Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to echo my compliments to the

chairman for his service to this body and to the armed services of this country. But 7 months ago, Mr. Speaker, when this bill passed, my good friend, the chairman, said that there was no difference between Republicans and Democrats regarding the fighting of terrorism and where we stood. We passed a provision out of here that prohibited terrorists at Guantanamo Bay from coming to the United States. Unfortunately, that provision was left out of this bill until about 2 hours ago when it was put in, but it has a huge difference because it is only for 1 year.

Mr. Speaker, the problem with that is 2 years ago when this administration came in, a prosecution of the worst terrorists that had ever hit the United States, the 9/11 defendants, was under way and had been under way for 18 months--56 motions. The prosecutor said we would have had a guilty plea within 6 months. This administration not only stopped all of that prosecution, but has refused for the last 2 years to prosecute the worst terrorists that have ever hit this soil. And when we put a provision in there that said we would never bring those detainees to this soil, it sent a message to them, go ahead and prosecute them.

With this provision, Mr. Speaker, what we are now saying is, because of our majority on the other side, well, give us another year to think about it. But, Mr. Speaker, I am optimistic for two reasons: one, because I believe next year we will have a bill that we won't be at the 11th hour doing; and, secondly, I know under the ranking member who will become the chairman, he will fight to make sure that we permanently prohibit those detainees from ever touching U.S. soil.

Mr. Speaker, like the other two Members, I rise in strong support of Senate bill 1132, the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Improvements Act of 2010. As has been mentioned, the Senate bill is a companion to legislation I sponsored in the House.

S. 1132 improves the current Federal law that authorizes active and retired police officers to carry firearms throughout the United States. The premise of that law was simple: allowing trained, active-duty, and retired law enforcement officers to carry firearms to enhance public safety.

Further, the law provides clear, uniform nationwide rules to replace the variety of local laws that create confusion and uncertainty as to whether an officer may carry a firearm when he or she is off duty.

The legislation that the House considers today expands the definition of qualified law enforcement officers to include current and retired officers of the Amtrak Police Department, the Federal Reserve System, and other agencies of the executive branch. S. 1132 further expands the categories of law enforcement officers authorized to possess a firearm in a school zone to include retired law enforcement officers.

Mr. Speaker, in a time when homeland security is paramount, this authority provides the country with additional trained and armed first responders at no additional cost to the taxpayers.

There is a long history of armed off-duty officers coming to the rescue in life threatening situations. This legislation expands the areas where these officers can be equipped for the emergencies they are trained to respond to.

In passing this legislation, Congress acknowledges the need for retired officers to have the opportunity to protect themselves and their families. The oath to serve and protect our communities is not nullified when officers retire.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and commend the Honorable Ray A. Conner as he receives the distinguished designation as First Citizen of the City of Chesapeake, Virginia for the year 2010. This prestigious honor is bestowed annually by the Chesapeake Rotary Club to an individual whose record of service and reputation of excellence and integrity exemplify the Rotary motto: ``Service above self.''

Ray has an extraordinary record of public service that extends from his professional position as Chesapeake's Commissioner of the Revenue to his tireless efforts on behalf of a broad spectrum of community life.

Demonstrating a lifelong commitment to excellence, Ray, an honor graduate of Great Bridge High School, received a Bachelor of Science Degree from Old Dominion University and entered public service as a Magistrate for the City of Chesapeake, Virginia. Rising quickly to the position of Chief Magistrate, Ray then became Commissioner of the Revenue--a position to which he has subsequently been re-elected eight times by the citizens of Chesapeake.

Ray earned certification as a Master Commissioner of the Revenue from the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia, and his high professional standards have earned him positions of leadership as president of the Virginia Commissioners of the Revenue Association and president of the Virginia Association of Locally Elected Constitutional Officers. Ray has also served on the Advisory Committee of the Virginia Institute of Government and the Board of Trustees for the Virginia Retirement System.

Ray's impressive and extensive record of service to the community includes leadership roles as president or as an officer of the Chesapeake Regional Health Foundation, the Chesapeake Rotary Club and its Foundation, the Chesapeake Crime Line, Oak Grove United Methodist Church, and the South Norfolk Ruritan Club. Ray also serves on the boards of directors of the Southeast Virginia Community Foundation and Towne Bank.

Ray attributes his accomplishments and community spirit to the work ethic and personal values instilled in him by his parents, Dorothy Conner Payne and the late Clarence E. Conner, and to the loving support of his wife, Gretchen Maurer. Ray Connor has managed, through the force of his passion for his hometown and his profound commitment to serving others, to build a lifelong career of making Chesapeake, Virginia, a great place to live.

Madam Speaker, I feel privileged to ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing and commending the Honorable Ray A. Conner as 2010 First Citizen of Chesapeake.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I support House Resolution 1566. This resolution recognizes and commemorates the 50th anniversary of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, which is also known as SNCC, and the national sit-in movement in the 1960s.

The SNCC was a key contributor to the civil rights movement in the 1960s. The nonviolent aims of the SNCC helped bring about desegregation, civil rights, and voting rights for all Americans.

The SNCC formed under the leadership of Ella Baker at Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina, in April 1960. A conference was held for students to share experiences and to coordinate activities with regard to racial equality. As sit-ins occurred throughout the South, the SNCC grew into a large organization. By August of 1961, the movement had attracted more than 70,000 participants.

The SNCC's nonviolent sit-ins, boycotts, and protests helped bring about the desegregation of places of public accommodation. The SNCC was also one of the leaders of the Freedom Rides in 1961 and of the historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963. SNCC Freedom Riders put themselves at great risk by traveling in racially integrated groups throughout the South. More than 400 people took part in these Freedom Rides throughout the spring and summer of 1961.

Robert Parris Moses helped transform the SNCC from a student protest group to a community-based political organization for the rural poor. He led a voter registration project in Mississippi in 1961 that became a springboard for similar SNCC activities from 1962 to 1966.

The SNCC's voter registration efforts culminated in 1964 with the Mississippi Summer Project, which was sponsored by the SNCC, by the Congress of Racial Equality, and by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Hundreds of black and white volunteers from the North and South participated in voter registration projects.

The SNCC also organized Freedom Schools for the purpose of eradicating fear and educating African Americans about their right to vote and to participate in the democratic process.

Finally, the SNCC worked with the NAACP to bring about the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

It is clear that the nonviolent sit-ins of the students who began the SNCC in 1960 inspired others later to take historic steps toward the building of racial equality in America, so I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have had occasion before to listen to Congressman Lewis address this topic. Each time I enjoy doing that, and appreciate it wouldn't be appropriate for me to follow words after his, and so I will continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, sometimes we have resolutions commending certain events and certain organizations where a few words can actually offer more respect than more. In this case, I think it's the life of Congressman Lewis that really puts this resolution into perspective for all of us. And once again, we just thank him for his service, thanks to this resolution. We urge our colleagues to support it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, over the past week and a half, in response to the regrettable loss of lives off the coast of Gaza, there has been much controversy and speculation over Israel's right to self defense. Yet we are reminded again of the situation Israeli families face every single day.

Imagine two young parents living each day going through their mental check list of how to protect their children. Is the path to the shelter clear? Do they know each other's schedules so they can find them if there is a missile strike? Do the schools have their emergency numbers? Have they taught the kids enough to react quickly in the event of a strike, but not too much to scare them?

While the kids are at school they worry about hearing sirens of an imminent attack from a neighboring territory and are always worried that it will come when they can't physically protect their children.

When this happened in America in the early 1960s these were my parents' fears. But with all of these fears they knew that the United States would do what was necessary to protect our families and our country. It would prevent the weapons from falling into the hands of people who wanted to destroy our way of life.

Like the United States during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Israelis have blockaded the source of the threat to their homeland.

America was able to protect itself, and we must ensure that Israel has the ability to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

I am, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, sometimes things are not as complex as we try to make them here in Washington. In fact, sometimes our best decisions come down to simple truths. One of those truths is that Americans are safer when our government fights to keep terrorists off U.S. soil rather than when it fights to bring them here.

Mr. Speaker, in January 2009, 17 months ago, the worst terrorists who had ever attacked the United States were on the verge of conviction in Guantanamo. The most experienced and best prosecutor the U.S. had against terrorists and a full prosecution team had been prosecuting these terrorists for almost 2 years. They had handled over 56 motions, countless hearings, and, according to them, would have had guilty pleas out of all five of the 9/11 defendants within 6 months; in other words, June a year ago.

But this administration issued an order 17 months ago that destroyed all the work that prosecutor had done, all the work his entire team had done, every motion they had won, done away with every hearing, for nothing, and forced us as a nation to begin this prosecution anew sometime, somewhere.

Today, 17 months later, there is not a single individual in this Chamber that has a clue as to when, where, how, or even if these terrorists will be prosecuted. All we know is that we are now 3\1/2\ more years down the road and the clock is still ticking while the Attorney General continues to debate whether we should prosecute them here or we should prosecute them there.

Now, while the victims of 9/11 have been waiting, the ACLU has not. They have moved forward with the John Adams Project to robustly defend these terrorists who, by the way, have admitted their guilt. And while the victims of 9/11 have been waiting, there are allegations that the identities of key military and intelligence personnel have been passed to the 9/11 defendants more than a year ago, and allegations that such passage could have come from the attorneys involved in the case. There are further allegations that the passage of this information could have been a criminal act and could have jeopardized the safety of some of the individuals involved.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, there have been concerns that the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General have failed to timely and adequately investigate these matters.

So what is the difference between our motion to recommit and this bill? First, we say, enough is enough; try the terrorists in Guantanamo. And we therefore prohibit the transfer of the detainees to the United States. Simple, straightforward, no more wobbling.

The majority's position in the bill, Mr. Speaker, is that the President can continue to take all the time he wants to determine if, when, where, and how he will prosecute the terrorists and where he will house them until he does, and all he has to do is file a plan when and if he ultimately decides to do so.

Now, my good friend, the chairman of the committee, loves to tell us, just read the bill. Well, if you just read the bill, you will find that the bill prohibits the Department of Defense from spending any money to reinforce security or other facilities, but it does not stop them from coming. It just stops us from preparing for them to come.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit says that the inspector general shall investigate as to whether or not there has been a crime from any of these allegations of distributing this information about military personnel and intelligence personnel. The current bill only allows him to investigate matters within the Department of Defense.

This bill makes sure that if any crime has been committed, he can investigate it, but the bill gives two get-out-of-jail-free cards. If the Secretary of Defense or the Attorney General decides that this would impair or interfere with an investigation, they can stop it--the same Secretary of Defense who has punted the investigation for a year, the same Attorney General who has not prosecuted these terrorists.

Mr. Speaker, I would just say if the Attorney General won't prosecute the terrorists, he is not going to investigate the attorneys that are representing them.

Mr. Speaker, let me say this in conclusion. The bottom line is, we can't stop every terrorist from coming to the United States, but we can stop the ones that are coming from Guantanamo. This motion to recommit does that. We can't protect all of our military and intelligence personnel from terrorists, but we can help the ones involved in this case. And that is what this motion to recommit does.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to stand in strong support of this bill as recommended. I would also like to express my sincere appreciation for Chairman Skelton, Ranking Member McKeon, and the chairman of our Readiness Subcommittee and my good friend from Texas, Mr. Ortiz.

Creating legislation of this magnitude and of critical importance to the defense of this Nation is no easy task, and I appreciate their leadership and their hard work in crafting a solid bipartisan bill.

Mr. Chairman, our Founding Fathers knew that our freedoms were so precious that they were worth protecting and worth defending. They also knew, as we know today, that one of the realities of having these freedoms is that there will always be individuals who want to rob them from us. Throughout the course of our Nation's history, we have seen this to be true. Today is no different. Recent attempts in Times Square, New York City, and on passenger airlines on Christmas Day are stark reminders that there are terrorist organizations that are actively trying to kill American citizens.

Mr. Chairman, we need to keep terrorists off U.S. soil, not provide means for any administration to bring them here. And while the committee did not support an amendment that would have prevented the transfer of any Guantanamo Bay detainee to U.S. soil, I do want to take a moment to highlight one provision that I am very glad is included in the mark. This provision requires an inventory and analysis of the modeling and simulation tools used by the Department of Defense during the development of the annual budget. This is a terrific first step in making sure the department has the right tools to ensure that the readiness needs of commanders will be reflected in the budget. By starting with funding priorities in support of commanders out in the field, we will make sure we are providing what is required to defend America.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you, and I thank all of the Members of this committee for their hard work in preparing this bill. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 5136--provided it's not destroyed with the adoption of political amendments that could negatively impact the readiness of our troops, such as the removal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy before the military has concluded its impact on our readiness.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to thank the ranking member for yielding that time.

Mr. Chairman, I was excited, as I was reading some articles in my office before I came over here, the leadership of the House has finally moved us up to where we now have an 18 percent approval rating across the country.

That means that only 82 percent of the Americans feel that this body doesn't have a clue about where we need to go or why. The reason is because, as hard as they try to find it, there is one thing they can't find in any of these walls and under any these chairs, and that is just simple common sense.

Because, Mr. Chairman, when they go to buy something, they know the first thing they need to do is ask how much does it cost? And yet we pass a health care bill, and we don't even really look at all the facts. We just want to get out of here. And later we find out it costs a whole lot more than what we thought it would, and we just come back up and say, well, that's just too bad. And we're getting ready to do the same thing, because when they take any action in their business, one of the first things they want to do is say, What's the effect going to be on that particular action?

Mr. Chairman, as we look at this provision on trying to remove the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy that is currently the policy for DOD, we hear our Chiefs of Staff in one voice: Admiral Roughead saying, just wait and get the facts before you make a decision. Just some common sense. We hear General Schwartz, the Chief of Staff of the Department of Air Force saying, just wait and get the facts. Let us do the study before you make a decision. Just some common sense. We have General Conway who says, just wait and get the facts before you make a decision. Just some common sense. And we have General Casey from the Army saying, just get the facts before you make a decision. Let us complete the study. Just some common sense.

But what some individuals want to do on this House floor is--same thing we do with so many other things--bury the common sense: let's just push forward, we'll get the facts later, let's just pass the provision now. And that's why, Mr. Chairman, I hope that this body will protect this authorization bill and not pass the amendment to remove Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Joe Luter, on the occasion of his life-long dedication and contributions to Smithfield and Isle of Wight County, Virginia.

Mr. Luter's commitment to the community he has called home for more than 70 years cannot be overstated. As a family man, business owner, community leader and philanthropist, his impact on the lives of thousands of people has been measurable and meaningful.

Mr. Luter graduated from Smithfield High School and went on to attend Wake Forest University, where he graduated from in 1962. Upon his graduation from college, he returned home to work in the family business, Smithfield Packing Company, and served as its president until 1970. After moving to Bayse, Virginia and developing Bryce Mountain Resort, Mr. Luter returned to Smithfield in 1975 as Chairman of the Board and CEO of Smithfield Foods, Inc., where he held that position until 2006.

Under his leadership, Smithfield Foods, Inc. has become a $12.5 billion company that employs over 52,000 people world-wide. Mr. Luter's love for people and his community led to his creation of the Smithfield-Luter Foundation in 2002. In 8 short years, it has granted 74 scholarships worth over $800,000. In addition, it donated $5 million in 2005 to Christopher Newport University, an institution located just a few miles away from the town of Smithfield. In 2006, the Foundation announced a $5 million gift for cancer research and treatment to the University of Virginia Health System in honor of longtime Smithfield employee Palmer Weber.

Tomorrow, the citizens of Smithfield and Isle of Wight County will honor Mr. Luter at the Grand Opening Dedication of Windsor Castle Park, a 210 acre riverside park located in the heart of downtown Smithfield. Mr. Luter's generous contribution made possible the purchase of 162 acres of farmland and development of the park, which he subsequently donated to the Town of Smithfield. Another 46 acres was gifted to the town by Mr. and Mrs. Lewis McMurran. The park includes a woodland trail system, picnic and play areas, a dog park, kayak and canoe launch, scenic overlook and the Windsor Castle Historic Site.

Madam Speaker, please join me and the citizens of Smithfield and Isle of Wight in offering our sincere gratitude to Mr. Luter for his exemplary service and commitment to his community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove Ms. Eshoo of California as a cosponsor of H.R. 877.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. James K. Stickland, on the occasion of his retirement as Executive Support Officer at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard.

As the Senior Leader assigned coordination of VIP visits, he was successful in promoting the Norfolk Naval Shipyard and its accomplishments to all levels of government, from local mayors in the community up to and including State and U.S. Senators. Those visits had a positive impact on the Naval Sea Systems Command as a whole in that they enabled our governmental representatives to see first-hand the special circumstances and challenging work situations we encounter every day in the ship repair community.

As the Executive Support Officer, he directed a staff which encompasses security, public affairs, congressional affairs, command instructional design, drug free workplace program, internal review, and parking control. His work during this period was complicated by the merger of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Maintenance Center into the Norfolk Naval Shipyard. He not only welcomed new personnel into his organization with proper courtesy and care, his public affairs expertise was helpful in developing and executing a communication strategy for the workforce to accompany such a significant change. That integration was completed in phases, with each phase being executed seamlessly, in accordance with established schedules.

As Executive Support Officer, he developed a relationship of trust and open communication among all levels of the Shipyard, from labor organization representatives up to and including the Shipyard Commander. He brings to the table a well-deserved depth of experience. When emergent or new tasks come about, he continually delivers not only within his assigned responsibilities, but he goes out of his way to help other departments where he can. He has clearly demonstrated excellence through an aggressive pursuit of quality and has shown, not only to the Navy but also to the community, that people with inspiration and dedication can make a difference.

Mr. Strickland's aggressive actions in connection with identified security deficiencies at Norfolk Naval Shipyard resulted in improvements in processes which have crossed over and positively impacted the region as a whole. Similarly, his recent involvement regarding proposed reductions in fire and emergency services at NNSY, Naval Medical Command Portsmouth and Naval Station Norfolk resulted in no reduction in service or adverse impact to mission.

Mr. Stickland was awarded the Purple Heart for injury sustained during his service in the Navy, demonstrating his selfless sacrifice and

the full measure of his devotion to the United States.

Madam Speaker, please join me and the employees of Norfolk Naval Shipyard in offering our sincere congratulations to Mr. Strickland on his exemplary service and a retirement well deserved.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Steve Best, on the occasion of his retirement as Fire Chief of the Chesapeake Fire Department.

Chief Best's contributions to the safety and health of the City of Chesapeake's citizens cannot be overstated. Chief Best modernized and diversified Chesapeake's fire and emergency personnel services to meet the wide-ranging challenges of modern life.

Chief Best began his fire fighting career as a sixteen-year-old volunteer with the Deep Creek Volunteer Fire Department. That experience led to professional firefighting with the Chesapeake Fire Department upon graduating from high school in 1974.

Working his way up through the ranks, Best worked as Fire Inspector and Fire Marshal for Chesapeake. He was promoted to Assistant Fire Chief, then Deputy Fire Chief until April 1998 when he became Chesapeake's Fire Chief and Emergency Services Coordinator.

Chief Best has ensured the Chesapeake Fire Department is able to respond to specialized situations involving hazardous materials, technical rescues, marine incidents, and foam firefighting. He greatly assisted in equipping every Chesapeake fire engine and ambulance with Advanced Life Support Equipment to save precious time in beginning life saving procedures. Best's fire department embodies a sense of community by offering programs such as child safety seat installations, fire station tours, and fire extinguisher training.

During his professional career, Chief Best continued to pursue educational opportunities. In addition to an Associate's Degree in Fire Science, a Bachelor of Science Degree in Governmental Administration, and a Master's Degree in Business Administration, Chief Best graduated with a Juris Doctor Degree from the Regent University School of Law in May 2008.

At home, Chief Best and his wife Sheree reside in Chesapeake. They are the proud parents of two sons. Chief Best teaches Sunday School at Deep Creek United Methodist Church and has served in many leadership roles on the Church Council. He has also served as a board member of the Boys and Girls Club of Southeast Virginia, Chesapeake Division, the Chesapeake Public School Foundation, and the YMCA Board of Management.

Chief Best deserves the gratitude of all of Chesapeake's residents for his innumerous accomplishments that have improved the quality of life here. Madam Speaker, please join me and the citizens of Chesapeake in offering our sincere congratulations to Chief Best on his exemplary service and a retirement well deserved.

Madam Speaker, I am submitting the following information regarding an earmark I received as part of H.R. 3288, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010.

Requesting Member: J. Randy Forbes

Bill Number: H.R. 3288

Account: Commerce--Justice--Science

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: City of Suffolk Police Department

Address of Requesting Entity: 120 Henley Place, Suffolk, VA 23434

Description of Request: Provides $70,000 for the Suffolk Police Department Technology Enhancement Initiative within the COPS Technology Program.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 3388, the Petersburg National Battlefield Boundary Modification Act. This legislation would provide for the expansion of Petersburg National Battlefield in Petersburg, Virginia, which will serve to increase heritage tourism in the Commonwealth of Virginia and enable Americans to learn more about the final years of the Civil War.

Nearly one quarter of the entire Civil War was fought in and around Petersburg, Virginia.

Only 25 miles south of Richmond, the city of Petersburg served as an important supply center to the Confederate capital. With its five railroad lines and key roads, Petersburg was recognized as a lynchpin of all Confederate efforts by both General Ulysses S. Grant and General Robert E. Lee, which is why on June 1864 General Grant moved to surround and isolate the City. Remarkably, for 9 1/2 months, General Lee held off the Northern troops, in what became one of the longest sieges in the history of American warfare. Eventually, both armies were forced to abandon Petersburg, leaving behind 70,000 casualties as they began their trek toward Appomattox Courthouse, where General Lee would ultimately surrender.

The historic sites at Petersburg National Battlefield tell this incredible story, and serve as an important reminder of an extraordinary chapter in American history. The numerous battlefields, monuments, and museums allow not only Virginians, but all Americans, to appreciate those who came before us during one of the most trying conflicts in the history of our great Nation.

The bill before us today, H.R. 3388, expands the area of the Petersburg National Battlefield in Virginia by over 7,000 acres. The bill allows the National Park Service to acquire the land by purchase, easement, exchange, and donation from private and nonprofit landowners. This bill would also allow for the administrative jurisdiction transfer of approximately 1.17 acres of land between the Fort Lee Military Reservation, through the Department of the Army, and the National Park Service, through the Department of the Interior. H.R. 3388 is supported by all parties involved, including each surrounding locality.

The Petersburg National Battlefield is an integral part of the local community, an important tourist destination for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and a touchstone of America's past. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3388 to ensure that this important historic site is enhanced for generations of Americans to come.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 197, to encourage banks and mortgage servicers to work with families affected by contaminated drywall to allow temporary forbearance without penalty on payment on their home mortgages. I am a proud cosponsor of this Resolution.

Along with thousands of affected homeowners across the country, my constituents are waiting for answers on the potential health and safety hazards posed by toxic drywall imported from China between 2004 and 2007. The corrosion of electrical wiring, home appliance failure, the emission of strong odorous gases, and health problems such as headaches, nausea, and throat irritation, are just some of the commonly reported problems associated with Chinese drywall.

Although a federal Interagency Task Force has been investigating this problem for nearly one year, suffering homeowners have still not been provided federal guidelines for inspection or remediation of their homes containing Chinese drywall. Basic questions remain unanswered, such as whether these homes are safe for people to reside in; whether Chinese drywall may combine with other common home fixtures or chemicals to cause additional harms. Homeowners continue to wait for answers from their government. Despite nearly 2,000 reported cases of Chinese drywall to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and untold thousands more still unreported, committees in the House of Representatives have yet to hold one investigative hearing on the matter. Members deserve the opportunity to hear from expert witnesses across the spectrum of this growing crisis. Health, financial, safety, and legal ramifications need to be explored in depth so that appropriate action may be taken on behalf of so many American homeowners and affected businesses.

Madam Speaker, H. Con. Res. 197 is a step in the right direction. At this juncture, it is important that all those impacted by this drywall, from homeowners and builders to developers and banks and mortgage companies, work together with understanding until more answers are provided on the effects of this toxic drywall. I urge my colleagues to hold immediate congressional hearings on this issue, and I urge them to demonstrate their support in bringing relief to thousands of Americans whose homes have been so severely affected by Chinese drywall.