Floor Statements

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 223, ``Honoring the Life, Achievements and Contributions of Paul Harvey.''

Born in 1918 in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Paul Harvey's fascination with radio started at a very young age when he would pick up radio stations on his homemade cigar box crystal set. As a teenager, he worked, sweeping the floors at the station KVOO until the station manager decided to give him a job. The rest, as they say, is radio history.

Mr. Harvey moved from Tulsa to accept a position working at KXOK in St. Louis. While working in St. Louis, Mr. Harvey met his beloved wife of 68 years, who later became the producer of his show.

From St. Louis, the Harveys moved to Chicago, where his daily program for ABC Radio, Paul Harvey News and Comment, became the highest rated radio program in the region. Building on his audiences in Chicago, his show was soon broadcast throughout the entire country. In 1976, Harvey started a second daily radio show, The Rest of the Story, telling anecdotes about famous people or historic incidents, always with a little twist at the end.

Mr. Harvey's upbeat, positive demeanor and the ability to weave together the stories of life in America made him a national treasure. His uncanny ability to find a story, then to give it his own folksy style, delivered in his unique cadence, was remarkably popular. Mr. Harvey never lost sight of the significance of everyday life and of the stories of ordinary people in America.

With well over a half century of broadcasting experience, Mr. Harvey's show reached an estimated 24 million listeners daily. Receiving countless honors over the years for his broadcasts, he received the highest acknowledgment of his career when, in 2005, Mr. Harvey was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President George W. Bush.

Sadly, after more than 70 years on the air, Mr. Harvey passed away in February at the age of 90. The loss of Paul Harvey is the loss of a symbol of a simpler era in America. Even with the passage of time, his broadcast stories were as timely at the end of his life as they were back in Tulsa, where his career started. As Mr. Harvey would say at the end of each story, at the end of each show, ``And now you know the rest of the story.''

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Sullivan), the author of this resolution, and yield him as much time as he may consume.

Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers and would yield back the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to come before this House today to express support for a resolution I recently introduced to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.

In a world where force and hatred often overcome understanding and reconciliation, where individuals can too easily allow conflict and strife to mute the call of conscience to peace and concord, this treaty stands as an enduring reminder that no conflict can be pervasive enough, no animosity strong enough to triumph over the will of men who turn to one another in a gesture of goodwill and humility to make a decision for peace.

For peace is a choice. Sometimes hard, sometimes costly, and when we look at the recent history of the Middle East, we see layer upon layer of suffering and grievance. Innocent lives needlessly destroyed through relentless and unforgiving cycles of seemingly uncontrollable anger and retribution.

We can choose to believe that these forces are so powerful that no political solution can be brought to bear. Perhaps that is right. Perhaps there is no political solution. Perhaps we are seeking a political solution when only a solution of the human heart can suffice, a solution that recognizes that each person in this world longs for the same things and that the bond of our common humanity is stronger than the hatred that seeks to divide neighbor from neighbor, Muslim from Jew, or Arab from Israeli. A solution that recognizes that peace can only be found in treating others with dignity and respect, and that regardless of the circumstances, this is always possible unless one chooses otherwise.

The choice for true peace does not demand appeasement of tyranny, false sentimentality or warmth that cannot easily be summoned. It is, at its most practical, a commonsense choice for self-preservation, and at its most noble, a choice to build up rather than to tear down, a choice by leaders to bind wounds and heal the past.

Mr. Speaker, as a young man in 1979, I entered the Sinai Peninsula across from the Suez Canal, and in the vastness of the beige sand and desert, I came upon a twisted heap of metal and concrete--a scene all too familiar now throughout the Middle East--and upon that heap of concrete were scrawled in words in both English and Arabic, ``Here was the war--here is the peace.''

The atmosphere at that time and at that place was one of jubilation and deep abiding respect for the role that the United States played in brokering a compromise for peace.

Because Menachem Begin, the Prime Minister of Israel, and Anwar Sadat, the President of Egypt, at great personal risk to each, chose peace on March 26, 1979. They opened channels of communication that endure to this day and continue to point towards hope in a war-weary region.

Despite the painful legacy of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the Suez Crisis of 1956, the Six-Day War of 1967, the War of Attrition along the Suez Canal, and the Arab-Israeli War of 1973, these leaders stood together to make peace possible. In the poignant words of Prime Minister Begin, ``No more wars, no more bloodshed. Peace unto you. Shalom, salaam, forever.

The peace treaty provided for the mutual diplomatic recognition of Egypt and Israel and ended the state of war between the two nations dating back to the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Mr. Speaker, this was no easy choice. It was a costly choice. The choice these leaders took, to stand together ``with the boldness of heroes who dedicate themselves to a sublime aim . . . to erect a huge edifice of peace . . . an edifice that . . . serves as a beacon for generations to come,'' led to the expulsion of Egypt from the Arab League and to the assassination of President Sadat himself. Yet to this day, the treaty beckons us to ``challenge presuppositions about the intransigence and inevitability in the Middle East.''

Perhaps the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty of 1979 is an example that can be replicated and modeled throughout the region. Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, we will see twisted piles of rubble and concrete from more recent conflicts marked with the poignant words, ``Here was the war, here is the peace.''

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

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

I rise here today, Mr. Speaker, in support of House Resolution 152, which expresses the sense of the House that the United States remains committed to the NATO Alliance.

For over half a century, NATO has played a vital role in preserving transatlantic peace and security and in safeguarding freedom and democracy. NATO has contributed to the security of the United States and continues to serve as an important component of our broader national security framework. Although the Cold War is over, the Alliance has and must continue to transform itself to better address new challenges confronting NATO member nations.

The job of the Alliance is not over as the security of NATO member states continues to be threatened by those who seek to spread destruction, oppression and instability. Addressing these challenges will not be easy, and much needs to be done to strengthen the strategic capabilities of the Alliance.

The upcoming summit in Strasbourg, France, and Kehl, Germany, in April serves as an opportunity not only to reaffirm NATO's fundamental purpose but also to articulate a concrete vision for the Alliance in the 21st century.

I would like to thank our distinguished colleague, Congressman Tanner, for introducing this important resolution. I would also like to express particular support for the language in the resolution that states that NATO must ensure equitable sharing of contributions to NATO operations by its members, encourages the Alliance to

begin considering a new strategic concept that would take into account the challenging security environment, and calls on NATO to recognize and help address the threat posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and by terrorism.

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

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield my time to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on member requests, I am submitting the following information regarding-an-earmark I received as part of H.R. 1105, the FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill:

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Economic Development Initiatives

Project Name: CEDARS Children's Crisis Center

Amount: $142,500

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: CEDARS Youth Services, Inc., located at 620 North 48th Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68504.

Description: The funding will be used for construction of a new Children's Crisis Center for abused, homeless, and runaway youth in Southeast Nebraska. CEDARS Youth Services plans to build a children's crisis center to provide short-term emergency shelter, immediate professional assessment of each child's needs, intense family-centered therapeutic services, and an environment that inspires a rapid return to stable and enduring family living. The 18,000 square foot facility will not only provide immediate safety and protection for vulnerable children and youth across the Midwest, but also a comfortable family- friendly setting for them to begin reunification or to meet prospective foster parents in a safe, professional supervised setting. While primarily helping persons from the Midwest area, the Center has recently served youth from the states of Tennessee, Georgia, California, Michigan, Texas and others. CEDARS is the only emergency shelter provider for children and youth in Southeast Nebraska, and this children's crisis center will expand the current service capacity by as many as 12 children each day. This is a 50% increase.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on member requests, I am submitting the following information regarding an earmark I received as part of H.R. 1105, the FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill:

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Corps of Engineers--Construction

Project Name: Antelope Creek Flood Damage Reduction Project

Amount: $4,620,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Lower Platte South Natural Resources District located at 3125 Portia Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68521.

Description: The Antelope Creek Flood Damage Reduction Project is a critical element of a flood control, transportation and community revitalization project known as the Antelope Valley Project. The project is being constructed in central Lincoln adjacent to the University of Nebraska Lincoln main campus to improve flood control, transportation networks and community well-being in the city's downtown area.

First, let me thank the gentleman from New Jersey for conducting this very, very important discussion.

Madam Speaker, over the past several years, I have received scores of letters from my constituents that reflect widespread national confusion about stem cell research. Let me take a few moments to cut through the fog on this important issue.

There are two types of stem cell research often confused in our public debate. The first, which I wholeheartedly and enthusiastically support, is the type of stem cell research which uses cells derived from sources such as cord blood, skin, and bone marrow, commonly known as adult stem cell research. This is good science, helping to save American lives and providing real treatment options now.

The American people deserve to know that adult stem cell science is progressing at a staggering pace, showcasing over 70 successful clinical treatment models for conditions ranging from heart disease to Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, sickle cell anemia, stroke damage, leukemia, chronic liver disease, and many, many more. The empirical evidence is sound, and it really is eye opening, giving hope to those who suffer from these debilitating conditions.

Madam Speaker, the American people also deserve to know that there is a clear distinction between adult stem cell science and embryonic stem cell science. Between hope and promise for cures on the one hand and misleading, misguided efforts to funnel their tax dollars to bail out research companies, research enterprises, that thrive on the destruction of nascent human beings, embryos, who are no less human than Members of this august legislative body.

Widely touted and vigorously promoted nationwide as a potential cure for many of the same conditions that adult stem cell research may treat, embryonic stem cell research requires the destruction of unborn human persons to derive stem cells for research. We know that embryonic human life is still human life. The marvels of modern science leave no room for confusion on this important point. Moreover, embryonic stem cell research has shown no clinical success to date. It represents a degradation of human life that is wrong. Science that harms human beings, no matter how small they are, no matter how vulnerable they are or easily disposable they are, is always wrong.

With so many proven ethical alternatives, embryonic stem cell research presents an unnecessary moral dilemma for persons of goodwill. It siphons limited Federal funds away from adult stem cell research that is now saving lives. And American taxpayers, who have recently been asked to shoulder an unprecedented deficit that will burden generations to come, should not be forced to pay for it. Adult stem cell research works, saves lives, and avoids the ethically divisive issue of the destruction of innocent and unborn human life.

So, again, with that I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey for conducting this important dialogue.

Thank you very much.

I thank the gentleman from Iowa, and I always appreciate your passion and your willingness to engage in the most profound issues facing our country. I didn't mean to interrupt. If you were concluding, I was hoping you would yield time to me for about 6 or 7 minutes on another topic that I'd appreciate your listening to.

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, today, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Gordon Brown, spoke strongly and eloquently before this body of our Nation's specialness of our shared history, traditions, as well as our values. He also spoke of the past, present and future challenges confronting our partnered nations.

I respect this long, historic relationship that Prime Minister Brown laid

out. There were many principles of his speech with which I deeply agree, such as the defense of human rights worldwide, nuclear security, a sustainable energy future, and human rights in addition to the fact that he also proposed a broad, vast, new array of new ideas that can help bring about a new day and mantle of leadership in this essential area of need for our world's poor. However, he also proposed a ``global new deal,'' a new deal that is not clearly defined but that is pointed toward a vast, new, international arrangement.

With regard to the current financial difficulties in our developing global economy, it is indisputable that our economic challenges affect the rest of the world. America has a long history of meaningful trade with other nations, especially with our partner Great Britain, but America also has an entangled relationship pertaining to our national debt. We have borrowed from the United Kingdom, China, Japan, and from numerous countries in the Middle East to finance our burgeoning debt and to accommodate our deficit spending. Much of this has been discreet and out of the public eye, but the implications of foreign ownership of Federal debt instruments are greatly significant.

Approximately half of the total public debt is in foreign ownership. At some point, Mr. Speaker, global investors may grow weary and may decide not to take the risk of buying our debt. We would consequently be faced with the choice to stop borrowing to finance our deficit spending or to raise interest rates in order to attract investors. If any of these countries chose to quickly sell their U.S. holdings, a tumultuous devaluation of the dollar could quickly ensue.

As Prime Minister Brown said, we are all seeing how certain ``financial instruments have spread contagion throughout the world.'' This is certainly true, and I appreciate the Prime Minister's calls for further transparency and accountability. However, I challenge his presupposition that a greater global consolidation of financial systems is in our national or in the international community's best interest.

Financial consolidation, extreme volatility and speculation in world markets, reckless use of exotic financial instruments, liberalized credit have certainly contributed to the current collapse. The global scale of the credit crisis and confidence should give us pause to consider that our profound economic connectedness may actually cause more problems instead of prosperity. The increasing concentration of wealth assets into fewer and fewer financial institutions will increase our financial vulnerability. One of our greatest concerns right now is how to stabilize banks and financial entities that are deemed ``too big to fail.''

Well, Mr. Speaker, I believe we need a paradigm shift, a new paradigm. We should be asking: Are these financial systems too big to succeed? Now is the time to reconsider an essential component of Western philosophy--the great potential of the individual in solidarity with one's community. I believe that America, the United Kingdom and the other strong financial powers in Europe should take this time to empower individuals and communities to provide for themselves through a network of strong local and regional economies.

As the Prime Minister added, America is a nation of extraordinary capacity, and to spur growth, I believe it is imperative that our government's efforts be targeted toward helping small business entrepreneurs whose successes will be the bellwether of economic progress.

Recent data from the Commerce Department shows that small businesses have generated 60 to 80 percent of new jobs over the past decade. By enacting good commonsense initiatives to benefit entrepreneurial growth, we may create local jobs and new opportunities to stem the tide of economic difficulties in our communities, our State and nationwide.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that it is local financiers and local businesses who best know the needs of their communities and who are, in the very essence, more transparent and accountable. This is the motto we should return to, and it is the proper motto for us to help lead in building sustainable local economic connectedness for the world's developing nations.

I thank the gentleman for the time.

Mr. Speaker, again, the gentleman from Iowa was kind enough to allow me to borrow some of his time. And I appreciate, again, his passion and his focus on the essential issues of the day. But I'd like to continue, just briefly, the discussion that we were engaging in at the moment regarding the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom's address before a joint session of Congress today.

And let me add, Mr. Speaker, that Prime Minister Brown rightly warned us earlier of the dangers of protectionism. But in no way is it protectionist, I should add, to want to consolidate our economic recovery efforts on Main Street. More than any bailout crafted by Washington or Wall Street, it is a return to our hard-fought American ideals of responsibility, discipline, entrepreneurship and stewardship that will actually help Americans build a more just and secure future for ourselves, as well as for the world's poor.

Mr. Speaker, the United Kingdom has been a stalwart friend of ours throughout our modern history. And after two centuries of partnership, it can be said that we have no greater ally. In no way do I seek in these comments to undermine that. Our two nations will be forever grateful for our aid to one another during times of both war as well as peace.

The United Kingdom is our greatest ally in preserving our long- standing commitment to the inalienable human rights, especially for vulnerable populations. I deeply value the Prime Minister's words that when the strong help the weak, it makes us all stronger. And this certainly rings true with regard to the pursuit of international policies that recognize the inherent dignity and rights of the human person, which are essential to preserve liberty and justice in the world.

However, Mr. Speaker, let me make this clear: we should give long pause before becoming more intertwined in an internationalist, industrial financial model for the future. Let us continue our strong relationships of commerce with the United Kingdom and all other nations, but let us not find our financial wellbeing entangled in complex, poorly understood, exotic, international economic alliances. Instead, let us embrace a new philosophy of recovery and renewal based on the time-honored principles and notions of individual responsibility, entrepreneurship and community.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 7 o'clock and 32 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, March 5, 2009, at 10 a.m.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on member requests, I am submitting the following information regarding the earmarks I received as part of H.R. 1105, the FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill:

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Special Research Grants

Project Name: Drought Mitigation

Amount: $469,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: University of Nebraska-Lincoln located at 202 Agricultural Hall, Lincoln, Nebraska 68583

Description: This funding is for the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC) which conducts research and educational programs on drought mitigation and planning for drought. The project has assisted numerous states and municipalities in developing drought plans and implementing drought response action teams. The Center has received national visibility for providing information on the severity of drought throughout the United States. Both print and electronic mass media routinely use Center produced materials in their news stories on the drought.

The NDMC's program is directed at lessening societal vulnerability to drought through a risk-based management approach. The NDMC works with local, state, and tribal governments, federal agencies, and non- governmental organizations. The objectives of the NDMC are: (1) to develop and evaluate existing drought policies and plans in the United States and elsewhere with the goal of improving drought-coping capacity and (2) to develop and evaluate new techniques and methodologies for monitoring drought severity and its impacts, identifying and classifying users in the United States and elsewhere.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Buildings and facilities

Project Name: Systems Biology Research Facility

Amount: $1,088,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: University of Nebraska-Lincoln located at 202 Agricultural Hall, Lincoln, Nebraska 68583

Description: This funding will be used toward construction of a University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL)/Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Research Facility. This facility would provide critically needed space for UNL and ARS research addressing two areas of national concern: renewable energy and water resource conservation and management. Agriculture is expected to provide almost 40 percent of the nation's liquid fuels within 30 years. This will further intensify demands on our soil and water resources. UNL and ARS scientists have been collaborating at UNL since the 1930s. Very strong collaborative programs continue today, including the ARS program at UNL that has been developing improved switchgrass varieties for 30 years and

is the leading program in the world on the use of switchgrass for cellulosic ethanol. These scientists are scattered across the UNL campus and the proposed building will enable them to share collaborative, cutting-edge research space that will move this important research forward more rapidly. This project would advance major research focused on essential national efforts.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: COPS Law Enforcement Technology

Project Name: Lincoln Police Department Security Upgrades

Amount: $132,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: City of Lincoln located at 555 S. 10th Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68508

Description: The Lincoln Police Department wants to take its first steps into the emerging technology of digital recording systems for police patrol cars. The proposal would equip 20 police patrol vehicles with digital video systems integrated with the Department's existing mobile data computers. These systems will capture video from car- mounted cameras onto flash memory media that can be downloaded for archiving. These systems will replace older analog video tape recorders and cameras. This would integrate digital content into our extensive Intranet resources, so digital video can be used by police and prosecutors. Although many departments are beginning to make the transition to digital recording equipment, this integration is the key component of this project that differentiates it from most. The equipment will allow for greater efficiencies within the Department and accelerate information-sharing with neighboring jurisdictions.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Corps of Engineers--Construction

Project Name: Antelope Creek Flood Damage Reduction Project:

Amount: $400,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Lower Platte North Natural Resources District located at 511 Commercial Park Road, Wahoo, Nebraska 68066.

Description: The Antelope Creek Flood Damage Reduction Project is a critical element of a flood control, transportation and community revitalization project known as the Antelope Valley Project. The project is being constructed in central Lincoln adjacent to the University of Nebraska Lincoln main campus to improve flood control, transportation networks and community well-being in the city's down- town area.

Essential to progress on the entire Antelope Valley Project is the completion of the flood damage reduction component. This multi-purpose project is a partnership of the City of Lincoln, the University of Nebraska Lincoln, and the Lower Platte South Natural Resources District, along with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the federal Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development. The project reduces flooding threats to over 800 dwellings and businesses and 1,200 floodplain residents and removes 100-year floodplain restrictions on 400 acres.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Corps of Engineers--Construction

Project: Sand Creek Environmental Restoration Project

Amount: $400,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Lower Platte North Natural Resources District located at 511 Commercial Park Road, Wahoo, Nebraska 68066.

Description: The Sand Creek Project will restore several types of historic wetlands and add to the national wetlands inventory in support of the Administration's ``net gain'' national wetlands policy. A quantitative analysis of all environmental outputs by the Corps of Engineers in addition to the Feasibility Study demonstrated a significant level of benefits for this wetland restoration project for the Lower Platte River watershed which serves the North American Central Flyway.

The Sand Creek Project supports the national goal of a net gain in American wetlands. Active pursuit of this goal also provides for improvements in water quality and water supply to achieve watershed improvement. Flooding in Wahoo along the U.S. 77 Expressway corridor occurred twice during 2006. Completion of the wetlands restoration structure will also provide flood damage reduction benefits and the roadway allowing completion of this expressway between Lincoln and Sioux City. This is a key segment of the expressway.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Corps of Engineers--Construction

Project: Western Sarpy-Clear Creek Flood Damage Reduction Project Amount: $2,775,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Papio-Missouri River Natural Resources District located at 8901 S. 154th Street, Omaha, NE 68138.

Description: The Western Sarpy-Clear Creek Flood Damage Reduction Project is vital to the health and well-being of a large number of Nebraskans. It is planned to protect vital drinking water resources that supply up to 50% of Nebraska's population in the eastern part of the state from flooding due to potential ice jams on the Platte River. Elected officials at local, regional and state levels in Nebraska have been long committed to this project's construction because of risk to water supplies and other infrastructure.

Significant construction progress towards completion is vital to Nebraska in the year ahead. The Congress has provided construction funding for the past four years in the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act.

In 1993, flooding in the Lower Platte severed one-half of the City of Lincoln's water supply and catastrophe was again threatened in 1997 from ice-jam induced flooding. That portion of the new Omaha Metropolitan Utilities District well field on the western side of the Platte River now under development south of U.S. Highway 92 will also receive vital protection from this project. Treatment facilities for water from this well-field will be completed in the months ahead.

Additionally, this project is needed to provide protection to: I-80 and U.S. Highway 6; The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, an Amtrak line; Military facilities at the National Guard Camp at Ashland; National telecommunication lines; and Other public infrastructure.

Construction of a separate but companion levee at the Nebraska National Guard Camp at Ashland was fully funded by the Congress in the FY '04 Military Construction Appropriations Bill and is completed. Neither of these adjoining levees is effective without the other. Ice jams with the potential for flooding in the area around Camp Ashland and the 1-80 Bridge where it crosses the Lower Platte River occurred again as recently as 2001 and will continue to be a significant threat until both of these projects are completed.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Corps of Engineers--Construction

Project Name: Missouri National Recreational River

Amount: $335,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers located at 106 S. 15th Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68102

Description: This funding is for the Missouri National Recreational River (MNRR), located on the Missouri River from Gavins Point Dam downstream to Ponca, Nebraska. Federal activities pursued within the MNRR must protect and enhance the values for which it was designated-- scenic, recreational, fish and wildlife, historic, and cultural. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' FY09 capability of $9 million would be used for bank stabilization, easement acquisition, and fee title purchase.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Section 205

Project Name: Fremont Section Sec. 205 Flood Control Study

Amount: No specific dollar amount

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Lower Platte North Natural Resources District located at 511 Commercial Park Road, Wahoo, Nebraska 68066

Description: This funding is for the federal share to complete the Fremont South Section 205 Flood Control Study. Funding for this Section 205 project will continue urgent feasibility planning to strengthen an existing flood control levee in order to remove a portion of South Fremont from the threat of flooding in the 100 year flood plain. This Fremont South area will be soon identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (``FEMA'') as within the designated flood plain. The total cost of the project is $1,086,000 split equally between the Corps of Engineers and the nonfederal sponsor.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Section 205

Project Name: Schuyler Section 205 Flood Control Study

Amount: No specific dollar amount

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Lower Platte North Natural Resources District located at 511 Commercial Park Road, Wahoo, Nebraska 68066

Description: This funding under the Section 205 authority is for the federal share to continue the Schuyler, Nebraska Flood Control

Study. The amount requested will continue the Schuyler, Nebraska Sec. 205 Flood Control Study. The purpose of the study is to plan for mitigation of flooding in 40% of the city which is anticipated to be placed in the flood plain for the first time when designated by FEMA. The total cost of the study is $772,000 split equally between the Corps of Engineers and the non-federal sponsor.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Project Name: Bioenergy Demonstration Project: Value-Added Products from Renewable Fuels

Amount: $1,903,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: University of Nebraska-Lincoln located at 302 Canfield Administration Building, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588

Description: The funding will be used by the University of Nebraska- Lincoln to establish a pilot-scale corn-ethanol bioenergy facility and research program. Research will focus on developing new fractionation processes for removing value-added components from corn before and after fermentation to biofuel and on exploring new commercial uses for these products. Establishment of a research facility and program will help ensure the economic viability of the rapidly expanding biofuel industry during periods of commodity price uncertainty for grain and ethanol. The ability to test feed formulations with greater amounts of biofuel co-products will be critical to the livestock industry as corn and soybean prices rise in response to expanded biofuel production. This research facility's goals align with the U.S. Department of Energy's goal of displacing 30 percent of 2004 gasoline demand with biofuels, primarily ethanol, by 2030. Achieving this ambitious goal requires a rapid expansion of the fuel ethanol industry and research on the most efficient and cost-effective means of producing ethanol and of utilizing the byproducts of that process.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Project Name: Intelligent Controls for Net-Zero Energy Buildings

Amount: $475,750

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: University of Nebraska-Lincoln located at 302 Canfield Administration Building, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588

Description: The funding will be used by the University of Nebraska- Lincoln to develop intelligent real-time controls for buildings using distributed electrical generation systems. The U.S. Department of Energy has set a goal of marketable net zero energy buildings buildings with annual net energy consumption of zero by 2025. Because residential and commercial buildings consume almost 70% of U.S. electricity, reducing energy use in existing and new buildings is critical to achieving zero energy buildings. Many large buildings needing an uninterrupted power supply, such as hospitals, schools, manufacturing facilities, hotels, and retail buildings, use distributed generation systems that include diesel generators and steam and gas turbines and could include solar, wind, and fuel cells. The intelligent controls developed by this project will decide in real time which energy source to employ and how much to charge and discharge storage systems to balance energy use and emissions over a year. These controls will enable operators to determine the optimal mix of on-site power generation and utility grid-supplied power needed for large buildings to maximize energy consumption and carbon emission credits. This research will lead to improved distributed generation applications in retrofit and new construction that reduce the energy use and carbon footprint of buildings.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: STAG Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Project

Project Name: City of Lincoln Wastewater Treatment Upgrades

Amount: $550,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: City of Lincoln located at 555 S. 10th Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68508

Description: New and stricter wastewater treatment NPDES effluent discharge permit limits were issued in January 2004 to the City of Lincoln for both the Theresa and Northeast Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Over the last five years, more than $61 million in improvements have been made to these facilities to meet the new NPDES permits. The last of these improvements is nearing completion. The City continues to make improvements to the treatment facilities and collection system pipelines and pumping systems to be more cost efficient; reduce overall energy use; control and reduce odor emissions; reduce greenhouse gas emissions by further utilizing biogas generated by the treatment processes, and minimize the overall carbon footprint of facility operations. The City's six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) identifies $17.7 million in treatment facility improvement projects and $84.9 million for maintenance and improvement projects to the collection system. These improvement projects are essential for assuring air and water quality, protection of the environment, public health and safety of the community. The City expects to incur the majority of the costs to make improvements to the collection and treatment facilities through a capital construction program funded by user fees and federal assistance.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Higher Education (includes FIPSE)

Project Name: Northeast Community College

Amount: $761,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Northeast Community College located at 801 E. Benjamin Avenue, Norfolk, Nebraska 68702

Description: This funding is for a new collaborative education center in South Sioux City, Nebraska. Northeast Community College (a comprehensive community college), Wayne State College (a regional comprehensive public state college), and South Sioux City, Nebraska, are partnering in this project. The new College Center will serve the area by creating a ``one-stop'' consolidated service center offering community and economic development resources in addition to providing educational opportunity for area residents at an affordable price. The primary purposes of the joint center are:

to improve access to higher education in an underserved area of Nebraska with special focus on the large number of minority and first- generation students in the region

to offer comprehensive ``start-to-finish'' degree programs that will allow place-bound students to earn associate's, bachelor's, and master's degrees in focus areas without having to relocate

to support economic and community development in the region through workforce training and consolidation of services

The vision for the Center is to meet the educational demands of the region, provide a combination of classroom and lab instructional space adapted to the customized needs of regional employers, as well as to collaborate with area high schools to provide academic transfer, career and technical instruction for secondary students. This project will serve regional needs of Northeast Nebraska and the greater Siouxland area, including the southeast portion of South Dakota, and the west central to northwest portion of Iowa.

The new College Center facility will be designed to serve 500 full- time students by providing space for general classrooms, specialized instructional spaces for distance learning, science labs, computer labs, nursing labs, and a multi-purpose conference area that can be used as training classrooms for business and industry and learning community activities. It will also include areas for support services and academic support spaces for testing, tutoring, library services, study commons, and conference spaces. The South Sioux City Community Development Agency has donated 57 acres of centrally located land to Northeast Community College. The College Center will be located at this site.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Project Name: Environmental Health Informatics Database

Amount: $238,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: University of Nebraska Medical Center located at 986380 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska 68198

Description: This funding is for the University of Nebraska Medical Center to create a Midwest Health Informatics database to assess environmental influences on the development of diseases by collecting health information from 50,000 Midwesterners. Currently most information about the relationship between disease and the environment is generated by major databases located in large urban areas on the east and west coasts which tend to be regionally specific and generally not applicable to rural areas. This database would be the first research cohort in the Midwest to study the relationship between rural populations, the environment, and disease development. This project could reveal environmental factors responsible for birth defects or lymphoma, a cancer with high incidence in Nebraska. The data will provide valuable information on the factors influencing development of deadly diseases like cancer and

position UNMC Eppley Cancer Institute to be designated a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Comprehensive Cancer Center. This high distinction will allow for the most advanced patient care and research to be available in Nebraska. UNMC is the ideal institution to spearhead this database with its numerous resources, well-established statewide hospital network to collect data, a state-of-the art cancer research team and facilities, and comprehensive database capabilities to collect and assess acquired data from this project.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Transportation, Community, and System Preservation

Project Name: Antelope Valley Transportation Improvements

Amount: $570,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: City of Lincoln located at 555 S. 10th Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68508

Description: The City of Lincoln is committing significant resources for road and pedestrian improvements associated with Antelope Valley. Some of the important projects that remain in the $125 million transportation component of Antelope Valley Project include: construction of 5 miles of roadway (including the Antelope Valley Parkway from 17th & Y Streets to Capital Parkway) to improve traffic in the City's central core and Northeast Lincoln; reducing through traffic congestion on the University campus and on downtown streets; eliminating two dangerous mainline at-grade rail crossings, and providing a new overpass (16th Street Overpass) to the State Fair Park, Devaney Sports Center, state military areas, and surrounding neighborhoods. The federal assistance would be used in FY 2009 on Construction of P and Q Street bridges and roadways that are over the flood control channel that is to be constructed concurrently by the Corps of Engineers.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Transportation, Community, and System Preservation

Project Name: Nebraska Highway 35

Amount: $380,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Nebraska Department of Roads located at 1500 Highway 2, Lincoln, Nebraska 68502

Description: The intent of this project in northeast Nebraska is to develop the most efficient route from Norfolk to South Sioux City. Currently, the route is comprised of several short segments of highway winding its way to the northeast. This project has significant regional and national importance. It would provide substantial safety and economic development benefits. The Nebraska Department of Roads has classified the Highway 35 project as a planned expressway.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Bill

Account: Transportation, Community, and System Preservation

Project Name: Rulo Bridge Replacement Project

Amount: $95,000

Name and Address of Requesting Entity: Nebraska Department of Roads located at 1500 Highway 2, Lincoln, Nebraska 68502

Description: This funding is for the Rulo Bridge project between Nebraska and Missouri. The funding would be used for the initial planning and design of a replacement bridge. The current Rulo Bridge was built in 1939 and is too narrow to handle modern-day traffic. It also has dangerous curves in both of its approaches, limiting visibility and making it difficult for safe passage of vehicles meeting each other.

Madam Speaker, my district includes the largest city in the world named for Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln is the capital of Nebraska, a State that bore great significance to our President's legacy.

On October 16, 1854, Abraham Lincoln delivered a speech that changed the world. One of the famed Lincoln-Douglass debates, this 3-hour speech challenged the Kansas-Nebraska Act and presented arguably the most thorough moral, legal, and political argument against slavery to that date. He deplored Stephen Douglass' invocations of the quote `` `sacred right' of taking slaves to Nebraska.'' He spoke passionately against the act, declaring:

``I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world--enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites--causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty.''

Were Abraham Lincoln to not have spoken these words, my State may have suffered a past of grave injustice. Nebraskans are thankful for his stand for the principle enshrined in the preamble to our Declaration of Independence: All men are created equal.

Abraham Lincoln's legacy, 200 years after his birth, is now deeply rooted in our American tradition. He led our Nation through our greatest and most profound crisis and strengthened our country.

Though Lincoln's work at healing a fractured Nation was tragically and reprehensibly cut short, countless Americans have carried the mantle set forth in his remarkable orations. We work, as Lincoln said, ``to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all Nations.'' Even today, and even while our Nation is under many pressures at the moment, it is a testament to Lincoln's legacy that the world still turns to us to lead on critical human rights issues.

Madam Speaker, as a Representative of Nebraska, as a resident of Lincoln, as an American citizen, deeply moved by the grand yet simple ideal of equality, I am honored to stand here today and pay tribute to President Abraham Lincoln on the 200th anniversary of his birth.

Thank you, Congressman Burgess, Dr. Burgess, for hosting the hour tonight.

We all know the economy is in very difficult straits. Families are hurting; businesses are taking downturns, and people, in general, are suffering. I do not want to see any family face unemployment or foreclosure or see any business take a downturn, but I think the question before us is: What is the right thing to do?

There is not a Member of this body nor a member of the administration who is not carrying that heavy burden in his heart--we understand that--but I do think that we should ask the right question: What is the responsible, appropriate response to maximize economic productivity and to create jobs in order to help families?

Dr. Burgess, you might be interested in knowing that we have a long tradition as the Nebraska delegation. A group of Nebraskans--anybody who is in town during the week--meets for breakfast on Wednesday mornings. It has been going on for 66 years. One of the things that I like to do with constituents who are in town is to just give a basic overview of the Federal budget.

I hope you can see this adequately, but this is basically the Federal budget. This is the projected budget for fiscal 2009. It is $3.5 trillion. Basically, this is where the expenditures go. The red part of the pie is what we call up here in Washington ``mandatory expenditures,'' including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, as well as other expenditures, which include food stamps, farm payments, the Earned Income Tax Credit, as well as unemployment insurance and Federal worker benefits.

This plus net interest on the debt is well over 60 percent of the entire Federal budget. National defense is in an area of this purple sector of the pie. We call that up here in Washington ``discretionary'' because we tend to haggle over it, but it is about 18 percent of the

overall Federal budget. This small sliver right here is called ``nondefense discretionary,'' and that is where other important programmatic elements lie.

Many of the constituents who come up here come to talk to us about that very small area of the budget, whether that's parks or roads or programs to meet special education needs and a variety of governmental functions.

This chart is very telling as well because it shows where our revenues come from. In fiscal 2009, the revenue estimates are $2.4 trillion.

Now, you'll remember the expenditure chart, $3.5 trillion. To do a quick little bit of math, it says a $1.1 trillion budget deficit for this year for our ordinary budget. This is where the money comes from. Individual income tax is about 45 percent, which is in the purple area of the pie here. This maroon area is the corporate income. Corporate income tax is about 10 percent. Payroll taxes are about 40 percent. There are others--the excise, estate and gift taxes.

But it's that figure that I want to talk about, the $1.1 trillion. Unfortunately, our process here, in order to create an opportunity to help their economy, has resulted in an unrestrained, unsustainable, massive, Washington-style spending bill that will be very, very difficult to reverse.

Before the year 2000, by the way, the Federal budget was about $1.8 trillion. This year, it is almost going to be double that at $3.5 trillion. We have been on a massive spending spree, and it should have been stimulated, but here we find ourselves in serious economic straits.

I was on the radio the other day, and the radio announcer said that it's very difficult to get your mind around $1 trillion--and it really is--but think about this. The very deficit that we're leaving, should this bill pass along with other expenditures at this time, is larger than the Federal Government's entire expenditures were just a few short years ago. The deficit this year will be larger than that of the entire Federal Government before the year 2000. That is a very serious problem because we are going to pass debt on to children or we are going to sell the wealth asset value of this country overseas. That is a shift of the wealth of this country into the hands of foreign debt holders or we are simply going to monetize it and are going to create inflation, which is a regressive form of taxation, particularly for the poor. These are very serious issues.

So, if we are to do a stimulus that is appropriate, it needs to be targeted and temporary, moving tomorrow's decisions to today in order to maximize economic leverage and to create jobs. We should also have some basic outline of a plan to pay for it. So those are some of the real dilemmas here that I see that I wanted to come down and point out.

Thank you for hashing this out, not only among Members but for anyone who might be watching. I thank you for the time.

I want to thank the gentleman for having this very important discussion tonight on the House floor.

My fear is what we've done here in the name of stimulus is actually create an unrestrained, unsustainable spending bill. And since the year 2000 or so, it's very important to note that the Federal Government has actually grown by about 60 percent. We've been on an 8-year stimulus run in the name of spending, if you will, and yet we remain in economic straits at the moment.

I think this is very important to point out because the other problem here is the massive amounts of debt that we're going to compile if this bill should be passed. Debt that is unpaid for--the stimulus bill not being paid for--will be passed along to future generations, children and grandchildren, or it will be sold, the wealth asset value of this country sold overseas to foreign debt holders, or it will come out in other forms of taxation such as inflation.

Inflation is a very regressive form of taxation, particularly among the most vulnerable among us.

With that, let me say, I don't want to see any family experience unemployment, any business take a downturn or any family experience a foreclosure. And with that said, I think it's very, very important that we work very hard to get this right, a plan that makes sense, that maximizes economic productivity through any type of new governmental policies that we set, but a plan that is also potentially paid for over time and that does have some new bold ideas in it.

One of the problems here as well, though, is that much of the spending is targeted to States, and some States like Nebraska, we've been very fortunate to be insulated from these larger downward economic trends. We have a strong ag economy that is hitting some bumps at the moment, but nonetheless, we also have a set of values, if you will, where people work hard and take responsibility for themselves and care for their neighbor. Businesses, as well as our citizens, have made prudential decisions about buying and lending, and we haven't suffered like the rest of the country in this regard.

But with that said, this bill effectively asks Nebraskans to subsidize other States that may have been poorly governing and want the Federal Government basically to make the tough decisions for them, not force them to make the tough decisions.

I thank the gentleman for the time.

I think we are. It's a very important point to be made that a lot of communities in a lot of places have had to make choices with limited budgets to set priorities and have not rushed up to Washington to say bail us out, help us out. They have made those tough choices responsibly, and it's places like those, like Nebraska and other places, that I fear are subsidizing other places that have not performed admirably in terms of governance.

Another point here is I think there are some bold, new, innovative ideas in this overall package. I think they could be potentially considered as stand-alone measures. President Obama has a strong focus on, for instance, alternative energy development for a sustainable energy future.

This economic crisis was precipitated by, you recall, a very high spike in energy costs which accelerated other difficulties in the economy. But we've almost forgotten that now. Can you imagine where we would be if gas were $4 a gallon right now? So we've dodged a bullet right there.

But trying to get underneath the question as to what our real economic vulnerabilities are, including our overdependence on foreign oil and fossil fuel in general, is an important policy consideration.

So there are some admirable components here that might ought to be considered as a part of a reasoned stimulus plan that has a payment schedule for it, or stand alone separately.

So we don't want to stand here and simply oppose everything in that regard. But we are halfway.

Well, again, I'm grateful.

We don't, again, want to see any family suffer any unemployment or suffer any situation like that. But I think this letter that I got today from a constituent back home from Gail in Fremont says quite a bit. She said, ``I'm writing to let you know I oppose the stimulus, Congressman. I'm opposed,'' she adds, ``to the overwhelming debt the government is all too willing to place on us with no long-range plan for getting us back on stable ground.''

She goes on, ``What is the Federal Government doing without during this emergency?'' She says, ``In my home when there's no money, we do without. We don't spend money we don't have. I'd rather tighten my belt for a time than to live the rest of my life under the burden of increased taxes for this bloated stimulus package.''

Unrestrained, unsustainable spending is the issue here, and we need to maximize economic productivity through smart thinking about what really is stimulus.

Mr. Chair, I do not want to see any family face unemployment or foreclosure, or any business experience a downturn, but I fear we are suffering from a tyranny of worn-out ideas here.

This bill is called a stimulus bill, but I believe it is an unsustainable spending bill.

Mr. Chairman, when did we decide that more Federal spending in itself is economic stimulus? Since 2000, we have increased spending by about 60 percent in this country and the national debt has nearly doubled. Despite these growing expenditures, our economy has worsened, and we are left with an $11 trillion debt. And now we have a proposal that is before us that would be the largest spending bill in the United States history, and no plan to pay for it.

Will we continue to rely on foreign nations, such as China, already bankrolling our spending habits? Or just defer responsibility to our children

and our grandchildren and future generations? We are delaying tough choices and we are pushing reality down the road here. Much of this assistance goes to subsidizing States. Some States, like Nebraska, have thus far managed their budgets responsibly, even in tough times. I won't ask Nebraskans to pay for poor governance elsewhere.

Mr. Chair, I don't want to give a speech simply to oppose. There are some important, new bold ideas here, such as alternative energy for a sustainable energy future, a modern electrical grid and health information technology. But the entirety of the package puts us on a path of aggressive spending, in the name of stimulus, that will be nearly impossible to reverse.