will have to suffer if they move this anywhere up and down the coast in either of our districts is not as important to the safety of the flying public.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield briefly to the Congressman from New York (Mr. Crowley).

I would yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Stony Brook University President, Shirley Strum Kenny, on the occasion of her being recognized as a Stony Brook University ``Star'' at the Tenth Annual Stars of Stony Brook Gala. In her numerous roles in the field of education, President Kenny has demonstrated her commitment to the principle that education remains the key to breaking down our own economic barriers and to securing our nation's standing in the world. I commend President Kenny for her commitment to public education and dedication to the egalitarian notion that a higher education should be affordable and accessible to all. This commitment is in the finest traditions of Stony Brook University and the State University of New York system as a whole.

In 1994, President Kenny began her tenure as the first woman President of the University. Since that time, Stony Brook has experienced a renaissance with expansions in the opportunities it provides across the board: from Division I Athletics to major improvements to the Stony Brook University Medical Center. During her presidency, enrollment has increased from 17,500 to more than 23,000, faculty numbers are up 8 percent, and demand for a Stony Brook University education has increased exponentially. With President Kenny's leadership, Stony Brook University has undertaken major construction projects, including the Charles B. Wang Center, a Stony Brook Manhattan campus, the Simons Center for Geometry and Physics, new buildings for Life Sciences, Humanities, and Engineering, and most recently, the Stony Brook University Southampton campus.

Concerned about our nation's educational system as a whole, President Kenny has been a leader for national reform. She launched and chaired the Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University, which produced a report advocating a dynamic model of education that would engage students and inspire them to conduct research consistent with the unique resources of each institution. She has served as Chair of the Association for American Colleges and Universities, and as a board member of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

President Kenny's impact on countless numbers of students, to whom she has dedicated her life and work, is immeasurable. For her selfless dedication to her students and commitment to advancing education for all, I ask all my colleagues in the House to please join me in honoring President Shirley Strum Kenny.

Mr. Speaker, about thirty years ago, when diplomacy did not have to be reintroduced as a fresh new approach to our national security, the United States helped bring Egypt and Israel together to make peace.

Israel at the time was anything but a regional power. Though it had survived wars in 1948, 1956, 1967 and, with enormous U.S. aid, in 1973, it was isolated and, frankly, right to be concerned for its continued survival. Egypt, the clear leader among the Arab states, had a new leadership that was prepared to make a sharp and unmistakable break with its past policies and re-align its future toward peace and prosperity.

The wreckage and slaughter of the 1973 Yom Kippur war, unlike all the preceding wars, thus produced fertile ground for American diplomacy. With bold, strong leaders in both Egypt and Israel who were not only ready for peace, but ready to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve it, the Camp David Accords were signed on September 17, 1978.

Since then the Middle East has been a very different place, clearly a much better one for ourselves and, I would argue, even more so for Egypt and for Israel. From our perspective, the peace made at Camp David has linked the two most important militaries in the region to the goodwill of the United States; it has prevented any further Arab- Israeli state-to-state conflicts, though the problem of non-state proxies has grown. And, most importantly, the peace between Israel and Egypt shifted the political center of gravity in the region toward peace with Israel, versus the prior consensus for continual war against the Jewish State.

This point can not be overemphasized. But for the peace between Israel and Egypt we might still be fighting against the Arab League's ``Three No's'': no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel. If this policy sounds familiar, it's because it is still the policy of Iran and the terrorist groups it supports, Hamas and Hizballah.

The Camp David Accords not only cemented America's role as the architect of any future Arab-Israeli peace, but obliterated the ``Three No's,'' a defeat that extremists have been struggling to reverse ever since.

For Egypt, the peace made at Camp David freed their nation to pursue economic and social development without the continual intrusion and disruption of war. Israel, which had never before in its entire existence had even one completely peaceful and quiet border, probably gained the most. For ourselves, the total cost of 30 years of peace forged at Camp David is about $150 billion, which is a lot of money. But, by comparison, that same $150 billion buys 1\1/4\ years of war in Iraq.

Unfortunately, over time, Americans, Egyptians and Israelis have all lost sight of the singular importance of the peace made at Camp David, and the massive strategic benefits each nation has silently accrued as a consequence every day since. This oversight is more than just a shame, it is a strategic risk.

Each nation has its complaints with the others, and these are not trivial, nor imagined. Over time it is easy for us as human beings to take each other for granted, and the same can be said about the relationships between nations. But in the Middle East today, the risks are too great to allow this pattern to persist in the trilateral relationship. The security of all three nations depends on our re- remembering what made peace so important thirty years ago.

Mr. Speaker, I rise as a proud co-sponsor of H. Con. Res. 55 and I want to commend Chairman Faleomavaega and Ranking Member Manzullo for moving this timely resolution forward.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join in recognizing the 30th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act. Since 1979, the TRA's clarity of purpose as the framer of U.S.-Taiwan relations and its singular role in shaping our relationship with the Peoples Republic of China has few equals in terms of foreign policy legislation produced by the Congress.

Under the TRA, Taiwan, and I dare say the mainland, have both prospered and are vastly different places from what they were before the TRA was enacted. The TRA has facilitated Taiwan's evolution into a full-fledged, multiparty democracy with a robust free market economy. And as Taiwan has evolved domestically, its role internationally has changed as well. Taiwan is an active participant in addressing transnational threats and has been deeply engaged in humanitarian relief efforts, addressing public health and environmental protection initiative as well as financial stabilization efforts.

The resolution before the subcommittee today reaffirms the unwavering support of the United States Congress for Taiwan, its democratic institutions, and urges a deeper and stronger relationship between the United States and Taiwan. These are sentiments with which we can all agree, so I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.

Reclaiming my time, gentlemen. I think you struck something that strikes me as being a tremendous irony. The people who created the problem now are charged with fixing it. And that leaves us in kind of an interesting--and I think that the reason that I wanted to take a little bit of time with you, gentlemen, and knowing that you know this subject, the reason I want to take time on it is because sometimes people want to say, oh, we don't want to go witch-hunting or go looking at who we are going to blame. But on the other hand, if we don't understand how we got into the problem, we will end up doing the same dumb thing over again. And that is my concern.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 84, honoring the heroic actions of the pilot, crew, and rescuers of US Airways Flight 1549.

Madam Speaker, a jetliner, floating in the Hudson River in New York City, on a cold, January afternoon, was an incredible image. More incredible was that no lives were lost when Flight 1549 was forced to land on the river after running into a flock of birds. Through the steady skill and quick thinking of Captain Chesley B. Sullenberger III, First Officer Jeffrey B. Skiles, and the entire flight crew of Flight 1549, serious injuries and fatalities were averted. Their professionalism and unflappability enabled them to overcome the direst of circumstances on January 15, 2009. Pilots Sullenberger and Skiles adeptly landed their crippled aircraft on a busy and churning river. Flight crew members Sheila Dail, Doreen Welsh, and Donna Dent calmly and efficiently made it possible for all of the 150 passengers to exit the plane without major incident.

Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, New Yorkers are no strangers to tragedy. I commend the flotilla of commercial and civil watercraft that so swiftly reacted to assist the passengers and crew. Once again, New Yorkers went, without hesitation, to the scene of an emergency without thought for their own safety. In addition, the first responders of the New York Police Department, Fire Department of New York, and of course, the U.S. Coast Guard, skillfully and quickly were able to come to the aid of Flight 1549. Their actions made it possible for the crew and passengers to escape any harm after leaving the plane.

Madam Speaker, I ask that we all extend our deepest gratitude to the crew of Flight 1549, the first responders and those individuals who rushed to the scene. I strongly support H. Res. 84 and I urge all of my colleagues to also support this resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of an outstanding humanitarian, Dr. Robert J. Smithdas, whose personal accomplishments and dedication to the U.S. deaf-blind community are truly remarkable. Dr. Smithdas is retiring as director of Community Education at the Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults, HKNC, after many years of dedicated service.

Having contracted meningitis at the age of four, Dr. Smithdas eventually suffered a total loss of both vision and hearing. With great determination, he embraced educational opportunities at the Western Pennsylvania School for the Blind and the Perkins School for the Blind. Assisted by individualized instruction and speech therapy, Dr. Smithdas thrived in scholastics, earning an average of 98.6. After graduating in 1945, he was accepted to the Industrial Home for the Blind, IHB, and earned a fellowship to St. John's University in New York. Dr. Smithdas earned his BA cum laude in 1950 and later attended New York University, where he became the first deaf-blind individual to earn a master's degree. Dr. Smithdas also earned honorary doctoral degrees from Gallaudet University, Western Michigan University, Mount Aloysius College, and St. John's University.

Dr. Smithdas' commitment to education prepared him for his lifelong service to the deaf-blind community. Having worked in several management capacities at IHB, Dr. Smithdas played a crucial role in offering the kind of rehabilitative services necessary to expand the horizons of succeeding generations of deaf-blind individuals, including the development of appropriate legislation. With Helen Keller herself and deaf-blind community advocate Peter Salmon, Dr. Smithdas played a vital role in helping to enact the Vocational Rehabilitation Act, which sanctioned the creation of the Helen Keller National Center.

Leading by example, Dr. Smithdas has demonstrated that with rehabilitative training, deaf-blind individuals can be active members of our society, and that they have much to contribute. Dr. Smithdas' numerous national awards and achievements include being named both The Poetry Society of America's ``Poet of the Year'' and ``The Handicapped American of the Year'' by the President's Committee on Employment of People Who Are Disabled, as well as being inducted into the National Hall of Fame for Persons with Disabilities.

Dr. Smithdas' impact on the lives of the deaf-blind--both those he has met and those who have just benefitted from his good works--is truly immeasurable. And those who have had the privilege to read his works, attend his lectures, and take advantage of the programs he developed know that he is a truly exceptional American. I ask my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives to please join me in honoring and thanking Dr. Robert J. Smithdas for his lifetime of dedication to the American deaf-blind community.

I thank the chairman.

Madam Speaker, my colleagues, I spent Sunday in Sderot with Mayor Bloomberg of New York. We were being briefed by some people on the Israeli side of the border with Gaza when suddenly, after 14 missiles had already fallen that morning before we got there, the sirens started screaming, and we were rushed and told we had 20 seconds to get into a fallout shelter before the missile hit, rather petrifying.

I cannot imagine what I would have done had I children out on the street, as happens each and every day, sometimes hourly in that little town, trying to live peacefully across the border from its neighbor.

I listened very, very carefully to our colleagues, especially to the gentleman from Ohio, who has run twice on our side for the Presidency of the United States, and the gentleman from Texas, who ran twice for the Presidency of the United States on the other side of the aisle, and I was wondering, had they become President, either of them, and God forbid our country was struck by missiles, and they had taken the oath to defend our country, how many missiles would have had to have fallen before we struck back?

Countries have rights to defend themselves. It is not just one missile or two missiles or three missiles. From the beginning of this decade, each year over 1,000 missiles have been launched from Gaza on Israel. Thousands of missiles. And yet they have held their

strength, they have held their warnings that they issued, with the patience of Job. A country that was founded to protect the lives of Jews from destruction and annihilation after World War II held its calm, held itself together, until the missiles started falling 50 a day, 80 a day, 100 a day. And they warned the Palestinians that they would strike back, and they have, as is their right, as is their responsibility to their citizens.

We are all upset at the loss of innocent lives in this altercation and any altercation. But, you know, it reminds me of my two boys when they were growing up and they would get in a little hassle with each other, and I would separate them and say, Who started this? And Ari would say, Corey hit me back first.

If you don't want to be hit back, don't hit. That is the message. Israel has the right to defend itself, and we stand with Israel as it exercises that right to live in peace with its neighbors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Thomas Santiago for receiving the prestigious ``Green Living Award'' from the Alley Pond Environmental Center, APEC, on November 13, 2008. APEC, located in Douglaston, Queens, is a superb educational center committed to environmental understanding and awareness. Tom's commitment to using environmentally-friendly green building techniques and protocols for Citigroup's new office tower in Long Island City is a truly groundbreaking example of ``green living'' in an urban environment and is truly worthy of public notice and praise.

In his role as the Managing Director of real estate for Citigroup in the Northeast U.S., Tom was the driving force behind Two Court Square, Citigroup's second 1.5 million square foot tower in Long Island City. The building is Citi's first ever Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, LEED, Gold certified green building, the national benchmark for rating green buildings. Two Court Square serves as the ``green'' model for corporate America, not only for being environmentally responsible, but also for demonstrating the economic value of money-saving ``green'' building technologies and materials.

Under Tom's leadership, Two Court Square is LEED Gold certified because it meets or exceeds stringent criteria in five categories: Sustainable Sites, Energy and Atmosphere, Water Efficiency, Indoor Environmental Quality and

Materials and Resources. Some of the amazing environmentally-friendly innovations include: Electricity requirements are met by the purchase of 100 percent wind-power energy; over half the wood used in construction did not originate from logging; low-emitting volatile organic compound materials are used for paint and adhesives; 90 percent of its structural steel contains post-consumer content; 2 million gallons of water annually are saved by recycling rainwater for building cooling and through the use of low flow plumbing fixtures; and the carpet uses backing made from recycled soda bottles. This kind of top- to-bottom environmental sensitivity is where our Nation and our planet's future lies.

I would also like to acknowledge APEC's leadership in environmental education and awareness. Every year, over 35,000 school students from all over New York City and Long Island visit Alley Pond Park. At APEC- run programs, students of pre-school, elementary school, middle and high school ages learn about the environment and conservation policy. APEC also runs wonderful teacher workshops to educate teachers in methods to enrich and improve their natural sciences curriculum when they return to the classroom. APEC restored and reclaimed Alley Pond Park in the 1970s as a refuge where New Yorkers could experience nature, wetlands and woodlands first hand. APEC features live animal exhibits and several miles of trails in both wetland and woodland areas, bird walks, nature hikes, craft sessions and workshops on environmental topics. Through the ``Green Living Award'', APEC continues its environmental mission by recognizing the ``green'' achievements of individuals throughout the New York area.

Madam Speaker, I am delighted to recognize Tom Santiago for his exemplary work in green building construction and for receiving the ``Green Living Award'' from the Alley Pond Environmental Center. I know my colleagues in the House of Representatives will join me in congratulating Thomas Santiago and his colleagues at Citigroup for this well-deserved honor.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Queens Borough President Helen Marshall for receiving the prestigious ``Green Leadership Award'' from the Alley Pond Environmental Center (APEC) on November 13th, 2008. APEC, located in Douglaston, Queens, is a superb educational center committed to environmental understanding and awareness. Helen's dedication and support of environmental education, public parks and responsible zoning and land-use in Queens is a great example of how we can promote ``green living'' around the nation through local political leadership.

Thanks to Helen's aggressive efforts, over $60 million has been allocated to maintain, improve and expand the parks and playgrounds of Queens. Recently, Helen was instrumental in procuring resources to help begin construction of APEC's new environmental educational

facility. APEC had a staggering 40,000 New York City area school students visit Alley Pond last year. During APEC-run programs, students of pre-school, elementary school, middle and high school ages learn about the environment and conservation policy. APEC also runs wonderful Teacher Workshops to train teachers in methods to enrich and improve their natural sciences curriculum when they return to the classroom. Demand for APEC's educational programs is so high that over 8,000 students had to be placed on a waiting list to visit Alley Pond.

Borough President Marshall, recognizing APEC's need for space, led the way for the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation to allocate resources for APEC's future environmental educational facility. Utilizing the $1 million in funds that Helen helped to get, APEC will soon start construction of a new green facility that will make student waiting lists for APEC's programs a thing of the past. For Helen, this kind of action is nothing new. From her time as a teacher, to her service as a member of the New York State Assembly and the New York City Council, to being the Queens Borough President; she has been the most tireless advocate for children's educational and environmental resources. From libraries, to remedial programs, to playgrounds and parks, no one has done more to make certain that the children of Queens receive the help they need for the best education possible.

Madam Speaker, I highly commend Borough President Marshall for her extraordinary dedication to environmental education and for receiving the ``Green Leadership Award'' from the Alley Pond Environmental Center. Helen embodies the spirit of the award, having devoted herself to ensuring that children experience the world's natural beauty in America's greatest city. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to please join me in congratulating Helen Marshall as a recipient of this well-deserved honor.