Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 469, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 68) making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2006, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I hope I do not consume very much.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring to the House the continuing resolution for fiscal year 2006. The CR will run through November 18. It is a clean CR without exception. Several Members are pushing the extension of dairy programs, adding emergency spending for the Corps of Engineers, and a whole host of other ideas. We have rejected them all. These items can be addressed in the next supplemental, regular fiscal year 2006 bills, or in reconciliation. The CR will fund agencies at the lower of three levels: the House-passed level, the Senate-passed level, or fiscal year 2005 current rates.

Agencies funded in the Labor-HHS, Treasury, Transportation and Defense bills will be funded at the lower of the House-passed or current rates since the Senate will not pass these bills by October 1. The House and Senate have not passed a CR under the current framework since 1994. By returning to a traditional CR that funds the government operations at the lowest possible level, it will provide a strong motivation for this Congress to complete its work in regular order and produce individual appropriations bills and conference reports.

I want the body to know the Committee on Appropriations is strongly committed to bringing back to this floor individual conference reports for each and every bill. The committee does not support an omnibus or minibus in any form and will do everything in its power to ensure that that does not happen.

I remain committed to moving these bills individually and within the framework of the budget resolution. In order

to help the Senate with the difficult process of passing the Treasury, Transportation and Labor-HHS bills, we will continue to push the lower rate, long-term continuing resolution prospect. I am convinced that this is the only way for us to get back to regular order. The House and Senate committees on appropriations are both committed to this goal.

With regard to the regular order appropriations bills, the Interior and Legislative branch conference reports have been signed into law. The Homeland Security conference concluded just this morning, and we expect to file a conference report today.

The Senate has now passed eight appropriations bills, and the ninth is expected to be completed by early next week. We have begun giving notional allocations to Energy and Water, Foreign Operations, Science, Justice, State and Commerce and Agriculture subcommittees so they can begin negotiating. We are making very good progress.

This continuing resolution is an important step toward achieving our goal of restoring regular order to the congressional appropriations process.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's motion.

Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order under clause 7 of rule XVI. The instructions proposed in the motion to recommit range far beyond the subject matter of the joint resolution.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my support of the work of both the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) on this very important matter. They have done great work together. I appreciate it.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleagues Jim Kolbe and David Dreier for taking the lead on this extremely important measure. This amendment is about meeting federal responsibilities, about fairness to our states, and about making sure federal policies make our streets safer, not more dangerous.

There can be no debate that immigration is a federal responsibility. The Supreme Court has ruled again and again that the states cannot take the lead on immigration, even if they want to. Every President has insisted that the federal government must control, and be responsible for, immigration. And Congress throughout history has passed laws that ensure we will help states cover the costs of immigration.

I want my colleagues to understand this point: The SCAAP fund is not a grant program. We are reimbursing State and local governments for money they have already spent to arrest, process and incarcerate criminal aliens. These aliens should not be here, creating a burden on our society. We all agree that if the federal government was protecting our borders effectively, this would not be the problem it is.

Yet every year, more than $635 million is spent by California and our local governments to incarcerate criminal aliens. This is not an estimate--to qualify for SCAAP, the states must clearly document their costs and get federal verification that the convicts are aliens. Nationwide, the costs are nearly $2 billion a year to jail more than 200,000 criminal aliens in state and local lockups.

Let me be clear on this: This is $2 billion that has been spent on criminals who everyone agrees are federal responsibilities. This is $2 billion that is not being spent by states, counties and cities on more law enforcement officers, better courts and reducing the prison population.

This is not a partisan matter. When Mr. Kolbe and Mr. Dreier introduced an amendment to increase SCAAP reimbursements this year, it was passed easily in a bipartisan vote. The Senate has passed this reauthorization legislation unanimously. It is time for Congress to reaffirm this federal responsibility. Please vote for the Kolbe-Dreier- Lewis amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Bureau of Land Management California Desert District Manager Linda Hansen, a dedicated public servant who has been a leader in balancing the protection of our vast public lands in the California desert with the needs of our public to use those lands in the most beneficial way.

Throughout my years here in the House of Representatives, I have had the honor and pleasure of representing much of the Southern California desert lands, which range from the Sierra Nevada on the north to the Mexican border. The land itself is some of our nation's most unique and unspoiled, and the people who live, work and recreate there are very unique in their own ways. Many desert peaks provide vistas of hundreds of miles in every direction with no sign of civilization. But often a short drive down a canyon road can reveal a group of homes, a working ranch or rare mineral mine that are every bit as vital to the desert experience.

It takes a special leader to balance the needs of the desert lands and their users. For the past 3\1/2\ years those needs have been very well balanced by the capable hands of Linda Hansen, the manager of the 10.5 million-acre California Desert District of the BLM. She has found ways to protect desert dunes and grant access to off-road vehicle riders. She has helped preserve desert wildlife like the Bighorn Sheep and met the needs of the thousands of hunters who know those arid lands so well.

Linda Hansen joined the BLM by chance 28 years ago, taking a job as a receptionist in the Carson City office after her family moved there. She worked her way up through the ranks over the years, serving in both the state and national offices, and was finally named in 2002 to be the first female director of the Desert District.

During her three years, the BLM has completed regional land use plans to guide management of public lands in the Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert, Northern and Eastern Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley, and the Imperial Sand Dunes. She also oversaw the final stages of development of the largest Habitat Conservation Plan in the United States in the West Mojave Desert, slated for completion by the end of 2005.

She has improved the working relationship with her federal management partners, including the Forest Service, National Park Service, Department of Defense, and Fish and Wildlife Service. An Imperial Valley native, she has helped forge a compromise that allowed off-road enthusiasts to use the Imperial Dunes, while at the same time protecting much of the Dunes' fragile eco-system. At the same time, she has forged the United Desert Gateway, helping communities like El Centro and Brawley reap the benefits of the increased visitation there. Along the way, she has gained a reputation for being fair and patient in dealing with everyone who is dedicated to the protection and enjoyment of the desert.

Mr. Speaker, after 31 years of federal service and 28 years with the BLM, Linda Hansen will soon be retiring. Please join me in thanking her for her dedication, patience and perseverance, and wishing her well in her future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3673.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3673) making further emergency supplemental appropriations to meet immediate needs arising from the consequences of Hurricane Katrina, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.

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

Mr. Speaker, it was less than 1 week ago that Congress approved $10.5 billion in disaster aid to begin providing immediate assistance to the people of the gulf coast. That emergency supplemental bill was the first of what will likely be several supplementals addressing the urgent needs of our citizens affected by Hurricane Katrina.

I plan to be very brief in my remarks.

The human needs in the gulf region are all too apparent. The President has promised an unprecedented level of assistance and, once again, Congress is backing that promise with the funding and resources to keep the aid flowing.

This is a straightforward supplemental providing $51.8 billion for emergency response and recovery needs associated with this disaster. Our effort today will ensure that there is no disruption in funding for needed relief efforts. We fully expect to be approving still more assistance once we have an assessment of the full scope and costs of this disaster.

It is important for our Members to know that we are insisting on proper oversight for those appropriated dollars to ensure that funds are being spent wisely. Specifically, we have added a provision allowing the transfer of up to $15 million from FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund to the Homeland Security inspector general. Congress also will provide that every dollar needed is spent to rebuild, but we will require accountability for every dollar that is spent.

The destruction along the gulf coast will require months and even years of intense effort to recover and rebuild. Congress and the Bush administration are fully committed to the rebuilding process.

One final thought in closing. I recall vividly the scene of Republicans and Democrats standing on the steps of the Capitol singing ``God Bless America'' on the evening of September 11, 2001. We stood not as partisans or political opponents, but as American citizens united in our grief and resolve. We would all do well to follow that model of comity and civility. Our success in rebuilding in the wake of this natural disaster demands that we tone down our political rhetoric and weigh our words and actions carefully.

The lives and livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of people are at stake. The temptation to point fingers is great in the aftermath of a tragedy of this magnitude. Regardless of party affiliation, we must all resist this temptation to point fingers when our citizens are suffering and in need. There will be plenty of time to assess how and why this disaster occurred, but not today, not now. We must stand together as we did on 9/11, united as Americans, to assist our citizens in need.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Alexander).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), a member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bonner).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to mention, as I did in my opening statement, that we have changed this a bit by adding $15 million to make sure our inspector general is assisting us in making sure that every dollar that will be spent, and it is necessary to help those people who have been affected by this tragedy, that indeed it is our intention to ensure to the American public that every dollar is spent well.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I first want to say that I appreciate the gentleman bringing this to our attention, as chairman of the Committee on Small Business. Indeed, I will be happy to continue working with the gentleman over time regarding this matter, and I look forward to that effort.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, as I go about introducing my final speaker, I was very impressed by the gentlewoman's comments and her willingness to work in a bipartisan way regarding the challenge ahead of us.

I wanted to mention to her we have been looking very seriously at the problems in the region of the gulf for a long time. In the last 5 years, the Congress has appropriated some $1.9 billion for flood control in Louisiana. I might mention only $1.4 billion has been appropriated for all of California, seven times the population. So we have been truly focusing upon that region.

Just last Friday, as you know, we passed a $10.5 billion package for this immediate crisis, and today we have over a $50 billion package before us. So the Congress is attempting to focus upon this very real challenge.

I am very happy that the gentlewoman recognizes that we do need to work together in terms of finding the why of all of this, but right now it is most important to respond to the challenges and needs of the American people in danger.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the majority leader of the House.

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

Mr. Speaker, the funds provided in H.R. 3673 to meet the urgent needs arising from the consequences of Hurricane Katrina are designated as emergency requirements for the purposes of section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95, 109th Congress. The requirements funded in the bill meet criteria outlined in section 402(c) since they are in response to a situation which poses a direct threat to life and property, is sudden, is urgent and compelling, is unpredictable, and is not permanent in nature. The funds are also essential to the continuing recovery effort.

The devastation that has occurred in New Orleans and around the Gulf Coast as the result of Hurricane Katrina is of monumental proportions. It already is the most costly natural disaster in the Nation's history, and most government natural disaster assistance experts anticipate recovery needs far beyond the $62.3 billion to be provided by Congress in the first two Hurricane Katrina supplemental measures. The funds in H.R. 3673 will provide urgently needed food, shelter, security, and reconstruction. The funds will help to save lives. Clearly, the funds meet emergency needs and are consistent with the criteria outlined in the budget resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it shall be in order at any time without intervention of any point of order to consider H.R. 3645 in the House; the bill shall be considered as read; the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening motion except (1) 10 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit; clause 10 of rule XX shall not apply to the question of passage of the bill; and all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I just wanted to emphasize a comment you just made that the limited debate of 10 minutes is designed to have us expedite the paperwork and otherwise from this process. In the meantime, we know the Members want to be heard so there will be a Special Order following the passage of the bill so that we can move forward with the paperwork and make sure the President gets this on his desk as quickly as possible.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House, I call up the bill (H.R. 3645) making emergency supplemental appropriations to meet immediate needs arising from the consequences of Hurricane Katrina, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

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

We have come together today, for all of us in the House of Representatives know that words are not adequate to begin to deal with this horrendous natural disaster that has beset all Americans but particularly those people in the region of the Gulf.

Indeed, Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to speak extensively here today but to say that the bill is designed to make sure that all of us understand that America will respond to this tragedy. Money is not going to make the difference in the final analysis. This bill provides for $10 billion to make sure that FEMA has enough flexibility and adequate dollars will be available to flow in the very near term as we really assess the cost moving forward. This will not be the last time we discuss this issue in terms of both financial strain and also the horrid strain it is placing upon those Americans who are directly affected. The bill beyond that provides $500 million that will also be available for the Department of Defense to, in a flexible fashion, be of further assistance in this tragic disaster.

With that, I hope that the Members will participate in the Special Order that will follow this very brief debate in order to make sure that there is a complete airing as the House would seek its will.

Mr. Speaker, words cannot begin to describe the toll Mother Nature has taken on the people of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. The levels of desperation and human suffering from Hurricane Katrina are unlike anything we have seen in our country.

I do not intend to take much time today for the need in the affected region is so great. This is not a time for words or political rhetoric. It is a time for action. We need to move quickly, to save lives, and help the people of the region get back on their feet. The President has promised an unprecedented level of immediate aid. Congress is backing that promise with the funding and resources to keep the aid flowing.

This is a simple 2\1/2\-page supplemental. It contains two sections: $10 billion for FEMA within the Department of Homeland Security; and $500 million for the Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide account within the Department of Defense. The $10.5 billion figure was determined based on what FEMA is now spending on a daily basis and how much is needed to take us out a few weeks until we get a better assessment of what the long-term funding needs will be.

At the beginning of this week, FEMA had roughly $2.6 billion in its Disaster Relief Fund and $1.5 billion in the Flood Insurance Program. In recent days, FEMA and OMB concluded that these funds were being utilized at a rate of between $500 and $750 million per day. President Bush and our leadership made the decision to convene the Congress in an emergency session and move this supplemental to the President for his signature today.

We do not yet know how much the recovery from this disaster is going to cost. Our resolution today provides an immediate infusion of money to allow FEMA and the Department of Defense to address the most immediate needs resulting from this natural disaster. Costs associated with evacuation, emergency repairs, deployment of personnel, and other costs resulting from immediate relief efforts are included in this package.

This initial step today will ensure that there is no disruption in funding for relief efforts. We fully expect to be approving additional emergency funding in the coming weeks. Quite frankly, it will take some time to assess the full scope and cost of this disaster. Much of the damage is still underwater and the full extent is still unknown. Damage assessments will be collected from a great many Federal entities--FEMA, the Corps of Engineers, the Coast Guard--and others.

The destruction that has overtaken New Orleans and the Gulf Coast will require months, and even years, of intense effort to recover and rebuild. It will take nothing less than a domestic Marshall Plan to rebuild new roads, utilities, homes, and businesses. On this point, let me be very clear: Rebuild, we must. Rebuild, we will. Congress and the Bush administration is one-hundred percent committed to the rebuilding process and today's action is the first step.

One final thought as I conclude my remarks: There is no greater spirit than the American spirit responding to citizens in need. When we see suffering, we want to do something. We want to lend a hand. Many people are responding to this tragic circumstance by offering their prayers and opening their hearts and their checkbooks to organizations like the Salvation Army and the American Red Cross. I encourage my colleagues and our citizens to do the same in the days and weeks ahead.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the distinguished majority whip.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close the debate on this measure and in doing so suggest that those who are looking with interest that one of the great things that has happened in recent years is that we often televise

our discussions here. While that theoretically would build a base of support on the part of Americans for the Congress, it is strange to me that the polling would suggest that many Americans are very disconcerted by the tendency for extreme rhetoric on both sides of the aisle often carrying on partisan battle for the sake of it and so the polls are just seen as coming down, down, down.

The reality of that is that the American people expect better of us than that. But Americans respond in times of crisis and tragedy. There is not any doubt that this tragic event that has been experienced by the people on the Gulf Coast is beyond imagination, but in reality also the public will see the Congress reflecting the best of our people. They do not want us pointing fingers at each other, trying to figure out who you can blame besides myself. They want us to recognize that we have a responsibility to serve our people, and in times of crisis especially respond to their basic needs, saving lives, extending those lives, helping them to begin to rebuild.

The destruction that has overtaken New Orleans and the Gulf Coast will require months and even years to completely respond to recovery. It will take nothing less than a domestic Marshall Plan to rebuild our roads and utilities and homes and businesses. On this point, let me be very clear. Rebuild we must. Rebuild we will. The majority whip suggested that Americans themselves are already responding individually. Indeed, as we responded to the tsunami in spades, Americans are already responding, with their hearts, with their prayers and indeed with their pocketbooks to the Salvation Army, the Red Cross and otherwise. They are going to make sure that money is not the question. We are beginning that process by way of our public responsibility today with this bill, but indeed in the weeks and months and years ahead, we will demonstrate as a Congress that America does its best work when we come together as Americans and not as partisans.

With the passage of this bill, this task is just beginning. I urge people on both sides of the aisle in the weeks ahead to make certain that we are holding hands with those victims and all of our Americans who want to see us respond in the way that we can respond and we are doing our best.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will not consume very much time. I rise to express my deep appreciation one more time to my colleague and friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), for his cooperating with me as we have gone through this initial conference process, but most importantly to congratulate both my colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), and my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Taylor), for the fabulous job on this first of a series of conference reports that we expect to send to the President's desk.

It is very early in the process, but the Interior bill will be on the President's desk, and I am very certain he will find it to be to his liking. So congratulations to each of you for your work.

I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, let me further say that none of this would have been done as effectively and with the high quality reflected in the conference report without the great help of our staff. They have done a tremendous job. They are breaking records here. It is because of the cooperation of the entire committee, the Members and the staff working together.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and that I may include tabular and extraneous material on the conference report to accompany H.R. 2985.

Mr. Speaker, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2985), making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume. I do not expect that we will use very much of our time, Mr. Speaker.

The conference report I bring forth today to fund the legislative branch involves those activities providing some $3 billion, 800 million, an increase of 4.5 percent over the year 2005.

Mr. Speaker, the adjustments upward almost entirely represent increased expenditures for our police services and security around the Capitol campus, and, beyond that, expenses that are directly related to the development of the Congressional Visitors Center.

Otherwise the bill is absolutely flat in terms of spending over 2005- 2006. It is a very, very lean bill. I urge the Members to support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I submit the following for the Record:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH28JY05.006

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH28JY05.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH28JY05.008

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH28JY05.009

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH28JY05.010

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

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

Mr. Speaker, it is by way of suggesting to my colleagues in the body that my friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), is raising serious questions regarding the visitor center, and because of that focus he has not spent a lot of time today talking about the fundamentals of this bill that relate to supporting the institution, the work of the legislative branch, an effort which is fundamental to our being successful as a legislative branch.

The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and I share together great concern about making sure that work goes forward and goes forward successfully. We are partners. In connection with this, I, frankly, today would like to predict at least that somewhere out there before we leave the Congress, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and I together will walk with our brides through this visitors centers and have different kinds of observations. We will enjoy much of the Taj, but in the meantime it will be a fabulous addition to the Congress, the largest addition that has been made in our lifetime at any rate, my public affairs lifetime.

I am very proud of the work of this subcommittee, the work they have done to carry forward the effort of the legislative branch.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would not mind, I would like to take just a moment to ask my colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), to kind of introduce your piece of that because the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and he share similar interests regarding the real work of the legislative branch.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood).

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Rear Admiral Anthony W. Lengerich, United States Navy, who is retiring after more than 34 years of faithful service to our Nation. A native of Redlands, California, Rear Admiral Lengerich received his commission in 1971 through a Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps scholarship at the University of Colorado, and has since served with great distinction both as a Surface Warfare Officer and an Engineering Duty Officer.

Rear Admiral Lengerich's impressive career has included sea duty aboard USS GURKE (DD 783) and USS BADGER (FF 1071), and on the afloat staffs of Commander U.S. Seventh Fleet, Commander Destroyer Squadron Thirteen, Commander Carrier Group Two and Commander Cruiser Destroyer Group Twelve. During these tours, he qualified as a Surface Warfare Officer and was designated as ``Qualified for Command at Sea.'' He also served as Communications Operations Officer for the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean on the staff of the Commander in Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe in London.

Following his selection as an Engineering Duty Officer in 1984, Rear Admiral Lengerich served as the Platform Integration Officer for the Joint Tactical Information Distribution System on the staff of the Naval Electronic Systems Engineering Command, Washington, DC. His next assignment included duties as Project Officer for the Command and Control Processor and Director of Force Systems Engineering within the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR). He later served as the Division Director for Afloat Mission Planning Systems within the Command and Control Program Office on the staff of the Program Executive Officer for Cruise Missile and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. An exceptional leader, he has commanded the Naval Electronic Systems Engineering Center, Charleston, South Carolina, and ``commissioned'' the Naval Command, Control and Ocean Surveillance Center, In-Service Engineering, East Coast Division, also in Charleston. He subsequently commanded the Naval Command, Control and Ocean Surveillance Center, San Diego, California, with additional duty as Corporate Operations Officers and Corporate Information Office for SPAWAR.

In 1998, Rear Admiral Lengerich was nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate for the rank of Rear Admiral (lower half). His initial flag assignments included Director of Installations and Logistics for SPAWAR, and next, on the staff of the Chief of Naval Operations as Director of Industrial Capability, Maintenance Policy and Acquisition Logistics, and as Deputy Director of the Fleet Readiness Division. He was nominated and confirmed for the two-star rank of Rear Admiral in 2001.

Rear Admiral Lengerich assumed his current duties as Vice Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command in August 2002, effectively meeting the spectrum of demanding challenges in the daily operation of a command comprising nearly 50,000 employees and a $20 billion annual budget. His efforts have been instrumental in creating the foundation for an integrated organization with a single corporate focus that specifically aligned NAVSEA's mission in support of the Chief of Naval Operations, Secretary of the Navy, and Secretary of Defense initiatives. His visionary leadership and practical day-to-day approach during a period of unprecedented institutional transformation, has substantially and materially guided the execution of extremely complex acquisition, fleet maintenance and modernization programs to fulfill the needs of the Fleet today and the Navy of tomorrow.

Rear Admiral Lengerich has been indispensable in bringing the leading edges of technical thinking and management skills together to meet myriad Navy needs. A champion of sound fiscal methods, Rear Admiral Lengerich chaired a command review of major acquisition programs to identify and address shortfalls, and provided recommendations to reduce testing and evaluation costs, which were incorporated in the Department's investment process. Organizationally, he has fostered the improved communications and enhanced teamwork needed to produce desired ``bottom line'' results within the command and across the Navy. His vision led to the merger of the NAVSEA Warfare Centers into a single business unit, enabling process commonality between the NAVSEA Warfare Centers and Divisions, and the designation of Product Area Directors to ensure each Warfare Center customer received the best and most efficient combination of talent, facilities, and cost. Notably, Rear Admiral Lengerich chaired the Systems Command Integration Board to address the range of issues vital to the delivery of effective war fighting systems, and, has also chaired the Functional Naval Capabilities--Total Ownership Cost Integrated Process Team for the past six years, and led efforts which have yielded over $3 billion a year in ship, aircraft and ground vehicle maintenance cost avoidance.

Rear Admiral Lengerich has devoted significant energies to the command's civilian and military personnel. He has shaped the command's ``roll out strategy'' for transition to the National Security Personnel System and he developed the metrics to guide the command's Human Capital Strategy. Within the Navy's Engineering Duty Officer (EDO) Community he spearheaded efforts to pro-actively manage the community strategy in meeting Navy dynamic requirements. With the same focus on the future, he has been a personal mentor to nearly one-third of the entire Navy ED community and has worked with the Naval Postgraduate School to create a new accredited Master of Science in Systems Engineering curriculum and to create an advisory board on course curriculum critical to NAVSEA and SPAWAR.

For the past two months, Rear Admiral Lengerich has served superbly as NAVSEA's Acting Commander, answering the call of duty as he has done many times before. He is an individual of uncommon character and total professional whose presence will be sincerely missed but whose many contributions will certainly endure. I am proud, Mr. Speaker, to thank him for his honorable service in the United States Navy, to commend him for a job ``well done,'' and to wish him ``fair winds and following seas'' as he closes his distinguished military career.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Colonel Michael J. Smith, Project Manager Soldier Weapons, for his support of our Soldiers in their ongoing war on terrorism and in particular for his innovative approach to shortening the acquisition cycle for critical new weapon systems. Of particular note was his success in rapidly fielding the Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS). Through his vision and calculated risk taking, he has rapidly fielded this and other systems which have demonstrably led to the saving Soldier and civilian lives in Iraq. This has been a true force protection success story and a force multiplier for the Army.

Col. Smith's innovations benefit Soldiers, policy makers, and tax payers by streamlining the costly test and acquisition process. His wise use of tax dollars resulted in Soldiers receiving the best possible equipment and enabling the rapid fielding of new technologies to enhance soldier capability while ensuring soldier safety. Through his leadership, Col. Smith

established new levels of cooperation and teamwork between his program office and the numerous contractors involved in his programs. He embodies the highest tenants of Acquisition Reform and the Army's innovative Rapid Fielding Initiative.

Mr. Chairman, a point of order has been reserved, and I make a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

Mr. Chairman, I do not find myself always happy with what witnesses before our committees have to say. Just because I disagree with them does not mean they are not being as complete as they would choose to be.

I do not always have witnesses provide me with the answers that are my answers. But I do remember early on in my career here, it was my second term, I was a new member of the Committee on Appropriations. In those days the issues swirled around what was going on in Central America. There was a divide in the House it seemed. Most of the people on that side were very much concerned about changes in Central America. I remember the debates about the Sandinistas and there was discussion that maybe the witnesses were not being totally open and fair and straightforward.

It is convenient to point a finger and suggest one administration's witnesses is not being straight, another one is answering questions fully. The fact is that it is pretty obvious we expect people to be straightforward with us.

I would suggest if the gentleman really has a problem in some of his committees, he might want to urge that people take the oath everywhere. I do not tend to follow that pattern in my own committees. But indeed it is important to recognize that people in public service, whether they are working for the administration, maybe working for the State Department or otherwise, do come to us generally and try to do as full a service as they possibly can.

I must say that I sense a pattern here where issues are being raised in this fashion because perhaps some people have ambitions to do something else with their life besides just sitting in a committee. But indeed, it is important that we not distort our process to the point where public affairs becomes a political battle, a partisan confrontation at every turn.

If there have been partisan votes on the floor, let me submit the vast percentage of those have come that way because there was a direction from the Democratic side that we are going to be together and be opposed to whatever those Republicans are doing.

That is not a healthy way to carry forward public affairs. I am very concerned about the pattern. I do not believe I will carry my discussion about this much further than I am today but I may because it is very disturbing to this Member of Congress.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

I appreciate the gentleman yielding because, indeed, that was the Reagan administration. And during that time the Democrats were supporting the Sandinistas and we were fighting for freedom.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, did the gentleman not already do that before?

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I do not have a serious reservation to having this bipartisan discussion regarding the growing understanding of the shortfall that lies in veterans health care. My reservation, and it is a serious one, is that it is one thing to want to take credit for doing something about this problem, but we are attempting to do it in a bill that is not going to become law for 2 or 3 months.

The gentleman knows that the appropriate committee had an oversight hearing just yesterday morning to begin to draw in the administration, get information, et cetera, in order to lay the foundation for expediting this process. The way to solve this problem and truly in a bipartisan way deal with the challenge that we have in serving our veterans is to come together and move something quickly. Any appropriations bill is going to take longer than that.

So I do not want to be pretending today that we are doing something by passing an amendment, when regular order will allow us to move much more quickly. We are trying to lay the foundation for that. That is why we had an oversight hearing yesterday.

Mr. Chairman, I would think we ought to proceed with regular order. So in that connection, I have a reservation in terms of what is being done here today. It appears to be a ``credit'' business rather than real business. I would look forward to working with the gentleman in the days ahead.

Point of Order

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

Mr. Chairman, I have risen to strike the last word, first, because I want to express my deep appreciation to the chairman of the subcommittee and the ranking member of the subcommittee for a rather fabulous job done on this bill overall. In a time of short financial circumstances, they produced a very balanced bill that reflects a cross-section of very important issues to the country.

I rise also to specifically talk about the job the committee has done relative to Amtrak. It is not like Amtrak does not have problems, and it is not like the chairman is suggesting we ought to shut it down by way of his bill but, instead, to deal with the reality that Amtrak has been going over a cliff for some time now.

In the last 3 fiscal years, the subsidy has grown from over .5 billion to over $1.2 billion. And, indeed, others in this town have decided its pathway is such we cannot afford it any longer, so recommendations were made to zero Amtrak. This subcommittee, in a very thoughtful way, in a very tough budget year, laid the foundation to eliminate the very expensive routes to support the northeastern corridor, the routes in the West, and at the same time try to make sense out of this process.

It is long past due that we reviewed this policy and put in place something that will work so we have a passenger rail system. If we continue on the path the way that we are, and the amendment presented by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) essentially does that, takes us back to that pathway, eventually the train is going to go over the cliff and Amtrak will be no more.

I would suggest that the House recognize a rather fabulous job done by this subcommittee. I congratulate them for their work and in doing so urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the LaTourette amendment and to support the committee's product.