Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the conflict in Iraq weighs heavily on us all, especially when we receive casualty announcements and face the stark reality of precious lives lost far from the comfort of home and family.

Today, I would like to pay tribute to First Lieutenant Jacob N. Fritz of Verdon, Nebraska, who lost his life in a brutal ambush on January 23.

A graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, Lieutenant Fritz served valiantly in the Army's 25th Infantry Division when he came under attack near Karbala, Iraq. While details are still pending, we know that a group of men wearing U.S. military uniforms infiltrated a government compound and opened fire on Lieutenant Fritz, who was standing outside his vehicle at the time of the incident.

Mr. Speaker, I am so grateful to Lyle and Noala Fritz, Jacob's parents, for taking so much time to speak with me

about Jacob recently. As Noala said to me, ``God got a good one.''

Continuing a proud family tradition, Lieutenant Fritz's brother Daniel is currently at West Point and is scheduled to graduate in the year 2008. I want to reassure Daniel and the entire Fritz family that we are all united in our support and concern for the outstanding men and women who willingly risk their lives in Iraq under arduous circumstances that would tax the best of us.

Mr. Speaker, as we take this moment to grieve, we also want to honor the Fritz family for their dedicated service to the United States. I pray that God's peace will console and strengthen them during this difficult time and in the days ahead.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for her leadership on the Foreign Affairs Committee, as well as our chairman, Mr. Lantos, for your support of the resolution today.

Madam Speaker, I would like to add my voice to those who have commented on the leadership of Mr. Price of North Carolina, and Mr. Dreier of California, as well as the excellent service that the dedicated staff has provided in the formation of the House Democracy Assistance Commission.

Madam Speaker, I was very pleased to receive an appointment to the commission during the last Congress, because I recognized its potential to help legislators around the world who are struggling to give representative democracy a chance. By supporting this program we can provide direct help to build effective legislative institutions worldwide. Through the work of the House Democracy Assistance Commission we bring the best of our practical experience in running this Congress to emerging democratic societies, where people are longing to experience robust institutional systems that value the just principles of self-determination.

Last Congress, the commission selected 12 parliaments from Afghanistan to East Timor for participation in its technical assistance program. Logistical challenges notwithstanding, the commission's dedicated professionals and committed members reached out to help replicate this institution's success stories in legislatures throughout the world.

In reauthorizing the House Democracy Assistance Commission, we can continue to help other countries place their people's aspirations within reach. In helping them to succeed, we can play a direct role in laying the foundations for a more stable and peaceful world.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution today.

Mr. Speaker, please find attached references which conclusively demonstrate the therapeutic benefits experienced by human patients who have undergone a variety of adult stem cell treatments. These references are available at www.stemcellresearch.org. Also, please find attached the text of a Wall Street Journal article on November 16, 2006, citing progress on amniotic stem cell research as referenced in my floor statement during the January 11 debate on H.R. 3.

Peer-Reviewed References Showing Applications of Adult Stem Cells That

Produce Therapeutic Benefit for Human Patients

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin with a story. Several weeks ago, I was reading some of our national publications, and I came across a very small article that reported how Swiss scientists were taking amniotic fluid from preborn children, children who had been diagnosed in the womb with heart disease, and they were taking adult stem cells from that amniotic fluid and beginning the process of growing heart valves that would inevitably be placed in those children because of that heart disease.

Mr. Speaker, my spirits lifted. I had hope again. You see, my daughter Kathryn is 6 years old and she suffers from complete atrial ventricular septal defect, a severe form of heart disease. She has had three open-heart surgeries thus far. We are probably looking at a fourth in the coming months, and in that surgery it is likely she will need a mechanical valve which further complicates her difficulties. This is why this article was so meaningful to me.

You see, adult stem cells from bone marrow sources and umbilical cord sources and now amniotic fluid are showing real therapeutic value in the treatment of 72 diseases currently, and this avoids the ethically divisive issue of the destruction of unborn human life, the destruction of unborn human embryos.

Embryonic stem cell research has shown no therapeutic value to date, is highly controversial, and many taxpayers do not wish to have their money spent here. So, Mr. Speaker, I say, why not? Why not invest our limited resources in adult stem cell research that is showing great promise and giving real hope? This is good public policy. This is the right thing to do.

Mr. Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to champion the principle of informed consent, which should concern each and every one of us here today. I also want to thank Mr. Smith yet again for his courageous and tireless dedication to the most vulnerable persons among us, the unborn. His leadership on human rights is a constant inspiration.

For over 30 years, our society has been torn apart by the issue of abortion. There may be very few of us who have not been affected by the emotional and physical pain of abortion, as experienced by millions of women, children, and families throughout the country.

Modern therapeutic and diagnostic technologies make it increasingly more difficult to deny the essential humanness of unborn children. These technologies and sound, scientific research have enabled us to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that unborn children are able to experience excruciating pain from 20 weeks of gestation.

It is my hope that one day we will all choose to open our hearts and minds to the unborn and face the reality of abortion for what it is. Until that day, let us at the very least work to ensure that women are given the medical facts about fetal pain. Women deserve this respect.

Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, September 26, 2006, I was unavoidably detained and thus I missed rollcall vote No. 478. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Mexico.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3871, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey a Lewis and Clark visitor center in my district from the National Park Service to a well- respected nonprofit organization. As the sponsor of this bill, I encourage my colleagues to support this important legislation.

I would like to begin by expressing my sincere appreciation to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), the chairman of the House Committee on Resources, and the distinguished gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce), the chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks, for their outstanding work on bringing this legislation to the floor. We appreciate it.

I would also like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to Nancy Hoch from Nebraska City, who has played such a key role in the construction of the visitor center and its ongoing operation. Her vision and leadership have been instrumental in making the center such an outstanding success.

The bill is very straightforward. It would simply convey certain Federal land near Nebraska City associated with the Missouri River Basin Lewis and Clark Interpretive Trail and Visitor Center to the related nonprofit group, the Missouri River Basin Lewis and Clark Interpretive Trail and Visitor Center Foundation, Incorporated.

The bill also authorizes $150,000 annually for 10 years to operate the facility. It is important to note that the National Park Service currently provides about $200,000 annually to subsidize operations at the center. As a result, enactment of this legislation would actually save the Federal Government about $50,000 per year.

It is also important to note that I worked with the National Park Service in drafting the language for the bill, and this proposed conveyance fits with the long-range plans for the center. I also believe that it would be the most cost-effective option for the Park Service.

H.R. 3871 is cosponsored by both of my colleagues from Nebraska, Representatives Lee Terry and Tom Osborne. A companion bill in the Senate, S. 1957, has the support of both Nebraska Senators, Chuck Hagel and Ben Nelson.

The Interpretive Trail and Visitor Center is an outstanding resource and an impressive facility. The nonprofit organization associated with it includes a committed group of individuals who have spent many years making the center a reality and ensuring that it provides a meaningful and educational experience for those who visit

it. This legislative action is needed to fulfill the original plan for operating the visitor center.

The Missouri River Basin Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center is truly unique. It is the only visitor center or museum in the United States to focus on the flora and fauna and scientific discoveries recorded by Lewis and Clark.

The Lewis and Clark Expedition was a watershed mark in American history. Two centuries later, the courageous story of these two outstanding explorers and the Corps of Discovery continues to inspire Americans of all ages. This legislation will help ensure that future generations will have the opportunity to learn about this remarkable journey.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I would encourage my colleagues to vote for H.R. 3871.

Mr. Speaker, ``It's hard to be sad when I'm so proud. You are my hero.'' These were the words Alvin Debro, Jr., used to bid his brother, Sgt. Germaine Debro, a final goodbye.

Sgt. Debro was killed near Balad, Iraq, on September 4 when his Humvee hit a roadside bomb.

A member of the Nebraska National Guard, he had served in both Bosnia and Kuwait. Because of these recent deployments, he was not required to go to Iraq. But as a single man with no children, he volunteered so other soldiers would not have to leave their families.

At the funeral service at Morning Star Baptist Church in North Omaha, Pastor Leroy Adams said to us ``I look across this sanctuary and see America . . . One Nation, under God, in a Church, and Germaine brought us together. . . . It's not how long you live--it's how well you live.

His friends recalled Germaine's love for life, selflessness, and compassion for others. Germaine's mother, Priscilla, said her son ``died a proud soldier.'' Our Nation will be forever grateful to Sgt. Germaine Debro.

``It's hard to be sad when I'm so proud. You are my hero.'' These were the words Alvin Debro, Jr., used to bid his brother, Sergeant Germaine Debro, a final goodbye.

Sergeant Debro was killed near Balad, Iraq, on September 4 when his Humvee hit a roadside bomb. A member of the Nebraska National Guard, he had served in both Bosnia and Kuwait. Because of these recent deployments, he was not required to go to Iraq. But as a single man with no children, he volunteered so other soldiers would not have to leave their families.

At the funeral service at Morningstar Baptist Church in North Omaha, Pastor Leroy Adams said to us: I look across this sanctuary, and I see America, one Nation, under God, in a church brought together by Germaine. It's not how long you live, it's how well you live.

His friends recall Germaine's love for life, selflessness and compassion for others. Germaine's mother, Pricilla, said her son died a proud soldier. Our Nation will be forever grateful to Sergeant Germaine Debro and his ultimate sacrifice.

I thank the gentleman from Georgia for coordinating tonight's discussion, and I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania as well for his beautiful insights that he read that, as you so well said, have helped us create an opportunity not just tonight but through the events of the day, the difficult tensions, nonetheless, maybe there is a moment here which will allow us to explore, to unpack the inextricable link between faith and reason.

I would like to tell a story, though, that might augment some of these reflections. As a much younger man, I spent a considerable amount of time in the Middle East and I was in a country that was predominantly Moslem and was being hosted by a Moslem family who were extraordinarily generous to me in welcoming me into their home. They lived in an oasis area that was just rich in agricultural production. Their neighbor was a Christian man. My host made a point to introduce me to him, knowing of my own faith tradition. He very humbly showed me, because I did not understand the language, the nature of their community, the nature of the way they lived. If I recall correctly, he took his Christian neighbor's hand, bowed down and gave it a kiss to show again the unity, in spite of the distinctions that are their faith tradition, the ability to live next to one another out of respect and humility, out of respect perhaps for a higher good, a higher calling to be a member of the human family. And perhaps again what has already been discussed tonight in terms of the Pope's comments, it gives us an opportunity to explore that beautiful wedding of faith and reason as it flows out of the very nature of the divine.

If you recall, though, the Pope's very first writing, his first encyclical, was Deus Caritas Est, God is Love. If I could read some reflections on that, they are these:

``The Holy Father has already made clear in Deus Caritas Est that love of our neighbor is not primarily a government project, that justice is not enough, and often is not even a beginning. We simply cannot just talk of faith and justice without beginning and ending in charity and the reasons for it.'' In other words, the reasonableness of acting in faith or acting out faith in love and the unreasonableness or the irrationality of imposing the faith, particularly, or enforcing a faith particularly through violence. I think again the opportunity to unpack that discussion tonight is extraordinary.

I appreciate the gentleman's allowing me a little bits of time to speak.

If the gentlewoman will yield, thank you for quoting the source. I didn't say that earlier.

I would like to thank the gentleman from Georgia. I would like to return to some of the commentary that the gentleman from Pennsylvania made, because in our founding documents, in another of our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence, here are the words. ``We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.''

In other words, the founding document in a certain sense separated the institution of church and state, yet at the same time affirmed the transcended values, the transcended ideals that make democratic politics possible.

Frankly we are at a crossroads, because I think for the world to progress in the name of civil reform, in the name of civilization, we have to recognize this fundamental principle, that

every person has inherent dignity and rights. That is the foundation of an order that can then be built upon justice and in charity.

That is what we are facing worldwide. It is so essential that those of us who have been given the gift of stabilized societies, who have lived with the blessings of that philosophical context, help others who are reaching out as well for civil society and to build up the institutions that can promote that very principle, that every person has inherent dignity and rights.

This is the crossroads that we face I think in the world today, because all of civilization hinges upon that key principle. We have had to work that out in our country. It has been imperfect. We have fought. It is not perfect today. And yet at the same time, this has spread beyond our shores, this idea, because of the transnationalism that has now occurred, because of the advances in communications, in technology and transportation have caused the world to shrink very, very rapidly. So we have an opportunity to rethink some of the foundations on which the very order is built.

So, again, this is an opportunity to explore it a little more deeply, some of our own history, some of the goodness embedded in our own history and perhaps what other people are longing and reaching out for.

Mr. Speaker, today we remember those who died tragically on September 11, 2001--and the family members who continue to mourn such terrible loss. We honor the strength of these Americans and we also thank the brave men and women defending America today from those who continue to seek to do us harm.

We live in a very special place. We live in a country that is built on the fundamental principle that all persons have inherent dignity and rights. The freedoms we enjoy depend on this fundamental principle. As many did in the immediate aftermath of the 9-11 attacks, Americans are willing to risk their lives for the sake of their fellow citizens--for the good of country, family, and community.

Last week I had the privilege of formally welcoming home the soldiers of the 67th Area Support Group of the Nebraska National Guard as they all returned home safely from a yearlong deployment.

What a beautiful scene! Families reunited . . . husbands and wives in loving embraces, children scrambling to greet the mom or dad they'd known only through letters and photos the year before. Parents taking up young children in their arms, some perhaps for the first time.

In their commitment and patriotism, these soldiers had given a year away from families and homes to serve their country. Many of our military service personnel will tell you that their service is driven by the events of that fateful day 5 years ago. They sacrifice so much personally to help protect our Nation.

Fortunately there has not been an attack on America for five years. This is not due to wishful thinking. This is due to the extraordinary effort to rethink and reform our national security efforts. Our military, our homeland security forces, police officers, firefighters, and emergency first responders have all played a very important role in protecting America.

Their work helps make America safer--their sacrifice keeps our families more secure.

And the compassion, sacrifice, and resolve of the American people help make our Nation great. We have faced difficult challenges of worldwide significance in the past--World War II and the Cold War. We prevailed then and we must now prevail for the good of our country and the hope of a more peaceful world.

Mr. Speaker, today we remember those who died tragically on September 11, 2001, and the family members who continue to mourn such terrible loss. We honor the strength of these Americans, and we also thank the brave men and women defending America today from those who continue to seek to do us harm.

Mr. Speaker, we live in a very special place. We live in a country that is built on the fundamental principle that all persons have inherent dignity and rights. The freedoms we enjoy depend upon this fundamental principle. And as many did in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, Americans are willing to risk their lives for the sake of their fellow citizens, for the good of the country, family, and community.

Last week, I had the privilege of formally welcoming home the soldiers of the 67th Area Support Group of the Nebraska National Guard as they all returned home safely from over a year-long deployment. What a beautiful scene, families reunited, husbands and wives in loving embraces, children scrambling to meet the mom or dad they had known only through letters or photos for the past year, parents taking up young children in their arms perhaps for the very first time.

In their commitment and patriotism, these soldiers had given more than a year away to family and home to serve their country. Many of our military service personnel will tell you that their service is driven by the events of that fateful day 5 years ago. They sacrifice so much personally to help protect our Nation.

Fortunately, there has not been another attack on America for 5 years. This is not due to wishful thinking. This is due to the extraordinary effort to rethink and reform our national security efforts. Our military, our homeland security forces, police officers, firefighters, and emergency first responders have all played a very important role in protecting our country.

Their work helps make America safer. Their sacrifice keeps our families more secure, and the compassion, resolve and support from the American people give their work all the more meaning and help keep our Nation strong.

We have faced difficult challenges of worldwide significance in the recent past: World War II and the Cold War. We prevailed then, and we must prevail now for the good of our country and the hope of a more peaceful world.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify the amendment with the modification placed at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may consumed.

(Mr. FORTENBERRY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to offer this amendment to H.R. 5682, the United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006. The purpose of this amendment is to provide Congress with the ability to assess, to the extent possible, whether U.S. civilian nuclear cooperation with India may potentially contribute to growth in India's military fissile material production. The amendment is straightforward. It simply calls for a report each year to ensure that the United States is not unintentionally complicit in the growth of India's nuclear weapons capabilities.

First of all, let me express my appreciation to Chairman Hyde and Ranking Member Lantos and the House International Relations Committee staff for their efforts to address a wide variety of concerns expressed by members of the International Relations Committee.

Given the global significance of this potential agreement, I believe it is important to remain diligent in the conduct of our oversight responsibilities.

Mr. Chairman, civil nuclear cooperation with India is a bilateral initiative with wide-ranging multilateral implications. The nonproliferation, energy and environmental objectives of this proposed agreement with India are laudable; and the Committee on International Relations has emphasized the need to ensure that such an agreement would not result in unintended consequences which may undermine its purpose and directly or indirectly result in boosting India's military nuclear capabilities.

It is my expectation that the International Relations Committee will avail itself of this opportunity to hold as many hearings as necessary to examine the content of this report and the potential implications for the U.S. compliance with Article I of the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons as referenced in the bill.

This is particularly important in light of the recent news regarding the discovery of a reactor project which would enable Pakistan to make many more nuclear weapons each year. This news highlights very real concerns about a potential arms race in South Asia. It is up to Congress to ensure that any U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement remains just that, a civil nuclear agreement which will have no impact on the production of nuclear weapons.

Mr. Chairman, I understand that Chairman Hyde and Ranking Member Lantos are in support of this amendment, and I am grateful for their support.

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

I yield to the gentleman from California.

I thank the gentleman and appreciate all of his hard work.

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

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, July 20, 2006, I was unavoidably detained and thus I missed rollcall votes Nos. 389, 390, and 391. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on all three votes.

Mr. Chairman, I do rise in support of this amendment as well offered by my colleague, Mr. Kennedy.

In every congressional district throughout the country, narcotics does take on a sinister but very unique face. In rural communities that span the First District of Nebraska, that ugly face is methamphetamine abuse, production, and trafficking.

Throughout my district, local law enforcement agencies are using as much as 85 percent of their resources to battle meth. Broken families, child abuse, gang violence, and environmental decay are other consequences that this poison imposes on our communities. In other districts maybe the problem isn't meth, but perhaps something just as sinister like cocaine or heroin.

But no matter what face narcotics takes in any particular district, I would like to remind my colleagues that we must, in good conscience, support the men and women of local law enforcement. These are the courageous men and woman who risk their lives daily to better the communities, and they deserve our gratitude, but also our efforts to assist them in the difficult and dangerous work they do.

I urge my colleagues to vote for the Kennedy amendment.