Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, June 12, 2006 I was absent from the House due to an airline delay.

Had I been present I would have voted:

Rollcall No. 251--``yea''; rollcall No. 252--``yea''; rollcall No. 253--``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, May 19, 2006, I was absent from the House due to a prescheduled event with the President on his American Competitiveness Initiative at Northern Kentucky University. Had I been present I would have voted: Rollcall No. 173 (previous question)--``yea''; Rollcall No. 174 (rule)--``yea''; Rollcall No. 175 (Blumenauer amendment)--``no''; Rollcall No. 176 (final passage)--``yea.''

Mr. Chairman, I also thank the chairman. It is a privilege to serve on a committee chaired by a fellow Army Ranger.

Today, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5122 and to speak about a matter of importance to our men and women who serve in the Reserve component, in the National Guard and our Armed Forces. As a former enlisted soldier, West Point graduate and 11-year veteran of active duty, and serving a number of years in Reserve, this is an important issue and one of particular interest and concern to me.

The bill which we are considering today includes an important provision that will for the first time establish equity in the computation of retired disability pay for all servicemembers, regardless of whether they were serving in the active military, Reserve or National Guard.

I thank Chairman Hunter and Personnel Subcommittee Chairman McHugh for their support of my amendment in committee which ensured inclusion of this vital amendment in today's legislation.

Earlier this year on one of my trips to Walter Reed Hospital, I visited a severely wounded member of the Kentucky Army National Guard from my district, Sergeant Carlos Farler of Tollesboro, Kentucky. I was stunned in talking with this great American, whose home is not far from mine, as he told me that his disability pay would be computed at a different level for Reservists and for Guardsmen than it is for active servicemembers who have the same wounds from the same battle.

After meeting Sergeant Farler, I researched how military disability and retirement pay is computed. I learned that this computation is often based on the years of service. Under current law, a Reservist gets credit only for the time he actually spends in uniform. For example, a soldier who has spent 13 years in the Kentucky National Guard may have only 4 years of service when his or her duty days are added up. With a 30 percent disability this soldier gets about 8 percent less disability retirement pay than their regular Army counterpart.

In other words, two personnel with identical disabilities, incurred in the same Iraqi fire fight, will end up with a different disability retirement benefit with the citizen soldier coming up short. A lifetime difference of 8 percent in disability pay can have a significant impact on a retiree's standard of living.

The amendment which I offered and which was accepted in committee will change the law so that the actual number of years spent in the Reserves will be used. Any servicemember who earns the Purple Heart for being wounded in action and who was medically retired as a result of that action will be entitled to the same compensation for his or her disability retirement pay as somebody serving in the regular military.

A bullet does not discriminate between an active and Reserve servicemember and neither should we. Now is the time to correct this long-standing inequity. With passage of today's bill, we will do so.

In closing, I thank Sergeant Farler for bringing this inequity to my attention and for his service to our Nation, and also, more importantly, to his fellow veterans in the Guard and Reserve, and again I thank Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Skelton, Chairman McHugh for their support of this important provision to do right by America's soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines, truly making the regular Reserve and Guard forces one force to defend this Nation.

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, May 9, 2006, I was absent from the House. Had I been present I would have voted: Rollcall No. 128--``yea''; rollcall No. 129--``yea''; rollcall No. 130--``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago we heard almost all the members of the Out of Iraq Caucus ask for a debate on the war, and one of the comments that was made throughout that series of unanimous consent requests was a statement affirming that they honor and support our troops, as do I believe all Members of this body seek to do that.

However, the deeper question I would like to raise in this, if we honor and support our troops, I would suggest to this body that we also listen to our troops and what they are saying on the ground, especially those who have paid a tremendous price.

I had the great honor and privilege yesterday to visit with several soldiers from Kentucky, one of whom was from my district, in Walter Reed Hospital. They included Specialist Jeremy Lowe, Sergeant Bill Winburn, and Sergeant Carlos Farler.

All of them emphasized strong belief in the mission. All of them shared very clearly and articulated the successes, most unreported by the national media, that they are seeing on the ground. They expressed a tremendous amount of confidence in what the Iraqi people are doing.

I think it is important that we stand with the troops in this resolution, that we stand with our country, that we stand with the Iraqi people, and that as we debate the war, and I believe there is an important need for debate, for discussion on policy, on the future, that one thing that we need to keep clear is that the messages that are sent communicate to several audiences: first and foremost to our troops in the field; second, to the Iraqi people; third, to our enemies, who will use our words against us; and, finally, to the entire world who is watching.

We must keep our promises, we must keep our commitment to our troops and carry on this mission that they believe in, where they see success, until it is completed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2830, The Pension Protection Act of 2005. This bill addresses a serious issue facing our Nation. The ultimate enactment of pension reform must be a priority to this House and the Congress.

I congratulate and thank Chairman Boehner and Chairman Thomas for crafting a comprehensive pension reform bill with so much support from the business and the labor communities.

This legislation represents a successful compromise that will help protect workers in the auto industry and also protect the major U.S. auto manufacturers against loss of promised benefits or plan terminations.

One area that remains to be addressed in conference is the issue of airline pension plans. The Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Airport is one of the Nation's busiest. It is home to Delta Air Lines' second largest hub. Thousands of men and women in Kentucky's Fourth District work for airlines. They depend on the retirement benefits provided by the airline industry.

Without a change in current law that allows air carriers with Defined Benefit plan obligations to make their pension payments over a longer period of time--20 years--it is possible that some or all of these plans will be terminated, benefits reduced and liability shifted to the American taxpayer.

The airlines want to keep their promises to their employees. They want to honor their obligations. They do NOT want to terminate their pension plans nor to reduce benefits. But, they need to be equipped with the tools necessary to have a fighting chance to keep those promises.

The Senate airline pension language is carefully crafted to meet the particular concerns of all the major carriers and provide them with a 20 year period to meet their obligations.

Although we are not addressing this specific issue today, I strongly support continued pursuit in conference of the Senate-passed airline pension provision.

Finally, I wish to thank my colleagues on the Ways and Means and Education and Workforce Committees and their staff for the hard work that has brought us to this point today. I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of final passage.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time.

I believe it is imperative in this body that we have an open and frank dialogue on issues that are of concern to us. I am disturbed and disappointed, frankly, by some of the rhetoric I have heard, because we are judged and we are acquitted and/or we are found guilty by those words, but the luxury we have is they are simply words here.

The impact of those words, though, on the other side of the ocean, in the AOR, in Iraq and Afghanistan, is that in this small world, not only do our friends but also our enemies watch, and they do not understand our concept of openness, of tolerance, of free speech and spirited dialogue.

Indeed, sometimes remarks that have been made in this Chamber have been used for the recruiting of suicide bombers. I think that one thing, and I would have to say quite candidly, is in our oversight: It is also important that we have oversight on our own words.

The comments that were made yesterday by a man with a distinguished military record, who I do not fault one bit, fly in the face of the comments of hundreds of soldiers, ranging from junior enlisted personnel across the AOR to my West Point classmates who are commanding brigades on the ground and disagree categorically, based on the phone calls that I got last night, including one from the commander of America's premier counterterrorism organization, who asked what in the world was happening here to make those kind of comments to encourage our enemies.

However, remarks irresponsibly given, not based on facts, simply do this: They place policy over politics while our young men and women are on the front line and unwittingly cooperates with and emboldens our enemies.

Liberal leadership has stated that they do not have a policy on Iraq, as one of your leaders said yesterday, but will have one in an appropriate time, I am sure in time for the 2006 election.

Because we are accountable for our words, I urge a yes on this rule to bring this resolution to the floor so the time for tough talking will end, and there will be accountability. If people want to make hard statements, they can be accountable for their words because of this. Because of our words, our troops are going to endure the consequences of those statements, and I urge all of you to be accountable for the statements that have been made.

Mr. Speaker, I would point out first that the childish shouting from many who have not served dishonor those who serve on the front lines with quiet resolve at this time while we have a necessary debate on this war.

I am here to represent some folks who cannot speak because they are serving on the front lines right now. I received a phone call in the well of the

House this evening from one of the commanders of America's premier counterterrorism organization. He shared with me his great dismay at much of the rhetoric that had emanated from this body today, making them the pawns in a political battle over what they clearly see as they are making success on the front lines. Please, your shouting and your rhetoric sends echoes to our enemies as well as to our soldiers and our friends.

It is honest to have a debate, my friends, but when I am asked on the floor of this house, why are you doing to us what was done to so many veterans here by Members of this body during Vietnam, when I am told repeatedly of their successes, my friends who I served with over nearly 30 years ago and who are serving now on the front lines commanding the units, leading the units and who are serving as junior enlisted soldiers, hundreds of soldiers whose opinions fly in the face of the rhetoric shared tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment to share a perspective that I think is often lost in the freedoms we enjoy, the freedom to meet in this Chamber, the freedom to reflect upon the great decisions that have been made here through the generations, The decision to enter into a war, to provide freedom and the maintenance of our union, the decision to free peoples in Europe and ultimately preserve our security at home.

On December 7, 1941, President Roosevelt stood in this Chamber and declared that December 7 was a day of infamy. He shared that this unprovoked attack which moved the United States to war, eventually into Europe as well. In the Korean War, we stopped Communist aggression. In Vietnam, the American people responded. During Operation Desert Storm, the American people responded.

In this Chamber in September of 2001, President Bush responded to an attack that was not brought about, my friends, by some nebulous global war on terror. I think it is important that we understand this war is not about some nebulous terrorist concept. This is about Islamic extremism that chooses to impose itself on the world. These people who largely act as agents of states, these non-state actors do not follow the teachings that they purport. Yet if we look more deeply, we see that they are seeking to be true to their interpretation of that religion.

In every generation there is a call upon that generation to defend the freedoms that have been purchased at such a tremendously high price. To maintain the union of our country and to free those who were enslaved cost 600,000 soldiers. In World War II, 444,000 soldiers gave their lives to provide freedom; and now we are engaged in a great struggle, a generational struggle that has been imposed upon us.

I think that it is important that we understand that the freedom that our minority leader had today to say, frankly, entirely inappropriate things about our national leadership, the freedom that all of us have to disagree, the freedom that all of us have to offer alternatives, the freedom that all of us have to protest, the freedom that reporters who sometimes distort the truth and, in fact, in many cases do not even report the truth but fabricate it, all comes down to the men and women who have answered the call to duty.

It is always the same. It is always the minority in the country that does that. Those who believe that there is something bigger in this country than individual selfishness and covetousness of the moment, that there is something worth risking all to protect because of those who come behind us, because they understand they are part of something bigger than themselves, bonded to something of greatness.

I want to thank tonight those Marines of the Second Marine Expeditionary Force, the soldiers of the Third Infantry Division, the solders of the 101st Infantry Division, of the 173rd Airborne Brigade in Afghanistan, of the Tennessee and Louisiana National Guards who are rotating back into the United States, and all of those soldiers who are moving in and out, the Marines who are moving in and out, our airmen and sailors who support this effort, because you understand that you have accepted the call of the generations that is so important that many people do not realize.

The freedom we enjoy in this Chamber was brought to us by 10 percent of the population of this country who chose to rebel against tyranny and stand for a principle that was higher than dignity of the individual, the rights and freedom of the individual, and that was purchased not simply in a declaration, but to get to the Constitution that gave us the government we have today was purchased in a great price in blood.

I am convinced that if today's cynical media had to cover the Normandy invasion, the greatest invasion in history that defeated the greatest tyranny in history up to that point, had it been reported by today's media, today's cynical media, today's profit-driven media, Mr. Speaker, I believe we would have lost that war. Because the Nation would have called for a pullout because there was risk associated with that, because things did not seem to go well. Because when unforeseen circumstances that always come up in war, and anybody who has served in the military, let alone in this Chamber, unexpected things happen.

I find those who have not served who are the great experts on military history do not really understand what they are talking about. Rather than commending our soldiers who have adapted to a fluid situation and the great things that have been done to support them, they provide criticism of why could that not have been anticipated?

It is simple, my friends. We are fighting an adaptive and motivated and, frankly, evil enemy that has a religious doctrine that stands and flies in the face of everything on which this country was founded, on which the Constitution was based, that respects the rights of the individual, the dignity of a man, the dignity of a woman to pursue opportunities in the way in which they define. And when somebody wants to impose an attack upon this Nation, and one that was planned long before September 11, and attempts that were made long before September 11, we have no choice but to yield or to respond, and we have responded.

Comments that have been made by my colleagues on the other side that talk about casualties, I can speak with some authority on that issue, having buried some of my friends. I find it interesting that they want to talk about numbers, which dishonors those who serve. I did not see any of my colleagues who talk about these numbers standing with me as I buried a friend of a friend who was killed in Al Qayyim in June over at Arlington Cemetery. They were back here at PAC fund-raisers and going to receptions and making pointless statements in this Chamber about things they know nothing about.

More than that, I would suggest to you that these same people who want to talk about numbers and these liberal reporters who do not care about this Nation, who do not care about the price that was paid for the freedoms that they enjoy, where were you for the last 25 years? Where were you when 16,000 American soldiers died between 1983 and 1996 in service to this Nation? Where were you when 24,000 American men and women gave their lives between 1980 and 2004? Your comments, frankly, are despicable, dishonorable, uninformed, unhistorical, anti- intellectual and, frankly, un-American. But I respect your freedom to make those statements, because they were purchased with the blood of all of those who served.

I would suggest that in this body that the liberal reporters who watch and our enemies who watch and the soldiers who watch and those who want to speak against this from their positions of ignorance and political convenience, who use our soldiers: You learned your lessons during the Vietnam War. Now you use our soldiers in a dishonorable way as human shields to advance an idea that stands in contravention to the freedoms that have been purchased at such a high price.

I ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who have been here for many years and like to speak with false authority: Where were you when my friend Ken Maddock was killed from Task Force 160? Where were you when my classmate from West Point, Mike Scott, died? Where were you when Lee Border died or Brian Haller died in the 101st Airborne Division? I saw no requiems in this Chamber. I saw no requiems on television for them. It was not politically expedient.

But now you disagree with the policy when our Nation is threatened by extremists, and soldiers and Marines and airmen and sailors have responded to that call, and you sit here mouthing your empty words. Casualties are always a great tragedy.

I think the one thing that was most poignant to me as I visited my old Airborne Unit, I deployed to the Middle East with the task force of the 1/508th running aviation operations in support of them, and I went and visited that unit today in Paktika Province in Afghanistan.

A CNN reporter came to one of the forward operating bases. There had been an attack on that base earlier in their deployment as they were clearing out the enemies of freedom, and not

simply ending a military operation but bringing order and civil government and roads and sewers and the fact that the government can be good and the people can be helped and they can be part of something bigger than themselves, which is not a tyranny, an ideological tyranny. That reporter was looking for bad stories and refused to cover the reenlistment of every soldier in the 1/508 on that forward operating base who was up for reenlistment. That is a tragedy, and that is unfortunate.

To me, I think the lesson that we have to ask ourselves is how do we get around this, how do we avoid this problem. Well, the media is not going to be helpful to this country because I think they have lost their connection with the heartland of this Nation, with the people who have borne the burden of the price of freedom through the generations.

Every generation of my family has served in the Armed Forces, not in glorious ranks of generals and admirals, but in the enlisted ranks, carrying the rifles and manning the ships that provided the freedom for the people in this body to say the things that they have said. And I would say this, Mr. Speaker, I do not care about the media. What we need to do is allow these soldiers and these marines to go into every editorial board, into every Rotary Club and chamber in this Nation and let them tell their story. Let them tell their story in the communities and in the fiscal courts. Let them tell their stories in the courthouses and on the street corners, and I guarantee you that these people who purport to be experts on things they know nothing about will be discredited and things will be shown for what they are. Because you cannot refute a 100 percent reenlistment rate in units where these soldiers have borne this burden and they go back over and over again.

To you military people who are watching, I want to say thank you, as a fellow soldier. To you who cherish our freedoms, I thank you. For you in the press who enjoy this freedom but you abuse it, know that the price that is paid by those who frankly have greater moral character than you, who refuse to cover the truth of what they are doing, know that it is their sacrifice, not yours, that allows you to share what you share.

And finally, to those of our citizens in the heartland know that these men and women are doing a great service to prepare the way for us to adapt to the 21st century; that we will have a safe country and a community to pass these freedoms on to the next generation.

I will leave you with a story from the 1/508, commanded by Colonel Tim McGuire, as he was moving northward from Shirana forward operating base to Orgune. He shared that coming back from that mission a little boy ran from a village up to his convoy. He stopped. He did not speak Pashto, and the interpreter asked the little boy what the problem was. The little boy had waved, as many of the children I saw in Afghanistan did at the Americans all the time. He asked the little boy what he was concerned about, and he said that two bad men had come into the village and put something in the road. That little boy saved potentially American soldiers.

The enemy were dealt with and that village is open and free, but Colonel McGuire asked the question which encapsulates all of what this struggle between radical Islamic extremism and the values of freedom and dignity of the individual that we cherish expresses, and he said, Young man, why did you do that, knowing that there was risk associated with what that boy did. He looked at this airborne colonel in the 173rd Airborne Brigade, and he said to Tim, before you Americans came, I could not go to school.

That is the contrast that we have here: freedom, opportunity, hope, true faith, or extremism, persecution, tyranny and hatred. Thank you for you who serve.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Edward Conner, a young

man from Falmouth, Kentucky, who has shown a tremendous appreciation for the service of many veterans in Kentucky through his involvement with volunteer activities honoring the Men and Women who served in our Armed Forces.

Edward, or ``Eddie''--as his friends call him, is an honorary member of American Legion Post 109 and despite his young age of 15, is actively involved with organizing annual Veterans Day events in Pendleton County.

Eddie often volunteers his time at the Legion Post--performing a variety of services and speaks to children at area schools about his work with veterans.

Being a Member of the American Legion, I thoroughly appreciate Eddie's hard work and commend him on volunteering his time in support of veterans everywhere.

Mr. Speaker, as a fellow Ranger, I thank the chairman. It is a great honor to serve in this Chamber. I think the one thing that has been very humbling to me is the experiences I shared visiting many of my friends that I have known for 28 and 29 years, serving around the world, serving in Afghanistan, serving in Iraq; and I think that their story is never told in this Chamber.

Their story is very rarely told in the American media; and if it is told, it is told almost as an afterthought. The one thing I would share that my classmates from West Point, friends from when I served as an enlisted soldier, friends who are in command of units on the ground now in the theater, returned to the United States with one common feeling towards the American media and toward the left, and that is anger at a complete misrepresentation of what they are doing.

I think the thing that we need to understand very clearly is that the battle to defeat the insurgents in Iraq is not taking place in Baghdad. It is not taking place in Tikrit and Fallujah and Mosul and Ramadi. That is where the kinetic end of the business is; but the insurgents are desperate. If Abu Mosab al-Zarqawi and Ayman al-Zawahiri in Iraq and Afghanistan can make the clear statement that they see the center of gravity of this fight right here in the United States and right here in American public opinion and in the willingness of American citizens to simply accept a call to duty, that is so clear when the American people have the facts.

As I travel in my district and as I have traveled in this country, the one thing I find very clearly is if an American citizen has taken a moment to speak to a soldier or Marine who has served on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan, they have a completely different opinion, a completely different opinion of what is happening.

I think the thing that is remarkable to me, and I remember when I first joined the Army, is that the members of the left mocked the military. I remember receiving the Hitler salutes and being called a baby killer if I showed up on a college campus in uniform. The thing that is remarkable to me and some of the deceit about the American left, and frankly some of the deceit I see in this Chamber when we talk about the greatest struggle that the United States has faced since the end of the Second World War, is now the American soldier, to their disgust, is being used as a human shield to attack their use in defense of this Nation and defense of our freedom.

To those on the left and my colleagues on the other side who go to great lengths to talk about how much they care about the American military, where were they when 18,000 American servicemen died between 1983 and 1986 during peace and war in the service to this country? I think your lack of an answer to that ever in the media speaks for itself.

When we talk about the success, I think it comes down to the fact that there is a political agenda that is driving this that has to do with taking America down at the expense of right. Moreover, I think that if we listen to what Abu Mosab al-Zarqawi and Ayman al-Zawahiri are really saying, they are more and more desperate, and ironically it feeds into the liberal media's desire to control the message in this country.

I recently met with an editorial board of a major newspaper. We got into this very discussion when I met with the soldiers of an airborne unit I deployed in the Middle East with, the 1st 508th Parachute Infantry, now in the 173rd Airborne Brigade. The national media did not want to cover their successes. They were looking for disgruntled troops and could not understand why 100 percent of those soldiers wanted to reenlist. It is very simple: they believe in the mission they see on the ground.

I brought this up with this editorial board about the successes of the 2nd Brigade Combat Team in East Baghdad that have totally neutralized that area, which was once very violent, working closely and receiving great support from the Iraqi people. In fact, the Iraqi people are moving more and more into the front lines providing intelligence, providing the needed information. They are in the fight.

This editor of a major American daily newspaper looked me in the eye and said, ``Geoff, car bombs are more sexy than opening schools.'' My heart broke when I heard that, because for the sake of a few dollars of profit, for a bit of readership, he chose to distort the very heart of what is happening in the world in the struggle that we face.

I would challenge those in this Chamber, as the left is selective, I would challenge those in this Chamber who want to talk about soldiers, and those watching on C-SPAN from around the United States, ignore the politicians. Talk to the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. I would challenge that in every community in the United States of America, invite a Marine, invite a soldier who has been on the ground, who has been in the theater and served working with the Iraqi people and trained the Iraqi security forces, and who understands who an IED is, and that it is not some convenient means to beat up on the administration or to engage in partisan political attacks, but has lifted a friend who has put his life on the line out of a wreckage.

I would tell you to invite those people to talk to your Rotary clubs and your chamber of commerce, talk to the editorial boards of the local paper, and bypass these people who are bent on one thing, which is deceit of the actual mission, or a complete cultural misunderstanding of what is happening, and share those successes as we hear over and over again from the troops on the ground in every unit that comes back. There are is lack of recruits for the Iraqi security forces, and our units in combat are reenlisting at rates of 100 percent, and it means one thing: they believe in the mission. They see the success. They understand the seriousness of this fight; and ultimately they care about us in this Nation enough to serve.

I thank all of you men and women who are serving on active duty right now who have accepted the call to duty. My prayer is that this Nation

will rise up, that citizens all across this country will rise up on the east and west coasts and in the heartland and will accept the call to duty that we have as a Nation and this generation to protect the foundation of our freedom, to finish this job and to have the forces of tyranny and suppression of truth know once and for all that they cannot prevail.

That is why they will not fight us in the street. They seek to win in American public opinion in the media or in criminal attacks against innocent civilians.

With that, I thank the troops for serving. I thank my colleagues for having the courage to stand in this body and point the truth out, to cut through the political rhetoric. I challenge those in the media to cover the truth of what is happening and to bring our soldiers and our Marines' stories into the forefront so the American people get a true perspective.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for allowing me to speak tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I am a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association and a life-long shooting sports enthusiast. I have been an outspoken supporter of second

amendment rights and strongly support the original intent of this bill.

I regret the legislation we are voting on today contains the Kohl- Reed storage device amendment. We need to protect the firearms industry, an industry I would like to remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is responsible for arming our troops, our law enforcement professionals, including the Capitol Police. But responsible gun owners should not have further limits placed on their second amendment rights. Unfortunately, it has become necessary to enact legislation to protect responsible owners, manufacturers, and sellers from frivolous liability lawsuits and criminals and others who irresponsibly handle firearms.

The original legislation from the House had 257 cosponsors and the original bill in the Senate, which did not contain the Kohl-Reed amendment, had 62 cosponsors. I do not understand why then we are about to pass a measure that is a compromise of the two bills that were overwhelmingly supported by both Chambers.

Among the provisions of this amendment is a requirement of using devices like a trigger lock to protect an individual from a release of liability if a criminal should take their weapon. For example, trigger locks can violate a fundamental safety rule of keeping everything out of the trigger guard until ready to shoot. The very real safety hazard is that the lock could actually depress the trigger as it enters the trigger guard if the weapon is not cleared.

Having said that, though, I think it is very important and I urge my colleagues to support the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, because we need to take immediate steps to protect the firearms industry and manufacturers and responsible gun owners from the liberal left's culture of frivolous litigation and to legislate by lawsuit.

Mr. Speaker, Cuba is a country that has a people with a diverse culture, a rich heritage, a people who came as pioneers, people who came and sought their freedom and built a future. This rich and diverse history was suppressed 46 years ago under a dark veil of Communist rejection of all freedom, of rights, of dignity and liberty of the individual.

I think it is important that this resolution pass, and I rise today in its support. I cannot stress enough how important it is that human rights and human dignity be afforded to the citizens of Cuba who live in oppression under a brutal, tyrannical dictator who cares more for his own power and the advancement of his family and his cronies than his citizens who are starving and are neglected of the basic rights and privileges and necessities that we take for granted in this country.

He stands against those things that we represent, and my family has seen that firsthand. My wife Pat has helped many Cuban families who have made literally the pilgrimage to freedom, in a heartbreaking decision to leave their home country, to leave all that they love, lose all of their worldly possessions, except for their dignity, their self respect, their faith and, ultimately, maintaining cohesiveness in their family, to come seek a new life here, awaiting that day when they may return to their land and live in freedom.

Unfortunately, some in the international community see fit to recognize Fidel Castro as a power with whom to negotiate and placate. We must remember one thing. Still, today, even in old age, he is a dangerous man. He is an enemy of freedom and has sought on many continents to suppress that throughout his entire career of leadership of his tyrannical government. He is a suppresser of faith, the ability of his people and peoples elsewhere to express their faith in God, to practice their religion and, ultimately, he is an enemy of the future, an enemy of freedom in this hemisphere of no greater value than anyone else.

On July 14, the government of France invited Castro to the French Embassy in Havana to celebrate Bastille Day, but courageous members of Cuba's democratic opposition were not invited, so they chose to peacefully protest the French decision. On the morning of the protest, Cuban security forces stormed the homes of those planning to demonstrate and arrested at least 20. This type of dictatorial behavior cannot be tolerated for any length of time whatsoever. Think about it: a dictator invited to a celebration of liberation of people and, at the same time, suppressing his own people from peacefully expressing their views. It is illogical and it is illogical for the French to accept this.

For too long, the international community has danced around Castro and his Communist state, while the people live in oppression or risk their lives attempting to escape. It is not just the 20 individuals who were simply planning to protest who were arrested. Protestant Christians in Cuba are facing new regulations on house churches that can restrict religious freedom.

In order to suppress one house church, I know personally of a case where a pastor was arrested on the pretext of practicing medicine without a license simply because he prayed for one of his parishioners in the house church.

Imagine for a moment a place where the government supervises church services, and if an agent of the government arbitrarily decides that the church is breaking government regulations, it can shut it down. Imagine also a place where the government say that two house churches of the same denomination cannot exist within a mile and a half of each other, and imagine a place where human rights activists are taken into custody for simply commemorating the tragic deaths of 35 people who were killed when the boat they were fleeing in was rammed by authorities. Imagine all of that, and you will be imagining Castro's Cuba.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this critical and important resolution for the message that it sends.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 485, I put my card in the machine but it didn't register my vote. Had it registered I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.

This tragedy is of grave proportions, as evidenced by the unprecedented meeting of the President's Cabinet here tonight, Mr. Speaker, who spent 3 hours with us discussing a wide range of responses from government agencies, of agencies of the State as well as the local level, but particularly looking at the response that was engendered by this.

I think the one thing that we can clearly say, looking at history, looking at this response and looking at others is there is no substitute for leadership and initiative, particularly on the front lines and in the local level; and there are countless stories of individuals and communities who rose to the occasion, ranging from mayors of small cities, pastors of churches, small business owners who all gave of themselves to make a tremendous difference, as the military and national response was able to come into an area that was devastated and largely inaccessible. I would point out that the response has been actually unprecedented in scale.

When we think about this, I would like to bring some perspective to my colleagues. No disaster, no natural disaster, has struck this Nation of the proportions that Hurricane Katrina has in terms of its devastation and its impact. Nearly 90,000 square miles were affected by this. That is an area approximately the size of Great Britain, approximately the size of the State of Wyoming. When we begin to look at that, I do not believe that there is any agency that had fully prepared or built the infrastructure for that level and certainly the city of New Orleans did not have the wherewithal, just the simple hydraulics and physics of it.

But the one thing that I want to point out is that people in neighborhoods rose to the occasion, individual citizens rose to the occasion. And many of my colleagues have risen to the occasion, abandoning the legislative role during that last week of the recess, working in everything from relief positions to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany), one of my colleagues, a physician, who helped in the start-up of hospitals, coordinating rescue operations from his district in Lafayette. I look at communities in the surrounding States and throughout the country who have responded with an incredible amount of magnanimity, of charity, of compassion, of love and outreach to see these people have a hope and an opportunity and a future.

In some ways, Mr. Speaker, I have to share candidly, as a former military professional, I was somewhat disappointed with some of the media coverage. I felt that it neglected many of the great works that were being performed by people in hidden places throughout the communities that were affected. Just as an aside, the Coast Guard rescued more people in the last week than four times what it would do in a typical year. That is simply remarkable, the ability to stage those resources in there and begin that response. When I look at the amount of rescues that have had to be performed for nearly 60,000 people who were trapped on rooftops and structures, public safety professionals, military professionals, National Guard resources from all over the United States are pouring in. Even before the storm hit, resources were being mustered around the United States, even from our own fourth district.

The day after the storm, I ran into early Tuesday morning a convoy of vehicles from our own Owen Electric Cooperative that had been on two prior hurricane responses and were on their way to lower Mississippi to the central staging area. There was a concerted response of private groups, of public groups coming together to deal with the tragedy whose magnitude no one could have imagined.

For a week now, we have watched the heartbreaking scenes of death and destruction in Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana. So many people left homeless, left without anything except the clothes they were wearing and one or two precious items that they could grab as the flood waters deluged their homes. As we grieve over this unimaginable horror, we have also watched in unmistakable awe ordinary people who have opened their hearts, their homes, their pocketbooks to these storm victims. Families who have little to spare themselves are taking in entire families of strangers simply because someone else is in need. This is the American way of selflessness and generosity. There is no ulterior motive, no agenda; and there is nothing but the simple desire to help, to lend a hand, to reinforce the dignity of every individual who is affected by this great tragedy.

The city of Houston, Texas, has done something unprecedented. And I point out that in the tsunami and in other disasters in other parts of the world no country, no people have ever responded with the level of outpouring of response of individuals to local, State

and Federal Government agencies as we have seen in the last 7 days. I think that is an important point of perspective that we keep in mind. The level of this tragedy was equal in magnitude to any of the countries that were hit by the tsunami, and when we look at the response of our people here, it has been simply phenomenal from a perspective of infrastructure.

In that outpouring in Houston alone, 225,000 people have been received into that city. The people of Texas have set an example of compassion and leadership. Other States around the country are receiving people, colleges, universities, communities, homeless shelters even. And I look at that, and I see in virtually every State, all of our States along the Ohio Valley, where I live, are seeing the same level of compassion. It has been simply overwhelming. They have responded to a grave situation by giving hope, by giving opportunity, and helping communities to ultimately reestablish while the water is being removed, while an infrastructure that no longer exists is being put back in place.

Things that are important to remember from a standpoint affecting the entire country as we are dealing with the human tragedies, we are dealing with the health care issues, as we are providing refuge for those who are affected by this storm, crews from industry, from the private sector, from our national security organizations have responded. By the end of this week, our national refineries in the gulf will be back at 95 percent of production. That is a tremendous statement.

Our pipelines are going to be open again to make sure that that critical infrastructure is working. The on-water transit capability is going to be back in operation very shortly, and hopefully, we will see that port open up. Why that is so important is restoring normalcy and restoring employment, vocation, jobs and restarting that market economy and rebuilding the foundations of those communities over time.

I think it is also important to remember what the national response is. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, it took nearly 6 months to stage the 250,000 troops into Iraq, including the infrastructure that they needed, only crossing one major water obstacle, a river with most of the bridges intact. As of tomorrow, there will be nearly 50,000 soldiers in the disaster area, mobilized in less than 1 week. That, again, is a testimony to the resourcefulness of the response and capability of our military, of our National Guard, and I think they need to be commended for what they are doing. Our first responders have done an outstanding job. Many are overwhelmed, out of resources, are taking the initiative to do the things that are necessary to make sure that lives can be saved, that people can be kept healthy.

In my district, Kentucky's Fourth, the largest medical center, St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Florence, recently sent about 15 medical personnel, including a dozen nurses and two pallets of medical supplies to a staging center in Louisiana. St. Luke's Hospital, also in Florence, also sent medical personnel to the Gulf Coast. And my church, Grace Evangelical Free Church, is sending its third truckload of supplies to the region this weekend.

Last Tuesday morning, as I mentioned, the utilities crews that were heading south, not to mention truckloads of equipment that passed through my district on I-75 headed toward the disaster areas. We have seen vehicles coming from as far away as Canada, but from all over the United States, that are converging to provide the resources to help stabilize that situation and rebuild it. This is a beacon of outstanding response. There is no perfect response to any unpredictable situation, but I want to look at and commend the adaptability of our people who have responded on the scene and those who have opened their pocketbooks, opened their resources and lent their hands from around the United States.

The city of Covington, Kentucky, sent a truck loaded with water, sports drinks and other provisions to its unofficial sister city of Covington, Louisiana. There was a report of a woman who arrived in Covington in a beat-up car and who was described in a newspaper report as not looking ``like she had a penny to spend,'' but she brought $100 worth of supplies because she simply cared. Covington City officials were also waiting to learn how many people would be traveling to their area of northern Kentucky for temporary housing. Northern Kentucky University is reaching out to take in as many students as it possibly can. Communities around our district, as with many, many congressional districts around this country, are responding with an openness and a charity that I think sets an example of brotherly love and compassion that honors the spirit of our founders in this country.

Then, there is Mike Detzel and Dave Yeazell who loaded up a van with 3,900 bottles of water and drove south from Florence, Kentucky, to Slidell, Louisiana. Prior to making this trip, Mr. Yeazell gave money to the Red Cross and Mr. Detzel and his wife offered spare rooms in their homes to the evacuees. But like so many others, they wanted to do more.

One of the things I have always admired most about our country is our willingness to give and to want to help. We respond to international tragedies with such an outpouring of generosity that we are left breathless by the momentum. And now that we have been hit here at home by a tragedy of almost biblical proportions, it seems there are no boundaries to the generosity of our people and the response from around the United States.

As difficult as this time is for the storm's victims, we must approach this carefully and orderly to be sure that the supplies reach the people who need them the most. People in the disaster areas need to know they are cared about; there is concern and outpouring from around this Nation; and this country will not let up until every person is found; and no one will be left behind.

We also have to give thought to the Housing issues in the long term to those who have lost their homes in the wake of this deadly storm. So many cities throughout this nation are taking in evacuees on what is being called a temporary basis. Mobile home manufacturers in our area are responding with upgraded production and, in many cases, donated mobile homes to be sent into the disaster areas, as is happening around the country. There is a long-term need for housing, for schools, that needs to be addressed, and it will be addressed by this body as well as local governments, and it must be addressed sooner rather than later.

I think those of us who are in a decision-making position who have not been directly impacted by this tragedy have overcome our initial shock. We are past denying that it is not going to turn out as badly as we think. The harsh reality is it turned out much worse than anyone could have imagined or frankly could have planned for. Now we need to focus on long-term solutions for the evacuees, the survivors and rebuilding the region and the economy and the communities that these people have spent their lives building prior to this impact.

I think, in the long term, the ultimate benefit of this is going to be a great demonstration of the American spirit, Mr. Speaker, but also along those same lines, in this new world that we live in today, the silver lining in this is going to be a response to potential great disasters that could befall this country. God forbid they ever happen, but the lessons that we should learn out of this will provide the wisdom, the knowledge, the planning infrastructure to respond to far greater threats that may emerge in the future.

I thank the gentleman for the opportunity to share. I appreciate his leadership on this issue and his ability to put this together on such short notice.