Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, it is with deep sadness that I inform the House of the death of the Most Reverend Bishop Michael F. McAuliffe of Jefferson City, MO.

McAuliffe was born on November 22, 1920, in Kansas City, Kansas, son of John and Bridget McAuliffe. His education included the St. John High School Seminary in Kansas City, St Louis' Preparatory Seminary and the Theological College of Catholic University of America in Washington, DC. On May 31, 1945, he was ordained a priest. In 1954, he earned a doctorate in Sacred Theology.

He served many parishes and education assignments. One of these assignments was superintendent of the diocesan schools in the Kansas City area. On July 2, 1969, Pope Paul VI appointed McAuliffe as the second Bishop of Jefferson City. He served in this position for 28 years. During his tenure, he had an active interest in parochial education. Approximately 13 years ago, he started the Diocesan Excellence in Education Fund.

McAuliffe retired in 1995, at age 75, but remained the bishop until Pope John Paul II appointed the current bishop in 1997.

Mr. Speaker, the Most Reverend Bishop Michael McAuliffe was a valuable leader in both the church and his community. I know the members of the House will join me in extending heartfelt condolences to his friends and family.

Mr. Speaker, it has come to my attention that a long and exceptionally distinguished career in public service has come to a close. Mr. Fred Siems has retired from his position as Blue Springs city administrator.

In 1978, Siems became the first professional city administrator in Blue Springs. He served in this position for 27 years, overseeing the city's growth from approximately 10,000 to almost 52,000 people. He retired at the end of December 2005 as Missouri's longest-serving city administrator in one city.

During his tenure, he was honored with the Mid-America Regional Council leadership award. The International City/County Management Association recognized him as its outstanding city administrator.

Mr. Fred Siems has distinguished himself as a community leader. I am certain that my colleagues will join me in wishing Fred and his family all the best in the days to come.

Mr. Speaker, thousands of Americans have lost their

lives and billions of U.S. dollars have been spent in the war in Iraq. This war has dangerously overstretched our military and preoccupied our country for almost 3 years now, and it still has no end in sight.

And after all this, what a tragedy and disaster it will be if the real winner in this war is not the Iraqi people nor a more secure and democratic Middle East but rather Iran, a country that supports terrorism and opposes most of what we stand for. Yet today this possible scenario is exactly what we face.

Iran has used our preoccupation in Iraq to its advantage. While we have searched for nonexistent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Iran has pursued its own nuclear ambitions. Now, with its decision to resume uranium enrichment, Iran is dangerously closer to having the capability to produce nuclear weapons. And press reports today link Iran's supposedly peaceful nuclear program to its military work on high explosives and missiles.

At the same time, Iran has deeply insinuated itself in Iraq. It has taken advantage of Iraq's porous borders and is supporting anti- American efforts there. Its goal is to promote a Shiite-dominated anti- American state that can strengthen Iran's military, economic and political power in the region.

But even before its latest nuclear pursuits and involvement in Iraq, Iran's actions have been seriously troubling. It has pursued dangerous chemical, biological, and ballistic missile capabilities; supported terrorists; and undermined the Middle East peace process.

Amidst all of this, Iran's leaders have escalated their anti-Semitic rhetoric, threatening to wipe Israel off the map.

Yet, rather than handle Iran's nuclear situation and involvement in Iraq early and decisively with a sophisticated policy that also addresses the broader problems posed by the country, this administration largely relied on the Europeans to sort this thing out. As a result, the nuclear situation is now an international crisis, and we risk having a radical anti-American regime armed with nuclear weapons entrenched as the dominant power in the Middle East.

We simply cannot let this happen. Iran must not acquire a nuclear weapon. It must respect Iraq's sovereignty, and it must become a constructive member of the international community. While cooperation with our allies and strategic partners is critical, the U.S. must take the lead here. The agreement brokered by Secretary Rice this week to report Iran to the U.N. Security Council is encouraging, but action by the council is uncertain and may not resolve the nuclear crisis or much else. The administration must put forth the necessary plan, and Congress must do its part. Today, the House Armed Services Committee held a hearing on this matter and will do more.

There are no simple answers or easy solutions, but one thing is clear: the administration, with Congress, must be more engaged and must get this right. Other countries will be closely watching this situation, and there are serious implications for the security of our Nation, stability in the Middle East and the nonproliferation regime.

We must address the immediate nuclear crisis, but we must also account for the complexity of the situation and broader, long-term issues involved; and we must consider all tools at our disposal. Yet there are limits to what we can accomplish militarily, and sweeping sanctions could cause more harm than good. Still, there are many tools available that this administration has, unfortunately, failed to utilize effectively or at all.

Here are some of them: we should actively support the IAEA's efforts. We should pursue more focused and vigorous diplomacy and encourage China, Russia, and India to play key roles. We should develop necessary human intelligence capabilities.

We should cultivate U.S. support among the Iranian population and substantially increase democracy promotion efforts that encourage the population to demand more moderate leadership. Specifically, we should increase communication through TV, radio, and the Internet. We should convey a coordinated U.S. policy. We should widely disseminate information about the regime's repression and corruption. We should provide effective assistance to Iranian dissidents and pro-democracy NGOs here in the United States.

We should increase cultural, academic, and professional opportunities for Iran's youth and women. Additionally, we should consider ``smart sanctions,'' as well as incentives that would target Iran's leadership, avoid harming the Iranian population and have strong international support. For example, we should sanction overseas assets of corrupt leaders.

Also, we should encourage Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah, which Iran uses to reject power. We should limit Iran's ability to disrupt oil and gas supplies and increase energy prices. This includes reducing the vulnerability of Middle Eastern energy resources to Iranian-backed terrorist attacks and decreasing U.S. reliance on such resources.

We simply cannot allow Iran to emerge as the real winner in the war in Iraq. This must be a top bipartisan priority.

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

(Mr. SKELTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I first wanted to ask the chairman a question, because I am not sure I heard him a moment ago. Does the chairman confirm that this conference report is the report of the conferees as signed and intended to come to the floor as it was on 3 p.m. Friday?

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I rise in strong support of this conference report. Once again, I am proud to be part of the process that delivers our troops the support they need.

Let me take this moment to commend our chairman, Mr. Hunter, for his work on this bill. This is important

work, and I applaud all the members of the Armed Services Committee on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Record at this point two letters, one signed by John Warner and Carl Levin and one signed by Erin Conaton on my behalf.

U.S. Senate,

Committee on Armed Services,

Washington, DC, December 18, 2005.

Hon. Duncan Hunter,

Chairman, Armed Services Committee, Chairman, National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006

Conference, Washington, DC.

Dear Duncan: On Friday, December 16, we joined you and Ike

Skelton in conducting the final meeting of the conferees

along with other Members of the Senate and House.

At the conclusion of the meeting the ``base bill'' was

agreed upon and signatures of Republican and Democratic

Committee Members were requested and affixed to the

Conference Report with the expectation that the House,

following the customary procedure, would be the first chamber

to file. It was our further understanding that this would be

done Friday evening.

We are returning to you the signatures of the Senate

conferees on the condition that there are no changes made in

the ``base bill'' and Conference Report and that the House

obtain a Rule which precludes any further amendment.

You have shown strong leadership during this very brief and

unusual conference period and we have confidence that you can

achieve passage in the House of the ``base bill''. We believe

it is in the interest of the Nation aud the men and women of

the Armed Forces that our Conference Report as agreed to on

December 16 becomes law.

Sincerely,

Carl Levin,

Ranking Member.

John Warner,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz).

(Mr. ORTIZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Marshall).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).

(Mr. SPRATT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).

(Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

(Mr. NADLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, the chairman, Chairman Hunter, flatters me. It is rather interesting, and it is important for me to point out that my late wife, Susie Skelton, went to All Saints High School, which is in the middle of the Vicksburg, Mississippi battlefield. And because of that, that has special meaning to our family and, Mr. Speaker, I am most appreciative.

This is an excellent bill. It includes language regarding detainees, pay raises, and medical help. I hope that this does not set a pattern on process. I realize that there was a time problem with the Senate passing the bill so late, and with the Thanksgiving recess coming up. But I hope that the panels will be able to meet fully, explore each of the issues, and as we are not able to do that as nearly as fully as we should, we had to rely on our wonderful staff, and they did an outstanding job.

Toward the last, Mr. Speaker, this was a rather torturous procedural effort. We jumped two major hurdles toward the end; and at the end of the day, the bill is an excellent one for those in uniform and for those who defend our country.

So with that I thank all of the members of the committee. Chairman Hunter, thank you especially for your help, your leadership, and to each member on our committee for the tremendous work that they did. Hours and days went into this. And a special thanks, Mr. Chairman, for this book on Vicksburg.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak for an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I am indeed flattered, and I do thank the gentleman from Georgia for this unexpected tribute, and a special thanks to Senator Isakson, the fellow Georgian, for his efforts in this. I am indeed flattered, and I will do my best to merit the confidence both of the chairman for his presentation and the presentation Mr. Marshall made, and with deep appreciation.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me take this means to congratulate and pay tribute to Hubert Wilkens of Concordia, MO, who recently received the Safe Driver Award from OATS Public Transportation. He has distinguished himself and the Concordia community with dedicated service.

Hubert Wilkens was given the Safe Driver Award for 4 years of driving the OATS bus without an accident. Mr. Wilkens picks up senior citizens from the city of Concordia and the outlying rural area. He transports them to the grocery store, doctor, chiropractor, dentists appointments and to the Concordia Senior Center.

Mr. Speaker, Hubert Wilkens has been dedicated to making the City of Concordia a better place to live. I am certain that my colleagues will join me in wishing him and his wife Eunice all the best.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor RADM Christopher Weaver, United States Navy, who is retiring after more than 34 years of faithful service to our Nation.

A native of Harrisonville, MO, Rear Admiral Weaver began his career in 1971, when he graduated from the United States Naval Academy. He holds a bachelor of science degree from the Naval Academy and a master of public administration degree from George Washington University. He is also a distinguished graduate of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces. Rear Admiral Weaver is an honorary Seabee and honorary master chief petty officer.

During the years that followed, Rear Admiral Weaver accrued an impressive operational career highlighted by command of USS Exultant and USS Spruance. Rear Admiral Weaver was designated a surface warfare officer in 1973. His sea tours also include duty aboard USS Marvin Shields, USS Capodanno, USS Boulder, and USS Samuel Eliot Morison.

Ashore he commanded U.S. Naval Station, Norfolk, VA, the world's largest Navy base, and served as an assignment officer in the Bureau of Naval Personnel, as head of the Seamanship and Navigation Department at the U.S. Naval Academy, as head of the Surface Combatant Branch of the Surface Warfare Division and as head of the Mine Warfare Branch of the Expeditionary Warfare Division. He also served as executive officer to the director of Logistics, J4, the Joint Staff.

He was selected for Flag rank in February 1997. Rear Admiral Weaver served as the 83rd commandant of Naval District Washington, the oldest continuously operated Navy installation in the Nation. In his most recent assignment as commander, Navy Installations Command, and director, Ashore Readiness Division, Rear Admiral Weaver led unprecedented organizational change amid an historic time of overall Navy transformation in the Navy's shore infrastructure.

Rear Admiral Weaver is an exceptional leader. He is an individual of uncommon character and his professionalism will be sincerely missed in the Navy. Mr. Speaker, I am certain that my colleagues will join me in thanking RADM Christopher Weaver for his honorable service in the United States Navy, and wishing him and his wife Chris all the best in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, it has come to my attention that Colonel Tony A. Imondi is retiring after a long and distinguished career.

Colonel Imondi received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Aeronautics from Dowling College in 1975. After completing Officer Training School in 1976, he entered the Air Force. In 1981, he received a Master of Science Degree in Systems Management from the University of Southern California.

In 1987, he joined the B-2 Stealth Bomber program and became a member of the B-2 Operational Test and Evaluation team and the Deputy Commander for Operations of the 31st Test and Evaluation Squadron at Edwards AFB, CA. In September 1991, he became Strategic Air Command's very first B-2 pilot. He subsequently moved to Whiteman AFB, MO, upon delivery of the first production B-2. He was appointed Deputy Commander of the 509th Operations Group at Whiteman AFB, MO, in December 1993.

After his promotion to Colonel, he attended the Industrial College of the Armed Forces at Fort McNair in Washington, DC. Following his distinguished graduation from ICAF, he served two years on the staff of the Secretary of Defense monitoring weapons testing before returning to Whiteman as the Commander of the 509th Operations Group in 1998.

In 2000, Colonel Imondi assumed duties as the Vice Commander of the 2nd Bomb Wing, Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana. In September 2001, after the terrorist attacks on the United States, Colonel Imondi deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom as Vice Commander of the 28th AEW, conducting combat missions in Afghanistan. In 2002, Colonel Imondi was assigned to the Directorate of Operations, Headquarters AETC. Colonel Imondi is a command pilot with more than 5,500 hours of flying experience in a wide variety of Air Force aircraft.

Colonel Imondi's awards and decorations include the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Bronze Star Medal, the Legion of Merit Award, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Air Medal and the Aerial Achievement Medal.

Mr. Speaker, I know the Members of the House will join me in paying tribute to Colonel Tony A. Imondi for his exception commitment to the United States Air Force and the United States of America.

I thank my friend for yielding.

Mark Twain once said: The more you explain it to me, the more I don't understand it.

I want to know where the Defense bill is; 3 o'clock yesterday afternoon, we ended our conference. By 5 o'clock, we filed the necessary signatures, both the Senate and the House, and yet the Defense bill is not even on any calendar whatsoever. This is outrageous.

I understand the Republican leadership wishes to put some extraneous matter onto the bill. But the proper procedure was followed. It was a torturous, difficult, but a fair ending, and we signed the report. Yet, the Defense bill is not there, being held up for some extraneous misunderstanding, reason. I just don't understand it.

I want that Defense bill on the floor. The United States of America wants it on the floor. We have young men and young women in uniform all over this world, Afghanistan, Iraq, and yet we can't get the bill here that authorizes a pay raise, TRICARE for reservists, all the ammunition that they need, the medical care that we need, the policies set forth in the detainee language, all of this that has been worked out. Yet we don't have the bill. I don't understand it.

Please explain it to us and to the American people: Where in the world is the Defense bill, the authorization bill?

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

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

I rise to offer a motion instructing House conferees on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 to support the Senate provision requiring a classified report on alleged clandestine detention facilities for individuals captured in the global war on terrorism.

Before I get to the motion itself, let me speak to the broader issue of detainee policy that has been under consideration in this conference. Our conferees have an opportunity to bring back a conference report that will strongly state that it is our law and policy that no one in custody of the United States will be subject to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This House spoke resoundingly on that issue last night on Mr. Murtha's motion. This is the right policy, and I commend Senator McCain for offering his amendment for this Nation and our military forces as well as intelligence personnel.

Mr. Speaker, I am confident that the ultimate conference report we bring back will contain this language. The rest of the provisions in that detainee package are complex. They deal with intricate changes in the law, and their implications will be felt for a long time to come. We would have been better served by a more deliberative process with hearings and debate. I will have more to say about the outcome of that package when we return a conference report to this body.

A critical issue beyond the McCain language that should be included in the conference report is the issue of congressional oversight of potential secret prisons around the world. On November 2, the Washington Post published a story claiming that ``the CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe.'' Citing U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement, the article said that ``the secret facility is part of a covert prison system set up by the CIA nearly 4 years ago that at various times has included sites in eight countries.''

The story has been followed by a flurry of press reports, both here and abroad, and statements by the administration. It has created a firestorm of concern amongst our European allies and defense partners that threatens to undermine our efforts in the war against terror. Just yesterday, the 25-nation European Union legislature voted to establish a ``temporary ad-hoc committee on the alleged use by the CIA of European countries for the illegal transport and detention of prisoners.''

No nation or individual should question America's commitment to combating terrorism; yet what sets us

apart from the enemy is our fundamental commitment to human rights and the rule of law. While the administration has publicly stated that Americans do not torture and that the United States does not secretly move terrorism suspects to foreign countries that torture to get information, Congress has a fundamental responsibility to verify these claims on behalf of the American people. It is critical to ensure that the appropriate Members of Congress are fully informed about these activities. Congress must not hear of these matters from a newspaper.

During Senate consideration of the defense bill, an amendment was adopted with bipartisan support, by a vote of 82-9, that would clearly establish congressional oversight expectations over clandestine facilities currently or formerly operated by the U.S. Government, regardless of location, where detainees in the global war on terrorism are or were being held.

The provision, which had the support of both the chairman and ranking minority member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, does not pass judgment on the merit or values of these facilities. It simply asks for a classified accounting of activities related to the facilities by the director of National Intelligence to the Congressional Intelligence Committees.

The provision was offered as a compromise measure by Senator Kerry and Senator Roberts, chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Senator Rockefeller, vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee, also supported the provision.

The Senate provision sets a higher standard for congressional oversight than what we have seen throughout the war on terror on numerous matters, including the abuses of detainees. We must set a higher standard in our own oversight and in what we expect the administration to tell us.

Success in any war requires the informed consent of the American people, and in a matter as sensitive as this, that can only be derived from Congress reviewing appropriate information from the administration so we can understand the issues involved and provide such consent.

The Senate provision is reasonable and limited in scope. It is the least we can ask for from the administration as it simply reenforces existing legal responsibility under title 50 of the U.S. Code to inform Congress about intelligence matters.

Voting for this motion to instruct will send a clear message to the American people that the Congress intends to thoroughly review this matter and fulfill our important oversight responsibilities. It will also send a message to our allies that we are taking this matter seriously. It is a reasonable and modest motion, and I urge my colleagues to vote yes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, how much time does each side have remaining?

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

Mr. Speaker, it was William Shakespeare who once said, Me thinkest thou protest too much.

Why are those speaking against this motion doing so? Are not they anxious to learn the truth? That is what this is, an informational inquiry.

We have been hearing discussions from our friends on the other side, particularly my friend from Kansas, about something else. He did not address this particular motion.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the to the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie).

(Mr. ABERCROMBIE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 additional seconds to the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie).

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

My good friend from New York failed to read the part of the Senate bill that makes this all correctly before us. In section 1047, subsection A, the President shall ensure that the U.S. government continues to comply with the authorization reporting notification requirements of Title V of the National Security Act of 1947. The National Security Act of 1947 deals with this subject matter before us.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

(Mr. KUCINICH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

If the gentleman will yield, yes, this part of the Senate bill became part thereof as a result of the majority chairman of their Senate committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. Speaker, the Senate of the United States passed a section to which I would like to have as a centerpiece in my motion to instruct conferees to adopt. By a vote of 82-9 the Senate adopted this amendment which was offered by the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

I do not understand why some people do not want to learn the truth. That is what this is. It is an attempt to have a provision that allows us in the Congress of the United States, both the House and the Senate, under the provisions of this language to learn the truth. We do not want to learn things from the front page of a newspaper. We want to learn things as they should be properly reported to us from the White House which this motion to instruct would require. It is that simple.

The other side seems to wish to confuse the issue which causes me to scratch my head as to why they oppose this motion to instruct. It is clear-cut. A huge majority of the Senators, both parties, voted in favor thereof in the Senate.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of my motion to instruct, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, the PATRIOT Act has been an important law enforcement tool in the years following the dastardly terrorist attacks on our country, and taken as a whole, the bill has enhanced our national security. The United States and our allies are fighting a war like no other. It is an unconventional war that must be met with unconventional tools used by law enforcement professionals to protect the American people from those who would do us harm.

The PATRIOT Act provides federal officers greater powers to trace and intercept terrorists' communications for law enforcement and foreign intelligence purposes. It reinforces federal anti-money laundering laws and regulations in an effort to deny terrorists the resources necessary for future attacks. It tightens laws pertaining to seaport security. And, it creates several new federal crimes, such as laws outlawing terrorists' attacks on mass transit and increases penalties for many other violations of the law.

As is true of any law that empowers the government to collect security-related information domestically, evaluating the PATRIOT Act requires us to weigh a wide range of competing interests, like the ability of our government to detect and thwart terrorist attacks and the constitutional rights of the American people. Of course, proper oversight of the PATRIOT Act by Congress is essential to guaranteeing our constitutional rights are not trampled.

Important for Missouri, the PATRIOT Act Conference Report also includes bipartisan language that helps fight the scourge of methamphetamine abuse in America. This drug epidemic has been especially hard on rural areas. The bill bans over-the-counter sales of cold medicines that contain ingredients commonly used to make methamphetamine, allowing the sale only from locked cabinets or behind the counter. It limits the monthly amount any individual could purchase, requires individuals to present photo identification in order to purchase such medicines, and requires stores to keep personal information about these customers for at least 2 years after the purchase of these medicines. The bill also allows judges to impose strict sentences for those who possess pseudoephedrine with the intent to distribute it for methamphetamine creation.

I urge my colleagues to support reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act.

Mr. Speaker, let me take this means to share my support for H.R. 452, a bill introduced by my good friend and Missouri colleague, Congressman Lacy Clay. I was pleased to cosponsor this legislation, which would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the feasibility of including the St. Louis Soldiers' Memorial Military Museum as a part of the National Park System.

Through the years, the people of St. Louis and the surrounding area have visited the St. Louis Soldiers' Memorial to pay tribute to the selfless sacrifices of our men and women in uniform. Originally constructed to honor Americans who lost their lives during the first World War, the monument was dedicated by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1936 and opened to the public in 1938. Since that time, the memorial has held a unique place in the history of our state and our country.

As such, it seems fitting that Congress authorize the Interior Secretary to determine whether the St. Louis Soldiers' Memorial should be included in America's inventory of national monuments. I hope my colleagues agree and will support this sensible legislation offered by the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Clay.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for this Special Order and for giving me the opportunity to say a word or two about my friend John Dingell.

John Dingell is a friend, a colleague, a gentleman of great knowledge, stature. And at the end of the day, he is known as a pillar of this institution. Fifty years of service to the Nation as a Member of this body. That is wonderful.

It is interesting, having the thrill of a spouse, a wife, who is such a companion to me, I know full well that so much credit goes to the wife of John Dingell, Debbie Dingell, because she has devoted her life to making this institution better and our country a better place to live. So along with John Dingell, tonight, we salute Debbie.

In 1944, at the age of 18, John joined the United States Army. He became a second lieutenant and received orders to take part in the first wave of a planned invasion of Japan in November of 1945.

He has been reported to have said that Harry Truman saved his life by using the weapon that he had at hand to end the war with Japan. He finished the military service in the fall of 1946, studied chemistry and law at Georgetown before working as a forest ranger, prosecuting attorney and a lawyer.

When his father passed away while still a Member of this Congress, John was elected to that open seat at the age of 29. He has served Michigan, our country, and this body ever since.

Mr. Speaker, this is an institution of relationships, those who have knowledge, those who have studied this subject and those who understand the word ``friendship.'' If you want something done or something passed, one must have the knowledge and the stature and the respect of others before something becomes law. That is the way this institution works. It is a wonderful, wonderful American way of doing things. John Dingell is the master of all. He understands the subject matter, he studies it, he speaks well, but, most of all, all of us look to him as a friend.

So we are pleased to salute him tonight as the dean of the House, as a role model for those who will follow in the days and years to come. I can honestly say that each of us who has had the privilege of serving in Congress with John Dingell says it is a true highlight in our life to do so.

Mr. Speaker, it is with deep sadness that I inform the House of the death of Vice Admiral Arthur K. Cebrowski, USN, Ret.

Admiral Cebrowski was born in Passaic, NJ. He graduated from Villanova University in 1964. He received a master's degree in Computer Systems Management from the Naval Post Graduate School and attended the Naval War College.

In 1964, he entered the Navy through the Reserve Officers Training Corps. He was a naval aviator and commanded Fighter Squadron 41 and Air Wing 8. He commanded the assault ship USS Guam, the aircraft carrier USS Midway and the USS America Battle Group. He had combat experience in Vietnam and Desert Storm. His joint assignments included service as the director, Command, Control, Communications and Computers, J-6, Joint Staff. He also had served in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations as director of space, information warfare, and command and control. Admiral Cebrowski retired from the Navy on October 1, 2001, after serving as the president of the Naval War College in Newport, RI. On November 26, 2001, Admiral Cebrowski was appointed to the position of director, Office of Force Transformation.

Mr. Speaker, Admiral Cebrowski was a valuable leader in the U.S. Navy and our country. I know the Members of the House will join me in extending heartfelt condolences to his family.

Mr. Speaker, it is with sadness that I inform the House of the death of Dr. David Henson of Jefferson City, Missouri.

Dr. Henson grew up in Orlando, Florida. He attended Florida A&M University where he received a B.S. degree in Biology in 1961. In 1968, he earned a M.Sc.Ed. degree in Chemistry from Tuskegee University. In 1972, Dr. Henson received his Ph.D. degree in Biochemistry from the University of Iowa.

For more than two decades Dr. Henson made significant contributions to the field of higher education. Most notably, he was the Acting Chairperson, Department of Biochemistry, Assistant Dean of Student Affairs, and Associate Professor of Biochemistry at Howard University College of Medicine; Dean of Student Affairs, Associate Dean of Yale College, Lecturer in Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry and Fellow in Timothy Dwight College at Yale University; Provost and Professor of Chemistry at the Broward Campus of Florida Atlantic University and Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Services/Student Support Services at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Dr. Henson also served as President and Professor of Chemistry at Alabama A&M University in Huntsville, Alabama, and as Vice President of Student Services at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana. On July 2, 1997, Dr. Henson became the seventeenth President of Lincoln University, Jefferson City, Missouri. Under his leadership Lincoln University experienced unprecedented growth and renewal.

Dr. Henson also was involved in the Jefferson City community. He served on the Board of Directors for the Jefferson City Chamber of Commerce, was a member of the Jefferson City Leadership Forum and the Rotary Club of Jefferson City.

Dr. Henson was a member of Sigma XI Honorary Society, Beta Kappa Chi Scientific Honorary Society, Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc., and an Honorary Member of Kappa Kappa Psi Band Organization. Dr. Henson received the ``African Americans Who Make a Difference Award'', the Howard University College of Medicine Student Council's Award for ``Excellence in Teaching'', the George Washington Carver Research Foundation Student Award, and an American Council on Education Fellowship.

Mr. Speaker, Dr. Henson was a valuable leader in his community and was respected by everyone who knew him. He will be missed by all. I know the members of the House will join me in extending heartfelt condolences to his family.

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

In the rush to the floor, the resolution before us, any country lawyer across the country could say it is flawed in the way it is written. It makes no reference whatsoever to the redeployment. It is a sad mistake when you rush to judgment to get something to the floor.

One thing that really concerns me a great deal is our friend, our colleague, the recipient of the Bronze Star, two Purple Hearts from Vietnam, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) being attacked as he has.

I remember in 1978 Congressman Sonny Montgomery who led a group of us to Vietnam to bring back remains of those who had died in combat. I remember the reverence with which the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) treated those 14 coffins of his former colleagues who were killed in action in Vietnam.

I have seen in the 29 years I have been in Congress his supporting our troops, supporting under the Constitution our duty to raise and maintain those wonderful young people who protect our freedoms. He has a resolution. He introduced it. He represents the people of Pennsylvania.

I admire his assessment of the war. We disagree on the outcome. I have a proposal myself. I sent a letter to the President on October 20 setting forth, the only person that has set a formula, for three Iraqi brigades of level number one, one American brigade may be redeployed.

It is interesting to note that there has been no hearing on this resolution, no hearing on similar issues that are of utmost importance to our country. Now, though mistakes have been made, and they have, such as allowing the looting and disbanding the Iraqi Army rather than giving them a pick and shovel and a small paycheck, and as a result many of them became insurgents against the Americans, no one here as spoken of the success that is needed in Iraq.

If we are not successful, if the Iraqi military is not successful, Iraq will be a snake pit for terrorists, every bit as bad as the Taliban had in Afghanistan, and lo and behold the problems it may raise in stability for Jordan and Saudi Arabia. It is important that we have success.

But it is also important that we have fair and full debate. It is important that we have hearings in the Committee on Armed Services on issues such as this, which we have not had. Hearings yes, but not on the war issues as we need them discussed in a full hearing with proper witnesses as we can ask questions of them.

At least, Mr. Speaker, let me say that we have wonderful young people in uniform representing us in Iraq and Afghanistan and across the globe. I am so proud of them. I am so proud of what they do in bringing the fight to a successful conclusion.

And the issue of redeployment, whether I agree with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) or not, and I do not, because my formula

I think is the best and I have had positive results in my home State with positive unsolicited newspaper articles saying that it was a good and reasonable method of redeployment, we must do our best to have success there and proper redeployment of our troops from Iraq.