Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of our American flag and as a cosponsor of H.J. Res. 4, which would amend the Constitution to allow Congress to protect the United States flag from acts of physical desecration.

Our flag has become a symbol of freedom for Americans and people around the world, whether flying outside of a home, or raised out of the rubble of the World Trade towers after the September 11 attacks. As an international emblem of the world's greatest democracy, the American flag should be treated with respect and care. We should not consider the flag as mere ``personal property,'' which can be treated any way we see fit, including physically desecrating it as a form of political protest.

The American flag is a source of inspiration wherever it is displayed, and a symbol of hope to all nations struggling to build democracies. As a proud member of the House Armed Services Committee, I deeply admire those who have fought and died to preserve our freedoms in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world throughout our history. These men and women have bravely defended our flag and the fundamental principles for which it stands. They deserve to know that their government treasures the flag and all it represents as much as they do.

Before being overturned by the Supreme Court in 1989, 48 states and the District of Columbia passed laws protecting the flag. Over the last few years, all 50 states have passed resolutions calling on Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment, which is the only way to restore the power of states and Congress to implement the will of the people.

For these reasons I, as well as a great number of Americans, believe that our flag should be treated with dignity and deserves protection under the law. With Flag Day on June 14, I can think of no better way to honor the enduring symbol of our democracy than adopting this resolution today. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.J. Res. 4 to allow Congress to prohibit desecration of the American flag.

Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 219, my vote was not recorded, but had it been recorded I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, three years ago, Mr. Chen Shui-bian was democratically elected president of the Republic of China on Taiwan. His election showed the world that democracy was alive and well and could easily thrive in a Chinese society like Taiwan.

During the last three years, President Chen has continued his democratization program for Taiwan, which today has free elections at every level, a totally free press and a strong record on human rights. Taiwan continues to set an excellent example for other nations to follow.

Moreover, President Chen has on many occasions stressed that Taiwan and China must work together to discuss issues of mutual interest. President Chen has asked the Chinese mainland authorities to respect human rights and to accept the political reality that the two sides of the Strait are ruled separately by equal political entities. Any progress toward improved cross-strait relations must ensure protection of the interests of the 23 million people living in the Republic of China on Taiwan.

As a first step toward resumption of cross-strait dialogue, China should remove its military forces along Taiwan's coast. China has deployed 350 short-range missiles aimed at Taiwan and is adding 50 missiles a year. Instead of threatening with military might, I hope the two sides will work to resolve disputes and differences peacefully.

As the people of Taiwan prepare to celebrate their president's third anniversary in office, I also stress my support for the granting to Taiwan of observer status at the World Health Assembly this May. As the outbreak of SARS threatens Asia and the world, Taiwan must be included in all World Health Organization activities. Secretary of State Colin Powell recently said, ``infectious disease knows no borders and requires an effective and coordinated response at local, national and international levels.'' It is now time for Taiwan to be included in the global campaign for the protection of public health.

I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting these important goals. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

As a member of the House Committee on Armed Services, I am very pleased to speak in support of this bill before us. I wish to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), ranking member, for their outstanding leadership in crafting a bill that will provide for our military and the men and women who serve in it the resources they need to keep America strong in the 21st century.

I am pleased with the provisions of the legislation, particularly that demonstrate Congress's commitment to the role of submarines as an essential part of a strong naval fleet. The authorization of multiyear procurement for the Virginia class submarine will encourage more rapid and cost-effective production of this important system and give the United States Navy new capabilities to respond to future threats.

The people of Rhode Island have historically played an integral role in submarine production, and I am pleased that we will be a part of this important aspect of military transformation.

I remain concerned, however, with several controversial provisions of the measure that would undermine existing environmental and civil service protections. The Department of Defense's legislation recommendations delivered to Congress only shortly before the Committee on Armed Services began its markup requested changes to make its civilian employees more competitive and to enhance military readiness. Well, if the DOD wants assistance in these areas, then I believe it is our duty to work with them toward that important goal. However, their unprecedented effort to alter employment rules for 700,000 workers deserves no less than extensive and thoughtful discussion, which we, unfortunately, did not have.

Furthermore, the broad environmental exemptions in the bill exceed the needs of military readiness, and, unless amended, could pose a serious threat to mammals and endangered species.

Mr. Chairman, I hope that we will be able to address these problems during the upcoming amendment process so that all of my colleagues will be able to support this measure without reservation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1261, the reauthorizing legislation for the Workforce Investment Act. This bill will not benefit people with disabilities and other Americans who are seeking to secure jobs that increase self-sufficiency and integration into the mainstream of community life.

For years, state vocational rehabilitation programs have provided optimal service with minimal funding. In 2001, 233,000 individuals with disabilities entered the workforce with the help of VR. Those individuals earned $3.4 billion in wages and paid nearly $1 billion in State and Federal taxes. The success rate for VR programs nationally is 69 percent--higher than most other government programs providing services to adults. And after 3 years of job placement, 76 percent of those individuals continue to be gainfully employed.

H.R. 1261 grants governors unrestricted access to funds specifically intended for VR and other essential programs to use for one-stop

center infrastructure, with no assurances that people with disabilities or other target populations would continue to benefit from the funds. One-stop centers, while effective in certain populations, are not programmatically--or in many cases, physically--accessible for people with disabilities.

In this time of state budget constraints, 37 state VR agencies are operating under such limited resources that they have instituted an ``order of selection'' policy, serving people with the most severe disabilities first. They are being forced to leave behind increasing numbers of eligible individuals who want to work. H.R. 1261 would exacerbate this situation, by taking funds from the successful VR programs to fund programs that cannot reach their target population. In light of the unemployment crisis faced by our Nation and staggering 70 percent unemployment rate in the disability community, it is critical that we preserve the funding stream for VR programs.

Please vote against H.R. 1261.

Mr. Speaker, today our Chamber threw away any semblance of fiscal responsibility by passing H.R. 2, the Republican tax bill that provides more massive tax cuts, while ignoring the need of the majority of Americans. Two years ago the administration and Congress were looking covetously at a staggering $5.6 trillion cumulative surplus through 2010. At the time Congress was continually reassured by the administration that we could afford an enormous tax cut, ensure the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, pay down the national debt, fund our domestic priorities and still have a large surplus reserve fund to front anticipated emergencies.

Like many of my colleagues, I cautioned the administration at the time that its budget and enormous tax cut were based on unrealistic surplus projections that would never materialize. Not surprisingly the Congressional Budget Office confirmed that in less than 2 years the 10- year projected surplus has been erased. While portions of this decline are a result of our efforts to defeat terrorism and preserve national security both at home and abroad, the depletion of the surplus to date was largely caused by the administration's fiscally irresponsible policies of 2001.

What do we get for these tax cuts which were supposed to stimulate our

economy? Well, we now have the highest unemployment rate in 9 years. Severe cuts in State budgets and programs and the largest among deficit in national debt in our Nation's history. Not content with these successes, the Republicans now want more tax cuts largely skewed to the wealthiest Americans, the top rate income tax reduction in dividend taxation provisions are particularly egregious when 8.8 million Americans are unemployed, with the average length of unemployment now at about 20 weeks. The Republican tax cuts ignore the situation of those Americans. Furthermore, our Nation will have to borrow to pay for the funds to pay for these tax cuts at a time when the United States has a $6.4 trillion national debt and spend $1 billion per day on interest payments for that debt. In fact, debt interest payments are now the third largest expenditure in the Federal budget. Money that could instead be used for homeland security, health care, prescription drugs for our seniors, or education for our children.

Almost as outrageous as the provisions of the Republican tax plan was, the House leadership decision not to allow the Democrats to offer their alternative was even more egregious. Our plan was far more fiscally responsible, costing only $129 billion in immediate spending, and even those costs would be offset for long term economic gains such as income taxes from newly employed Americans. The Democratic plan would create 1 million new jobs, more than double the estimate for the Republican plan. Additionally, it would put money in the pockets of families most likely to spend, provide tax relief for businesses most likely to invest, and hire and provide direct financial assistance to States that are struggling to provide health care and other vital human services to their citizens. This financial assistance would forestall State tax increases or service cutbacks that would otherwise deepen the recession and destroy jobs.

Mr. Speaker, I am deeply disturbed by the outcome of today's vote, as well as the heavy handed tactics used by the Republican leadership that denied a debate on our responsible alternative. I will maintain my opposition to irresponsible tax and budget policies that are leading this Nation down a path that could put the economic survival and stability of our Nation in jeopardy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Charles Boucher, an exceptional teacher and role model from Burriville, RI. Mr. Boucher has been named the Rhode Island Teacher of the Year for 2003. As an Applied Science and Technology teacher at Burriville High School, he has shown exemplary commitment to making education engaging and exciting. Under his tutelage, Mr. Boucher's students have received more than 30 state and national awards and his Bio Technology class was featured on a Discovery Channel program. His work and creativity have helped hundreds of student transition from school to the working world.

Mr. Speaker, I find it heartening that there are educators in this country who devote so much time and effort to shaping the minds of our young people. I hope you and our colleagues will join me in recognizing Mr. Charles Boucher for his dedication to education and vocational training.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1350, reauthorizing legislation for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The reauthorization of IDEA is critical to the educational outcomes of millions of students with disabilities for years to come. I am sorely disappointed that H.R. 1350 represents a lack of commitment to fulfilling the promise of IDEA by failing to fund the law, and even proposes changes undermining the very philosophy of

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 1036. By protecting an industry from liability, we eliminate a major incentive for it to operate in a safer way, and ultimately we make people and corporations less accountable for questionable manufacturing and sales practices.

As an individual who was paralyzed at the age of 16 when a police officer's gun accidentally discharged and severed my spinal cord, I know how a person's life may be changed by gun violence or accidents.

Our society frequently witnesses the needless misfortunes that can take place due to firearm mishandling, and we should strive to make our society safer. Yet this bill would move us away from that goal. Too many people who suffer from gun violence and accidents are victims of an industry that fights every effort to improve the safety of its products, including the installation of chamber load indicators and trigger locks, features that could have changed the course of my life.

They are victims of dealers who look the other way as their wares are used for criminal activity, and gun control laws that are not sufficiently enforced. Supporters of the bill claim that it has exemptions to permit lawsuits in the case of clear knowledge of criminal activity or negligence. But they will not mention that the exemptions are so narrowly worded that they are meaningless.

They also make intriguing parallels about how the gun industry is currently being held to a higher standard than other industries, while not recognizing the exemptions from Federal consumer safety laws that the gun industry enjoys.

I am deeply disappointed that this measure will not do a single thing to prevent gun violence or accidents in the United States. However, I am even more disturbed that it may exacerbate our existing problem.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 1036, so that we can demonstrate our commitment to a safer America.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the efforts of the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan) to hold gun dealers and manufacturers truly accountable for negligence and strongly support his amendment.

Our Nation is familiar with cases of gun dealers who sell to criminals and claim ignorance about their intentions. Bullseye Shooter Supply, the Washington State gun dealer that was the source of the sniper rifle allegedly used by John Mohammed and John Lee Malvo in the D.C. sniper shootings, says it cannot account for that weapon, or 237 other guns in its inventory. We should be cracking down on deadbeat gun dealers, not exempting them from liability.

I have introduced legislation to improve enforcement and inspection of these facilities, and I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan) for his support of that measure and for drawing attention to this matter with his amendment today.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support the Meehan amendment.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) and distinguished ranking member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, for this timely special order.

There is no more important issue facing us in Congress than protecting the freedom and security of the American people. I was deeply honored when the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) asked me to serve on the Select Committee on Homeland Security. It is a responsibility that I take very seriously and I am eager to embrace the challenges confronting us.

We have an incredibly important obligation to our first responders across the country, and we must make their needs a top priority. Firefighters, law enforcement officers, health care workers, and others on the front lines need our support to keep America safe. With dozens of States experiencing their worst fiscal crises since World War II, combined with the activation of thousands of Guard and Reserve members, first responders are more desperate than ever for Federal assistance. In addition, we are faced with significant unmet needs in the area of port security, nuclear and chemical plant security, border security and more. Mayors and Governors nationwide are faced with soaring costs as they seek to meet

their obligations under a heightened threat alert and a newly implemented Operation Liberty Shield.

I was deeply disappointed to learn yesterday during the supplemental appropriations markup, Republicans voted down the Obey amendment to add $2.5 billion in homeland security funding. This funding is absolutely critical if we are to live up to our promises to the American people. The amendment would have meant an additional $3 million of first responder funding for my home State of Rhode Island, money that is sorely needed to equip our State and local governments to fight the domestic fronts of our war on terror.

Another area that is of special interest to me is intelligence, and I am honored to be serving as interim ranking member on the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism. In this capacity I hope to turn the committee's attention to some critical issues facing Congress as the new Department of Homeland Security gets up and running.

One of the most important things we must address is the issue of integration and cooperation among the different intelligence agencies. We need to know how DHS is receiving and analyzing information, what kind of intelligence the agency is getting, whether the process is efficient and streamlined, and whether DHS and the rest of the Intelligence Community understand their roles and obligations to each other clearly enough to make sure that there is neither too much overlap nor too much falling through the cracks.

Along these lines it is absolutely critical that we look at the relationship between the President's proposed Terrorist Threat Integration Center and the DHS Information Analysis Directorate. Their roles sound strikingly similar to me and it has not been made at all clear how they will interrelate and work together.

In addition, we must ensure that our State and local law enforcement agencies are properly equipped to share information and coordinated activities so that threats that cross jurisdictional lines can be adequately addressed.

Finally, as we endeavor to identify threats before they become real dangers, we must be ever vigilant of the civil liberties of our citizens. Protecting the homeland does not need to run counter to protecting privacy and freedom. We should make sure that intelligence tools are used judiciously, and we must always work towards a balance that ensures both security and liberty.

Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) for hosting this special order and urge my colleagues to make homeland security a priority both in words and in deeds.

Mr. Speaker, today I am joined by 22 of my colleagues in introducing the ``Crackdown on Deadbeat Gun Dealers Act'' to hold licensed gun dealers accountable when they knowingly sell guns illegally.

Last year's tragic Washington, D.C., area sniper shootings provide a dramatic illustration of what many consider a lack of regulatory authority over the nation's estimated 104,000 licensed firearms dealers, which are overseen by just 600 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) inspectors who must also oversee breweries and tobacco plants among their other responsibilities.

Federal agents, who searched Bull's Eye Shooter Supply of Tacoma, Washington, last December, indicated in a court affidavit that 78 firearms listed in the store's inventory were missing and could not be traced through required sales records and other documents. Among the missing weapons was the rifle allegedly used by the two D.C. sniper suspects, John Allen Muhammad and John Lee Malvo. During the past few years, many weapons had simply vanished from the shop without an adequate paper trail--some of them possibly bound for people barred from owning firearms.

Unfortunately, the Bull's Eye case is not an isolated one. Statistics provided by the ATF in 1998 show that over 50 percent of the firearms used in crimes nationwide were traced to just 1.2 percent of the nation's gun dealers. By conducting crime gun traces, the ATF can analyze why such a large number of firearms from this small proportion of dealers are used illegally and develop investigative strategies to address this problem.

Currently, the ATF may inspect a licensed dealer's inventory and records without a warrant to ensure record-keeping compliance. The accuracy of a dealer's inventory is critical to the ATF's ability to trace crime guns. However; since 1986, criminal penalties for most dealer recordkeeping violations have been reduced from felonies to misdemeanors. In addition, current law restricts ATF to one compliance inspection of licensed dealers every 12 months. With the exception of violations committed by dealers in transferring firearms to prohibited individuals after national instant criminal background checks, the current law also generally limits ATF's administrative actions against dealers to revocation of the license.

The Crackdown on Deadbeat Gun Dealers Act will increase compliance and keep guns out of the hands of criminals by increasing the permitted number of annual compliance inspections by federal law enforcement inspectors of licensed firearms dealers; raising the maximum criminal penalty for dealers who knowingly violate the law by committing serious record-keeping offenses that can hinder tracing guns used in crimes; and authorizing $320 million in grants for 5 years to hire 500 additional ATF inspectors.

Now more than ever, Americans are demanding protection and security, and some are purchasing guns in an effort to protect themselves and their families. But we must remember that others with more sinister motives can just as easily do the same. Real protection means providing authorities with the strongest possible mechanisms to prevent unlawful purchases.

I urge my colleagues to join me and the 22 original co-sponsors of this bill in holding licensed gun dealers accountable when they knowingly sell guns illegally. Please co-sponsor this responsible law enforcement measure, and help keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as a proud American and member of the House Committee on Armed Services to strongly condemn the cuts to our veterans health care that were pushed through in the House budget proposal for fiscal year 2004, and that we thankfully restored today when we voted overwhelmingly to instruct conferees to prevent those cuts from being considered by the conference committee.

It is outrageous that upwards of 90 percent of the mandatory spending that would have been cut came directly from programs that provide service-connected disability and education benefits to our Nation's bravest citizens. These programs are the heart of the Veterans Administration, and in fact they are the very reason the VA was created.

The across-the-board cuts did not stop there. Discretionary funding, which includes veterans health care, was also grievously cut by $14.2 billion over the next 10 years. Health care takes up 96 percent of that spending, meaning we were slashing at least $1.63 billion per year in health funding. At a time when this Congress is searching for ways to provide better health programs, like a prescription drug benefit to seniors, how could we have justified cutting into successful programs veterans currently receive? Many of these men and women would have no choice but to turn to Medicare because of our actions; and until the Spratt amendment, which was passed today, and spearheaded by so many of my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle, Medicare itself would have been cut as well.

The path this House almost chose to embark upon is even more troubling given the action our military is now engaged in overseas. Our courageous servicemembers are engaged in dangerous combat, and a number of them will inevitably sustain injuries. Madam Speaker, I will not return home and tell the brave men and women and families of those deployed overseas that we are not doing everything in our power to support them when they return. We have promised these benefits again and again as the very least we can do to repay the risk and sacrifice the men and women of our Armed Forces make on a daily basis. We must not break that promise now.

I choose to show our servicemembers that I support them and will continue to support them when they return home from combat. I want them to remain confident that they will be cared for should they be injured. I want the families to know that they will not be abandoned should, God forbid, their loved ones not return home to them.

Madam Speaker, the Republican budget resolution did none of these things and must be improved. We took that step today. Earlier today I voted for the Spratt motion to instruct conferees to eliminate proposed cuts in so many programs vital to veterans to show our Armed Forces and veterans that they are not second-class citizens and that we value their efforts and sacrifice. This motion to instruct passed today, and I will continue to fight for our veterans just as hard as they have fought for us. It is the very least that they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a proud American to commend the brave men and women of our armed services who are carrying out the mission to provide hope and freedom to the Iraqi people held captive by Saddam Hussein and his regime.

I also join my colleagues in praying for the continued safety of the Prisoners of War from the United States: five members of the 507th Maintenance Company, taken from their convoy during the confusion of war, and the two pilots of an Apache helicopter shot down while on a mission. Sadly, the fates of several others are still unknown.

I am disgusted by the Iraqi regime's blatant disregard of the Geneva Conventions implemented after World War II to protect soldiers on either side of any conflict. The regime of Saddam Hussein, which rules over a signatory nation of the treaty, is responsible for the safety of our soldiers. If they ignore this serious responsibility, they will bear the consequences when they are prosecuted as Prisoners of War after this conflict. The United States will not allow Iraq's failure to abide by international law go unpunished.

Finally, I wish to add my voice to those commending all our men and women in uniform, praising them for their efforts and praying for their swift and safe return to us.

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Hellenic Caucus, I rise to register my dismay that negotiations between the President of Cyprus, Tassos Papadopoulos, and Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash on a United Nations settlement plan to reunite Cyprus ended two weeks ago without a final outcome.

Mr. Denktash has put most of the blame on his own shoulders for this lost opportunity. By not allowing the Turkish Cypriots to vote on the U.S. settlement plan by a referendum, Mr. Denktash has made the decision for the Turkish Cypriots that they will not live under the European Union's laws or reap its economic benefits. Mr. Denktash should not just look at this as a personal matter, or even as a dispute between Turkey and Greece, but should rather take into consideration what is the right choicer for the people of Cyprus.

As may other members have expressed, I do not want the recent reunification talks, the fourth attempt since the Turkish invasion of Northern Cyprus in 1974, to end in an impasse. The U.S. settlement cleared a path for all of Cyprus to unite once again, to share in the European Union's prosperity, and to end military zones. Now with just the Republic of Cyprus poised and ready for membership into the EU in 2004, a deeper divide between the two sides may grow without a push for future negotiations.

The United States must continue its role in supporting negotiations so that there is still potential for all of Cyprus to join the EU. Consequently, I recently sent a letter to President Bush asking that we continue to encourage reunification negotiations in Cyprus. Although

frustration levels at this point are high, the United States should still play a positive and supportive role that will lead to a final Cyprus settlement. I urge Congress to continue to support Cyprus' membership to the European Union and the United Nation's settlement plan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in proud recognition of the 182nd anniversary of Greek Independence. This special day for Greece commemorates the end of nearly four hundred years under the rule of the Ottoman Empire and a return to its democratic roots.

The political philosophies of both the United States and Greece have been challenged by oppressive powers, and both nations have proudly defended their right to self-government. After showing a desire to be free from the Ottoman Empire in 1821, Greece endured eleven long years of war to succeed in gaining independence. American and Hellenic cultures greatly respect their tradition of independence and recognize the importance of democratic principles.

The United States and Greece have always enjoyed a reciprocal relationship in international and cultural endeavors. Hellenic principles resonate in our culture and politics, since the United States was founded on the principles of democracy developed thousands of years ago in the city-states of ancient Greece. Hellenic influence can even be seen in the architecture of our Capitol building. Our country has also had an influence on Greece since our Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution influenced their first Constitution.

On a cultural level, I am looking forward to 2004 and the homecoming of the Olympic Games to Athens. Since Greece resurrected the Olympics in 1896, they have symbolized peace and excellence for people around the world. Greece will undoubtedly serve as a gracious host of the Games, and the 25th Summer Olympics will prove again to the world how Hellenic ideals such as equality and friendship have stood the test of time and continue to flourish at a global level. Hellenic culture, whether through its development of democratic government or from its espousal of friendly competition, encourages people to come together amicably even during the most difficult of times.

Mr. Speaker, it would be difficult to imagine a United States of America, or even the world, without the great contributions from Greece. I will continue my work in Congress to support Hellenic causes and keep the ties between our two countries strong. I would like to join my colleagues in congratulating Greece on the anniversary of its independence.

I urge my colleagues to join me in celebrating this anniversary.