Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support, with my colleagues, of H.R. 6560, a bill that as has been said will make certain changes to the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement, which the House passed exactly 3 years ago yesterday. It will also make changes to our African trade preference program and will extend the generalized system of preference for one more year.

The changes to the DR-CAFTA agreement will encourage the use of American-made fabrics in the production of pants in the DR. This helps to support American textile jobs, and it gives the Dominican Republic more flexibility to strengthen its competitiveness, too. So it is a win-win for jobs here in America and for jobs in Central America as well. It's a small change, but it can help American exporters and Dominican producers, and it's evidence of how the agreement has created economic benefits for all participants.

In fact, if you drill down a little deeper into this agreement, in the past 3 years, even though it's really not fully implemented, Guatemala, for example, has not only shown remarkable economic progress and growth since the CAFTA agreement was put into place, but a lot of their jobs that they're creating are in the rural areas, in the poorest of the poor. So they're helping not just the number of a few big producers; they're helping the average person in Guatemala by raising the standard of living and by their having some hope for the future just as it is creating jobs here in America.

What we have learned over the years is that it's not enough to simply buy American. You have to sell American. We have to aggressively sell our American products and services all throughout this world.

For the U.S., as it has been pointed out, our $1.9 billion trade deficit with the six partners in Central America has now turned into a $3.6 billion trade surplus thanks to this agreement. That means we're selling more than we're buying and that we're supporting good paying American jobs in manufacturing, in services, in transportation, in logistics, and in agriculture.

We recently learned that, if you take all of our current free trade and fair trade agreements, we see the same trend, that deficits are turning into surpluses across the board. We now have a surplus of nearly $3 billion, and our free trade agreement partners, who are only a small part of the world economy, now account for half of all that America sells overseas. So we are creating some of the best customers for American products and for American workers here in our agreements.

In fact, if you look at the American economy today, nearly 40 percent of our economic growth comes from selling our products all around the world, and we're selling them to the countries we have these agreements with. They are great customers, and we need more of them.

What I've realized is that, as to the giant sucking sound that was predicted for trade agreements, it turns out that that's the hot air deflated from the critics who've been proven wrong about each one of them, especially about CAFTA. This is yet another reason why this Congress needs to pass the U.S.-Colombian Trade Promotion Agreement.

Like Central America before it, Colombia already enjoys access to America. They can sell their products almost duty free into the United States, but when we try to sell our products back into Colombia, their tariff is almost 14 percent, much higher than Central America's was before. They don't create a level playing field for American workers. We want to have two-way trade and equal competition.

An agreement would lock in Colombia's trade preferences while creating a better investment climate for the country, which would help build its legitimate economy, which is dynamic throughout this region. A stable Colombia is good for the United States and for the hemisphere.

If you've been following the news, you've seen remarkable progress by Colombia and by President Uribe on

human rights, on labor rights and especially, just lately, on its remarkable rescue of the American hostages after their being 5 years within the FARC. They are taming the terrorist organizations with our help, and they deserve our continued support in that effort.

Madam Speaker, the Central American agreement has helped to bolster ties with our partners in the region. It has helped to create U.S. jobs and to encourage economic growth in neighboring countries. Colombia will do the same. I reiterate my call for the leadership of this House to schedule an up-or-down vote on Colombia this year. Given the nature of our trade laws, it will be too late if this gets put on hold until next year, and we will have missed a critical opportunity to strengthen our relationship with an important partner in the region and to create fair trade for Americans.

Ladies and gentlemen, the whole world is watching America. Let's not turn our back on Colombia. Let's not show the world we're economic isolationists--afraid to compete or afraid to hold out our hand to partners in our backyard. Let's not as a Congress be beholden to a few special interests. Democrats and Republicans, Defense Secretaries and Secretaries of State agree that this is one of the most important foreign policy decisions that we can make. The whole world is watching. Let us schedule a vote for Colombia and pass it this year.

If the gentleman from Illinois would yield.

Well, isn't it my understanding as well that technology has long existed to turn our vast resources of coal into super clean liquid fuels, the type, because you always think of coal will help lower your utility bills at home, but the truth of the matter is the technology since the 1940s in Germany converted coal to diesel fuel, the type we use in our cars and trucks. And today some of our African countries are using coal, converting it to diesel for almost a third of all their transportation needs.

I recently talked to our major research company, the Woodlands Huntsman, to talk about coal and its conversion and could it be done. And their researchers just laughed. They said, are you kidding? Of course we can do this.

My understanding is the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hensarling, has introduced legislation to use the purchasing power of our Air Force, to use the purchasing power of our own government to accelerate that type of research and bring it into the marketplace so we can develop those super clean liquid fuels coming from an abundant resource that will be less dependent on foreign countries for our energy needs.

I thank the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hensarling, for his leadership on this issue and his legislation, including leadership in the American Energy Act just introduced last week to try to force this Congress to finally get serious about taking responsibility for our own energy needs in this country.

I have been in Congress a while, but one of the best decisions my wife and I made was not to move to Washington. We live at home in Texas with our two young boys, six and nine years old. I commute to work each week here in Washington. We do that so I can stay closer to the families and neighborhoods in Texas that I represent.

Flying up today to Washington, I just was glancing at some of the headlines in our local papers. They read like this: Fuel costs forcing county to rethink current budget; county gives food banks a break at gas because they're getting fewer and fewer volunteers who just can't afford those high prices; trash companies increase rates to cover fuel costs so families will pay more for their trash pick up; fuel costs cause schools to raise food prices. So our children and the parents of children will be paying more for school lunches because of energy costs.

I just met with a number of our law enforcement agencies, our constables and Sheriffs and police forces, and they are not cutting their emergency response but they are cutting back on their community policing. They're patrolling within our neighborhoods to try and stretch their fuel budgets. Frankly, their fuel budgets are gone for the year. Small businesses, so many are telling me that they are working essentially for nothing these days.

What has this Congress done about it? Nothing really but gimmicks. I call it the Democrats' Jed Clampett Energy Plan. They shoot at a bunch of targets and hope that energy is going to come bubbling up from the ground just like old Jed found.

And look at the gimmicks they proposed. Democrats in Congress have said, ``Let us sue OPEC and we will lower your gas prices.'' Well, has anyone seen their gas prices lowered? They said, ``Let's force companies to use it or lose it,'' which frankly, every independent geological group in America just started laughing at. Did you see your gas prices go down?

They said, ``Let's stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve,'' our nest egg for a rainy day in energy. Did your prices go down? Last week they said, ``Well, it's drawn some of that down.'' Of course, gas prices aren't going down significantly, certainly not because of these gimmicks.

The truth of the matter is as the speaker tonight, Mr. Shimkus, the gentlemen from Texas, Mr. Hensarling and Mr. Gohmert, have talked about is that three-legged stool of energy: more conservation, because we can all be more efficient in our homes in our daily use; bring those renewables on line--renewable energy not from food but from non-food sources; and then, of course, the third leg, we've had votes on conservation and we've done it. We have had votes on renewable energy, and we are achieving it. We've just not had a single vote on more exploration, more American-made energy.

Now, I think the first goal America should set is that we are going to take responsibility for two-thirds of our daily energy needs. Today we rely upon the rest of the world for that. We ought to take more responsibility for what we need here in America, and to do that is what the speakers in the Republican party are talking about tonight, all-of- the-above.

Let's explore offshore and those deep ocean waters that hold so much potential, proven reserves for us. Let's tap responsibly into ANWR. Let's convert coal to super clean liquid fuels, and let's tap the oil shale in America. Let's begin creating more American-made energy and more American-made jobs because, at the end of the day, even a hillbilly isn't going to buy the thought that we can just gimmick our way out of this problem, not with families and with small businesses paying what they do today. We've got an abundant supply of energy. We need more supply in America. We need to take more responsibility for our own energy needs. The good news is that we're capable of it.

So all we ask, and all of us tonight are asking one thing of our Speaker. Just give us a vote. Just let the will of the American people prevail. Let the little guy in the door for once. Give him a voice, Mr. Speaker. Tell the special interest lobby to stand aside. Let the little guy's voice be heard. He doesn't have lobbyists. He probably hasn't made campaign contributions to you. He's just paying the freight on energy prices he can't afford and that his family can't afford anymore. We need to let that voice be heard.

Before we leave in August, give us a vote, just a single vote. Let the American public's and let the little guy's voices be heard in Congress again so we can develop more American-made energy here in America. That will lower prices.

With that, I yield back.

Mr. Speaker, another day, another energy gimmick. It must be the 110th Congress.

The American public, hammered by high fuel prices, is getting tired of the Democrats' Jed Clampett energy plan. You just can't shoot at a bunch of imaginary targets and hope that energy is going to come bubbling up from the ground. Today is another such gimmick. Depleting America's emergency oil nest egg at a time when the world is increasingly unstable in oil-producing nations like Nigeria, like Venezuela, and Iran, why, even a hillbilly like me doesn't think that makes much sense.

Tapping our energy reserve for 3 measly days of energy, 3, 3 days of energy, that won't lower prices, nor does it send a signal to the world that America is serious about taking more responsibility for meeting our own daily energy needs.

If this bill were to pass, and it will fail spectacularly today, but if it were to pass at the end of the drawdown, America would be more dependent on foreign oil than we are today. We would be more dependent on foreign oil than we are today. And how does that solve the problem?

So here is the question: How high does gas have to get before Congress will act? How many families will be hurt? How many small businesses will go under? How hard will our economy be hit before our Speaker allows an up-or-down vote on producing more American-made energy?

Congress has voted on conservation, we voted on renewable and passed them both. Why can't we get a vote on more exploration here at home with our resources? Speaker Pelosi to the Democrat leadership, I know that you have the right heart. Tell the special interests to step aside. Make room for the little guy who doesn't have a lobbyist, who hasn't contributed to your campaign. Let them have an up-or-down vote on this floor, a vote now for the American Energy Act so we can produce more American-made energy so we can get serious about lowering gas prices here in America.

Mr. Speaker, another day, another energy gimmick, it must be the 110th Congress. The American public, hammered by high fuel prices, is getting tired of the Jed Clampett energy plan put forth by Democrats. You just can't shoot at imaginary targets and hope that energy is going to come bubbling up.

Look at the record. Look at the record. In this past year Democrats said, if we can sue OPEC, we will lower gas prices. Have your gas prices gone down? They said if we pass use it or lose it, which was laughed at around the world, they said gas prices will go down. Have your fuel prices gone down?

Earlier they said we'll just stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and your gas prices will go down. Did they? The answer is no.

Today is just another gimmick. Depleting America's emergency oil nest egg at a time when the world is increasingly unstable in oil-producing nations like Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran, why, that makes no sense at all. Tapping our emergency reserves for three measly days of energy, three, that won't lower prices, nor does it send a signal to the rest of the world that America is serious about taking responsibility for our own energy needs. You really believe the world market that uses 85 million barrels a day is going to look at this tiny amount and lower the prices?

If this bill were to pass--and it won't, it will fail again--at the end of the drawdown, America would be more dependent on foreign oil than when we started. And when it's replenished, we will have just bought oil at a higher price out of taxpayers' money.

So here's the question: How high does gas have to be before Congress will act? How many families will be hurt? How many small businesses will go under? How hard will our economy be hit before Speaker Pelosi allows an up-or-down vote on producing more American-made energy?

We voted on conservation, we voted on renewables. Why can't we vote on more exploration?

When will we put the special interests aside? When will the little guy have a vote? When will the little guy, that doesn't have a lobbyist, and big campaign contributions, when will he have a say in this public? It's time to vote this gimmick down and let us have a vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this bill.

There's no question that if Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were to collapse, it would deal a serious blow to our economy, and nearly every community would feel the negative effects. But this bill fails to give taxpayers enough confidence that the two mortgage giants won't be back again for another dip in the trough.

I'm concerned that we're unduly putting a massive burden on taxpayers for Wall Street's bad decisions and those of speculators who took on risky mortgages.

I believe that before we use taxpayer dollars to potentially increase the national debt, provide an unlimited line of credit, and allow the government to buy a little less than $1 trillion in stock in private companies, then Congress needs to insist on these three conditions.

First, unlike today, Freddie and Fannie must be required to have the capital standards necessary to ensure their fiscal stability.

Secondly, that over a set period of time they are gradually reduced in size so that America's housing eggs are not all in one basket.

And finally, that the leadership of Freddie and Fannie be replaced. The millionaire captains who grounded this ship have proven they are not capable to steer us to calmer waters.

I am also hopeful that should this plan work, I unfortunately believe the underlying bill on housing misses the mark. Rather than a $300 billion bailout for the housing areas, what we've seen as an alternative is that the HOPE NOW Alliance, the private sector, has stepped forward to help 1.7 million homeowners transfer from those high ARM rates, adjustable rate mortgages, to fixed rate mortgages so they can keep their home.

And I fear, too, that the way we pay for this bill, which would hurt American companies creating jobs here in America, and raises taxes on those with second homes, vacation homes, investment homes, retirement homes, will further hurt our housing economy at a time we simply can't afford it.

Reluctantly, I oppose this bill.

Mr. Speaker, there's no question that if these two mortgage giant were to collapse, it would deal a serious blow to our economy and nearly every community would feel the negative effects. If the White House and this Congress are convinced the plan will calm the waters, then I am certainly hopeful it works. But this bailout fails in one important aspect: it doesn't fully solve the problems that brought Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to this crisis point, so taxpayers have no guarantee that these two companies won't be back again for another handout.

Before we use taxpayer dollars to potentially increase the national debt, provide an unlimited line of credit and allow the government to buy nearly a trillion dollars of stock in private companies, then Congress needs to insist on three conditions. First, unlike today, Freddie and Fannie must be required to have the capital standards necessary to ensure their fiscal stability. Second, that over a set period of time they are gradually reduced in size so that America's housing eggs are not all in one basket. And third, that the leadership of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae be replaced immediately. The millionaire captains who grounded this ship have proven they are not the ones to steer us to calmer seas.

I am skeptical that the proposed new Federal regulator is strong enough to take these necessary steps so it is essential that Congress insist on adding these safeguards in law before we put the taxpayers on the hook for the bailout.

Madam Speaker, tomorrow would be the 83rd birthday of Thomas Watson Moss, Jr. However, Mr. Moss passed little more than 1 month short of starting his 83rd year. I rise today to offer my condolences and prayers to his family and share the story of a remarkable man. It is an honor to have this opportunity. I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing a member of the ``Greatest Generation'' and a unique and notable individual.

Thomas Moss was born in Forsyth County, Georgia, on July 18, 1925, and grew up in the midst of the Great Depression. Like many of his generation, he answered the call of his country and proudly served in World War II after graduating from Gainesville High School and attending North Georgia College. During his service as a medic in the U.S. Navy, during which he was attached to the Marine Corps, he participated in some of the seminal battles in the Pacific theater, including the invasion of Okinawa. He received two Purple Hearts and a Presidential Military Citation for his exemplary service.

After returning from the Pacific, Mr. Moss joined the family business, Moss Equipment Company, in Buford, Georgia. In addition to his success in business, Mr. Moss was active throughout in his community and state. The dedication to his country and his value of serving others was clear through his time with the Gwinnett County Chamber of Commerce, Buford Kiwanis Club and the Georgia Farm Equipment Dealers Association. He was one of the founding members of the Gwinnett County Fair Association, served in the Georgia legislature and on the Buford school board.

The tremendous impact he had on his community is incredible and indicative of his generation; where service, duty and honor were the guiding principles. Despite the demands on his time in business and civic activities, Mr. Moss was the pillar of his family and is survived by his wife of 58 years, Martha Smith Moss, two children, Mark and Lisa, six grandchildren and three great-grandchildren. Tom and Martha's daughter Linda preceded Tom in death many years ago.

Madam Speaker, I hope my colleagues and the American people will pause with me in recognition of a life well lived and learn from the example Mr. Moss set for his family, his community and his country.

Mr. Speaker, it is a very unfortunate time when families are struggling to try to make ends meet with these energy prices, small businesses too. Basically, Congress is debating a bait- and-switch piece of legislation.

Democrats are hoping that the American public isn't smart enough to realize there are two oil fields in Alaska--ANWR, the one that has been put off-limits, is fertile with what we believe are vast oil and gas reserves. And the National Petroleum Reserve, which, by the way, has been explored out now for 70 years.

The difference between ANWR, and the National Petroleum Reserve, is the difference between Jimmy Carter and his brother, Billy Carter. ANWR holds vast reserves in a small amount of land that can be accessed much more affordably and quickly. The National Petroleum Reserve was first drilled for two decades by the U.S. Navy, the Federal Government.

Then for the next two decades it was drilled again by the U.S. Geological Service, again, the Federal Government. For the recent decades, it has been drilled by companies, three principally, two of them in the Texas area. Unfortunately, no major finds were there. That's why most of this area, it's big, but most of it hasn't been leased because most of it is a dry hole.

What they found instead is that there are some small finds along the edge, which are very expensive to explore, it costs about $1 billion to put an oil well there, and $10 million a mile to try to connect it back to the existing fields. Unfortunately, even doing that, even stringing those small finds together to try to produce oil has been held up by environmental lawsuits and red tape.

So the claim that oil companies aren't exploring and doing their best, they are investing billions of dollars there. To claim that there are vast reserves that merely need to be leased, the whole world has passed on these leases year and year and year again. You can offer them every 5 minutes, and they are going to pass on them again.

We need to quit playing games with the American public. We need to open up ANWR, the other Alaskan oil field, that holds a real ability for us to take more responsibility for America's own energy needs, for us to have some say

in that price of energy, to make sure that when families are filling up, they aren't filling up with oil from the Middle East or from Venezuela or that they are paying prices dictated by Iran and Nigeria and Russia, but more American-made energy.

Ignore this bait and switch. Let's get to real energy policy, real American-made energy in ANWR.

Madam Speaker, on Monday, June 30, we will mark the one-year

anniversary since negotiators for the United States and the Republic of Korea signed the historic and landmark U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, one of the most commercially significant free trade agreements to be signed by the United States in over a decade.

The Republic of Korea and the United States are already major trading partners. South Korea has the world's 11th largest economy and stands as our 7th largest trading partner with more than $80 billion passing between our two nations each year.

Today, Korea took a critical step toward implementing the recent agreement between the United States and Korea that will allow exports of high-quality U.S. beef to resume, based on internationally recognized standards that affirm the safety of U.S. beef.

Before the import ban, South Korea was the third largest sales market for U.S. beef, valued at over $800 million a year. As the nation's fourth largest beef exporter, Texas would stand to benefit greatly from new opportunities in the Korean market. Under the FTA, Korea would remove tariffs of up to 40 percent levied on U.S. beef, giving U.S. ranchers an advantage over other foreign competitors.

By eliminating tariffs and other trade barriers and strengthening protections for U.S. companies, the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement will expand trade and investment further. The U.S. International Trade Commission has forecast that the elimination of tariffs on U.S. goods under the U.S.-Korea FTA would grow U.S. GDP by over $10 billion annually, upon full implementation. The agreement will also eliminate regulatory and other non-tariff barriers that have historically restricted access by U.S. farmers, manufacturers and service providers to the South Korean market.

Should the United States Congress sit idle and continue to ignore the economic potential this historic agreement offers, I assure you South Korea will not stop efforts to liberalize its trade relations with other countries--putting Americans at a disadvantage when competing abroad. We cannot afford a time-out on trade while the rest of the world marches on.

Madam Speaker, in closing, this week, we took a moment of pause on June 25, 2008, to remember the 58th anniversary of the outbreak of the Korean War. As that conflict, out of which was born the U.S.-Korea alliance, has often been referred to as the ``Forgotten War,'' it is our duty to honor and remember the noble sacrifices of our Korean War veterans.

The Democrats claim there's 68 million acres of energy-rich lands that companies are refusing to explore. Sixty-eight million acres. Really. So name one. Name an acre of land where vast reserves of oil are underground and a company refuses to explore.

I will open the mike. One acre. Any takers?

Absolutely.

Well, bring down the map and identify an acre and tell us how much oil is underground and who has refused to drill.

Do you have an acre you can point to?

That's what I thought. This bill is a shame and an insult to families who are trying to pay their gas bills.

Mr. Speaker, this bill offers a false choice between helping our physicians and our pharmacists, who need fair reimbursement, and helping our seniors, especially those in minority communities and those in rural communities from being able to see a doctor who they know and knows them.

Unfortunately, this Congress is full of false choices. In Texas, I know if we pass this bill, we have got over 800,000 seniors, mainly in rural communities and in very poor communities, who will not be able to see a doctor, will not be able to get the health care that they chose under Medicare, because this Congress has decided that they are going to pit those poor seniors against physicians and pharmacies in our communities. Those false choices is why this Congress has the lowest approval rating since they began taking polls.

Let's stop playing games with our doctors, let's stop playing games with our pharmacists, and let's stop playing games with the lives of our seniors. We can do better than this.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6327, the Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2008.

This bill would extend for 3 months the excise taxes that presently fund the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. These are taxes on passengers' tickets and on jet fuel. They are due to expire next Monday. It's important we extend them because they benefit our Nation's airports, airlines, passengers, and pay the salaries of thousands of FAA employees.

This 3-month extension will also allow us additional time to consider some fundamental reforms to the tax structure that finances the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.

We need time to study how the burdens of the taxes that fund our airports and our air traffic control system are distributed among the users.

For example, higher fuel prices have led to higher ticket prices, which means Americans are paying more in taxes on their tickets since the tax is based on a percentage of the fare. I hope we will examine a new system that replaces the percentage tax with a more fair approach that is based on a departure fee, plus the mileage traveled. It seems to make much more sense.

We also need more time to examine proposals to modernize our air traffic control system to satellite, which promises to help cut down on congestion and delays and reduce fuel costs.

Unfortunately, this bill does nothing to help the airline industry keep fuel costs under control, does nothing to keep prices reasonable, does nothing to keep routes accessible and jobs stable for American families, businesses and thousands of airline workers today.

The escalating cost of jet fuel--which peaked at $175 a gallon last month, up nearly $100 from the beginning of this year--in this country is killing our aviation industry, and they can't make up the cost enough in ticket prices alone. This year, the airlines are projecting they will spend $20 billion more in jet fuel, and that will be a 72 percent increase from last year.

Now fuel costs consume almost 40 percent of the price of a ticket, which has tripled just in the last 7 years. Jet fuel has to compete against gasoline and biodiesel for refinery space, and gas continually wins out. We simply don't have enough supply or refinery capacity to produce enough affordable jet fuel.

In response to these record-high jet fuel prices, the airlines have laid off thousands of workers, cut service to hundreds of communities, raised ticket prices, and have started charging new fees even for luggage.

Americans are suffering. Our economy is suffering, and airlines are suffering because of these high fuel prices. I urge my colleagues to bring legislation to the floor that will finally address the core of the problem we all know to be: more supply, more American-made energy, less dependency on foreign sources of oil. And we don't need more gimmicks, gimmicks like suing OPEC, gimmicks like use-it-or-lose-it, gimmicks like windfall profits taxes.

We need to open up the closed areas in our waters and on our land to thoughtful exploration and production. We need to invest in existing technologies.

We need to develop oil shale and coal-to-liquid technology, which can go in our airline fuel tanks, as well as promote advanced biofuels instead of relying on food-based fuel. We also need to get more refineries online by streamlining the permitting process. We also should extend current tax benefits for renewable energy, as well as solar and wind technology.

So, while I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill, I hope they will consider real relief for the airline industry, passengers and its workers to address the growing cost of fuel.

Congress has failed to act. Our airlines and their workers and those passengers have paid the price. It is time to produce more American- made energy.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to a gentleman who is a recognized expert on aviation infrastructure in America, the ranking Republican on the Aviation Subcommittee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I would say these sky-high jet fuel prices are caused in part because America is doing less, not more, to take responsibility for our own energy needs.

We're blessed in this country with more than a 200-year supply of coal. It is affordable, but not yet clean. It can be, with the right technology, converted to super clean liquid fuels. Technology has existed in Germany since the 1940s and used in African countries for almost one-third of their diesel and other vehicle fuels. This Congress needs to act to create more affordable fuel here at home.

With that, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas whose district reflects a lot of the American-made energy that has created America, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway).

Mr. Speaker, at this point, I yield 3 minutes to one of our leaders in the party who is knowledgeable on many issues, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the remaining time.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from North Carolina, who is going to talk about one of the solutions to higher jet fuel prices for airlines.

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

This bill is an appropriate one. It is important in the airline infrastructure to find the right solutions. As America continues to grow, the aviation infrastructure needs to grow and upgrade as well.

I appreciate the gentleman from Massachusetts and the gentleman from Illinois' leadership on this issue because it is so vital to our future in America.

Equally important, I think, though, is the cost of energy in this country. It seems to me that while America has done less and less to take responsibility for our energy needs, we've seen prices go up and up. Under President Carter's Presidency, at the time of the last energy crisis America was only importing one-third of the oil that we needed each day. Today, it is the reverse; we import nearly two-thirds of what we use each day and we are now, unfortunately, subject to the whims of the global market on energy prices. As a result, in the airline industry we're seeing each day we can't open the newspaper without seeing the cuts to some community that depend upon service from airlines. We don't see some notices of layoff. I know in Continental, we're going to lose 3,000 jobs, 3,000 families being laid off through no fault of their own, except this Congress has not acted. It has failed to act to address lower jet fuel prices for the airline industry plus lower gas prices for America as a whole.

The solution is fairly direct. In addition to energy conservation, which we need to do more of, in addition to renewable energies, which are important, we need to also provide more traditional energy, the supply of oil and gas, coal and oil shale, that will help ease the transition to renewable energies and avoid the cost of layoffs, the unprofitable quarters, and the impact on our American airline industry.

I hope that this Congress will come together again, not on gimmicks, but on real substantive issues that Republicans and Democrats together can support that will create more American-made energy, more supply here in America, and lower gas prices.

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

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to remove my name as a cosponsor of H.R. 6041.

Mr. Speaker, economically, our Nation is a Nation of thirds. One-third of our States face steep economic challenges, one- third are chugging along with their traditional economies, and one- third are enjoying strong job growth and, in fact, record low unemployment.

This measure is well-intended. There's no question about it. But compassion isn't enough. Jobs are what is needed.

Instead of targeting workers in the struggling States that need both help with their bills and, more importantly, a new job, this measure provides no job training, no hope to laid off workers, workers that I know don't want a handout. They want an opportunity for a job that they can raise their families on. They want an opportunity for new skills. They want opportunities.

And like many one-size-fits-all Washington programs, this bill unnecessarily drains the precious unemployment trust fund an extra $8 billion by not targeting the help to the States and the workers who need it the most.

For hardworking Americans, though, what is most troubling is that this bill abandons the minimum work requirement that has, in the past, prevented the unscrupulous from gaming the system. By throwing out this reasonable requirement, that you actually have a real job before you get job benefits, people in some States can work as little as 2 weeks and receive government paychecks for 1 year.

Most Americans do the opposite. We work for a year, then we receive 2 weeks of vacation. In this bill, it's the opposite, 2 weeks of work and a year of Federal aid. And in fact, while it's been questioned that that isn't the case, according to the Congressional Budget Office, 4 States allow you to work as little as 1 week under some circumstances to receive benefits.

And what's unfortunate, who will pay the benefits that have been gamed? Hardworking American taxpayers who are struggling to make ends meet with record fuel prices because this Congress refuses to act to open up our resources and take more responsibility for America's own energy needs.

In conclusion, helping workers who need it the most, helping them find new jobs and stopping the gaming of our Federal aid is a bipartisan goal. Unfortunately, this bill fails on all counts.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and service of a Magnolia, Texas, native, SSG Jason Brown, who was killed in Iraq on April 17, 2008.

America was formed in the crucible of the Revolutionary War and hardened during the tragedy of the Civil War. We demonstrated our willingness to carry the standard of freedom during World War II. During these, and numerous other times in America's history, our Nation's finest young men have answered the call and stepped forward to serve their Nation and protect the cause of liberty. Staff Sergeant Brown honored the sacrifice of those who answered the call before him by stepping forward in another time of national crisis; after the cowardly attacks of September 11th and at the dawn of the war in Iraq.

Just days after the beginning of the Iraq war in 2003, Sergeant Brown joined the Army and the next year earned one of the Army's most revered symbols: the Green Beret worn by members of the elite Special Forces. After enlisting in Magnolia and completing his training, Sergeant Brown was serving with the 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne) based at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. Sergeant Brown was on his second deployment to Iraq and had previously been awarded the Bronze Star Medal, the Purple Heart, a Meritorious Service Medal, an Army Commendation Medal, an Army Good Conduct Medal, and the National Defense Service Medal.

I come forward to honor Sergeant Brown in the truest sense of the word. Men and women like Sergeant Brown are truly deserving of our profound esteem and recognition. Stories of their courage fortify us and inspire us to better ourselves, our communities and our country. We are reminded what it means to sincerely serve others and defend a truly noble cause: the cause of liberty and freedom. It is with faith in Almighty God that we are able to find solace and peace at a time when our collective heart breaks. The deep sadness I feel can be nothing compared to the grief that is felt by Sergeant Brown's daughter, Alyssa, his parents, James and Rosemary, and the friends and family of those who have died serving their Nation in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places abroad. An emptiness has been created where Sergeant Brown existed for those who knew him and I know my words will do little to fill it; I can only offer my prayers and the sympathy of a grieving Nation. Sergeant Brown will be missed at holiday celebrations and will never have the chance to walk his little girl down the aisle, but I hope his family knows that they have the deepest respect and gratitude that a nation can offer.

With each soldier's life that is taken from us too early, we are renewed in our commitment to spreading the light of liberty to people and countries that have never witnessed it. The Gospel of Luke reminds us that, ``. . . to whom much is given, from him much will be required.'' America has been given much and much continues to be required. America was unique in its founding and put forth the new idea that the state would serve as the insurer of individual liberty and freedom. We continue to espouse the very best ideas of our founding, with Sergeant Brown acting as the modern day champion of that cause by standing where few would and ultimately paying for that unflinching bravery with his life.

The reverence we have for all those who serve and, especially, for Sergeant Brown and all those men and women who have sacrificed their lives for the cause of freedom transcends political affiliation and ideological differences. We put down our partisan assaults and pause to pay tribute to the very best of our country. It is my distinct honor to represent our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and Coast Guardsmen in the greatest legislative body the world has ever known. Let us never forget that this body's existence was made possible by the sacrifice of men and women like Sergeant Brown and let our work here honor their memory and the memory of those who will fall tomorrow.

Madam Speaker, I hope those in the Chamber and those watching at home will join me in offering our most heartfelt prayers for Sergeant Brown, his family and all those families who have lost a son, a father, a daughter, a mother, a best friend, a wife, or a husband in the cause of liberty. Let us always remember their courage and the courage of their comrades who remain in distant jungles or far-flung deserts across the globe. Let us never forget their sacrifice, nor those they leave behind.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Margaret Benjamin, who died on August 15, 2007 at the age of 93.

Living a life that spanned most of the 20th century, Margaret Montgomery was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, to Robert Montgomery, a veteran of the Spanish-American War, and his wife, Agnes Stern Montgomery. But her parents did not live to see her and her younger sister, Roberta, grow up, as they passed away when Margaret was only 13. Being orphans in the years leading up to the Stock Market Crash of 1929 was hard enough, but in the Depression that followed, it could have been ruinous were it not for the girls' father having supported the Junior OUAM National Orphans Home in Tiffin, Ohio, where they were sent to live.

Growing up without parents and feeling responsible for her younger sister gave Margaret a mission in life based on community service and caring for others without ever feeling sorry for herself. Reaching her prime in an era when women did not generally work outside the home, Margaret took on numerous volunteer activities. Not the glamorous, fundraising kind, but the ones where she saw a need and stepped in to fill it. These included helping to organize a volunteer ambulance corps in the town where she lived but where the nearest hospital was far away. Later, she volunteered at a nearby state mental hospital, working one-on-one with patients struggling to overcome addiction to drugs and alcohol.

Her volunteer activities also included helping her husband, Roy, in his successful political career. She loved the heat of battle in campaigns, seething with passion underneath the veneer of cool professionalism. By the time he was ready to retire from politics, she had become so good at identifying issues, communicating with constituents, driving change, and embodying commitment to public service, that she was asked to run for office in her own right. And she won. Even in retirement, Margaret stayed active in politics. At the age of 86, she managed her son-in-law's successful campaign for local office, showing up at the polls and chasing down voters with the assistance of her walker. Despite old age and failing health, she loved Election Day and treasured the freedom that the privilege to vote entailed.

Until the last year of her life, Margaret was active in volunteer activities related to her lifelong passion for music. She sang in the Woodlands Sweethearts chorus, making appearances at local events and nursing homes so that others could be touched by the music that was a constant source of inspiration and comfort in her life.

Indeed, she passed peacefully from this earth while listening to the music of J.S. Bach that she always found so calming and inspiring.

I had the privilege to know Margaret in her retirement years when she moved to Texas to be closer to her daughter. One of her last endeavors was helping my staff to organize a Social Security workshop at the senior citizens housing complex where she lived. To the end of her life, Margaret encouraged people to participate in government, to let officials like me know their thoughts, and to be accountable. We could do worse than to follow her motto formed in the crucible of politics, ``just be gracious, no matter what.''

Madam Speaker, it is the dedication, faith, and commitment of individuals such as Margaret Benjamin who make our country strong and who bring out the best in our communities. Thank you for the opportunity to recall her spirit and her service.