Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the dedicated men and women who serve my district, the State of Connecticut, and our nation as firefighters.

Today, across the country, over 1.1 million career and volunteer firefighters stand ready to answer our calls for help. In 2003, our 30,524 fire departments responded to 22.4 million alarms--an average of one every 20 seconds. They work and volunteer countless hours ensuring the safety of others, and if needed, are ready to risk their life to save another.

Firefighters are truly on the front lines of protecting our communities and our nation, and in recent years their role has extended beyond just putting out fires. Today, firefighters serve as the first responders for medical emergencies, provide search and rescue services to victims trapped in burning or collapsed buildings, handle hazardous materials and extract injured persons from car accidents. Above all else, they provide hope to those in need in times of danger and despair.

I have met many of the men and women who serve as firefighters in the first district of Connecticut, and I am proud to represent such brave and dedicated public servants. Each and every day, these selfless heroes give their all to protect our communities and our families. I thank them for their service and urge all of my colleagues to support H. Res. 188.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the lifelong dedication of Firefighter Neil Laribee, who after 52 years of service has retired from the Southington Volunteer Fire Department.

The son of a fireman, Neil Laribee first volunteered to fight fire for the town of Southington in 1952. A dedicated public servant, Neil has protected the Southington community for over fifty faithful years. Known around the Plantsville Engine Company #2 firehouse as ``Deke,'' he has been instrumental in shaping the Department throughout the years. Neil has been a loyal friend and source of fire and rescue information to both new and veteran fireman at Company #2. As one of Southington's most experienced firefighters, he has held leadership positions including Company Secretary and a Company Trustee. Neil Laribee has spent his life protecting lives and serving his community and his presence in the Southington Volunteer Fire Department will be certainly missed.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me today to recognize the lifelong dedication of Fireman Neil Laribee and thank him for his years of service to the town of Southington.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit this statement for the record and regret that I was unavoidably detained on Thursday, March 17, 2005 during Rollcall Vote Nos. 82 and 83 on H. Con. Res. 95, as well as Rollcall Vote No. 84 on H. Con. Res. 32. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on Rollcall Vote No. 82, an amendment offered by Congressman Obey to H. Con. Res. 95, ``no'' on Rollcall Vote No. 83; an amendment offered by Congressman Hensarling to H. Con. Res. 95, and ``aye'' on Rollcall Vote No. 84 on H. Con. Res. 32, expressing the grave concern of Congress regarding the occupation of the Republic of Lebanon by the Syrian Arab Republic.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, and I commend the gentlewoman from Wisconsin for truly putting this together and taking the time to make sure that all of America gets to hear what has got to be a mosaic of concern all across this country, because, like the gentlewoman and myself, several others have conducted town hall meetings and forums and have received letters of concern from our constituents all across this great country of ours. It is quite compelling when you both read the mail and you listen to the citizens of this great country speak their minds.

I was particularly struck by a gentleman from Windsor, Connecticut, who wrote me and said: ``I would like to encourage you to oppose President Bush's Social Security personal accounts with every resource possible. I turned 54 this year, missing the cutoff for retaining my full promised benefit by 7 months. I am not a spend-thrift who has wasted his money over the years. In fact, I have placed at least 10 percent of my earnings in retirement savings plans since 1978. I fully fund my 401(k) and my Roth. But I have no pension, and my wife is not even eligible for a 401(k) or equivalent since she works for the Manchester School District as a tutor.

``Despite all my efforts to save, I will not have enough to retire on without the guarantee of Social Security. Why? Because I worked for five companies between 1984 and 2000 that all went out of business or left Connecticut: Heublein, Ames, Shawmut, Northeast Savings and International Paper. Each time I was forced to find another job, I lost a year of contribution to my 401(k) and another year of employer match, through no fault of my own. That adds up to quite a bit of savings that have been lost. I am putting one child through college and I have another yet to go. I have no more to save. I have always supported my family and paid my own way. I am relying on the Social Security system my employers and I have already contributed about $200,000 to, to live up to its promises. If the government of the United States can turn its back on its promises to its own citizens, of what value is it?

``Please, help me and every other person in my shoes.''

It is this kind of poignant response that we have heard from our citizens all across the country that screams out for this Congress to take action.

One little woman in my district, part of the golden girls, her name is Gracie Vigneau, stood up and said, I understand that there are three legs to this stool. I understand the importance, having lived through the Great Depression, having fought and persevered through the Second World War, having come home and rebuilt this Nation, but I always felt that we had this special contract, that guarantee from our government, that third leg of the stool, if you will, that was the Social Security guarantee. It provided the floor, the safety net from which nobody could fall through. That was the contract that came out of the, well, the Great Depression and its aftermath, and what it did to so many people and how it ruined their lives. Yet, today, we see the problems that exist both in pensions and personal savings, which are in far greater crisis than Social Security.''

And so she asks, ``Why would we place any element of risk in the program that is there for our guarantee?'' She said, ``I will be long gone.'' She said, ``I am concerned about my children and their children and their children's children.''

This has been the most successful program in the history of this country, and it has kept so many people out of the depths of poverty. Just last week we talked about the impact that this program has had on women and how they are disproportionately disadvantaged and how crippled they would become if the so-called Bush plan were ever to go into effect.

So I commend the gentlewoman. I have other things, other letters to read as well in this dialogue that we have here this evening, this important dialogue with the American public, that they have with us placed their trust, and where we have sworn to give our very best.

I know that we are joined by the gentleman from New Jersey, and I will yield back to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin so that she may recognize another outstanding member of this caucus.

Madam Speaker, I wanted to ask the leading Democrat on Social Security on the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin) discussed very eloquently and poignantly, as the gentlewoman pointed out in her letters, the number of people outside of the retirement benefits, but survivors benefits and also those on disability, what are the statistics on that?

So when the gentleman says the President's good blueprint will in fact weaken Social Security, that is exactly what it is doing?

Has the administration now admitted that that will not in any way, shape, manner or form close the gap that exists?

I thank the gentleman for clarifying that.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin again for her diligence and hard work in this effort and deeply appreciate the opportunity to be here this evening.

I honestly believe that Congress should do more of this. I hope that people all across this country are listening to these heartfelt responses from our constituents, and in so many ways, they are often more eloquent than any Member of the United States Congress because their needs and concerns are so heartfelt and real, and this is what I think makes this such a special evening for this Special Order.

I would just like to read one more letter that I have, with the gentlewoman's permission, and this is from a woman in Newington in my district who writes, I am very concerned about what Mr. Bush is doing to the country. I have been working for 37 years, and I have been at my current position for 28 years. From day one, I was told that I would be given a pension at the end of my tenure. Over the years, the company has changed hands and, in fact, changed leaders. Now, the pension has been changed to a cash balance. Because of this change, I will be getting about one-quarter of what I would have been getting in my pension, and now, Mr. Bush claims that under his privatization plan, Social Security benefits would go up. Yet the Congressional Budget Office says Bush's privatization plan will cut benefits by 45 percent or more for seniors. The Bush plan will reduce benefits for all seniors, even those who choose not to invest in private accounts. I am too old to build up a substantial plan and account. Have we not been traumatized enough under this man? I do not want you to vote on this plan or make such a drastic change to the system. If the politicians put a lock on it, like Mr. Gore wanted to, we most likely would not be in this situation. Mr. Bush should stop spending the money. We have the money for Iraq but not for our seniors in this country. I am asking you, please, not to vote for this.

She, like so many others we have heard tonight, I think speaks to what is their concern. Some of our colleagues on the other side have said that these are fear tactics. Hardly.

Grace Vignean again points out that we were a strong generation that persevered through the Great Depression, a Second World War, the Korean and Vietnam Wars. We raised families, rebuilt these countries. We do not scare easy. What we want is the truth. What we need, I think, is for all of us to come together with an understanding, and it is my sincere hope that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are listening, as well as the President.

President Roosevelt said it best. He said he was concerned that they had become frozen in the ice of their own indifference. Frozen in the ice of their own indifference towards collapsing pensions and shriveled up savings that, for the most part, have to go for the care of your health. Indifference to the 45 million people in this country that are uninsured, indifference to the women and minorities whose drops off in benefits will be so dramatic.

That is why the voices of these citizens need to be heard and why this Congress needs to act in a responsible and bipartisan manner in order to continue to strengthen and preserve the most successful social program and governmental program in the history of this country.

Again, I thank the gentlewoman for providing us the opportunity to discuss these letters and the concern of our constituents.

Madam Speaker, if the gentlewoman would yield, on that point, we heard the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) discuss that earlier, that even the President's so-called privatization plan does nothing to close the gap or the shortfalls that potentially exist in Social Security if we do not act on a bipartisan basis.

So to the gentleman's point, this is all about ideology and politics and not substantively about doing what is in the best interest of the American public. I think that is what has citizens so outraged, that this seems to be from the very get-go, from whether you go back to Hoover and Landon and Friedman and Stockman, who said we must starve the beast, that beast being Social Security, that is what has American citizens outraged at this proposal. That is what has them writing thousands of letters to each and every one of us because of their deep- seated concern of where this administration is taking us, to a ``me'' society versus ``us.''

The gentleman said it very eloquently and passionately, and again, I want to thank the gentlewoman for arranging this dialogue and these letters which I hope we continue to come to the floor and discuss.

Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 3 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, March 9, 2005, at 10 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Ray McKenna of East Hartford, a community sports leader, champion, and friend, who passed away Tuesday, March 1, 2005.

A hometown hero, Ray defined integrity, commitment, and generosity of spirit and vision to his family and the East Hartford community. For kids like me growing up in East Hartford, the man from Burnside--Ray McKenna was a legend. At East Hartford High, Ray demonstrated his competitive nature in athletics and excelled at basketball, football and baseball. In 1939, he was the instrumental cog in East Hartford's first Connecticut state basketball championship. With a sense of duty to his country, Ray enlisted in the U.S. Navy during World War II and was stationed in the Philippines and the Aleutian Islands. Upon his return, Ray organized a local fast-pitch softball team, the legendary Burnside Dovelettes in 1947. For 30 years, he lead the Dovelettes to the top of the semipro league with a record of 1,831-339. While employed by the East Hartford Post Office, Ray formed the Marco Polo Explorers basketball team and coached them to 13 New England Basketball Association titles. In 35 years, the semipro team held an unparallel record of 1,123 to 245. Ray also founded and directed the annual Tap- Off Club Hall of Fame dinner to honor East Hartford athletes for 28 years. Although Ray retired from the Post Office in 1985, his long interest in sports continued and he became Sports Editor for the East Hartford Gazette--the most widely read column in the town.

The impact Ray has had on the town of East Hartford is inspirational. In 1984, East Hartford honored Ray's devotion to athletics by dedicating a local sports field in his name. For over two decades, Ray McKenna Field has been the home for baseball teams of all ages, including the Hartford Hawks. In 1985, Ray was presented with the Gold Key, the most prestigious sports' award in the state of Connecticut. The Gold Key is awarded by the Connecticut Sports Writer's Alliance to those like Ray, who have made noteworthy contributions to athletics in Connecticut. Representing one of Connecticut's finest, Ray was also inducted into the New England Basketball Hall of Fame at the University of Rhode Island in 2003.

With all his good works and awards of recognition, Ray will most be remembered for his honest love of the game. He lived everyday giving back to his community and inspired the best in all of us. To Ray, true victory was the result of discipline, confidence, and heart. His giving nature, generous laugh and Irish wit will be missed by all those who knew him. For my family and myself, we will forever treasure and value this wonderful man who so loved the game, the competition, and the camaraderie of sports and made it the centerpiece of his life in East Hartford, the state of Connecticut and throughout the Nation.

Our hearts go out to the entire McKenna family, especially his beloved wife Josephine,

his son Michael, and daughters Dorene, Susan and Carol, eight grandchildren and four great-grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order today.

Mr. Speaker, it is my great privilege this evening to be able to address a vital subject to all of America, that of preserving and strengthening Social Security. Many of us have had the opportunity over the break to go back to our districts and hold public forums and hearings and town hall meetings, and the input that we received from our citizens has been extraordinary and insightful.

This evening, we will be joined by distinguished members of our caucus, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), and hopefully others who will be joining us as well as we seek to report back to America about what is going on.

We are most fortunate to have the man who has followed in the footsteps of the dearly departed Bob Matsui who was a champion on Social Security. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) is the leading expert in our caucus and on the Committee on Ways and Means in matters of Social Security and has held these forums and hearings not only in his State but has been on

shows and appeared all across this great Nation. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

So these forums that the President is conducting are not open to the public, that you have to be invited by the President's people? Carl Rove?

When the gentleman says the privatization proposal, this is the so-called plan that perhaps the President may submit to us?

So this privatization plan will lead to a cut of more than 40 percent in benefits. We heard the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) say earlier that it does not even solve the gap or the supposed problem that the gentleman from Arizona was alluding to. Is that correct?

This is confusing to some of our citizens. The gentleman from Michigan is an expert on this. He has served on the committee. Why does this transfer have to take place? Seniors are asking about this. Some have said, this is like taking a credit card of your own and trying to go out and purchase stock with your credit card in the hope that the stock's returns will exceed both the interest you are paying on that credit card. This is hard to understand for a generation that has relied on Social Security as a guarantee. What actually happens?

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) again for his insight and his outstanding service to the Committee on Ways and Means in this United States Congress.

I think Roosevelt said it best when referring to our distinguished colleagues on the other side of the aisle. With regard to Social Security and its impact and the plight that so many citizens go through, he said, they are frozen in the ice of their own indifference, the indifference to what ordinary Americans face on a daily basis.

No one understands that better than the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), who works on their behalf every single day and fights for them and has done an outstanding job in her district and beyond and also held public hearings and is here this evening to add to this dialogue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, that is an excellent point, and the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) made it earlier as well when she stated quite succinctly and clearly, Social Security was never intended to be in and of itself the retirement vehicle. It was, as she pointed out, the third leg of a three-legged stool, having pensions, which we know are under stressed everywhere; personal savings, where it is so difficult for people to save; but the thing that people could count on.

The reason that it came into existence was to provide, as the gentlewoman has pointed out, an absolute guarantee, the full faith and credit of the United States of America standing behind its commitment to its citizens. It is as simple and as fundamental as that and more eloquently stated by our citizens and the young women who have come to forums and hearings and town hall meetings like the gentlewoman's all across this country.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois for her insightful comments and for her continued diligent work in this area on behalf of all of our citizens, but especially for all women across this great country of ours.

Mr. Speaker, speaking of a leader on those issues, we are also most fortunate to have the gentlewoman from California with us here this evening who also has done an outstanding job in the caucus and on committee in terms of focusing on the needs of women and children and families all across this great country of ours.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, did most of the individuals who attended the gentlewoman's forums and public hearings understand that Social Security

benefits were not just retirement benefits, that they also provided survivor benefits?

I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentlewoman may have heard what the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) said earlier.

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that they were friends during the Medicare debate but now that they have spoken out against Social Security, they are now a special interest group.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentlewoman raises a very excellent point, and, again, it is the same point that was raised earlier by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) and also the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky). What we need, and the guarantee that we have provided every American through Social Security, is, as the gentlewoman pointed out, a safety net, a floor from which they cannot fall through. And, as the gentlewoman pointed out, our pension systems are already overstressed. We have gone from defined benefit to defined contribution to companies pulling out, wholesale, from providing benefits, to people's personal savings where, again, the gentlewoman points out the difficulty that people have, the lack of incentives that are there for them to save.

So the question that a lot of the people at my forums ask is why would we introduce an element of risk in the only guarantee that we have on that three-legged stool that prevents us from falling through the floor and into the depths of poverty, which for a woman in this country is so vitally important.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, no, I did not. But I think the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), our distinguished leader on the Committee on Ways and Means, said earlier that clearly the President has asked us to wait until he brings forward a plan. He has withdrawn the fact that this is a crisis, but points out there are problems.

Everyone recognizes that there are problems with Social Security and Social Security needs to be strengthened. But the President further goes on to now admit, as well as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) points out, when the actuaries and the financial people have a chance to look at the proposed plan, that it does nothing to solve the problems that the President has spelled out in Social Security.

So one has to come away with thinking as to why would they possibly then want to privatize or introduce risk in the most successful governmental program in the history of this country.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it might

surprise a number of our viewers, because I believe the gentleman from Arizona was talking before about the need to get the facts straight. I believe that the gentleman is correct about that, and there should be an open and honest and frank debate about this issue, and all the various proposals should be laid on the table. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) has asked for that, where we still have not seen any plan. We are told by Secretary Bolton and others that it is a ``work in progress,'' that we may see it in the future.

In the meantime, I think a number of our listeners would be interested to know that in 2000, Social Security lifted 7 million senior women out of poverty. This means that without that safety net, without that floor which they cannot fall through because it has the full faith and credit of the American Government, it is the social contract we have with our people who have paid in to this system, that it is there for them. It is a guarantee.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it might also surprise people too, when we are talking about Social Security, I know for many people, from Hoover to Landon to Friedman to Stockman, that Social Security is anathema. It is something that they would just as soon do away with. Mr. Stockman said it is ``a beast that needs to be starved.''

When we look at the policies emanating from this administration, you wonder if this is not still the plan that they are marching forward with, to privatize and to further starve the moneys that are needed.

How much money do people receive on average? What does someone get who has worked hard and played by the rules and sacrificed all their life, whether they be people that are currently serving in Afghanistan or Iraq, or whether they are firefighters or our police, or whether they are in the hospitals as nurses or other people?

The monthly retirement benefit for a woman is $798. In America, could you live on $798 a month? This is what the guarantee is. But it does prevent these people from falling into the depths of poverty. It is what Franklin Delano Roosevelt promised to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, many have said to me in my forums as well, and I am sure the gentlewoman heard the same thing, and I am pleased to announce we have been joined by two distinguished Members from the Great State of California as well to contribute to this dialogue, but many have said at the hearings that I have conducted how Social Security for so many of them is their only source of income, and they look out and they see their pensions disappearing, they see cuts that are being made on a regular basis, and so they ask aloud for the government to please honor, honor, what it has promised and guaranteed them and what they have worked so hard for throughout all of their life.

I think it is important, as the gentleman from Arizona said, that we get the facts out there and expose the myths that have been put forward.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for articulating that point.

I am pleased now to turn to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), who also has spoken and held hearings in her district and is here this evening to contribute to this very important dialogue about the strengthening of Social Security and pointing out the direct impact that it has on women who rely so heavily on Social Security.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, let me echo the sentiments of the gentlewoman and commend the outstanding leadership that has been provided by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis).

I yield to the gentlewoman.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I know the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) left here and spoke earlier, eloquently as always, left here so he could be with you and share remarks with you over there as well.

The gentlewoman is absolutely correct. And I thank her for pointing that out. I would like to yield to both the gentlewomen from California to finish off the remainder of our time and focus on the specific needs and concerns that you both articulate so well Mrs. Capps.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 26 to honor and pay tribute to the valiant efforts of the Tuskegee Airmen of World War II, who defended the freedom of the United States and the World while breaking down the racial barriers of the U.S. military.

In the midst of World War II, the U.S. Army Air Corps began a program to expand the role of African Americans in the military. In July 1941, 13 men started the first aviation cadet class at Tuskegee Army Field in Tuskegee, Alabama. After 9 months of vigorous flight training, five men successfully completed the program and graduated from the Tuskegee Flying School. These five airmen included Captain Lemuel R. Custis of my home State of Connecticut, who went on to become one of the first members of the 99th Fighter Squadron. The United States sent the 99th Fighter Squadron to North Africa and later Europe, where the Tuskegee Airmen proved to be valuable to the Allied Forces. By the end of the war, 992 men had graduated from pilot training at Tuskegee, of which, 450 were assigned to combat oversea. In total, the Tuskegee Airmen of the 99th, 100th, 301st and 302nd Fighter Squadrons distinguished themselves with 1,578 missions. The 332nd earned a Presidential Unit Citation for ``outstanding courage, aggressiveness, and combat technique'' while escorting heavy bombers over Germany.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me today in honoring the outstanding record of the Tuskegee Airmen who proudly defended our Nation and paved the way for full integration of the U.S. military. Their achievements and bravery represent the best qualities of America, and we all owe them our appreciation for their valiant contribution to this county.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to draw awareness to a bill I will reintroduce to address concerns that have been expressed about political organizations referred to as ``527s''.

527s are named after a section of the Internal Revenue Code that specifies the tax treatment accorded political organizations and tax- exempt organizations which make political expenditures. Under Section 527, all political organizations are tax-exempt for purposes of federal tax law.

Starting this month, new rules will require more 527s to register with the FEC. 527s whose only purpose is to support or oppose a Federal candidate may only do so with ``hard money''. Citizens who give to the hard money accounts of these 527s will be under the same contribution limits as if they were giving to Members of Congress. 527s will also not be able to finance their entire operation using ``soft money''. They will now have to use a mix of at least 50 percent hard money to pay for activates and expenses, raised using federal limits.

This legislation goes a step farther to give the Department of the Treasury, the Federal Election Commission, and the American people a better understanding of 527 organizations by aiming to place them to the same type of reporting requirements as political action committees (PACs) and other political organizations.

This bill will provide the American people with more information about who is donating to the political process and how that money is being spent. If we want to inspire and encourage more Americans to participate in the political process, we must make all aspects of the process accessible to them.

This bill would make 527s more transparent through the four main components of this bill. First, any political organization that meets defined minimum financial requirements must disclose this information to the Department of the Treasury. Second, political organizations that raise, spend or intend to raise and spend over $25,000 in an election year will have to file disclosure reports with the IRS monthly. Previously, organizations in this category were only required to file quarterly. Third, organizations with less than $25,000 in receipts must file quarterly. Fourth, the Department of the Treasury and the Federal Election Commission must work together to improve the database disclosure system.

The guidelines in my bill will bring to light political organizations' donors and demonstrate they have nothing to hide. Moreover, this information will help Americans to make more informed choices.

I believe that efforts to restrict 527 organizations could raise First Amendment concerns and may merely result in their reconstitution as 501(c)4, 501(c)5 and 501(c)6 organizations, which have virtually no public disclosure requirements. I believe that it would be more beneficial to our political process to mandate greater transparency of 527s rather than attempting to shut them down or otherwise curtail their participation in the political process. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Oregon seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 7 votes for President, and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 7 votes for Vice President

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 21 votes for President, and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 21 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Tennessee seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 11 votes for President, and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 11 votes for Vice President.

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Texas seems to be quite proud in reflecting the regular form and authenticity, and it therefore appears that George W. Bush of that great State of Texas received 34 votes for President, and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 34 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the Commonwealth of Virginia seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 13 votes for President and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 13 votes for Vice President.

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Washington seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 11 votes for President and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 11 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, you should be justifiably

proud that the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Wyoming seems to be in regular form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 3 votes for President and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 3 votes for Vice President

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the great State of Connecticut seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 7 votes for President and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 7 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Delaware seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 3 votes for President and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 3 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Hawaii seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 4 votes for President and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 4 votes for Vice President.

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Idaho seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 4 votes for President and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 4 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Iowa seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 7 votes for President and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 7 votes for Vice President.

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Kansas seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 6 votes for President and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 6 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Maine seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 4 votes for President and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 4 votes for Vice President.

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Maryland seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 10 votes for President and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 10 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Minnesota seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 9 votes for President, that John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 1 vote for President, and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 10 votes for Vice President.

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Mississippi seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 6 votes for President, and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 6 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Nebraska seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 5 votes for President, and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 5 votes for Vice President.

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Nevada seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 5 votes for President, and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 5 votes for Vice President.

Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of New Mexico seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that George W. Bush of the State of Texas received 5 votes for President, and Dick Cheney of the State of Wyoming received 5 votes for Vice President.

Senator LOTT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of New York seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that John F. Kerry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received 31 votes for President, and John Edwards of the State of North Carolina received 31 votes for Vice President.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and service of Officer Peter Lavery of the Newington Police Department in Connecticut, who was tragically shot and killed in the line of duty on December 30, 2004, as he responded to an emergency call.

It was a terrible day for the people of Connecticut as one of our finest public servants was cut down in the prime of his life. Officer Lavery was a dedicated 17-year veteran of the Newington Police Department, and had served his Nation proudly as a member of the Connecticut National Guard. He was known for his ``big golden heart'' and sense of humor, and so many of my constituents will never forget the important role he played in their lives or in the communities he served. He leaves behind his wife, Pamela, and two children, Raymond and Samantha, to whom our hearts go out during this difficult time.

We struggle to understand why such a horrific act of violence was visited upon such a good and decent man who loved his family and served his community. In the end, there are no answers.

Today, as thousands of his neighbors and fellow officers gather in Newington to honor the life and service of Officer Lavery, we must remind ourselves of the thousands of brave, dedicated men and women that put their lives in danger each day to protect us and our families. Officer Lavery made the ultimate sacrifice in the name of this cause. He will not be forgotten.

May God bless him, his family and the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I support passage of S. Con. Res. 2, which would re-establish the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies to continue preparations for the presidential inauguration at the U.S. Capitol on January 20, 2005 and authorizes the use of the Capitol Rotunda for the proceedings.

This non-partisan joint committee was originally created last year by concurrent resolution S. Con. Res. 94, to begin its work, but since resolutions do not carry over from one Congress to the next, it expired automatically on January 3, 2005, along with the 108th Congress. That is why this routine action is necessary today.

Congress passes this concurrent resolution every four years. The Speaker, Majority Leader and Minority Leader were originally appointed to represent the House on the joint committee and will be re-appointed to continue in those roles.

As for the use of the Rotunda authorized by Section 2 of S. Con. Res 2, we traditionally pass this measure at the beginning of any Congress following a presidential election in order to accommodate security planning and rehearsal for the inaugural, since the Rotunda is routinely used for ceremonial purposes during the inauguration and could host the event itself, depending on the weather at that time. A similar concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 93) was also passed last year during the 108th Congress to allow early planning for the inaugural to begin, but, like any resolution, it expired on January 3. That is why this action renewing the authority is necessary today. Therefore, I would like to urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution so that we can move forward with Inaugural ceremonies.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Patricia Ritter, who passed away on December 10, 2004. Mrs. Ritter was one of Connecticut's most influential civil rights leaders and she leaves a legacy that will not soon be forgotten. Her passion for social justice was only matched by her passion for her family. She leaves behind her husband and five children, two of whom served in the Connecticut General Assembly. While I served as State Senate President Pro Tempore I had the privilege of working with her son Tom, who served as Speaker of the House. My deepest condolences go out to Tom and his family during this time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in remembering and honoring the life of Patricia Ritter. I would also like to submit for the Record this editorial from the Hartford Courant which captures the essence of what made Mrs. Ritter such a special person.

[From the Hartford Courant, Dec. 14, 2004]

The Remarkable Pat Ritter

She stood for something. She acted on her beliefs. She

changed things.

Patricia Ritter, who died last week at the age of 84, was

an activist, civil rights pioneer, internationalist and

teacher as well as the wife and mother of three state

legislators.

A woman of grace, good cheer and quiet intensity, Mrs.

Ritter was exposed to, and appalled by, a segregated

restaurant when she was a 16-year-old freshman at the

University of Iowa. She organized a protest and then headed

South with the first of the Freedom Riders--traveling in the

odious ``Colored Only'' train cars, and refusing to move.

After marrying and moving to Connecticut, she was named to

the state's Commission on Human Rights in 1950, the first

woman so honored. Facing the problem of segregated housing,

she and her husband George co-founded the Connecticut Housing

Investment Fund, Inc. in 1968 to finance integrated and

affordable housing and neighborhood revitalization projects

throughout Connecticut.

This allowed racial minorities to buy homes in the suburbs,

which sometimes brought threats of violence and, on at least

one occasion, actual violence to Mrs. Ritter.

To date, CHIF has provided more than $108 million to help

individuals and organizations purchase, rehabilitate or build

homes for low- and moderate-income families.

The wall between city and suburb was not the only one she

helped tear down. After China opened its doors to the West in

the 1970s, Mrs. Ritter founded China in Connecticut, one of

the first educational links between this country and China.

A college teacher, she spent a decade teaching English at

Chinese universities, and sponsored many of her Chinese

students to study at U.S. colleges. Several of Mrs. Ritter's

children followed her example and taught in China as well.

The results of such work are incalculable. Mrs. Ritter's five

children carried on her beliefs; as artists, writers,

teachers, businessmen and legislators. Her husband and sons

Thomas and John served in the General Assembly; Thomas was

speaker of the House for three terms.

``Her integrity, her character, her work, her children--she

was just a marvelous person,'' said Judge Robert Satter, a

longtime family friend. Mrs. Ritter's life affirms the

proposition that, yes, one person can make a difference.

Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) to explain the purpose of the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, further reserving my right to object, I want to take a moment to both thank and applaud the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) for his diligence in determining the need for and pursuing the necessary funding for the authority for the new Committee of Homeland Security.

I think he has described amply the need and the necessity under which the circumstances arose and why this resolution is so important.

Third, I wanted to just take a brief moment to reflect on the extraordinary efforts of the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) and the former ranking minority member, Jim Turner, who is no longer with us, who took a skeletal concept of a committee and have turned it into a robust working reality.

I would like to extend my own deep sense of appreciation to former representative Jim Turner for his extraordinary leadership and contributions on national security issues and, in particular, homeland security during the 108th Congress.

As the first ranking member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, he vigorously pursued oversight

and legislation to enhance the security of the American people. His diligent and purposeful efforts have prompted the leadership of our country to move faster with a strong and smart sense of purpose to preserve and protect the security of our Nation.

During the first 2 years of the Select Committee on Homeland Security's existence, his work resulted in a number of significant initiatives and related efforts that we pause and honor today. In particular, in April of last year former Representative Turner released a 90-page comprehensive plan to eliminate the threat of al Qaeda to the United States. The report, which includes over a hundred specific recommendations, sets forth a strategy to win the current war against al Qaeda and like-minded groups. Produced with the assistance of Democratic leadership and other committees, winning the war on terror reaffirms the commitment and need to prevail in the U.S. struggle against terrorism.

The comprehensive plan played a large role in the introduction later in the 108th Congress of winning the War on Terror Act, H.R. 5291, designed to implement a series of initiatives and defeat terrorists and enemies.

Mr. Turner's accomplishments and what he was able to do in conjunction with the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) serve as a standard for the way that committees should proceed in this area. I cannot commend him enough and will present further accolades attesting to the attributes of Mr. Turner and the outstanding job he did on behalf of the State of Texas and this great country of ours. His service was exemplary, and I think this body owes him a great deal of gratitude for the performance that he undertook, along with the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) on this committee, and to see this committee today come to fruition as a full standing committee I think is a tribute to both of their hard work and zeal.

The gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) will continue on. Mr. Turner, of course, is no longer in this body but will long be remembered for his diligent effort, his straightforward manner, his gentleman-like way that he dealt with both sides of the issue and the manner in which he was able to bring these very important issues to the floor of this House to proceed in protecting this great Nation of ours from threat, from dangers abroad and here at home.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say three things. First, I want to thank Chairman Ney for his diligence in determining the need for, and in pursuing the necessary funding authority for the new Committee on Homeland Security.

Second, as the original co-sponsor of this resolution with Chairman Ney, I want to take a moment to ensure that Members understand its purpose. Although House rule X provides temporary interim funding for committees which existed in the 108th Congress, and which the House rules have recreated in the 109th Congress, this temporary interim funding provision only applies to committees which succeed themselves in the new Congress. The former Select Committee on Homeland Security no longer exists, and the House rules have created a new, permanent standing Committee on Homeland Security to take its place. Because of this change, and in the absence of this resolution, the new Committee on Homeland Security would not have resources to operate until the House adopts the Omnibus Committee Funding Resolution sometime in March.

By adopting the resolution, the House puts the new select committee on essentially the same temporary funding basis as other committees.

Third, I want to take a moment to reflect on the extraordinary efforts of Chairman Cox, and Ranking Minority Member Jim Turner, who took the skeletal concept of a committee, and turned it into a robust, working reality.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend my own deep sense of appreciation to Representative Jim Turner for his extraordinary leadership and contributions on national security issues and, in particular, homeland security during the 108th Congress. As the first ranking member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, he vigorously pursued oversight and legislation to enhance the security of the American people. His diligent and purposeful efforts have prompted the leadership of our country to move faster, with a strong and smart sense of purpose, to preserve and protect the security of our nation. During the first 2 years of the Homeland Security Committee's existence, his work resulted in a number of significant initiatives and related efforts that I honor today. In particular:

In April of last year, Representative Turner released a 90-page comprehensive plan to eliminate the threat of al-Qaeda to the United States. The report, which includes over 100 specific recommendations, sets forth a strategy to win the current war against al-Qaeda and like- minded groups. Produced with the assistance of the Democratic leadership of other committees, Winning the War on Terror reaffirms the commitment needed to prevail in the U.S. struggle against terrorism. The comprehensive plan played a large role in the introduction later in the 108th Congress of the Winning the War on Terror Act, H.R. 5291, designed to implement a series of initiatives to defeat our terrorist enemies.

In February, 2004, Representative Turner, in concert with his Democratic colleagues on the Select Committee on Homeland Security, released a comprehensive report, entitled America at Risk: Closing the Security Gap, identifying the significant security gaps that continued to remain across the United States more than 2 years after the attacks of September 11. The comprehensive 135-page report identifies shortcomings in our homeland security efforts and recommends specific actions to ensure America is as safe as it needs to be from terrorist attack. An additional six oversight reports were subsequently issued on specific homeland security topics.

In September 2004, Representative Turner released a comprehensive 130-page report, entitled Transforming the Southern Border: Providing Security and Prosperity in the Post-9/11 World, calling for the transformation of the U.S. Southern Border to enhance security and promote economic prosperity. The result of a 6-month oversight effort, which included visits to multiple U.S. border communities, the report highlights the many security gaps that exist on the southern border and offers policy recommendations to close them. The comprehensive report was followed later in the 108th Congress with the introduction of the Secure Borders Act, H.R. 5130, to strengthen U.S. border security.

In addition to these efforts, Representative Turner, either alone or in concert with his Democratic colleagues, sponsored 12 homeland security legislative initiatives during the 108th Congress. Among other subjects, Representative Turner's efforts resulted in the introduction of the Prepare Act (H.R. 3158), containing unprecedented proposals to reform the U.S. first responder grant system by determining--for the first time--the essential capabilities needed to protect American communities; and the Rapid Cures Act (H.R. 4258), designed to develop a national plan to develop countermeasures to protect Americans against the threat of bioterrorism.

Mr. Speaker, these are only a few examples of the extraordinary contributions made by Representative Turner to our national homeland security effort. His leadership within the Democratic Caucus, and as a Member of the House on national security matters, has set a heightened standard for all of us to emulate. On the day that we create the first- ever permanent Committee on Homeland Security, it is fitting that we remember and honor the service and dedication of Representative Jim Turner.

Mr. Speaker, needless to say, as an original co-sponsor of this temporary funding resolution for the new Committee on Homeland Security, I urge each of my colleagues to support our country's continuing efforts to fight terrorism by voting in favor of this resolution.

I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.