Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, as we well know, the rising cost of gasoline is a burden on hard-working families and on small businesses across the country.

Recently, the price of crude oil hit the historic high of $75 a barrel. The average price of gasoline is now a whopping $2.92 cents a gallon, and it shows no sign of dropping before the busy summer travel season.

While much of this is the result of increasing demand generated by our growing economy and increased instability in Iran and other oil- producing countries, Congress has a duty to take action.

Some in Congress like to play politics on this issue. The American people don't want cheap political games and stunts. They want and deserve solutions.

We provided good solutions in the strong conservation and renewable energy titles of the energy bill that we passed last year. Had it not been for political gamesmanship, these measures, which languished in Congress for 4 years after we passed it in the House, would already be reducing gas prices with more hybrid and E85 ethanol cars on the road and more biofuels to fuel them.

Instead, these policies are just being implemented now. Over time, I believe that last year's energy bill will help bring down the cost of energy for consumers, but, in the meantime, we must do more.

Last year, in the House, we passed the Gas Act that would not only streamline the process of expanding refineries but also provide, for the first time, a Federal criminal penalty for price gouging in gasoline or diesel fuel cells.

Additionally, Mr. Speaker, we ought to stop giving tax incentives to big oil and gas producers when they are already reporting record profits. That is why last year I introduced legislation with Congressman Mark Udall to redirect $2.5 billion in tax incentives away from the oil and gas companies, instead put it towards doubling incentives for E85 ethanol, hybrid and hydrogen vehicle production.

Renewable fuels are the key to our energy independence and to freeing drivers from the high cost of imported oil. We need only look to my home State of Minnesota, which has been leading the Nation in developing renewable fuels. Minnesota was the first state to require ethanol be sold in all gasoline and has been instrumental in the development of E85 fueling stations, with over 100 such stations throughout the State.

Mr. Speaker, the proof is at the pump. These policies have resulted in Minnesota gas prices being amongst the lowest in the country. It is common in Minnesota to see E85 being sold for 50 cents less than regular gasoline.

These savings should be enjoyed nationwide, which is why I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 4357, which was introduced last year by my fellow Minnesotan Congressman Gutknecht. This bill would require that our country adopt Minnesota's model that all gasoline should contain 10 percent renewable fuels.

We must get beyond the partisanship and obstruction that is blocking these additional measures. We have now waited for a year. We cannot afford to wait for 4 years. We must act now.

But we also must, in the meantime, make sure that the high gas prices don't destroy the strong economic growth that is providing jobs to so many. One of the first things we should do is a temporary suspension of the Federal gas tax. Suspending the gas tax will produce an immediate 18.4 cent per gallon savings for motorists when they fill up their tanks. That is why I will be introducing legislation to suspend the Federal gas tax throughout the summer driving season.

Highway trust fund revenue lost from this temporary suspension would be paid back and the fund made whole by fixing an oversight that has allowed some oil and gas companies to escape paying what they owe under the law to the Treasury. Unlike other measures, we can do this now, providing immediate relief to drivers hurting at the pump.

Mr. Speaker, high gas prices hurt American families and threaten our growing economy. We have a duty to respond. Let's stop the politics and get to work.

Mr. Speaker, this bill does include many important provisions, and I am thankful for that; but I feel that we have not gone quite far enough in terms of stopping the revolving door from public service to K Street. It does not extend the current 1-year ban on Members becoming registered lobbyists.

To fix the problems caused by competing public and personal interests, we must close the revolving door between Congress and lobbying. That is why I introduced H.R. 4685, to permanently ban Members from taking jobs

as registered lobbyists. We must make sure there is not the temptation for Members of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud the things that are in the bill. I hope that we can continue to work on this further in the future.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the clarity that was put in the bill.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to call attention to the persecution that has been well laid out to those who dare challenge the Chinese Government on matters of human rights and religious freedom. This resolution calls on the Government of China to stop its persecution of lawyers who defend clients in human rights and religious freedom cases and to repeal its laws designed to prohibit unlicensed religions from meeting freely.

The case of Gao Zhisheng, one of China's best-known lawyers and human rights defenders, is illustrative of the abuse that the Chinese people suffer for the exercise of rights that many Americans take for granted.

Mr. Gao has dared to represent Chinese citizens in lawsuits over corruption, land seizures, police abuse, and violations of religious freedom. One of these lawsuits was filed to appeal a verdict against Cai Zhuohua, who was found guilty of illegal business practices because he dared to distribute Bibles. Because of his human rights defense work, Mr. Gao had his law practice closed and virtually everyone he knew and his family followed by state agents.

Madam Speaker, just as troubling is the case of Chen Guangcheng, a human rights lawyer who is blind and who exposed cases of violence against women, including forced abortion and forced sterilization under China's one-child policy. For his advocacy, last October Mr. Chen was beaten by state agents, placed under house arrest, and this past March taken into police custody. His whereabouts are presently unknown.

These are not isolated cases, according to the Department of State 2005 Country Report on Human Rights Practices in China. That report detailed the serious intimidation and abuse that continues to occur in China for those who defend basic human rights and religious freedom. In fact, with the promulgation of the Regulations on Religious Affairs, the Chinese Government has stepped up its efforts to eliminate unregistered religious activity with raids on house church Christian groups and the detention of hundreds of house church leaders, dozens of whom remain in custody.

Last November I stood with Chairman Chris Smith, Ranking Member Lantos, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and listened as the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom report the active efforts to suppress religion it found in China. The commission's report detailed systematic activity against religious freedom, including the criminalization of unregistered religious organizations and severe penalties for those who engage in unregistered religious activities. Those who defy these rules are subject to harassment, detention, arrest, and closing of their religious facilities. Some, like the members of Falun Gong, face brutal oppression for their beliefs and horrific acts of torture that shock the conscience.

Madam Speaker, when I traveled to China last year, I spoke with government officials, including representatives of the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, to address these subjects. I spoke of the need for the U.S. and China to have an open dialogue about the importance of respecting these values. As I said then, fundamental human rights such as religious freedom should face no ideological, political, or geographic boundaries. These are rights given to man by the Almighty. They are part of who we are as human beings and are bigger than any government.

Madam Speaker, I urge the Chinese Government to release Chen Guangcheng and to cease persecution of Gao Zhisheng and reinstate his license. If China wants the respect of the world, it needs to respect its own people. I ask my colleagues to support this resolution. Let us make a statement that the Chinese Government and the Chinese rights defenders will hear.

Madam Speaker, in a story published today, entitled ``Best Cheap Thrill: Crystal Meth,'' the Minneapolis/St. Paul City Pages sunk to a nearly incomprehensible low. In that story the newspaper, and I use that word loosely, had the amoral audacity to advocate for meth use.

Its editor, Steve Perry, then dared to try to justify such lunacy by saying the point of the item was that it is impossible to make entirely too much of the drug hype of the hour.

Drug hype of the hour? Such a statement shows a shocking ignorance of the facts and an unparalleled insensitivity to the thousands of Minnesotans of every age and walk of life who are struggling to rebuild their lives. They were shattered by this alleged, quote, best cheap thrill of the year.

Comparing the harrowing experience of meth addiction to a cheap thrill is an unconscionable act, and it is a disgusting act. The City Pages should immediately retract this filth and issue an apology to every Minnesotan who has been harmed or knows someone who has been harmed by this drug.

Better yet, Madam Speaker, maybe the editors should do as I did and visit a drug treatment facility to see just what devastating harm this can cause to people and their families. I did yesterday visit Teen Challenge and talked to 300 Minnesotans that are struggling with an addiction. These brave souls are trying to piece their lives back together, and they would have plenty to tell Mr. Perry and his associates about just how much the pursuit of, quote, cheap thrills, unquote, like meth cost them in their lives and the lives of their families and friends.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot comprehend the shameful lack of responsibility exhibited by the City Pages and hope its pleas of recklessness fall only on deaf ears.

I remind the children of Minnesota that meth is not a drug hype of the hour. It is a drug whose dangerous addictiveness knows no bounds and must at all costs be avoided.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an individual whose contributions have unquestionably made the world a far better place. Through a career in scientific research that has spanned half a century, Dr. Norman Borlaug has distinguished himself and is in a class of his own.

Dr. Borlaug grew up on a farm in Cresco, Iowa, and attended the University of Minnesota in my home state where he went on to earn his doctorate in plant pathology in 1942.

In 1944 Dr. Borlaug participated in a project to boost wheat production that began in Mexico and spread as far as India and Pakistan. This project sparked the Green Revolution that literally saved hundreds of millions of lives. In recognition of these efforts, Dr. Borlaug was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970. To this day, he is the only person to have received the Award in either the agriculture or food production fields.

Since then, Dr. Borlaug continued in his work throughout Africa, where maize, sorghum and wheat yields have experienced significant increases, helping to curb starvation and malnutrition.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all Minnesotans, I would like to congratulate Dr. Borlaug on his distinguished career and remarkable contributions. His legacy and service will continue to benefit our society for generations to come.

I would like to thank my good friend Representative Tom Latham of Iowa for his leadership on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his leadership on this issue and all that he has done to make sure that that our seniors understand how important this program is and how it can really benefit them. Too many are out there trying to just dish the program and spread really complicating lies about it and scaring seniors. That is not what we ought to be doing to our seniors.

We ought to be out there making sure they understand the benefits that can be available to them. Through the efforts of you, so many in the community, as was mentioned, more than 27 million seniors are now enrolled in the Medicare part D prescription drug benefit. They are seeing hundreds, even thousands of dollars of savings. In fact, CMS, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, have projected that the benefit will save the average senior $1,100 this year. Meanwhile, the AARP and others have found that the benefit lowers the cost of drugs for seniors by an average of 44 percent, with low income seniors seeing price reductions of up to 90 percent.

Better yet, the average senior's monthly premium is 32 percent below the average estimate, a third. This terrific reduction is evidence that the market base competition used by Medicare part D is working to drive down prices and increase the benefits for our seniors. At the same time, CMS has reported that the projected costs of administering the benefit has come down $7.6 billion in 2006 from what they originally estimated, and States will see at least $700 million in additional savings this year.

All of this is very good news. However, the May 15 deadline for eligible seniors to sign up for the plan without penalty is fast approaching. Well, the program's enrollment has surpassed earlier estimates. There is now still more that needs to be done. That is why it is important that community activists and we as Members of Congress have been holding sign-up forms in our districts to spread the facts about this great new voluntary program.

These forums bring together CMS, trained volunteers, seniors and their families together in an environment where questions can be answered and seniors can become informed about which plan best fits their needs so they can begin saving on their drug costs.

I was pleased to hold two large forums in my district in Minnesota earlier this year, and I am working hard with other groups to help hold forums of their own. I want to thank those community groups who work in towns and cities all over this Nation to make sure seniors know their options. These events and other forums are essential to making sure that seniors who want to sign up for the Medicare drug plan are able to do so before May 15.

Mr. Speaker, it is easy for me to stand here and talk about the benefits of this plan, but do not just take it from me. Take it from the seniors who are realizing, in some cases, hundreds of dollars in savings every month. Countless seniors are reporting that they now have more money to use for other things, like paying for their bills or visiting their grandchildren.

Before the Republican Congress acted, we heard terrible stories of seniors forced to choose between life-saving medication and food. We heard these stories years, but we never saw action from our friends on the other side of the aisle, but we acted. Seniors are saving as a result.

I encourage my colleagues, and I thank Dr. Gingrey for his leadership on this, to continue to educate seniors in their districts before this May 15 deadline so every senior has access to affordable drug coverage, and I would turn it back over to the distinguished doctor from Georgia to continue to talk about what kind of benefit seniors are getting and why it is important that we take the time to make sure they understand before the May 15 deadline.

I thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline), my good friend and my colleagues.

I am pleased to stand here and rise to speak in support of this resolution that we have offered to honor and congratulate the Minnesota National Guard on their 150th anniversary.

On April 17, 2006, the Minnesota National Guard will celebrate 150 years of history, a history that extends from the battlefields of the Civil War to the war on terror in the desert sands of Iraq.

When President Lincoln sent out his calls for troops in the early days of the Civil War, among the first militia units to respond were from Minnesota. These men, who were from the 1st Minnesota Infantry Regiment, saw battle at Bull Run, Antietam and Gettysburg.

At a pivotal moment in the pivotal Battle of Gettysburg in the fight to preserve our national union, the 1st Minnesota answered the call, even though it resulted in the suffering of the highest casualties of any unit in that war. In a real sense, they may have saved the Union.

On July 3, 1963, as my colleague, Gil Gutknecht, so eloquently will speak of, 262 men of the 1st Minnesota Infantry closed the gap in the Union line, stopped the desperate Confederate attack at the center of the line on Cemetery Ridge. Only 47 of them answered the roll call the next day.

Had these men not acted with courage and boldness to turn back the charge and buy the rest of the U.S. Army precious time to reinforce, Confederate forces may have been able to breach Union lines. What began as the beginning of the end of the war would have turned out differently on that day.

Mr. Speaker, I have had the privilege to go to Iraq three times to meet our soldiers and the commanders on the ground. I prefer to talk to the people who are there to learn what is going on, not to see the latest sensationalist 30-second story of gloom and doom and defeat.

On one of these trips, I met with members of the Minnesota Guard serving with the 1st Cavalry Division. I asked them, what is your best and your worst experience here in Iraq? One of them said to me that his best experience was listening to the Iraqis complain to him. I said, you should be in Congress.

He told me that you knew that they knew that the Iraqis would never have dreamed of complaining to one of Saddam's soldiers. But even though he stood there with a rifle over his shoulder, clearly having power over them, they felt comfortable complaining to him, confirming that he and his colleagues had given them a gift of incomparable value, the gift of freedom, the gift of freedom of speech, the gift of protest.

That is what 2,600 members of the Minnesota National Guard now staging in Kuwait as part of the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 34th Red Bull Division, the highest rated brigade in the whole Guard, are bringing to the Middle East. That is why my nephew interrupted his college studies to recently serve a tour of duty with the Minnesota Guard.

At the same time, while they are bringing safety and security to America by battling terrorists abroad, the Guard is also helping to bring relief to families in need at home. As we speak here today, members of the Minnesota National Guard are responding to destructive flooding in northwestern Minnesota where their experience, professionalism and planning are saving property and lives.

These selfless deeds, at home and abroad, show the sacrifice and heartfelt dedication of every member of the Minnesota National Guard.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, it is appropriate that my colleagues and I rise to honor and congratulate the Minnesota National Guard for 150 years of service to their State and country.

I have absolute confidence that future generations of Americans will continue to witness firsthand the great deeds of the Minnesota National Guard, and will continue to have cause to say thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today also to honor Dr. Norman Borlaug, whose contributions have unquestionably made the world a better place.

Dr. Borlaug grew up in Iowa, but earned his Ph.D. in 1942 at the University of Minnesota in my home State. Go Gophers.

In 1944 Dr. Borlaug participated in a project to boost wheat production that began in Mexico and spread to India, Pakistan and Africa. The project sparked the Green Revolution that literally saved millions, hundreds of millions of lives.

In recognition for these efforts, Dr. Borlaug was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970, the only person to have received the award in either the agriculture or food production fields.

On behalf of all Minnesotans I would like to congratulate Dr. Borlaug on his distinguished career and remarkable contributions, and thank my good friend, Tom Latham of Iowa, for his leadership on this matter.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, let me begin by telling the Members why am I on the floor today.

Less than a month ago, the body of Corporal Andrew Kemple, who was killed while fighting for our freedom in Iraq, was laid to rest during a ceremony at the Zion Lutheran Church in Anoka, Minnesota, in my congressional district.

However, instead of the funeral Corporal Kemple deserved, one where his family and friends were able to share fond memories of their time with him and where his faithful service to this country could be honored, there was, instead, a vile and hateful display. Funeral protesters, and I use that term loosely, chanted vile slogans like ``God hates America'' and ``God loves IEDs'' during Corporal Kemple's funeral ceremony for more than an hour.

As my colleagues know too well, the improvised explosive device, or IED, has been a favored tool of the terrorists in Iraq and has been responsible for much death and injury for our troops.

Mr. Chairman, words like ``reprehensible'' and ``disgusting'' do not adequately describe these slogans or this stunt on this solemn and sacred occasion. Unfortunately, this shameful incident in my district is not an isolated one. This scene has been repeated again and again at the funerals of fallen servicemen and women across the country. We must and can stop it.

That is why I rise today to offer an amendment that will ensure that none of the funds in this supplemental can be used to approve demonstrations at Department of Defense or Department of Veteran Affairs cemeteries during a funeral or memorial service for a member of the United States Armed Forces.

My amendment would ensure that our men and women who have given what Lincoln called ``the last full measure of devotion'' receive the honors they are due.

My colleagues may have heard of efforts in the States to preserve the sanctity of military funerals. As many as 17 have been reported to be working to preserve the solemnity of this occasion. This fact does not relieve Congress of its duty to take action on Federal lands.

This amendment would be a meaningful first step to preserve a measure of decency for grieving families of fallen soldiers right now while Congress considers legislation introduced by my friend Mike Rogers to address the problem long term. Our men and women in uniform are doing their duty in the war on terror and we must do ours.

Mr. Chairman, though I believe my colleagues are being denied an important opportunity on account of this procedural matter, I ask to withdraw my amendment and I urge all Members to support the forthcoming legislation that my good friend, Mike Rogers, is about to introduce that provides a lasting solution to this outrage.

Mr. Speaker, I express today my strong support and appreciation for the 2,600 soldiers of the Minnesota National Guard's 1st Brigade Combat team as they prepare to depart Camp Shelby, Mississippi for Iraq.

As the 1st Brigade heads overseas for their 12 month deployment, we will remember not just their service and sacrifice, but also that each and every one of these soldiers has a family who is also sacrificing for their country's security in the War on Terror.

Today these soldiers and their families are showing us their commitment to their Nation's security and safety.

Let us make sure we show them ours by giving them the tools and support they need to do their jobs and return home quickly and safely.

As these brave soldiers depart over St. Patricks day, may all our prayers and the luck of the Irish be with them. May they come home safely.

Offered By: Mr. Kennedy of Minnesota

Amendment No. 37: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following new section:

Mr. Speaker, on February 16, while police officers representing law enforcement organizations with over 100,000 members from every congressional district in the country were on Capitol Hill lobbying to save Byrne-JAG formula grants, police officers just outside the town of Monticello in my district in Minnesota were proving why the shortsighted elimination of the Byrne-JAG program must be rejected.

During a mid-afternoon traffic stop involving several individuals from Washington State in a vehicle likely stolen in California, a Minnesota State trooper noticed the smell of meth coming from a car.

After a brief search of the car with a trained drug dog, an elaborate trunk-latch device wired to the car's air conditioning knob was discovered and eight sealed packages and one large ziploc bag of meth were located in the car's passenger-side air bag compartment. In all, more than 11.5 pounds of meth worth over $1 million was taken off our streets, along with several traffickers who profit from dealing this poison.

Mr. Speaker, 11.5 pounds of meth is the equivalent of over 45,000 hits. One hit of meth is enough to form an addiction more difficult to break than even heroin.

Mr. Speaker, I commend the police officers who made this bust and kept this staggering amount of meth out of the community in my district and likely those of many of my colleagues. However, Mr. Speaker, imagine how much meth they were not able to catch because of the devastating cuts to the Byrne-JAG program.

For the second year in a row, the administration has singled out the Byrne-JAG program for elimination, despite the fact that local police and the communities they protect praise the valuable source of crime- fighting grant money it provides.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join Representative Lee Terry and me in our letter to the Budget Committee urging in the strongest terms that the President's proposal to eliminate Byrne-JAG grants not be followed and that this critical program to protect our communities from drugs and violent crime be funded at no less than $900 million in the fiscal year 2007 budget cycle.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to my colleague who has been a leader on this issue, Representative Davis of Tennessee.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from

Delaware and the others who are speaking on behalf of this resolution. I am pleased to be here to honor the contributions of Catholic schools.

My first real encounter with Catholic elementary and secondary students was my interaction with graduates from Catholic schools that I met at St. John's University. These students impressed me. They were not only well prepared for college, but they were courteous, kind, respectful, caring and friendly to me. They say you can tell a tree by its fruit. By this measure I assume Catholic schools must be great.

I remember a conversation I had while in college with a few graduates of Catholic high schools reminiscing on their high school experience. One of these students was so cynical about his Catholic education that I resolved never to send my children to Catholic schools. Well, it turns out the cynical student became a priest, so I changed my mind. Catholic schools really do nurture one's faith.

My wife Debbie and I have four wonderful children. They have been able to experience the best of both worlds. They all graduated from Watertown Mayer Public Middle School, and they all chose to attend Catholic high schools, not just to get a great education, but to be able to talk about how God influences history and the world around us.

We are pleased to see that they have been nurtured in the Catholic spirit of helping others. They participate in many programs to help those in need. For example, my daughter Emily organized a food drive for Mary's Place, an outreach center for the needy, while she was at Holy Family Catholic High School. She collected enough food from her fellow students to fill up a van and feed many in need.

I have so much faith in Catholic schools because they consistently provide a great education for 2.5 million students across America and have a student-teacher ratio that averages 15-1.

I can attest to the quality education with two of our children now attending the University of Notre Dame. Catholic schools have done an extraordinary job of reaching out to the disadvantaged youth throughout our country. More than 27 percent of students enrolled in Catholic schools are from minority backgrounds, and nearly 14 percent of them are non-Catholics.

Mr. Speaker, Catholic schools make fantastic contributions to education in this country, but every school must recognize that there is more that can be done. Well, at St. John's Prep my son's physics teacher was a former engineer at 3M. My son, his classmates, and likely hundreds or thousands of other students were not only able to benefit from his invaluable real-world experience, but they also gained an understanding of the success that can be achieved by those who study math and science.

That is why I introduced the Teachers for Tomorrow's Career Act, H.R. 4622, with my Democrat colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt). This legislation will bring down barriers so that math and science professionals can make the transition into teaching and offer real-world experience to the critical task of teaching math and science to our children.

The Kennedy-Holt legislation goes a long way toward fulfilling President Bush's new proposal of bringing 30,000 math and science professionals to teach in our classrooms, and make sure our children are competitive in the 21st century no matter what kind of school they attend.

Mr. Speaker, last week was Catholic Schools Week. The theme was ``Catholic Schools: Character, Compassion, Values.''

I urge my colleagues to join Mr. Lipinski and I in supporting this resolution to commend our Catholic schools and their teachers, the parents, and religious communities that support them in their service to our Nation's youth.

Madam Speaker, what a difference 2 years makes. In August of 2003, I was in Iraq, and every Marine I met wanted to show me the field that Iraqis began digging in as soon as they took control of it. A mass grave was there with 3,000 bodies, part of the 400,000 to 500,000 mass graves around the country. This hopelessness has really driven the Iraqis to embrace the freedom that our brave soldiers have given them the opportunity for. That is why, as we stand here today, millions of Iraqis, Shia, Sunni, Kurds are giving the terrorists the finger, the ink-stained finger voting for the third time this year, and as they do that, they are piercing through the hopelessness that breeds terrorism. They are giving themselves the opportunities for a better life. They are transforming a region. They are making America safer. We applaud the Iraqis. We thank the American troops that have made this possible.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that section 122 of this bill is an important public policy statement that says corporate executives who are not properly funding the pension plans of their employees should not be feathering their own nests with overly generous retirement packages. Currently, the bill penalizes employers who fund executive compensation if the sponsor's employee defined plans are less than 60 percent funded. My concern is that by setting this threshold too low, we are not discouraging them enough from being irresponsible with the retirement security of their employees while they take care of their own retirement packages.

I ask the chairman to work with me in conference to increase the threshold to at least 80 percent so that we encourage executives to take their pension funding obligations more seriously, not leave their defined benefit plan beneficiaries and, indeed, the PBGC and taxpayers on the hook.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his response.