Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so my colleague, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) can bring to the floor legislation that would delay the Base Realignment and Closure process better known as BRAC.

Mr. Speaker, at war in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Army is restructuring itself. We are assessing our base structure overseas and plan to bring two divisions home from Europe and to reduce our troop strength over a period of time from South Korea by at least 12,000 troops. We are increasing the end strength in this bill to relieve the stress on our troops. We are still developing the Pentagon's role in homeland security. The division of labor between active duty forces and the Reserve component is still being evaluated and is a question mark. This is really a heck of a time to be conducting BRAC.

Voting ``no'' on the previous question will allow the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) to bring up legislation that would delay BRAC 2 years. I think a 2-year delay is prudent. Given the turbulent times facing our military, the legislation will not kill BRAC; it will just delay it. The House voted decisively several months ago to delay the base closures, but this provision was dropped by the conference. The House deserves a serious, serious debate on this issue. I support the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) on a ``no'' vote.

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

Mr. Speaker, I join the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) in strong support of this Defense Authorization Act. More than anything, it is a bill for the troops at a time when we are at war, the war in Iraq and the war against the terrorists in Afghanistan.

Let me commend my chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), for his leadership in bringing the bill to completion. It was a lot of difficult, hard work, late nights; but it got done, and we are here. And I also want to applaud all the Members, Democrats and Republicans on the Committee on Armed Services, for their tireless effort on this bill.

I want to mention a couple of items of concern, however. The disappointments of course are in the process. I spoke strongly last May of our desire to delay the upcoming round of base closings; yet we were unable to obtain everything, and I am also disappointed with the conference outcome in the Colombia troop cap when our troops are so very thinly stretched across the globe.

But this very bill has at stake during wartime $446 in defense. It is very, very important that we pass this this evening. This is probably the best piece of legislation that we have had for the troops, their families, and for military retirees in a long, long time. And at the end of the day, those who wear uniforms and their families who support them so well will be the ones who benefit from our efforts.

It eliminates the cap on privatized housing for military families, something so many of us have been calling for. This program allows private contractors to build housing on or near military bases, who then recoup their investment through rental payments. That has been a long, involved effort. It also involves additional health benefits for our troops who serve us proudly and with so much distinction. We extend TRICARE benefits to the nonactive duty Reservists and Guard members who have been called and ordered to active duty on or after September 11, 2001.

We also provide for additional benefits for the survivors of those who have served. The bill eliminates the Social Security offset to survivor benefit payment plans, phasing it in over 4 years as opposed to what the Senate wanted to do. I have to give our friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards), special credit for his effort to have a discharge petition on this particular issue.

Finally, the conference report includes a series of provisions relating to Iraq that will require the administration to explain its policies and allow Congress to conduct better oversight of what is going on there. A strategic plan is required on the stabilization of Iraq. Policies and reports are required on the subjects of preventing the abuse of detainees in American custody and a new guidance mandated on the use of contractors for security functions. These are very, very important.

In summary, Mr. Speaker, this is not a perfect bill, but it is a very, very good bill. When we say we support the troops, when we put the bumper sticker on the back of our truck or car, this is saying it loudly and clearly: we support the troops to the tune of $446 billion. All that they need, all that we can do is in here.

I applaud members of the Committee on Armed Services; and I thank the chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter). I think this is an excellent piece of legislation to move forward at this very, very dire and difficult junction in American history.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the minority whip, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the ranking member on the Committee on the Budget, 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 Arkansas (Mr. Snyder), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Total Force.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez), the distinguished member of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. Speaker, I take pleasure in yielding 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. McCarthy).

(Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I take pleasure in yielding 4 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), a senior member of the Committee on Appropriations.

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

Mr. Speaker, I take pleasure in yielding 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), who is the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.

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

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

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

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

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

The remarks of my friend from California (Mr. Cunningham), who is a distinguished war hero in his own right, cause me to wish to say a word or two about those who wear the uniform and about those who wore the uniform.

Mr. Speaker, every Sunday morning, I have the pleasure of being with a group of men from my hometown of Lexington, Missouri, most of whom are veterans of wars of yesteryear, heroes in their own right, Marines of Vietnam, Army, Navy, my friend Vic Cosner who saw the very worst of battles in Europe during the Second World War.

We owe it in this Congress under the Constitution that charges our committee and charges this body with raising and maintaining the military to produce and care for and train young men and young women who can take the place of those who so nobly served our country in the past. That is what we are doing today.

A special thanks to our chairman, Duncan Hunter, who worked tirelessly with us well into the evening to produce this bill and got it to the floor. A special thanks to every member of the Committee on Armed Services, Democrat and Republican, and the unsung heroes of all of this is the tireless effort of the staff of the Committee on Armed Services. We could not do it without them. We thank them so very much.

Mr. Speaker, I had a rare privilege 3 weeks ago of being able to address the new sailors who had just graduated, were graduating, from the Great Lakes Naval Training Station, Great Lakes, Illinois. Mark Kirk, our fellow Member of Congress, invited me for such an event. I spoke to them, and I thanked them, and I also read a letter to the graduates that my father had written his mother in 1918 from that very same Great Lakes before he proceeded on to serve aboard the USS Missouri of the day. I want everybody to know that those young sailors, men and women, stood so tall, and you could see the pride in their faces, but even more proud were the parents and the families, thousands of them, to see the some 900 brand new American sailors become part of the fleet.

So what we do in our own way here is to legally provide and maintain, but more than that, I think this effort and what we have done for those in uniform and the families, major steps to help them along the way. Cicero, the great Greek orator, said that gratitude was the greatest of all virtues. I hope that the efforts that we do today will show a bit of gratitude from this body to all of those young men and women who wear the uniform of the United States of America.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me take this opportunity to congratulate Sheriff Kerrick Alumbaugh for being named the Missouri Deputy Sheriffs' Association's 2004 ``Sheriff of the Year.''

Sheriff Alumbaugh was born on March 19, 1964, in St. Charles, Missouri. He graduated from Lafayette County C1 High School in Higginsville, Missouri. Later, he graduated from the FBI National Law Enforcement Academy.

In September 1985, Sheriff Alumbaugh began his law enforcement career as a patrolman for the Higginsville, Missouri, Police Department. Then, in 1993, he became the Chief of Police of Higginsville, Missouri. He became the Sheriff of Lafayette County on January 1, 2001.

During his time as Sheriff, he has had many accomplishments. Sheriff Alumbaugh formed a county-wide crime scene team comprised of local police agencies and trained by the Kansas City Crime Scene Unit, fought to give deputies a living wage, and was instrumental in the passage of the county-wide law enforcement tax and a new jail and court system. Also, he developed an investigation unit within the department, comprised of two detectives, that investigates and solves rural crimes. These two detectives alone filed more Felony cases in 2003 than the whole department did in 2000.

Most importantly, he has instilled pride and professionalism for the deputies that work for the citizens of Lafayette County.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I wish to extend my congratulations to Sheriff Kerrick Alumbaugh. It is with great pride that I honor him for being named the Missouri Deputy Sheriffs' Association's 2004 ``Sheriff of the Year.''

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant support of H.R. 10. Mr. Chairman, this bill is a bill to reorganize our Nation's intelligence community. This bill proposes to reform the organization and structures of national intelligence capabilities in an effort to better protect us against catastrophic terrorist attacks similar to those of 9/11. Of course, that is a laudable goal.

The bill that is before us is far from perfect. Many of us on this side believe this bill does not go nearly far enough in revamping our national intelligence system. In addition, unnecessary provisions on immigration and the PATRIOT Act have been added.

This bill could and should be a better product. We can make it better if we adopt the Menendez substitute amendment which will bring the bill into line with the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission as well as the Collins-Lieberman-McCain bill in the Senate that was passed yesterday.

The bill before us creates a new National Intelligence Director with the authority to develop, manage, and reprogram the budget of the new intelligence.

The Menendez bill creates real budgetary power. The National Intelligence Director is authorized to transfer personnel and appoint key leaders throughout the intelligence community. Moreover, under this bill the National Intelligence Director is expected to establish the guidelines and priorities of the entire intelligence community. Better coordination is the aim of the Menendez substitute.

Mr. Chairman, the foremost concern that I have about the bill relates to battlefield intelligence. The soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines are the ones on the front lines of the war on terror. We all know that. The intelligence community both serves and relies on them. Forward deployed, they are the ones collecting much of the intelligence. In fact, more than 80 percent of our Nation's intelligence capability is derived from Department of Defense resources. I am hoping that whatever conference agreement is achieved on this bill will recognize this and respect the role and unique responsibilities of the Secretary of Defense.

I do, however, want to register my unhappiness over the process that brought us to this point. This bill was written behind closed doors.

I would also like to note that although the Committee on Armed Services marked up this bill, several titles of the bill have made it to the House floor, Mr. Chairman, without any committee consideration of any committee of the House of Representatives. Moreover, several amendments adopted in the committee markup are not included in the text of the bill before us. That is just simply wrong.

One omission is the proposed creation of a civil liberties oversight board to oversee the issuance of intelligence-related legal and regulatory guidance to ensure consistency with our Nation's Constitution and our civil rights law.

Another provision that should be included in this bill would establish an independent Inspector General with the responsibility to investigate alleged fraud, waste and abuse under the new system and within the office of the National Intelligence Director. This is important, but it is not there.

Other provisions that should be in this bill would improve our national ability to reduce the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction around the world. We all know that it is the most dangerous, Damocles' sword that hangs over the head of the free world. H.R. 10 does not go far enough in curbing the flow of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons to terrorists. Robust counterproliferation programs, in my opinion, are essential to winning the war against terror.

In the end, Mr. Chairman, I believe all of us support a better intelligence capability, and toward that end, I will support H.R. 10. However, as I said earlier, reluctantly, in my view, though, this would be a much better, better bill now if the process that led to its consideration had been a full and bipartisan one.

We have a chance to improve this bill today. We can do it simply by adopting the Menendez substitute, and I urge my colleagues to support that amendment when it comes before this body.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper).

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

May I make an inquiry, Mr. Chairman, as to the time remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Tennessee.

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

Let me make this prediction. Unless the Menendez substitute is adopted by this House, this bill, at the end of the day, will go nowhere and the United States of America will be without intelligence reform.

We saw what the Senate did, we know what the White House wants, we know what the families of 9/11 have endorsed. And I hate to say it, but this may lead to a graveyard for legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Let us put some common sense into this piece of legislation, if we may.

You are about to see an attempt to mix oil and water legislatively. We see that the Senate passed 96 to 2 the recommendations of the Commission, the 9/11 Commission. The White House recommended and urged such a passage. The family victims organization of 9/11 has recommended that. And we see in this H.R. 10 a diversion from the only hearing that we had, which was by the chairman and vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission, and I thought they explained their situation well.

I would like to read from a statement of administration policy from the Executive Office of the President. Three pages of concerns regarding the base bill that we have, H.R. 10. And in those three pages of concern it says ``The administration is concerned that H.R. 10 does not provide the National Intelligence Director sufficient authorities to manage the intelligence community effectively.''

I thought we had a sense of urgency about this. As a result of the 9/ 11 Commission and recommendations, a sense of urgency had come over our Congress, I thought; over our country, I thought. And yet we see this bill, should it pass, H.R. 10, should it pass, you will see it mixed in conference with the Senate like oil and water. And I predict this will very well end up in the legislative graveyard, sadly.

Mr. Speaker, Calvin Dunn, of my hometown of Lexington, Missouri, wrote an excellent poem, entitled ``Our Flag-911.'' Mr. Dunn wrote this poem on the day after the events of September 11, 2001. I wish to share Mr. Dunn's writing with the rest of the chamber:

``Our Flag-911''

``Old Glory'' what a beautiful sight, as she rises in the

morn and gets put away at night.

For over 200 years she has waved in the wind, battled the

rain and the snow again and again

She had been tattered, torn, ripped and burned, but bounces

back each time with a lesson learned.

She has been spit on, trampled and even wollered in the dirt,

yet she feels no pain and shows no hurt.

She is loved, adored, worshiped and praised and she will

continue to fly for a million more days.

She is in foreign lands, across the sea, she's at the ball

park waving ``oh say can you see''

She's at the federal building flying high, she's at each

veteran's final goodbye.

She flys at half mast where tragedy has been, but you can bet

tomorrow, she'll fly high again.

So wherever you see her salute her and brag and remember

those that died for that ``rugged old flag.''

Mr. Speaker, let me take this opportunity to congratulate Mrs. Linda Eisinger for receiving the Missouri Teacher of the Year Award.

Mrs. Eisinger was born on October 8, 1951, in Independence, Missouri. After graduating from Raytown High School, she attended Central Missouri State University where she graduated in 1973 with a degree in Elementary Education. In 1977, she received a Masters degree in Education from Central Missouri State University.

Mrs. Eisinger has been a teacher for over three decades, and this year she begins her

27th year as a teacher in Jefferson City. Currently, she is a third grade teacher at West Elementary School in Jefferson City.

Last spring, Mrs. Eisinger was chosen from more than 100 applications as the Jefferson City District's Teacher of the Year. Then, out of a group of six teachers competing for the State honor, she was chosen as the Missouri Teacher of the Year. As Missouri's Teacher of the Year, Mrs. Eisinger automatically will be entered in the National Teacher of the Year Competition.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I wish to extend my congratulations to Mrs. Linda Eisinger. It is with great pride that I honor her for being named the Missouri Teacher of the Year.

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

And let me first congratulate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam) for being assigned to the Committee on Rules. I am sure in days ahead we will see a lot of each other as we testify before the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I speak about agriculture disaster assistance. Let me commend at the outset the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) for introducing a disaster package in the House and for his tireless work on behalf of American agriculture. No one in this body does more for farmers than the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm).

We are here today to discuss emergency funding for natural disasters. Fewer and fewer of us in this House represent rural areas. When natural disasters impact the people we are privileged to represent, we tend to band together across party lines to do what is right for those outstanding Americans, our farmers. This is especially true when it comes to those from rural areas.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, I must say I am disappointed that the Republican leaders in this House have decided to play politics with America's farmers. Rather than passing a stand-alone, emergency disaster bill for U.S. producers whose economic well-being has been turned upside down by extremely dry weather, Republicans have decided it would be better to slash funding for programs within the 2002 farm bill.

The gentleman from Texas' (Mr. Stenholm) bill declared that the drought conditions facing our farmers were an emergency that they should be paid for, just like any other national emergency, through an emergency supplemental spending bill. Opening up the 2002 farm bill to pay for this assistance is wrong-headed and ends up hurting some farmers to help others. This political theater has no place in the House, and it does a disservice to the men and women who are in the fields right now all across our land harvesting the food that we eat.

Over the past several years, Missourians have experienced Mother Nature's fury. Tornadoes, flooding, and drought have plagued our State. Widespread drought has had the greatest impact on Missouri farms and on the rural communities that dot the countryside.

I come from the Show-Me State. It is high time that the Congress shows all American farmers that we are here to help them when disaster strikes.

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 rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 306, introduced by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi). I would like to recognize the gentleman from Arizona for his efforts to bring forward this resolution honoring the service of Native American Indians in the United States Armed Forces. I also wish to recognize the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), my colleague on the House Committee on Armed Services, for his support of this bill. We thank him for that.

For over 200 years, Native American Indians have distinguished themselves in military action. Most Americans would be surprised to learn that since the founding of our country, Native American Indians have made substantial contributions to our Nation's defense.

Our Nation is at war, and our troops are serving on the front lines in combat in the Middle East. Of those serving in uniform, nearly 19,000 are American Indians and Native Alaskans, and over 3,000 of them, Mr. Speaker, are women.

There are more than 2,000 Native Americans and Alaskan Natives deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Over 1,000 American servicemembers have been killed while in service to our Nation; and while we honor all those who have given their lives to defend our freedoms, today we recognize the 13 Native Americans and Alaskan Natives among them that made the ultimate sacrifice.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 306, introduced by Mr. Renzi. I would like to recognize the gentleman from Arizona for his efforts to bring forward this resolution honoring the service of Native American Indians in the United States Armed Forces. I would also like to recognize Mr. Cole, my colleague on the House Armed Services Committee, for his support of this bill.

For over 200 years, Native American Indians have distinguished themselves in military action. Most Americans would be surprised to learn that since the founding of our country, Native American Indians have made substantial contributions to our Nation's defense.

More than 12,000 American Indians are believed to have served in the United States Armed Forces during World War I. Nearly 600 Choctaw and Cherokee Indians from Oklahoma, assigned to the 142 Infantry of the 36th Texas-Oklahoma National Guard Division, distinguished themselves on the battlefields of France. Four American Indians from the 142nd were awarded the Croix de Guerre to recognize their bravery in the face of enemy action. Also lesser known during World War I was the use of the Choctaw language to encode military messages.

When World War II dropped on the shores of America there were less than 350,000 American Indians, yet more than 44,000 volunteered to serve this nation in uniform. It is only relatively recent that Americans finally learned the valuable contributions Native American Indians made to the war effort. Nearly 50 years after the war, the veil of secrecy was finally raised and Americans learned the true story of the legendary Navajo Code Talkers.

Navajo Code Talkers took part in every assault the U.S. Marines conducted in the Pacific from 1942 to 1945. In May 1942, the original 29 Navajo recruits helped to develop a dictionary of military terms that were required to be memorized during basic training. While the Japanese were able to decipher the codes used by the Army and Army Air Corps, they were never able to crack the Navajo code used by the Marines. Over the course of the war, nearly 500 Navajos served as code talkers, and it was not until September 17, 1992, that the United States finally recognized and appropriately honored the Navajos for their extraordinary contribution to the war.

American Indians, however, served in both the Pacific and European theatre during World War II, and three were bestowed the Nation's highest military award--the Congressional Medal of Honor--Jack Montgomery, a Cherokee from Oklahoma; Ernest Childers, a Creek from Oklahoma; Van Barfoot, a Choctaw from Mississippi.

Native American Indians also distinguished themselves in battle during the Korean conflict. Two American Indians were also awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for their actions on the battlefield. Mitchell Red Cloud, Jr. a Winnebago from Wisconsin; and Charles George, a Cherokee from North Carolina.

Once again, our Nation is at war and our troops are serving on the front lines of combat in the Middle East. Of those serving in the uniform services, nearly 19,000 are American Indians and Native Alaskans, and over 3,000 of those are women.

There are more than 2,000 Native American and Alaskan Natives deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Over 1,000 American service members have been killed while in service to our Nation, and while we honor all those who have given their lives to defend our freedoms, today we recognize the 13 Native American Indians and Alaskan Natives among them that made the ultimate sacrifice.

The most prominent is the first service woman killed in action. Army Specialist Lori Piestewa, a Hopi Indian, who grew up on the reservation near Tuba City in Arizona. She is also the first Native American service woman to be killed in combat. The 507th Maintenance Company to which she was assigned was ambushed by enemy forces on March 23, 2003, near Nasiriyah, Iraq. She along with the 12 other Native American Indians and Alaskan Natives will be remembered for their devotion to duty and sacrifice in service to this Nation.

I am proud to be here to honor Native American Indians and all Native Americans for their rich tradition of strength, wisdom, and warrior ethos. And, I commend them and all those in uniform who have volunteered to defend the rights and freedoms that we all hold dear.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

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

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

I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) for his leadership on this as well as the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi). I think it is very important that we recognize this very important segment of American society, the Native Americans and the Alaskan Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Ms. Boswell).

(Ms. BOSWELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to this bill.

Mr. Speaker, so I understand, am I entitled to the time in opposition? I am the ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. Speaker, I am claiming the entire time in opposition, as the ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services.

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

Mr. Speaker, we have seen something that I have never seen in 28 years in the House of Representatives, never; someone whom I respect and consider a good friend, someone bringing a bill to the House floor that they do not support. That is news. That is the first time ever and probably in the history of the United States House of Representatives.

So I am in strong opposition to this bill. I am surprised that the Republican leadership would bring the bill to the floor. And why? Not to reinstate the draft.

The fact that the Republican leadership would bring this bill to the floor suggests to me, as an observer, several reasons: The war in Iraq is not going well. The President's plan to handle this situation with a minimum number of troops is not working, and we need more in-strength, as Paul Bremer just told us. And this tacit allegation that the administration wants to reinstate the draft right after the election. One of those three.

Americans should take notice of the fact that the House leadership thinks we need to resume the draft by bringing it up.

I have said before on occasion what Mark Twain once said, ``The more you explain it to me, the more I don't understand it.'' Why are we wasting our time, precious time, we ought to be talking about health care, be talking about the deficit, be talking about taking care of the troops. And, my goodness, I am so proud of them, and the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) and I have worked so hard to try to take care of those troops with body armor, to try to take care of them with pay raises, and I know he is disappointed as well in bringing this bill up.

And at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, to bring this bill to the floor is nothing more than a cynical election year political ploy. If you want to play politics, go rent yourself a truck bed and get yourself a microphone and get a crowd and talk there, but this is not an electionary place. This is where we make the laws of the United States of America. And for someone to bring this bill to the floor that does not support it, does not want it, and wants to make a political point, well, I need not finish that sentence.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the dean of the House.

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

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

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

(Mr. RYAN of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. Speaker, may I ask what time is allotted for each Member.

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

I mentioned earlier that this is a moment in history when someone brings a bill to the floor that does not support the bill. In my years here in the House of Representatives, I have never seen that.

I think it is also historic for another reason, that this piece of legislation was brought to the floor to quell a rumor. That, I am sure the history books will never reflect, never reflect the fact that legislation was brought to the floor to quell a rumor.

Mr. Speaker, it has come to my attention that Olympic gymnast, Terin Humphrey, of Bates City, Missouri, received two silver medals at the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens, Greece.

Terin was born on August 14, 1986, in St. Joseph, Missouri. After graduating from Odessa High School in the spring of 2004, she now plans to attend the University of Alabama. While at Odessa High School, Terin trained at the Great American Gymnastic Express gym for daily six hour workouts. Terin was coached by Al Fong and his wife, Armine Barutyan- Fong. Terin trained with her Olympic teammate, Courtney McCool.

Terin always has been a strong all around gymnast and has a strong record in the sport. Terin was a member of the 2003 gold medal winning United States World Championships Team. In 2004, at the Visa American Cup, Terin won bronze medals in three events: uneven bars, vault and floor. Terin then placed third in the all around at the 2004 United States Championships. In the summer of 2004, Terin made her Olympic debut at Athens, where she won two silver medals for the team competition and for the uneven bars event.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to extend my congratulations to Terin Humphrey for her achievements at the 2004 Summer Olympics.

Mr. Speaker, a distinguished career in Missouri State Senate will soon end. Missouri State Senator John T. Russell will retire at the end of the year.

Senator Russell was born on September 22, 1931 in Lebanon, Missouri and grew up on a farm near Gasconade River. After graduating from Lebanon High School, he attended Drury College in Springfield, Missouri.

Senator Russell has had an impressive legislative career. He first was elected to the Missouri House of Representatives in 1962 and served until 1974. During his time in the State House, he held the position of Minority Floor Leader in 1971 and 1972. Then, in November 1976, Senator Russell was elected to the Missouri Senate, representing the counties in south central and southwest Missouri. While in the State Senate he served as Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, member of the Gubernatorial Appointments Committee and member of the Transportation Committee.

In addition to his legislative work, Senator Russell has a record of service and leadership in the community. He received an Honorary Doctor of Laws Degree from Southwest Baptist University in 1979. The Missouri Chamber of Commerce presented Senator Russell with the Spirit of Enterprise Award. He received the Guardian of Small Business Award from the National Federation of Independent Business. In 1997, he was given the Community Service Award from the Lebanon Area Chamber of Commerce. Also, he is a member of the First Baptist Church in Lebanon, Missouri, and is a Veteran of the United States Air Force, serving in the Korean War.

Mr. Speaker, I know the Members of this House will join me in thanking Senator Russell for his life of public service and in wishing him and his family all the best in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation, and I certainly commend the gentlewoman from Kansas City, Missouri, the fifth district of our State, for her foresight and her effort to expand the boundaries of the Harry Truman Farm.

As we all know, Harry Truman is very special to us in the State of Missouri, and expanding the farm is all the more important because the Park Service wishes to continue to build and preserve the land and to make it a historical part of the farm area. The land will be used to plant vegetation and to shield the site from encroaching modern development.

The Truman Farm was Harry Truman's home in his younger days when he was forming his character and opinions behind the plow. The Truman family purchased this land in 1840. He farmed it from 1906 to 1917. In 1980, there was speculation that financial difficulties would force land to be sold, compelling a group of concerned citizens to form the Harry S Truman Farm Foundation which saved the farm.

We certainly hope that this body will pass this legislation. It is very important to the State of Missouri. I think it is very important to the history and to the memory of the great President from the State of Missouri, Harry Truman, and I again compliment the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. McCarthy) for her foresight in this legislation.

Madam Speaker, let me take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from Arizona and especially the gentlewoman from Guam for bringing forth this resolution.

Having visited that wonderful territory on two different occasions and having participated in a veterans' ceremony there in Guam, I know how very important it is that this piece of legislation commemorate the courage of the Guamanians in their struggle for freedom. I think it is certainly fitting and appropriate. I thank the gentleman for this opportunity to speak in favor of the measure.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for yielding me time.

I do rise in support of this motion to instruct conferees on the National Defense Authorization Act.

Madam Speaker, our Nation has seen far too many cases of violent criminal acts related to prejudice, bigotry, and

intolerance. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has reported a significant number of cases involving violence directed against a member of a religious, ethnic, disabled, race-based, or gender-specific association. Statistics show that nearly 8,000 acts of violence have occurred annually since 1994. Society cannot and should not tolerate the cowardly, mean-spirited, and hateful acts that we call hate crimes.

Indeed, such hate-based acts have a deeper impact on society than many other crimes. They are injurious to the community, and they are often committed by offenders affiliated with large extended groups operating across State lines.

I think all of us at one point or another in our lives have seen the ugly face of prejudice, bigotry, and discrimination. When hatred is a motivating factor in the commission of a crime, I believe it should be an aggravating factor that is taken into account in the sentencing process.

Moreover, Madam Speaker, as a former trial lawyer and State prosecuting attorney, I do not view the Senate proposal lightly. Although the ability to prosecute crimes against individuals exists today, the Senate bill would provide prosecutors with more tools with which to fight crimes and in which bias, prejudice, and discrimination are motivating factors.

The Senate bill is narrowly tailored. A hate crime would occur only if the person charged deliberately committed or tried to commit an act of violence resulting in bodily injury to another person. In addition, the Senate language only speaks to crimes involving the use of fire, a firearm, an explosive, or an incendiary device. So this is not a case which would criminalize free speech or would address a broad range of conduct.

Madam Speaker, agreeing to the Senate language is simply the right thing to do, and I urge my colleagues to support this instruction.