Floor Statements

Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of this important amendment. One wouldn't think that the Congress of the United States should have to pass amendments on appropriations bills to ensure that the Constitution is upheld by the bureaucracy or that long-held promises made by the Federal Government are kept.

That's exactly what this amendment does. Not only will it ensure that the Corps of Engineers no longer engages in charging the States of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana and its citizens and the sovereign tribes along the Missouri River for the water that is rightfully theirs, but it also frees up the Corps to engage in more productive activities that we've heard a lot about tonight.

I am proud to be a sponsor and proud to stand here and support this important amendment, and urge my colleagues to do the same.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague and neighbor from South Dakota for authoring and offering this amendment, which I support and urge my colleagues to support. It really re-prioritizes the spending and the good work that the Appropriations Committee has already done just a few million dollars. It re-prioritizes it in a way that recognizes the changing of our Nation in recent years because so much of the policy and the appropriations of our Energy Department are based on an old order that recognizes our country as having a scarcity of natural resources for energy development.

That, Mr. Chairman, is no longer the case. We are now a Nation of abundant energy resources, but we are still, especially in the West, a Nation of scarce water resources, water resources that are important to the development of many of our rural communities and our tribes and our farms and ranches, water for drinking, water for industrial growth, water for irrigation. So I think this re-prioritization of a few million dollars is appropriate and recognizes how different our world is.

With that, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, and yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. Speaker, a couple of weeks ago, our President announced his intention to unilaterally disarm our national defense by cutting back our nuclear deterrent. This week, he announced his intention to unilaterally disarm our entire economy by declaring war on coal.

In my State of North Dakota, the coal industry employs over 17,000 highly paid workers that provide the lowest cost electricity to our retail customers anywhere in the country. They contribute $3.5 billion to our State's economy.

And in case the President thinks that we need his EPA to keep our air clean, he should know that North Dakota meets all ambient air quality standards as prescribed by the EPA.

And I will not sit idly by and watch this President steal the jobs, hopes, and dreams of my constituents, nor will I sit idly by while he and his EPA impose their mediocrity on my State's excellent stewardship of our natural resources.

North Dakota will not retreat from this war waged on us by our President. We must and we will fight back.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity for the next hour to bring to the attention of the House of Representatives and to the American people some very important issues pertaining to America's potential to be energy secure.

This is an interesting week that we would have this discussion. This is a week when the House Committee on Natural Resources is bringing forward two bills for consideration that will tear down some of the barriers and remove some of the regulations that have gotten in the way of tapping into the vast resources of oil and gas off our shores.

We know that there's been growth in oil and gas development in our country, but not offshore. And yet we know there are vast resources that would be very, very important to America's energy security.

At the same time, this week we also have our President, who made official his declaration of war against coal, stating, once again, that fossil fuels are the bad guy somehow. At a time when we're looking to create jobs, create wealth, create opportunity, he puts up yet more barriers to the development of these vast resources of fossil fuels.

Since coming to Congress 6 months ago, I have heard our President and his allies in this Chamber often reference the fact that since Barack Obama was elected President, America's oil and gas production have actually increased. They brag about this increased production and the jobs that it creates as though they had something to do with it.

Well, on behalf of the citizens of my State of North Dakota, let me just say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, you're welcome because the fact of the matter is that, yes, production of oil and gas in this country is up. It is up, except where the Federal Government is the landlord, because the large reserves under Federal lands and offshore resources are going untapped because of Democratic opposition to using the incredible opportunity that

new technologies have created to get us more jobs, more opportunity, and more energy secure.

I want to illustrate a point today by reading one sentence from a recently released State Personal Income Growth Analysis put out by the United States Department of Commerce. Here's the sentence. It's very profound:

State personal income growth ranged from a -.2 percent in

South Dakota to 12.4 percent in North Dakota.

That's right. Two rectangles in the center of the North American map, two Dakotas, side by side, two States that basically have the same size and land mass, the same size in population, the same climate, same cultures, they grow vast amounts of food to feed a hungry world.

We're similar in nearly every way. And yet the Dakotas differ in one significant way, and that is my State of North Dakota has fossil fuels that South Dakota does not have.

I point to this distinction because I believe it represents the possibilities of America. It represents what can be done in much of our Nation if the Federal Government would just get out of the way and allow the unleashing of American ingenuity and the development of American energy.

Instead, what we get from our President is more restrictions on the use of fossil fuels and more fantasizing about unproven, uneconomical, unreliable alternatives. And while billions of tax dollars get wasted experimenting on whimsical dreams of a carbonless future, American job opportunities are lost and our debt rises.

Our President continues to pursue an energy policy based on an old model, an old model of resource scarcity, rather than on the new reality of resource abundance.

According to the Institute of Energy Research, underneath Federal land and offshore, that is to say, Federal oil and gas reserves, at today's prices, the United States taxpayer has $128 trillion worth of fossil fuels that we're not tapping into.

Resource abundance: abundance based on the application of new technologies is transforming our economy and has us on the path to security. And North Dakota is evidence of what can be done in our country.

But there are a lot of speakers today that have a lot to offer in this discussion and this debate, and right now I'd like to yield to my good friend from Colorado (Mr. Gardner).

Thank you for sharing that, and for the invitation. I very much appreciate your referencing the cost of energy. Affordable energy, after all, really is a driving factor in many other investment decisions and job opportunities. And I think we'll have much more on that as we work through this important hour of discussion.

With that, I would like to yield some time to my friend from Pennsylvania, Mr. Rothfus.

I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania, and I appreciate his raising the point of the war on coal and talking about the economic benefits of coal in Pennsylvania.

I don't know if anybody noticed, but deep in that 21-page declaration of war on coal, or the climate change document, the President actually talks about another important fossil fuel that Pennsylvania is tapping into--and that's gas--in the attack on methane. So those that think perhaps natural gas will be the next great fuel to replace coal ought to think again, because as soon as they have their way shutting down every coal plant, they'll be after the gas plants as well. We truly need an all-of-the-above.

At this time I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reed).

Thank you so much. Thanks for your stories. I think they illustrate so beautifully the importance of an all-of-the-above energy policy that keeps prices rolling.

You know, one of the things I thought about as you were talking about jobs and this cascading impact of this war on coal and war on fossil fuels, there is a survey every year that's taken by an area development magazine, it's called Site Selector Survey. It asks site selectors, What are the characteristics, what are the factors that you look at when making a determination of where to put a manufacturing facility or some other business?

When I was an economic development director 15 years ago, the cost of available energy was somewhere between 15th and 20th on the list. It's moved up to the top five. Our competitive advances in the global marketplace rest with our ability to keep energy costs low.

With that, I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan), who has provided real leadership on some of the issues we are going to be taking up this week.

I thank the gentleman for his leadership today and his leadership on this important legislation coming out of the Natural Resources Committee.

I would like to speak specifically to some more economic opportunity as illustrated from my home State of North Dakota just to get a sense of it.

North Dakota's gross domestic product increased from $34 billion in 2011 to $38.7 billion in 2012. That's a 13.4 percent increase, representing the most significant growth of any State in the country last year. Texas is second with a growth rate of 4.8 percent, where the national average during the same time was 2.5 percent.

So it can happen. It happened in my State because the vast majority of the oil and gas in North Dakota is not under Federal land. The vast majority--like over 90 percent--is under private land, where the only landowner is the guy that farms and ranches the land, the person whose sustainability demands good stewardship. We can show the way in how to do it around the country as well as offshore if you just unleash American ingenuity.

I suspect that my good friend from Kentucky (Mr. Barr) might have a thing or two to say about this week's declaration of war on coal, and so I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr).

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for his good leadership on this important topic on the importance of coal as a major player in our energy fleet.

If I could just for a second, Mr. Speaker, inquire about the balance of time available in the hour.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the gentleman from Kentucky's speaking to the issue of coal, because like oil and gas, coal is also important to North Dakota. It's an industry that's been around for decades. In fact, we really learned about energy development in North Dakota on coal. We have a little better than 17,000 folks that are employed either directly in the coal industry or in one of the service industries that service the coal industry. It contributes about $3.5 billion to our State's economy. That's a lot in our little State.

We've been mining coal for decades. We've been mining 30 million tons a year for decades. We use that coal right in North Dakota, burning it to generate electricity at seven power plants in our State, and we generate some of the lowest priced electricity in the country. Again, getting to the issue of affordable energy, very important in terms of our competitiveness in the global marketplace.

So it's not just about the jobs, as important as those are--high-paid jobs, I

might add--but it's also about the competitive edge it gives us with lower cost electricity.

But in North Dakota, under our beautiful prairies, there's an 800- year supply of coal. To wage war on it today and leave 800 years' worth of a product that provides wealth and jobs and opportunity and low-cost electricity in the ground makes no sense whatsoever.

With that, I want to yield some time to my neighbor and good friend who knows a fair bit about the energy industry himself--in fact, I have to admit the Bakken was actually discovered in the State of Montana-- the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Daines).

I thank the gentleman for his comments.

I especially appreciate your reference to the Keystone pipeline and to the importance of the role of electric cooperatives.

A lot of people forget that there is a Keystone pipeline. There was actually one sited and built with very little fanfare. I was at that time a member of the North Dakota Public Service Commission and carried the pipeline portfolio and sited the first 220 miles in the United States of the original Keystone pipeline. It didn't go anywhere near the Bakken, unfortunately; but it did cross 600 landowners' land--green field all the way, two scenic rivers. We put a lot of restrictions on it, but it was with very little fanfare. In fact, every landowner willingly signed the contract. There wasn't a single inch of that pipeline in North Dakota that had to be condemned to be built.

It was interesting because we have, I think, five or six pumping stations in North Dakota on the original Keystone, and the co-ops were all sort of arguing about whose territory would it be in because every pumping station was a load equivalent to a city of 10,000 people. For those who argue that it's not about the United States, the Keystone XL, that's big time for the people of North Dakota and for the people of the United States. It is about the United States. So I appreciate your raising that issue.

Another State that has a lot to lose in the war on coal and a lot to gain by more offshore drilling is Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith).

Thank you so much for your insights and your experience in this very important industry of coal and all of the things that it supports and that support it.

I think that an appropriate way to sort of wrap this discussion up is to remind folks that while we are advocates for domestic energy development, American energy production that creates a competitive global advantage in all areas, we are also good stewards of the environment.

Let me just close with this. These counties in North Dakota that have seven power plants burning coal, all got A ratings from the American Lung Association. And I believe that the same God that created the beauty and splendor of the oceans and the mountains and the prairies and the topsoil, put the minerals underneath it, and we ought to use all of them for our benefit.

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

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

The idea that somehow this amendment creates free and fair trade is a fallacy, and the idea that somehow sugar has not been reformed in recent years and decades is also a fallacy.

The greatest reformation of the sugar program is the North American Free Trade Agreement, which gave access to U.S. markets completely, not only to the sugar farmers south of us, but to the Governments of Mexico and Brazil. The idea that a no-net-cost program like the American sugar program is somehow a great advantage over countries like Brazil, which is subsidized with tax dollars of $2.5 to $3 billion per year, I think is the most distorting fact in this entire debate.

I rise to oppose this amendment, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Chairman, George Washington said:

To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means

of preserving peace.

Besides the United States and the United Kingdom, the rest of the world has never seriously considered entertaining the idea of eliminating their nuclear weapons. China, France, India, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, and Russia are all engaged in maintaining, expanding, or modernizing their weapons programs.

We should not continue down the path of reduction and degradation of our nuclear programs, including this important ICBM force. The cost of maintaining this force is minor compared to the price tag associated with rebuilding it should we judge incorrectly.

Now, some will argue that the U.S. taxpayer is funding the maintenance of weapons never used. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the U.S. taxpayer is funding the maintenance of weapons being used every day, successfully deterring our enemies from launching their own nuclear weapons.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment will save money and may very well save our country.

Mr. Speaker, this week, the House of Representatives is going to vote on a very important piece of legislation that should be unnecessary.

Due to the President's objection--at the insistence of Hollywood and the EPA--a critical piece of North America's energy security puzzle languishes on a desk in the Oval Office while thousands of unemployed workers collect government benefits instead of a paycheck. That is why I cosponsored and am doing all I can to pass H.R. 3, the Keystone pipeline Northern Route Approval Act, a bill that renders the northern route of the pipeline approved for construction, eliminating the need for a Presidential permit.

As vast reserves of oil are discovered and new technologies unlocked, energy security in this decade is well within our reach. The amount of oil that could be flowing to U.S. refineries in the Keystone XL represents nearly 50 percent of the oil that we currently import from the Middle East.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to sitting on two of the subcommittees that held hearings on this legislation, I have a long history of involvement with TransCanada and the Keystone pipeline as a former environmental regulator in North Dakota. From 2003 until my election to Congress last year, I carried the pipeline portfolio as one of three members of the North Dakota Public Service Commission.

As you might imagine, the oil and gas pipeline construction business is robust in my State, as the Bakken shale development has elevated North Dakota to the position of the number two producing State in the country.

One of the pipelines we sited while I was on the PSC was the original TransCanada Keystone pipeline. It carries over 500,000 barrels of crude from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin in Alberta to U.S. refineries in Illinois and Oklahoma.

The first 217 miles of this pipeline actually run through our State. It crosses the border in Cavalier County, North Dakota, and runs through seven more counties, crossing 600 landowners' land, two scenic rivers, and includes five pumping stations.

While not universally loved, I can tell you that not a single inch of this line in North Dakota required condemnation proceedings--not because I was such a great regulator, but because I represent such great citizens. Our citizens understand the value of energy security and the jobs that energy development creates, and that same sentiment exists in our Nation today.

The environmental safeguards we demanded on the Keystone are rigorous and appropriate. They've been tested and they work.

I toured the Keystone during construction and met many of the men and women, who were grateful for the good-paying jobs that built the line, and many other local restaurant and hotel proprietors, retailers, subcontractors who were happy to have the work and the business. The local officials and school administrators are grateful for the tax revenue that would not be there but for the Keystone pipeline, and, of course, the tax relief it provides local farmers, in addition to the easement payments, are a blessing.

Mr. Speaker, I've sited hundreds, maybe thousands of miles of oil pipelines that operate safely and efficiently throughout North Dakota, but none as thoroughly vetted and safe as the Keystone XL.

I've heard the arguments from my friends across the aisle who claim the Keystone only helps Canada and does nothing to the benefit of the United States. They also claim that the carbon footprint is too great. The fact of the matter is the Keystone has already signed up over 60,000 barrels of North Dakota crude and has the capacity for at least 100,000 barrels.

Today, 71 percent of North Dakota crude is shipped by rail. Now, I have nothing against trains, but railing oil costs more and is not as safe as pipelines. It also requires trucks to get the oil to the train.

According to the director of the North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources, Lynn Helms, approval of the Keystone XL will cause two things to happen: 300 to 500 truckloads per day will be taken off North Dakota highways, and there will be one to two fewer trains leaving the State. He calculates that greenhouse gas emissions from rail are 1.8 times and trucks 2.9 times greater than the emissions from pipeline transportation, and spills from truck transportation occur at three to four times the rate of spills from pipelines.

Approval of the Keystone will result in 450,000 to 950,000 kilograms per day less in greenhouse gas emissions in North Dakota alone, as well as significant decreases in dust, and 60 to 80 fewer spills per year.

North Dakota officials also expect highway fatalities will be reduced by three to six per year, and injury crashes by 85 to 150 annually if the Keystone XL is built.

Mr. Speaker, America's national security and America's economic security are tied directly to America's energy security, and the Keystone XL pipeline is a critical weapon in that security.

Thanks to my colleague from Utah.

I also want to thank the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, Mr. Hastings, and the ranking member, Mr. Markey, and especially thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Minerals, Mr. Lamborn, and the ranking member, Mr. Holt. We worked together on this, and I'm very proud of the outcome. It's a rather benign bill that has rather major ramifications, I believe.

I also want to thank the leadership at the Bureau of Land Management for not only doing an excellent job in managing the Federal lands in North Dakota, but their support of this bill and their guidance, frankly, in helping to craft it in a way that meets the objectives.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established a Federal permit streamlining pilot project to improve the processing of oil and gas applications for drilling on Federal lands. The Montana BLM office in Miles City was included in the pilot project, but what was not known to the drafters of the legislation then was that North and South Dakota are under the direct jurisdiction of that regional office in Miles City. So, without the word ``Dakotas'' in the Energy Policy Act, North Dakota was excluded from this pilot project.

That, in normal times, may not be all that important. But as it turns out, North Dakota really is the heart of the largest oil play and the most exciting oil play going on on the continent.

So the streamlining process itself, I think, deserves some explanation, because I think what I want to do is to calm the fears of anybody that might think we're looking at cutting corners or expediting regulatory process that deserves the rigor that it is receiving.

What the streamlining process does is not cut corners, but rather, it streamlines by co-locating all of the various federal agencies that have jurisdiction, like the EPA, like the Bureau of Land Management, perhaps the USDA and USGS. And by co-locating them, you actually not only enjoy the efficiency of everybody working together in the same place, but you actually get some synergy as well, because you have the experts in the same room on the same plot of land at the same time.

This is a bill, as I said, that doesn't cut corners and streamlines, but it also has broad ramifications because I think that North Dakota is the perfect laboratory for a pilot project like this. The reason I say that is because there's high demand for processing and a lot of applications for drilling on very few acres.

North Dakota is blessed to largely be private and State land, not much Federal land. But there are about 2 million Federal acres that BLM has direct

oversight of; that is to say, we have 2 million mineral acres, and there are over 700 permits or applications for permits to drill on that small plot of land.

In North Dakota, the average number of days for getting a permit processed by the State regulatory body is about 20 days. For the Federal lands, it's anywhere from 225 to 300 or more days. That's too much. I certainly don't advocate, nor do I think anybody else could advocate, streamlining this to the point of where it only takes 10 or 20 days to issue a permit on Federal lands. Clearly, there are 325 million owners of those Federal lands. It requires a more robust environmental protection regime. But we can do better than that, and I think we ought to do better than that.

I think the North Dakota experiment is one that people will look back on and say, that's the way to do it, that's the right way to do it. We in North Dakota care a great deal about our land, about our water, and about our air, and we look forward to working closely with the Federal officials who have an equal care in making this work.

I might also just add that this similar bill was passed last year in the Senate. It did not get a hearing in the House. The same, a companion bill, has been introduced again in the Senate this year by Senator Hoeven and cosponsored by Senator Heitkamp. It has bipartisan support in the Senate. It has passed the committee over there. It has not gotten to the floor yet.

So, again, I appreciate the leadership that the chair and ranking members have provided on this and urge my colleagues to pass this important bill.

Madam Speaker, just under 3 years ago, a 2-year-old little boy in Bismarck, North Dakota, watched for half an hour while his stepfather beat his mother to death. Today, that little boy is my 5-year-old son. Kris and I were blessed, and are blessed, to have been able to adopt Abel into our family where we work every day to dilute the memories of that awful night and many previously to it with new memories of love and affection.

I know the scourge of violence against women personally. It is not an abstract concept to my family. It's very real. That is why I support and will vote today for the Violence Against Women Act, because I want the shelters and programs that keep

women safe to be well funded. I want the advocates of change to have the resources to turn victims into victors. I want law enforcement officers and prosecutors to have the tools to impose justice on behalf of my son and other women and children. It is not just theoretical to me. It's personal to me.

While I support the Violence Against Women Act because it is personal, I support this amendment because it's principled. Our Constitution in its genius guarantees due process--due process--to the accused. The concept of ``innocent until proven guilty'' is known as the cornerstone of American justice. It is what gives moral authority to our system of justice.

By codifying the language acknowledging ``inherent sovereignty,'' I fear we risk giving up the moral high ground for a political slogan that does nothing to protect the victims of violence.

Even if you are willing to rationalize trading justice through due process guaranteed in the 5th and 14th Amendments of our Constitution we pledged to uphold, please consider the damage we will have done if a court overturns this act and its protections because we wanted a good political slogan more than a good law.

Friends, let's vote for the Violence Against Women Act that not only protects the vulnerable in our society, but also protects the civil liberties upon which our system of justice is built.

Thank you to my colleague from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, today, I dropped in the hopper my first bill as a Member of the United States House of Representatives. And while it's a simple bill, it's a big day for me. It's a bill that simply corrects an oversight in previous legislation.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established a Federal Permit Streamlining Pilot Project to improve the processing of oil and gas permitting for onshore Federal lands. The Miles City, Montana, BLM field office was included in this pilot project. But unknown to the drafters of the legislation, the Miles City office also serves North and South Dakota. Without the Dakotas included in the language of the law, North and South Dakota permits are excluded from this program.

Permitting to drill on Federal lands has exceeded 225 days for the past 4 years when State permits on non-Federal lands in North Dakota take only 10 days to process. With the passage of this bill, more land will be opened to a program that seeks to reduce this sluggish pace, and oil and natural gas explorers and their many supporting businesses will have more work to do sooner.

Beyond the immediate benefits of this bill, Mr. Speaker, I hope it begins

a conversation on more extensive reform of the permitting process for Federal land. The new oil and gas revolution in the United States has the potential to lead us out of this economic slump. I believe America's national security and America's economic security are tied directly to America's energy security, and I urge my colleagues to pass this bill as my friends work to pass the same legislation in the Senate.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the legacy of a treasured North Dakotan who touched the lives of his wonderful family and all who knew him. Dr. Ben Clayburgh left this world for a better place on January 21, my birthday.

Ben earned many titles during his life. He was a surgeon, a U.S. Army private, a professor, and a passionate political leader. But above all, he was a

healer and a diplomat who inspired those around him.

Grand Forks, North Dakota, will always remember Ben Clayburgh. After serving his country in the U.S. Army as a flight surgeon, he established himself in Grand Forks as a trusted man in medicine and politics, two of his greatest passions.

He served as North Dakota's Republican National Committeeman for 12 years and, in 2004, was honored in becoming the Presidential elector for George W. Bush. His picture hangs in the Hall of Fame at the Ronald Reagan Center in Bismarck, and the memory of his tremendous character will always be in the hearts of those who knew and loved him.

May God bless Ben's memory, his wife, Bev, and the Clayburgh family, his greatest legacy.

Mr. Speaker, a North Dakota legend died recently, and I was honored to be able to attend the celebration of his life, a sendoff worthy of a king.

Chester Reiten was like royalty, especially to the people of his hometown of Minot, where he served as their mayor for 14 years. Public service came naturally to Chet. During World War II, he enlisted in the United States Navy, serving as an ensign and commanding officer of a landing craft infantry ship.

In addition to military and local service, Chet served 16 years in the North Dakota Senate where he was also president pro tem.

Chester really made a name for himself and Minot when he combined his loves of Norwegian culture and America by founding the annual Norsk Hostfest, the largest Scandinavian festival in North America. The Hostfest brings thousands of people to Minot every year to celebrate all things Scandinavian. Chester received the St. Olav Medal from the King of Norway as a result of his work with Norsk Hostfest and his promotion of Norwegian and Scandinavian heritage. He received the Theodore Roosevelt Roughrider Award in 2002 and was inducted into the Scandinavian American Hall of Fame in 2011.

May God bless Chester's memory; his wife, Joy; and their beautiful family. He will be missed.

Madam Speaker, as inadequate as words are in expressing our gratitude to our American heroes who wear the uniform of our armed services, I rise to do my best to pay tribute to one very special soldier from North Dakota.

Former Army Staff Sergeant Clinton Romesha will be presented with the Medal of Honor next Monday by President Obama for ``acts of gallantry and intrepidity,'' becoming only the fourth living recipient for actions in Afghanistan or Iraq. With the help of an assistant gunner, he took out a machine-gun team before sustaining shrapnel from a grenade. The citation recalls his acts of heroism this way:

Undeterred by his injuries, Staff Sergeant Romesha

continued to fight, and upon the arrival of another soldier

to aid him and his assistant gunner, he again rushed through

the exposed avenue to assemble additional soldiers. With

complete disregard for his own safety, he completely exposed

himself to heavy enemy fire as he moved confidently about the

battlefield engaging and destroying multiple enemy targets.

This young husband and father not only fought the enemy after sustaining his own wounds, he organized air attacks and provided cover while three of his wounded comrades could get to aid, then pushed on to retrieve the bodies of fallen soldiers.

Madam Speaker, I'm honored to serve in this prestigious assembly, always aware I do so because people like

Staff Sergeant Romesha serve me and our Nation in ways we can't even imagine. May God bless Mr. Romesha and his family and all of our American heroes who serve the cause of freedom around the world.

``No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.''

Article II, section 1:

``The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the North Dakota State University Bison and head coach Craig Bohl on winning another FCS national championship on January 5 this year in Frisco, Texas.

NDSU is well known as a student-focused, land grant research university with more than 14,000 students, offering over 100 majors, covering everything from architecture, pharmacy, food science and engineering, to business, biotechnology, music and interior design.

The victory over Sam Houston State was the Bison's second consecutive national championship, an accomplishment even more impressive when considering the Thundering Herd became a Division I program only 8 short years ago. I look forward to following the Bison on many more championship runs and am pleased that Coach Bohl has agreed to a multi- year contract extension rather than pursuing a career in politics.