Floor Statements

Madam Speaker and my colleagues, in the last few hours, our new President reached out across the aisle and he came to the Republican conference and he asked us not to be Republicans, he asked us not to be Democrats, but he asked us to be Americans. He cited the urgency of the time and the challenge that we face. And that is why I am over on this side right now. I have done this one other time. It may have been after 9/11.

My colleagues, we face an economic 9/11. My side gave me the opportunity to offer a motion to recommit. I didn't want to play any games with that because I know that there are men and women out there, fathers and mothers, people who want a job and deserve a job and need a job, and what are we going to offer them?

These are the headlines: Top Companies Slash 70,000; Job Cuts Deepen Across America. You have seen them. You have seen them in your own State, in your own district.

Now you're going to have to go back tomorrow or this week and look those people in the face and say, I had an opportunity to vote for more jobs. And that is exactly what this motion does.

I didn't play games picking out or I haven't criticized any project. In fact, I came here and I spoke for two Democrat amendments and against one Republican amendment so far on this legislation, because this is about creating jobs. Whether we are going to create--we are going to take $825 million.

I ask unanimous consent for 1 additional minute.

We are going to be asked the question, What did we do? And I wanted to have the opportunity. I have worked my heart out with Mr. Oberstar. You all should thank Mr. Oberstar for what he has done in a bipartisan fashion.

But, again, we have got to go back and say there is 7 percent of this on infrastructure out of $825 billion. We have an opportunity to double the amount of infrastructure money. No games being played. I didn't single out or deride any program. I just said any new or unauthorized project or program in this would be eliminated. You have the votes to do those later on if you want to do them. Right now, we have got to get the most people we can to work as soon as possible. And I know you believe that in your heart too.

So this isn't some game, some political charade. I came across the aisle, asking you to support a measure that will put our people--your people and my people--to work sooner rather than later. Thank you.

Madam Speaker, I wanted to join others in congratulating the University of Florida on winning the recent National College Football Championship. As a 1967 graduate of the university, I am proud of the athletic accomplishments of my alma mater. Fellow Gators have much to be proud of in the many achievements and honors gained by students, faculty, staff and graduates of this great institution of higher learning.

While we salute this athletic win it is important that our university, the State of Florida and all those interested and supportive of quality education programs work together to improve and restore our College of Education Historic Norman Hall. As a graduate of the U.F. College of Education, I urge our State legislature and Congress to aid in renovation of this principal building and center of our College of Education. While numerous other colleges have restored important campus structures Norman Hall remains neglected. If one of our major institutions devoted to training educational professionals remains in tatters how can we accommodate the faculty, staff and future quality teachers for our State and Nation?

So let's not sit on our athletic laurels but recommit to winning one for quality education at the University of Florida and go Gators!

Madam Speaker, I strongly support Israel's right to defend itself against the Hamas terrorist attacks. Until Israeli citizens can live without fear of these attacks, Israel is justified in its effort to maintain national security for its citizens.

While we all hope for peace in this region, it must not come at the expense of Israel's sovereignty or right to exist. The Gaza Strip, from which Israel unilaterally withdrew in 2005, poses a growing security threat to Israeli civilians. Over 10,000 rocket and mortar shells have been fired from Gaza since 2001, and this indiscriminate bombardment has escalated since Hamas seized power in their violent coup in 2007. About 860,000 Israeli civilians, or more than 12 percent of Israel's population, live in daily fear of a Hamas rocket attack.

Hamas ended the 6-month cease fire on December 19th by increasing its random rocket bombardment of Israeli civilians. Israel was compelled to take on the responsibility of defending its citizens against these terror tactics. In response to being attacked, it launched a defensive air attack against Hamas' terrorist rocket launchers and their terrorist infrastructure. Israel responded with a ground assault to minimize collateral losses in the civilian neighborhoods the Hamas terrorists hide in to launch these rockets.

Critics of Israel demand it sit down with Hamas to negotiate a lasting peace. I ask them all, how do you find a diplomatic solution with an enemy that will not recognize your right to exist? What terms can you offer that will bring peace with such an enemy other than outright capitulation?

Madam Speaker, let us stand together as an institution to show our Nation's support for Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza and pledge our continued commitment to Israel's right to defend itself as a free, independent and sovereign state.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and pay tribute to U.S. Congressman Dave Weldon, M.D. who I have had the privilege to serve with over the last 14 years in the House of Representatives.

Congressman Weldon, Florida's doctor, will be retiring at the end of the 110th Congress after being first elected to the House in 1994. He has been a great example of a citizen legislator--giving up successful professional careers in the U.S. Army and in medicine and in sacrificing time with family to serve our nation.

Not only is Rep. Weldon a brilliant physician, but throughout his tenure in Congress, he has been a provider of leadership in representing Florida's Space Coast. When Dave spoke on the floor, he spoke with knowledge, insight and understanding. Not only did he contribute to the legislative process, but he also improved the legislative product.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to salute Rep. Weldon and his wife Nancy for their public service. Madam Speaker, I ask all Members of the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Congressman Weldon's service to our nation through all aspects of his life. To Dave and his family, we extend our sincere thanks and well wishes for the future.

Well, thank you, Madam Speaker.

Ladies and gentlemen of the House and my fellow Americans, this is an interesting time in the history of our Republic and in the history of Congress. It is probably one of the most contentious issues and difficult issues I've seen in my almost three decades in the Federal arena.

Tonight, before I get into a couple of comments that I want to make about the situation we have facing us with the financial crisis, I want to take just a minute--and I know some of my colleagues are going to join me, particularly those from Florida--to insert into the Record a statement relating to the retirement of one of our colleagues, the Honorable Dave Weldon of Florida--Dr. Weldon as he is known and also as he is professionally titled.

I've known Dave since he decided to run for Congress. He is one of, I think, at least 30 individuals on our side--and we have some incredibly dedicated and distinguished Members who have served many, many years in the House of Representatives--who is retiring. It's a little bit of a concern to me. You know, maybe this has become a very difficult job. It's not one for the faint of heart. It's a job to which people must devote all of their time awake--their hours in the days and on the weekends. Sometimes when they say they're going back to their districts on recess, those Members go back and have much more full schedules than we have even in Washington.

Dave is one of the Members who is retiring, Dave Weldon. This concerns me. It is going to be a loss to this Congress. Very often, we see people come to Congress from many different backgrounds. Dave Weldon is the kind of guy who we should encourage others with his qualifications and background to come to Congress.

He is a physician, and he probably can make four or five times as much as he has made in the service to the United States House of Representatives, but he has been in service to our Nation. This isn't the first time Dave Weldon served our Nation. Dave was also, besides being a practicing physician and Army veteran, he served our Nation in the United States military.

So on behalf of my colleagues from Florida, I want to thank him for stepping out of his role as a physician. The time he spent since I first met him working with all of us devoted to this institution, if you look at the Space Center and the space coast that he represented, David has always been a tireless advocate to the space coast and the space program.

Dave, again since I met him, I have watched his children, Katie, and his son, David, grow up over the years of his service. I know the time and commitment he has extended to this House of Representatives, this country, for the good of all people. He is a shining example of the kind of devoted people that we have serving here. His lovely wife, Nancy, again, people have no idea how many days and nights, weekends and occasions Dave has had to leave his wife and be in service to the House of Representatives.

We are really blessed. The good Lord sends us people like Dave Weldon and his family who have been devoted to this House for 14 years. And it does make a difference. I know right now everybody is critical of the Congress. And I find people, you know, making hostile remarks about Members of Congress, but they have no idea what a great institution this is. And the people like Dave Weldon who come here and serve, again, selflessly serve, sometimes leaving their family aside, but always meeting their responsibilities. But Dave after 14 years is going to leave us, and the House will not have his service or his knowledge.

One of the things I would love to do with Dave Weldon was listen to him speak. He would come to the floor, and very often there are well- intended folks who talk about subjects, and sometimes they know the subject fairly well and sometimes they have no idea. People expect Members of Congress to know everything, and most of us are generalists when it comes to legislation. And we are also products of our experience.

Dave is a product of great professional experience and background. The thing I loved about Dave Weldon, he could come here and talk about issues that are near and dear to my heart. He would talk about medical procedures. We have had debates about abortion and debates about different procedures. Some people sort of talk, again, on sort of their general knowledge. But Dave Weldon is someone who can and has stood up here in the House of Representatives and spoken from knowledge, experience, from professional medical training, a very smart individual whose talents again we are going to lose.

I hope this isn't the case that the good get going in the House of Representatives because this institution, with all of its flaws, is just reflective of the United States of America. Representatives come, all 435, from all corners of our land. They are reflective of the land, and sometimes we get some exceptional Members like Dave Weldon who leave, and I am hoping again that this is not the case, that others choose to leave.

It is tough duty, particularly in a time of financial crisis when you pick up the phone and people say I may lose my retirement, my business won't function, my opportunities are becoming limited for financial avenues. But there are folks who do step up to the plate and try to do the best they can.

What is neat is Dave has been not only a hero for the unborn, but also a hero for the taxpayers. Sometimes when you get through all of this, people think there are a lot of special interests running the place. And sometimes you see again people spending lots of money lobbying Members of Congress and people get disgusted with that process. But I think for the most part, and particularly on the part of an individual like Dave Weldon, you see someone who votes from his heart and also from his mind and also from his experience and knowledge. That has been a great thing for the House of Representatives.

I will miss Dave. I will miss some of the others on both sides of the aisle who have been part of this institution and have contributed in a positive fashion. Again, I just come before the House tonight, and I am going to talk in a minute about some other issues, but I see Dave Weldon has come to the floor. I didn't know whether or not he would be here. But, Dave, on behalf of the whole Florida delegation, many who will be submitting statements to the Record as a part of our tribute to you and thanks for your service, I thank you on behalf of all of not only the Members of the Florida delegation and not just the Republican side of the aisle, but those on both sides of the aisle, I want to thank you for your years of service to your district, the State and the Nation.

I yield to Dave.

Again, we are so proud of Dave Weldon and to his service to the House of Representatives. He is the first medical doctor to serve from the State of Florida. He is also one of the first Representatives from Florida's east central coast to serve on the Appropriations Committee, and we will certainly miss his presence on that committee.

On the Appropriations Committee, Dave Weldon served on various subcommittee, including the Science, State Justice and Commerce Subcommittee. He also currently has served on the Labor, Health and Human Services as well as the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittees.

Dave has been a very active advocate for the cause of autism. He has worked also with those interested in finding a cure on cancer, and it is great that we have had a physician to be part of the Cancer Caucus. He is also a strong advocate for renewable energies, and he has been active in that caucus and the Tourism Caucus that is so important to the State of Florida, and the Military and Veterans Caucus.

Dave Weldon is a veteran, and he is also a member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 453 known as the Rocket Post in Rockledge, Florida. I know they share my pride and everyone's pride in Dave's service, not only to our country in uniform, but also here in the House of Representatives.

In previous years Dave Weldon has served on the House Science Committee, the House Banking Committee, and the Government Reform Committee. He was also a member of the Education and Workforce Committee during the 104th Congress. One of his leadership positions has been on the Science Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics for 8 years. And again, I don't think Florida or our space coast could have a better advocate.

Again, to Dave Weldon, thank you for your 14 years of service to our Nation. I thank Nancy Weldon and his wonderful two children. We are very proud of Dave Weldon and his departure from this House will be a loss.

Our Financial Crisis

You know, tonight I want to speak a minute in addition to saluting a leaving colleague to the question of where we are in this country today. I have heard a lot of comments, some pretty rough comments this week, and Members have been under siege on the financial crisis. I respect some who have spoken here. The gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) said how important it is that Congress stay here and get the job done. We do face a very serious financial crisis.

We have had several proposals. Of course Mr. Paulson brought one out, and I will talk about those in a second. But I want, Madam Speaker, the people of the United States to know that for all the disparaging comments made about Congress, this in fact is a great institution. It is in fact representative of the people. Sometimes people say that special interests run the place, and I don't see that to be the case. For every issue there is a lobbying side on one side and an equal and opposite lobbying force on the other side. We have seen incredible public concern about legislation and proposals that have been brought by the administration and passed by the Senate. That's interesting because the public actually, I believe, is the biggest lobbying factor.

The Founding Fathers were incredibly wise some 200 years ago to devise a system of having Members run every 2 years, and it doesn't matter who gives them campaign contributions and where they are from, they must listen to the people and be held accountable. They are the only elected Federal officers who must be elected by the people, and they know that.

So the Founding Fathers created a great system 200 years ago. And, of course, we have the Senate, which was the other body which was originally appointed by the State legislatures, and that body has a 6- year term and their own way of doing things.

But this is an incredible institution, our government. And the people who serve are no different than the rest of the population. Of course, we've got a few bad eggs in Congress. And the great part about our system is they get sorted out either by our incredible judicial system, criminal justice system--some of them, I always tell students who come to the Capitol, that they are held accountable and they must--and whether you're a student or you're the President of the United States or a Member of Congress, in our society--and this is the great difference--you are held accountable. If you do wrong, you will be held accountable.

And for the most part, again, I believe that this body is reflective of the population that they represent and try to do the best they can in representing folks.

I have been married for 36 years, and I tell folks that there is not a day that goes by that my wife and I don't disagree on something. Now, usually, she wins the argument. But the House of Representatives is no different. We have 435 very diverse individuals who come from very diverse parts of this great land and come together.

So we have had a very difficult week or two. We face a crises in the financial markets. And as Marcy Kaptur said, our job is to stay here; it's not to go out and campaign. Our job is to stay here if it means 24-7. And there are many folks that we represent that are hardworking Americans. Some of them triple up on jobs to make ends meet. I did that at one time, had to struggle financially to make ends meet. There are folks who are working day and night to provide for their families. There are retirees who have worked their whole lives and have their savings at stake and their retirement at stake.

But I truly believe that the institution does somehow work its will-- and it is amazing with 435 people--and it will work its will.

And I think it's great that people take the time to call. I sat in the office the other night--and we were there quite late--and I picked up the phone and started answering calls during that evening and several times during the day picking up the phone. I have, fortunately, very capable staff who also assist me. Otherwise, I would just be on the phone 24-7. But it was great to hear from people, and that's what this process is all about is this House and this Congress should and must be reflective of people, and that process is taking place right now.

How we got ourselves into this situation is sort of an interesting thing. I heard a number of comments, and I went back to review some of the history. And again, whether we're talking about Dave Weldon, a medical physician who came here with certain knowledge, we're all a little bit different. I came here. I was in business. I had a small development and real estate investment business activities. I had my own personal experiences with banks and with financial institutions which led me to certain actions.

Part of the reason I think we got ourselves into this--and I will just review some of the history for those who may not be familiar with it--is a bill that was passed after the Great Depression and the bank failures after the depression was called Glass-Stiegel. And that law prohibited banks and financial institutions from making speculative investments, taking depositors' money and investing it in speculative ventures.

In 1999, a proposal came to Congress, and I think under the guise-- the name

of the bill was the Financial Modernization Act of that year--they proposed that the provisions on the restrictions of speculative investments by banks and financial institutions be lifted. I thought long and hard about this, and based on my personal experience, I made a decision in 1999 not to vote to repeal those restrictions, again allowing banks to get into some speculative activities.

That was based on my experience, again, in the private sector and in business and some of the development in real estate activities I've been involved in.

I felt that financial institutions, particularly those with depositors' money, should not be in competitive activities or speculative activities competing with, again, folks that they are really set up to provide financial services to.

I was one of a handful of Members, both in the House when the bill came here, final passage some months later, the end, I believe, of 1999, when the Financial Modernization Act passed.

Now, under that guise--again, I think it was another door that opened for folks to, in the banking industry, to put some of the money into more speculative activities and investments.

Now, one of the things that we're going to do next week, and I enjoy my service on the Government Reform and Oversight Committee--that's our investigative committee of Congress--we're going to hold hearings beginning Monday and Tuesday, and I appreciate Mr. Waxman calling some of these hearings. We're going to look at the failure of Lehman Brothers, we're going to look at the failures of AIG. And I'm hoping-- and Mr. Davis, who is our ranking Republican member of that important investigative committee--I'm hoping that he and I can convince Mr. Waxman to go further.

Unfortunately, I don't think there was proper oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We saw during the 1990s a movement towards allowing, unfortunately, speculative investments in lowering the reserve under, again, unfortunately, under Franklin Raines, the former Clinton OMB director who became the head of that important agency. There was a change in rules--not a change by law--but a change in rules that allowed them to lower their reserves from 10 percent down to 2\1/2\ percent. I think that was another fatal mistake.

And also another fatal mistake that led to the current banking crises was the decision to allow even that agency, which was backing up our mortgages nationally, to get into the subprime area.

So, we had sort of a mentality that we should be allowing banks and financial institutions, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, to get into speculative adventures. And the situation, as I recall, we could see the beginning of problems back in 2002.

In 2002, I have to say that one of my colleagues who pays close attention to some of these financial issues--I'm not on the Financial Committee--is Chris Shays, a gentleman from Connecticut. Chris asked me to cosponsor legislation to bring Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac into some regulatory regime. I believe at that time we were looking at the SEC or something to get a handle on the agency that, again, was backing our mortgages who was going overboard in some of these areas.

Repeatedly, attempts to pass that legislation, to put some curtailment on getting into speculative investments were blocked. This isn't the time to point fingers, but many on the other side of the aisle unfortunately got into stymieing those efforts. No less than some 17 times has this administration brought to the Congress in the last number of years, several years, proposals to deal with regulation. And even back in the time when everyone was focused on terrorism in 2003-- and national security and international terrorism were the prime issues--this administration also proposed dramatic overhaul and reform; every time brought to Congress and turned down.

There are some interesting recordings I've seen of some of those hearings. If anyone wants to access them, I have seen them on YouTube. I think that they're very telling of how people turned a blind eye towards bringing this situation under control.

I see my colleague that I paid tribute to, Dave Weldon, has come out. And I am pleased to yield to him for a minute as I continue this little review of how we got ourselves into this tough situation.

Well, reclaiming my time, I do thank my colleague Dave Weldon for his comments and also for his institutional recollection. And that's something we're going to lose with him departing from the Congress, and that's why it's so important--and I know people think there should be a turnover in Congress, but it is very important that we keep people here who have been through some of these hearings, heard some of the so-called song-and-dance and get sort of, as Paul Harvey says, ``the rest of the story.''

But Dave Weldon brought up several points. First of all, again, with Mr. Davis, the ranking member, I intend to ask that we, our committee, Government Reform and Oversight, conduct extensive review of all those who walked away with hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. We need to start with Franklin Raines, the former OMB Director under the Clinton administration, who headed up the agencies that, again, Dave Weldon spoke about, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And I am told that just Mr. Raines alone walked away with $100 million. I know there have been some proceedings, and he got a slap on the hand, but Mr. Raines had accomplices in the cleaning out of that agency. Not only did they inflate, as I understand it, their returns so that they could get huge bonuses, but they were only slapped on the hand for their misdeeds, and now some of their misdeeds are becoming the responsibility or the potential responsibility of hardworking Americans who are going to have to pay for that.

So I will demand hearings, and we will find the individuals that allowed themselves to take advantage of these agencies and these activities and walked away with tens of millions and left us in the straits that we are in today.

Additionally, again, I think it's important for folks to know that some of the changes that were made, again, back in the 1990s with these agencies were to encourage homeownership. If I came to the Congress 4 years ago and gave a speech that said that people with limited incomes, people from certain areas of the community that may be blighted shouldn't get loans, or if I said we should limit the amount that we would lend to folks, there would probably be an outcry.

And what we saw was the creation of financial instruments, and we now know them to be called subprime, which assumed again some of the debt and responsibility, and these mortgages ended up being cast throughout and interwoven throughout our entire financial system and assumed as solid assets or assets that had some value.

Many of them may have value, but my point here is that the Congress and others in different administrations also encouraged homeownership. No one called for a breaking of loaning to marginal borrowers, and so this situation that we're all familiar with now was created. And we do have a responsibility, one, to hold people accountable who made errors not only in judgment but also fudged their books and walked away with huge amounts of profits, commissions, and salaries.

I know that everyone's concerned about the $700 billion that is proposed by Secretary Paulson and also passed by the other body, and they've tried to say that folks who took advantage of the situation previously should not actually have an opportunity in the future to participate. And I think there's no question that that restriction has to be placed there, but I think what's even more important is to make certain that those responsible for the situation we're in are held accountable, the people that, again, ran away with hundreds of millions of dollars and fled with the commissions and bonuses.

And I, again, will call on the Chair of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, Mr. Waxman, and I think Mr. Davis will join me, in asking for those additional hearings and to hold those people's feet to the fire.

Again, we have gotten ourselves into a difficult situation. We have interwoven into banks and financial institutions these subprime instruments and paper. Suddenly no one wants to trade them. The value is a zero on balance sheets. We do have a credit crisis in the country.

I took some time to review how we got ourselves into this mess and tried to outline it as objectively as I could and what occurred, and we have pretty good documentation for what I offered here tonight and also for what Dr. Weldon offered here tonight.

The question now is how we work ourselves out of the mess without leaving the taxpayers at bay. I represent tens of thousands of hardworking folks, and every day they're doing their job, raising their family, going to work, paying their taxes, paying their mortgage, paying their bills, and now I'm being called on as a Representative to ask those folks to subsidize someone's bad judgment, bad investment or risk that they took, or someone who made bad decisions that allowed people to produce that now worthless paper.

I might say that that paper is not necessarily worthless. Some of it may not have any value. Some of the borrowers may be deadbeat, the properties may be defunct, but there are many properties that will have value, and there are people who do pay these loans. And what I believe the Congress has to do is work to get the credit market back in order to establish some value for paper that does have some value, and some of that subprime does have value.

I was the chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee during the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and I recall the responsibility I had as chairman to try to bring some order to the financial stability of our aviation industry. Today, we're some 7 years away from that horrendous time when the entire industry collapsed, planes were halted from flying, markets totally ran away from the aviation industry, airlines.

And I look back on the history of that. In 11 days, working in a bipartisan manner, we were able to get to the President a bill that helped stabilize the finances for the industry. Most people don't know this story. We didn't provide loans. We didn't provide direct cash, although, we did pay airlines for auditable damages that were done by failure of the United States Government in protecting those aircraft. And I think that also stemmed a lot of the potential for suits and carrying the results of that disaster and terrorist attack on.

But what we did was we provided loan guarantees. We had about $10 billion worth of loan guarantees, and we required also very tight parameters in which those loan guarantees would be granted.

It's interesting that about 2 months ago every one of those loans-- now, several of them were rescheduled but every loan was paid back. The taxpayer made $323 million, a third of $1 billion, and the fund was closed out.

It would be my hope that whatever measure we take--and I would prefer either backing with insurance or with some guarantee that paper that's there. Quite frankly, I do have a problem with the Paulson proposal. The Paulson proposal the Secretary brought us initially was to give us $700 billion and we'll buy these mortgages up, this bad paper or this paper doesn't that have worth right now, and sort of trust me.

Now, the House of Representatives, again being reflective of this Nation, did not want to allow that to happen, and we saw a vote in this House that did not allow that to happen. There were modifications and some protections and some improvement from the Paulson original proposal. The Paulson proposal was number one.

The measure voted on in the House, at the insistence of many of my colleagues on my side of the aisle to improve the package, was proposal number two.

I don't know if proposal number three will make it or not in a vote that we may have here in the House tomorrow. I think we're going to. I have not

seen all the details of it, and I hope to tonight before I cast my vote.

But, again, we have to think of the people that we represent out there, hardworking folks who have met their obligations. Some of those folks are retired and want their retirement funds secured. Some of the folks I represent are businessmen and -women who are having trouble getting credit, expanding business or even meeting payroll. So we do have an obligation to do something, but that should be based on a sound plan.

Again, I would prefer some sort of insurance backing or guarantee backing by the government for those instruments to give them some value, and if they have value, then they can be assessed on the balance sheets of all those who are holding them, and also for that guarantee or for that insurance, the lenders or those who have acquired that paper would have some financial obligation.

That obligation and money could be pooled and also help absorb any losses for bad investment or bad paper. That would be my approach. I'm one of 535; I don't necessarily get my approach. I'm not sure I'll get that opportunity to vote on that proposal.

But any proposal that we do have, in my judgment, will be based on how it treats the taxpayer and the person who has met their responsibility, not the individuals who have taken advantage of the system, who have taken business risks or investment risks or gone beyond what should be reasonable caution with investment of either their depositors' money, their investors' money, or, in this case, if we give it to them, taxpayers' money or backing.

I know the House will work its will. We've had tough times in the United States. The Congress has always risen to the occasion. And as I said, this is a great body. People, again, have been very critical of it this week, but it is a system that does work, that does allow for debate, does allow for opportunity to participate. And the public, each one of the public who have called my office or other offices to express their opinion are also participating in the development of hopefully what will be a positive outcome here. Do we know if whatever we pass will work or what I suggested will work? I don't know. You do your best. And I think people will try to do their best when we have that vote here tomorrow. But again, I think that if we all calm down, approach this from a rational standpoint, from a business-like and commonsense standpoint, and also for the true benefit of those people we represent, the American taxpayer, the American citizens across our great land.

And finally, I believe that there isn't any challenge that we can't tackle. While everyone is focused on the financial challenges that we face and the credit crunch crisis, I'm very pleased that I learned today that the President intends to sign the first Amtrak Reauthorization bill in 11 years, which also has a Rail Safety bill incorporated in it.

I've been the harshest critic of Amtrak. I've ordered more investigations and Inspector General reports, GAO reports of Amtrak; not that I oppose passenger rail service, I think it's needed in this country, but I had problems with the way our government--I call it ``Soviet-style'' Amtrak--operation ran. And, unfortunately, for many years, 11 years now, Congress has given Amtrak money without setting policy and parameters and reforms that are long overdue.

I'm pleased that, as the Republican leader of the House Transportation Committee, myself, Mr. Shuster, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, our ranking Republican member, Ms. Brown, the Chairwoman from Florida of the Rail Subcommittee, and Mr. Oberstar, my Democrat counterpart, the chairman of the T&I Committee, Transportation Infrastructure Committee, did work in a bipartisan fashion. We took Amtrak apart. We included reforms that are long overdue. We have opened the door for historic participation by the private sector in developing, financing, constructing, and also operating--for the first time across our country, where it makes sense and where it can be used in some 11 corridors that have been designated, high-speed rail. One of Mr. Shuster's ideas was to take some of the money-losing routes, put them up for private bid competition, which is also included in the legislation that's headed for, we hope, the President's signature soon.

We saw the opportunity to expand passenger rail service because our Nation is facing an energy crisis, and there is no better way to move people. Unfortunately, the United States has become somewhat of a third-world country when it comes to rail passenger service and we have no true high-speed rail service, passenger service in the United States.

So within that legislation we've incorporated dramatic changes, some opportunities for expanded service with partnerships, not with the Federal Government paying the whole tab, with a set out formula for participation; and again, expecting some accountability from the investment that we're making in passenger rail service in this new legislation.

Finally, in that bill, we did incorporate some needed rail safety measures. One of those measures relates to positive train separation, trying to get technology where we have passenger service that's mixed with freight lines and have the latest technology to ensure that we don't have a repeat of what we saw in California with the loss of lives several weeks ago. That was a horrible accident that possibly could be prevented. And by 2015, according to this legislation, with a little bit of help from the Federal Government, our freight and passenger partners--many of them who provide public transportation--will make certain that they have the latest safety train separation equipment in place. Also in the bill are other measures to improve safety; crossing improvements and rail safety inspections that will be enhanced.

So I think when you hear some of the bad news--Congress can't get it done, Congress doesn't do its work, you guys up there just don't have a clue--there are many things happening that are positive, that are done in a bipartisan fashion.

Now, the story I just told you, the story about the aviation so- called ``bailout,'' that won't be in the paper tomorrow. No one wants to print those stories; they want to print the story that the Congress is not doing its job, Congress is not acting responsibly, Congress is in a fight and this one is calling that one something. That's not what it's about. Sometimes that does occur, and probably in this Chamber. If we look at the history, they've almost had some duels and fisticuffs in the past and some very harsh language exchanged. But it is, again, a reflection upon our society, upon human nature. And these are all human beings, with all their pluses and minuses; for the most part, they're good folks and they do their best to represent people across this great land.

Finally, again, I just want to say that, in my years of service here--and I'm kind of unique in the Congress in that my brother served here as a Democrat Member, I'm a Republican, we're the only two brothers or siblings to serve here since 1889 from different parties, but we've seen it on both sides of the aisle, so to speak. But you do see the magnificence of the structure and the system created by our Founding Fathers, and it somehow does work. It probably shouldn't work with all the diversity of opinion and people and places and folks that they represent, but it does work, and that's what has made it a great Nation. And the Union has prevailed, even in some very difficult times.

So if it requires 24/7, if it requires us staying here through November, December, we need to get the job done for the American people and for the opportunity for those who come behind us, our children and our grandchildren and future generations, to have, again, the same opportunity that we've had.

So I'm sorry I can't come tonight and just condemn everybody and throw bodies around and create some difficulty that would set the House on fire, but I thought it would be better to come tonight and talk a little bit about the greatness of the institution and the ability of the Members that are here to solve any task that confronts them and do it in an honorable fashion.

So those are my comments tonight. I came originally to honor one of those Members from the Florida delegation that's leaving, Dr. Dave Weldon. There are many others that are departing of their own volition, there are

some that will be taken out by the voters; but they all, in my estimation, have done their best to serve their representatives, each and every one of them, in their own way.

So with that, Mr. Speaker, could I ask how much time I have remaining?

Well, again, with that, Mr. Speaker, I do conclude my remarks and thank those of you, Mr. Speaker, and my colleagues who have listened tonight. And I thank the American people for the trust they place in this institution, and once again reassure them that this is a great Congress and a great country, and we will do the right thing. Sometimes it takes one or two times to get it right, but we'll be there.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 2382, the FEMA Accountability Act of 2008, which would enable the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to better manage the thousands of excess trailers in its inventory since Hurricane Katrina.

First, I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar and Subcommittee Chairwoman Norton for working with me in a bipartisan manner to make an important revision to this bill.

I would also like to thank Congressman Mike Ross from Arkansas who has been working with me to cleanup FEMA's trailer mess for several years now.

In 2006 and 2007, several neighborhoods in our districts were devastated by tornados, and numerous families were left homeless.

After the Christmas Day 2006 tornados in my district it took almost 2 months to receive a federal disaster declaration and authorization for housing assistance. In the meantime my constituents had no place to turn for help after the temporary shelters closed.

At one point I had half a dozen of my congressional committee lawyers and FEMA lawyers on the telephone trying to figure out how FEMA could take a few of the hundreds of excess trailers it had stored near Orlando and use them to house these homeless tornado victims.

Ultimately we received a federal disaster declaration and several trailers before FEMA could figure out how to make some of its excess trailers available without a federal disaster declaration.

In Congressman Ross's case, his district was never declared a federal disaster area after several tornados struck his district, and it took months for FEMA to come up with a way to transfer excess trailers to the State and help his homeless tornado victims.

The ridiculous part of this story is that FEMA had over 60,000 excess trailers at the time and it was spending over $3 million a year to store them in 17 storage areas across the country.

In typical government fashion, the taxpayer spent almost a billion dollars on trailers after Hurricane Katrina. Tens of thousands of them were never used. And FEMA was unable to provide them to states to house homeless tornado victims.

In response to this mess, Congressman Ross and I introduced legislation to provide FEMA authority to transfer excess trailers to state and local governments and voluntary disaster relief organizations to house disaster victims even if a federal disaster has not been declared.

These are trailers that FEMA does not need for its own purposes and that FEMA is spending millions of dollars a year to store and maintain.

I am pleased we were able to include language addressing this problem in the bill we are approving today.

Again let me thank Chairman Oberstar and Subcommittee Chairwoman Norton for working with me in a bipartisan manner, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Madam Speaker, today, September 27, 2008, 100 Volusia County veterans from the Second World War visited our Nation's Capital as part of the Honor Air program. The trip was made possible through the Rotary Clubs of Volusia County and with the support of sponsors and the 49 Guardian escorts.

It is my pleasure to assist in hosting the veterans during their visit to our Nation's Capital. This morning they will visit the World War II Memorial to pay tribute to their fellow patriots. This is the first visit for most of the servicemen, and it will be a moving occasion. I look forward to visiting with these heroes as they stand among the stone columns, fountains, and pools that comprise the Memorial.

This afternoon, the Volusia veterans will pay their respects at Arlington National Cemetery. Veteran leaders and I will have the privilege of laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns in a solemn tribute to those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for our nation. The day will conclude with visits to the Woman in Services Memorial, the Korean War Memorial, the Vietnam Memorial and the Iwo Jima Memorial.

As the Congressman from Florida's Seventh Congressional District, it is my honor to play a part in our Volusia County heroes' visit. I ask that the U.S. House of Representatives join me in expressing our appreciation to the 49 Guardians, who through a sense of duty and at personal expense will escort the World War II veterans on this memorable day.

The September 27, 2008 Volusia Honor Air Guardians

included:

Robert Blackwell, Floyd Brewer III, Bernadette Britz-

Parker, Frank Coe, Linda Edwards, Howard Fisher, Raymond

Fletcher, Robert Gast, Wayne Gordin, John Harting, Todd

Heffington, Angela Heffington, Sharon Hill, Victor Hindery,

David Hinshaw, James Houck, Francis Irza, Barbara Irza,

Mathew Jemison, James Jemison, Jeffrey Lau, Charles Matousek,

William McGhee, Kenneth Naser, Patti Ostermann, Charles

Paiva, Daniel Parker, Christopher Rego, Diana Santos, Robert

Sullivan, Lorraine Sullivan, Daniel Thorne, Walter White,

Jr., Bonita Winn, Michael Brooks, Geof Felton, Dave Brannon,

Gloria Denston, Judith Hensley, John Hill, Raymond

Heffington, Derek Mears, Robert Apgar, Phillip Martin, Roger

Baumgartner, Leslye Lorenz, Timothy Biggs, Edward Malloy,

Morgan Gilreath.

Madam Speaker, today, September 27, 2008, 100 Volusia County veterans from the Second World War will visit our Nation's Capital as part of the Honor Air program. For most of these central Florida veterans this will be their first opportunity to see the World War II Memorial. As the Congressman from Florida's Seventh Congressional District, it will be my privilege to assist in their visit. As part of their mission to Washington, DC, I will join them in laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery to honor those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for our Nation. This will be a special occasion in the lives of our World War II veterans. I ask that the United States House of Representatives join me in recognizing Our Greatest Generation from Florida's Seventh Congressional District and wish them well as they gather in America's Capital City.

It is my privilege to honor the service and sacrifice of those veterans who will be visiting our Nation's Capital on September 27, 2008:

Rhea Adams, Leonard Ballesteras, Raymond Behrens, Seymour Berman, Michael Bloch, William Brown, Bernard Bruns, Dan Brunson, James Brussow, Robert Burrough, Mildred Cavanaugh, Tervence Cavanaugh, Jr., Kenneth Chapman, Robert Chase, William Clark, Kenneth Coe, George Crippen, Robert Deline, Robert Dinda, Rabun Dittmar, Jr., Richard Douglas, Arthur Dreves, Dorothy Dreves, Leland Eamest, Albert Edwards, Donald Ellwein, Delbert Erickson, Albert Erwin, Ben Fabian, Jr., Dominick Ferrarini, Louis Figliuolo, Victor Frank, James Galloway, Edward Gariano, David Garland,

Edward Gartland, Richard Goodwin, George Gornatti, Leroy Gwaltney, Authur Harriman, Daniel Harting, Richard Heard, Frederick Hering, Clarence Hershberger, Stanley Hiers, Marvin Hinshaw, George Holden, James Holsapple, Jack Honaker, George Hood, James Houck, Francis Johnson, Helen Jurewicz, William Kautz, William Kernstock, Howard Koons, Adolph Koury, Phyllis Lee, Earl Leone, David Levenson, Claude Lindquist, Jr., Eric Loveland, Albert Luckett, Jr., Russell Macomber, Gabriel Maioli, Howard Meyers, Navy Meyers, Daniel Miller, Robert Miller, Boris Nekrassoff, William Parker,

Frank Parsons, James Patterson, Ivey Poe, Jr., Harry Price, Donald Priddle, Marion Reid, Mary Rickerson, Edwin Rieger, Wilfred Rook, William Schildecker, Herman Schmidt, Ethel Schuemann, Juanita Semsky, William Shiepe, Lester Shontz, Jr., Vincent Sindelar, Jack Singleton, Charles Skeels, Eugene Swarbrick, Robert Thousand, Sr., Charles Underwood, Jr., Wilbert Varley, Alfred Vogel, Bertran Wallace, Keith Weihermiller, Walter White, JD Womack, Walter Ziamik.

I know I join countless Americans who continue to recognize their heroism and their families' incredible sacrifice to our Nation.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the Congressional Record regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance and Continuing Appropriations Act. I have requested $2.4 million in the FY 09 Defense Appropriations bill, Research, Development, Test And Evaluation, Navy, account for Electronic Warfare Associates. The entity to receive funding for this project is Electronic Warfare Associates, 250 International Parkway, Suite 240, Lake Mary, Florida, 32746. The FY 2009 funding will develop the necessary software tools for coordinated mission planning and mission rehearsal, common training tools, and consistent concepts of operations and tactics to ensure Marines are fully integrated between air and ground and can seamlessly operate in any theater with any service or coalition partner.

Results from operations in Afghanistan and Iraq all point to the critical need to better fuse data and coordinate action between Marine Corps air and ground EW elements. The necessity for integrated action and the essential nature of coordinated and uniform application of EW assets has become a focal point for the Marine Corps. The plan to resolve this serious shortfall is known as MAGTF (Marine Air Ground Task Force) EW 2020.

The basic Marine Corps fighting organization is a MAGTF. A MAGTF is sized according to the mission and can vary from a battalion to an entire division. It is a complete fighting unit that includes all combat elements--air, ground, and support. Electronic warfare is integral. The EA-6B Prowler provides airborne EW while Radio Battalions provide ground EW via equipment such as CESAS (Communication Emitter Sensing and Attacking System). They are supported by various planning and processing capabilities, such as TEAMS (Tactical EA-6B Mission Planning System) and TERPES (Tactical Electronic Reconnaissance Processing and Evaluation System). Despite being integral to a MAGTF, the current coordinated and standardized training, tactics, procedures and integration of the air and ground USMC EW elements is rudimentary, as is coordination with Air Force and Navy EW units.

Pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the Congressional Record regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance and Continuing Appropriations Act. I have requested $450,000 in the Homeland Security Appropriations bill FEMA Predisaster Mitigation Account for the retrofitting of Crescent City High School in Putnam County. The entity to receive this funding is Putnam County located at 410 St. Johns Ave., Palatka, FL 32177. These funds will be used to retrofit the high school to serve as an emergency shelter during a hurricane, and to provide the school with the necessary generator to ensure that the shelter has the needed power during and following a storm.

With Florida's unique tendency of experiencing frequent hurricanes, wildfires and other natural disasters, there is currently no way to sufficiently accommodate Northeast Florida residents who have lost, or are forced to evacuate, their homes. When these catastrophes occur, emergency management services are forced to create temporary means to house, feed and provide the basic necessities of life for those who have been rendered helpless. The local high school in Crescent City is used as a shelter but is not a certified hurricane shelter. The only way to evacuate the area northbound is over a bridge on U.S. Hwy 17 that the FDOT closes when winds exceed 40 mph. As a result many of the most vulnerable people who live in mobile homes are stranded. In 2008 Putnam County was rated by the State of Florida to have a shelter deficit.

Pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the Congressional Record regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance and Continuing Appropriations Act. I have requested $300,000 in the Homeland Security Appropriations bill FEMA State and local Programs Account for the town of Pomona Park Emergency Operations Center. The entity to receive this funding is the Town of Pomona Park located at 109 Worcester Street, Pomona Park, FL 32181-0001.

The funds for this project will be used to expand the current fire station which serves as the Emergency Operations Center in Pomona Park in order to make room for new equipment and provide room for emergency service coordination during a severe storm.

Pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the Congressional Record regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance and Continuing Appropriations Act. I have requested $800,000 for the Mobile Medic Training Program which I requested be included in the FY 09 Defense Appropriations bill, Research, Development, Test And Evaluation, Army, account for Engineering and Computer Simulations. The entity to receive funding for this project is Engineering and Computer Simulations, 7770 S. Hwy. U.S. 1 Suite H, Bunnell, FL 32110. The funds appropriated in this bill will be used entirely for the research and development of a training simulation tool that will enhance the overall effectiveness of combat medical training by providing realistic casualty information through the utilization of a hand held PDA.

The Mobile Medic Training Program, through the utilization of a hand held PDA, will provide realistic casualty information that allows the combat medic to practice medical treatments, thus bridging the gap between virtual and live environments.

This training simulation tool will enhance the overall effectiveness of combat medical training by providing realistic casualty information through the utilization of a hand held PDA. Currently, mobile computing technology, in the form of a hand held PDA that offers advice on diagnosis and treatment, provides medical reference material and tracks soldier treatment, is being used by combat medics. The Mobile Medic Training Program, through the utilization of a hand held PDA, will provide realistic casualty information that allows the combat medic to practice medical treatments, thus bridging the gap between virtual and live environments.

Pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the Congressional Record regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance and Continuing Appropriations Act. I have requested $4.8 million for the Gateway System in the FY 09 Defense Appropriations bill, Navy Procurement account for the Gateway System manufactured by Ocean Design, Inc., located at 1026 North Williamson Boulevard in Daytona Beach, Florida 32114. The funding would be used for the Navy's procurement of the Gateway System.

This project benefits the constituents in my district. This system has been developed for the Navy to provide a ``system of systems'' approach to seeing and sensing the ocean floor; subsurface and surface of the littorals. The Gateway System is a fiber and electrical cable interconnect system that provides any number of electro-optical inputs and outputs to static or dynamic subsea assets such as acoustical sensors, detection sensors, video cameras and power docking stations. The Gateway acts as a hub for information and/or power centric activity in the underwater battle space and acts as an underwater networking tool that allows different units to communicate and share information. The system will be instrumental in enhancing maritime domain awareness and securing maritime approaches.

Madam Speaker, I am truly disappointed that the United States Congress today would even consider giving benefits to Filipino veterans and ignore American veterans who were victims of the Bataan Death March in the Philippines.

In crafting H.R. 6897, which gives all Filipino veterans benefits, did you know that the Veterans' Affairs Committee dumped a provision to the bill that would have authorized $4 a day for the American survivors of the Bataan Death March?

Did you know that of the 4,500 veterans that survived the march, there are only 1,700 American veterans or spouses alive today? Why would Congress ignore these American veterans and their spouses?

Passing any legislation that would give foreigners veterans benefits from the American taxpayer without providing just compensation to our citizen veterans is unfair. These are Americans who in the Bataan Death March were tortured, imprisoned, and starved; and, to date, have been denied benefits Congress would grant to Filipinos. Does the United States Congress have no conscence? Furthermore, it is incredible that the Japanese Diet is considering giving benefits to the Japanese captors who are responsible for torturing and maiming our own men. Now the U.S. Congress is adding another insult to those who suffered in the Bataan Death March. The provision that was not included in H.R. 6897, the Filipino Benefits bill, is included in H.R. 1570, The Samuel B. Moody Bataan Death March Compensation Act, which I have introduced year after year. A copy of a previous ``Dear Colleague'' letter that I sent to Members of Congress and the Veterans' Affairs Committee contained the following information.

Bataan Death March Survivors Deserve Just Compensation

Dear Colleague: In 1942, American and Allied troops fought

bravely against the Japanese army during the Second World War

on the Bataan Peninsula in the Philippines. Due to the low

supplies and no hope of reinforcements, these men fought

valiantly until they were forced to surrender to the enemy.

Our troops were corralled in the Mariveles, just south of

Bataan, and were forced to endure the journey of their

lives--the Bataan Death March.

Treatment by their Japanese captors was inhumane and often

fatal as those who could not continue marching were summarily

beaten or executed on the spot. Many marchers attempted to

escape into the jungles and some succeeded; however, most

were forced to continue on their journey. Once they reached

the railroad sidings, the troops were crammed into railroad

cars like cattle. After reaching Camp O'Donnell in the

jungles of Arlac Province, our soldiers were held as

prisoners of war (POWs) for over 3\1/2\ years.

Over the years, Congress has adopted provisions concerning

the pay, allowances and benefits of members of the uniformed

services in ``missing status'' and ``POWs''. As a general

proposition, the provisions are intended to leave members of

the uniformed services who are in ``missing status'' and

``POWs'', including their dependents, in the same position

they would have been if the members were not missing.

Unfortunately, veterans of the Bataan Death March were never

given their due allowances or benefits. It is only fitting

that those soldiers who bravely fought and sacrificed for our

freedom be appropriately compensated for their service to our

country.

In an effort to give these brave men their just benefits, I

have introduced H.R. 1570. This legislation would provide

compensation to those individuals who were forced to partake

and held imprisoned following the ruthless procession. I ask

you to join me in this effort by cosponsoring this

legislation and ensuring that those who gave so much in

service to our Nation receive just compensation for their

sacrifice and valor. Today a grave injustice was committed

when American POW Bataan Death March Survivors were ignored

and left behind.

While this statement is in opposition to the action

approved by the U.S. House today, I in no way want to imply

that the military service sacrifice by Filipino nationals to

the United States should not be recognized, appreciated or

properly compensated.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker and my colleagues, first I have to say, again, as Mr. Oberstar said, this is a very historic moment for passenger rail service in the United States. I have to first preface any comments I would make by expressing my sincere thanks to Mr. Oberstar, my partner on the Transportation Committee and our Chair; Ms. Brown, who chairs the Rail Subcommittee, my colleague from Florida; and also Mr. Shuster, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, who is the ranking Republican member on the Rail Subcommittee. I would be remiss if I did not also thank staff on both sides of the aisle for their tireless effort to bring us to this point today.

Mr. Oberstar and I sat down when we assumed responsibility for the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and we set out some goals that we hoped to achieve. This is one of the final goals that we felt was important. And it's not a Republican issue, it's not a Democrat issue, it's not a liberal, it's not a conservative. It's an issue that affects the transportation system as we know as a Nation and it hopefully, with the action today, will take us into the 21st century.

This is one of the most historic occasions because the Congress has not been able to pass an Amtrak reauthorization for some 11 years, since 1997. I think I voted against every bill that came out. I probably ordered more studies and reviews of Amtrak, not that I was opposed to passenger rail service or high-speed rail service, but what I wanted was the most efficient operation for the taxpayer and also for the traveling public.

We made a commitment almost 18 months ago, Mr. Oberstar and I, and we've worked together and staff have worked together. What we've come up with tonight is a combination not only of Amtrak reauthorization but also rail safety. And we worked together on that issue to try to make passenger rail service across the Nation safer for our passengers.

So, the two bills now I might mention, for folks who may be listening and coming to vote on this, Madam Speaker, is we passed by 311 votes the Amtrak, again a historic vote, and nearly 400 votes, the rail safety measure.

So tonight we will vote on a combination of those two measures in a bipartisan agreement.

This couldn't be a better time to pass something, first because we need an economic infusion in this country. This country has become a third world nation when it comes to passenger rail service, and in particular high-speed rail.

We have no high-speed rail service in this country. Acela moves rather slow up the Northeast corridor. This is a proposal that will bring the potential of bringing high-speed rail not only to that corridor, but to all of the corridors across the country that have been designated by Congress.

It has a well-thought-out progression and plan for the first time for the private sector to become engaged in high-speed rail service in this country. It opens the door to competition for the development, for the financing, for the

construction, and also for the operation of high-speed rail systems. Those proposals go first to a stakeholder commission, those involved in communities around the country that want and desire service, then to the Secretary of Transportation, and then finally to the Congress for approval, a good progression and a logical order. So this is dramatic for a change the way in which we approach high-speed rail service.

This also has reforms in the bill for Amtrak that we all feel are long overdue. It also opens up some of the money-losing routes that Amtrak has to private competition. I have to give Mr. Shuster from Pennsylvania credit for negotiating that particular provision.

One of the interesting things too as we talk about finances, and I didn't know this, without reauthorization legislation we have had to pay a premium for the indebtedness that Amtrak has and for all of our projects. With reauthorization, we actually will save the taxpayer money, move projects forward in a cost-effective manner and also have the ability to finance them, particularly when we have some shaky markets out here. But these projects are based on cooperative efforts.

We also dramatically expand the opportunity for intercity rail service so we can get some cars off the roads and so we can move people in the most cost-effective, energy efficient manner in the history of our Nation. So all that is rolled into this legislation.

Finally, we have the provision for safety. We enhance again rail passenger safety. We saw the horrible crash we had a few weeks ago in California, so we couldn't pass rail safety provisions at a more appropriate time really to help prevent an accident like we saw and the tragedy many families had to experience in California. So this is the combination.

Again, I hope that we can get the administration to join us in making certain that our country moves forward with a transportation alternative that is cost-effective, energy efficient and protects the environment. I am hoping the other body will act soon.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis).

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished ranking Republican member of the Rail Subcommittee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

I reserve the balance of my time.

At this time, I do not. I would like to close on my side, but I know that you get to close.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I'm just sitting here, thinking that sometimes you have ideas, you know, that you come up with, that you think about and that you dream about that have an opportunity to become reality. I've got one in this bill. Will it work? Honestly, I don't know. I've given it my best try, but my intent has been to try to take the things I've seen around the world, the best from them, and adapt them to the United States of America, this great country where, I don't think, anything is impossible.

When I see other countries that have high-speed rail systems which take people from one end of their land to the other, I think about our country and think: Why not? Why can't we?

We wouldn't be here today if it weren't, again, for the cooperative effort of my counterpart, Mr. Oberstar--our Chair of the T&I Committee--and for the two of us and others--Mr. Shuster and Ms. Brown--all working together. In closing, I do want to just thank a couple of other people.

I didn't know Mayor Bloomberg very well when I took this idea to him in New York City. New York, of course, is at the center of the east coast, at the center of the Northeast Corridor. I explained the proposal to him. I said that we'd like to see high-speed rail. Right now, from Washington to New York, on average, Acela runs at 83 miles an hour. On average from New York to Boston, it runs at 66 miles an hour.

I said, ``Mayor, what if we could go from Washington, D.C. to Center City New York in less than 2 hours? What would that do?'' Of course, his eyes lit up, and he endorsed the proposal. It would make a dramatic change in the Northeast Corridor.

I chaired Aviation for 6 years. I remember the congestion we had in 2001. The congestion is back today. Seventy percent of all of the air traffic control delays in the country emanate from New York City. So, if we could, let's put in place high-speed rail in this corridor. I don't know any other transportation solution that's more cost effective and environmentally sound than what we're proposing here tonight. Again, here, the leader of our largest city endorsed the proposal.

Then I went to Mike Castle. Congressman Castle is the former Governor of Delaware. He heads the Rail Caucus in the House. I explained it to him, and he supported the proposal. Then I went to folks like Susan Molinari, who was our Chair, who tried to reform Amtrak when she was here, and she supported the proposal.

Now, as a Republican, I come to the floor also to thank America's rail labor unions and their employees. When I had the opportunity to sit down and say you've seen your employment dwindle from 28,000 to 19,000 on Amtrak and that you've seen proposals to zero out your budgets, just saying ``no'' is not the answer both on your side and on our side. We can do better and we must do better.

I want to thank America's rail unions for working together to make this possible. In working together, we can expand employment, and we can improve transportation. We can develop that corridor and can make it a shining asset, something we can all be proud of in development along the way. So we'll create jobs and opportunities both in their industry and along that corridor.

So, in closing, I also want to thank some of the folks from the Federal Railroad Administration, including Jo Strang, Grady Cothen, Mark Yachmetz, and Mark Lindsay. They provided us valuable technical assistance.

I want to also thank the committee staffers who worked in a bipartisan way on the bill on the Democrats' side: David Heymsfeld, Jennifer Esposito, John Drake, and Niels Knutson. On our Republican side, I want to thank Jim Coon, our staff director for the committee; Amy Steinmann, our policy director; Joyce Rose; Mike Meenan; and Allison Cullin for all of their hard work.

You don't get here by one person's coming up with an idea or by one person's trying to move a proposal or by one person's trying to dominate the legislation. You come here through the concerted effort of many people joining together.

So, in closing, again, I thank Mr. Oberstar and all of those.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and also recognize the efforts of our Subcommittee on Public Buildings of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Also we have Ms. Johnson here and Mr. Graves for this reauthorization bill on the Kennedy Center.

I just wanted to add my congratulations for the incredible work that this national cultural center does provide, not only to the District of Columbia and the northeast United States, but the entire country.

Mr. Oberstar, our chairman, and myself as ranking member, get to serve as honorary trustees on the Kennedy Center Board, and I had the honor and privilege of attending the reopening of the Eisenhower Theater.

Now, folks don't realize that the Kennedy Center was opened in 1971, and, of course, some of the facility does need rehabilitation. The Eisenhower Theater, one of the most prominent theaters, named after President Eisenhower, was closed for several years and underwent a complete renovation, and now is open.

But I had the opportunity to attend the little ceremony and dinner commemorating the reopening, and the Rogers family and others who have helped lead that effort are also to be commended in this commentary this afternoon.

Most folks don't know this now, and I really wasn't aware of it until this dinner, but the Kennedy Center was actually the idea and one of the primary projects of Dwight David Eisenhower. President Eisenhower actually was the author of creating a national cultural center, and it was during his administration and it was a bipartisan effort in 1958 that they authorized a national cultural center to be located in our Nation's Capital here, and it did open in 1971.

Now, it was interesting also to see the plans and vision that President Eisenhower had for a national cultural center back then. Of course, it was named for our slain and lost most distinguished President, John F. Kennedy, but the Eisenhower Theater within that complex still bears the visionary's name for this center.

So as you undertake this act today, and I commend again the committee members and staff who have worked on this and all those who do make the Kennedy Center one of the richest national cultural centers and facilities, not only in the United States, but the world, I just wanted to add that commentary for the record.

Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, now, this is going to be a lesson in Government 101. Now, 2 years ago, and this may surprise a lot of the American people and even some Members that follow politics, but the Democrats seized control of the Congress. They control the House, the Senate.

Now, people across the country woke up this morning and yesterday and saw the financial markets implode across the United States. Now, who's in charge, the Democrats or the Republicans?

Now, for 2 years they promised us change. Look at the financial leadership of the House of Representatives. Look at the leadership of the Ways and Means Committee, right now under siege.

They promised us and the American people that they would have a policy, the Pelosi Energy Policy, some 2 years ago when gas prices were hovering around $2.

They control the process. We don't control the process. Now, they have brought out a sham. They are in control, and we have the highest energy prices in a bill that does nothing to solve the problem.

That's Government 101.

Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, I don't rise in opposition to the Former Vice President Protection Act; I appreciate the work that has been done by the committee on this measure. I don't come here to deride any of their efforts. It's legislation that we probably need to pass.

But I do have to say that I just returned from my district in Florida that extends all the way from the suburbs of Orlando to Jacksonville city limits and has the suburbs on the south of Jacksonville through six counties, 32 cities. I spent a wonderful weekend with my constituents, more than a dozen meetings, probably saw more than 1,000

folks this past weekend, enjoyed being home, Florida sun, actually, just a beautiful weekend.

But I have to tell you, my colleagues, from one end of my district, and my house is just within a few blocks of the southern border, all the way to the Jacksonville city limits, traveling through most of those six counties, not one person came to me and said, Mr. Mica, go back to Washington, pass the Vice Presidential Protection Act. But I will tell you that everywhere I went there was one thing on people's mind, and that's the cost of energy.

With the storms, our heart-felt thoughts and prayers go to the people of Texas and all the area that was hit along the coast and up through the heartland of America this past few days. Another natural disaster, my area was hit some time ago by three hurricanes. We have had tornadoes, and we have had floods. We all have to deal with those.

From that hurricane that we saw hit the coast, that had immediate impact in that we had, unfortunately, some price adjustments, some price gouging by people taking advantage of the situation with just the slight turnoff of the refineries and delay and production of energy.

As I traveled up and down my district, some of the gas stations closed early. Many of them had plastic bags over the lower cost grade of fuel. People were concerned about energy.

I am not talking about people, and I have some very wealthy people on the south end in the suburbs and in the north end, that don't have to worry about $4 and $5 fuel costs per gallon. I am talking about working men and women, single parents, people struggling, retirees that are trying to pay their bills.

Again, none of them talked to me about passing a vice presidential protection act, but they said, Congressman Mica, go back to Washington, and whether the cameras and lights are on, and whether the gallery is full or empty, whether the press is here, or whatever the subject, you bring, as our elected representative to the people's House, the House of Representatives, our concern that we want our government, our Congress, our House of Representatives and the United States Senate to act to pass a comprehensive energy plan.

Now, they get it out there. They understand that Congress has that responsibility, and it has the ability to do that.

Now, I served as a leader of the Transportation Committee, and let me tell you how quickly this place can work if it wants to. I have agreed with Mr. Oberstar, my Democrat counterpart. He is the Chair of the Transportation Committee; I am the Republican leader. I agreed on a Friday to introduce legislation which we agreed to, again, on a Friday. On a Monday, we introduced it in the House. On a Tuesday, we passed it through the House of Representatives. On a Wednesday we passed it through the United States Senate. On a Thursday night at 7 o'clock, the President signed it into law.

After 9/11 we came together in a national emergency. Now, we didn't have a terrorist hit, but we had a national emergency. Our people are hurting, people are hurting. It's the folks that the other side of the aisle claim to be trying to be the advocates for, and they have been standing in the way.

I have been around this place for more than two decades. I come from the most bipartisan family since 1889 to serve in the House of Representatives. I have never seen the House closed or Members denied the opportunity to discuss in a time of national crisis, and we have a crisis on our hands. Energy is not only affecting the price of gas, if you haven't been to the supermarket lately, my friends in the House, anyone who is in elected office who may not get to the supermarket, I advise you to get to the supermarket and see the sticker shock that the same folks are seeing, exorbitant prices at the fuel pump people are paying for average goods just to try to keep food on their table.

So we have a crisis. I have never seen a time when we weren't even allowed to bring an issue that would deal with a crisis, and here we know need a comprehensive approach. It's not just drilling, although I have a record way back to my days on the floor of the legislature of promoting responsible exploration, development of our domestic resources.

Sometimes it was a pretty lonely caucus that I belonged to. I was the only member from the Florida delegation, Democrat or Republican, to support us keeping energy independent in a responsible manner. Maybe I was ahead of my time, but I didn't want us to become dependent on foreign energy. That's where we are right now.

They have got us right where they want us. When you have a natural disaster, like we had this weekend, it drives speculation. It drives the cost up. It drove the availability up, because there is nothing like driving to a gas station and seeing a plastic bag over all of the pumps and no fuel available.

I am disappointed. Again, I don't want to detract, what this committee is doing is a responsible act, but no one asked me to come here to pass a Vice Presidential protection act. But I am telling you, they told me to come back to Washington to, to stay in Washington, to work in Washington, and, in a bipartisan fashion, to pass all of the above.

They get it, it's drilling, and we are not talking about the politics of drilling, and I have seen the politics of drilling in my own State of Florida for years. That was bad politics, and it got us in this bad situation.

What we need to do with extracting oil or gas or natural resources from off our shores is use the latest technology and base our exploration and development on sound science and good practices that do not harm the environment. Don't tell me you can't do it, you can do it. We can do it. We can extract it.

Why should we be dependent on the Mid East, Nigeria, Venezuela, and other foreign sources of energy? Folks, it doesn't make sense.

But you know what? The American people got it. They have been busy out there. They are trying to raise a family. They are trying to put food on the table. They are trying to send their kids to school. They are struggling to keep their jobs in a depressed market right now, and all they want is a little help from the people they sent here to do their job.

They get it about drilling. They get it about alternative sources. You know, just drilling isn't going to do it, and just developing our resources, which we can do, and we can do it in an expedited fashion. But they know the long-term fix is to get off that, to have alternative fuels.

I submit that the proposal by the Republicans, the American Energy Act, does just that. It's all of the above. Somehow we have gotten it.

Now we can't afford a sham in coming forward, and you know, some people are looking for political cover. They have an election around the corner. We have got to have a vote on something to make it look like we are doing something. But that does not solve the problem.

I plead, on behalf of those people that I saw this weekend in the Seventh Congressional District, to do something meaningful, to do a comprehensive energy act. It will start to solve some of our problems.

We can start becoming energy independent. We can lower the price of fuel and food that people depend on to feed their families. Then we can start building this economy again. The great opportunity that I have had in the last year and a half, leading the Transportation Committee, is not just see the projects and things going on in my district, but see the magnificence of this country from sea to shining sea.

This is an incredible country, and there isn't any challenge that we have never been able to undertake and also win at. We are creative people. We can do it.

All those people out there that are working so hard, sending their money here, relying on us to do something, to be their representative in this governing body that has so much say, let's just do our job. Put the politics aside, put November aside, put these people forward. That's all they are asking is for us to do our job.

So I stayed here when the lights went out last week until I had the opportunity to speak, and C-SPAN was turned off and the Speaker had left and

the place was closed down. I came back early today to tell you that they did not ask me, not one of them, to pass the Former Vice President Protection Act, but they did ask me, please do something about our energy, Mr. Mica. You are our Representative. Go back there and tell them that we need their help to get the economy going, to get this situation under control so we can give a great opportunity to our children, to our hopes and dreams for this great country.

I know we can do it. I know we can do it. Our predecessors have done it. I don't know why we are not doing it.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise today, September 11, 2008, to once again honor and pay tribute to Sergeant Bryan J. Tutten, 33, who, like many other brave Americans, joined the military following the terrorist attacks on our homeland 7 years ago. Sergeant Tutten died in service to our country on Christmas Day, December 25, 2007, fighting insurgents on his second tour of duty in Iraq.

On Saturday, September 13, 2008, the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 2391 in St. Augustine, Florida, will hold a special ceremony to honor the life and service of Sergeant Tutten. The Post will be renamed the Veterans of Foreign Wars Bryan Tutten Memorial Post 2391.

On Tuesday, January 15, 2007, I included in the Congressional Record the following remarks and today I want to again honor Sergeant Tutten's life by reflecting on his service to the United States.

Prior to joining the Army, Sgt. Tutten, born in St.

Augustine, Florida, graduated from St. Augustine High School

and attended St. Johns River Community College. He was also a

member of Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church in St.

Augustine.

We should all remember Sgt. Tutten's courage and his

ultimate sacrifice for our nation. The freedom and liberty we

enjoy and peace in the world for others for which he fought

are part of the great legacy that Sgt. Tutten leaves behind.

He was laid to rest at San Lorenzo Cemetery in St. Augustine,

Florida on January 4, 2008.

After the devastating events of September 11, 2001, Sgt.

Tutten enrolled in the Army. His family remembers him as an

avid sportsman who loved to fish and cook, and how he enjoyed

the time he had playing with his daughter, Catherine. He was

assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division based in Fort Bragg,

North Carolina which was deployed to Iraq.

With the passing of Sgt. Tutten, America has lost an

outstanding citizen and a shining example of service to our

nation. He will be remembered as a patriotic American, a

pillar of our community and a compassionate husband and a

loving father.

To his wife Constandina, his daughter Catherine, his son

Gareth, his mother Ms. Sylvia Smallwood and his loving family

and friends, we offer our deepest sympathy.

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to recognize Sgt. Bryan

J. Tutten's contributions and to ask all Members of the U.S.

House of Representatives of the 110th Congress to join me in

recognizing his service in our nation's Armed Forces and

remembering a great American hero.