Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to a cost-of- living increase for Members of Congress. During the recent August district work period, I traveled across Kansas, meeting with farmers and ranchers, teachers, small business owners, and health care providers. Many of them shared with me the difficulties they face making ends meet in our recovering economy with the rising costs of transportation and health care services. These individuals are working hard to provide for their families, but while they are experiencing first-hand the effects of a cost-of-living increase, an automatic pay raise is not available to them. Families in Kansas and across the country are making tough decisions, controlling spending, balancing their budgets, and practicing fiscal discipline; Members of Congress should be no different.

I am opposed to an automatic congressional pay raise and believe the process should be reformed. If Congress desires a pay increase, we should debate the issue as we do with other funding legislation. There should be a yes-no vote on the record with full disclosure to the public. Congressional action should reflect the interests of our constituents and any vote to increase Member salaries should be done with an open, transparent process.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an Armenian- American who has chosen Kansas as his home, and is tirelessly devoted to bringing Kansas and Armenia closer together. Alex Kotoyantz, now a resident of Junction City, Kansas, has worked with Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius to have June 18 designated as Kansas-Armenia Partnership Day.

The Kansas National Guard State Partnership Program has allowed Kansans to travel to Armenia twice for the purposes of assisting with peacekeeping operations as well as health and medical operations. As a former Soviet republic that has faced tragic ethnic conflict, Armenia is in need of assistance. Kansans can and are providing valuable aid.

I would like to include in the Record Governor Sebelius's proclamation that declares June 18 Kansas-Armenia Partnership Day. It reads as follows:

``Whereas, The National Guard's State Partnership Program

has achieved outstanding success in establishing a military-

to-military association and in improving security cooperation

between the United States and partner countries; and

Whereas, Kansas is proud to partner with Armenia in

military-to-military, military-to-civilian, and civilian-to-

civilian contacts and development; and

Whereas, The Kansas National Guard hopes that this endeavor

will foster goodwill between Kansas and Armenia and achieve a

secure, prosperous and dignified future for the citizens of

Armenia; and

Whereas, Armenia's Deputy Minister of Defense and the U.S.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense signed the Bi-Lateral

Affairs Agreement at the close of the Bi-Lateral Defense

Consultations, June 13-18, 2003; and

Whereas, Kansas is grateful for the contributions of

Armenian Americans who have chosen Kansas as their adopted

homeland; they have employed wisdom, courage and centuries-

old traditions to enrich the character of our state;

Now, therefore, I, Kathleen Sebelius, Governor of the State

of Kansas, salute the modern nation of Armenia and Armenians

everywhere, and do hereby proclaim June 18, 2004, as Kansas-

Armenia Partnership Day in Kansas and urge all citizens to

join in this observance. Our state and the Armenian nation

stand together, with our partnership of peace, prosperity and

freedom.''

I am proud that my state has taken this initiative, and I will continue to support the Kansas National Guard in its partnership with Armenia.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to recognize a man from my hometown who is a legend in Kansas and a pillar in our community, a man who is sought out for his political expertise and advice as well as for his legal skills, and a man who is well known for his charitable efforts and his vision for our State and our country. I am here tonight to honor a leader, and my friend, Mr. Norbert Dreiling.

Mr. Dreiling may best be known as the father of Democratic politics in the State of Kansas. Through years of dedicated service, he breathed life into a struggling Democratic party and established a lasting two- party system in our State.

Early on, Norbert found ways to use his talents to further his beliefs in good government and in opportunity for all. After graduating from law school in 1949, he returned to his home of Hays, Kansas, where he volunteered as a precinct committeeman, a position he held for the following 25 years. Norbert's enthusiasm and ability brought opportunities well beyond local politics. From 1966 to 1974, he served as State party chairman of the Democratic Party and as campaign chairman for Kansas Governor Robert Docking.

The party flourished under Chairman Dreiling's leadership; and for the first time in Kansas's history, an incumbent Republican Governor was defeated in a race for that office. Norbert went on to advise Governor Docking and helped elect him to a historic four terms as Kansas Governor, the most terms ever served by a Governor in our State. Norbert took an interest in national politics; and along with serving as a delegate to four national party conventions, he served as State co-chairman for the Johnson and Kennedy Presidential campaigns. Today, at the wise age of 79, Mr. Dreiling continues to advise and empower candidates and officeholders.

Norbert's influence extends well beyond politics. Even before President Kennedy's call for civic duty, Norbert was revered as a strong leader and a generous spirit in our community. His benevolent service in support of hospitals, rest homes, schools, and civic organizations is legendary. With an eye to bettering the future, Norbert also knows the importance of remembering

the past. He has been instrumental in promoting the Volga-German heritage of Ellis County, Kansas; and he has authored a history of the Volga-German people and their immigration to Kansas, as well as a pageant play marking the centennial anniversary of these events.

When he is not volunteering his time and talents, Norbert is a successful attorney and a partner in the law firm of Dreiling, Bieker and Hoffman. Despite his many activities, his family comes first. Norbert is a devoted husband to his wife Jeannie, and a proud father of four children: January, Mark, Curtis, and Kathy.

Like his Volga-German ancestors who crossed the Kansas prairie many years ago, Norbert's hard work and strong values have made his community and our State a better place. I want tonight to thank Norbert for his many accomplishments, for his civic-minded spirit, and for his sound leadership. Despite a difference in our party affiliation, he is a friend and adviser; and I commend him for his longtime service to our great democracy.

Norbert has spent his life advocating for those in need and enabling others to overcome life's challenges. Today, Norbert himself is facing a great challenge, a personal battle with Parkinson's disease. And tonight, our prayers go out to Norbert and his family during these difficult times. May the strength and courage demonstrated in his years of service throughout his life help him fight the effects of this terrible disease.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. Con. Res. 114, a resolution that recognizes the importance of food distribution in schools and expresses gratitude to former Senators George McGovern of South Dakota and Robert Dole of Kansas for their efforts to eliminate hunger and poverty.

The McGovern-Dole International Food for Education program began in 2001 as an initiative called the Global Food for Education program. This program provided food to improve nutrition for mothers, infants, preschoolers and schoolchildren in developing countries.

During the pilot program, the U.S. Department of Agriculture donated about 800,000 metric tons of commodities, providing school meals for nearly 7 million children in 38 countries.

Because of the Global Food for Education program's success, this initiative was expanded, renamed the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education Program, and authorized by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. As a conferee on the Farm Bill, I am proud to have played a part in enacting the McGovern-Dole program.

Through the McGovern-Dole program, the USDA is able to distribute foods such as wheat, flour, rice, corn and other basic items. Being from Kansas, I am glad that one of my State's main crops--wheat--goes to such a noble cause.

This noble cause includes three main goals: to reduce hunger, to improve literacy and to improve primary education. Private, voluntary organizations, cooperatives, intergovernmental organizations and governments of developing countries all contribute to achieving these goals.

McGovern-Dole was launched on March 10, 2003, on the 50th anniversary of the creation of the Foreign Agricultural Service. This timing is appropriate since McGovern-Dole combines two of the USDA's broad goals: to provide food in schools and to provide foreign food assistance.

About 120 million school-aged children around the world are not enrolled in school, in part because of hunger or malnutrition. A disproportionate number of these children are girls. By supporting this resolution, we in Congress can help reaffirm the U.S. commitment to education and child development.

Supporting this resolution demonstrates support for a better future for our global society. By providing food for schoolchildren in developing countries, we can help to reduce poverty and malnounshment. We can increase the number of children attending schools. By feeding and educating children around the world, we are able to open doors for these children and give them a real chance to someday achieve their dreams.

I want to thank Senator Elizabeth Dole for introducing this resolution in the Senate and my colleague, Congressman James McGovern, for introducing it in the House. I thank these Members for recognizing the efforts of my fellow Kansan and predecessor, Bob Dole. I also thank the House International Relations Committee for their consideration of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 257, a resolution that would urge the President to posthumously award Harry W. Colmery of Topeka, Kansas, the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

In order to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, a person must have contributed in one of the following areas: the security or national interest of the United States, world peace, or another significant public or private endeavor. Harry Colmery's work to bring the gift of education to so many millions of American service members certainly qualified.

Harry Colmery answered the call of duty in World War I by serving as a first lieutenant in the Army Air Service. Aviation was a new concept in those days, and Mr. Colmery showed exceptional bravery and faith by serving his country in the air.

Harry Colmery also served the United States as a lawyer, having received his law degree from the University of Pittsburgh in 1916. He used his education well and argued two successful cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. In his personal life, Mr. Colmery was active in the American legion, and its members elected him National Commander in 1936.

In December of 1943, Mr. Colmery's law career and his devotion to his country intersected. Millions of young Americans had answered the call of duty and served in World War II and were starting to return home. Harry Colmery and the American Legion wanted to ensure that these returning soldiers would be able to transition back into civilian life. In Room 570 of the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C., Mr. Colmery outlined the legislation that became the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, better known now as the G.I. Bill of Rights.

The G.I. Bill has helped to create over 250,000 engineers 238,000 teachers, 91,000 scientists, 67,000 doctors, and 22,000 dentists since being signed into law. Thanks to these men and women, bridges, buildings, and ships have been built; children have realized their dreams, scientific mysteries have been solved, and patients in need of care have been healed.

As an active member of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, I am proud that Mr. Colmery's work on the G.I. Bill of Rights is something we have built upon. In the 107th Congress, my colleagues and I worked to pass legislation to expand educational benefits for veterans. This legislation, The 21st Century Montgomery G.I. Bill Enhancement Act, included an increase in basic education benefits, an increase in the rate of survivors' and dependents' educational assistance and an expansion of the work-study program.

Today, the military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq are creating a new generation of veterans. Harry Colmery's foresight has secured valuable educational benefits for these men and women who are so bravely defending freedom in the war on terror and gives them opportunities for their futures.

I am pleased that my colleague, Mr. Ryun, has been successful in bringing this resolution to the House floor, and I am proud to be a cosponsor of this resolution to posthumously award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Mr. Harry W. Colmery.

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

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the courtesies extended to me by the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), the chairman.

I rise to discuss an amendment that under appropriate circumstances, if the rules allowed, I would offer today concerning the health care services that are being provided to our service men and women.

In 1997 this Congress passed legislation requiring the Department of Defense to conduct predeployment and post-deployment physicals for our servicemen and women, and as a member of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs and one who chaired the Committee on Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Health for a number of years, we looked at this issue, and my goal in examining what was going on or not going on was based on a concern that we did not want our servicemen and women to return to the United States after deployment and incur Persian Gulf War syndrome.

And one of the things we learned from the Persian Gulf War syndrome studies was that we needed a baseline to know what our servicemen and women encountered, what their health condition was before they departed for their deployment and what their physical condition was when they returned.

In 1997, Congress passed legislation requiring the Department of Defense to conduct physical examinations upon those servicemen and women. I have concerns that those physical examinations are not occurring, and in fact, the GAO report that my subcommittee heard about, took testimony from the GAO, indicates that someplace between 38 and 98 percent of the deployed personnel are lacking in one or both of those physical examinations.

Again, this is an issue that I have requested an additional hearing from the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. During my term as subcommittee chairman, we conducted a series of hearings about the health conditions that our servicemen and women were encountering, and believed that it is awfully important for these physicals to take place, and it is uncertain as to whether they are.

In fact, in March of this year, the Committee on Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations took testimony, and the DOD indicated that servicemen and women who answer yes to certain questions on the questionnaire then have a referral for additional examinations. That implies to me that those who answer no to questions are not receiving those health care physical examinations by health care personnel.

And so the amendment that I am discussing here today would express a sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should fully comply with section 107(f)(b) of Title 10 of the United States Code relating to those

predeployment and post-deployment medical examinations.

And, again, I would hope that we could hold the Department of Defense's feet to the fire for purposes of protecting the lives and safety and the health of our servicemen and women now deployed.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, I am not going to take 5 minutes and I trust my colleagues are not going to either, but I do want to express my support for this amendment. It is a very important issue, a principle upon which I could not agree more with the author of the amendment because the functions that are going to be contracted out, if this amendment does not pass, are in fact inherently governmental.

We are talking about approximately 1,400 professionals, experienced people, who have to apply judgment. They need to determine whether law enforcement agencies need to be notified, they need to determine who should come into this country, who should be deported, who should be arrested. This is not something you want to contract out to private firms who may be very well intentioned, but the fact is that ultimately it is a profit incentive that motivates them to compete for this contract.

These are governmental jobs that need to continue to be governmental. If this goes through, it is like contracting out income tax collection. I cannot imagine many more jobs that could be more important that could not be more inherently governmental than this. If this amendment does not pass, it jeopardizes the safety and security of the American people; and certainly it is a slap in the face of the extraordinarily good, professional work that is done by the vast, vast majority of people working for the Customs and Immigration Services.

Please support the Roybal-Allard amendment, and let us do the right thing by a government that we have every reason to be proud of.

Mr. Speaker, we are blessed to live in a country filled with so many men and women willing to go beyond the call of duty, to accomplish great things for the benefit of their fellow citizens. Each day, ordinary souls are called upon to perform extraordinary tasks. I rise to pay tribute to one of the greatest individuals of our time--President Ronald Reagan.

Like the WWII veterans honored last week during the dedication of the National WWII Memorial in Washington, D.C., and those honored this past Sunday on the 60th anniversary of D-Day in Normandy, President Reagan was a great American, steadfast in his appointed duty, thorough in thought, long on compassion and short on vanity.

His love of freedom and embrace of optimism were virtues of many in the Greatest Generation. Let us pray that our generation, and the generations to come, remember that freedom is a worthy cause.

I traveled to the beaches of Normandy this week, joining President Bush, Speaker Hastert, and others, to commemorate the 60th anniversary of D-Day. During the ceremonies, I could not help but feel Reagan's presence.

In his own speech on that shore twenty years ago, President Reagan said, ``The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next. It was the deep knowledge--and pray God we have not lost it--that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest.''

President Reagan understood, like our WWII soldiers, that what they were doing was not to harm, but to help. That even though sacrifices would be made--the greater good was at stake and no price was too high.

In announcing that he had Alzheimer's disease, Ronald Reagan said that he was beginning the journey that would lead him ``into the sunset'' of his life. He said, ``I know that for America there will always be a bright dawn ahead.'' Since 1994, Reagan had suffered the cruelty of Alzheimer's. So our sorrow today is tempered by the knowledge that the President has indeed gone to a better place--a place where he has a front row seat to watch all the bright dawns that lie ahead for America.

President Reagan is responsible for so many of those bright dawns that we have to look forward to. He changed the world by living his convictions. Not ``clinging to'' them or ``sticking to'' them, but living them. Reagan's core beliefs were exactly that. They were at his core and were therefore part of his every action.

Reagan's convictions gave him confidence. He was a man of the people. He listened. And when he heard what the people needed, he took action, in accordance with his convictions. On the domestic front, the people said they were tired of their economy spiraling downward, so Reagan worked to reverse that trend.

To accomplish these feats, President Reagan was not afraid to take hard stances. But he also knew that these changes would take bipartisan efforts. We should all remember, respect, and try to live up to Reagan's model of bipartisanship. His efforts to change America were based upon his philosophy and beliefs--not upon any partisan gamesmanship.

On foreign policy, Americans said they were tired of living in fear, so Reagan worked to bring security. President Reagan engineered the end of the decades-long Cold War. Because of his policies, and his faith that freedom would prevail, our children and grandchildren are not growing up with the constant fear of mutual destruction. We all are able now to live in a world that, though still imperfect, strives toward peace, works for justice and rejects tyranny.

I call upon my colleagues to remember Reagan's strength. Remember him as he was while in office. In his final radio address as president, on January 14, 1989, Reagan said, ``The hope of human freedom, the quest for it, the achievement of it, is the American saga.'' Reagan's hope, his quest, and all his achievements--those are what we all honor and remember.

Now, too, the Great Communicator, has gone the way of so many of our greatest generation. I rise not only in sadness for his passing, but more importantly in celebration of his life, his accomplishments and his deeds. I rise to pay tribute to President Reagan in the words he used to honor the crew of the Challenger Space Shuttle in 1986--``We will never forget him, nor the last time we saw him, as he prepared for the journey, waved goodbye and slipped the surly bonds of earth to touch the face of God.''

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I congratulate the Arlington Committee of 100 on its 50th anniversary this year. With its monthly forums on citizen education and discussion of local and regional public affairs, the committee has helped keep the citizens of Arlington County informed of the issues confronting their community.

In 1954 the Arlington Committee of 100 was formed to help counteract the polarization that developed throughout the county between the new arrivals and the established business and professional people in the community after World War II. The founders hoped to improve the quality and level of communication that existed between Arlington County's diverse commmnities and neighborhoods. In the past, poor communication had often led to animosity and misinformation between neighbors. Seeking to turn conflict into constructive discussions, the Arlington Committee of 100 brought residents together in an atmosphere conducive for them to get to know each other as people with similar concerns, thoughts and ideas for Arlington County.

For the past 50 years, the Arlington Committee of 100 has brought these groups together for a dinner-forum session preceded by a social hour to create the right atmosphere and achieve the goal of thoughtful discussions of community concerns. The committee has come together to discuss issues such as the Arlington County budget, the environment, affordable housing, community safety, public education, transportation, economic development, the death penalty, and the arts. As a citizen education group, these discussions allow for the free exchange of ideas and discussion among its members without the committee ever taking an official position.

Currently, the Arlington Committee of 100 has more than 300 members and is constantly seeking to broaden its membership to reflect the ever increasing diversity found in Arlington County. Through the committee's forums people are able to share the concerns of their friends and neighbors and help the county achieve so many great things due to this diversity. The Arlington Committee of 100 has successfully built bridges across divisive issues and strengthened a community that stands ready to deal with the challenges of today and tomorrow.

I am very pleased to congratulate and commend the Arlington Committee of 100 for its 50 years of outstanding service in providing an educational forum for Arlington's residents to learn about and discuss the local and regional affairs of their community. I wish the Committee of 100 many more years of success and serve to Arlington's diverse and vibrant community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to utilize this time for my Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to pay tribute to a man of principle and faith who nobly devoted his energies to the service of others. Today, we mourn the death of Kansas State Senator Stan Clark of Oakley, Kansas, who was tragically taken from us as a result of a vehicle accident this past Saturday.

I had the honor of serving alongside Stan Clark in the State Senate for 2 years of his decade of service. As I and many of his colleagues will attest, Senator Clark was unwavering in his pursuit of issues based upon principle. He deservedly earned a reputation for being a conscientious and dedicated legislator. As peers, we valued his thoroughness in considering each piece of legislation and his deliberate, detail-oriented analysis of policy affecting his constituents. He always knew more about pending legislation than any other member of the State Senate.

Stan dedicated himself to public service on behalf of Kansans, and especially those who call northwest Kansas home, and he did it with conviction and purpose. The fact that Senator Clark sought elective office is in itself unusual. He had to convince the leadership of the Dunkard Brethren Church that public service was an appropriate calling for a Christian, for his church firmly believed that a person must not be conformed to this world. I cannot imagine a congregation that can be more proud of a decision to allow a member of their church to pursue public office. Stan did not conform to the things of this world but worked to transform the world and to perfect the will of God.

A lifelong Kansan, Stan was always true to his roots. He lived a life guided by the morals and values we in Kansas hold dear. He was motivated to do the right thing in each and every circumstance. In today's partisan arena where there is too much Republican this and Democrat that, Stan put people above politics. Although Stan was not always able to convince everyone of the rightness of his position, nor was he always in the majority when the votes were cast, he treated every person with dignity and respect.

His humility and his warm, genuine grin, which originated deep within his heart, won him the love of friends and the respect of opponents. He lived his life striving to follow Paul's instructions in Romans 12:

``Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil. Cling to what is good. Be kindly to one another with brotherly love, serving the Lord, rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly in prayer, given to hospitality. Do not set your mind on high things, but associate with the humble. Do not be wise in your own opinion. Repay no evil for evil. If it is possible, live peaceably with men. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.''

In a speech just a few days before his death, addressing those gathered at a Vietnam moving wall displayed in his hometown of Oakley, Kansas, Stan told his neighbors his thoughts about death and as a result his thoughts about life. These are his words.

``Thinking about death produces a true love for life. When we are familiar with death, we accept each day and each week as a gift. This acceptance helps us to see all human life as priceless. Only when we are able to accept life, bit by bit, does it become precious. Only this awareness of death creates true inward freedom from material things. When we look death in the face, we overcome ambition and greed and the love of power and the fear of losing material things. When we look at ourselves, we realize how weak and misguided we can be. If we have not had the thought of death, we cannot achieve an inward freedom to live. When we bury death's control over our own lives and experience freedom and peace of mind, life becomes a gift that we can share with others.''

After his commitment to his faith, most important to Stan was his family. He devoted endless love and attention to his wife, Ruth, and their son, Will. Most common was Stan's dedication to balancing public responsibilities with a commitment to quality time shared with his family.

Today I join his many friends and admirers in extending my deepest sympathies to Ruthie and her family during this time of loss. Stan, you will be greatly missed by me, by my family, and by our many friends and your constituents, but he who does the will of God abides forever.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 50th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision in Brown versus the Topeka Board of Education.

In 1951, a door closed on Linda Brown when she was denied admission to an all-white public school in Topeka, Kansas. But on this day in 1954, a door opened for our nation. The Brown decision was the culmination of many desegregation cases. Previous court decisions had ruled that ``separate but equal'' was a valid policy.

By ruling in favor of Linda Brown, the Supreme Court helped America finally open its eyes and see that segregation is, in fact, wrong and does, in fact, perpetuate inequality. Through the plight of young Linda, a mere third-grader, Americans came to understand that separate is never equal.

While in law school, I was privileged to study under Paul Wilson. Earlier in his life. as a humor Kansas assistant attorney general, Professor Wilson was assigned to defend the Topeka Board of Education. He never suspected that he would end up arguing before the Supreme Court.

I would like to take a moment and pay tribute to Professor Wilson. His role in the Brown decision was a difficult one. He knew that segregation was wrong, but he was charged with the duty of defending the Topeka Board of Education. During his time at the University of Kansas, Professor Wilson wrote about the Brown decision and his recollections of that time period. In the classroom, he told my fellow students and me about his trip to Washington, D.C., and about being admitted to the Supreme Court bar. He said to us, ``The decision issued in 1954 caused me, caused America, to realize that to argue the policy of separate but equal was to defend the indefensible.'' Professor Wilson's words, and the tales of experiences, have stayed with me.

We must never lose sight of the importance of Brown versus the Topeka Board of Education. This decision has set a higher standard for our schools and for our nation. Even today, disparities exist among groups of students, and we must continue working to ensure that all students are learning what they need to learn, and are receiving the kind of high-quality education they deserve.

As the father of two daughters, one in middle school and one in high school, I am thankful for the change that the Brown decision brought to the American education system and to our society. I am thankful that my daughters attend school in a country where all children are considered equal.

Our public schools today are rich in diversity because of the hard work of the NAACP, and the willingness of Linda Brown and her family to stand up for what is right. Because of the Brown decision, we are better able to foster understanding, tolerance, and morality in our young people.

I am proud to have been a part of establishing the Brown vs. Topeka 50th Anniversary Commission in 2001. Since its inception, the Commission has been preparing for this anniversary. Commission members have traveled all over the country, visiting the cities whose desegregation cases set the stage for Brown's success. The Commission has also encouraged many activities across the nation related to the anniversary, including an essay contest, a film and discussion series, and traveling museum exhibits.

I want to thank everyone who worked to make this anniversary so memorable and so historic. Cheryl Brown Henderson, daughter of the late Oliver Brown, has worked tirelessly, not only for this anniversary, but also for educational equity everywhere. As cofounder of the Brown Foundation for Educational Equity, Excellence and Research, Mrs. Brown Henderson has helped establish a living tribute to the plaintiffs and attorneys involved in the Brown case.

Today, President Bush visited Kansas for the first time. The President spoke this morning in Topeka at the dedication of the National Park Service's $11.3 million historic site in the Monroe School, the former all-black school that Linda Brown attended before the 1954 Supreme Court ruling. I want to thank President Bush and the city of Topeka for helping to make this anniversary worthy of the event it commemorates.

We cannot forget that our work is not yet done. We have celebrated and remembered, but we must do more. We must recommit ourselves to the philosophy behind the Brown decision--to the elimination of bias and the changing of society for the better. We must continue working to provide equal opportunities for all. We must make a fresh commitment to this Nation's children.

Colleagues, I trust we can be of one voice tonight. Let us join together in our celebration

of the 50th anniversary of the Brown decision and in our renewed commitment to our children.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an outstanding businessman, and a man who is proud to be a ``Kansan by choice,'' Chris Hauck.

On June 1, Chris will retire from his position as president and CEO of Sunflower Electric Power Corporation in Hays, Kansas. His retirement feels like the end of an era, but if I know Chris, it is only the beginning of a whole new chapter in his life, a chapter that will be full of time spent with loved ones, and time given to the community.

Although Chris is not a native Kansan, he soon realized that Hays is a place where he could raise his family, be active in the community, and put his business talents to good use. I have known Chris Hauck since his arrival in Hays. As soon as he took charge, Chris began leading Sunflower Electric into a new era of financial success. Through an intensive reorganization of the company's debt structure and an aggressive marketing campaign, Sunflower Electric has seen a 152 percent increase in sales to member electric systems.

Chris has been active in his industry, aside from his formal duties at Sunflower Electric. He is a past president of the Western Fuels Association, and is still a member of its board of directors. He is also a past president of the Greening Earth Society. Chris co-founded the Western Power Producers, a regional coalition of western cooperative utilities, and served as its president for a time. He has also been involved in both the MOKAN and Southwest Power Pools, and the National G & T Manager's Association Technical Advisory Committee.

This man's influence and expertise has influenced his industry on the global level as well. Chris served on the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association's Global Climate Task Force. During his time on the task force, Chris was part of a committee that, in 1993, influenced the United National Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Apart from his professional life, Chris is deeply involved in prison ministry. He travels weekly to Ellsworth Correctional Facility along with his wife, Rita. Rita and Chris recruit inmates to participate in the Prison Fellowship Ministries' Inner Change Freedom Initiative. The Haucks believe wholeheartedly in the prison ministry, and I commend them for their devotion to bringing God's word to the inmates in Ellsworth.

Not only has Chris brought Sunflower Electric to new heights, and not only has he spent countless hours giving the gift of faith to Kansas inmates, but Chris Hauck is also a great family man. Chris and Rita are the proud parents of two remarkable sons, Les and Christian. Both of these young men are graduates of the United States Air Force Academy. Les, now a captain, has returned from the Persian Gulf and continues to serve his country at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona as an F-16 instructor pilot. Christian, a first lieutenant, is based in Atlanta, Georgia. In addition to serving as a hospital facilities engineer, Christian plays on the United States Combined Armed Forces Rugby Team. Later this year. Chris will be joining his son, and the team, to travel with them as a videographer.

Chris Hauck has been many things to many people. At one time, he was a big-city guy. Now, he is a self-proclaimed ``Kansan by choice.'' In his words, Kansans, ``have much to be thankful for, and little to complain about.'' I know I am certainly thankful for Chris--for his contributions to the western Kansas economy, for his commitment to ministering, and for his friendship. Thank you, Chris, for your service. I wish you all the best in your retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman very much for yielding me this time and for his leadership not only on this issue today, the previous one, but all the many things he does on behalf of our country's veterans. I am delighted to join him as a member of his committee here today on a resolution that I introduced, H. Con. Res. 409, which recognizes the men and women who served during World War II, those who died defending our freedom, and the millions of Americans who supported the effort on the home front.

This resolution also celebrates the completion of the National World War II Memorial here in our Nation's Capital, on the Mall between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial, which will be dedicated on May 29. Veterans who served in World War II and their families have made a tremendous sacrifice for this country, and I am proud to be involved in honoring those men and women with this memorial.

I am also proud to be from a State that has been home to many prominent members of our military, including the gentleman just described in the previous bill, Mr. Colmery, who was a Kansan, and who wrote out the GI Bill of Rights on a napkin here in Washington, D.C. But also two that come to mind today, General Dwight D. Eisenhower, from Abilene, Kansas, and Senator Robert J. Dole of Russell, Kansas.

General Eisenhower rose quickly through the ranks of the military, and during World War II he achieved the rank of a five-star general. He served as the Commander of Allied Forces in our landing in North Africa in November of 1942, and on D-Day he served as Supreme Allied Commander of our troops that began the battle for Europe. General Eisenhower's dedication and sacrifice made a significant difference and brought about the freedoms that we enjoy today as Americans.

A soldier from Russell, Kansas, Second Lieutenant Bob Dole, also fought for freedom and served under General Eisenhower's command. Second Lieutenant Dole served in World War II in the Allied liberation of Northern Italy and was twice wounded and decorated for heroic achievements.

Both General Eisenhower and Senator Dole achieved greatness on the battlefield and in public service. Senator Dole is recognized in this resolution for his contribution in making the National World War II Memorial possible. Through his fundraising efforts as the national chairman, Senator Dole played a crucial role in raising more than $195 million in private money pledges to construct this memorial.

All in all, Kansas is proud to be home of approximately 40,000 World War II veterans, and I am honored to be here today to pay tribute to them and to recognize the contribution they made for me and my family and for all those Americans who fought for our great country.

I am honored to be serving in Congress with a number of World War II veterans, my colleagues, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), a group of men who fought the battles of World War II who now serve with distinction in the United States Congress. I would also like to acknowledge the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), who with her foresight and commitment over many years brought about the legislation that establishes this memorial honoring our World War II veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I put my tennis shoes on today and walked to the World War II Memorial this afternoon. It is a tremendous tribute to our Nation's veterans. If it has the impact it had upon me this afternoon, it will be a fitting memorial to those who served our country so well.

In fact, my father, another Kansan, an 89-year-old former staff sergeant from World War II, received a call from his son today, something I have never said before to my dad, Dad, I love you, I am proud of you, I thank you for your service to our country, you are to be honored as a World War II veteran at this memorial, and it means a lot to me and my family to know you and others, all who served like you, have made a difference so important to all the rest of us.

So I am proud to sponsor H. Con. Res. 409, and I thank the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and the Committee on Resources for their support of this resolution, and I ask my colleagues and all fellow Americans to join me in recognizing the contributions and sacrifices of our Nation's veterans, the contributions they have made to protect this Nation and defend our way of life, and acknowledge all those who made the World War II memorial possible.

Mr. Speaker, I address the House today to call for a higher level of political dialogue and to request that we set aside the recent onslaught of partisanship concerning the war in Iraq.

Being in Kansas over the last several weeks has reminded me of the need to come together, to unify behind our forces fighting overseas. While not everyone will agree on the reasons they got there or whether these reasons justify war, the reality is that American soldiers are engaged in battle. Our troops are fighting for the rights that we have in this Chamber that we must uphold: The cause of liberty, of justice, and freedom from oppression.

This Congress adopted a resolution authorizing the use of force on October 16, 2002 with a vote of 296 to 133.

In recent weeks we have seen the reports of some of the deadliest fighting of the war. We have received reports daily that another soldier has been killed and that another young person has died. Timing is important and priorities must be established. I believe there are legitimate questions to be asked and answered about intelligence that we received before the war, but now we have thousands of troops that are depending upon Americans to unite behind their efforts. Partisan fingerpointing surrounding the 9/11 Commission is not productive, either to the Commission or to the troops. It undercuts the jobs our troops have loyally agreed to do.

These are not Republicans or Democrats in Iraq, these are American soldiers, our men and women, our sons and daughters, our neighbors and friends, fighting so that the people of Iraq might have a chance for a better tomorrow and to reduce the threat of a terrorist attack on our own country.

These are critical times. Historically during times of crisis, some of our greatest leaders have risen above the partisanship of the moment to unite behind our troops and our President. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, from my State of Kansas, is just one example. Following the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion, Eisenhower emerged from his farm and from retirement to meet with President Kennedy and to defend the President's actions.

Eisenhower understood. He knew what it was like to be President, but he also knew what it was like to be on the front lines as a soldier. He knew that criticizing the President during difficult times would provide encouragement to our foes and weaken our Nation's resolve. Eisenhower knew that using war for partisan gain would only serve to undermine the mission of the troops and dishonor the sacrifices of their families.

But today candidates and elected officials alike rush to the evening cable news shows to berate President Bush, to the detriment I believe of the troops he commands, diminishing the validity of their efforts. I am troubled as I imagine a soldier or a soldier's family listening to insensitive remarks, wondering if the soldier will be forsaken by a country whose call to duty he or she answered. Our soldiers and their families deserve better. Partisanship for the sake of scoring political points has no place on the front lines of the war.

Last week, a friend told me, ``This is just another Vietnam.'' Well, I thought a lot about that and concluded it is only another Vietnam if we create that environment. I came of age during the Vietnam era. I remember the protests, the body counts, the escalation and the retreat. This is not today's Vietnam, not unless we choose to make it through inconsistent policies, contradictory strategies and weakened resolve. We can win both the war and the peace in Iraq, and emerge having given the people of Iraq and the region new reason for hope.

An e-mail from a Fort Riley soldier arrived in my office this month and ended with this quote: ``You have never lived . . . until you have almost died . . . for those that have fought to protect it . . . freedom has a special flavor . . . the protected will never know.''

Mr. Speaker, I call upon my colleagues and all Americans to think of our men and women overseas before they rush to criticize the conduct of this war. Our soldiers' efforts must be upheld and honored. I do not consider it unpatriotic to question governmental decisions, but what we need today are politicians who put country above partisanship and their Nation ahead of the next election. We need statesmanship.

By unifying behind our troops and their efforts, by requiring our political and military leaders to develop not an exit strategy but a winning strategy, and by making certain that the Iraqi people fully fight for the future of their own country, we can sustain our troops and the mission can be accomplished. With consistent policies, clear strategies, and a firm resolve, we can avoid the war in Iraq becoming just another Vietnam.