Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Northern Virginia Black Chamber of Commerce and to congratulate those members who are being honored for their contributions to the business and local communities.

The Northern Virginia Black Chamber of Commerce (NVBCC) is a vibrant organization dedicated to the growth and development of African- American owned businesses in the City of Alexandria and the counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William. The Chamber provides leadership, strategic information, technical assistance, networking opportunities, and other support to more than 120 member partners, helping to ensure the growth and success of their businesses. In addition, the NVBCC actively supports area non-profits in efforts to increase the financial literacy and leadership capability of school- aged children in our area.

Each year, the NVBCC recognizes its members for their extraordinary success and contributions to the Chamber and our community. It is my honor to enter the names of the following 2012 Business Honor Award recipients into the Congressional Record:

Outstanding Emerging Business: Nationwide Insurance--The Brad Ryant Insurance Agency

Business of the Year: Valley Green Landscaping

Outstanding Corporate Partner: Intelligent Office of Alexandria

Outstanding Community Partner: Alexandria-Fairfax County Alumni Chapter of Kappa Alpha Psi, Inc.

Member of the Year: Kim de Peiza, Key Concepts Knowlegebase, LLC

Member of the Year: Isaac Lewis, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney

Outstanding Public Partner: Fairfax County Economic Development Authority

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the 2012 Business Honor Award recipients and in thanking each of them for their efforts to strengthen our local business economy and for their commitment to building a stronger community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Wynfred Joshua, one of the 2012 recipients of the Defense Intelligence Agency's Torch Bearers Award. This award is presented to individuals who have made significant and lasting contribution to defense intelligence and whose performance also embodies the agency's core values and principles.

One of the first defense intelligence officers at DIA, Dr. Joshua retired in February of 1998 after 24 years of dedicated service. An expert on the Soviet Union and strategic nuclear capabilities, Dr. Joshua was a guiding force for DIA analytic teams throughout the Cold War era. Dr. Joshua was known throughout the intelligence community as a person of immense honesty, intelligence, and reliability.

Dr. Joshua's leadership and teaching ability also helped conserve our Nation's precious public resources. She developed and implemented a successful program to improve DIA's role in supporting the National Defense University. Her contributions not only enhanced the DIA's status within the Intelligence Community, but also provided the critical intelligence assessments that shaped our national military strategy. Dr. Joshua's dedication to DIA, the Intelligence Community, and the United States is a testament to her integrity, unwavering professionalism, and commitment to excellence.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Dr. Wynfred Joshua and thanking her for her 24 years of service and selfless dedication to the defense of our country. Her distinguished service has greatly contributed to the advancement and prestige of our Nation's intelligence capabilities.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Ilene Gillispie, of the Alexandria

portion of Fairfax County, a 2012 State Department Critical Language Scholarship (CLS) recipient. Ilene was selected for this competitive award based on her academic ability, exemplary citizenship, and her commitment to learning and mastering a foreign language of critical importance.

While studying in Chandigarh, India, Ilene studied at the Punjabi Summer Institute and focused on creating a strong foundation for both her language fluency and her cultural competency. She participated in daily educational activities and built relationships with young leaders from all over the world with a focus on the Punjabi language, one of the thirteen ``critical needs'' foreign languages determined by the Department of State. The CLS program--a key component of the National Security Language Initiative--provides fully-funded, group-based, language instruction and structured cultural enrichment experiences to U.S. students overseas. The accelerated program of study over 8-10 weeks is approximately equivalent to one full year of language study, and includes extracurricular activities designed to supplement the formal curriculum.

Ilene is a student at the New College of Florida. It is inspiring to see young people who are interested in international educational and developmental experiences such as these. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleges to join me in recognizing Ilene Gillispie's achievements and wishing her continued success in her academic and professional pursuits.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Amanda Michette, of Springfield, as a 2012 State Department Critical Language Scholarship (CLS) recipient. Amanda was selected for this competitive award based on her academic ability and her commitment to learning and mastering a foreign language of critical importance.

While studying in Amman, Jordan, she was a participant in the Arabic Summer institute and focused on improving both her language fluency and her cultural competency. The CLS program--a key component of the National Security Language Initiative--provides fully-funded, group- based, intensive language instruction and structured cultural enrichment experiences to U.S. students overseas. The accelerated program of study over 8-10 weeks is approximately equivalent to one full year of language study, and includes extracurricular activities designed to supplement the formal curriculum.

Amanda is a student at James Madison University. It is inspiring to see young people who are interested in international education and developmental experiences such as these. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleges to join me in recognizing Amanda Michette's achievements and wishing her continued success in her academic and professional pursuits.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Benjamin Bissell, of Fairfax Station, as a recipient of the 2012 State Department Critical Language Scholarship (CLS) and a participant in the CLS Russian program.

The CLS Program, created in 2006 as a key component of the National Security Language Initiative, has had more than 3,350 participants who have acquired specific skill sets in business and language, as well as cultural perspectives unique to their experiences. The CLS Russian program covers approximately one academic year of university-level Russian study over an eight-week period. Mr. Bissell, a fourth year student at the University of Virginia, studied in Vladimir, Russia, for the entirety of the program.

Mr. Bissell followed his passion for politics in demography and linguistics, specifically Russian, which led him to the program. With his admirable determination to learn more about the international impact of demography, and to enhance his cultural experiences and knowledge, he successfully completed the program and was awarded this outstanding scholarship.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Benjamin Bissell's achievements and wishing him continued success in his future academic and professional pursuits.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Washington Regional Alcohol Program (WRAP) and to congratulate it on the occasion of its 30th anniversary.

Founded in 1982, WRAP is an award winning, public-private coalition formed to fight drunk driving, drugged driving, and underage drinking in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. Through educational and innovative public programs, WRAP is credited with keeping Washington area alcohol related death rates consistently below the national average. Programs and resources include Youth Outreach, Adult Outreach, and Public Education programs designed to educate students and the general public on the dangers of alcohol and drugs, particularly driving while under the influence. Through the WRAP Holiday SoberRide program, individuals who are impaired can request a free cab ride home. Since SoberRide was launched in 1993, 55,851 free cab rides have been provided, preventing possible accidents and deaths.

In 1982, the year that WRAP was founded, 26,173 people in the United States lost their lives in alcohol-related car accidents; 60% of all traffic fatalities involved drunk driving. Due to the tireless efforts of WRAP, other organizations such as MADD and SADD, local and state police, and enforcement of more stringent anti-drunk driving laws, alcohol-related traffic fatalities decreased to 9,878.

Since 1997, WRAP has sponsored an annual Law Enforcement Awards Ceremony to honor local law enforcement professionals who have gone above and beyond the call of duty in the fight against drunk driving. It is my honor to enter the following names of the 2012 Law Enforcement Award of Excellence recipients into the Congressional Record:

Officer Brandon Smith, City of Alexandria Police Department

Officer Avery Carroll, Arlington County Police Department

Police Officer Harold Morris, Fairfax County Police

Department

Deputy Alexander Brackle, Loudoun County Sheriff's Office

Trooper John W. Cabrera, Maryland State Police

Officer Roderick Saunders, Metropolitan Police Department

Police Officer John Romack, Montgomery County Department of

Police

Corporal Christopher Lord, Prince George's County Police

Department

Police Officer Jeremy A. Schenck, Prince William County

Police Department

Officer Ronald Pisano, United States Park Police

Senior Trooper Michael S. Middleton, Virginia State Police

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating the recipients of the 2012 Law Enforcement Award of Excellence and in recognizing WRAP for its 30 years of public service. I commend the staff of WRAP under the leadership of President Kurt Erickson for their tireless dedication to eradicating underage drinking and drunk driving. Their efforts combined with the support of partner organizations and law enforcement agencies have truly saved lives and are deserving of our highest praise and gratitude.

Mr. Speaker, we are about to have a hold- your-nose vote here in the House of Representatives. And many of us are going to wrestle with the problem of making perfect the enemy of the good.

We do have an opportunity to stabilize taxation for 99 percent of all Americans, to extend depreciation and investment expansion for small businesses, to make sure that families in America, through the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit, and student loans, are stabilized for their planning in calendar year 2013. The R&D tax credit is extended. So there's a lot in this package that's good.

And there's a lot that's not addressed at all in this package. We have a debt ceiling crisis pending. We have a sequestration crisis spending. It must be addressed, or it's going to have a huge drag on the United States economy, and in the case of the debt, once again, revisit the issue of default for the first time in American history.

So it's not a perfect package, but it is something that gets us by while we tackle the larger issues in the next Congress. I pray God that next Congress is more willing to compromise than this.

Mr. Speaker, in order to allow the author of the bill to speak, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill, H.R. 6726, which seeks to extend the pay freeze on the dedicated men and women of our civil service for the third consecutive year.

This is a pig in a poke.

From the outset, let me be clear. I strongly support freezing the salaries of Members of Congress. I've signed a letter to do that. And if this bill did only that, I would be an original cosponsor. But it doesn't. The Senate last night did just that. It froze our salaries. But it didn't do this. It didn't extend that freeze for a third year to the men and women who serve our country in Federal service.

The bill before us today, which cynically pairs a pay freeze for us in Congress with a continuation of the pay freeze on career civil servants, is yet another tired, duplicative, and cheap shot at our Nation's dedicated Federal workforce. It's one last parting shot in the dying days of this Congress, which cannot die too soon.

If Members of Congress and the public simply take a look at the scoreboard, they'll see that, with respect to the deficit reduction, Federal workers not only have borne a disproportionate share of the cost, they've virtually borne the only share of the cost. Federal employees have contributed already $103 billion toward deficit reduction through an extended pay freeze that continues to this day-- and benefit cuts.

For example, Federal workers have contributed $60 billion towards deficit reduction as a result of the 2-year pay freeze covering 2011 and 2012. The recent pay freeze extension through March of this year adds another $28 billion. This total also includes the $15 billion contribution that will be made by Federal new hires who, starting next year, will see their pay decrease by 2.3 percent as contributions to their pensions are raised compared to current civil servants, with no commensurate increase in benefits. Meanwhile, this inequity is amplified when one compares the financial sacrifice made by our dedicated civil service to the deficit reduction contributions made by millionaires and billionaires over the past 2 years.

I might add, as if it weren't enough, my friends on the Republican side of the aisle actually tried for the first time to finance transit in America--in a transportation bill that died an ignominious and well- deserved death--$50 billion by having these same pension benefit cuts on existing civil servants, which would have added $50 billion

more to the deficit reduction cost only apportioned to Federal workers. Meanwhile, if I'm not mistaken, compared to the $103 billion deficit reduction contribution by Federal employees, the deficit reduction sacrifices--that shared sacrifice my friend from Pennsylvania referred to--has demanded of millionaires and billionaires adds up to a grand total of zero. Yet, despite these facts, there are still some attempting to squeeze even more deficit reduction out of Federal workers, even as they seek to protect the millionaires and billionaires who have yet to make any contribution to debt reduction in this country.

Republicans in the 112th Congress have treated Federal employees like America's piggybank, dipping into pay and benefits to help pay for everything from the payroll tax cut to unemployment benefits to transit in the transportation bill.

Federal employees are on the front line of communities throughout America. They defend America. They serve side-by-side with our military in theaters of war. They put out fires. They process Social Security checks. They deal with the sick and they deal with our children. They protect our borders. I strongly oppose any attempt to cut benefits and wages that Federal employees have earned by providing essential services to all Americans.

Given the very small share of the Federal budget represented by Federal employees' salaries, further reducing their pay and benefits is not rational and not an effective way to reduce our Nation's debt. It's picking on them.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

I must say I appreciate the gentlelady's points about cynicism. But Federal workers and the American public might be forgiven for thinking that it is cynical to be decrying a last-minute deal necessitated by the fact that the House has been out for 15 of the last 19 weeks in recess instead of doing its business here on the House floor, which is why we're here today.

By the way, I also want to appreciate, because I know it wasn't a cheap shot, and I know that the distinguished chairman of the committee was trying to inform me of the fact that a bill I was not aware of was introduced yesterday. If there is a clean bill introduced by my friends from Minnesota and Pennsylvania simply to freeze congressional salaries, I'm only too happy to cosponsor it. I know that will reassure my friend, the chairman of the committee.

I now yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

I would inquire of the Chair how much time remains on this side.

Mr. Speaker, I would simply observe to my friend, the chairman of the committee, in talking about the 11 percent cut here in the House of Representatives, of course that does not address the lack of productivity here in the House. There are many Americans who might think that that cut is deserved given how little got accomplished in the 112th Congress--one of the least productive Congresses in American history.

I would normally yield, but I would remind my friend, Mr. Speaker, that he would not yield to me when he made his comments about cosponsorship of the piece of legislation, and so I reluctantly will not yield.

I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).

Mr. Speaker, before I call on the distinguished Member from Virginia, I would simply note, of course, the productivity I talk about is the productivity of this legislative body, not the honorable men and women who serve us, but for us.

And we passed a fewer number of bills in living memory. We have been out for 15 weeks since August instead of doing the people's business. That is one of the least productive records in American history, and no words are going to change that, not in the history books and not in the minds of the American public that is showing its disapproval of that productivity with the low approval ratings of this Congress.

I now am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished Member from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I have an inquiry. How much time remains on this side?

If I may inquire, Mr. Speaker, if my colleague on the other side has any other speakers?

I'm prepared to wrap up and yield back, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I'm worried about the future of the Federal workforce's continued denigration of public service. Continued whacking away at compensation and benefits that make it an attractive career choice for so many young people is going to make it much harder to recruit and retain the skilled workforce of the future. And despite what my colleague just indicated--I'm not quite sure where he got his statistics--the Federal Salary Council, which looks at Federal salaries every year, concluded that Federal employees earned, in 2011, 26.3 percent less than their private sector counterparts and, this year, 34.6 percent less. A CBO study found that people in the Federal workforce with a Ph.D. degree earn 23 percent less than their private sector counterparts, and if you had a bachelor's degree, roughly 23 percent less, and only in the high school level did

they actually earn more, 21 percent more.

Actually, we've got a problem. As we look at the baby boom generation getting ready to retire, 47 percent of the entire existing workforce is eligible for retirement over this next decade. How will we recruit and retain that workforce if we're going to continue to use them not only as a piggy bank to finance the deficit, but perhaps more disgracefully as a punching bag in terms of disparagement of service? We are far away from John Kennedy's call to serve your country.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to join with the distinguished chairman in support of S. 3662 to name a postal facility in Westminster, Massachusetts, as the Lieutenant Ryan Patrick Jones Post Office Building.

I too join in sorrow at the necessity of having to take this action because of the loss of a promising young life. One can only hope that taking this action will actually provide comfort to his parents and to his family and to his broader community given their terrible loss.

We salute the honor and patriotism of Mr. Jones, who was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army, and we honor his sacrifice and his service to his country.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I am pleased again to join with the distinguished chairman in support of S. 3630. Again, we are honoring service to country. We are honoring bravery and the ultimate sacrifice by a young American, Captain Rhett W. Schiller. I think it is fitting that we do rename a post office to honor the bravery and the sacrifice. Again, I hope to provide comfort to the friends and family members of the late Captain Schiller in this action.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, the start of a new year is supposed to be a joyous occasion. It is time to reflect on the past year, to take pride in our accomplishments and learn from our stumbles. There's a novel thought.

Similarly, the start of a new Congress offers us an opportunity to look forward with hope and aspiration for the opportunity to work together--again, a novel thought--to deliver on behalf of those who have put their trust in us.

Let's not pull the rug out from underneath both of those things before they've even had a chance to begin. The start of the new year and the new Congress do not have to be colored by the partisanship that's characterized the past year. There is a last-minute absolution to be had if we can seize the spirit of the season and do that which we have done all too little of this past year: compromise, come together.

Let's ring in the new year with a fix, albeit a modest one, of the fiscal cliff and start off our new year and new Congress with a proper welcome for our constituents and our colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3159, as amended, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me start first by thanking my distinguished colleague from Texas (Mr. Poe) for his leadership on this legislation. He and his staff have worked tirelessly to address a range of technical issues so that this bill could be considered under suspension.

H.R. 3159 is an important first step in bringing greater rationality and oversight to the foreign aid process. It contains two fundamental reforms to make our programs more efficient, more effective, and better at serving our national interests.

The first is to strengthen monitoring and evaluation so that we can be sure our aid is performing as intended. Right now we make most of our aid decisions in the dark. We set budgets year after year without having any idea necessarily what the outcomes might be. This bill requires the President to establish a consistent set of guidelines so that all Federal agencies carrying out development assistance will set measurable goals, establish indicators, monitor results, and evaluate impact. We can make much better decisions about how and where to invest our scarce resources once we know which types of programs are the most cost-effective and produce the best results.

The second reform is to increase aid transparency so that everyone can see where we're spending the money and why. There are all too many misperceptions about the size of the foreign aid budget and exactly what it does. This bill will address that.

It also requires the President to establish and maintain an Internet Web site that makes comprehensive and timely information accessible to the public.

Similar reforms are included in comprehensive foreign aid reform legislation recently introduced by the current ranking member of our committee, Mr. Berman, and myself. They were also included in the State Department authorization bills passed by the full House under the leadership of our outgoing chairwoman, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, in 2009, and reported by the Foreign Affairs Committee in 2011. Both times, these provisions were adopted with strong bipartisan support.

The administration also recognizes the need for these types of changes. They've created the Foreign Assistance Dashboard, a Web site that provides accessible and easy-to-understand data about our aid programs. Both the Millennium Challenge Corporation and USAID have put into place their own rigorous evaluation policies.

This bill will ensure that all Federal agencies carrying out development programs will adhere to the same high standards, and at a time when there are so many issues that divide our parties and our Nation, I think this is one that we can come together on. Again, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

[From The Hill, Dec. 12, 2012]

Overhaul of U.S. Foreign Aid is Overdue

(By Reps. Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) and Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.))

At a time when competing government priorities face the

chopping block, advocates of effective foreign aid have a

responsibility to make the case that aid directly serves our

country's long-term national-security and economic interests,

and in a cost-effective way.

A key goal of foreign aid is to make the right investments

that reinforce America's priorities. Unfortunately, the

current foreign aid process and the underlying statute are

encrusted with legislative barnacles built up over half a

century that are messy, conflicting and outdated, and that

actually hinder our ability to deliver foreign aid

effectively and efficiently.

It is time for a complete overhaul. The 21st century

requires a foreign aid program that recognizes today's

priorities and streamlines the process in the post-Cold War

era. For instance, do we still need language in current law,

passed in 1961, that requires the president to assure

Congress that foreign aid recipients are not ``controlled by

the international Communist conspiracy''?

The many task forces and policy committees that have

examined U.S. foreign aid have cited the myriad goals,

objectives and priorities contained in the Foreign Assistance

Act of 1961. The Center for Global Development, for example,

identified more than 33 major objectives, 75 priorities and

247 directives relating to foreign aid in the act. And all of

this for a miniscule piece of the federal budget. Little

wonder, then, that we lack any central focus to our effort

and even less of an ability to measure its effectiveness.

The Global Partnerships Act of 2012 (H.R. 6644) replaces

this byzantine labyrinth of priorities by identifying eight

concise goals for development assistance. The legislation

simplifies the bureaucracy administering foreign aid by

restoring the U.S. Agency for International Development's

policy and budget functions and clarifies the roles and

relationships of key officials involved in its delivery.

In addition, the Global Partnerships Act tackles problems

like the lack of transparency, accountability and oversight

in the system. It requires the maintenance of an online

database of information, easily accessible by the public,

with complete information about all forms of U.S. foreign

assistance, including an unclassified database on security

assistance. This online database would provide detailed

information on overhead and administrative costs for overseas

projects, ensuring that U.S. taxpayers get the most out of

their investment.

Opponents of foreign aid say that aid programs amount to

little more than handouts. But the purpose of foreign

assistance, as President Obama has insisted, must be to

create the conditions where it's no longer needed. To do

this, our programs should aim to build indigenous capacity in

various sectors, with the ultimate goals of country ownership

and self-reliance. The Global Partnerships Act emphasizes the

importance of country ownership by transforming the donor-

recipient relationship to one of partners working toward

mutually agreed-upon and beneficial goals.

Many believe that foreign assistance is a luxury we can no

longer afford in an era of tight budgets and fiscal

challenges. They perpetuate the misconception that foreign

aid encompasses a massive portion of the federal budget. In

reality, this assistance amounts to only about 1 percent of

federal spending.

Moreover, foreign aid is a critical component of our

national-security strategy, which includes three key pillars:

defense, diplomacy and development. National-security experts

and military leaders frequently extol the importance of

foreign aid, recognizing, as former Defense Secretary Robert

Gates once said, that ``economic development is a lot cheaper

than sending soldiers.''

It is critical that the United States modernize its foreign

aid policies and maintain its foreign aid investments. It is

also critical that we establish metrics to gauge the efficacy

of those investments. There are other countries ready and

willing to fill the vacuum that we will leave behind.

Foreign assistance is a critical tool in the diplomatic

toolkit. A great power must have the tools to act--beyond

simply intervening militarily. A streamlined, effective

foreign aid template can enhance U.S. values and influence in

a dangerous world and help avoid the enormous costs in blood

and treasure that inevitably result from military

intervention.

While admittedly some of our foreign aid investments have

been ineffectively deployed in the field over the years, it

is beyond dispute that foreign assistance has dramatically

lowered infant mortality rates, raised hundreds of millions

of people from poverty, extended longevity, created

employment and fostered democratic institutions in every

corner of the world. Its return is well worth the investment.

I have no other speakers. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support of S.J. Res. 44, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

This resolution provides the consent of Congress for a Memorandum of Understanding reached among a number U.S. states and Canadian provinces to provide for mutual assistance in managing an emergency or disaster.

This MOU, which includes states in the upper Midwest and the provinces of central Canada, is very similar to existing cross-border agreements in the Northeast and Pacific Northwest.

These agreements provide for the sharing of personnel, equipment and other resources in an emergency or disaster, whether natural or man- made.

In the past, they have provided a framework for U.S. crews to help their Canadian counterparts clear roads after blizzards and to deploy search and rescue teams.

Mr. Speaker, as all of us know, disasters do not respect political boundaries, and it is in our interest to allow our states to coordinate emergency preparedness efforts with our close friends and allies to the north.

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

Now it's Newtown, 20 innocents and their six teachers. More tears, more burials, but will we heed its meaning? Will we break the gun lobby spell that has held us in thrall to a psychosis that has left us numb and paralyzed with each passing tragedy? I think so.

First step in any recovery program: admit the problem. We have too many weapons with too much ammunition that is unregulated, unchecked, and unjustified. We need to restore rigorous background checks to keep dangerous weapons away from criminals and the mentally ill. We need to close the gun show loophole. We need to facilitate database sharing among law enforcement agencies--Federal, State, and local.

Next step: limit access to weapons of mass killing. No hunter needs an Uzi; no citizen needs an assault-style weapon for self-defense. No other civilized society has allowed the argument that any restriction of any kind is a direct assault on our personal liberty, except us.

Next: require registration and stiff penalties for failure to secure dangerous weapons in the home or workplace while banning their presence in a select number of public places such as churches, police stations, mental health facilities, recreation and youth centers, government buildings, and--oh, yes--schools.

The gun lobby has bullied and intimidated us for too long. Reasonable gun control measures like those just listed provide for public safety; they don't threaten it. The lobby loves to fall back on trite mantras that unfortunately have proved all too effective in silencing any meaningful public debate heretofore: ``Guns don't kill; people do.'' ``Any restriction real or imagined contravenes my Second Amendment rights to bear arms.''

Oh, really?

Even Justice Scalia, in writing his unprecedented and deeply flawed Heller opinion, acknowledged that it did not preclude reasonable gun control measures. Even Scalia has had to admit in his originalist interpretation of the Second Amendment he cannot answer whether the Constitution envisioned a universal right to possess rocket launchers, RPGs, stinger missiles, or military assault weapons in our homes. That is the logical fallacy and folly of the argument of unrestricted rights to bear arms without limit. Its proponents allow for no check on this right in the Constitution. Even the First Amendment has limitations. So does this one.

We've been lulled into a passivity and fatalism with the logical fallacies and sometimes thuggish tactics of the gun lobby and its extreme right-wing allies at a terrible cost. Each year, guns kill

almost 10 times the number of Americans lost on that tragic day in 9/ 11; and each year, we face another massacre: Aurora, Tucson, Virginia Tech, and now Newtown.

Time for our outrage to return us to action and reshape this gun culture. It is in our hands.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize and commend David J. Robertson on the occasion of his retirement from the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, where he has served with distinction for the past 26 years, culminating in his appointment as executive director a decade ago.

The Council of Governments functions as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the National Capital Region, and it is comprised of 21 regional governments representing Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia. COG and its leadership play a key role in coordinating the regional response on issues ranging from Chesapeake Bay preservation to affordable housing and from homeland security to transportation planning. Those activities are financed by the member jurisdictions, federal and state grants, and private sector funds.

Dave has been a mainstay at COG, where he began as a regional planner in 1986. Throughout his tenure, Dave has held a series of roles, both technical and managerial, and prior to being named executive director, he was head of COG's Department of Human Services, Planning and Public Safety. In a region with overlapping local, state, and federal interests and competition, Dave has proven adept at keeping the organization's staff and membership focused on the mission of addressing our shared challenges to improve the lives of our collective constituents.

It was my great pleasure to serve on the GOC board of directors while I was a member of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors. I also chaired the COG board in 2000 and collaborated with Dave on a number of projects, including my initiative to increase telework among the regional governments. In addition, I chaired COG's Emergency Preparedness Council, where Dave was instrumental in coordinating response and preparedness efforts not only among the local governments, but also with the states and the federal government, which is no small task as each major weather incident or natural disaster reminds us.

In addition to his role at COG, Dave also served on a number of regional organizations, including the American Red Cross of the National Capital Region, the Greater Washington Board of Trade, the American Planning Association, the International City/County Management Association, and the Washington Region for Justice and Inclusion.

Prior to his tenure with COG, Dave worked for the National Association of Home Builders and former member of Congress David Bonior of Michigan. He received a Master of Urban Planning degree from George Washington University, and also holds a Bachelor's degree from Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Dave Robertson on his many accomplishments and thanking him for his tremendous service to the Council of Governments and the National Capital Region. Thanks to Dave's leadership, we spent more time focusing on those challenges that unite, rather than divide us, and that continues to serve as a lesson for us all to follow. We wish Dave the best of luck in his future endeavors.