Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further consideration of H.R. 3058 in the Committee of the Whole pursuant to House Resolution 342, notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no further amendment to the bill may be offered except:

Pro forma amendments offered at any point in the reading by the chairman or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees for the purpose of debate;

Amendments printed in the Record and numbered 4, 8 and 13;

An amendment by Mr. Nadler regarding HOPWA;

An amendment by Mr. Pickering regarding enforcement of the Individuals With Disabilities Parking Reform Amendment Act;

An amendment by Mr. Obey regarding D.C. funding;

An amendment by Mr. Sanders regarding contracting out flight service stations, which shall be debatable for 20 minutes;

An amendment by Ms. DeLauro regarding corporate entities chartered in Antigua, Panama, Bermuda, Barbados and the Cayman Islands, which shall be debatable for 15 minutes;

An amendment by Mr. Obey regarding an OMB Circular, which shall be debatable for 40 minutes;

An amendment by Mr. Cuellar regarding funding for the Community Development Fund;

An amendment by Mrs. Jones of Ohio regarding HOME Investment Partnership Program;

An amendment by Ms. Waters regarding funding for the Community Development Fund;

An amendment by Mr. Costello regarding cities of Alton and Granite City, Illinois;

An amendment by Mr. King of Iowa regarding funding for the Supreme Court;

An amendment by Ms. Herseth regarding judiciary funding;

An amendment by Ms. Hooley regarding increasing funds for HIDTA;

An amendment by Ms. Velazquez regarding e-travel and small business protection;

An amendment by Ms. Kilpatrick of Michigan regarding the sale of Unocal Corporation;

An amendment by Mr. Van Hollen regarding revisions to circular A-76;

An amendment by Mr. Tiahrt regarding regulations on U.S. business competitiveness;

An amendment by Mr. Hefley regarding an across-the-board cut;

An amendment by Mr. Brown of Ohio regarding reporting on the cost of new prescription drugs;

An amendment by Mr. Hinchey regarding private contractor activity;

An amendment by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey regarding eminent domain;

An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding the travel ban with Cuba;

An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding religious exemption on the travel ban with Cuba;

An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding cap on remittances with Cuba;

An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding enforcement of the weight limit on baggage for travel to Cuba;

An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding amateur sports teams travel to Cuba;

An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding family travel to Cuba by members of the Armed Forces;

An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding trade agreements and their relationship with Cuba;

An amendment by Ms. Lee regarding academic institutions and travel to Cuba;

An amendment by Mr. Rangel regarding enforcement of the economic embargo on Cuba;

An amendment by Mr. Honda regarding military recruiters and the Department of Education;

An amendment by Mr. Markey regarding transfer of tax activity among countries;

An amendment by Mr. Wynn regarding financial contractors;

An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding section 12 of the U.S. Housing Act;

An amendment by Mr. Clay regarding FHA loans and abusive lending practices;

An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding funding for the

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I accept the amendment.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I oppose any amendment to continue the section 108 loan program which is recommended for elimination as part of a broad sweep of lower-priority programs. We must reduce or eliminate these programs in order to free up the funds for the highest priorities in HUD: assistance to extremely low-income families and restoring funds for community development.

There are many good reasons for terminating the program which the administration has proposed to do for the last 4 years. This program has been rated as ineffective, underutilized, and lacks accountability.

First and foremost, this program duplicates several others that, relatively speaking, have a long history of success. CDBG economic development loans and grants average about $500 million annually. New markets tax credits, $15 billion in subsidy over 5 years. Empowerment Zones, enterprise and renewal community tax credits and SBA loans are part as well of this successful side.

Mr. Chairman, I want to state further that section 108 loans are among the most expensive forms of financing relative to tax-exempt State and local borrowing. The program is contrary to the Department of Treasury rules and principles in effect today for all loan programs.

The program is already in decline. Last year, only 74 took out section 108 loans, 74 out of 4,000 eligible communities.

Finally, the program will not end in 2006 even if there are no funds in 2006. Ample funds from prior years will carry the program forward for at least the next 2 years. Over $13 million is still available to guarantee over 550 million in new loans, even if no new funds are provided.

So I would urge my colleagues to vote against restoring this program. I know the gentlewoman wants it very badly, but we really do not have a need for it; and we want to preserve HUD's highest-priority programs instead.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).

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

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

The committee provided additional support for the Supreme Court salaries and expense accounts in order to hire additional police officers and a threat assessment officer. I understand part of what the gentleman is saying. He disagrees with the decision of the court. But I think the idea of reducing funding is going in the wrong direction. Reducing this funding would weaken security at the court at the very time when threats and violence against judges is a real concern. And I do understand the gentleman's concern with the recent imminent domain ruling. But I do not want to jeopardize court security to make a political point. I think it is the wrong decision.

Furthermore, I do not recall a single time in my tenure when this House cut funding for the Supreme Court to punish it for a ruling. And that is the part I disagree with very strongly. So I would urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver), my ranking member for any thoughts he has on this amendment.

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

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

Just in closing, I recognize the gentleman has some difficulty in that decision. But as I said before, this is something that I have never heard in the history, certainly in my history, where we were asked to penalize the Supreme Court for a decision.

The thing I would say is, yes, there are individuals on the Supreme Court that we may have more identification with, more support for and would reinforce. But it is nine people that make the decision, not one. And so I think that we should leave it as it is, and I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendment proposes to add $6.9 million to the Judiciary to pay for class action lawsuits. And I am certainly familiar with class action lawsuits. What I am not concerned about is class action lawsuits but rather the fact that the money that is coming out of GSA is becoming a burden, a big burden.

The Judiciary has received an increase of more than $325 million above last year, or more than 6 percent. Of that total, the amendment received a $223 million increase in the bill. That is $223 million up.

While I am sympathetic to the needs of the Judiciary, I believe that sufficient funds are being provided in the bill to address the intent of the amendment.

Furthermore, as I said, GSA is being threatened, it seems, with death by a thousand cuts. I ask that the House not support amendment that compromise GSA's ability to provide safe and clean facilities for government agencies. And so therefore, I ask for a ``no'' vote.

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

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

I said pretty much what I felt was at issue here. And I think again it is GSA. If you remember when we started earlier in the day, GSA became the focus for any kind of money for any kind of purpose. And if anybody is doing any totaling, they will know that we are really stretching what ultimately is going to become a difficult problem for GSA. So when does the money have to flow back into GSA? At some point. I would rather not even go that direction and say that, as I have said before, that I would really prefer that the House not support amendments that compromise GSA's ability to provide safe and clean facilities for government agencies, and so I ask for a ``no'' vote.

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

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

Just briefly, the reason everybody is going to GSA is that is about the only place they can go for money. There is not any out there. So I, again, would ask strongly for a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to this amendment because it does not significantly increase HIDTA, but would reduce the White House agency by more than 10 percent, and HIDTA is fully funded. We brought it up to its full funding level.

Given that HIDTA was fully funded in this bill, clearly such a trade- off is not merited. A $9 million increase to HIDTA would be useful no doubt, but this is not the right offset; and clearly the White House will not stand for this amendment. So I would strongly urge defeat of this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).

Mr. Chairman, I reserve my time.

Mr. Chairman, can I get an idea of how much time is remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver), the ranking member.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time.

I want to say that the gentleman from Nebraska's (Mr. Osborne) presentation was startling, and it is one that makes us think about how can we help.

I must say, this amendment will significantly impact all of GSA's owned and leased buildings, the tenants in those buildings and the visiting public. Already, today, this afternoon, we have taken over $1 billion out of GSA. We cannot go back to the same pool over and over.

With this amendment, GSA will not be able to make all of its lease payments for property it is leasing on behalf of government agencies. These reductions to the building operations account cannot be absorbed without a corresponding negative impact on the operating programs within the Federal Buildings Fund.

Funding for this account is GSA's highest priority. So let me note that many of these costs are fixed, for example, like fuels, cleaning, maintenance and utilities, and for that reason, I ask for a ``no'' vote.

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

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 163, line 6, be considered as read, printed in the Record and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 194, line 7, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me time and for bringing the rule to the floor on H.R. 3058. It is a bill making appropriations for, as has been mentioned, Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies, and that is why we call it TTHUD.

This is a good rule for a really good bill. We have tried diligently to work with the many authorizing committees of jurisdiction on the various provisions of our bill, and I think we have come to a great deal of agreement on those provisions. I thank my colleagues for working with us in such good faith, and I appreciate their help in bringing this bill to the floor tomorrow.

This bill fully funds surface transportation programs as authorized by TEA-LU and aviation programs as authorized in VISION-100. I want to repeat this; at least I want to say it once and maybe twice: we fully fund Section 8 and many other housing and assistance programs under HUD. We fully fund Section 8. We have even managed to keep CDBG in HUD. Not one dime did we not fund in the request. Did we have to make some hard decisions? Yes, we did. But we funded the most important, the most beneficial, the most effective programs under our jurisdiction.

There are some programs, like Hope 6, Youthbuild, and Amtrak, which are in desperate need of reform or reauthorization. We felt that rather than continuing to throw money at these programs, we would let the authorizers have their chance to provide oversight and legislative direction. All in all, this is a balanced and good bill that we will consider tomorrow.

I thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier) and the Committee on Rules, particularly the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart) here today, for their work, and I urge a ``yes'' vote on this rule.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill, the fiscal year 2006 Foreign Operations Appropriations Act.

Let me begin by commending the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for his work as chairman of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs. Every year he puts a great deal of effort into examining the issues thoroughly and giving sincere consideration to Members' requests. Thanks to his efforts, we have before us today an excellent bill.

I also commend the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member. She and I have worked together on a number of issues over the years, and together we have achieved some important results.

I also want to thank all of the staff for their hard work and the research they have done over the weeks and months to address the many issues in this bill. Their organization and discipline has made this year's process move more smoothly.

As Members of Congress, we have a responsibility to exercise our oversight to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent as effectively as possible. Oversight has been a primary focus of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations this year, and there are important provisions in this bill to help make our foreign assistance programs more accountable.

This bill requires the administration and international organizations to set transparent goals and measure progress towards these goals in tangible ways. The bill also limits spending until certain reforms are implemented. Because of this oversight, the committee has been able to produce a bill that is $2.5 billion below the administration's request and still focuses on the important priorities.

Assistance to the Middle East is always a central part of this bill. For fiscal year 2006, Israel will receive $2.28 billion in military assistance, $240 million in economic assistance, and $40 million to help resettle Jewish refugees in Israel. I strongly support all of this funding.

I am also pleased that the bill provides $40 million for assistance to Lebanon, which is an increase of $5 million from last year. With Syria's military withdrawal from Lebanon and the recent elections, there is an opportunity for positive change. This extra funding will give the State Department and USAID some flexibility to take advantage of this opportunity.

There are also a variety of important programs in the bill that provide support to reform efforts within the countries of the broader Middle East, including $85 million for the Middle East Partnership Initiative.

Regarding Armenia, the bill provides $67.5 million in economic assistance. Unfortunately, Turkey and Azerbaijan continue to seal the transportation routes into and out of Armenia, so this funding is important to offset this economic blockade.

The bill also maintains parity in military assistance to Armenia and Azerbaijan, which is critical to our overall policy toward the South Caucasus.

There are other valuable programs in this bill, including the Millennium Challenge Corporation and funding to fight the scourge of

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Fiscal Year 2006 Science, State, Justice Appropriations bill and to compliment my colleague, Frank Wolf, for a job well done.

I am particularly pleased with the increase given to the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, MEP and I would like to commend Chairman Wolf for his support of this important program.

The manufacturing sector in this country faces many challenges. There are several major issues that we and other policy makers on the Federal level need to address to improve the business environment for manufacturers. Those will take time. But the MEP program has a direct impact on thousands of small and medium manufacturers each year.

MEP is a Federal-State-private network of over 60 centers with 400 locations in all 50 States. These not-for-profit centers work with small and medium-sized manufacturers to help them adopt and use the latest and most efficient technologies, processes, and business practices.

The MEP Center in my home State, the Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center, or MMTC, helps Michigan's small and medium-sized manufacturing companies get competitive and remain that way. Founded in 1991, MMTC has six offices in Michigan. I have heard from numerous companies throughout Michigan that have benefited from MMTC's services.

Let me point out one such company, Tru-Val Tubing Company in Waterford, Michigan, which is located in my district. Tru-Val fabricates metal tubing for General Motors and DaimlerChrysler as well as several other Tier I automotive suppliers and employs approximately 120 people.

Tru-Val Tubing began working with the MMTC in 1999, and over the past 6 years of improvements, the company's defective parts-per-million have dropped from 3,500 to zero. This resulted in General Motors reclassifying Tru-Val from the bottom 5 percent to the top 5 percent of their supply base. Furthermore, Tru-Val's employees are much more satisfied with their jobs than they once were, as the company has seen a dramatic reduction in employee turnover. Most importantly, Tru-Val increased its employment from 85 to 120 as a result of the improvement in the company.

Helro Corporation of Rochester, Michigan, also located in my district, is another excellent example. Helro, a small manufacturer with 19 employees, was established in the 1960s as a form toolmaker, using a patented carbide coating and whitewall tire buffing. After relocating to Rochester, Michigan, in April 1998, Helro recognized that it would need to achieve certification if it wanted to compete in the tooling marketplace.

Finding the idea of a peer group exchange of information appealing, Helro quickly joined MMTC's ISO 9000 User Group and got everyone in the company involved. As a result, Helro came through its ISO 9001 certification audit with flying colors and was certified in September 2000. Through the certification process, Helro identified areas of waste, resulting in savings that covered the cost of its participation in the User Group. Moreover, Helro improved customer satisfaction and its credibility in the marketplace, allowing for easier introduction of its new product line.

The results at Tru-Val Tubing and Helro are not an anomaly. In fiscal year 2003 alone, MEP served more than 18,0 0 manufacturers nationwide. Those manufacturers reported an additional $2.6 billion in sales, $686 million more in cost savings, $912 million of additional investment in plant modernization, and more than 50,000 more jobs just as a result of

their projects with MEP Centers that year. Additionally, an estimate of the Federal return on our investment in MEP Centers is $4 in Federal tax revenue for every $1 invested in the program.

MEP has a documented positive impact on our manufacturing sector, and is particularly vital to our small manufacturers. As vital as this program is to our manufacturers, fiscal year 2006 funding is vital to

Mr. Speaker, on June 13 and 14, 2005, I was unavoidably absent and rollcall votes 241-243. For the record, had I been present, I would have voted: No. 241--Yea; No. 242--Yea; No. 243-- Yea.

Mr. Speaker, one of our Nation's greatest assets is our veterans. When I look around this chamber and see the reflection of our democracy, I can't help but think of those who fought to ensure our safety, our strength, and our freedom.

I rise today to recognize an honored veteran and an extraordinary American, Mr. Hugh Ferguson.

Those who study World War II are aware that the United States was at war with Japan for three months after Germany surrendered. The end of the war with Japan came only after President Harry S Truman made the brave and difficult decision to use the atomic bomb.

On August 9, 1945, Mr. Hugh Ferguson was piloting the B-29 bomber plane that dropped the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, Japan. This mission required bravery, faith, and discipline in order to see it through. Mr. Ferguson was just a mere twenty-two years old when his country employed his piloting skills to end the battle and forever change the make-up of the world.

As Mr. Ferguson will tell you, he and his fellow pilots knew their acts would end World War II and save hundreds of thousands of American lives. This knowledge made it clear to Mr. Ferguson what his mission was and that his success was necessary--even at its great cost.

It takes a brave and faithful man to carry out the missions of the United States military. It takes an even braver man to test history with the new technology that was the atomic bomb. Yet, Mr. Ferguson's bravery did not stop there. Years later, he again answered the military's call of duty. Mr. Ferguson flew the only plane on site when the United States detonated the world's first hydrogen bomb on Eniwetok Atoll. Not knowing the consequences of this flight, he and his crew bravely documented the power of the hydrogen bomb for United States officials.

This year marks Mr. Ferguson's 82nd birthday. I wish to congratulate and honor him for his service to this country in the face of war. As a member of Congress, as a proud citizen of the United States, and as a person who enjoys the freedom this great Nation offers, I officially recognize Mr. Hugh Ferguson.

Mr. Speaker, today I join the people of the 9th Congressional District and the State of Michigan in announcing the opening of the Michigan Chapter of Justice for Children. JFC is the only nonprofit corporation formed to save at risk unprotected children who have been physically abused or neglected.

Justice for Children intervenes on behalf of abused children when child protection agencies and courts fail to protect them. They help children whose cases have been closed by Children's Protective Services before help has been provided and have no Court Appointed Special Advocate or who even with CASA support, are on the verge of being sent back to an abusive home.

Last year Mr. Chip St. Clair, a Rochester Hills resident, called the JFC National Office in Houston and said he wanted to make something good arise from his childhood of abuse and violence. Becoming a regional director for JFC fulfills that desire and the abused children of Michigan now have an ardent advocate to save them from the life he had to endure as a child.

Mr. St. Clair was a victim of terrible abuse at the hands of his father--Michael Grant--who was a convicted child murderer. That murder took place in 1970 in Indiana. Grant escaped from the Indiana State Penitentiary in 1973 with the aid of the woman who would become Chip's mother. St. Clair was born in 1975 and did not discover that his father was a murderer until 1998 when he was 23 years old.

``I emptied the glass which was full of horror stories of my childhood and began filling that glass with nobility and honor. Joining JFC and helping abused children represents a major step in the Journey of Justice which began on that fateful day in 1998,'' said St. Clair.

Justice for Children has been acclaimed by the American Bar Association, jurists from around the country, national television networks, news programs, and bipartisan congressional leaders for its work on behalf of abused and neglected children. Today we honor the Michigan Chapter of Justice for Children and Director, Chip St. Clair for their dedication to help abused and neglected children.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 32, the ``Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act.'' This legislation will help stop the scourge of counterfeit manufactured goods.

Let me thank the Committee on the Judiciary in its entirety, particularly the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) for all of his assistance, the subcommittee chairmen, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), and the majority leader for his leadership in bringing the bill to the floor today.

Most people understand that counterfeit goods is a problem, but many people do not understand how severe the problem is and how severe it has become. Counterfeiters are endangering consumers, are stealing jobs and money away from legitimate companies, destroying brand names and requiring costly investigations. The numbers are staggering, in addition to safety issues, and it has been mentioned about counterfeit auto parts, but they cost the automotive supplier over $12 billion annually. It has been estimated if these losses were eliminated, the industry could hire some 200,000 additional workers.

The impact of counterfeiters affects almost every manufacturing industry in the country, including clothing, batteries, electronics and even pharmaceuticals. When it comes to the economy, the U.S. Customs Service has estimated that counterfeiting resulted in the loss of some 750,000 jobs and cost the U.S. around $20 billion annually. It is estimated almost 7 percent of world trade is counterfeit.

My bill has two key provisions that will help address the problem. The first provision is the most important. It requires the mandatory destruction and forfeiture of the equipment and materials used to make counterfeit goods.

Under current law, a convicted trademark counterfeiter is only required to give up the actual counterfeit goods, not the machinery used to make those goods. My bill would prohibit trafficking in counterfeit labels, patches, and medallions.

Passing this bill will send a signal to counterfeiters around the world that the U.S. will fight this growing problem. This bill will give prosecutors more tools to go after the criminals and punish them severely. This legislation also addresses the global problem, and has the widespread support of the MEMA, NEMA, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 32--the ``Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act.'' This legislation will help stop the scourge of counterfeit manufactured goods.

Let me thank the Judiciary Committee, including Chairman Sensenbrenner, Subcommittee Chairman Coble and Subcommittee Chairman Lamar Smith. They've all provided important leadership to bring this bill to the floor today. I'd also like to thank the leadership, including Majority Leader DeLay, for their help in getting this bill through the process.

The economy of my district is largely centered on the auto industry, particularly auto suppliers. In fact, my district includes the headquarters of over one-fourth of the 100 largest auto suppliers in North America, as well as a host of small suppliers.

To say that the manufacturing sector is important to my district and to the State of Michigan is an understatement. In my district alone, there are more than 1,500 manufacturing entities, and over 90 percent of them have less than 100 employees.

Most people understand that counterfeit goods are a problem. But many people don't understand just how severe the problem has become.

Early last year, I was made aware of the serious and growing problem of counterfeit auto parts. What I found out was the counterfeiters are making all sorts of fake parts including brake pads, spark plugs, old filters, and in one case even an entire car. I was struck by how large an impact counterfeiters are having on the auto supplier industry.

The numbers, in fact, are staggering. In addition to the obvious safety issues, counterfeit automobile parts cost the automotive supplier industry over $12 billion annually. It's estimated that if these losses were eliminated, and those sales were brought into legitimate companies, the auto industry could hire 200,000 additional workers. It's important to remember those numbers, because counterfeiting is not a victimless crime.

In addition to selling bogus products, the counterfeiters are stealing jobs and money away from legitimate companies, destroying brand names, increasing warranty claims, and requiring legal fees and costly investigations.

The fight against counterfeiters is not limited to the automotive industry. The impact of counterfeiters is broad and affects just about every manufacturing industry in the country--including clothing, batteries, electronics, and even pharmaceuticals.

When it comes to the economy overall, the U.S. Customs Service has estimated that counterfeiting has resulted in the loss of 750,000 jobs and costs the United States around $200 billion annually. The International Chamber of Commerce estimates that seven percent of the world's trade is in counterfeit goods and that the counterfeit market is worth $350 billion. We must provide more tools to fight counterfeiters, not only for the economy, but for the safety of our consumers.

My bill has two key provisions that will help stop criminals who use counterfeit trademarks.

The first provision is the most important and gets at the roots of the problem--it requires the mandatory destruction and forfeiture of the equipment and materials used to make the counterfeit goods.

Under current law, a convicted trademark counterfeiter is only required to give up the actual counterfeit goods, not the machinery used to make those goods. If we don't take away the equipment used to make the fake goods, what's to stop the criminals from going back to make more? My bill would require the convicted criminals to give up not just the counterfeit goods, but also the equipment they used to make those goods. This will help to dig up the counterfeiting networks by the roots.

In addition to this provision, my bill also prohibits trafficking in counterfeit labels, patches, and medallions.

Under current law, it is legal to make and sell these items if they are not attached to a particular counterfeit good. This just doesn't make sense. Why would counterfeiters make these labels, if not for the chance at illegal profits?

This bill will send a signal to counterfeiters that the United States is serious about fighting this growing problem. Passing this bill will give prosecutors more tools to go after the criminals here in the U.S. and punish them severely.

This bill is also necessary to address the problem globally. Most of the counterfeit goods are being manufactured in other countries, particularly China. Some countries are better than others at fighting counterfeiting, but we need to have ways to prod the stragglers. However, we can't demand that other countries take steps to combat trademark counterfeiting that we have not taken ourselves.

So, by passing my bill and improving our own law, Congress will empower our trade negotiators to press for stronger anti-counterfeiting provisions in other countries. We will show the world that the United States is serious about putting counterfeiters out of business for good.

This bill has broad support, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, the IACC, International Trademark Association and a host of major associations and corporations.

As I have outlined, counterfeiting is a very serious worldwide problem that threatens public safety, hurts the U.S. economy and costs Americans thousands of manufacturing jobs. No one supports counterfeiters, and we must do everything we can to eliminate the problem.

For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I respectfully urge my colleagues to support H.R. 32, the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act, and I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 90th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

April 24th, of every year, marks the anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. Ninety years ago, 1.5 million innocent Armenians were killed at the hands of the Ottoman Empire. This, the first genocide of the 20th century, must be remembered, acknowledged, and continuously reaffirmed.

It must be our goal to remind the Congress, remind the country, and remind the world that the Genocide happened. It is a historical fact, and we will never forget.

The United States should affirm the genocide once and for all for so many reasons. But one of the most important reasons is so that we prevent atrocities from happening in the future.

If we're ever going to prevent genocides in the future, the world has to admit to the past. When genocides happen, we have to condemn them for what they are.

The quote from Adolf Hitler, in justifying his evil acts, says it all--``who remembers today the extermination of the Armenians?''

Well, as Co-Chair of the Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues, I'm here today to answer that question. We remember. And we'll never forget.

And we're not alone by a long shot. In fact, 37 States in this country have formally recognized the Armenian Genocide. I think that's a strong statement about the level of support in this country for recognizing the Genocide.

And of course the Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues is fully committed to this cause. On April 24th of every year, the President is required to issue a statement on the Armenian Genocide. Recently, 178 Members of the House of Representatives, and 32 Senators sent letters to the President urging him to use the word ``genocide'' in this year's statement.

We will continue our efforts here in Congress and use all the means at our disposal.

Some dispute the charge against the Ottomans, but let me make my feelings clear; the Armenian Genocide happened, and it is the duty and responsibility of the United States and this Congress to affirm that. I rise today, to reaffirm my position; it is time the United States Congress does the same.

Mr. Speaker, today I join the people of the 9th Congressional District and the State of Michigan in honoring the passing of an American hero and patriot, Captain Sean Grimes, who lost his life in the line of duty in Iraq on March 4th. Captain Grimes was assigned to the U.S. Army's 1st Infantry Battalion, 9th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team where he served with distinction as a Combat Medic. At the time of his passing, Sean Grimes was 31.

A Bloomfield Hills native, Captain Grimes graduated from Lahser High School in Bloomfield Hills in 1991. Shortly after graduating

from high school Sean enlisted in the Army Reserve serving as an enlisted man for four years. His love of the Army prompted him to enroll in the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) while pursuing a Bachelor of Science degree in Nursing at Michigan State University. In 1997 he graduated from MSU and was commissioned as a Distinguished Military Graduate. His efforts and desire to provide the best medical care to soldiers led him to the Brooke Army Hospital at Fort Sam Houston in Texas in 2003, whereupon he graduated from the Army's Physician Assistant Course.

Until the day of his death, Captain Grimes displayed a sense of service not only to his fellow soldiers, but to his fellow man, helping civilian Iraqis in need of medical care. We may never really know the full impact his selfless acts may have had on the lives of his fellow soldiers and civilians he came into contact with. But the manner and character in which he fulfilled his duties tells us that he indeed made a difference in the lives of others and that that difference was for the better. These efforts have been recognized by the Army through a variety of medals Captain Grimes received during his career, culminating in being awarded the Bronze Star and Purple Heart posthumously.

Captain Sean Grimes exemplified what is best about the American soldier, devotion to duty above self, tireless dedication to his fellow soldiers and most importantly a driving desire to protect the freedoms we cherish so dearly. While he will certainly be missed most by his family, his sacrifice will not be forgotten. Captain Grimes paid the ultimate price both to protect the freedoms we exercise daily and to, bring those same freedoms to people who have never experienced true liberty. Today we honor his memory and may we never forget his sacrifice.

Mr. Speaker, today I join the people of my Congressional District, as well as thousands around the country and the world, in honoring the passing of a truly great individual Mr. Max Fisher. On March 3, 2005, Max Fisher passed away at the age of 96.

Max Fisher, a resident of Franklin, Michigan, was an internationally known philanthropist, businessman, advisor, and diplomat, and universally recognized as a driving force for positive change in the United States and the world.

The son of Jewish Russian immigrants Velvil and MaIka Fisch, Max was born in Pittsburgh in 1908. He attended Ohio State University on a football scholarship and graduated in 1930 with a degree in business administration. After graduating from college Max Fisher moved to the Detroit area where he became an extremely successful businessman and real estate land developer.

Max Fisher played a unique role in U.S.-Israel relations. This role has been described by many, including in the 1992 biography, Quiet Diplomat, by Peter Golden. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger wrote in his memoirs that Max Fisher provided an important service as an informal liaison between the White House and the American Jewish leadership under Presidents Nixon and Ford.

Max Fisher also served as the head of a variety of nonprofit and charitable Jewish organizations including United Jewish Appeal, the

Republican Jewish Coalition, the Jewish Welfare Federation, the Jewish Agency, Council of Jewish Federations, United Israel Appeal, the American Jewish Committee, and the National Jewish Coalition.

Max was a self-made man who spent much of his life raising money for philanthropic and political endeavors and remained an active supporter of charitable and civic organizations. He was a major benefactor of the Detroit Symphony Orchestra, gave generously to Ohio State's College of Business, and helped found Detroit Renaissance, a nonprofit business roundtable aimed at improving conditions in the city and region.

Max also held 13 honorary degrees from educational institutions.

Max Fisher is survived by his wife, Marjorie Fisher; daughters and sons-in-law, Jane and D. Larry Sherman, Mary Fisher, Julie and Peter Cummings, Marjorie Fisher; son and daughter-in-law, Phillip and Lauren Fisher; 2 sisters; 19 grandchildren and 13 great grandchildren.

Max was a humble man of strong principle, who consistently focused on doing what was right, without seeking fame or prestige. His optimism and positive mental attitude continually motivated those around him to overcome the challenges before them.

Therefore, I express my deepest condolences to his family, friends and admirers. And I also join in honoring Max Fisher for his diplomatic contributions, exceptional philanthropic achievements, boundless generosity, unwavering principle and integrity, and achieving great financial success while maintaining admirable humility.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the loss of Mrs. Terri Schiavo.

On March 21, 2005, S. 686 passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 203-58. This was rollcall vote number 90. Unfortunately, I was out of the country on official Congressional business and unable to return for this emergency session. However, had I been present I would have voted in support of this legislation.