Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

I can understand why there would be some confusion on the other side about why we would need to move these appropriations bills in a timely manner because, yes, the fiscal year starts October 1. So what is the urgency, I'm hearing.

I can understand why there is a lack of recognition of the urgency because in the 12 years, Mr. Chairman, that the Republican Party controlled this House, they were able to complete all the appropriations bills on time exactly zero times. They were unable to do it any time in the 12 years they controlled this House.

So, yes, I understand there is some confusion about the process and why it is important to get these bills out on time.

If anyone is interested, the last time that all the appropriations bills were completed on time was 1994, which perhaps, by coincidence, was the last time the Democrats controlled the process in this House. So we do understand the urgency of getting these bills done on time; and we do understand that October 1 is going to be here and we need to complete work on these bills.

Certainly, what has happened in the House the last couple of days, and I would expect is going to happen over the remaining course of the week, and perhaps months, does not bode well for our ability to do that because we are facing a lot of obstruction. I think it would be instructive to talk about what is actually in this bill rather than talk about the procedural gimmickry which is going on to prevent us from passing this bill.

The bipartisan Homeland Security Appropriations bill provides critical funding to improve the Nation's homeland security and implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, which have languished for more than 4 years now. One of the first things we did in the first hours of this House was to vote to implement the 9/11 Commission recommendations. This bill moves us in that direction; it enables us to do that with the funding that is required. I don't think that is something that should wait any longer. We have already waited 4 years from those recommendations. We have waited almost 6 years since 9/11 to see this take place.

This legislation strengthens border security. I hear a lot of talk about border security and immigration. This bill provides emergency first responders with additional training and equipment, and improves aviation and port security, all important aspects of the 9/11 Commission recommendations.

We talk about immigration reform. This bill makes border security the top priority by devoting substantial resources to secure our borders not only against potential terrorists, but also to help stop the growing flood of illegal immigrants entering our country each and every day, totaling more than 12 million at this time.

In this bill, we invest in our Nation's most pressing security needs by hiring 3,000 additional border security agents. That's what we are talking about, we are going to secure the borders. We include $1 billion for fencing. I think that is as important to people on the other side of the aisle as it is to people on our side of the aisle. I don't know why they're delaying this; that $1 billion goes to fencing infrastructure and technology along the U.S.-Mexican border.

We commit $2.1 billion to illegal immigrant detention and removal. We hear about this ``catch and release'' program as part of the immigration debate. This bill stakes a step in solving that problem. We are in the process of debating that. Let's get it done. Let's stop all the delaying tactics. Let's get this bill done.

This bill provides $550 million in State homeland security grants which are used to hire, train, retain and equip emergency first responders. Is there anyone in this House who doesn't think that's an important priority that we should make a priority and get this bill through the legislative process?

This bill increases funding for firefighter assistance grants. Unfortunately, the President recommended a 55 percent reduction. We put that money back in because I don't know that we can come up with any more important segment of our society than our firefighters, the brave men and women who put their lives on the line every day here at home to keep us safe.

We improve aviation security by doubling the amount of cargo screening on passenger aircraft, another key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. So these are not things that should be delayed.

We invest in port security by providing $400 million in grants to improve critical port facilities and infrastructure. And this Homeland Security Appropriations bill includes strong oversight measures to ensure careful spending of taxpayer dollars. I want you all to hear that: It eliminates the wasteful, no-bid contracts that have led to billions of dollars in losses.

Mr. Chairman, what this bill does is give our brave men and women who respond to emergencies the tools and resources they need to protect our communities. I can think of no better way to show the American people that we are committed to this.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Reclaiming my time, that has not been the case. The House has not completed its work. These bills were not finished and implemented by October 1.

The last time they were implemented on time was 1994.

Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 2 o'clock and 10 minutes a.m.), the House adjourned until today, Wednesday, June 13, 2007, at 10 a.m.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 354) to recognize the year 2007 as the official 50th anniversary celebration of the beginnings of marinas, power production, recreation, and boating on Lake Sidney Lanier, Georgia.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

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

I rise in support of House Resolution 354 offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) to recognize the year 2007 as the official 50th anniversary celebration of Lake Sidney Lanier.

Congress first authorized the construction of Buford Dam in 1946 as one project in a comprehensive plan to develop our Nation's water resources for the purposes of national defense, power production, flood control, navigation, and water supply. The first groundbreaking for construction occurred on March 1, 1950, and on June 17, 1957, the first hydropower was produced by the generators of the dam.

Today, Lake Lanier provides power production, flood control, water supply, navigation, fish and wildlife management, and recreational activities to members of the surrounding communities and businesses. This week in June is a suitable time to recognize Lake Lanier's contributions to the area and accomplishments. As summer heat begins to spread across the Nation, both water supply and cooling water recreational activities are on many minds.

More than 60 percent of the population of the State of Georgia relies on water stored in Lake Lanier or down the Chattahoochee River. Similarly, properties around the lake and down the river rely on its banks and dam for flood control.

Nearly 8 million visitors come annually to appreciate the scenery and leisure opportunities provided by the lake. In fact, Lake Lanier holds the title of the most-visited Army Corps lake in the entire country. Facilities include 10 marinas and 57 parks for swimming, boating, fishing and picnicking. In 1996, Lake Lanier hosted the paddling and rowing competitions for the Summer Olympics in Atlanta.

And several years ago, the Marine Trade Association of Metro Atlanta found that Lake Lanier has an economic impact of $5.5 billion.

I urge my colleagues to join with me and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) in supporting House Resolution 354 to honor the impacts, accomplishments and continuing success of Lake Lanier on its 50th anniversary.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I urge passage of the resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I just want to say how proud I am of my fellow Pennsylvanian and the second Murphy now to join the 30-Something Working Group, along with the gentleman from Connecticut. He is someone that we look to for his expertise, having been in the field of battle and having served in this conflict; and I really am excited to hear that he is going to be joining us now with the 30-something group to talk more about these issues. And he definitely has a unique perspective that he's adding. So I was excited to hear his voice, and I am very proud to hail from the same State.

I wanted to talk a little bit about one of the consequences of this action that we're talking about, as Mr. Meek brought up, is the fact that we are creating, through our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, hundreds of thousands of new veterans are returning to this country, many of whom are returning seriously injured. We have over 25,000 that have been injured. We are approaching 4,000 killed now. And those

that are returning and are going to have to use the VA system are going to find, thankfully, that for the first time in the history of the program, 77 years of the Department of Veterans Affairs, we have increased funding at a rate that has never been seen in the history of the Department. We are up to approximately $15 billion in increased funding for the VA in this Congress.

And as every member of the 30-Something Working Group knows and certainly every Member of this House knows, this is a priority issue for me. Funding for Veterans Affairs has languished in the past several years, unfortunately, but this Congress has stepped up to the plate in a bipartisan way, I will say, to give the Veterans Affairs Department, especially the health accounts, the necessary funding to take care of these hundreds of thousands of veterans that we are creating in Iraq and Afghanistan.

These are men and women who have fought bravely, people like Mr. Murphy from Pennsylvania who have put their lives on the line, who have left a family behind to do this and have made every possible sacrifice. They deserve to know that they can count on the United States to give them the health care that they deserve and that they have earned, that they've been promised when they entered the military.

So we voted in just the first 5 months here in this Congress to increase funding by $15 billion for the VA. And significantly, for the first time ever, we exceeded the recommended independent budget request of the service organizations, the American Legion, the VFW, and others.

I want to repeat that point for my colleagues. For the first time ever, Congress exceeded the request of the service organizations. I think that's something we can be proud of.

We talk about the enormous achievements we've had in the first 5 months, the many bills and the different subjects that we have addressed. The fact that we have paid attention to and finally moved forward with our veterans health care facility in a way that is unprecedented in the history of this country is I think one of the things we can be most proud of in our first 5 months in office here.

Some of the things that this funding is going to allow us to do, we are going to be able to hire more doctors and nurses and improve medical services at the VA. As we saw with some of the Department of Defense facilities with regard to health care and Walter Reed, chronic underfunding can lead to some disastrous consequences. We need to make sure that we don't allow that to happen in our VA system. So this bill is going to improve the quality of care.

I have in my district a Department of Veterans Affairs hospital that is undergoing a $100 plus million expansion right now. Hopefully, when that is done, we are going to have in my district the preeminent health care facility in the entire VA network; and I want every VA facility to have that type of access across this country. Our veterans deserve nothing less than the highest quality health care this Nation can provide for them.

We are going to reduce waiting times. We have a backlog at the VA, unfortunately, of nearly 500,000 cases. And every Member of this House knows, you probably have the same experience that I am having in my office of people who are calling, frustrated veterans who want to access the VA health system but they have to wait, they have to get in line. And it is a very long line, weeks or months of waiting, because of that backlog, nearly 500,000 cases. The bill that we passed in this House, the legislation that we've passed is going to go a long way towards improving that situation.

I appreciate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) for his comments and certainly his leadership on this issue, which is unmatched in this House. I am proud to hear your comments.

We have a situation at Walter Reed which we all came to know very well, of course, in the months. I had the opportunity to tour Walter Reed, and when you see these kids that are returning from battle and you think about them, one of the fantastic gentlemen that we met was a 2005 graduate of the Naval Academy. And you can picture him just 2 short years ago in his uniform, throwing his hat in the air, excited, cream of the crop, the best this Nation can put forward, and he came home just horrifically injured.

It breaks your heart to see these men and women who fought so bravely, and you think that they went home to Walter Reed, and it is our responsibility to give them the best medical care that money can provide, and we had disastrous things happening there. You think of the living conditions that were outlined in that Washington Post article, and the paint peeling from the walls and the rodents and the mold, and you think, how could we possibly have let this happen?

For several years, there were complaints that were made, but nothing was done about it. But this Congress is doing something about it. We have not only done the investigations and the oversight to find out what went wrong and to hold those accountable who are responsible for what happened at Walter Reed, but, just as important, we have a commitment in this House and in this Congress that this is never going to happen again.

We are going to give the necessary funding to the Department of Defense and to Walter Reed so that they can take care of the maintenance and the repair that's necessary. And we are going to do a top-to-bottom review of every Department of Defense health facility and every VA facility in this country, find out if anything similar is happening, if there are any problems of this sort, and fix them immediately, not wait for this to take place again.

Because it shouldn't take a Washington Post article. It shouldn't take the newspaper to bring this situation to light. We have a responsibility, and we are fulfilling that responsibility, to ensure that this never happens again. And we are doing that in a variety of ways, through oversight and through the funding increases that I've talked about.

The supplemental bill that we supported and that went to the President's desk, which was signed, included an increase in funding to help the Department of Defense health care and the VA health facilities fulfill these obligations. And, as I said, we are now at record levels. The Appropriations Committee dealing with Veterans Affairs just today announced that they had marked up their bill with a $6.7 billion

increase in funding for the VA which, as I said, for this 1 year is the largest in history and is nearly $4 billion above what the President had requested.

We are going to talk a little bit later about bipartisanship, and that is an issue of which there can be no disagreement. There are issues that we talk about, like immigration, like Iraq, like tax cuts, where there is a deep divide among us. There are serious policy differences among us. But every Member of this House can agree that there is no group that should stand ahead of our Nation's veterans when it comes time to make Federal funding decisions. That is an issue that we can all agree on.

I am proud to be a Member of this House that has, for the first time in a very long time, as I said, created an atmosphere where we all agree that veterans come first, and we need to increase the level of funding for the VA health facilities after years and years of neglect.

So, with that said, I would yield at this time to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy).

I wanted to commend the gentleman from Connecticut again. We say a lot of things when we are transferring comments here back and forth about the different roles that we play, but it truly is the truth to say there is no one in this Congress who has done more on a public policy basis to promote this issue than the gentleman from Connecticut. He has done it at the State level. He is passionate about it. He has done it here in Congress. He has made it a staple issue of his young career, and I want to commend him. He has shown great leadership.

And in saying that, I want to recognize that we have a colleague, the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), who certainly deserves credit second to none for her pushing this agenda. I certainly don't want to overlook her in recognizing Mr. Murphy's equal efforts on this issue.

I have a unique perspective in my support of this issue in that I am a pro-life Member of Congress. I used the occasion of my first floor speech on the floor of this House specifically on this issue because it is that important to me.

I have a view that embryonic stem cell research and a vote to promote it is a pro-life vote. By voting to pursue embryonic stem cell research, we are voting to improve the lives of people. And most importantly with this bill, we are voting only on, and this is a very key point, lines of stem cells that would otherwise be discarded by the fertility clinic. That cannot be overlooked.

This is not a situation where we are going to be able to pick and choose types of stem cells that can be used for other purposes. The administration talks about snowflake babies and other uses. These are only lines of stem cells where the donor has said I am done using them. They cannot be used for my other purpose, they are to be discarded, and then they agree that the stem cells could be used for research purposes. Otherwise they are discarded.

That is something that in my mind is the decisive point on this. If they are going to be discarded anyway, hundreds of thousands of lines of embryonic stem cells, why not use them for scientific research to save the lives and improve the lives of people who are alive today, real men and women who are suffering from diseases, and the people who don't know they are going to have those diseases in the future, people who are going to suffer from these diseases tomorrow.

We are talking about debilitating diseases, we are talking about long-term diseases that are reaching epidemic proportions in my district of southwestern Pennsylvania, like diabetes. Imagine if this research could show a cure or improved treatment for any of these illnesses. Why would we not use them for scientific purposes if they are otherwise going to be discarded.

I am certainly not the only pro-life Member who is going to support this tomorrow, as the gentleman said. But I do want to emphasize this is an issue whose time has come. The President has vetoed it in the 109th Congress. He has vetoed it once in this 110th Congress. We are expecting we are going to face a second veto, and I know the vote is going to be close on whether or not we are going to be able to override that veto.

But we have sent a message, and we are going to do it tomorrow, that the time for this issue has come. This is not about political games or trying to score points for a political agenda. This is about saving lives and improving the lives of people who are alive today, and I strongly support this initiative.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I will do two things. First, it has come to my attention that while we were talking the Anaheim Ducks kept the Stanley Cup in the United States of America. I want to congratulate them. And I will now yield back to the gentleman from Florida to wrap up.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor 2 true western Pennsylvania heroes, Mr. Harry Kramer and his wife, Barbara. ``Uncle Harry,'' as he is known to generations of campers, was Executive Director of YMCA Camp Kon-O-Kwee in Fombell, Beaver County for 37 years, before retiring this spring. On June 2, hundreds of campers, parents, counselors, and others touched by Harry's kindness and selflessness will return to Camp Kon-O-Kwee to honor Uncle Harry and his wife, Aunt Barbara, and to dedicate the brand new dining hall as ``Kramer Hall.''

Harry and Barbara have devoted their lives to helping others. Together they turned Camp Kon-O-Kwee from a ramshackle boys camp slated for closure into the country's premier camp for special needs children and adults. Kon-O-Kwee also serves as a place for at-risk youth retreats, senior citizen camping trips, school field trips, and parent- child weekend campouts. Over 17,000 campers come to Kon-O-Kwee each year, and Uncle Harry and Aunt Barbara's warm smiles and big hearts have made an indelible imprint on each and every one.

Madam Speaker, these 2 western Pennsylvanians are shining examples of what the rest of us should strive to be. They have worked tirelessly for almost 40 years to create a magical place that Uncle Harry has called ``heaven on earth.'' And for the thousands who have passed through Camp Kon-O-Kwee--be it for a day, a weekend, or a week--it has been exactly that.

On behalf of the U.S. House of Representatives, I extend to them my deepest thanks for their years of service to western Pennsylvania and I wish them the very best in their well-earned retirement.

Mr. Speaker, Democrats continue to demonstrate that they are changing the way Congress does business. We reach across the aisle to pass bipartisan legislation that puts the American people first. Just last week Republicans and Democrats came together to provide a much-deserved pay increase for our troops serving bravely overseas. We joined together to fight crime by adding 50,000 cops to the street, and we passed an affordable housing bill that keeps the people of the gulf coast on the road to recovering after Hurricane Katrina.

We also accomplished something last week that 3 of the last 5 years Congress was unable to do: come to an agreement on a sensible budget with the Senate. It is a budget that prioritizes our Nation's veterans and achieves balance without raising a penny of taxes.

Mr. Speaker, our brave service men and women are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with TBI at an alarming rate. Sixty-five percent of the soldiers at Walter Reed today have been diagnosed with traumatic injury, and thousands of veterans have mild TBI, but have not been diagnosed. And I'm concerned that the VA has not been properly diagnosing and treating those veterans with traumatic brain injury.

As has been mentioned today, traumatic brain injury is the signature injury for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is why I introduced the Veterans Traumatic Brain Injury Treatment Act, which has been included in its entirety in this legislation we're debating today. My bill would improve the diagnosis and treatment of TBI for our Nation's veterans by requiring the VA to screen veterans for symptoms, develop and operate a comprehensive program of long-term care for postacute TBI rehabilitation, establish TBI transition offices at all polytrauma network sites, and create and maintain a TBI health registry.

In addition to improving the diagnosis and treatment of traumatic brain injury, this bill will improve the VA's research of TBI and ensure that the VA provides better care to veterans in rural communities.

I want to thank the subcommittee chairman, Mr. Michaud, and the full

committee chair, Mr. Filner, for their leadership on this issue, for including my legislation in its entirety in this bill, and I want to urge my colleagues to support this piece of legislation.

Madam Speaker, we are now 4\1/2\ months into the new session of Congress, and the Democratic Congress has a long record of achievement. We have already passed 37 pieces of key legislation, many, I am proud to say, with bipartisan support.

We have passed bills to strengthen our military, increase funding for our veterans, restore accountability, promote energy independence, lower the cost of prescription drugs and student loans, balance the budget and grow our economy. But unfortunately, not everyone got the loud and clear message the American people delivered for change last November. President Bush opposes two-thirds of those bills that we passed this session. I hope that the President will join us in moving this country in a new direction.

Mr. Chairman, ongoing military engagements and extended deployments impact not only our troops, but also the families of our brave men and women in uniform. Military families are struggling to balance everything from their financial obligations to child care responsibilities.

I offer this amendment to address this and provide military families with some relief. This amendment allows the immediate family of military personnel to use Family Medical Leave Act time for issues directly arising from deployment and extended deployments.

The wife of a recently deployed military servicemember could use the Family Medical Leave Act to arrange for child care. The husband of a servicemember could use the Family Medical Leave Act to attend predeployment briefings and family support sessions.

The parents of a deployed servicemember could take Family Medical Leave Act time to see their raised child off or welcome them back home.

This amendment does not expand eligibility to employees not already covered by the Family Medical Leave Act.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to rise today to introduce Pastor Donald Green as today's Guest Chaplain. I have known Pastor Green for many years through our involvement in the McCandless Rotary Club, which is just one of the many service organizations to which Pastor Green lends his time in western Pennsylvania. He is truly an extraordinary man, and it is an honor to present him to you today.

Pastor Green has led a number of trips abroad to assist in various relief efforts. His travels have taken him to Kenya and Zambia to visit projects funded by the Lutheran World Relief and Lutheran World Federation. In 1997 he visited missions in India, and in 1999 he took a group of volunteers to Puerto Rico to assist in hurricane relief. He also led a group of volunteers to Madagascar to lay the foundation for a youth center, which now bears his name, the Pastor Don Green Youth Center. These are but a few examples of Pastor Green's commitment to his community and commitment to service above self.

Pastor Green now serves as the Executive Director of Christian Associates of Southwestern Pennsylvania. He and Kathy, his wife of 36 years, are the proud parents of three children and one grandson.

On behalf of my colleagues in the House, Pastor Green, welcome and thank you for your many years of service.

Madam Speaker, it is a true pleasure for me to stand here tonight to talk about my favorite city, the city of Pittsburgh, which was once again named by Rand McNally as America's ``most livable'' city.

Now, Rand McNally has been designating cities as livable for 26 years, and

Pittsburgh is the first city to ever repeat. We also won it in 1985. They do it every 4 years. And I can't tell you how happy I am to have this designation because this shows for the rest of the country and the rest of the world what we already know in Southwestern Pennsylvania, that Pittsburgh is a great place to live and work. And Rand McNally has done this through formula. And 379 cities are rated on nine categories: housing, transportation, jobs, education, climate, crime, health care, recreation and ambiance, which covers its being a great place to live and work and things to do.

Pittsburgh was in the top 30 percent in the housing category. It is 93 percent of the national average in the cost of living with regard to housing. In transportation, Pittsburgh's commute is 25 minutes to work one way. And I challenge the rest of my colleagues in some other areas of the country to match that. I know that it is frustrating during rush hour to find your way into work, and in Pittsburgh generally on most days you can get in relatively quickly.

The average house in Pittsburgh is 49 percent below the national average in cost at $112,000. So that is why we rank so high in housing. In jobs, Pittsburgh is in the top quarter there. For 100 years, it still is one of the Nation's top corporate centers as home to Fortune 500 companies: Alcoa, Heinz, Mellon, PNS, PPG, U.S. Steel, and WESCO International. We have more than 90 multi-billion dollar, global corporations that call the city of Pittsburgh home.

We have more than 2,000 acres of ready-to-go sites near our airport. We have the Nation's second busiest inland port with our three rivers and the waterways. And importantly, for the environmentally conscious, Pittsburgh has the most certified ``green'' buildings in the entire country.

In education, we are home to 34 colleges and universities, including Carnegie Mellon University, which always is ranked as one of the best in the entire Nation. We have four distinct seasons with 7 months that see sunshine 50 percent of the time. And I will admit that our winters can be tough, and that was probably not our strong suit, but we still were number one overall.

Pittsburgh in crime has the lowest crime rate of any of the top 25 cities in the entire country, and this is a consistent rating that Pittsburgh has finished strongly.

In health care, we are an international leader in medical research and innovation. We have a world class health care system. We are ranked 14th overall in the country and our children's hospital is ranked 11th in the entire country.

In recreation, we have five cities. We have three rivers that provide 38 miles of shoreline for recreational purposes such as fishing. And we have PNC Park for our baseball team, which has been rated consistently as the top baseball park in the country. We have a new Penguins arena scheduled to be built and a great young hockey team. And we have a football team that has now won five Super Bowls. So we have a lot of sports and recreation to do.

And in the performing arts, we have more performing arts concentrated in one area than any city in the country outside of New York City. It has been voted the second best cityscape in America, the view from the top of Mt. Washington in Pittsburgh. We have whitewater rafting and downhill skiing within 90 minutes. And we have a bike passage that goes all the way from the city of Pittsburgh to right here in Washington,

I appreciate the gentleman from Connecticut, and I admire his leadership. I know that you did make that trip to Iraq and you came back and you can speak with some authority and some expertise, and I appreciate hearing from you. And I especially appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight on what is definitely the most important issue I think everyone would agree that we face.

I was struck by the fact that the gentleman mentioned third-party verification for different options and different opinions in Iraq. And what strikes me is the fact that the President of the United States has declined to listen to any third-party verification. He has delivered a loud and clear message last November that the American people called for change, not only domestically here in America but especially in Iraq. He has been told by his generals on the ground that he is not moving in the correct direction. He has been told by his advisers, before they're replaced, that he's not going in

the right way. The Iraq Study Group, as we all know, recommended the course of action that we have advocated; and the bill that he vetoed was verified by the Iraq Study Group.

The fact that he fails to listen to the American people, he fails to listen to his military advisers, he fails to listen to his White House advisers and he fails to listen to the Iraq Study Group, that demonstrates a clear decision on his part that he is going to ignore all of those opinions and continue down the same failed course.

I was dismayed today when I heard the news that 35,000 American troops have been told that they can expect to be sent to Iraq this fall and that their tour is going to last at least through the spring of 2008. Now, this is additional troops after the surge that we had been told in January was only going to last a few months and only going to be 21,000 troops. Now we're hearing an additional 35,000 troops and the surge is going to be at least 18 months instead of the 2 or 3 or 4 months that were we were initially led to believe.

But, thankfully, this Congress took clear and decisive action by sending the President a bill, which we have talked about before, that gives the troops the money that they need. It actually contains more money in funding for our troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan than the President requested, and that bill was met with a veto, as we know.

I had someone come up to me over the weekend and say, well, when are you going to get our troops the money that they need? And I said, we sent the President a bill that does exactly that. It was the President's decision to veto that bill and delay this process and, most importantly, delay the funding for our troops.

So the fact that he now came out and made a statement today that if we sent him a bill, that is, we took out all the things that he talked about that he doesn't like, it is not going to have the timelines and the things that he used as his reason for vetoing it the first time, we are going to send him a bill that gives the troops the funding that they need to get them through the next several months, and it is actually going to again be more funding than he asked for for the period of time that we are going to send him the money for, and we were told today that is going to be met with a veto.

So I am exasperated to hear this, because I want the troops to get the money and the funding and all the equipment and resources that they need to continue the brave fight that Mr. Murphy from Connecticut was talking about and that he witnessed firsthand. But we can't do that alone. We need the President to sign the bill that we sent him.

Tomorrow, we are going to vote on our second bill after the veto; and we are going to send it to the White House. I hope that the President will reconsider his decision to delay the funding that our troops in the field need, because these are the bravest and brightest Americans. These are people who are putting their lives on the line. They are giving every sacrifice. They are leaving their families back home for extended periods of time, multiple tours. And we are giving them the money that is required, but the President is delaying the process. So I share the frustrations of the gentleman from Connecticut.

At this time, I will yield to the gentlewoman from Florida, our fearless leader with the 30-Something Working Group, Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

Mr. Speaker, I think the gentlelady has touched on that issue in a way that makes sense to most onlookers. She comes from a State that has seen problems. But we saw as a nation what happened in New Orleans in 2005 and the lack of response that took place in large part because of these issues that we are talking about, because the Guard and the Reserve that would usually be called upon to address those issues and come to the aid of the victims of that hurricane were deployed or otherwise engaged.

We have a National Guard and Reserve that has been the subject of multiple deployments now, often three, four deployments. And when we have a situation like unfortunately happened in Kansas recently, we see the result. The Guard and Reserve is over deployed, and we are not able to respond in the fashion we need to respond when we have a national emergency, such as we saw in Kansas.

I wanted, if it is okay with the gentleman from Connecticut, to switch the topic to gas prices, because I realized as I was looking at the gentlewoman from Florida, there may be some viewers who are wondering what that apparatus is that is next to her. It is a gas pump. I will let her talk about that momentarily.

But I just wanted to start the ball rolling on that discussion and read you a quote from the President of the United States from July of 2001. So we are going back 6 years now. This is what the President said: ``My administration has proposed a plan that will reduce America's reliance on foreign oil.'' Six years ago.

For those who are interested in the success or lack thereof of that statement: In 2002, this Nation got 58 percent of its oil from foreign sources. That was our dependence. In the year 2006, last year, that number had risen to 66 percent.

Here you have a President who says that it is one of his priorities to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We went from 58 percent in his first full year in office to 66 percent last year, and it is exponential growth, just a chart that goes straight up. So I would say that his philosophy has not worked as well as perhaps he would have hoped.

What is most disappointing to me is I sat here for my first State of the Union address as a Member of Congress, and I listened to the President go on for quite some time about energy independence and the need to reduce our dependence and reliance on foreign oil. I was encouraged by that. This was still my first month in office, and I thought, this is a President that has finally seen the light and was going to move in that direction.

But, unfortunately, I went back and I reread some of his previous State of the Union addresses, and I realized that he has made that claim multiple times over the years of his administration. And instead of seeing a diminishment of our reliance on foreign oil source, it is growing exponentially.

So it is frustrating to me to see the lack of attention to what is the first issue domestically that I hear about when I go back to my district, and I am sure the gentlelady from Florida and the gentleman from Connecticut have the same questions bestowed upon them when they go back to their districts, why are gas prices so high, and what are you doing about it?

Well, this Congress is taking steps to do something about it. After years of coddling the big oil companies and giving them taxpayer subsidies in the billions of dollars at a time when they are making all-time record profits for any industry in the history of the country, we have finally decided we are going to pull back on those subsidies and redirect them to alternative sources of energy, to research and development of a myriad of sources of energy, to get us off of our dependence on foreign oil, something the President said was his priority 6 years ago, but nothing was done about it.

So this Congress is going to use that money for research and development to grow us out of this problem through research and development.

I yield back to the gentleman from Connecticut, who has a chart that illustrates what has happened to gas prices since this President first took office.

I don't mean to interrupt the gentleman, but I did want to remind anyone who is observing this discussion tonight that the ``Six for '06'' was the Democratic mantra moving forward and going into the election. Ms. Wasserman Schultz was here for that discussion, and Mr. Murphy and I were out on the campaign trail. And we talked a lot about gas prices and taking on big oil for the first time in many years and revoking some of these subsidies and redirecting them. That was a key staple of this six policy issues that the Democrats made as their top priority for that election cycle and for the first 100 hours in Congress after we were able to retake the Congress.

The gentleman talks about the sequence of events that, as that discussion was brought out, it became pretty clear to everybody that this was going to be a change. This was going to be a new direction for the country.

Again, I am just saying that, as the gentleman is, it is an amazing coincidence that just as that proposal comes forward and just as the momentum starts to shift and look like the Democrats have a chance to promote this agenda in the majority for the first time in 12 years, we do see an incredible drop in gas prices. I think it went down something like 80 cents over a several week period leading up to the election. Now, as you said, it is back up to record levels here shortly thereafter.

I did not mean to interrupt.

The gentlewoman from Florida listed off a number of initiatives that this Democratic Congress has taken at long last to address the gas price crisis that we are facing in this country. We are going to move with great speed to address these issues. We are going to address the price-gouging situation. We are going to address alternative sources of energy. We are going to address the environmental impact of the choices and the long-term consequences. We will address the price of gas that we see at pumps every day, similar to the one that the gentlewoman was holding up.

But I want to remind everybody, which is obvious because we are having this Iraq debate now and the President has sent one bill back with a veto and may send a second bill back with a veto, that we, because of the Constitution, can't do it ourselves. This is a divided government that we have, and we need the assistance of the people on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue down at the White House to join us in this effort to make a national priority of lowering the gas prices and addressing this issue for the first time since this President took office.

I don't see any indication that he is willing to do that. We can pass legislation, we can have committee hearings and oversight and talk all that we want, but if we are not joined in this effort by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and especially the President, we are going to be unable to address this issue in a way that is satisfactory to the American people.

I would urge my colleagues to voice their opinion that this is a priority. It is important to their constituents, and we do need to have a bipartisan effort moving forward to do this because this is an important issue. These are big topics that we are trying to pursue, and we need a unified American people and a unified body to take the initiative to the President and hopefully work with him on a positive solution.

We only have about a minute and a half left, and Mr. Murphy is going to do the wrap-up.

I just wanted to say that I see this prop that we have here, and it reminds me of, Mr. Murphy and I were watching you and Mr. Meek and Mr. Ryan last year with that big oil rubber stamp that you kept bringing around. Thankfully, we were able to retire that rubber stamp because the American people voted for a change in direction. I hope it is not going to take 18 months for us to retire that prop, that we are going to take clear and decisive action here in Congress, as I know we will under the Speaker's a leadership, and we are going to be able to do something about the gas prices in a way that is going to allow us to retire your prop there. But we are going to do our part, and I am going to send it over now to Mr. Murphy.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 325) commending the Michigan State University Spartans for their victory in the 2007 NCAA Hockey Championship, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, on April 7 in St. Louis, Missouri, the Michigan State Spartans beat the Boston College Eagles 3-1 to win the 2007 NCAA Hockey Championship, affectionately known annually as the Frozen Four.

The win gave the Michigan State hockey team their first championship in 21 years, and Spartan forward Justin Abdelkader rang it off the post and scored with 18.9 seconds to snap a 1-1 tie and bring home the championship for Michigan State.

They scored three goals in the final 10 minutes of the game, and Spartan goalie Jeff Lerg was spectacular, making 29 saves and allowing only one goal.

The Spartans won the hearts of underdogs everywhere. Their win capped an improbable four-game run by the third-seeded Michigan State team, who few considered to be championship contenders. In fact, the Spartans are only the second number three seed to make it to the championship game and the first in history to win it.

Justin Abdelkader was the 2007 Men's Frozen Four MVP, and the championship is Head Coach Rich Comley's second. He also won as head coach of Northern Michigan in 1991. He is one of only three coaches to have won titles with two different teams.

This is the second straight year that Boston College has lost in the championship game, and I did want to take a moment to highlight their achievements.

Last year, they lost in the finals to the Wisconsin Badgers, but prior to this year's championship, they had won 13 consecutive games, piling up a 29-11-2 record. They had multiple All-American candidates and two players who received All New England honors.

I want to extend my congratulations to the Spartan's head coach Rick Comley, Assistant Coaches Tom Newton, Brian Renfrew and Rob Woodward. I also want to recognize Michigan State University Athletic Director Ron Mason, President Lou Anna Simon and, most importantly, the Spartan players for their amazing season.

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

I thank the gentleman from Michigan. I know there is no greater Michigan State fan in this body than him and how thrilled he was when they brought home that title. So congratulations to him.

This bill was sponsored by Congressman Stupak from Michigan, and he apologizes for not being able to be here. We had a change in the schedule due to the budget discussion that we had that went on for an hour or so. He wanted me to point out specifically how happy he was for Head Coach Comley, whom he has known for his years at Northern Michigan where he won his first championship.

Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I yield back my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 290) honoring the contributions of the Rocky Mountain Senior Games on its 30th anniversary for significantly improving the health and well-being of older Americans.

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

Mr. Speaker, for 30 years the Rocky Mountain Senior Games has offered athletic competition and social opportunities to men and women, age 50 and older. Athletes of all abilities are encouraged to participate in over 30 athletic and social events. Competition is divided into male and female divisions, as well as mixed competition and by age groups. The purpose of the Rocky Mountain Senior Games is to motivate women and men over the age of 50 to pursue and maintain a healthy lifestyle.

In 2006, the Rocky Mountain Senior Games hosted 1,035 participants from 17 States across the country. The Rocky Mountain Senior Games offers our Nation's seniors the opportunity to experience the thrill of competition and the joy of camaraderie, while improving their physical fitness.

It is of vital importance that we encourage all adults to establish and maintain healthy lifestyles so that they can maintain a high quality of life as they grow older.

For 30 years, the Rocky Mountain Senior Games have helped improve the health and well-being of older Americans in our Nation. Every year, more and more seniors travel to Greeley, Colorado, to participate.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring the Rocky Mountain Senior Games.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask that Members be given 5 legislative days to insert material relevant to H. Res. 325 and H. Res. 290 into the Record.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 371) in observance of National Physical Education and Sports Week.

Mr. Speaker, I request 5 legislative days during which Members may insert material relevant to H. Res. 371 into the Record.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution designates May 1-7 as National Physical Education and Sports Week. This is the second year in which Congress has officially observed the first week of May for this purpose.

The benefits of physical activity are well documented. It reduces the risk of obesity, heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, back pain, and even certain types of cancer. It can increase one's self- esteem and body image and reduce anxiety. In youth, it develops motor skills, leads to healthier lifestyles, improves social awareness, and averts risky behaviors.

The Centers for Disease Control recommends 60 minutes of daily physical activity for children and teenagers, and 30 minutes of daily physical activity for adults. Moderate exercise, such as a brisk walk, when done regularly, has a significant health benefit.

As a Nation, we should be more active. One out of four children do not attend any physical education classes in school; 61 percent of children, ages 9 through 13, do not participate in any physical activity outside of school. Only 25 percent of children get a minimum of 20 minutes of vigorous physical activity per day.

Mr. Speaker, in comparison, 60 percent of adults are not regularly active, and 25 percent are not physically active at all. The lack of physical activity has many negative results. The percentage of overweight young people has more than tripled since 1980. It is 18 percent of that population today.

Children are now being diagnosed with high blood pressure, high cholesterol and type 2 diabetes, all once thought to be age related. Two-thirds of adults are overweight or obese. Obesity-related diseases cost the economy more than $100 billion annually.

I want to recognize some exemplary programs that are currently promoting and encouraging physical activity. Four thousand Boys and Girls Clubs across this country provide more than 4.6 million kids with the opportunity to be physically active. YMCA provides services to over 20 million people, including the Silver Sneakers programs for seniors.

This resolution acknowledges that physical activity and sports play a central role in creating a healthy lifestyle for children and adults. Schools should include physical education classes and other opportunities for physical opportunities as part of the school day, and this resolution says communities should be involved and support schools in the promotion of physical activities, nutrition education and healthy lifestyles.

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

I thank the gentleman from Tennessee for his leadership on this issue and the other legislation that we talked about today.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.