Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against the phrase ``notwithstanding any other provision of law,'' on page 16, line 4.

This phrase violates clause 2 of rule XXI. It changes existing law and, therefore, constitutes legislating on an appropriations bill, in violation of House rules.

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against page 16, line 13, through line 20. This provision violates clause 2 of rule XXI. It changes existing law and, therefore, constitutes legislating on an appropriations bill in violation of the House rules.

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

Mr. Chairman, I will not take the 5 minutes, but just very briefly in response, I did start out the consideration of this bill with the point that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has certain prerogatives, and that is what we wanted to exercise tonight.

This House of Representatives works under a set of rules, and that rule is our charter of jurisdiction; and if we go outside of the rules or outside of the committee's jurisdiction and get into other areas, we can create chaos.

Each of the points of order that have been, in fact, raised, that I have raised, tonight deal with the charter that is set forth of responsibilities for conduct of legislative business of this House, and each of those have been ruled on by the Chair in a favorable manner.

I chose to propose a narrow scope in some of the limitations and some of the points of order that have I raised because we want programs to continue; and quite frankly, they are going to continue. I did not choose to expand them to wipe out these programs. So I think some of the accusations that have just been made are not accurate.

We are concerned about essential air service. We are concerned about airlines that may be going out of business, although I do not support the government underwriting losing-business propositions. I do support health care for everyone and am concerned about those who may lose their benefits if businesses go out of business, but that is not the intent of this.

We have a set of rules by which we operate, by which the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure can operate. I cannot get up here and appropriate money. I would love to have that power. These are some of the most powerful people in the United States of America. The chairman of the full committee I respect from Florida; the gentleman who controls a lot of the transportation agenda and appropriations, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook). All are honorable individuals and doing their job.

I am trying to do my job on behalf of the 70-plus members of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and do it in a responsible fashion.

Mr. Chairman, I stand and graciously and humbly raise a point of order against section 123 on page 22, line 20, through page 23, line 2.

This provision clearly violates clause 2 of rule XXI. It does, in fact, change existing law; and, therefore, it constitutes legislating on an appropriations bill, which is in clear violation of House rules.

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against section 125 on page 23, line 14, through line 22.

This provision violates clause 2 of rule XXI. It changes existing law and, therefore, constitutes legislating on an appropriations bill, in clear violation of House rules.

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against section 127.

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against section 127 on page 24, line 5 through line 12. This provision clearly violates clause 2 of rule XXI. It changes existing law by addressing funds in other acts and therefore constitutes legislating on an appropriations bill in violation of House rules.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2457, the Castillo de San Marcos National Monument Preservation and Education Act. It is also entitled the Castillo de San Marcos National Monument Boundary Adjustment Act of 2004. I thank the gentleman for taking me out of order at the beginning as sponsor of this legislation to explain it for a second and speak in support.

The Castillo de San Marcos National Monument is the oldest existing permanent seacoast fortification in the continental United States. This is not only a unique national park, but also a

national treasure. This 16th century fortress is the most complete and historic fortification in the United States. The star-shaped fort, surrounding moat, and earthworks were constructed between 1672 and 1756 to protect Spanish territory in Florida and the shipping routes along the coast.

This National Monument was the site of a British garrison during the American Revolution and was last employed for defense purposes in 1898 during the Spanish-American War.

Madam Speaker, more than 1.5 million tourists visit this National Monument each year. This 16th century fortress, while it has never been conquered in battle, is straining under the modern-day requirements to accommodate its growing visitors' population.

I have been working with the Colonial St. Augustine Preservation Foundation, the City of St. Augustine and the National Park Service to improve and expand educational resources and public accommodations at this national park site.

As Members can imagine, adapting a four-century old structure with adequate public facilities, meeting handicap and disability standards and visitor educational facility requirements is not an easy task. This bill authorizes funding for both the museum, education and visitor center facilities to compliment and serve this important 16th century structure.

For the first time, this legislation appropriately authorizes the use of Federal funds to construct this visitor center and educational resource center for the Castillo de San Marcos National Monument. Not only will this new visitor center assist the fort in maintaining its historical integrity, but it will also accommodate visitors' needs and provide a great educational experience.

The Park Service is expected to complete a general management plan in the following months which will include design, planning and construction options at the facility. This legislation will properly authorize a major infrastructure improvement for our National Park Service.

Finally, this bill will preserve for future generations this historic site, and will add to the enjoyment and education for both visitors and local citizens.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Radanovich), the gentleman from California (Chairman Pombo), and others on both sides of the aisle for their help in pushing this legislation forward and urge its adoption.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

I want to spend a second and also echo my appreciation to the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), to both sides of the aisle, for bringing forward this legislation; to the leadership of President Bush and his administration, who have acted, in advance of both this latest storm and the previous storm we had; for the leadership, the fantastic assistance provided Governor Bush. He has just been on the job working day and night. And I would be remiss if I did not mention all of the local officials. I represent some six counties, and many of those people have been through two disasters now, and they have worked nonstop. So, again, my congratulations.

This money that we are sending from Washington is part of the great strength of our Nation, part of the strength of a Federal system, and it is the people's money, the taxpayers' money. And when we have a need, it is appropriate that we do provide assistance from the country to an area that is hard hit, whether it is Florida; Richmond, Virginia; or other parts of the Nation. So it is one of the great strengths of our Nation and our people.

Finally, I want to say that Florida is open for business. I chair the Aviation Subcommittee. All of our major airports are open. I want to thank Marion Blakey, the head of FAA, she worked nonstop, and Woody Woodward, our national airports administrator, to make certain that Florida, which depends on travel and aviation, is open for business.

But we are open for business. There are some pockets in the southwest and

some in the southeast, but our major attractions are open. All of our interstates and our roads, I have reports back as a member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, are open. And we want people to do us a favor by not canceling their plans to visit Florida. We will dust ourselves off. We will clean up a bit. But people can help Florida by not canceling their plans, but coming to Florida. We are open for business, and we will prevail.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4056) to encourage the establishment of both long-term and short- term programs to address the threat of man-portable air defense systems (MANPADSs) to commercial aviation, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4056, which is entitled the Commercial Aviation MANPADS Defense Act. Again, MANPADS stands for man- portable air defense systems. It is also an acronym for shoulder- launched missiles.

There are two significant threats to commercial aviation today: first of all, there is the threat of explosives carried on board a civil aviation aircraft; and then there is the second significant threat which is shoulder-fired missiles. The legislation before us tonight addresses one of those issues, the growing terrorist MANPADS threat. It addresses four different problems that we face with this threat.

First of all, most of the Members may be aware that the administration has launched, with Congress' urging, an extensive research and development program, and that program has been expedited to develop a shoulder-launched missile defensive system to put on our commercial aircraft.

But the number one problem that we face even if we finish the research and development of that system today, the defensive system, is putting that system on an aircraft and getting it certified. So the first front and first problem that this bill addresses is an expedited FAA certification of an antimissile system that is currently being developed. The second part of this comprehensive piece of legislation deals with increasing multinational treaties and agreements to stem MANPADS and shoulder-launched missile proliferation.

We know and we have been told even with the conflict in the Middle East that there are a great number of

MANPADS available on the world market. We must do everything possible to stop the proliferation of them, and this encourages multinational treaties and agreements.

And, third, encouraging MANPADS market acquisition. This is a buy- back program. This legislation also requests the administration and those involved in buy-back programs to continue and expand those programs. And then the fourth part about this is that we know that these defensive systems that we can put on aircraft are a good step forward, we know that multilateral agreements and cooperation will bring MANPADS out of the market and we know that the buy-back program will work, but we still are at risk and we know that these systems even when fully developed do not cover us for all types of attack and the fourth part of this legislation promotes ground-based systems. So we look at another protective layer in the threat that we face.

While it may be difficult to attack domestic aviation in light of the current security measures that we have put in place, the availability of MANPADS weapons of terror is still a great cause for concern. This has been demonstrated repeatedly, most recently by the November 2002 attack in Kenya, by the 2003 attack on the DHL plane in Baghdad, and also most recently in August of 2003 by the arrest in New York City of three men accused in a plot to smuggle shoulder-fired missiles into the United States.

Last year at the direction of Congress, DHS began an aggressive research and development program to assess the viability of an antimissile technology for use in commercial aviation passenger aircraft. The administration's current $100 million research and development program and efforts to work through issues unique to our commercial aviation system and our commercial aircraft, I am pleased, are making very significant progress. We expect to have a recommendation on the viability, feasibility, and costs associated with these systems sometime next year. After that, these systems will need to be expeditiously FAA-certified for installation on our commercial aircraft.

It is also necessary, I have said, that we keep these destructive weapons out of the hands of terrorists. Other alternatives to protect our airlines and our airports must also be explored. That is why I, along with the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel), introduced H.R. 4056. This bill now is an interim solution and an interim measure addressing, again, problems that we face with this threat. It encourages continued actions to reduce the number of these weapons that are available to those who would do us harm.

We have worked closely with the Committee on International Relations and the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) to strengthen and clarify the provisions in the legislation dealing with international cooperative efforts. This bill makes clear that the administration must take additional steps to reduce the security risks created by shoulder- launched missile systems. It also encourages strong international diplomatic and cooperative efforts to limit the proliferation of these MANPADS as well as the continuation of our programs, as I have said, that would help us reduce the number of shoulder-launched missiles worldwide. The bill also requires the FAA to expedite their airworthiness certification of the missile defense systems for our commercial aircraft.

Finally, H.R. 4056 requires the Department of Homeland Security to report back to Congress within a year on the vulnerability assessment reports they are conducting at our airports throughout the United States and on how they are responding to the General Accounting Office's recommendations to prevent the proliferation of MANPADS.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and also the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel) for their hard work on this bill. I also want to thank Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Don Young and International Relations Chairman Henry Hyde for their cooperation and work.

This measure takes several important steps in dealing with the MANPADS terrorist threat. It is a good bill, it is a bipartisan bill; and therefore I urge passage and adoption of H.R. 4056, as amended.

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

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

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

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

To close here, Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank both the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel) and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for their work. This is not a partisan issue. This is an issue in the best interest of this Nation.

We have done things to make the traveling public who use aviation, which is so important to the economy of this Nation, safe. We have secured cockpit doors. We have air marshals on board. We have trained pilots to arm and defend their aircraft.

So we have taken measures, and I think even passengers who fly would never knowingly allow an aircraft to be overtaken. So the threat is not that type of threat that we faced September 11, and we know terrorists are always looking one step ahead to do damage to us. So this is an important complement to what the administration has done.

We have a $160 million research and development program to expedite producing defensive systems that can be used on commercial aircraft, and that is important. It gives us one more means of defense against a great terrorist threat.

Will we be able to put these on every aircraft? No. Are we able to put an air marshal on every aircraft? No. Does this cost us money? Yes, it is going to cost us money. But stop to think of the cost of one commercial airline being blown out of the sky by a shoulder-launched missile.

Eleven percent of our gross domestic product, the entire economy of this country, is really directly related and indirectly related to our aviation industry, jobs by the millions. And since September 11, we hear 3 million jobs. I guarantee that we could find 1\1/2\ to 2 million jobs that were lost just in aviation by the loss of four commercial aircraft.

So we have lessons to learn, and I have brought to the floor, in closing, the Kenya missile attack in November of 2002 in Mombasa. Not one, but two shoulder-launched missiles were launched on that date against an Israeli commercial charter aircraft; and this was also timed with a ground attack where people were killed, but hundreds would have perished had they been successful here. This is in Kenya on another continent.

However, even more recently, this is a DHL commercial airliner that left Baghdad in November, 2003, and was hit. So far, we have been lucky. So far, we have been fortunate. This aircraft also survived this terrorist attack. But we know there are more of these shoulder-launched missiles available on the open market than ever before.

So the provision of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel) helps in getting international cooperation.

And again I thank the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for putting a broad-based measure together that will fill in the gaps to provide us one more layer of protection against a potential terrorist attack.

Mr. Speaker, I insert in the Record at this point an exchange of letters between the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) regarding H.R. 4056.

House of Representatives, Committee on International

Relations,

Washington, DC, June 21, 2004.

Hon. Don Young,

Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,

House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: I have reviewed the text of H.R. 4056,

the ``Commercial Aviation

MANPADS Defense Act of 2004,'' as ordered reported from the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on May 12,

2004. The Committee on International Relations has

jurisdiction under Rule X over certain provisions of this

bill contained in Section 3, International Cooperative

Efforts and Section 5, Programs to Reduce MANPADS.

Recognizing your wish that the House of Representatives

consider this critical bill as soon as possible, and noting

the continued strong spirit of cooperation between our

Committees, I will forego seeking a sequential referral of

H.R. 4056 for the Committee on International Relations.

However, waiving the Committee on International Relations'

right to a referral in this case does not waive the

Committee's jurisdiction over any provision in H.R. 4056 or

similar provisions in other bills. In addition, I ask that

you support my request to have the Committee on International

Relations represented on the conference on this bill, if a

conference is necessary. Finally, I ask that you include this

letter in the Congressional Record during the debate on this

bill.

I appreciate your leadership and cooperation on this bill,

and I look forward to working with you to ensure that H.R.

4056 is enacted into law soon.

Henry J. Hyde,

Chairman.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4056.

Madam Speaker, I come before the House tonight as a Member of Congress concerned about the impending Presidential race and particularly concerned about the Vice Presidential nominee chosen this week by the Democrat nominee for President.

I am very concerned, Madam Speaker, because the choice that has been made is a divider rather than a uniter, and I think we are about to engage in a debate that will determine who will lead us for the next 4 years. I am very concerned that someone has been chosen that has talked about two Americas, and that is a great concern to me, the framing of this debate around two Americas.

Quite frankly, Madam Speaker, I am concerned about two Americas. I am concerned about giving access and a platform to the trial lawyers in America, a stage and the ability to launch their efforts, which is unprecedented in the history of our Republic.

I see two Americas. A lot of trial lawyers, attorneys are my best friends, but I see an America with a few trial lawyers who have benefited greatly and substantially financially, and I see an America in which the rest of us have paid and are paying every day for what those trial lawyers have done to our society and our country.

This is a very serious issue because we are going to decide in this campaign if we continue to let trial lawyers have two Americas, where a few benefit, and then we all pay.

I do not know any American that has been paying lower hospital bills or lower medical care costs. And if we look at the root of the higher costs, it is because of the system that has evolved. A few are suing, and a few are benefiting. I am very concerned about what I see for health care costs and, in manufacturing, the jobs that have been driven out of this country. I come from the business sector. I am so pleased I am not in business because of the threat of lawsuits today.

Everything we do in our society now, the cost is dramatically affected; not just prescription drugs or health care, access to health care, but also manufacturing, our ability to compete in the world. Sometimes we compete on a wage basis, but when we look at lawsuits, I will give two examples.

One, the only bill that we overrode when President Clinton was in office was one in which we attempted to do something about civil aircraft manufacturing. We were losing it in the United States, and we had lost most of it. We did override a veto, and we did restore some civil aviation manufacturing. However, we have lost all regional jet manufacturing, lost 50 percent of the large aircraft manufacturing. If we look around the States, North Carolina, the South, the North, Ohio, we see manufacturing closing down, because we would not want to manufacture in the United States when we can take that activity outside the United States.

Another example is Orlando Helicopter, in my own backyard in central Florida. It does not exist anymore. They moved to South America and China. Why? Because of liabilities.

So I see two Americas. I see an America where we may have a great opportunity for people to get health care at affordable costs, I see opportunity where we can expand jobs and have great economic opportunity, but I do not see it with, unfortunately, the Democratic nominee who is being brought forth.

What concerns me, too, having just survived 2 years ago a $5 million unprecedented election by a contestant who was a trial lawyer who spent $5 million to oust me from office, I see that same onslaught of funds coming in to try to capture the second highest office in our land. I see two Americas, and I see one that does concern me.

Madam Speaker, the Democrats have chosen a trial lawyer as their vice presidential nominee. Now that is just what this country needs, a trial lawyer in the second most powerful position in the United States. That is just what America needs, a well-positioned trial lawyer who can make certain we sue more health care providers, sue more hospitals and drug companies. That is just what America needs, a trial lawyer who can ensure we sue more manufacturers and corporations.

If trial lawyers have not driven our health care costs out of sight and our job overseas, we need to give them a better platform to finish the job.

Let us be frank, Madam Speaker, America needs a trial lawyer at the helm like Custer needed another Indian at Big Horn. However, there might be a bright side to having more trial lawyers in Washington, since the courts have given terrorists the right to have their own lawyers. At least now we will have something positive for more trial lawyers to do here.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to a good friend, a community leader, a wonderful wife and mother, and devoted American, Jackie Mallory.

Jacqueline Altman Mallory of New Smyrna Beach, Florida died June 23, 2004, in Port Orange, Florida. She was born in Homestead, Florida on August 27, 1936.

She was a graduate of New Smyrna Beach Senior High School. She received a degree in early childhood elementary education in 1957 from Florida State University. She was a member of the Delta Gamma sorority and was a member of the theater dance group. She taught school in Boston, Massachusetts and Sanford, Florida.

In 1974, Jackie earned a nursing degree from Daytona Beach Community College and worked as a registered nurse.

Active in civic affairs, Jackie was on the Board of the Southeast Volusia Hospital District at the time of her death. She also served in that capacity under Governor Bob Martinez. Recently, a building at Bert Fish Medical Center was designated to be named in her honor.

She was a member of the Smyrna Yacht Club; a member and past president of the Southeast Volusia Republican Club; a former member of the Volusia County Republican Executive Committee; a former board member of the Visiting Nurses Association, the Volusia/Flagler Red Cross, and the Space Coast Lung Association. She was active in numerous American Cancer Society Fund Raisers; was on the founding committee for the Atlantic Center for the Arts and Images; and was a cheerleading coach for the Southeast Volusia Athletic Association. She was a member of St. Paul's Episcopal Church.

She is survived by her husband, Peter, a son, Peter and his wife Sherri of Panama City; a daughter, Betsy Visconti and her husband Joseph of Titusville; a brother, Vernon Altman and his wife Mary Lee of Palo Alto, California; a sister, J'neese Strozier and her husband Thomas of Miami and New Smyrna Beach; and two grandchildren, Mallory Marie Pumphrey of Titusville and Mary Christine Mallory of Panama City.

Florida and the New Smyrna Beach area have lost a community leader. The Mallory Family has lost a loved one. I have lost a special friend whom it has been my honor and privilege to know.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4226) to amend title 49, United States Code, to make certain conforming changes to provisions governing the registration of aircraft and the recordation of instruments in order to implement the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment and the Protocol to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters Specific to Aircraft Equipment, known as the ``Cape Town Treaty,'' as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Cape Town Treaty was signed by the United States on May 9, 2003, and referred to the United States Senate for ratification at the end of that year. The Senate will most likely consider ratification of the treaty in the next month or so.

Now, this action by the House today of course will not approve the Cape Town Treaty. That responsibility does lie with the other body. However, this bill takes an action to conform United States law for proper implementation of that treaty, and that is why this action today is important.

The Cape Town Treaty is vital to international commerce. It will bring the uniformity of modern commercial finance laws, already in place in the United States, to international transactions involving aircraft and also aircraft engines.

This uniformity will both greatly reduce the risks associated with aircraft and engine sales abroad, and it will also help to bring improved and newer aircraft, it will help bring them to many areas of the world that desperately need them.

The job of the Subcommittee on Aviation since I have become chairman and, even more importantly, since September 11, 2001, is to aid this industry that has been ailing. If we look at what happened since September 11, many folks refer to some 3 million jobs lost in this industry, and I can almost stand here with certainty and guarantee that half of those 3 million jobs, 1.5 million were directly related to the aviation industry. This bill is one more step in helping to revitalize that shaky industry that we have seen since September 11.

The Cape Town Treaty seeks to establish an international registry where parties having an interest in aircraft or in aircraft engine can register that interest at an international level to ensure that they remain protected.

The treaty enjoys strong bipartisan support and is also supported by the U.S. aviation industry, as well as our key government Departments, including our State Department, Department of Transportation, and Department of Commerce.

In order to fully implement the treaty and its accompanying protocol, the administration has proposed to allow the Federal Aviation Administration's Civil Aviation Registry to be the United States' so- called ``entry point'' to the international registry for relevant actions. This is a minor, but important, change in United States law, because it will ensure that upon ratification, the Cape Town Treaty and its aircraft protocol can be fully implemented. That is exactly what H.R. 4226, the Cape Town Treaty Implementation Act, proposes to do.

This is important legislation, again, that will help an industry that is still recovering from the tragic events of September 11.

In closing, I would like to thank Ambassador Ed Stimpson. Ed Stimpson is the ambassador to ICAO, which is the International Civil Aviation Organization. That international headquarters is located in Montreal, and Ed Stimpson does a great job in representing United States aviation interests on that international body. So I wish to thank him for bringing the need to implement this needed legislation before the House of Representatives and also his leadership in trying to help revitalize our industry, both that produces large aircraft and also that produces aircraft engines. So again, I say thank you to Ed Stimpson, our ambassador, for his leadership on this issue.

I also join with the full committee chairman, the gentleman from Alaska

(Mr. Young); the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar); and the Subcommittee on Aviation ranking member, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), in urging immediate passage of this bipartisan bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, again I ask your support in the passage today of H.R. 4226 as amended. As you heard, this is an implementation technical bill that will implement provisions of the Cape Town Treaty. As you heard in my previous comment and the comments of the gentlewoman from California, this legislation will, in fact, aid our aviation industry which has been, again, so hard hit during the past 2\1/2\ years.

This will not only create jobs in Long Beach, California, but Washington and dozens of other States that produce major aircraft in the United States and also assist us to sell engines which are produced in the United States, I believe in Ohio, but not only from Ohio will there be a good results from the implementation of this treaty, but across the United States where additional parts are produced. So it aids manufacturing, it aids the job creation.

And we urge also the other body to act expeditiously in the passage of this legislation so that the full benefits in effect of the Cape Town Treaty when fully implemented can be realized.

So, again, I urge adoption of H.R. 4226.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 4226, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to congratulate Delta Airlines on the 75th anniversary of the airline's first passenger flight, June 17th, 1929.

Delta has a long and storied history in aviation development in America. Starting as a small crop-dusting business in Monroe, Louisiana under the name of Huff Daland Dusters in 1923, C.E. Woolman and his associates acquired it in 1928. A company secretary came up with the name Delta after the airline's location near the Mississippi River's outlet to the Gulf of Mexico. By 1929 the company had its first passenger plane. Seventy-five years ago today, a Delta Airlines plane carried passengers for the first time from Monroe to Dallas, Texas.

While competitors faltered during the Great Depression, Delta survived by teaching flying as well as providing maintenance and hangar rentals to other airlines at its Monroe base. Delta won a bid for a federal postal contract in 1934, giving the airline a route from Charleston, South Carolina to Fort Worth, Texas. As the airline grew Delta split the route into two parts--eastbound to Charleston and westbound to Dallas and Fort Worth, later linking them up in Atlanta. With this route and passenger service as reliable sources of income, Delta grasped the opportunity to evolve into one of the most successful airline companies in the United States. Today Delta serves 209 domestic cities in 46 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as 48 international cities in 32 countries. As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Aviation, I am pleased to recognize Delta's great contribution to the transportation industry.

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against section 524.

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against page 47, line 6, beginning with ``and the'' through line 13.

This provision violates clause 2 of rule XXI . It changes existing law, and therefore constitutes legislating on an appropriations bill in violation of House rules.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. This amendment is simply unnecessary and unworkable. Some of our colleagues have said, and I think wrongly believe, that air cargo is a hole in our aviation security system and that extreme measures must be taken immediately. I am sensitive to those misconceptions, but believe that serious efforts are being made by the Transportation Security Administration and the aviation industry; the airline industry are taking appropriate steps to address cargo security needs. TSA is currently developing new and more comprehensive standards for air cargo security which should be finalized soon, and TSA has also issued air cargo security directives recently.

Let me just respond, also, to a couple of things that have been said here. First, people are speaking without information. We heard the gentleman from Massachusetts say that we are putting our families through the utmost possible screening. That is not true. Some of the Members should take time to see the classified results of what we are putting them through and the holes in the current system. Putting explosives on a plane through cargo is a small risk at this point. Having a passenger walk through 1950 metal detectors is a great risk because those metal detectors do not detect explosives. That is how a plane will be taken down if a plane is taken down. This amendment actually can do a great deal of damage. In contrast to what the gentleman from Connecticut said, in the Congress we put a provision in that said 2003 instead of 2004. Those bags still are not being screened. We have only done 14 airports inline. That is because the Congress might say something, but they are not funding this.

Look at R&D. I put $50 million in the original TSA bill to fund research and development. One of our friends from the State of Washington in the other body took $30 million of the $50 million for R&D the first year, and that is why we do not have the technology to determine what equipment can be used to effectively detect explosives. And then again we can stand up here and ask the cow to jump over the Moon; but unless you provide the money and the technology and the means to do that, it is not going to happen.

The next year you took the money and you did not fund the money, and we had $75 million for R&D. You all waited 5 months, and the people who are talking now are the people who delayed the appropriations. So TSA took $63 million of $75 million out of their funds for research and development and had to use it for personnel. So the problem is here, and the problem is Congress making these kinds of edicts that do more damage.

I have summed up the problem. I have identified the problem. The problem is here, people talking about things, telling folks that we are putting our families at risk. We must address this on a risk basis, and we must properly fund R&D.

We do not have the technology to do this now. We do not have the technology to address our greatest risk, which is people strapping explosives to

themselves and walking through a 1950 metal detector that does not detect explosives.

So we need to address the risks. We need to do this on a logical basis. Not something that grabs headlines but something that is effective, that solves the problem at hand, that truly protects the American public from a terrorist act.

So I urge the Members to defeat this amendment. It could pass 100 times, and it does not mean anything because we are not going to be able to do it. We have $150 million this year for R&D, and that should be spent appropriately, not in haste.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, just to correct the record also, I would like the gentleman and the other Members to know, it was said in the beginning of this debate, also, that Pan Am 103 was brought down as a result of this situation, explosives in cargo. That is not true. It was explosives in luggage.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against page 14, line 9, beginning with the words ``provided further'' through line 19.

This provision violates clause 2 of rule XXI. It changes existing law and, therefore, constitutes legislating on an appropriations bill in violation of House rules.

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

Mr. Chairman, I want to also thank the committee Chair, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), for his leadership on this issue, the great job he is doing on homeland security. The gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and I have the honor and privilege of serving with him as the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Aviation. I understand the frustration of the gentleman. Both the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and me are very frustrated with the operation of TSA. However, I rise in opposition to eliminating the screening cap of 45,000 that the Committee on Appropriations has placed on TSA.

I did not coordinate my remarks with the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr.

Rogers), but ironically he got up and said we were promised in the beginning, it took, they said, maybe 26,000 it would take the private sector to add fewer screeners; and we can debate the merits and or demerits of what they did. And then we were told 30,000; and then we were told 35,000 would do the job; and then 40,000 would do the job. Only give us 50,000; and one day we woke up and there were 60,000 TSA employees.

Now, they did a job that was mandated by Congress, and they put all those folks out there. But at some point it got to be exactly what the chairman described. Thousands standing around. It became a joke. And what we had to do was right-size that agency. We got something in place; and it was, no question, overstaffed.

One of the problems with this is that a defect in the organization of TSA, and this is no offense to TSA, Congress organized it. But we created basically, and I have said this publicly before, a Soviet-style Moscow-centered, in this case Washington-centered, bureaucracy.

The Chair just described the process of hiring a person, a vacancy in San Francisco and then waiting days and weeks. We just waited 6 months for TSA to finalize its most recent screener allocations. They just released them. I am the chairman. I represent Orlando International Airport at one of the busiest tourist destinations in the United States. We needed 124 part-time positions before Christmas. I still do not have the part-time screeners that we need there. They cannot get it right.

Please do not believe that bigger government, just give us 10,000 more, 20,000 more, will solve this. It will not. It has to be decentralized. It has to be localized. And that is what we intend to do.

We do have 14 airports that have automated inline screening systems, and you heard the reduction in personnel, just at one example; and more will come online, so we actually need fewer screeners.

The performance rate of even the screeners we have, I hate to say this, I invite every Member of Congress to receive the classified results. The Inspector General testified before us publicly; we had Federal screening and five demonstration public screening operations compared with all Federal screening operations, and the Inspector General described the results that they performed equally poorly.

I say that TSA is mostly a mirage. We are fortunate that we have secured cockpit doors, that we have armed air marshals, that we in fact have pilots that have been armed. That gives us this protection, not this mirage you see. A bigger mirage is not going to solve it. What is going to solve it is decentralization of the process and then better technology. Go to New Jersey. You do not need an invitation. See our test center. See equipment that will detect weapons, will detect explosives. That is what we need in place.

I will say, no matter how hard they try and how many employees they get, 40, 50, 60,000, they will never get it right from Washington in this bureaucratized, centralized operation. It will never be able to service the needs, the requirements of 440 airports with different schedules.

Think of Dulles out here. They are going to have Independence Air with 300 additional flights. Well, that is not in the allocation that they just took 6 months to get. It will take them months and months to get it right. So we need to vote down this amendment and correct the deficiencies in TSA.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word to engage in a colloquy with the chairman of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, if you would, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

First of all, I want to take just a moment to commend the gentleman from Mississippi (Chairman Taylor) and the Committee on Appropriations for their outstanding efforts in bringing this important measure to the floor during these very difficult budgetary times.

As he may know, I have been working to improve and expand educational resources and public accommodations at the Castillo de San Marcos in St. Augustine, Florida. That is our national monument. This national monument is not only a unique part of our national parks infrastructure but it is also a national treasure. The National Park Service is expected to complete a study this fall which includes plans to construct a required facility there.

Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that when this plan is completed and this project is authorized by Congress, the Interior and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations would consider funding this much-needed expansion and renovation project.

I would ask the gentleman from North Carolina whether this is his understanding and intention as well.

I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

I thank the chairman for his response.

Mr. Speaker, it was my privilege to know Rosalie Robinson Gordon-Mills, a community leader and distinguished citizen of Florida's 7th Congressional District. Her recent death is a great loss to St. Johns County and the State of Florida because of Mrs. Gordon-Mills' many contributions to our school system, civil rights, and community service. I join others in paying tribute to this special woman. It is my honor to include in the Congressional Record of the United States House of Representatives the rich history of her life and many contributions from a recently published obituary.

Mrs. Rosalie Robinson Gordon-Mills, 96, died April 20 at

Flagler Hospital following complications of a collapsed lung.

A retired educator and counselor for 44 years with the St.

Johns County School System, she was head of the English

Department at Excelsior School and director of guidance and

college placement at St. Augustine High School.

In addition to her teaching career, Mrs. Gordon-Mills was a

civic leader and politician, having been the first black

woman in 400 years to run for public office in St. Augustine,

for which she is currently listed in the Florida history

books. In 1986, she received a Presidential Award from

President Reagan for Private Sector Initiatives because of

her outstanding leadership role with the St. Augustine

Council on Aging in procuring the site and establishing the

first multipurpose senior citizen's center in St. Augustine.

Mrs. Gordon-Mills was born in Tallahassee, to Arthur Howard

Robinson, owner of a dairy business, which exported dairy

products interstate. Her mother, Callie Eliza Ferrell, was a

school teacher with her own school, as was her grandmother,

Henrietta Robinson, the first licensed black teacher in the

state of Florida. In the 1920's, her parents moved to St.

Augustine, where her father became the head of the

Agriculture Division of Florida Normal College and her mother

became the dean of women. They came at the invitation of

President Collier, who had met them in Tallahassee.

Mrs. Gordon-Mills attended the Model Laboratory School of

Florida A & M, where she graduated with highest honors. She

then realized her dream of attending college at Boston

University, where she majored in chemistry and physical

sciences. During her years at Boston University, she was a

member of the varsity broad jump and pole vaulting team, as

well as the debating team. She also pledged Alpha Kappa Alpha

sorority-Epsilon Chapter and was a member of The Aristos, a

Boston social club. She would later return to Boston

University and receive her master's degree in guidance and

counseling in 1947.

When she returned to St. Augustine following graduation to

visit with her parents, she met her future husband, Dr.

Rudolph Nathaniel Gordon, America's first black maxillo-

facial surgeon, who was researching a location for his

practice. They met at an Episcopalian Church picnic, were

married and were together for 25 years prior to Dr. Gordon's

death in 1959. Together they were a formidable force in the

St. Augustine community. Education and care of the children

of Lincolnville was a top priority. They encouraged young

people to attend four-year colleges and often took them to

college and paid their tuition. He established a free dental

clinic for Lincolnville children and a Boy Scout troop for

the boys of the community. After Dr. Gordon's death, Mrs.

Gordon-Mills would marry Dr. Otis J. Mills, longtime friend

and member of the family that owned the famous ``Iceberg''

drugstore and manufactured the popular ``Smooth As Silk'' ice

cream. They had a wonderful 12-year relationship before he

succumbed to Alzheimer's disease.

Mrs. Gordon-Mills was an enthusiastic participant in the

civil rights movement and supported all efforts of

Lincolnville to work with Dr. Martin Luther King. She also

befriended Mrs. Peabody, who came from Massachusetts to

support the movement in St. Augustine. During this time, she

ran for the City Council against six males and, after winning

the primary, finished third in the final election, making her

the first black woman to run for public office. She always

felt a strong commitment to the future of St. Augustine and

wanted to promote racial harmony. A member of one of

Florida's most illustrious families, she was a direct

descendant (through her maternal grandmother, Henrietta

Robinson) of ``The Great Antonio Proctor,'' who was born in

1743 and was the recipient of 185 acres in St. Augustine from

the Spanish Governor of Florida for his work as an

interpreter between the Creek Indians and the Spanish when

Florida was still under Spanish rule.

Mrs. Gordon-Mills' elder years were as filled with activity

as her early years. A woman of intellectual brilliance,

impeccable character and determination, she continued to be

active as a lifetime member of the Board of the Council on

Aging; an officer of the Board of Echo House--a tutoring and

community center she started--and an active member of St.

Cyprian's Episcopal Church, where she was a member of The

Daughters of The King and a member of the Vestry. She was the

active C.E.O. of the family real estate business until the

week of her death, spending each day problem-solving, meeting

with her management crew and ensuring that her tenants and

her properties were well cared for. Her considerable

business acumen was respected by all of the business

people whom she encountered. (She made recent trips to

Tallahassee to meet with the State Historical Society to

present grant requests for her Echo House project).

Her social life was equally active. As a founding member of

the Daytona Beach chapter of the Links, Inc., she attended

meetings and activities regularly and participated in their

many scholarship fund-raising efforts for regional students.

In addition, she administered the scholarship fund set up by

her dear, deceased friend, Mrs. Bemis, of St. Augustine, that

enables deserving and talented students to attend Bethune

Cookman College. She enjoyed the regular gatherings of the

Clique Club and Venetian Club, to which she had belonged for

many years.

Mrs. Gordon-Mills loved her family; her daughter, Dr.

Carlotta Gordon Miles and her son-in-law, attorney Theodore

A. Miles, of Washington, D.C. (Her beloved son, Rudolph N.

Gordon II, predeceased her in 1967.) Her grandchildren were

the loves of her life and she had a special relationship with

each of them--Dr. Wendell Gordon Miles and Miss Lydia

Carlotta Miles, of Washington, D.C., and Mrs. Cecily Miles

Slater and her husband, Ramael Slater, of Hollywood, CA. Her

brother, Dr. Arthur J. Robinson, and his son, Arthur J.

Robinson Jr., of Palm Coast; her sister-in-law Verna C.

Robinson of Washington and her niece, Angela Robinson

Witherspoon, and her husband, John Witherspoon, of Los

Angeles, CA, and her nephew Elbert C. Robinson, of

Washington. Her first cousins, Celestine Nicks of Mandarin,

and Ida Mae Harrison, of Columbus, GA. Her family looked to

her for guidance, advice and as an example of a Christian

life well-lived.

Born into a privileged family, Mrs. Gordon-Mills had a deep

sense of obligation to her fellow man and an unfailing

determination to make a difference with her life. She had a

deep devotion to all children, a strong sense of racial pride

and a commitment to the concept of ``From those to whom much

is given, much is expected.'' Her selflessness and generosity

to others was unequaled. She believed that love should be put

into action and faith in God is the foundation of life.

Mrs. Gordon-Mills was fortunate in having a circle of

loving friends who, in the last years of her life, joined her

family in making these years especially joyful. W.D. McCoy, a

former student and ``son,'' was a devoted and concerned

companion; Dorothy and Rudolph Israel and Maggie and Pat

Patterson were ever present and supportive in whatever she

chose to undertake. Otis and Myrtis Mason made it possible

for her to continue her Links Inc. participation. Father

David Allert and the members of the St. Cyprian's

congregation admired and respected her wisdom and her

spirituality. Arthur Schwecke, her neighbor and ``son;'' and

Joe Logan and Janis Brown, her business manager, helped her

continue her corporate activities. Josephine Quarterman, Lena

Callueng and John Gilbert enabled her to continue to maintain

her household and lifestyle until the end.

These special friends will always be remembered with

gratitude and deep affection by her family.