Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to help schools educating the children of U.S. service members and schools serving Native American children on federal lands.

My legislation will improve the distribution of school construction grants under the Impact Aid program. Impact Aid compensates schools affected by a federal presence such as military installations or Native American reservations. Because federal lands are exempt from local property taxes, school districts located on or near federal lands lose a major source of revenue without the federal Impact Aid program.

Currently, school construction grants under Impact Aid allow unequal funding between military school districts and Native American school districts. For example, although 36 percent of the one million federal students are from military impacted schools, the majority of school construction dollars are spent on the 12 percent of Native American students.

In 2005 and 2004, $27 million in Impact Aid competitive construction grants were awarded. In 2005, only 1 of 8 competitive grants was awarded to a military impacted school district. In 2004, only three of 15 recipients were military school districts, and only one of 17 recipients in 2003 was a military school. In contrast, the formula grants under the Impact Aid School Construction program are equally distributed between military and Native American schools.

Considering that Impact Aid has historically been underfunded in meeting the needs of local school districts serving military and Native American families, this legislation is critical to ensure the most equitable use of available dollars.

Instead of sending 60% of funding toward 12 percent of federal students, the legislation I am introducing today would ensure 80% of school construction funding will be equally distributed between military and Native American schools. This approach will help ensure a high-quality education for the children of our military members selflessly serving our Nation. Priority would also be given to Native American districts in qualifying for emergency construction grants in recognition of the poor condition of too many Native American schools.

This legislation will also help schools affected by Global Rebasing at the Department of Defense (DoD). Over the next four years, DoD estimates that 38,000 military children will be returning to U.S. schools from closing overseas military bases. Under this legislation, schools that experience a 10% increase in the number of military students would be allowed to apply for emergency Impact Aid construction grants.

I am confident this excellent legislation will improve the Impact Aid program to better serve American families. I am proud that both Native American school districts and military-impacted school districts support the common-sense approach of this bill. I look forward to working with my colleagues on the reauthorization of Impact Aid later this year, and urge every Member of Congress to review and cosponsor this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I too am deeply disappointed today. I think part of the message from the electorate was that they want us to work together, that they want us to cooperate for the greater good. And, yes, that people were, at least in Nebraska, very upset with the examples of those who violated the public's trust.

We need to work together on an ethics plan. I am pleased that in this rule there are ethics measures that, by the way, the Republicans helped put together many months ago in reaction to the ethics violations we have seen from some of our colleagues.

So, as the people want us to work together in a partnership and not in partisanship, what we received was a partisan slap across the face. It is the mismatch between words and actions of which we are speaking today.

I have had a bill that was incorporated into the ethics package that we passed last May that the Democrats almost en banc opposed because it wasn't tough enough. The reality is that the package in today's rule, which we had no participation in, is, in many ways, weaker. And one of the examples is the fact that, as I worked on with our Speaker, that if you have violated the rules of this House and the public trust and you took money, you found $90,000 of cold hard cash or you took limousines or whatever the violations were, that you shouldn't be able to leave in the public disgust with the benefits of public service, i.e., a pension. That was in the ethics package passed months ago but isn't in this one. So this is a weaker package.

Now, I too wish I would have had the opportunity to take the bill that I have introduced today and did last year and work with our friends on the other side, but, in the partisan slap, have been denied the ability to do so.

Thank you, I appreciate this opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, to the gentleman from Ohio, the new Member who just spoke, I appreciate and respect his point of view. I will add, though, that the disgust, the frustration with the ethics violation, the disregard for the public's trust in this body because of a few of our colleagues isn't relegated to one side of the aisle or the other, nor one district or the other.

I think all of us in this institution today that took the oath of office are disgusted by the past; and that is why this body that last May passed a comprehensive ethics bill, which mostly was incorporated in this one, ironically, I think, it is fairly humorous, that most of our colleagues on the other side voted against it because it was not good enough, yet substantially similar to the one that is brought forward without our input into the process today.

Now I stand here today saying this isn't good enough. We could have done a better job of tightening down with lobbyists and gifts. Frankly, I don't know how to interpret the plane part, but I am concerned about establishing the public trust when someone accepts bribes.

In our package that was voted against by a lot of our colleagues from the other side of the aisle that are pounding their chests today, in that was saying that you cannot receive the fruits that you earned during your tenure in this office if you have violated the public's trust.

That is not part of the bill that stands before us today. If you have accepted a bribe, you are convicted of a felony and are sitting in jail, you should not be able to accept the part of the government- funded pension or other government-funded benefits that you earned while you were here. You just simply cannot do that.

My folks back in Nebraska think that is absolutely absurd. I just wish we had a process in place where we could have worked in a partnership to improve this bill, to make it better. But we didn't have that opportunity, and I don't have the opportunity on behalf of my Nebraskans, who feel that it is absurd that you have cash in a freezer, that you can accept bribes like we had in a California or in an Ohio district, and still accept your pension. I think it is absurd that we don't have that opportunity today.

Frankly, the fact that those folks that voted against a comprehensive ethics reform package introduced one without Republican input to improve the bill smacks of partisanship to me. I thought we were going to clear the decks of that and start working together for the public good, and it just doesn't seem like it is happening today.

That is a poor start for civility in this body.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deep disappointment in the rules package we are considering today.

The message from the American public last fall was ``we want Republicans and Democrats to work together.'' We all had high expectations for a ``new way of doing business in Washington.''

This past week during the Nation's remembrance of former President Gerald Ford, we were all reminded of the way Republicans and Democrats were able to find common ground to solve the country's problems. There was a time when the two parties could come together in the national interest.

Where, Mr. Speaker, did all of those grand and high-minded promises of bipartisanship go? I hope this is not a precedent for how the House will operate during the rest of the 110th Congress. Our constituents expect us to work together and get things done for the good of the country.

Included in this rules package are a number of ethics reforms, but they do not go far enough. We must have tougher and stronger ethics reform.

Today, there are Members serving in the House who have contributed to the American public's loss of confidence in this body. One Member was found to have $90,000 in cash in his freezer; another Member of the Appropriations Committee established separate entities that were recipients of appropriation funds. Yet, this rules package and the ethics reforms in it do nothing to punish such behavior.

We must adopt tougher and stronger measures if we are going to regain the trust of the American public. In my District, Nebraskans sent a clear message that said if Members take bribes and abuse the public's trust, they should not be protected and should not be allowed to reap the benefits of their House service such as a pension paid for by the taxpayers. Under this new Congressional leadership, Nebraska's voice will not be heard. I won't be allowed to even offer an amendment to be denied by the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am introducing today legislation that I introduced last year--to deny pension benefits to any Member or government official who is convicted of a crime that violates the public trust. Because of the lack of a fair and open process in this House, I have been denied the opportunity to offer this legislation as an amendment.

This is not what American voters wanted to see after last fall's election. We are being denied the chance to work together. We need to restore the public's confidence in this House and one way to do that is to work together to solve the problems facing this Nation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the good chairman for bringing this bill to the floor tonight, which also, as the gentleman from Ohio mentioned, does include a consumer protection which I wrote in regarding contact lenses which ensures that manufacturers cannot have tie-in agreements with retail shops where they are the exclusive providers of the contact lens, therefore thwarting the law that we passed in Congress several years ago, about 3 years ago, that allows the consumer the opportunity to shop around. I want to make sure that consumers have that right to shop around. That is what this protection allows.

I want to thank the folks that have allowed this to come to the floor tonight in our last night, regardless of the vehicle. It is a good consumer protection measure.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3248, the Lifespan Respite Care Act. This legislation would allow States to establish Lifespan Respite Systems to improve respite access and quality for the Nation's family caregivers regardless of age or disability. I am proud to say that the legislation is modeled on the Nebraska Lifespan Respite program, which was championed legislatively in the State by my good friend and colleague, State Senator Dennis Byars, and has made a world of difference to families in our State. I am also proud to say that this year's national respite conference was hosted by the Lifespan Respite program and the Nebraska Respite Coalition.

With passage of the Nation's second piece of State legislation on lifespan respite in 1999, the Nebraska Health and Human Services System established the Nebraska Respite Network, a statewide system for the coordination of respite resources that serve the lifespan. Six regional entities are responsible for information and referral for families who need access to respite, recruitment of respite providers, public awareness, coordinating training opportunities for providers and consumers, quality assurance and program evaluation. The Lifespan Respite Subsidy component is available to persons of all ages across the lifespan with special needs who are not receiving respite services from any other government program.

The stress of continuous care giving can take its toll on family caregivers and is one of the greatest contributing factors to caregiver illness, marital discord that can lead to divorce, and costly out of home placements. Respite has been shown to alleviate these symptoms and even help delay or avoid foster care or nursing home placements. In Nebraska, a statewide survey of a broad array of caregivers who had been receiving respite found that 79 percent of the respondents reported decreased stress and 58 percent reported decreased isolation. In addition, one out of four families with children under 21 reported they were less likely to place their children in out-of-home care once respite services were available.

The Nebraska program works because it is efficient and maximizes existing resources across all age groups and disabilities by developing unique partnerships with Medicaid, early intervention, area agencies on aging and other state and federal programs that provide or support respite. The regional Lifespan Respite Network Coordinator recruits respite providers for Medicaid, as well as for the Lifespan Respite Program itself. The coordinator meets with staff from HHS, Developmental Disabilities, the Early Intervention program, and others on a monthly basis in order to determine need. Respite providers are recruited and trained to fill the gaps, and providers list are shared. Most importantly, all family caregiver populations must be served equally with no preference for or limitation by age or disability.

The Nebraska Lifespan Respite Program was cited as exemplary by the National Conference of State Legislatures as a model for States to emulate in implementing community-based long term care, and highlighted by the National Governors Association for best practices. I would urge the Secretary in implementing this program to base its program guidance on the success of the Nebraska model, especially in its ability to reach out to and serve all age groups, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 843, the Combating Autism Act. As a member of the congressional Coalition on Autism Research and Education CARE, as well as a cosponsor of the companion bill, H.R. 2421, I strongly support the provisions of the bill. This important legislation will improve the lives of those affected by expanding and improving detection, care and treatment of autism spectrum disorders.

The establishment of centers of excellence for autism research will enable us to conduct cutting edge research and apply it in the most effective manner possible to treat our young citizens affected by autism in the best way we can.

I want to give a special thanks to the many parents, siblings, families and friends of those with autism, especially my constituents in the Second District of Nebraska. Your support of autism issues, and specifically this legislation, has been crucial to the advancement of this bill. I congratulate you and other advocates for your tireless work. I urge my colleagues to support the enactment of S. 843.

Mr. Speaker, on September 28, I inadvertently voted ``no'' on rollcall 503, the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Modernization Act. Please let the record reflect that I enter an ``aye'' vote on this rollcall.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1028 to support the goals and ideals of Red Ribbon Week.

Red Ribbon Week was established 21 years ago to honor the life of Drug Enforcement Administration Special Agent Enrique ``Kiki'' Camarena, who died in the line of duty while fighting illicit drugs. More than 100 organizations across the United States, including the Nation's Governors and community organizations such as Boys and Girls Clubs of America, have joined in this effort to promote drug-free communities.

As a Representative of the great State of Nebraska, I recognize the importance of such efforts to prevent abuse of dangerous drugs such as methamphetamine. The war against the rising tide of meth in the Mid- West and on the West Coast--and now even in some parts of the East Coast--can only be effectively fought through partnerships with law enforcement, government, social service agencies, communities, schools, parents and children.

The meth problem affects all aspects of our communities and requires comprehensive solutions at all levels of government and in partnership with private charities and volunteer organizations.

We need effective drug prevention and education programs; greater parental involvement and public awareness; and law enforcement and social services coordination in order to rescue our communities from the ruination and devastation of meth.

The recent survey of 500 county law enforcement officials found that meth abuse is still the number 1 drug problem nationwide. Many States, including Nebraska, have enacted laws to control access to Sudafed and other drugs that act as the basis for ``cooking'' meth. The number of Mom and Pop meth labs dropped by an astounding 70 percent in Nebraska and other states. However, 85 percent of law enforcement officials report the meth problem is still growing due to drug trafficking from ``superlabs'' in Mexico.

This Congress can best honor the memory of Agent Camarena by continuing a strong battle in the ``new front'' of the war against drugs: methamphetamine.

I urge my colleagues to join me today in not only supporting our law enforcement officers who risk their lives each day to keep our communities safe, but to join me and other Members of the Congressional Caucus to Fight and Control Methamphetamine by pledging to stop the scourge of meth across our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the service of Colonel Robert R. Tovado, the Commander of University of Nebraska Lincoln Air Force ROTC Detachment 465, who is retiring after three decades of service in the United States Air Force.

Colonel Tovado entered the Air Force in 1976 through AFROTC at the University of Northern Colorado. Since that time, he has served American in almost every major operation U.S. forces have been engaged in around the world. During his career, the Colonel has served in Operations Just Cause, Restore Hope, Sea Signal, Desert Strike, Desert Focus, Joint Guard, and Southern Watch.

Prior to his time in Nebraska, Colonel Tovado worked for General Tommy Franks as the Director of Manpower and Personnel at United States Central Command and he served as the Coalition/Joint Director of Manpower and Personnel deployed to Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom.

Since his arrival at the University of Nebraska, Colonel Tovado has taken his valuable military experience and applied it to his teaching and building of America's next generation of great leaders. During his tenure in Lincoln, the Colonel has led his staff and students in providing over 4,000 volunteer hours in support of a plethora of community service organizations for the betterment of Nebraska and her citizens.

Furthermore, he has helped countless students pursue their academic dreams by his efforts in bringing over two million dollars in scholarship money to the University of Nebraska. Under his command, UNL Air Force ROTC Detachment 465 was named the Right of Line Award winner for 2005 for the best Air Force ROTC Detachment in the nation. Furthermore, in 2005 Detachment 465 was also home to the Number One cadet in the nation. This marks the first time an Air Force ROTC detachment has received both awards during the same year and is a reflection of the work and leadership of Colonel Tovado.

Over the last three years of Colonel Tovado's tenure, 77 new lieutenants, including one of my former congressional staff members, have been commissioned into the United States Air Force. As I have been informed, the Colonel inspired and taught all of these great young men and women what it meant to be the best in the nation. These 77 young officers are now serving all across our globe defending America for future generations. This is perhaps the greatest legacy of Colonel Robert R. Tovado.

In closing, I join all Americans in wishing Colonel Tovado, his wife Wendy, and his family, heartfelt thanks on behalf of a grateful nation for his dedication and service to freedom.

Mr. Speaker, the Omaha Federation of Advertising will be celebrating their 100th anniversary at a centennial gala event on November 18, 2006 with the induction of their first Legends of Advertising Hall of Fame honorees, a salute to the top 100 local ad campaigns and a theatrical retrospect of the last 100 years.

Founded in 1906, the Omaha Federation of Advertising, OFA, is considered the unifying voice of advertising in the Omaha/Council Bluffs metropolitan area. The professional association is made up of and represents corporate advertising, agencies, marketing, media, printing, suppliers, academia and other advertising and public relations professionals. As advocates for the rights of advertisers, they educate policy makers, the media and the general public on the value advertising brings to the well-being of our community and the economy.

The OFA hosts a multitude of events and activities throughout the year that serve the public and attract a wide audience. A small example of such activities include: a national award-winning program to introduce college students to advertising professionals, called Meet the Pros; an annual awards event recognizing creative excellence, called the American Advertising Awards; a scholarship program in which thousands of dollars are awarded to students attending accredited universities and/or advertising/design trade schools; and a public service program committed to the goal of helping deserving non-profit groups to achieve their marketing/communication goals.

I'd like to congratulate the OFA on their 100th anniversary and wish them the best in the next century.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.J. Res. 88, the Marriage Protection Amendment.

Last Friday, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Nebraska constitutional amendment protecting marriage between one man and one woman, and affirming the legal protections and benefits reserved to this fundamental union. The amendment was approved by an overwhelming 70 percent majority in 2000.

Nationwide, 45 states have defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman or expressly prohibited same-sex marriage. Twenty states approved constitutional amendments upholding marriage; six states will vote on an amendment in November; and eight states are considering sending constitutional amendments to voters in 2006 or 2008. The 16 states that approved constitutional amendments since 2004 did so by an average 72 percent voter majority.

Even voters in Massachusetts--the first state to have its supreme court unilaterally declare same-sex marriage as constitutional--may have the opportunity to uphold marriage. The state's high court ruled last week that legislative efforts to put a same-sex marriage ban on the 2008 ballot could move forward. Recent court rulings in New York, Tennessee and Georgia have also upheld marriage rights.

The Federal Marriage Protection Amendment under consideration today would prohibit any governmental entity--whether in the legislative, executive or judicial branch at all levels of government--from altering the definition of marriage. It does not discriminate against homosexuals; it upholds and recognizes the importance of marriage between a man and a woman for the well-being of children and society at large.

Mr. Speaker, the American people want the Marriage Protection Amendment to be approved. Their will is clearly reflected through the overwhelming majorities voting for marriage protection initiatives in the states. We have a responsibility to children and families nationwide to send a clear message today that marriage will be upheld and protected. We also have a sacred duty to future generations to preserve marriage as the fundamental building block of society.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.J. Res. 88 today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 3504, the Fetus Farming Prohibition Act.

This critical legislation will help prevent the dangerous potential for creation of human ``fetus farms'' to harvest children's tissues and organs for medical research. It would make it a federal crime punishable by up to ten years in prison to knowingly buy or sell human fetal tissue from a pregnancy deliberately initiated for the purpose of harvesting organs and tissues.

Unless S. 3504 is enacted, the potential for exploitation of women and children is tremendous. Animal research has already been conducted that raises severe ethical concerns for application in humans. For example, Advanced Cell Technology attempted to clone cow fetuses, implanted the fetuses within a womb and grew them for three to four months before aborting the cows to harvest their liver tissue for research. In addition, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology cloned and grew mouse fetuses to correct an immune deficiency, but the research was only successful when the mouse was aborted at the newborn stage for cell harvesting.

Some researchers have already indicated that cells or tissues from human fetuses are more desirable than embryonic stem cells because they are more developed and adaptable for transplantation. While the biotechnology industry claims no interest in maintaining cloned human embryos past 14 days, it has supported State laws such as the New Jersey law which allows ``fetus farming'' into the ninth month of pregnancy to harvest more developed organs and tissues. The potential to pay women to act as incubators for children to be grown and aborted for ``research'' is easily seen. S. 3504 would prevent this horrific situation, and I am proud President Bush has agreed to sign this legislation into law upon passage by Congress today.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting S. 3504 to uphold human life and protect women and children from exploitation in unethical research.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Washington for introducing this modest amendment to help families across the Nation that are dealing with meth issues, and not only the families that have to deal with them but the law enforcement community, the people on the front line.

I want to thank you for your leadership, Mr. Reichert. Your experience and background as a law enforcement officer, somebody on the front line, has been instrumental to us in the United States Congress in this fight to empower our local police officers.

But I also want to thank the chairman of the appropriations subcommittee in charge, because Chairman Wolf knows what drugs has done to our families. The budget that was sent over to us zeroed these out, eliminated them. The chairman fought to get as much put back as he could, but we still need more. So I appreciate your efforts.

In Omaha, we have a real meth problem. It is affecting suburban housewives, teenagers, all segments and demographics of our community. I have personally seen how it ravages these families. I think it is important that we step up our efforts to rid this nasty drug from our communities. The only way to rid it from our communities is to empower the local law enforcement agencies.

Now, we have passed a meth law in this House that allows for pseudoephedrine to be put behind the counter. That makes it hard to do the labs now. Frankly, in States like Nebraska, Iowa, Oklahoma and Missouri that have done that, they have seen the number of labs go down. But now we have got gangs running meth from super labs in Mexico.

So as we take labs down, we still get inundated in our communities from these drugs from gangs now. And so it is extremely important that those people that know the gang members, know what they are doing can run the task forces. And here is a chart up here that shows just with meth, from the task

forces funded by this 5.54 kilos of meth taken off.

The National Association of Counties reports that 58 percent of counties ranked methamphetamine as their No. 1 drug problem in 2005, and CDC estimates at least 20,000 Americans die each year from drug abuse/overdose.

Byrne-JAG grants incentivize multi-jurisdictional drug enforcement and cooperation between local, state and federal law enforcement agents. These grants are the primary federal funds to discourage domestic production of methamphetamine.

The White House's 2007 budget request to Congress again eliminates funding for Byrne. In 2004, Congress provided $634 million to law enforcement agencies nationwide. Last year, the Senate voted to provide $900 million--closer to the original funding level for this program-- but the proposed bill provides just $367 million.

Since FY01, funding has been cut from over $1 billion to less than $367 million in the H.R. 5672. The effect of these cuts has been clear: many States have been forced to cut or completely eliminate their gang and drug task forces.

The $558 million reported as the funding level of Byrne-JAG includes $115 million in discretionary earmarks, and $75 million for Boys and Girls Clubs--leaving $367 million for state formula grants supporting drug and violent crime task forces.

The proposed $367 million funding level would cripple the effectiveness of drug task forces nationwide, and jeopardize the gains made in reducing nationwide violent crime to a 30-year low. The collaborative task forces built over the past 15 years to combat drugs cannot be easily rebuilt.

State and local agencies will take the brunt of meth investigations without federal assistance. More than 90 percent of drug arrests nationwide are made by state and local law enforcement.

Tom Constantine, former head of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) testified that the majority of DEA cases begin as referrals from local and multi-jurisdictional drug investigations. He was unaware of any major DEA case during his tenure that did not originate from information gathered at the state and local level.

Last year, Byrne task forces nationwide seized 5,600 meth labs, 55,000 weapons, and massive quantities of narcotics, including 2.7 million grams of meth. These results demonstrate the power of using federal dollars to leverage state and local partnerships.

Nebraska will be forced to eliminate 9 of 11 task forces unless Byrne-JAG funding is increased; Texas has already eliminated its task forces due to lack of funding, and New Jersey is considering the same course of action. Minnesota may be forced to discontinue its rural drug task forces, and only three of Missouri's 28 Byrne task forces would survive on state funding alone.

The fight against meth is the frontline of the Nation's war on drugs. The fastest-growing drug in the Nation, meth has produced a wider and more expensive array of problems than any other narcotic we have ever faced. And midwestern states such as Nebraska bear much of the brunt.

According to Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning, 60 percent of inmates in Nebraska jails have problems with meth. The number of people in Nebraska jails for possessing, selling or manufacturing meth has more than doubled since 1999.

Jails are overcrowded with meth addicts, many of whom require special medical care. Meth labs quickly become toxic waste dumps that can only be cleaned up with large amounts of manpower and financial resources. Worst of all, children in homes where meth is used or made are more often violently abused and neglected, and exposed to highly toxic chemicals.

Nationwide, law enforcement officers have dismantled more than 50,000 clandestine meth labs since 2001. Nearly half of those incidents occurred in just nine Midwestern and Plains states, including Nebraska.

The number of meth labs in Nebraska rose from 37 in 1999 to almost 300 in 2004. Fortunately, my State joined a growing coalition of States fighting against meth by enacting a new law in September to restrict the sale of pseudoephedrine. Since that time, the number of meth labs has fallen by a phenomenal 70 percent.

However, the problem is far from being solved since 80 percent of the meth in Nebraska is being trafficked from Mexico. This meth is far more addictive than what can be cooked in a typical ``Mom and Pop'' meth lab.

Thanks to Nebraska's new law, instead of using 80 percent of their resources to fight the home labs that comprised only 20 percent of the State's meth problem, Nebraska narcotic officers can now use more of their time to stop the inflow of Mexican meth.

Congress has played a role in combating the Nation's growing meth problem through Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grants for State and local law enforcement agencies. Unfortunately, these grants are endangered by the failure at the White House to recognize the significance of Byrne grants in combating meth and other illegal drugs nationwide.

Byrne task forces are the underpinning of our Nation's successful drug control strategy that brought us the lowest violent crime rates in 30 years. We must not turn back the clock in the war on drugs.

Offered By: Mr. Terry

Amendment No. 26: Page 23, line 4, after the dollar amount

insert ``(increased by $50,000,000)''.

Page 23, line 9, after the dollar amount insert

``(increased by $50,000,000)''.

Page 55, line 21, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced

by $50,000,000)''.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 731 to commend the Patriot Guard Riders for their valiant efforts to shield mourning military families from protesters at the funeral services of their loved ones.

I recently had the honor and privilege to attend the funeral of Army Sergeant Lonnie Calvin Allen, Jr., who was killed along with three other servicemembers when a roadside bomb struck his Humvee in Baghdad. Over 500 people attended the standing-room-only service to honor the life of this brave young man.

The Nebraska Chapter of the Patriot Guard Riders--decked out in leather and holding American flags--lined the walkway into the church for the protection and peace of mind of friends and family members. I felt proud to be an American as I witnessed this unforgettable display of honor and respect for one of our fallen heroes. The personal dedication and commitment of the Patriot Guard Riders is an inspiring example of true American patriotism.

The Patriot Guard Riders also shielded the surviving family members of Army Captain Joel Cahill, who was on his second tour of duty in Iraq when he was killed late last year by an Improvised Explosive Device, IED, that struck his vehicle. As protesters held signs such as ``God sent the IED,'' and ``thank God for dead soldiers,'' Patriot Guard Riders outnumbered them by at least five to one on the other side of the street, shielding Capt. Cahill's wife and two young daughters. Captain Cahill's 59-year-old father also took action in his own style: he handed the protesters sheets of paper containing biblical verses such as ``Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.''

Sgt. L.C. Allen and Capt. Joel Cahill were buried with full military honors in Arlington National Cemetery. Their valor and courage will stand the test of time, while the protesters dishonoring their noble sacrifices will fade into the annals of history.

I commend Nebraska State Captain Mike Smith and all the members of the Patriot Guard Riders, both in my State and nationwide. I join them in thanking the families of our servicemembers who have made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom at home and abroad. I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution to recognize the outstanding and selfless contributions of the Patriot Guard Riders--protectors of our fallen American heroes and their families.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution to affirm the United States of America will ultimately achieve victory in the Global War on Terror.

On September 11, 2001, 3,000 of our fellow Americans were brutally killed by Islamic terrorists under the leadership of Osama bin Laden. President Bush responded by declaring war against terrorism and its strongholds throughout the world. He said we would fight the enemy on their ground to prevent terrorists from once again attacking our citizens on U.S. soil.

The Bush Doctrine stated: ``Any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.'' U.S. and Coalition forces have verified his words with irrefutable action. The state-sponsored ``safe harbor'' Al Qaeda enjoyed in Afghanistan ended when U.S. and Northern Alliance forces routed the Taliban in a decisive military victory.

Afghanistan now has a newly elected parliament, a market economy, equality for women, and millions of children attending school for the first time. We still face challenges in this nation, but it is on its way to becoming a stable and secure democracy, freed from the oppression of the Taliban extremists. Most importantly, Al Qaeda can no longer use this nation as a launching ground from which to attack the United States.

In Iraq, Saddam Hussein repeatedly refused to comply with U.N. weapons inspection. Sovereignty was turned over to Iraqis a year and a half ago; a Constitution was drafted last summer and ratified in October; and a new government is being established. The seeds of democracy are beginning to take root, and a major threat of state- sponsored terrorism against the U.S. was removed.

Despite the danger of violent retaliation from radical extremists, 59 percent of Iraqi citizens exercised their right to vote in January, and approximately 70 percent in December. Iraq is on its way to fully assuming responsibility for its own security and governance.

The challenges we face are undeniable and difficult. President Bush was correct when he said this war would come at great cost in blood and treasure. However, the cost would be much higher--intolerably high--had we not decisively acted to protect the security and interests of the United States.

Who can forget the cheering of Iraqi citizens in the streets as Baghdad was liberated and the statue of Saddam Hussein toppled to the ground? Who can forget the courage of the Iraqi's who proudly displayed the purple ink on their index finger after exercising their right to vote? Who can forget the sight of Saddam Hussein cowering like a cornered rat when U.S. soldiers forced him from hiding? Above all, who can forget the sight of the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center collapsing, the burning embers of the attack on the Pentagon, or the scorched field in Pennsylvania that will forever stand as a testament to heroism and self-sacrifice. Our successes in the Global War on Terror have prevented additional horrifying images from filling our TV screens, saving untold innocent American lives.

We may never know what catastrophes have been averted by the dedication and vigilance of U.S. servicemen and women. Nearly 2,500 Americans have nobly given their lives in exchange for the peace that we have enjoyed here at home these past four and one-half years. The very fact that we have not endured another terrorist attack on U.S. soil proves their lives were not given in vain. We have not seen additional attacks such as those in London and Madrid, or experienced the fear Israelis face on a daily basis. We owe our safety and security to the soldiers who are giving their all to protect our families, communities, lives and liberties.

Al Qaeda remains a persistent danger to the United States. This terrorist network operates in over 60 countries around the world. It brainwashes men and women into becoming suicide bombers; destroys religious sites; bombs and beheads innocent civilians; and seeks the destruction and overthrow of America, our values, our people, our freedoms and our way of life.

We cannot allow Al Qaeda the opportunity to establish a permanent base in Iraq from which to attack the United States. The collapse of Iraq's new democratic government would be a huge victory for Al Qaeda, drawing additional recruits for bin Laden's brand of terrorism from the ranks of young Muslims. It is well-known that bin Laden seeks nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons of mass destruction to inflict severe casualties on the United States and allied countries.

Al Qaeda conducted poison gas experiments on dogs in Afghanistan, and the governments of Britain, France, and Jordan have each foiled plans by Al Qaeda to use chemical weapons. U.S. intelligence sources have documented repeated attempts by Al Qaeda to purchase nuclear material, including weapons grade uranium. Nations such as Iran and North Korea are a potential risk for transferring nuclear capabilities to terrorist insurgents.

We must not fall into a sense of complacency. The continued threat from Al Qaeda to

our citizens at home and abroad is real. Thankfully, U.S. and Coalition forces have captured or killed more than three-fourths of Al Qaeda's known pre-9ll leaders. These include senior field commanders, masterminds of the September 11th attacks, communications coordinators, and other key operational leaders. Just last week, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq was killed by U.S. forces.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had repeatedly attacked religious shrines and Iraqi political leaders to destabilize Iraq, provoke a civil war, and create a haven for terrorism. The February bombing of the Askariya shrine in Samarra--one of Iraq's holiest religious sites--ignited a firestorm of reprisals that led to the deaths of over 130 Iraqis. Killing the man who incited this violence was a resounding victory toward building a safe, secure, stable Iraq.

More than 4,000 suspected Al Qaeda members have been arrested worldwide since 9/11, and Al Qaeda cells have been identified and dismantled in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Africa. Over $140 million in terrorist financial assets have been confiscated or seized from over 1,400 bank accounts worldwide.

Mistakes have been made in the War on Terror, but the Bush Doctrine of dissuasion and deterrence is working. Pakistan broke its state- sponsored ties to Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and Libya surrendered its WMD and disavowed terrorism. Until recently, Iran had frozen its uranium enrichment program, but is now threatening our country amid the perceived weakness that we will pull our forces out of Iraq before that nation is able to govern and protect itself from terror. This dangerous situation underscores the fact that we must finish the job we began to ensure the continued safety and security of the American people. We must not give in to terrorism by pulling out of Iraq too early.

Fortunately, the talents and capabilities of our U.S. servicemen and women are protecting our nation well. Air Force Chief of Staff, General T. Michael Moseley, told reporters in February that Air Force satellites can locate activities and individuals on a global scale, and targets can be held at risk or struck down with the lethality of a weapon that detonates within several feet of the target. Al-Zarqawi learned this lesson the hard way.

General Moseley continued: ``It must be a bit disturbing [to terrorists] to know that if you act against the United States or its Coalition partners, the U. S. Air Force will find you and strike you. And there's nothing you can do about it. We may never know what has not happened because of this capability.''

General Ronald Keyes, head of the Air Force's Air Combat Command, rightly said: ``If you're a terrorist and you've got static on your phone, that's me . . . That shadow passing over you, that's me. That computer that will not boot, that's me. That noise you thought you heard until it's too late, that is me. And it will continue to be me until our children and grandchildren and those of freedom-loving nations everywhere emerge from this plight of terrorism.''

We can and we must improve our intelligence and military capabilities to ultimately eradicate terrorism worldwide. This war has not been waged perfectly, but it has in arguably succeeded in preventing additional terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, protecting American lives and liberty, and forcing terrorists to spend their time running rather than plotting additional ways to murder innocent citizens and spread darkness and destruction.

Voting ``yes'' for this resolution today will send the clear message to Al Qaeda that the United States is truly united in defeating terrorism and promoting a strong and stable Iraq.

I urge my colleagues to join me in thanking our U.S. soldiers, sailors and airmen for their incredible sacrifices, and in supporting this resolution to protect our citizens from terrorism at home and abroad.