Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Rock Spring Congregational United Church of Christ in Arlington on the celebration of its 100th anniversary on May 20, 2012. Founded a century ago by a group of neighbors gathered at a home near a stop on the Old Dominion trolley line, from its humble beginnings this church congregation has grown tremendously, and along the way has become a bedrock of the Arlington community and beyond.

In the 1930s, Rock Spring's women formed Arlington's first library, Rohrer Children's Library, which is now the oldest public library in Arlington. Today it holds over 5,000 books and remains open to the community, serving as an invaluable resource.

The County's population grew after World War II, yet there were no kindergartens in Arlington. To help meet the need, Rock Spring's women became the driving force behind the 1944 opening of the still-thriving Rock Spring Cooperative Pre-School, which operates on church property.

In the 1950s and 60s, Rock Spring's congregation and individual members supported and actively worked for the desegregation of the Arlington Public Schools and other public places.

The church and its members have supported and led movements to create social service and volunteer organizations in Arlington and Northern Virginia including: Hospice of Northern Virginia (now Capital Caring), Meals on Wheels, FISH (For Immediate Sympathetic Help), the Arlington Food Assistance Center (AFAC), AMEN (Arlingtonians Meeting Emergency Needs) and the Arlington Housing Corporation.

Numerous Rock Spring members, including the late Virginia Delegate Mary Marshall, and long serving Arlington County Board members Ellen Bozman and Jim Hunter, have served as public office holders and on local, regional and state boards and commissions.

Looking towards the future, Rock Spring members have declared their church to be a ``Just Peace'' and ``open and affirming'' congregation, and a place where a welcome is extended to all. They continue the church's tradition of activism and charitable work through activities such as the ``Fifth Sunday'' initiative, gardening for AFAC, and youth mission trips to build houses.

I would like to ask my colleagues in the House to join me in commending the Rock Spring Congregational United Church of Christ for its 100 years of commitment of service to Arlington, Northern Virginia, and the wider world, and to encourage their congregation to continue its faithful activism for the next century. I send my sincere thanks for their unwavering service to Northern Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, Iran's failure to comply with U.N. Security Council resolutions regarding its nuclear program, or its responsibilities as a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, are deeply troubling.

A nuclear-armed Iran would represent a grave threat to the interests of the United States, Israel, and our other allies in the Middle East. This body has forcefully and repeatedly emphasized the singular importance of contributing to Israel's defense and well-being, most recently only last week when we overwhelmingly passed H.R. 4133, affirming the strategic relationship between Israel and the United States.

Sadly, the resolution before us does not contribute in any appreciable way either to Israel's security or to the goal of compelling Iran's cooperation on their nuclear program. The ambiguous language of H. Res. 568 effectively redefines the circumstances that could be used to justify a military strike against Iran. This could make it harder to reach an agreement through negotiations, since it could be argued that Iran--and indeed any country with a civilian nuclear program--already possesses ``nuclear weapons capability.'' The consensus in the U.S. and Israeli intelligence community remains that Iran has not made the decision to move ahead with the development of a nuclear weapon.

Furthermore, the resolution declares that, of all possible responses should Iran make that decision, our government cannot consider containment. By combining these two provisions, even in a non-binding resolution, the Congress risks accelerating a drive to war.

Since President Obama took office, the United States has carefully built a comprehensive regime of multi-lateral sanctions in response to Iran's intransigence. After extensive diplomatic efforts by this administration, Iran agreed to reengage with the international community, and the second major negotiations session will take place in Baghdad on May 23.

The United States and our partners enter the dialogue with Iran from a position of strength and unity, while reports indicate Iran's leadership is divided and weak. With the P5+1 negotiations, we have a unique opportunity to demonstrate our resolve to achieve the goal of full compliance by Iran with IAEA expectations, while reversing the clock on Iran's nuclear efforts and building toward a permanent agreement that ensures Iran will never develop a nuclear weapon.

The United States built a global alliance against Iran with the support of close, like-minded allies Britain, Germany and France. But our efforts also rely heavily on Russia and China, partners that have at times seen this issue very differently. It is critical that we maintain a consistent and reasoned approach towards Iran that will help us maintain this network of partners.

As we wind down two wars in the region, it is urgent that we make the most of our extensive diplomatic efforts and the platform of stringent sanctions the world community has imposed on Iran. We must capitalize on the opportunity presented by the Baghdad talks. This resolution is inconsistent with that aim.

Madam Speaker, I rise in reluctant but strong opposition to H.R. 4970, a needlessly partisan reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) that unwisely undermines important protections for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.

Initially enacted in 1994, VAWA acknowledges the harmful and persistent impact that domestic violence, sexual assault, and dating violence has on our society. Nearly one in four women are the victims of rape or abuse by a partner during adulthood, with young women between the ages of 16 and 24 experiencing the highest rate of partner violence. One in four girls and one in six boys are sexually abused before the age of 18, half of whom are victims of incest. Nationwide, approximately three women are killed each day by a current or former intimate partner.

In addition to the physical and emotional trauma experienced by victims, domestic violence and sexual assaults impose a tremendous economic cost on our nation. Rape is the most costly crime to its victims, totaling $127 billion a year in medical costs, lost earnings, and diminished quality of life. The cost of intimate partner violence exceeds $5.8 billion, including $4.1 billion in direct health care expenses. Over 25 percent of domestic violence victims report that they lost a job, at least in part, because of this violence. In total, domestic violence is estimated to cost employers in the U.S. up to $13 billion every year.

To address this staggering problem, VAWA established streamlined programs to provide law enforcement, judges and prosecutors, and social service providers with the resources they need to hold offenders accountable and support the needs of victims. It allowed for coordinated, community-based services for victims and strengthened housing protections. VAWA also created important prevention programs for young people and improved the response to violence against Native American women and those in underserved communities. The tangible results of VAWA are impressive and should make all Americans proud.

Since 1994, reporting of domestic violence has increased by as much as 51 percent, while the number of individuals killed by an intimate partner has decreased 34 percent for women and 57 percent for men. States have enacted important protections for victims of stalking and strengthened rape laws in response to VAWA. Many more victims of domestic violence, dating violence, and sexual assault are able to access critical services. An entire generation of justice system professionals now understands that our society cannot tolerate these crimes. In just the first six years after enactment, VAWA saved an estimated $12.6 billion in net averted costs.

Yet, the bill before us today betrays the bipartisan history of VAWA. It fails to contain important reforms included in a Senate-passed version of the bill that ensure LGBT, Native American, and immigrant women receive the protections they deserve. The bill lacks protections for LGBT survivors despite the fact that studies have clearly shown that these individuals are underserved explicitly because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. It fails to provide American Indian women effective recourse to bring justice against non-Indian abusers, even though these women face rates of victimization more than double that of non-Indian women. And the bill, for the first time ever, weakens protections in current law for migrant victims of violence. The bill would leave immigrant victims without meaningful access to protection, create processing delays that will keep women in life- threatening situations for longer periods of time, and undermine law enforcement efforts to investigate and prosecute violent crimes with the assistance of immigrant victims.

Compounding the serious flaws in the legislation, Republicans forced the bill to the floor under a closed rule, allowing no opportunity for Democratic Members to offer amendments to improve the bill. Instead of following a truly democratic process to debate these important policy provisions, the majority finds it more important to shield their side from uncomfortable votes. This procedure is inappropriate for legislation as important as VAWA and is clearly inconsistent with the majority's pledge for a more open Congress.

VAWA always has been, and should have remained, a bipartisan bill. I am deeply troubled that my Republican colleagues decided to roll back protections for victims of abuse and failed to include the responsible reforms contained in the Senate bill that passed by a bipartisan vote of 68 31. We must pass a strong VAWA reauthorization, but this bill falls well short of that critical necessity.

I ask my colleagues to oppose this bill, and I encourage the Republican leadership to allow a vote on the bipartisan Senate bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong objection to an unwise and dangerous policy provision that is included in the Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill on the floor today. It would undermine the ability of Federal law enforcement to investigate and curb gun trafficking along the Southwest border.

In August of last year, the ATF began a program to require licensed gun dealers in the four most dangerous border States to report when an individual buys multiple assault rifles within 5 business days--just as all dealers have reported multiple handgun sales for over 20 years. The current rule is narrowly tailored to generate useful intelligence on illegal gun trafficking by Mexican drug cartels. According to ATF data, 70 percent of firearms recovered and traced in drug cartel crimes in Mexico originated from the United States. We know that semiautomatic assault rifles sold by U.S. dealers near the border fuel Mexican cartel violence--violence that has killed more than 47,000 people in Mexico, including thousands of police and military personnel.

This rule is working. In just the past 9 months, ATF opened more than 120 criminal investigations based on multiple assault rifle sales reports. And this action is constitutional. The rule is indisputably constitutional. The authority to operate such a program has been upheld by Federal courts. So there's no question about the legal authority. But this bill that we will vote on today, at the behest of the NRA and other gun groups, would block funding for this vital law enforcement program.

Unfortunately, this is only the latest in a long list of irresponsible actions this Congress has taken on gun policy, such as the fact that due to Congressional action, loaded firearms are now permitted in National Parks. The D.C. voting rights bill that enjoyed joint bipartisan support was scuttled by requiring restrictions on the D.C. City Council regarding the type of gun safety laws that they could enact if they wanted their right to vote.

Restrictions blocking State and local law enforcement access to important crime gun trace data were made permanent. Just last year, the House passed legislation to override the concealed carry requirements of individual States, establishing a lowest common denominator Federal standard.

Despite all of these actions to weaken gun laws, judging by the outlandish statements from the NRA, you would think that the Second Amendment was under constant bombardment. Wayne LaPierre, vice president of the NRA, said last year that the claim that the Obama administration has done virtually nothing to restrict the rights of gun owners is ``a big fat stinking lie.'' He went further to claim that the President's lack of action is ``all part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment in our country.'' Again, another LaPierre quote.

Actions are supposed to speak louder than words, but apparently for some people, crazy conspiracy fantasies speak loudest of all.

Instead of weakening gun laws further, we should be passing commonsense measures that are supported by the vast majority of Americans. In fact, according to a poll conducted by Republican pollster Frank Luntz, 82 percent of NRA members and 86 percent of non- NRA gun owners support prohibiting suspected terrorists from purchasing guns; 69 percent of NRA members and 85 percent of non-NRA gun owners support background checks for all gun sales at gun shows.

And yet the NRA opposes these commonsense restrictions and gets this Congress to do so as well.

There are bills introduced in Congress right now to address these two issues, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act and the Fix Gun Checks Act. Neither one has received so much as a subcommittee hearing in this Republican Congress.

Instead, we are debating a bill that includes a provision that would remove a modest, yet valuable, tool for Federal law enforcement to stop the illegal smuggling of firearms and the killing of thousands of innocent people. Where are our priorities?

I do want to thank Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah for including $12 million in the CJS bill to implement the NICS Amendments Improvement Act. It's a $7 million increase over last year; that's progress. In fact, it's a program that assists States in the establishment and upgrade of information such as mental health records entered into databases that are used to determine eligibility for firearm purchases. If we had had that, perhaps our colleague, Gabby Giffords, would not have been shot. Increased funding is a step in the right direction, but the inclusion of the ATF provision is not. It will only serve to undermine Federal law enforcement's ability to stop illegal gun trafficking. Congress needs to stop weakening gun policy to serve the narrow interests of the gun lobby and start enacting laws to protect the safety of the American public.

Mr. Speaker, Ronald Reagan was the last President to raise the Federal gasoline tax to support transportation programs when he signed the Surface Transportation Act of 1982. He justified the gas tax increase as necessary to pay for needed investments in building and maintaining our Nation's surface transportation infrastructure and to help jump-start an economy that was then also stuck in a recession. He referred to the highway bill as a ``jobs'' bill to promote economic growth.

Since that bill was signed into law back in January of 1983, Republican-controlled Congresses have allowed the highway fund to go bankrupt, necessitating multiple infusions from general funds to allow it to limp along with short-term extensions of current law. Today, some within this Chamber won't even support a Federal transportation bill at current funding levels, as if the crumbling interstates and growing list of structurally deficient bridges are no longer a Federal responsibility. Instead, they insist on including unrelated measures like the Keystone XL pipeline that is designed to stall completion of even a modest, multiyear transportation authorization.

Mr. Speaker, the Keystone XL pipeline should have nothing to do with the transportation bill and will have no impact on gasoline prices despite what its advocates claim. Today, there is already an estimated 20-year excess capacity of oil pipelines from Canada to the United States. This is about being able to export oil from the gulf coast to other countries.

Mr. Speaker, it's time to pass a responsible transportation bill for the 21st century.

I move to strike the last word.

I rise as well in very strong opposition to this amendment that prohibits funding for the National Ocean Policy. The purpose of this policy is to improve our Nation's ocean management effort, protect and create jobs, and grow our economy by ensuring all the multiple uses of the ocean are coordinated in a more seamless manner.

Far from a heavy-handed directive, as it's being described, the National Ocean Policy will actually streamline government programs and regulations. It will reduce bureaucratic red tape. And perhaps most importantly, it enlists local stakeholders in the decision-making process. And it shouldn't be a partisan issue.

The National Ocean Policy was a cornerstone recommendation of both the independent Pew Oceans Commission, which was chaired by current Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, appointed by George W. Bush. Both commissions called for harmonizing the responsibilities of the 27 different Federal agencies with jurisdiction over some aspect of ocean management.

As my colleagues can imagine, the current arrangement has led to ineffective management of resources, inefficient use of taxpayer dollars, and increased conflicts among a growing number of ocean users. Strategic planning maximizes organizational efficiency and use of public resources.

The National Ocean Policy will improve opportunities for community and citizen participation in the planning process and facilitate sustainable economic growth by providing transparency and predictability for economic investments. It represents a science-based strategy to align conservation and restoration goals at the Federal, State, tribal, local, and regional levels, and it will strengthen the integration of Federal and non-Federal ocean observing systems and data management into one national system.

Of particular interest to me, the Chesapeake Bay--I know it is to Chairman Wolf as well--is poised to benefit from the National Ocean Policy action plan. It will help advance the bay's health, from increasing public school education about the Chesapeake Bay region to creating a mapping tool for the Chesapeake Bay watershed that allows stakeholders to share information and ideas for land protection and restoration.

It calls for the establishment of a National Shellfish Initiative, in partnership with commercial and restoration aquaculture communities, which includes pilot projects to explore the ecosystem benefits of shellfish aquaculture while increasing shellfish production in U.S. waters. That's so important for our economy. In fact, all oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes are critical components of our Nation's economy. U.S. coastal communities are home to more than half of all Americans. They generate an estimated $8 trillion a year and they support 69 million jobs.

Declining ocean health and a lack of effective coordination is putting this great economic engine at risk. Comprehensive planning will ensure the stability of the Nation's seaports as additional users of ocean space evolve, including the responsible development of offshore energy resources.

But we must make no mistake: This attempt to defund and delay the National Ocean Policy is a dangerous political move that puts the health of our oceans, coastal communities, jobs, and our fishing industry at risk. We need to protect, maintain, and to restore the health of our oceans and coasts. Continuing to develop the National Ocean Policy offers our Nation the best path forward.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this misguided amendment and to do something that is very much needed for our economy, for our oceans and particularly for our coastal communities. Let's do the right thing. Let's get all these users organized and working together in pursuit of a streamlined consistent constructive policy. It's the right thing to do. This amendment is not. Let's defeat this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Autism Understanding and Training In School Methodologies for Educators Act (AUTISM Educators Act) of 2012. This legislation would create a demonstration program to train mainstream teachers in effective communications skills and in turn improve the learning experience for children on the autism spectrum. Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is the fastest growing developmental disability in the United States.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently announced updated statistics on the incidence of Autism Spectrum Disorder in the U.S. They are staggering. One in 88 children is diagnosed on the autism spectrum by age 8, and boys are five times more likely to have an ASD. These findings are based on 2008 data and reflect a 78 percent increase from the 2002 data. Although we are better at diagnosing ASD, the increase cannot be wholly attributed to better and earlier diagnosis.

We do not know the causes of ASD, but many in the field of research suggest environmental factors are at play.

While scientists work on the causes of and treatments for ASD, children on the spectrum deserve the best possible education. Many of these children are placed in special classes with trained special education instructors, but a number of ``high functioning'' children on the spectrum are enrolled in mainstream classrooms.

Unfortunately due to the rapid growth in ASD, many teachers have not had the opportunity to receive training in communicating with autistic children. Teachers want this training. And the AUTISM Educators Act will facilitate and implement qualified training programs in school settings.

There is a large demand for this legislation. I know this because the issue first came to me from families in my district who desperately need the public education system to work better for their children's special needs. These committed parents know that communications skills are paramount in working with children on the spectrum. The AUTISM Educators Act establishes a demonstration grant to a local education agency (LEA) in partnership with a university school of education to develop and

implement a program to deliver in-service training to practicing teachers.

My constituents--parents, teachers, principals and school board members--are in agreement that this is a remedy they seek. It is a small investment, but it can make an enormous improvement in educational success for our special needs children.

I am pleased that the cochair of the House Autism Caucus, Mike Doyle, is joining me as an original cosponsor of this bill.

I have been overwhelmed with the support of my local school community. I include their letters of support.

Arlington SEPTA,

Arlington, VA, April 9, 2012.

Hon. Jim Moran,

Rayburn House Office Building,

Washington, DC.

Dear Congressman Moran: The Arlington Special Education

Parent Teacher Association (Arlington SEPTA) enthusiastically

supports your legislative initiative to establish a

demonstration program to train classroom teachers and school

staff on how to implement evidence-based practices for

educating students with autism spectrum disorders.

Arlington has a highly organized community of families who

actively collaborate with schools to support students with

special needs. Two years ago, Arlington families established

the first Special Education PTA in Virginia. The Arlington

SEPTA is a county-wide Parent Teacher Association organized

for the specific purpose of providing information and support

to the families of children with special needs. Our

organization's mission is to enhance the educational

experience of children with special needs by creating a

collaborative network of parents, educators, and community

members. For example, we have developed a program to

competitively award mini-grants of up to $500 to classroom

teachers and school staff, who use the mini-grants to

purchase the materials needed to pilot enrichment activities

for students with autism spectrum disorders and other

disabilities.

The National Research Council's 2001 report on Educating

Children with Autism concluded that teachers,

paraprofessionals and others educating children with autism

spectrum disorders ``must be familiar with theory and

research concerning best practices for children with autistic

spectrum disorders, including methods of applied behavior

analysis, naturalistic learning, assistive technology,

socialization, communication, inclusion, adaptation of the

environment, language interventions, assessment, and the

effective use of data collection systems'' (p. 225).

Unfortunately, few teachers, paraprofessionals and related

staff receive such training and the resulting knowledge gap

is becoming a crisis as the number of children with autism

spectrum disorders continues to rise. The Center for Disease

Control and Prevention estimates that the number of children

identified as having an autism spectrum disorder in the

United States now is roughly 1 in 88, with boys four times

more likely to have autism at an estimated rate of 1 in 54.

Congressman Moran, your legislative initiative brings hope

to many families who are doing everything they can to support

their children with special needs. Not only students with

autism spectrum disorders, but also students with other types

of disabilities, will benefit from training classroom

teachers and school staff on how to implement evidence-based

practices for educating students with autism spectrum

disorders. Thank you for listening to the calls of this

unique community and dedicating time and resources to support

these special students.

Sincerely,

John E. Toner,

President.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 9, an irresponsible bill that, in the name of cutting taxes for small business and spurring job growth, would provide a windfall for those who need them least. This one-year measure would increase our federal deficit to the tune of $46 billion.

H.R. 9 provides qualifying businesses with less than 500 employees a 20 percent tax deduction for domestic business income which could be taken during the current tax year. Instead of supporting local small businesses though, this bill inordinately benefits wealthy business owners. Half of the tax cuts in the bill would go to the four percent of small business owners earning over $1 million a year. The 55 percent of small-business employers that have incomes below $100,000 would receive only 6 percent of the benefit from this bill. Struggling small business owners who are operating at an annual loss will not benefit from this bill in any way.

The Center for American Progress reports that professional sports franchises such as the Los Angeles Dodgers, Donald Trump's Trump Tower Sales & Leasing, and Paris Hilton Entertainment, Inc. are among the businesses owned by millionaires that would enjoy this tax break.

This one-time windfall simply will not change incentives for hiring. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO): ``[T]he one-year of tax savings provided by the bill is unlikely to make the costs of much investment in physical capital or labor recruitment and training worthwhile.'' In fact, this will incentivize qualifying business to delay investment in order to maximize taxable income in 2012. Additionally, H.R. 9 does not require a company to create any jobs or invest in the U.S. economy. In fact, if a company reduces their workforce or sends jobs overseas, they would still qualify for this 20 percent tax break.

H.R. 9 borrows billions in order to create a new tax expenditure yet fails to address the primary issue facing American small business, lack of consumer demand. This bill chooses anti-tax orthodoxy over fiscal and economic logic. Given our current fiscal situation we cannot afford another reckless giveaway to the wealthy. I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 9.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize Alexandria City's 25th anniversary of Days of Remembrance, Yom HaShoah, for the victims of the Holocaust. We are reminded by the words of Elie Wiesel, that ``for the dead and the living, we must bear witness.'' Bearing witness means standing by the victims of the monstrous event that was the Holocaust, and doing everything possible to ensure it doesn't happen again.

There is a moral imperative for those of us who, but for the luck of birth, benefit from peace and prosperity. Thus we also have the responsibility to speak out for those who face the atrocities of starvation and oppression. In honoring the victims, and by lifting up the survivors, we bear witness to all victims of genocidal aggression and violence by states or transnational agents of terror.

Unfortunately, genocide has not been eradicated. In the Sudan, the crisis continues. Sudan President Omar al-Bashir is currently blocking humanitarian and food aid to the South Kordofan, Blue Nile, and Abyei regions along the border of South Sudan. Military action in the region has prevented the Sudanese people from growing and planting food, threatening starvation.

The Government of Sudan's serious human rights violations have continued across different parts of the country over the last decade. It is a tragedy, and an atrocity, and we must stand together to stop what is occurring.

``Never again'' is a declaration of personal commitment. We can do nothing, and nothing will change. Likewise, we can stand up, to fight back--to make things better. On this, the 25th Anniversary of Alexandria's Days of Remembrance, let us rededicate our resolve to ending this modern day genocide, as one of the best ways to honor those who perished decades ago from the inhumanity of their fellow man.

Mr. Speaker, we pick up the Politico today, and the headline is: ``Republicans Ax Aid to the Poor.'' It goes on to explain that there's a $33 billion cut in food stamps in the Romney-Ryan Republican budget that passed the House so that the average family of four gets an 11 percent cut in their monthly benefits after September 1, and it requires that households exhaust most of their liquid assets before qualifying for help. This hits hardest among the long-term unemployed, who will be forced off the rolls until they've spent down their savings to less than $2,000, in many cases.

Then, we read we're going to do another tax cut this week. Majority Leader Cantor wants to cut taxes by another $46 billion. In fact, the majority of it goes to less than 3 percent of all taxpayers and less than 8 percent of business owners. It's available to highly paid professionals, longtime lobby firms, professional sports teams, and entertainers like Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian and the like. They all get another tax cut.

Where is our sense of justice? Where are our priorities? Where is our commonsense?

Notwithstanding the statement of my very good friend from Alaska, I rise in support of Mr. Peters's amendment. It would remove a provision that would allow for the importation of polar bears killed in Canada, but the provision only benefits 41 big game hunters who shot bears in Canada prior to their listing as a species threatened with extinction.

These hunters were on notice that the trophies would likely not be allowed into the United States, but rushed to hunt the bears anyway. Now they're asking for Congress to bail them out by creating an exemption in the law so they can bring their trophies into the country.

It's not about the number of polar bears. It is about the underlying principle that decisions related to the protection of threatened and endangered animals should be based upon science and subject to consistent enforcement, not dependent upon the whims of Congress. Polar bears are already threatened, and the last thing they need is more trophy hunters chasing them down and shooting them. But that's exactly what will happen if this Congress demonstrates that it is fully willing to retroactively change the law in this manner to accommodate the wishes of a very small minority. It's only 41 big-game hunters but we're changing the law on their account?

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and a Federal court have rejected previous requests to import trophies after 2008. That should be the final word on the subject.

I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Peters amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Alexandria, Virginia resident Andrew Rodriguez, on his receipt of the highly-esteemed Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) 2011 James E. Sullivan Award. The award honors the nation's outstanding amateur athlete and has annually been presented since 1930. Finalists were selected from personal nominations following a review by the AAU Sullivan Award Executive Committee. Renowned recipients of the Award include: Mark Spitz, Jackie Joyner- Kersee, Florence Joyner, Peyton Manning, Michael Phelps, J.J. Redick, Tim Tebow, and Shawn Johnson, just to name a few.

As you may know, the AAU is dedicated to promoting amateur athletics throughout this nation and is one of the largest non-profit volunteer sports organizations in the U.S. For over 100 years, AAU has remained committed to helping young people develop as both athletes and as valued citizens of their communities. The Sullivan Award, which is in its 82nd year, making it even older than the Heisman trophy, salutes amateur athletes who not only succeed in sports, but who also exhibit strong moral character in their daily lives.

In order to be considered, Sullivan Award nominees must demonstrate talent, excellent character, leadership and sportsmanship-- all qualities that Andrew has certainly surpassed during his career at the United States Military Academy at West Point. He recently received the Army's first Campbell Trophy and the National Football Foundation National Scholar-Athlete award, which recognizes the nation's best in combined academic success, community leadership, and performance on the football field. Andrew currently carries a 4.14 GPA as a mechanical engineering major and ranks third academically in his class of 1,052 cadets.

In addition to his exemplar character and scholarly record, Andrew is a senior linebacker on Army's football team and delivered 140 career tackles in 23 career games. Andrew suffered what many thought was a career-ending injury and missed the entire 2010 football season, but through determination and hard work, recovered and returned for the 2011 season as team captain.

Andrew is an outstanding leader both on the field and in the classroom. He has been very active in giving back to his community and honoring our military by spending many hours visiting the injured at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. He follows his father, Commanding General of the U.S. Army Forces Command David Rodriguez, and sister Amy, in a family tradition at West Point.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to ask my colleagues to join AAU and myself in congratulating Andrew on his outstanding achievement. We can all see that he is an exceptional, strong leader, and I very much look forward to following his continued success. It is truly an honor to represent Andrew and his family in the United States Congress, and I sincerely thank them for their commitment to our nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Disabled Military Child Protection Act of 2012. To put it simply, this bill will permit military retirees the ability to place their self funded Survivor Benefit Plan into a Special Needs Trust to ensure their surviving dependent child's future.

This is an equity and fairness issue. Civilians are allowed to create a Special Needs Trust for their permanently disabled children to ensure they receive care beyond the guardian's death but under current law, military personnel with severely disabled children are legally prohibited from establishing a Special

Needs Trust to ensure their surviving dependent child's future care.

This bill will provide veterans with the ability to direct their Survivor Benefit Plan annuity payments to a Special Needs Trust. The creation of an SNT will ensure that a dependent, disabled child will continue to qualify for means-tested benefits, such as Social Security Disability Insurance and Medicaid. Assets placed into a Special Needs Trust are not generally counted as income or assets, allowing dependent children to remain eligible for these benefits throughout their lifetime.

This bill would impact approximately 1,065 military dependents who are incapacitated beneficiaries under Survivor Benefit Plan and with individual care costs for a disabled child exceeding $100,000 a year, this additional benefit will increase their quality of life significantly.

For those who believe this bill may contribute to abuse, it must be noted that a Special Needs Trust is administered under both federal and state law. Appointed fiduciaries are subject to auditing and are responsible for managing a benefit for a specific group. Annuities are also placed in Special Needs Trusts that are subject to income tax. Therefore, beneficiaries are shielded from abuse considering each trust has significant oversight.

Finally, I am proud that this bill has 4 esteemed public servants as original co-sponsors: Congressmen Capps, Polis, Rangel, and Rothman. This bill is also supported by the Military Officers Association of America.

Madam Chairman, this budget proposal is a stunningly radical document because at its core is a massive redistribution of income from the economically disadvantaged to the wealthiest members of our society.

In order to fund historic, unnecessary, and unsustainable tax cuts for the rich, this Republican budget would require us to nearly eliminate our ability as a government to invest in our physical and human infrastructure.

In other words, it shows no faith in our Nation's future. It puts our future in the hands of those who can afford to live in gated communities and invest in foreign economies. In fact, more than two- thirds of the non-defense cuts in this Republican plan come from programs that directly benefit low-income Americans. The path laid out by this resolution is one where, in my children's lifetime, most of the Federal Government, with the exception of defense, Social Security, and health care, would no longer have the money to function.

Now, what does it mean to virtually eliminate non-defense discretionary spending? That's a budgetary term. But that includes research at NIH; roads and public transportation; transit funding; Head Start; education support; FBI; drug enforcement; food, meat, and drug inspections; no national park maintenance or environmental protection. That's what it means to virtually eliminate these functions of the government.

Madam Chairman, this is not a budget for the America that we know today. It's a budget for Grover Norquist's America--a radical, conservative fantasy land where government is no longer fiscally able to play a role protecting those who need it most, protecting our most precious natural resources and investing in the job creation initiatives that will enable us to move forward as a people. That is not a vision that we should want to see passed into law, let alone into reality.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Walter Alcorn, an exceptional constituent, on his receipt of the 2011 Fairfax County Citizen of the Year. Walter will receive this distinguished honor at the organization's 62nd Annual Awards Banquet on March 25, 2012. Walter has exhibited outstanding civic service and selfless volunteerism, and this honor is rightfully awarded.

Walter's recognition by the Fairfax County Citizens Association offers only a glimpse into his committed service to the residents of Northern Virginia. Most recently, Walter's involvement in Tyson's Corner helped a great deal in solving many of the complex planning issues.

As the Chair of the Planning Commission's Tysons Corner Committee, Walter led work to translate the vision and recommendations of the Tysons Corner Task Force into language appropriate for the Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan. For more than two years, Walter led the Committee and worked with all concerned stakeholders to develop consensus recommendations that were ultimately adopted by the Board of Supervisors in June 2010. In March of last year, the Board of Supervisors requested that the Planning Commission develop an all- encompassing method to address infrastructure financing, along with other Tysons-related implementation issues. Walter has diplomatically made sure that this has remained transparent throughout the entire process.

Walter's service goes back decades. He has served on the Fairfax County Planning Commission since 1997. He has chaired the Planning Commission's Tysons Corner Committee since 2008 and has served as its Vice Chairman since 1997. He was first by Board Chairman Kate Hanley, and reappointed 3 times on motions of Board Chairmen Gerry Connolly and Sharon Bulova. He also chaired the Planning Commission's Environment Committee from 1997 to 2006. Walter has been a Virginia Certified Planning Commissioner since December 1997.

Along with his service to the Fairfax County Planning Commission, he is an enthusiastic coach for Reston Little League, manager of the Reston Warriors 12U baseball team and serves on the steering committee of his Sunday School class at the United Christian Parish in Reston. When not volunteering, he is employed as the Vice President for Environmental Affairs and Industry Sustainability at the Consumer Electronics Association in Crystal City, where he commutes daily via the Fairfax Connector and Metro. Previously, he worked as an environmental consultant specializing in the development of a national system for recycling electronic equipment, co-founded the 501(c)3 National Center for Electronics Recycling in 2005, and was a Deputy Division Manager in the Technology Research Group for Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). Prior to his private sector employment, Walter was a Policy Aide in the Providence District Supervisor's office.

Walter is a model of the best kind of civil servant. I'm proud to congratulate him on his well-deserved award, and give my sincere thanks for his unwavering service to Northern Virginia.