Floor Statements

I want to thank my colleague for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, before I begin I just wanted to take a minute to congratulate the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), Senator Collins and Senator Lieberman for their extraordinary effort in getting us to this point. This Nation truly owes all of them a debt of gratitude for the diligent effort they have put into reaching this bipartisan compromise.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we will implement intelligence reform before the close of the 108th Congress, and I rise in support of the underlying bill. After 9/11, we clearly approached fighting the global war on terrorism as we had the Cold War. But it became clear that we needed to adapt our intelligence community, law enforcement agencies, and military to fight the new global threats. The 9/11 Commission gave us a blueprint for that mission, and this legislation will help us to implement their vision. Cooperation among agencies and Departments will be critical, and this measure shifts the mentality of our intelligence community from ``need to know'' to ``need to share.'' It also makes significant improvements to homeland security while avoiding some of the controversial provisions included in earlier drafts.

As a member of the Committee on Armed Services, I am pleased that this bill strikes a careful balance between creating a strong national intelligence director and preserving the ability of our men and women in uniform to gain access to the intelligence needed to be successful on the battlefield.

Mr. Speaker, I thank all of my colleagues for working in a bipartisan fashion to craft a landmark measure that will truly make America safer.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we will implement intelligence reform before the close of the 108th Congress and rise in support of this bill.

After 9/11, we approached fighting the global war on terrorism as we had the Cold War. But it became clear that we needed to adapt our intelligence community, law enforcement agencies and military to new global threats. The 9/11 Commission gave us a blueprint for that mission, and this legislation will help us implement their vision. One of the major recommendations reflected in this bill is the creation of a strong national intelligence director, who will coordinate the activities of our various intelligence agencies. Cooperation among agencies and departments will be critical, and this measure shifts the mentality of our intelligence community from ``need to know'' to ``need to share.''

The conference report also makes significant improvements in the realm of homeland security, including enhanced border patrol efforts, implementation of a comprehensive transportation security plan, improved passenger and baggage screening programs, and initiatives to protect commercial aircraft from unconventional threats such as shoulder-fired missiles.

It also recognizes the need for the U.S. to increase its interaction with and understanding of the Muslim world. As the 9/11 Commission so eloquently put it: ``We need to defend our ideals abroad vigorously. If the U.S. does not act aggressively to define itself in the Islamic world, the extremists will gladly do the job for us.'' By establishing new cultural exchange programs and enhancing diplomatic efforts, we can work cooperatively with Muslim nations to address mutual problems and demonstrate a free and democratic alternative to extremist ideology.

One noteworthy section of the conference report addresses the need for interoperable communications systems among first responders. As a member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I have worked closely with law enforcement officers in Rhode Island and throughout the nation, and they have all emphasized the importance of being able to communicate with each other in the event of an emergency. The measure also provides new authority for law enforcement agents to combat terrorism, while avoiding some of the controversial provisions included in earlier drafts, particularly with regard to immigration. We need to have a national discussion on immigration reform, and Congress should address such issues in that context instead of slipping divisive language into an unrelated measure.

Finally, as a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am pleased that this bill strikes a careful balance between creating a strong national intelligence director and preserving the ability of our men and women in uniform to gain access to the intelligence needed to be successful on the battlefield.

I thank all my colleagues for working in a bipartisan fashion to craft a landmark measure that will make America safer, and urge support of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we will implement intelligence reform before the close of the 108th Congress and rise in support of the underlying bill.

After 9/11, we approached fighting the global war on terrorism as we had the Cold War. But it became clear that we needed to adapt our intelligence community, law enforcement agencies and military to new global threats. The 9/11 Commission gave us a blueprint for that mission, and this legislation will help us implement their vision. Cooperation among agencies and departments will be critical, and this measure shifts the mentality of our intelligence community from ``need to know'' to ``need to share.'' It also makes significant improvements to homeland security, while avoiding some of the controversial provisions included in earlier drafts.

As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am pleased that this bill strikes a careful balance between creating a strong national intelligence director and preserving the ability of our men and women in uniform to gain access to the intelligence needed to be successful on the battlefield. I thank all my colleagues for working in a bipartisan fashion to craft a landmark measure that will make America safer.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to S. 2986, which would increase our Nation's debt limit by $800 billion. This irresponsible legislation shortsightedly gives Congress carte blanche to run up the deficit with no plan to get our budget back in balance. If this measure is signed into law, the real losers are future generations of Americans, who will be stuck with the bill for many years to come.

This bill would raise the debt limit for the third time in just as many years, including a record $984 billion increase in May 2003. That addition alone was larger than the entire national debt accrued by the United States from our founding in 1776 all the way to 1980.

Today's legislation would allow the national debt to reach a staggering $8.18 trillion. This thirteen digit amount is 70 percent of the size of our economy. As Senator Byrd noted in a recent floor statement, ``To count a trillion dollars, at the rate of $1 per second, would take 32,000 years.'' Should S. 2986 pass, counting to our debt limit would take more than eight times as long.

Most alarming is the Administration's refusal to admit that the ballooning budget deficit is a problem. Despite the President's campaign promise to cut the deficit in half, next year's deficit will likely to be even larger than this year's due to commitments abroad as well as the President's promises to privatize Social

Security while funding homeland security needs and reforming the Tax Code.

For fiscal year 2004, taxpayers owed $322 billion in interest alone. I hope my constituents realize that the first $2,000 of their taxes will not go towards better schools, roads, health care or defense. Rather, this sum is just one in a series of increasing interest payments they will make because this administration chose to forgo fiscal responsibility in favor of tax cuts for a few privileged Americans.

We need to restore fiscal responsibility to this Congress by reinstating meaningful Pay-As-You-Go rules. Just as a family must plan its budget for the next year, ensuring that expenses do not exceed income, Congress must create a balanced budget to avoid adding even more debt in the future.

I will be voting for the responsible Stenholm Motion to Recommit, which would extend the debt ceiling until April 15, 2005, when next year's budget is due. Unless Congress puts pressure on ourselves, we will never balance the budget. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Stenholm Motion to Recommit and oppose final passage of

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) for yielding me this time, and I rise today in strong support of conference report

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate my colleagues on the bipartisan agreement on special education and in support of the conference report on H.R. 1350. This agreement is an example of what we can achieve when we place the interests of our Nation's children, parents, and teachers before politics. In particular, I want to note the leadership of Chairman Boehner and Ranking Member Miller on this issue. On this bill, and several other pieces of legislation this year, they have been devoted advocates for children with disabilities.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act--known as IDEA--is a civil rights law. It establishes that every child has a right to a free and appropriate public education. As a nation, we have long held sacred the belief that education is a path to success, a way for any individual to rise above challenging circumstances and achieve his or her dreams. I can personally attest to the fact that this rings true in a special way for children with disabilities. Education is essential to leveling the playing field for children who face obstacles in life at an early age. By recognizing that they have contributions to make and dreams to fulfill, IDEA offers these children the hope and promise that they can become fully productive members of society.

For these reasons, it has been my top priority to preserve the philosophy behind IDEA and ensure that teachers and administrators are given the appropriate resources to carry out this law. I did not support the bill that came before the House of Representatives in the spring of 2003, because it failed to preserve safeguards for students with disabilities in instances where behavior problems may be a manifestation of their disability. I also felt strongly that clear standards for special education teachers must be established and enforced; as they have been for other teachers under No Child Left Behind. I felt that we could do better for our children with disabilities.

I am delighted that negotiations between the House and the Senate have resulted in a final product that does better. The conference report that we are voting on today represents compromises by both Republicans and Democrats; as such, it represents a clear willingness to work together toward a future where all children receive a high quality education in our Nation's public schools. This legislation maintains the protections for children with disabilities in the discipline process, reaffirms their right to due process, and recognizes that highly trained professionals make all the difference in providing an appropriate education for any student.

In the upcoming Congress, we will celebrate the 30th anniversary of IDEA. How appropriate that a law which began as a bipartisan agreement to commit federal resources to the educational needs of students with disabilities is being reauthorized today in such an atmosphere of cooperation between both parties.

We have made much progress in these last 30 years--the majority of children with disabilities are now being educated in their neighborhood schools in regular classrooms with their nondisabled peers, and college enrollments among individuals receiving IDEA services have sharply increased. We must continue to work to level the playing field for all students. It is my sincere hope that this collaborative spirit and commitment to children with disabilities is reflected in the appropriations process and future legislation that offers the promise of the American dream to our more vulnerable citizens. Let us take this reauthorization process to pave the way to ensuring the full funding of IDEA, giving schools and teachers the

resources they need to meet the goals for each and every child in their classrooms.

I urge all my colleagues to support the conference report to H.R. 1350.

Mr. Speaker, on November 16, I was unavoidably detained during rollcall vote No. 531. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate David Scott Molloy, Jr., for being named the 2004 Rhode Island Professor of the Year. The Professors of the Year Awards are the only national awards that recognize college and university professors for excellence in undergraduate teaching and mentoring. I'm thrilled to recognize and honor Dr. Molloy today, a professor who reminds us all of the invaluable contributions made by our nation's educators.

David Scott Molloy, Jr., of West Kingston, RI, currently serves as a Professor of Labor and Industrial Relations at the University of Rhode Island, where he has been teaching since 1986. In his tenure at URI, Professor Molloy has relished the opportunity to bring his expertise and unique experience to a range of departments and courses. He has taught courses in the History Department, the Business School, the Honors program, Economics, and in his academic home at the Labor Center.

His contributions to Rhode Island are too numerous to list, but they begin with his desire to highlight and explore the rich and often complex history of our great state. Offering such courses as ``Rhode Island History'' and ``Labor and Immigrant History in Rhode Island,'' he reminds our students of how important it is to understand where they and their ancestors have come from and the many challenges that our state has faced throughout history.

A true educator, Professor Molloy's contributions are not confined to the classroom. He delivers as many as forty presentations a year to various organizations in his community. He has also shown an eagerness to share his unique style and methods of teaching and instruction-- methods that have proven powerful and effective. His passion for the subjects he teaches led him to begin collecting immigrant and labor memorabilia. In 1990, the Smithsonian acquired 9,500 artifacts from him to establish the Scott Molloy Labor Archives.

Professor Molloy is perhaps above all an incredible leader and role model for Rhode Island's youth--a testament to the value of hard work, determination, and hope. The grandson of an Irish immigrant, he began his career as both a bus driver for the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority and a labor activist in Providence. Not one to let an opportunity pass him by, Dr. Molloy chose to pursue a Ph.D. part time while continuing his work as President of the Amalgamated Transit Union, driving a coach, and teaching a course on labor history. His dissertation on the history of public transportation in Rhode Island and the role that transit employees and unions played in its development was published by the Smithsonian Institution. In Professor Molloy's own words, ``going from the front of the bus to the head of the class,'' he is the embodiment of the American Dream. I cannot think of a better example for Rhode Island's bright and aspiring students.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I hope our colleagues will join me in congratulating Professor Molloy.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to privately say we finally did it. The Boston Red Sox have won the World Series for the first time in 86 years. Not only did they win, but they made history in the process. Congratulations to the gentlemen. They have done what so many thought was impossible.

As a lifelong Red Sox fan, I can honestly say that this is a dream come true. Like millions of other fans, I had such high hopes year after year only to see the World Series slip through our fingers. We have had so many opportunities during our long drought, but something was always missing. Time and time again when victory seemed to be within our grasp, fate intervened and the season would end once again with us muttering the line ``there is always next year.'' Next year was finally this year.

Self-confidence is the hallmark of this team embodied by Curt Schilling and is now classic mantra of ``why not us?'' History is in the past, and we must live and play for today, and that is what the 2004 Red Sox have taught all of us.

We also learned that over the course of this season that redemption cannot come easy. The Red Sox were three outs away from packing their bags for the winter, as they have so many times in the past. But perhaps the first time, these men knew they could not allow their arch rivals to celebrate at Fenway Park. More than that, Terry Francona knew that the Sox were not done and masterfully managed his team with four straight victories with the help of David Ortiz's amazing performances.

Red Sox fans know that the game is never over until the last out, but we have got to believe. We have all finally seen a dream come true. And it said that Red Sox, the Red Sox play 162 home games, the support of their amazing fans follows them everywhere and is a key factor that propelled the team to victory.

Finally, I am happy to be able to say this in my lifetime, that we did it and I look forward to the 2005 season when the Red Sox defend their World Series title.

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am pleased to speak in support of the conference report before us. Chairman Hunter and Ranking Member Skelton deserve great credit for negotiating a bill that will provide our military--and the men and women who serve in it--the resources they need to keep America strong in the 21st century. It is always a daunting task to craft legislation that balances the needs of our services, and such an effort is even more challenging during a time of military conflict. The chairman and ranking member have succeeded admirably in this endeavor, and the product before us today is a fine example of careful craftsmanship and bipartisan cooperation. We are proud of our men and women in uniform, and we must ensure that they are given the resources necessary to succeed in their mission.

H.R. 4200 recognizes the importance of our service men and women in the field and around the world and demonstrates the appreciation of Congress through the provision of a 3.5% pay increase for military personnel in FY 2005 and a permanent increase in the family-separation allowance and imminent-danger pay. I am particularly pleased that the measure extends TRICARE benefits to nonactive duty reservists. Our Reserve component has served the Nation professionally and valiantly even though they and their families have often had to make sacrifices. Providing enhanced access to TRICARE will provide greater stability to reservist families and will ensure that we do not lose qualified servicemembers because of insufficient access to health care.

The conference report also addresses several major problems that my colleagues on the committee and I have been working to solve. Our committee and our colleagues on both sides of the aisle in the House have fought for an end to a current flaw in our survivor benefits system that penalizes military spouses. For too long, military spouses have witnessed their survivor benefits drop by more than one-third once reaching the age of 62. Comparable civilian plans provide survivors a lifetime annuity of 50-55 percent of retired pay and protect against a drop in annuity at age 62. As a cosponsor of the Military Survivor Benefits Improvement Act, I have supported efforts to repeal this unfair burden and am pleased that this legislation would phase out from October 2005 to March 2008 the current offset under the Survivor Benefit Plan, and increase the annuities paid to survivors of military retirees who are 62 years or older. Additionally, the agreement expedites last year's concurrent receipt improvements by authorizing full concurrent receipt for disabled military retirees rated 100% disabled.

I am, however, disappointed, that the conference report scaled back the provisions that I offered with Congressman Jim Cooper during committee consideration that would ensure greater equity and efficiency of the Department of Defense's contracting process. The agreement appears to close loopholes that have allowed the Department of Defense to avoid Congressionally mandated competition requirements and provides limited appeal rights for government employees to challenge contract decisions. Yet it falls short in other areas intended to guarantee taxpayer savings and improved efficiency in DoD contracting procedures. I look forward to working with the committee to implement H.R. 4200's provisions and to address other shortcomings in this area.

Overall, this legislation is a well-balanced approach to the needs of our Nation's military, and I commend the chairman, ranking member, and my colleagues on the committee for a fine work product.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this measure, not because I endorse all of its provisions, but because I believe that Congress must act swiftly to reform our intelligence community and to protect our homeland.

As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I believe H.R. 10 does not go far enough to establish a National Intelligence Director with real authority. I agree that we must provide the Department of Defense and our men and women in uniform with the military intelligence needed to be successful, an assertion that 9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton accepted even though it was not specifically addressed in the report. At the same time, if we do not grant the NID true authority over our intelligence assets, we run the risk of adding another layer of bureaucracy that complicates, not simplifies, the challenges facing our system.

Furthermore, I am disappointed that H.R. 10 is largely silent in addressing the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation. There is no greater danger to our homeland than the possibility of a nuclear weapon being smuggled into our country by terrorists. Russia and many former Soviet republics retain nuclear material that is not appropriately safeguarded, and the United States must lead an international effort to track down, lock up and destroy those potentially deadly weapons. Unfortunately, an amendment offered in committee by the gentlewoman from California, Mrs. Tauscher, and the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Spratt, was blocked from consideration.

On a more positive note, this legislation appropriately recognizes the need to enhance our human intelligence capabilities and creates a national counterterrorism center to coordinate interagency intelligence efforts.

I am also heartened that H.R. 10 heeds the Commission's call to enhance America's image in the world and prevent the rise and recruitment of future terrorists. Dr. Joseph Nye, the former dean of the Kennedy School of Government and Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, has talked about the need to supplement our military might with ``soft power''--efforts to win the world's hearts and minds with our values and culture. Successfully exercising this type of power requires that we pursue many fronts, including international diplomacy, democracy-building, cultural exchanges, economic development, educational initiatives and communication about our values and ideals.

To win the ideological battle being waged in the world today, we have to offer an alternative to the hopelessness and despair that the likes of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida prey upon. There are millions of young people in the Islamic world who are hungry for hope and opportunity, and it is in our interest to show them that hope lies in freedom, liberty and democracy--not in extremism and hate. In doing this, we take a major step towards ensuring that we win the long-term war on terror.

As the 9/11 Commission so eloquently put it: ``We need to defend our ideals abroad vigorously. If the United States does not act aggressively to define itself in the Islamic world, the extremists will gladly do the job for us.'' While H.R. 10 does not implement all of the Commission's recommendations in this regard, I am pleased that our nation is finally taking an important step toward bolstering its stature in the world. I am hopeful that the Conference Committee will adopt stronger provisions from the Senate bill regarding our efforts in Afghanistan, public diplomacy initiatives, educational and cultural exchange programs, and economic development initiatives.

With regard to domestic security, the measure before us today takes some major steps forward. As recommended by the Commission, the bill calls for the creation of a stronger biometric entry-exit screening system, global standards for security systems, a transportation security strategy for all sectors, and improved prescreening of airline passengers. H.R. 10 also moves closer to a threat-based formula for distribution of first responder grants, an important change in the way we fund state and local preparedness efforts. Unfortunately, the bill falls short of several critical goals, among which are protecting privacy in information-sharing, ensuring spectrum and equipment for public safety interoperable communications, enhancing private sector preparedness, and improving the way we track terrorist travel and financing.

Most disappointingly, H.R. 10 undertakes a number of controversial immigration modifications not recommended by the 9/11 Commission and not found in the Senate legislation, which passed earlier this week by a resounding vote of 96-2. The inclusion of these divisive sections will likely slow down the upcoming conference and delay implementation of the many beneficial parts of this legislation.

One worrisome provision of H.R. 10 strips from the courts their traditional judicial oversight in many immigration cases and may require automatic deportation of noncitizens, even if they will face torture in the country to which they are sent. Not only is this provision a violation of the International Convention Against Torture, it is morally unacceptable and risks further damaging America's image in the world.

In addition, the bill expands the use of secret intelligence court orders, which can be issued under a far lower standard than conventional warrants or wire taps. The unfortunate inclusion of these and other extraneous provisions threatens civil rights and civil liberties and endangers the future of intelligence reform. I look forward to addressing some of these issues during the amendment process and urge conferees to reject any provisions which would threaten the bipartisan, bicameral response that the 9/11 Commission's report requires.

I am pleased that we will have the opportunity to vote on a substitute offered by the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Menendez, and I urge all of my colleagues to support its passage. The Menendez substitute is based on the bipartisan McCain-Lieberman-Collins legislation, which has the support of the 9/11 Commission, the White House and families of the 9/11 victims. This amendment addresses all 41 of the Commission's recommendations, and does so without adding controversial and divisive provisions that jeopardize the broad-based support the recommendations have garnered.

I am deeply disappointed that the House leadership has denied the minority a voice in drafting this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support the Menendez substitute to correct these problems. However, should it fail, I am confident that we will be able to improve this legislation in negotiations with the Senate and the White House so that we may provide the type of reform that the American people deserve.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce a bill that would provide long-term energy security and greater consumer protection to the American people.

The legislation would permit the Secretary of Energy to use any supplies in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in excess of 700 million barrels to address sustained price increases in gasoline or oil that could have an adverse impact on the Nation's economy. Currently, the President may authorize a release of supplies from the SPR to provide economic relief from petroleum price increases, though such an act would need to be in response to a sustained reduction in supply. This legislation would expand that authority for cases when price increases were not attributable to a shortage, such as international volatility, a major shift in demand, or a decline in refining capacity.

The consistently high prices our Nation is paying for petroleum-- today, oil reached $53 per barrel--threaten to damage our economy and stifle growth. Furthermore, they remind us of how reliant our Nation is on foreign sources of oil. With volatility in Iraq and elsewhere, major hurricane damage to energy facilities in the Gulf of Mexico, rising demand in nations such as India and China, and OPEC's apparent inability or unwillingness to reduce world oil prices, the United States has reached a point where we have little influence over a major factor affecting our economic well-being. It is therefore imperative that we increase the size of the SPR both to protect our Nation in a time of strife as well as to insulate our economy from problems in the petroleum market.

I have no illusions that this legislation will solve our Nation's energy crisis. In fact, the new release authority would not even enter into effect until the SPR surpassed 700 million barrels, which will not occur until next year at the earliest. We must adopt this new long-term goal as part of a larger effort to reduce our reliance on foreign oil, pursuing a comprehensive energy policy that encourages alternative fuel sources and energy efficiency. I look forward to working with my colleagues to see this measure enacted into law.

Mr. Speaker, it is with profound sorrow that I rise to recognize the death of Sergeant Christopher S. Potts, a brave soldier who served with dignity and honor in Iraq and as a member of the Rhode Island National Guard for 14 years. I join his family and the people of Rhode Island in mourning this great loss.

On Sunday, October 3, Sergeant Potts was killed by enemy fire while stationed at a traffic checkpoint in Taji, 13 miles north of Baghdad. That Sunday was also Sergeant Potts's 38th birthday. A member of A Battery, 1st Battalion, 103rd Field Artillery, Sergeant Potts was serving his first tour of duty in Iraq. A resident of Tiverton, Sergeant Potts led a life of service both to his country and to his community. When not on active duty, he worked as a marine mechanic at New England Boatworks in Portsmouth.

I extend my deepest condolences to his parents Jerry Potts and Betty Hackett, his sister Kim Evans, his wife Terri, and his sons Christopher Jr. and Jackson. The people of Tiverton and Rhode Island have demonstrated their appreciation for Sergeant Potts's sacrifice and have spoken highly of his contributions to their lives. Those who knew him well describe him as a true outdoorsman and a wonderful father. Our thoughts and prayers go out especially to his two sons, the greatest joy in Sergeant Potts's life.

His loss causes us to reflect on the bravery demonstrated by our men and women in uniform as they carry out their obligations in the face of danger. When their nation called them to duty to preserve freedom, liberty and the security of their neighbors, they answered without hesitation. We remember those who have fallen not only as soldiers, but also as patriots who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. May we keep their loved ones in our thoughts and prayers as they struggle to endure this difficult period.

We will continue to hope for the safe and speedy return of all of our troops serving throughout the world.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this measure, not because I endorse all of its provisions, but because I believe that the Congress must act swiftly to reform our intelligence community and to protect our homeland.

As a member of the House Committee on Armed Services, I do want to point out that H.R. 10 does not go far enough to combat the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation, and it could have. I also have reservations about the potential impact of some of these provisions on civil liberties. However, I am pleased that H.R. 10 recognizes the need to improve our diplomatic, educational, and cultural exchange initiatives with other nations, and would also enhance our human intelligence capabilities, for it is in these areas that we will help in ensuring that we win the long-term war on terror.

I am deeply, though, disappointed that the House leadership has denied the minority a voice in drafting this bill and has ignored many of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission while adding extraneous provisions. But I am confident that when the bill gets to conference that we will be able to improve this legislation in negotiations with the Senate and the White House.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference report for H.R. 1308, the Working Families Tax Relief Act. While I would have preferred a revenue neutral version of this bill that did not add to the national debt, this legislation does deliver continued tax relief for working families at a time when assistance is greatly needed.

Most importantly, this bill extends, through 2010, three family- friendly tax cuts scheduled to expire at the end of the year. These policies include continuation of the expanded 10 percent tax bracket, extension of marriage penalty relief, and expansion of the child tax credit. Without Congressional action, every American subject to the income tax, especially families with children, would face higher taxes next year. A tax increase is the last thing that my constituents need during these difficult economic times as Rhode Island's unemployment rate continues to hover above the national average.

This bill finally allows members of the military to use combat pay to qualify for the child tax credit. I have been pushing for this long overdue provision for more than a year, and I am pleased that Rhode Island servicemembers now will receive the credit they deserve while they risk their lives for us every day.

In addition, H.R. 1308 extends Alternative Minimum Tax relief, continues tax credits for renewable energy, and renews the Research and Development Tax Credit. These extenders serve a wide range of causes including promoting economic development and reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

The bill is far from perfect. Much of the cost of this legislation comes from the expansion of the child tax credit to those who earn more than $200,000 per year. However, the 9.2 million children in families earning under $11,000 will still not receive the $1,000 child tax credit that almost every other wealthier family will receive. There is still time to include these families, and I urge my colleagues to support tax relief for all Americans.

I am committed to sensible tax relief for the middle class, but I am also concerned about our national debt. With a national debt of more than $7.3 trillion, each additional dollar the government spends or uses for a tax cut must be paid back by future generations. This bill adds nearly $150 billion to the debt over ten years. I would have preferred that these tax cut extenders be offset by either reducing the tax cuts for the tiny fractions of Americans who earn more than $1 million per year or by cutting federal spending. Unfortunately, the majority has done neither. This is not fiscal leadership, and this explains why a record surplus of just 4 years ago has turned into a record deficit today.

I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1308, the Working Families Tax Relief Act to provide needed relief to Rhode Islanders. However, I also urge a more fiscally responsible approach when dealing with tax cuts and spending to ensure future generations are not left with the bill.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3193, legislation that would repeal Washington, DC's, self-enacted gun ban. For nearly 30 years, this ban has protected the citizens of Washington and the city's 20 million annual tourists. Over the last year, D.C. homicides are down 24 percent, and there have been 55 percent fewer murders since 1994. While the ban has not been perfect, there is no excuse for Congress making it easier for murderers and terrorists to get their hands on legal assault weapons. More guns will lead to more murders.

If enacted, H.R. 3193 would repeal the District's ban on handguns and semiautomatic firearms, including assault weapons, and end criminal penalties for failure to register a gun. This ban was enacted by an elected mayor and city council in 1976 and has never been eroded by legislation or court challenge. The House is now attempting to change the will of elected D.C. officials, but Washington does not even have a voting representative to voice the will of the people most affected by this legislation.

The dangers inherent in this bill are complicated by the recent expiration of the assault weapons ban. Should this bill become law, someone could purchase an Uzi or AK-47 and legally keep it at his or her home within sight of the White House, Capitol Building, or Supreme Court. During this time of unprecedented security, weakening gun laws will only make the job of law enforcement officers more difficult and more dangerous.

Unfortunately, the rule prevents all amendments, including those to ban assault weapons and cop-killer bullets. Without these life-saving provisions, it is only a matter of time until a member of he Metropolitan Police Department, U.S. Capitol Police, Secret Service, or other law enforcement officer is outgunned with a legal assault weapon.

Washington, DC, has the right to determine its own laws, and those laws deserve our respect. As D.C. Police Chief Charles Ramsey recently stated, ``We don't need a law that puts more assault weapons in circulation in D.C.'' I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing H.R. 3193.

Madam Speaker, I thank my friends and colleagues, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), for leading this Special Order. I especially want to recognize the work of the gentleman from Texas as our ranking member on the Select Committee on Homeland Security. Your colleagues and all Americans owe you a great debt of gratitude for your consistent valiant efforts to keep these critical issues at the forefront of the national debate.

Madam Speaker, there is no question about the importance of our efforts here at home to improve domestic security and preparedness, but I want to spend my time this evening addressing a topic that I think deserves equal attention, mainly the need for a full-scale global effort to enhance the image of America in the world and prevent the rise in recruitment of future terrorists. I think we often overlook this aspect of Homeland Security, perhaps because it is not as tangible, or the path is not as clear-cut, or perhaps because success is harder to measure. But we do so at our own peril and at the peril of countless future generations.

Dr. Joe Nye, the former dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, has talked about the need to supplement our military might with soft power, efforts to win the world's hearts and minds with our values and culture. Successfully exercising this type of power requires that we pursue many fronts, including international diplomacy, democracy building, cultural exchanges, economic development, educational initiatives, and communication about our values and our ideals.

Now, most people do not give this strategy the attention it deserves, but I am pleased that the 9/11 Commission report recognized that soft power will be a critical component in our long-term efforts to stop the spread of Islamist terrorism.

It is easy to say that we were attacked on September 11 because the terrorists despise freedom and hate the American way of life, but the truth is much more complicated, and we do ourselves a disservice if we accept the simple answer.

To win the ideological battle being waged in the world today, we have to offer an alternative to the hopelessness and despair that the likes of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda prey upon. Madam Speaker, there are millions of young people in the Islamic world who are hungry for hope and opportunity, and it is in our interest to show them that hope lies in freedom, liberty, and democracy, not in extremism and hate.

By pursuing policies abroad that promote voices of moderation, we can isolate the extremists and present a better vision of the future. By promoting democratic institutions, we can show that there is a better way, and we can offer a choice. By supporting economic development partnerships in the Arab world, we can help these nations become prosperous and self-sufficient. And by spearheading an international effort to offer educational alternatives to children in the Muslim world, we can provide the next generation with the tools to build a better future. These efforts will require significant resources, but the payoff will be immeasurable.

Perhaps most importantly, we must show the world what America and Americans truly stand for: tolerance, opportunity, hope, and freedom. And we must do it quickly, before an inaccurate image is indelibly emblazoned on the minds of millions. As the 9/11 Commission so eloquently put it, we need to defend our ideals abroad vigorously. If the U.S. does not act aggressively to define itself in the Islamic world, the extremists will gladly do the job for us.

Madam Speaker, in closing, let me again thank our ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner), and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) for bringing us to the floor this evening to discuss these critical issues. September 11 should have made clear to all of us that we do not have the luxury of time when it comes to addressing our security at home and abroad. I urge the President and his administration to exercise strong leadership and provide the necessary resources to ensure the safety of our citizens and our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 2363, the Boys and Girls Clubs Reauthorization. I am pleased to support a measure that would not only ensure the continued existence of this already successful organization, but that would increase its authorized funding to $100 million over the next 6 years and allow for the establishment of an additional 1,500 facilities. I thank my colleagues, Chairman Sensenbrenner and Ranking Member Conyers, for their much- needed leadership and attention to this issue affecting children throughout our country.

My connection to the Boys and Girls Clubs of Rhode Island begins on a personal level. My mother and father worked hard to create a positive and nurturing home environment for their four children and extend that warmth, generosity, and caring as foster parents to over 20 other children. Yet at the same time, my mother recognized that there were countless children in Rhode Island for whom the home was not a positive place, and she became a founding member of the Boys and Girls Clubs in my hometown of Warwick.

Today, the Boys and Girls Clubs of Warwick represent one of the few safe havens managed by caring adults where school-aged children can avoid the dangers of the street and the pitfalls of an unsupervised home. In Warwick, and throughout America, the Boys and Girls Clubs provide invaluable programs on education, leadership, the arts, and alcohol and drug prevention.

Again, I thank my colleagues for their continued support of the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, and I urge quick passage of this bill.