Floor Statements

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

Harriett Woods, a devoted mother, wife, grandmother, politician, author and community activist, passed away at her home in University City, Missouri, this February of leukemia. Born in Cleveland, Ohio, and raised in Chicago, Illinois, she went on to attend the University of Michigan. It was there that she became the first female editor of the school's highly esteemed student newspaper.

In later years, her career and political life proved to be an uphill battle

against more popular-known male politicians. Her political career began as a stay-at-home mom. She went to the city council with a complaint about a noisy manhole cover. When they ignored her, she pushed forward launching a successful petition to have the street closed. Causing the attention of the local press, she earned a job to run a community public affairs panel. Soon after, she was elected to the University City Council where she served for 8 years. She followed that up with two terms in the Missouri State Senate.

Harriett Woods ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in 1982, but her name became well known throughout the State. It helped her 2 years later to become the first female elected to statewide office in Missouri when she held the office of Lieutenant Governor. It was a post she held until 1989.

She remained active in politics and her local community throughout the rest of her life, focusing primarily on women's issues. From 1991 to 1995, she was President of the National Women's Political Caucus. Her dedicated work even earned her a spot on the St. Louis Walk of Fame.

It is with great pleasure that we honor her today with this post office naming, and I ask all Members to support H.R. 1617 in honor of this great lady.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, I urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 1617, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Willye B. White was quoted as saying, ``A dream without a plan is just a wish.'' It was this belief that led her to become the first American to have competed in five Olympic track and field teams, a feat still unchallenged.

Willye White competed in five consecutive Olympic games between 1956 and 1972. At the young age of 16, she won a silver medal in the long jump competition at the games in Melbourne, Australia, historically marking the first time an American woman ever medaled in that event. She earned her second silver medal in the 1964 Tokyo, Japan, games by participating in the 4-by-100-meter relay.

Born in Money, Mississippi, she was raised by her grandparents and fought through the daily struggles of the civil rights movement. Her love of sports emerged around age 10 when she discovered the joy of running and jumping. Overall, she competed in 39 international teams, four Pan-American Games teams and five consecutive U.S. Olympic track and field teams.

After her competitive career ended, she stayed active in the sport through coaching and other activities. She represented track and field on the U.S. Olympic Committee, coached athletes in the National Sports Festival in 1979 and 1981, coached and managed at the 1981 World Cup Track and Field Championship Games in Brussels and Rome, and she served as head coach for the 1994 Olympic Sports Festival.

Beyond coaching, she also founded the Willye White Foundation which helps children develop self-esteem and become active members of their communities through athletic participation. She has earned numerous awards throughout the years and is a member of eleven sports halls of fame.

She sadly lost her battle with pancreatic cancer in February. So, today, we proudly honor her life with the naming of this post office in her hometown of Chicago, Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to vote in the affirmative on

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

We often come to the floor to talk about our brave soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan; but today I am proud to speak about a hero, a highly decorated Korean War veteran, Lewis G. Watkins.

Staff Sergeant Lewis G. Watkins was born in Seneca, South Carolina, on June 6, 1925. After graduating from Greenville High School, he joined the Greenville Police Department. Furthering his public service, he enlisted in the United States Marine Corps in 1950. After his training in Camp Lejeune and Camp Pendleton, he was sent to serve in Korea.

Staff Sergeant Watkins fought valiantly during his only tour of duty. On October 7, 1952, his unit was attempting to take an outpost from the enemy. While leading his men up a hill and fighting off heavy small- arms fire and grenades, he was severely injured. Pushing through the pain, he successfully led his team further up the hill.

It was then that he noticed a grenade had landed nearby. Pushing his comrades aside to protect them, he instinctively grabbed the grenade to throw it out of harm's way. Unfortunately, the bomb exploded in his hand and he was mortally wounded. His heroic actions on that hill saved the lives of his fellow soldiers; and it was for this act of bravery and courage he deservedly, albeit posthumously, was awarded the Nation's highest military decoration, the Medal of Honor. His other awards include the Purple Heart, the United Nations Service Medal, and the Korean War Service Medal with two bronze stars.

Staff Sergeant Lewis G. Watkins' life and military achievements are to be commended. He fought and died for his country; and today we honor his heroism, his self-sacrifice, and his inspiring leadership by naming this post office after him.

I commend my colleague Mr. Barrett for bringing this to our attention.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to my very distinguished colleague from the great State of South Carolina (Mr. Barrett).

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

Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order.

I make a point of order under clause 9(a) of rule XXI regarding the earmarks in this bill, H.R. 2082. The list of earmarks in this bill fails to meet the requirements of clause 9(a) in that the list is deficient. One of the earmarks listed was included in the bill even though it failed to meet the requirement that the requesting Member notify in writing the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am saying that under clause 9(a) of rule XXI, that the list is deficient and did not include a notice to the ranking minority member on the committee of the earmark.

Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Is the Chair saying that the mere existence of a list is sufficient, even though it includes an earmark where the requesting Member failed to notify the ranking minority member of his request, as required under clause 17 of rule XXIII?

Mr. Chairman, further parliamentary inquiry.

Is the Chair saying that the mere existence of a list is sufficient, even though the list fails to include an earmark contained in the bill?

Mr. Speaker, I don't believe this is a hypothetical situation, but I want to make further parliamentary inquiry, if I could.

Is the Chair saying that the mere existence of a list is sufficient, even though it includes an earmark where the requesting Member failed to certify he has no financial interest in the earmark?

Finally, one last parliamentary inquiry.

Finally, is the Chair saying that the mere printing of a list of earmarks, or a statement that the bill contains no earmarks, is sufficient to render the point of order against the bill as not recognized by the Chair?

Further parliamentary inquiry.

So, Mr. Speaker, is it my understanding, from your last comments, that even though the rule specifically state that these procedures should be followed, and that they were not followed in this particular instance, that you are going to rule that the list, even though deficient not containing all the earmarks, just the mere fact that there was a list presented, no matter how accurate, that that will stand?

Mr. Speaker, due to being unavoidably delayed, I missed a vote on H.R. 1591, U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007-- Passage, Objections of the President Not Withstanding (rollcall No. 276). I would have voted ``nay'' had I been present to record my vote.

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

Mr. Chairman, I am confused. The gentleman from Washington has been stating about micromanaging the NSF; and now that I see what this amendment does is not only try to micromanage what they do with their grants and their money, but it is also saying to me that these institutions that get these awards grants for the research from the NSF do not have a complete teaching ability to teach these graduate students how to put their thoughts to a nonscientist audience.

Now, to me, we are not only micromanaging the NSF, but now we are getting into some of these schools that receive these grants and saying: You are not doing a full curriculum enough that you can educate these young scientists and these young researchers into how to explain themselves to nonscientist audiences.

So I think you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either we don't want to micromanage, and if we are going to micromanage, who is the ultimate decider of that? And also, are we going to start micromanaging what the curriculum is for these higher institutes of learning that are turning out these scientists?

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, we've got the lights. We've got the cameras. We've got the characters for some fine political theater in the House of Representatives today.

Last week this Congress passed an ill-conceived, wrong-headed, ill- fated war funding bill, even though every Member of this House knew the President would veto it, even though our troops are on the front lines of a war awaiting this funding.

And while the troops face fire, the Democratic leaders fiddled. They slowed down the process even more by sitting on the bill for days.

Madam Speaker, it's time for the majority to change out of their costumes, take down the curtain, take their bow, and exit stage left because Americans don't want to see the last act of this Democratic script that calls for waving the white flag of surrender.

We owe it to our Nation and to our troops to change the ending of the story. Send the President a clean bill and give the troops the money they need to do the job. And they will be victorious.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to two Americans who achieved greatness in April 2007 at Fort Benning, Georgia. SSG Brandon Greenway and his father, CSM Douglas Greenway, became the first father-son team to compete in the U.S Army David E. Grange Best Ranger Competition.

The U.S. Army David E. Grange Best Ranger Competition started in 1981 to determine the best two-man Ranger team in the country. The strenuous 3-day competition is designed to test the teams' physical, mental, and technical abilities as Rangers with less than 50 percent of the teams completing the competition. Every year, the event brings a great spotlight to Fort Benning, as the best and brightest Rangers in the U.S. Army display their incredible capabilities.

This event is designed to challenge the most tactically skilled and athletically gifted members of the U.S. Army. This is why so many took note when CSM Douglas Greenway entered this year's competition with his 23 year old son, SSG Brandon Greenway. At 47 years old, Sergeant Major Greenway was also the oldest Soldier ever to enter the competition. This father-son team met the challenges of this grueling competition and finished in the top half of the field.

This competition is a great way to cap the career of CSM Douglas Greenway, who is retiring in May 2007 after a distinguished 28-year Army career. Fort Benning will miss Command Sergeant Major Greenway, and I commend him as well as his spouse and family for their service to the country. For this reason, and for becoming the first father-son team to compete in the U.S. Army Best Ranger Competition, I am pleased to honor the Greenways in the United States House of Representatives.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to carry on a tradition started by the late Congressman Charlie Norwood, whose death this year was a great loss to Georgia and the U.S. House of Representatives. Each year on the eve of the Masters golf tournament in his hometown of Augusta, GA., Congressman Norwood would honor a golfer of great acclaim before his colleagues in the House.

This year, that tribute belongs to Gary Player, a world-renowned golfer whose accomplishments extend far beyond the links. In April, Mr. Player will tee up at the Augusta National for the Masters tournament for the 50th consecutive year, a remarkable achievement of longevity in any career. Few events in sports compare to the grace and beauty of the Masters tournament, and for a half century, Mr. Player has played an important role in one of the most cherished and most watched sporting events in the world.

Gary Player's record is the envy of countless golfers. It includes 159 victories worldwide. He holds nine major championships including: three Masters, three British Opens, two U.S. Opens and one PGA Championship. In addition, he has won the World Match Play Championship four times.

Outside the game of golf, Mr. Player has dedicated his life to family--he is celebrating his 50th wedding anniversary this year--and to serving the underprivileged.

In 1983, he established the Gary Player Foundation to address the education crisis in South Africa. The Player family started the Blair Atholl School--complete with a primary school of 400 students, a pre- elementary school for 75, a community resource center and a sports complex. The foundation ensures high-quality education, a nutritional feeding scheme and basic medical care for each child.

Besides his foundation, Gary Player hosts the annual Nelson Mandela Invitational Golf Tournament, one of the largest charity events in South Africa. To recognize his many achievements, Gary Player was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Laws from the Saint Andrews University in 1995.

Gary Player has lived an incredible life and he doesn't take those blessings for granted. He has said, ``I have been so lucky with golf, with my family, with my health, all I can be is thankful.'' Let us wish him continued luck and thanks for his accomplishments on and off the course. Mr. Player, good luck in Augusta.

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

You know, Mr. Speaker, Alan Jackson lives in my district, a great country singer, and I was thinking of some songs for him. One of them was ``I Would Rather Be in New York Raising Money Than Funding the War in Iraq.'' The other one was ``How I Turned the Blue Dogs Yellow.''

Then there is also an author in my district, Ferrell Sams; he writes a lot of books; you may have read some of them, but a good book is ``How to Lose a War and Store Peanuts.''

Let me say this, Mr. Speaker, for Alan Jackson to look at the rules. And he could do a whole album on the rules here. ``We Only Change Them When We Have To'' would make a great title for that rules album. ``We Only Leave the Vote Open When We Are Losing, When the Time is Up,'' would be another good one. And the last one would be, ``We Only Change Them When We Have To.''

I want to thank my friend from Texas for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from New York was making a great argument for the bill itself, but we are talking about the rule. We are talking about the ability of every Member of this body to be able to amend the bill. We go through a committee process here, well, I shouldn't say all the time, because in the 110th Congress, it has been very rare that we have gone through a regular order. But in this particular case we did go through a regular order as far as the bill going to Government Reform.

I had an amendment. The amendment was pretty simple. It said, notwithstanding the fact that the District of Columbia would get a vote on the floor of this body, but that the intention, and the end result, was for them not to have representation in the United States Senate.

Now, that was fairly simple. In fact, I believe it passed Government Reform unanimously. My 700,000 people that I represent in Georgia had an opportunity to amend this bill.

But because of the closed rule that we have today, an amendment that was passed, agreed to by both sides, put in the bill in Government Reform, has come to the floor without it.

You know, this was hyped up to be the most ethical Congress. I haven't seen any proof of that. It has been hyped up to be the most open Congress where all Members would have an opportunity to participate. We certainly haven't seen that.

This is government almost by gradualism. We are gradually getting to where the leadership of the majority party wants to go. I believe that is to give D.C. the ability to have Members of Congress.

Now, this little book right here, the gentleman from New York was quoting parts of the Constitution, but he didn't quote all of it. Because in here I think it lays out very plainly who is to vote on the floor of this House and who is to have representation in this House, and who is to have representation in the United States Senate.

I think this is the first step. I think my amendment made it clear that the intention of this bill was not to gradually give them the ability to have seats in the Senate. But because it made it so clear and described so clearly the legislative intent of this body, they won't allow it to be in the bill, because their intention is to go further.

I would hope that one day we would. I hear people's lips, I hear things coming out of people's mouths. I see lips moving, talking about bipartisanism: we are going to be bipartisan; we are going to let everybody participate.

I haven't seen that in action. Let me say this, I don't think anybody has ever written a perfect bill, a bill that couldn't be adapted or expanded or explained a little bit better, a bill that couldn't be made better, a bill that couldn't be perfected.

In fact, if you read the rules of this House, it talks about amendments and

perfection and perfecting the amendment, perfecting the bill. That is all we want an opportunity to do. I think everybody in this body, all 435 of us, I think the people that we represent, all they want us to have is an opportunity to try to help perfect the bill or make it better.

So far, we have been shut out of that process. I think it is a shame. As my friend, Mr. Bishop, said, a lot of people don't pay any attention to the process up here. But when the process is broken, the product is flawed.

I think the closed rule on this important bill is an example that this is a very broken process.

I want to thank the gentleman from Texas for having this amendment. I have called this Congress the smoke-and-mirrors Congress because of the way the majority party has presented their case to the public, and it has been a process of smoke and mirrors. This seems to be a fuzzy math program.

If you have 7,000 section 8 homes in New Orleans, and it's funny, we haven't heard from the people in Mississippi or Florida or some of the other places. This is specifically for the New Orleans housing. Seven thousand section 8 homes. Only 5,000 of them were occupied before the hurricane, and now we are wanting to put all 7,000 back. Yet in New Orleans today, there are 500 that is uninhabited that they can't get people to come back to. So somewhere there is a need to help people that don't seem to be taking that first step to helping themselves.

We have people from New Orleans in Atlanta and in a lot of places in Georgia. If they want to go back to New Orleans, I am sure that we want them to be back in their hometown, and that probably the Federal Government would give them some assistance to get back to New Orleans and to know that there are 500 vacant section 8 houses for them to go to.

I think the other interesting thing is that if you were in a section 8 house prior to Hurricane Katrina, and Hurricane Katrina destroyed your home that you were living in under the section 8 program, then you would now be entitled to section 8 for the rest of your life. Maybe for the gentleman from Texas that we would need to say that anybody, and I feel sorry for these people, but anybody that has an unfortunate situation happen to them in their life, that they could come to the government and just give us a list of things that they would need for the rest of their life.

I want to thank the gentleman from Texas for offering this amendment, and I hope that this House will see fit to support it.

Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

We just had a vote to restore the floor privileges for a Member who had his words taken down. Is it not true that the Democratic leadership, Speaker Pelosi, made the comments that we were going to have a more civil House and that we----

Parliamentary inquiry: Is it true that we did not pass rules in this House that talked about civility?