Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 4613) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.

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

Mr. Speaker, the 30 minutes of time that this side controls is 30 minutes that I do not intend to expend, largely because we had a thorough discussion of this matter within the committee. As the gentleman has indicated, it has very broadly based bipartisan support.

The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) was the point person on this issue. The only reason it is being considered as we go forward with the Defense Subcommittee report is because we want to move on this very quickly, and it would appear that this bill will go through, work its way through conference reasonably quickly, and on the President's desk before the break. It is very appropriate that the House be responding effectively regarding this matter; and, frankly, it is very important that we stand together as Americans reflecting our concern about this tragic reality in Sudan.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the cooperation of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson).

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

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

Let me just say that I very, very much appreciate the gentleman raising this question this way. We need to absolutely act together as a reflection of the people's body regarding this tragic circumstance in the Sudan. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) unfortunately has been detained elsewhere or I would have him really leading this portion of the discussion.

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

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

By way of a bit of an exchange with the gentlewoman who just spoke but also with my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson), is it not interesting we could have a crises like this, a crises like this that affects so many thousands and thousands of lives, men, women and children, a tragic circumstance, and, yet, ofttimes in this country the inane things that we see on the front pages of our newspapers, the New York Times, the Washington Post, et cetera, hardly a word about this crises. Is this not front-page material in this country if we truly have concern about the world? I would hope maybe as we go forward in this discussion today, we might send that message as well.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan.

For those who suggest they care about the people of the world, this is more than symbolism. It is very, very real; and I would hope they would begin to pay some attention.

Mr. Speaker, I yield whatever time he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) who helped us focus initially in committee on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he might consume to the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) of the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I asked for this time to simply express my deep appreciation to the chairman of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations of the Committee on Appropriations, my chairman, for his leadership on this issue. The responsiveness of both the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), as well as the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson), is very important and the reflection of the reality that from just once in a while the House gets its act together and recognizes that human problems are very real.

There is no partisan divide on an issue like this, but rather a concern about the picture, the reality of starving children and whole families being wiped out senselessly. We are going to respond as a country, and it is very important that we come together like this. I appreciate the gentleman's leadership.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 12 of rule XXII, I move that meetings of the conference between the House and the Senate on H.R. 4613 be closed to the public at such times as classified national security information may be broached, providing that any sitting Member of the Congress shall be entitled to attend any meeting of the conference.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) very much for yielding to me. I must say to the coach that he has always associated himself with class throughout his career. I can see he is doing this one more time by handling this Special Order on behalf of a wonderful Member of the House of Representatives.

Doug Bereuter is one of the classiest people to have ever served in this place. As my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), suggested, there are few and far between those who have his kind of class.

The gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) and I came to Congress with Doug. At that point, there were 79 Members in our class as freshmen; 10 of us remain. And, indeed, as Doug leaves us, all who remain will remember him for as long as we can possibly maintain contact.

California is a long ways for some, but it is not very far for several of us. It is my intention as I visit my grandchildren up north, to certainly come visit Doug and Louise and remember the times we had together way back when, several years ago when we arrived here in the House of Representatives.

Doug Bereuter is one of those classic Members for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the leadership that he has demonstrated in the field of foreign affairs. He is a Member of the House during my service here who has, from at least a Republican perspective, caused our caucus to focus in a way that recognizes that we are living in a shrinking world. And it is very, very important in that arena not to dwell upon partisan politics alone, recognizing that whoever the Commander in Chief is, whoever the President of the United States is, as we leave this country we need to speak in one voice on behalf of country.

In a very special way, he penetrated our caucus in connection with that understanding. Doug Bereuter is a person who I very much regret see leaving the House. But as he goes forth on his work on the part of the Asia Foundation, he will have a special way of communicating there as well, I am certain.

Doug's impact here in the House of Representatives now will have a very special impact upon a very important part of the world, as we all know Southeast Asia is such a significant part of our future.

To my friend, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), I really want him to know how much we appreciate his taking this time, this special effort to pay tribute to our mutual friend. It is a pleasure to be here with him.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to call attention to the federal, state and local firefighters whose bravery and quick thinking saved thousands of homes and many lives in the San Bernardino Mountains of California last year. Representatives of these community heroes are in town this week for well-deserved national recognition from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and I would like to add my voice to the acclaim they are receiving.

My colleagues have heard me say many times on this floor that we are facing a terrible crisis in our Southern California forests. Years of drought have weakened the trees, and allowed the pine bark beetle to attack and kill millions of them--leaving hundreds of acres ready to burn at any time. More than 100,000 of my constituents live among these trees, and their lives and safety are at risk until we remove these dead and dying trees.

In October last year, the disaster we feared struck California--and struck and struck again. Within days, fires were consuming tens of thousands of acres in San Bernardino, Los Angeles, San Diego and Ventura counties. In my district, a fire started in the foothills and spread to 100 acres within ten minutes. In less than an hour, it became clear that nearby communities would need to be evacuated. By nightfall the Old Fire consumed over 4,000 acres of land. It destroyed 400 homes and was responsible for two fatalities before the day was out. Ultimately, nearly 1,000 homes were lost.

As dawn arrived on October 26, Fire Incident Commander Norm Walker was contemplating the distinct possibility of the worst-case scenario: fire reaching the 40,000 homes in the Lake Arrowhead community. Mandatory evacuations of all of the mountain communities began. Resources were stretched to the absolute maximum, due to other fires burning throughout the state.

The San Bernardino Mountains rise steeply to 10,000 feet above the city, and running along the face of the mountains between 5,000 feet and 7,000 feet is the famous Rim of the World Highway, State Route 18. This is also the last point where the fire could be stopped before roaring into the millions of dead trees in and around our mountain communities. By evening on October 26, the main fire crossed Highway 18, and the order was given to begin backfiring along the highway across the mountain rim to the east. The northeast winds were predicted to shift, which would push the flames north across Highway 18 and directly into the community of Lake Arrowhead.

Four highly trained firefighters in a unified command, Randy Clauson (USFS), Jim Ahearn (USFS), George Corley (San Bernardino County Fire), and Bill Bagnell (Crest Forest Fire) initiated the difficult, strenuous firing operation at 9:00 pm using limited personnel. Except for radio communication, these four on-the-scene chiefs were largely on their own. Every member of their teams faced the possibility of being caught by 100-foot walls of flame that were sweeping up the mountains. But they stayed the course for the next two days--and the success of their operation is evidenced by the fact that nearly all of the mountain homes were spared.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in my mind the heroic, exhausting efforts of these four individuals over the course of three days resulted in saving thousands of homes and billions of dollars of infrastructure around Lake Arrowhead. Anyone who has seen photos of the conditions along Highway 18 during the height of the fire is in awe of the courage and fortitude of these firefighters, and mountain residents will be forever grateful for saving their homes.

In honor of those efforts, the fire chiefs on Friday will receive the U.S. Department of Agriculture Honor Award for heroism and emergency response. I ask my colleagues to please join me in congratulating them on this recognition, and thanking them for representing the highest level of bravery and resourcefulness in defending and saving our communities.

Mr. Speaker, I have already asked my colleagues today to recognize the bravery of firefighters who saved 40,000 homes in last year's devastating wildfires. But I would now like to also pay tribute to an unprecedented effort at planning and organization by federal, state and local officials that allowed the evacuation of 100,000 people threatened by fire--without a single injury or a major hitch!

Many of the heroes of this planning effort were on the front lines fighting the Old Fire, which eventually burned 91,000 acres and destroyed nearly 1,000 homes in October 2003. But their work to avoid a devastating loss of life began more 18 months earlier with the formation of the Mountain Area Safety Task Force, known throughout the San Bernardino Mountains as the MAST.

San Bernardino National Forest Supervisor Gene Zimmerman initiated the formation of the MAST to deal with an on-going crisis: the death of more than 5 million trees because of drought and attacks by pine bark beetles. The forest, which is largely in my 41st Congressional District, is one of the most urbanized and heavily used in the nation, with nearly 100,000 residents and visitors living amongst the trees. The chance for a devastating fire is overwhelming, and it will take many years and hundreds of millions of dollars to eliminate the danger.

It became clear that the task of restoring the forest--and avoiding the loss of thousands of lives in a fire--would require the coordinated efforts of the Forest Service, the state Department of Forestry and Fire, San Bernardino County Fire Department, and dozens of local fire departments, community groups and businesses. Such a coordination effort had never been undertaken on such a comprehensive scale, and the organizational hurdles alone were daunting.

But the mountain communities, while divided into dozens of small pockets by geography, are populated by people who look out for each other, and who are united in their devotion to the forest. Hundreds of residents turned out for every informational meeting, and officials from agencies at all levels made the coordination of effort their top priority.

With the substantial help of the geographic information systems company ESRI, the MAST established elaborate plans on how to evacuate residents along the few main highways that snake through the forest. Dozens of community meetings were held, and residents had access to an Internet Web site created free-of-charge by ESRI that provided even more detailed information.

When the Old Fire struck in October 2003, our worst fears seemed about to be realized. The fire appeared to be unstoppable before it reached the stands of dead trees. Within a day, the order went out to evacuate, even as the firefighters made valiant stands to stop the fire along the evacuation routes. The success of the planning process was soon clear: No one was injured in the evacuation. Although six deaths were attributed to the fire, none of our residents were caught in their homes like those who suffered tragic deaths in San Diego County.

Mr. Speaker, the MAST continues to meet and plan for the restoration of the forest and the upcoming fire season. While some progress has been made in reducing the number of dead trees, the fire danger remains high. Thanks to the extraordinary efforts of this group, I am confident that we will be prepared to meet that danger.

The members of the MAST--represented by Supervisor Zimmerman and San Bernardino National Forest Staff Director Doug Pumphrey--will be honored this Friday with a U.S. Department of Agriculture Honor Award. This award is without question highly deserved, and I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating and thanking those who took part in this life-saving effort.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) for yielding me this time.

Mr. Chairman, it is interesting for me to note that throughout the history of the country, there was that kind of constant understanding that the President in the arena of spending proposes and the Congress disposes.

The President, the executive makes a decision about spending in a specific area, and over time, the committees that affect that area make a decision as to exactly what our policy should be and what direction we should take by way of finally spending. Eventually that became the President's budget proposing, and then us disposing.

Over the years, it seems the Congress finds itself spending a lot more money than they had. A deficit began to accumulate over time. People were frustrated with one another about who had the right kind of priorities, et cetera. That led to specially a budget committee to help provide advice and counsel to the big committees, the Committee on Appropriations, the Subcommittee on Defense, the Committee on Ways and Means, et cetera.

That was going to solve all of our problems, and indeed, about the time I arrived, it was presumed that maybe that advice and counsel might work. And, yet, the deficit continued to expand.

Not so shortly thereafter, the majority changed, and in the budget process the whole committee made the decision to try to make sense out of an annual budget balance. And, indeed, that led to our putting voluntary limitations within the process using the budget to do that, and pretty well the Committee on Appropriations has stuck to those limits. And it has worked reasonably well, even though at times of war, like currently, we have great difficulty with that. Nonetheless, overall, it worked pretty well.

There seems to be a bit of stumble here in recent years, people not being happy with the way that process has worked for them in terms of priority, maybe not cutting spending as much as some like versus others, but as of this moment, we are at war. As of this moment, this bill includes statutory caps, which not only affects the President's budget, but has the President in a position to renegotiate again, essentially giving the administration a second bite at the apple. That concerns me; and, therefore, the chairman is absolutely correct. We need to go at this one more time. And I appreciate my colleague yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very much for yielding, and I appreciate the comments of the ranking member as well.

It was my privilege to serve on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence for some years, and I have great respect for the work you are about.

I must say that while the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) and I have discussed this amendment and I know of his concerns and I am very supportive of his concerns, in the meantime, I really asked for the time because I am a bit disconcerted about what I sensed from the general debate as I was watching it over C-SPAN from my office.

There appears to be developing here a level of kind of partisanship that I am not used to seeing when we discuss intelligence. There is absolutely no question that intelligence work does not know a partisan divide, if things are happening as they should, and to see that developing in the committee is most disconcerting to this Member.

Over the years, we all know that intelligence funding was way, way below where it should be. The development of that lack of funding took place as the Congress some years ago was radically reducing defense spending. In those days, I used to say as defense spending is coming down, intelligence spending should go up, because the Commander-in- Chief needs better and more information at such a time, rather than less.

In the meantime, there is little doubt that during the 1990s, there were significant impacts that were negatively affecting our intelligence programming. In recent years, we have seen a movement in the other direction.

In the bill that came off the floor yesterday, there was a reflection of all of our concern. Indeed, within the base bill, the appropriations for defense, we spent more than was in the President's budget. And in the Committee's action on the amendment that came from the administration for some $25 billion, we provided substantial amounts of additional funding for intelligence work.

There is little doubt of the priority of this president, this administration, in making sure we have adequate funding, and I feel very strongly that we should know that especially the Commander-

in-Chief does not see partisan value in this work.

The committee is a great committee, but there is a divide here that, I must say, reflects more than normally membership divide. If, at the staff level, we have people who are reacting for purely partisan purposes or their own biases, that is disconcerting to me. It is not healthy for the community, it is not healthy for our national defense, it clearly is not healthy for our intelligence community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill H.R. 4613, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

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

It is my privilege today to present to the House the appropriations for National Defense for Fiscal Year 2005. This bill includes a total amount for the Defense Department of $416.1 billion. Within that dollar amount, which is an enormous amount, there also is included approximately $25 billion that is a part of a bridge fund amendment providing funds for operations in Iraq. This recognizes that the Congress may be in recess for an extended period of time, perhaps even adjourn for the year for a period of time, before we have another supplemental coming forward. That additional funding is to make certain that we do not have any of the funds that are very important in terms of meeting our world challenges today run short or run dry.

Indeed, this bill is a package that is designed to meet the country's need in this ever-shrinking and ever-complex world. It is a very, very important bill, that first and foremost is designed to support our troops wherever they may be deployed around the world. Most significantly, in doing that, we are providing the funding that is necessary to carry forward the current effort in Iraq and around Afghanistan as well.

I would like to outline just briefly what the bill does. It supports those operations in Iraq, as I have suggested; but it also supports our troops by making certain that funding is there for their housing, for their training needs, their clothing needs, et cetera. But above and beyond that, it provides for full funding for the 3.5 percent pay increase that is a part of the President's budget.

The bill further increases additional funding for readiness for our troops, providing for the training as well as the equipment of their efforts worldwide.

The bill provides a very significant level of funding for our intelligence efforts, including an increase beyond the President's original budget. Further than that, within the supplemental package that is here, there is a very significant addition to our Intelligence funding. The bill provides for funding for a number of very important assets across the board, including funding for the Virginia-class submarine, for example, funding for the Joint Strike Fighter, the F-22 fighter, et cetera.

This bill also includes language that is designed to improve or increase the reporting requirements that we provide

for the Department of Defense and the various branches to make sure that the Congress is getting the kind of oversight that allows us all the assurance we need that the funding that has been appropriated by the Congress is being spent along those guidelines that the Congress has extended.

At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to provide for the Record a summary of the funding provided in this bill.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN04.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN04.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN04.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN04.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN04.005

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the full committee.

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

I cannot tell my colleague how much I appreciate his remarks and his great support throughout the development of this bill. And to say the least, to suggest that he is a partner in this subcommittee's work would be understating it, for he not only has been chairman of this subcommittee but as full committee chairman, he has been absolutely fantastic.

I would further say the same about my colleague the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha). This partnership has produced very positive results over the years and, indeed, it has been my great privilege and honor to work with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to my colleague from California (Mr. Cunningham), who would probably like to do the same.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might consume for purposes of having a colloquy with the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).

Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, I have the privilege of working closely with the Department of Defense. I see in here firsthand the skill, commitment, and bravery of our men and women serving in Iraq and elsewhere in the world.

We all know of the enormous contributions of our allies as well. And I must say the contribution of the United Kingdom is hard to overstate, but we have had great assistance from other allies, for example, Italy has 2,800 personnel working in Iraq and has donated some $210 million to the process that is here. We have had help from countries like Portugal, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Poland, and Kuwait.

So across the board, I must say that we have been helped greatly by allies who were willing to step up and pay a piece of the price of this very important venture.

I particularly wanted to mention the role played by our friends, the Japanese. For over the years, the Japanese have been very hesitant in the military front since World War II. But in this circumstance, they have really been a great ally. There are presently 1,000 Japanese troops known as the Self-Defense Forces, including some 600 ground troops in Iraq today. They have consistently indicated a willingness to support us in our effort there. I cannot compliment them enough.

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

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Vermont and the gentleman from Connecticut have both been very active in the fight for a cure and treatment of Gulf War Illness for many years, and the committee will work with both of them to increase funding for research in this area.

Yes.

Yes.

If the gentlewoman will yield, I will be very happy to work with the gentlewoman. I appreciate her withdrawing her amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, first I withdraw my point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I am very empathetic to the gentleman's concern as expressed here. We have discussed it on many occasions between the two of us. The fact is that currently the DOD is spending some $200 million a year in this arena. There is $204 million already in the bill. It seems senseless to me to say withdraw $5 million from other accounts and pass it here. It seems to me that this is unnecessary; and because of that, I would oppose the amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.

Mr. Chairman, I am very empathetic to the Member's expression of concern in this arena. There is report language in the bill that says the following that I would bring to his attention:

``The Defense Science Board and the General Accounting Office both express concerns with the efficiency of the Department of Defense plan for remediation of UXO, unexploded ordnance. Therefore, in the fiscal year 2005 DOD appropriations report, we have requested a comprehensive plan and cost estimates from the department on all identified sites by April 1, 2005.''

We are attempting, Mr. Chairman, to deal with this problem by dealing with the Department. We recognize that they are not as efficient as we might like.

I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

As we have discussed before, I am always willing to try to help the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Chairman, we had quite a discussion in the full committee regarding this matter. The problem in Sudan is very real, and we are going to do everything we can to work with the gentlewoman. I appreciate not just her expressing her concern but helping us with this very serious difficulty.

Mr. Chairman, I offer a managers' amendment, and I ask unanimous consent it be considered en bloc.

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

Mr. Chairman, it is with great reluctance that I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, what the gentleman is discussing here is an important policy question which was discussed thoroughly in the authorizing committee last year. The policy was established. If the gentleman had a problem with that

policy development, I regret he did not come to talk with us either at our markup process in the subcommittee or beyond that.

But it is clear to anybody who would look at the personnel difficulties within this huge department, the Department of Defense, there are needs for reform and change within this great arena. The authorizing committee did address that question.

The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) suggests he does not stop the Department in its tracks, he just stops the money from flowing, which is somewhere close to my track, at any rate.

It seems to me that without the ability to change labor management relations within the Department, the Department will be faced with negotiating all personnel policies with over 1,366 unions, and change is not going to take place under those circumstances.

A new adverse action and appeals system would allow the Department to take more prompt action on employees who are not performing on their jobs or facing disciplinary action based on misconduct. The current appeals system is lengthy and demands an overburden of proof before management can take action. The new system that the authorizing committee has gone forward with would establish a new process, while maintaining employee rights to fair consideration.

The bottom line is that DOD should oppose this amendment, and we oppose it as well.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate looking forward to working with the gentleman, but I wish we had had a chance to do so before today.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I have not had a chance to talk to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) about this, but I believe that the gentleman from Washington State is still a member of the subcommittee; is he not?

Well, I really look forward to discussing this with the gentleman personally before we come to the floor.

Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield further, I do very much appreciate the opportunity to discuss these matters with my colleague, sometimes privately, sometimes publicly.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, we understand my colleague's concern, and we can tell the gentleman that we believe that there is adequate funding.

Mr. Chairman, it has come to my attention that the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee was unable to include '05 funding for a system of recreational trails surrounding Diamond Valley Lake, as authorized in PL 106-500.

There are many constituents in my District who are counting on being able to enjoy these trails with their families and friends as a significant new recreational facility in one of California's fastest- growing communities.

I would like to ask my friend, the distinguished Chairman of the Interior subcommittee, if he would consider giving this project additional consideration during the conference on this fiscal 2005 legislation, particularly if the Senate is able to include this matter in its bill?

On behalf of the hard-working people of Riverside County, California, I thank the gentlemen for his consideration.

Mr. Speaker, today it is my pleasure to recognize Sherri and Robert Vines for more than 30 years of community service in San Bernardino County, California. The Vines, who are being honored with the Norman F. Feldheym Award from Congregation Emanu El in our community, exemplify the volunteerism that is the backbone our American communities.

Currently the President of the United Jewish Welfare Fund of San Bernardino County, Robert Vines has been serving his Congregation and his community for 30 years. Robert has been a respected member of the California State Bar since 1973 and served as the Deputy District Attorney for the County of San Bernardino from 1973-1975. As a member of Congregation Emanu El, Robert has served in a number of important positions, including Financial Secretary of the entire Congregation.

His wife Sherri has served Congregation Emanu El in many capacities, including teaching at the School of Jewish Living, chairing the Community Sedar and three terms as Sisterhood President.

Mr. Speaker, together they have been leading members of their community serving as officers in the Arrowhead United Way, as host family for the Western Regional Little League Tournament, and as coaches in the local Little League and AYSO. They have contributed their skills and resources to programs of Congregation Emanu El, including sponsoring temple events and serving as a host family for NFTY Conclave.

Sherri and Robert Vines will receive the Rabbi Norman F. Feldheym Award on June 12, 2004 on the 113th anniversary of the founding of their Congregation. They are certainly deserving of the award, which pays tribute to members who most closely resemble the Rabbi Feldheyin's qualities of love and loyalty to the synagogue, service to the community, and personal traits of humility, kindness, care and love. Please join me, Mr. Speaker, in recognizing Sherri and Robert for their outstanding service to their community.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of today and as designee of the majority leader, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 664) mourning the passing of President Ronald Reagan and celebrating his service to the people of the United States and his leadership in promoting the cause of freedom for all the people of the world, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the resolution under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, through the years of having the opportunity to know President Ronald Reagan, one could go down many a pathway in recalling his greatness. My first recollection of Ronald Reagan, I can recall clearly I was lying on the living room floor, and he was giving this speech on behalf of Barry Goldwater. The remarks in that speech entitled, ``A Time For Choosing,'' never to forget, ``You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.'' I will never forget rolling over on the floor and saying to my family, ``This guy ought to be Governor of California.'' And, by golly, just 2 years later, he was: Governor Ronald Reagan, elected in 1966 by the people of California.

Two years after that, a group of seven Republican freshmen legislators were invited to the Governor's home for a little dinner. They had a set of card tables in the living room, a couple sat down at one card table, I sat on an extra chair, and, lo and behold, the Governor sat down beside me. The gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) may remember that I was a bit more brash in those days than I choose to be now.

And so almost immediately, I raised the subject of interest to me to the then-Governor Reagan. I asked him what he thought about preschool and child care. It did not take 30 seconds for me to begin to understand that I had asked the right question, for Governor Reagan knew an awful lot more about preschool and child care than I ever thought of knowing. He and Nancy had been thinking about this subject for some time. And indeed, as a result of that beginning point of working together in this very special area of education, the Child Development Act was signed in 1972 by Governor Reagan and became the first major State quality day care programming that included health components and education components and involved parental responsibilities as well.

The Governor was way ahead of the curve, as one might see; for some 25 years later, Washington discovered the importance of child care.

Another illustration of an interesting side of the Governor who by many was considered to be some way out there, far out on the right; but quickly those who would observe carefully recognized that this Governor was looking out for the benefit of all people of California and because of that, shortly he became very well known as an environmental Governor. He joined quickly with Governor Laxalt of Nevada, and together hand in hand they literally saved Lake Tahoe.

A leader way ahead of his time, it was my privilege to spend so much time in those early days with Governor Ronald Reagan. At another time in this evening's discussion I would like to spend a moment discussing with all of you my first experience with Governor Reagan when he became President of the United States.

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

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

President Reagan came to Washington at a moment when our country was in great malaise. Interest rates had risen as high as 21\1/2\ percent. Inflation was raging the country. Jobs were very, very difficult to come by. And in typical Ronald Reagan fashion, the President for whom the glass was always more than half full, he began setting forth policies that reduced interest rates, that impacted inflation, and created jobs. He set a stage for tomorrow that would lead us all to believe in America again and have new hope and opportunity within our country.

It is my privilege, Mr. Speaker, to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly).

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a great honor to yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from California

(Mr. Rohrabacher), who served Ronald Reagan as a part of his staff before coming to Congress.

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

Ronald Reagan became President in 1981 after an election in 1980. At that point in our history, our defenses had been reduced to such significant levels, all of us were concerned about the future of America's ability to defend itself. Indeed, there were great leaders who recognized the importance of building our defenses. Among those who have come here since President Reagan was with us is the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. Speaker, the eloquence of our colleagues from both sides of the aisle reflect the best of Ronald Reagan. His leadership indeed recognized that there was little partisanship when you were really working towards solving problems for America's people.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), chairman of the Committee on Rules.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).

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

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).

Mr. Speaker, I could not feel more strongly than I do about the gentlewoman's remarks. Indeed, one of the wonderful things that has happened in recent years in the House is the advent of young women like this stepping up to the plate, running for Congress, and making a big difference in the People's House.

It is my honor, Mr. Speaker, to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall).

Mr. Speaker, we appreciate the comments of our colleague from Texas. I am reminded of that tragic day when Ronald Reagan, shortly after he became President in March of 1981, and the assassination attempt took place. As they rolled him on a gurney into the emergency room, he looked up and said to his wife, I guess I forgot to duck, honey. Ronald Reagan, a man who was always ready to try to calm down the other person and make sure they felt okay, our President.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture.

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

Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate my colleague from Texas joining with us in this discussion this evening of perhaps America's greatest President, Ronald Reagan. In his words, Ronald Reagan said, ``Some argue that we should encourage democratic change and right-wing dictatorships but not in communist regimes. Well,'' he said, ``to accept this preposterous notion, as some well-meaning people have, is to invite the argument that once countries achieve a nuclear capability, they should be allowed an undisturbed reign of terror over their own citizens. We reject this, of course.''

As Ronald Reagan rebuilt America, his defense budget designed to restrengthen our country's ability to defend itself, he stared down the Evil Empire and negotiated a nuclear arms treaty with Gorbachev. As two enemies became close friends, think of that, two enemies became close friends, Gorbachev was heard to say, Who would have thought it.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).

(Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague yielding his time back, and now we know why he is chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), my favorite coach.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

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

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson) very much for those very eloquent comments. I am reminded of the fact that in very simple form, Ronald Reagan challenged the world on behalf of liberty, on behalf of peace. He had this remarkable relationship that developed over time with Mikhail Gorbachev. After he described the Evil Empire in straightforward terms, they began to communicate as leaders of two great countries. Indeed, together over time they reduced the nuclear threat by coming to agreement with one another.

It has been said earlier, but let me repeat the words of Ronald Reagan: ``Mr. Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek the liberalization, come here to this gate, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.''

And indeed, within a couple of years, that wall came down. The East- West confrontation began to thaw; and between these two leaders, the world has seen a different kind of opportunity for peace. Today we face the challenge that involves the war on terrorism; and, indeed, that struggle is bound to last for years to come. It was the legacy of Ronald Reagan that laid the foundation for America to best be prepared to defend itself for liberty and for freedom.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 5 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House today and as the designee of the majority leader, I request an additional hour of debate on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Chocola).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, and I understand that somewhere in the building his son and his son's bride are wandering around. His son, Sam, was not born when the gentleman came to these Chambers, so because of family relations and otherwise, I now yield to him.

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) reminds me of another time when Ronald Reagan was trying to bring together Republicans to form a majority. It was 1969, and there was a majority for approximately 2 years in the California lower house for the assembly, and Ronald Reagan was then Governor of California. He came into this room, and here were 41 members of the new majority sitting there in front of him. He is sitting at a table in front of us, his legs dangling from the table, he has argyle socks on.

He said, I was trying to think about what I should say to you all. We have not had a majority before. We have to govern, he said, and he said, it is possible from time to time we may disagree with each other as we go about making decisions on public policy.

As I was thinking about what to say to you, I was reminded of my father-in-law, who is a dentist. It seems he had this fellow sitting in the chair, and the guy had an abscessed tooth which had to come out. And my father-in-law began to put this needle in his jaw. About that time my father-in-law felt kind of a groping at the lower part of his abdomen. He looked down startled, and the fellow looked back up and said, we are not going to hurt each other, are we, Doc?

For those who knew Ronald Reagan, he would get just to the edge of color, but nonetheless, he knew how to make a point to bring people together in a very special way; a man never to be forgotten, recognizing how important it is that we work together.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert), Ronald Reagan's home State.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker), a member of the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, before I proceed any further, pursuant to the order of the House of today and as the designee of the majority leader, I request an additional hour of debate on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode).

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

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

The gentleman from Tennessee, I must say, reminds me a bit of my own youth, for I was raised in a family where my father was a Republican, my mother was a Democrat. I was somewhat confused. But the gentleman reminds me of another thing. I remember as a student at UCLA having the chance to participate in a pre-Peace Corps people-to-people program. I was headed with a group of 11 other students on our way to India to talk about freedom and hope and opportunity.

During that time, I was really confused myself. Would I become a member of one of our great parties, the Democratic Party, or would I become a member of the Republican Party? It was amazing what that summer did. I made that decision for myself in the summer in India. Why? Because one of our great parties was of the view that maybe individuals in our society needed a little help, maybe individual people could not do it for themselves and government was a requirement. It was another of the great parties that thought the individual was critical, made a difference in our future, and if you apply your spirit, your talent, your energy within that party, the survival of the individual was the key. That is how I made my decision. The gentleman from Tennessee reminded me a lot of that tonight. It is a pleasure to be with him.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield such time as she may consume to my dear friend, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Granger).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

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

Mr. Speaker, from the days I knew Ronald Reagan as Governor, and he was a key leader who sponsored early development of child care in our State, recognizing the importance of quality daycare in terms of the future of America's children, the environmental governor who saved Lake Tahoe, to the days that I had a chance to watch him rebuild America's strength by building our defense, he always was straightforward, candid with the American people.

And not so long ago he was heard to say: ``In closing let me thank you, the American people, for giving me the great honor of allowing me to serve as your President. When the Lord calls me home, whenever that may be, I will leave with the greatest love for this country of ours and eternal optimism for its future. I now begin the journey that will lead me into the sunset of my life. I know that for America there will always be a bright dawn ahead.''

God bless you, Ronald Reagan. To Nancy and their family, all of us share with you our prayers for our great President, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Mr. Speaker, 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 10 o'clock and 29 minutes p.m.), pursuant to House Resolution 663, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 10 a.m. in memory of the late Honorable Ronald Wilson Reagan, former President of the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored today to pay tribute to Nina Coake of San Bernardino County, California, who has been mother to 1,152 children over the past 50 years, and helped create one of the most successful foster parent systems in the Nation along the way.

Nina and Vernon Coake took in their first two foster children in 1943, and then in 1945 built a 10-room home to provide care to many more abused, neglected and drug-addicted children. She cared for as many as six at a time constantly until she retired at age 81.

Foster parents are special people, Mr. Speaker. The Coakes told the county's Child Protective Services that they would take in children at any hour of the day, any day of the week. They understood that watching over these troubled children requires constant vigilance and love. Many have been abandoned, molested or physically abused, and it takes an exceptional person to find a way to make these young people understand that someone cares for them.

The Coakes opened the first shelter care home in 1976, and their work ultimately allowed the county to close its dependency lock-up section at juvenile hall. In 1996, Nina Coake began caring for medically fragile infants and small children, taking in severely drug-exposed and abused infants and seeing them through drug withdrawal episodes and healing broken bones.

Nina Coake has been a leader in foster parent groups, serving as president of the San Bernardino County Foster Parent Association for 10 years, and in a variety of statewide roles, ultimately becoming president of the California State Foster Parent Association for four years.

She was a leader in convincing the county to require 20 hours of foster parent training--more than twice the State-mandated 8 hours. She has presented numerous workshops at local colleges, as well as 25 statewide training conferences--including chairman of three statewide meetings. Two years ago, she was the primary foster parent representative in a statewide group that helped redesign the California Child Welfare System.

Mr. Speaker, Nina Coake was named Loma Linda University Medical Center's Hometown Hero in 2001, and on May 18 this year will be celebrate at a county luncheon in her honor. Please join me in thanking her for all her years of loving dedication to the children most at need in our society, and wish her well in her future endeavors.