Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me today to mark the final performance of the Nashville Symphony Orchestra at the Tennessee Performing Arts Center this May 27th.

Since its premier season in 1980-1981, the Tennessee Performing Arts Center has provided a magnificent setting for the Nashville Symphony.

Today we remember fondly the years our symphony has spent at the Tennessee Performing Arts Center, but look forward to many wonderful performances in the new world class Schermerhorn Symphony Center.

It is appropriate that the new facility be named after Principal Conductor Kenneth Schermerhorn, who led the symphony so capably for 20 years. We miss Maestro Schermerhorn, but I know he'd be pleased to see the symphony making the move to this new, world class space.

I hope my colleagues will join me in congratulating the members, staff, and many, many fans of the Nashville Symphony Orchestra as they celebrate their success.

Mr. Speaker, this year marks the 65th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Every December Americans gather in Hawaii to remember the day that so changed the world. This year, the John Overton High School band has been selected to represent Tennessee as we commemorate Pearl Harbor and honor those who died there on that fateful December day. Making their second appearance at this event, it's clear we're being well represented by members of the John Overton High School band.

The band will take part in a parade marking the day, perform at the USS Missouri Memorial and lay a wreath at the USS Arizona Memorial. This once in a lifetime opportunity will provide firsthand experience and insight into the bombing of Pearl Harbor and I know the students will never forget their time there.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join with me in congratulating the John Overton High School band, and their leader Jo Ann Hood, on this wonderful honor. We applaud their hard work and their commitment to honoring America's fallen heroes.

Mr. Speaker, today we will hold discussion and a debate about the global war on terrorism and about the battles in Afghanistan and in Iraq. It is appropriate indeed that we do so.

This week, we are celebrating the Army's birthday. We are celebrating Flag Day, and we are continuing to honor the men and women who serve so brilliantly in the U.S. military.

Today, Mr. Speaker, I want to rise for a moment and honor the men and women of the Tennessee National Guard. They have had deployments in the past year, and they have served with distinction. Today many of the junior officers and the commanders of the Tennessee Guard are in town. They

were honored at a reception last night, and they are visiting us here on Capitol Hill today.

We welcome them. We honor them, and we thank them and their families for their outstanding service, for their sacrifice, for their commitment to freedom, for loving this Nation and for being the embodiment of that freedom on foreign soil.

Mr. Speaker, you know, our colleagues across the aisle are asking the American people to divorce our mission in Iraq from the global war on terrorism. I think it is impossible. I think it is irresponsible, and it is bad policy.

If only terrorism were as clear cut a problem as they want us to believe, and if only elimination of the Taliban would have been sufficient to free us from the threat of terrorism. Mr. Speaker, have we not learned anything from September 11? It should be crystal clear that terrorism went far deeper than one rogue regime in Afghanistan.

But that is where they are in this debate. They are ignoring reality. Our troops, my folks from the 101st and the National Guard, know that if we are going to be free of terrorism, if the goal is to prevent terrorism from killing 2,000 Americans on our soil tomorrow or forevermore, then we must bring major change to the Middle East.

It is an unpleasant reality, but it is a reality. That is where we are in Afghanistan. That is where we are in Iraq. Progress is being made. Libya has changed, the Taliban is basically gone now, al Qaeda has significantly weakened and bin Laden is on the run.

Pakistan is an ally in the war on terrorism. Iraq, despite a 24/7 massive media campaign of negative news, is making progress, and we have eliminated al-Zarqawi. On this issue of amnesty, the Iraq National Security Adviser corrected the record and, for the record, stated that the Prime Minister was misquoted.

I have that entire interview and the transcript for the record, and I would like to quote for my colleague's benefit another portion, and I quote, he, as a matter of fact, if you were there, and this is the Iraqi National Security Adviser speaking, if you were there in this meeting with President Bush a couple of days ago, he looked the President in the eye and he said, thank you very, very much for liberating our country. I thank the American wives, the women, the American mothers for the treasure and the blood that they have invested in this country. It is worth investing for liberating 30 million people, and we are ever so grateful.

Mr. Speaker, we all stand grateful. We stand grateful.

From CNN Interview:

Kagan. Doctor, I know there's a big effort by your

government in your country to try to prevent civil war. And

as part of that, The Washington Post reports today that your

prime minister is considering offering amnesty to Sunnis or

to others who perhaps attacked only U.S. troops. This, not

surprisingly, causing great consternation here in the U.S.,

even talking about it and being raised on the floor the U.S.

Senate today. Is this, indeed, the case? Is your government

thinking about offering amnesty to those that attacked only

U.S. military?

Rubaie. This is not the case. I'm sorry to say that the

prime minister of Iraq has been misquoted and misunderstood.

He did not mean to give amnesty to those who killed the

Americans.

Aa matter of fact, if you were there in his meeting with

President Bush a couple of days ago, he looked the president

in the eye and he said, thank you very, very much for

liberating our country. Please thank the American wives and

American women and American mothers for the treasure and the

blood they have invested in this country. It's well worth

investing, of liberating 30 million people in this country.

And we are ever so grateful.

And we will--the blood of the Iraqi soldier and blood of

Iraqi civilian soldier is as sacred to us as the American

soldier. We are fighting the same war, we are fighting

together, and this is a joined responsibility. And we will

never give amnesty to those who have killed American soldiers

or killed Iraqi soldier or civilian.

Mr. Speaker, for months the national media and our friends across the aisle have consistently worked to convince the American people that the battle in Iraq plays no significant role in our national security. I know that some are really sincere in that belief, and I also know that there are some who are only looking for political gain.

But the call to disengage, the call to withdraw, based on this argument that our national security is separate from what happens in the battle in Iraq is naive at best.

On this Flag Day, a day we take to honor this national symbol and remember those who sacrificed for this great Nation, I want every member of the United States military to know that what you are doing in Iraq and in Afghanistan and all across the Middle East is important. It is vital to our national security, and it will ensure that our flag proudly waves for freedom for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me today in honoring Quebecor World Publications as they mark the publication of the one billionth copy of Highlights magazine.

Few things in this world are as consistent and positive as Highlights magazine has been for the past 60 years. Since 1946, Highlights magazine has kept parents and kids smiling. As a parent, I remember sharing time with my two children, Mary Morgan and Chad, while reading this wonderful magazine. Countless Americans have enjoyed decades of good memories thanks to Highlights.

In an era when we have to guard our kids' access to information like never before, it's nice to know that America can still depend on Quebecor and Highlights magazine not only to entertain but to teach the morals and values we hold dear.

Mr. Speaker, there is a stark difference in the way the Republicans and the Democrats approach this war on terror. There are many of the liberal elites who want to disengage and would like to leave broad swaths of this planet to terrorists. This course of action would lead to a lot of pain and suffering for future generations, for our children, for our grandchildren. It also would embolden the terrorists who are watching everything that we do and would lead to more strikes on U.S. soil.

After 9/11, our country made a decision that enough was enough and that it was time to fight back after two decades of terrorist strikes. It was time for us to protect our national security, and yes, indeed, because of our men and women in uniform, we have, and they are doing it brilliantly.

Is every day in this battle a victory? No. Is it easy? No. Is it very difficult? Incredibly so. But the important thing, it is a necessary fight and we are winning.

I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding. He is so appropriate in his remarks this evening as we talk about the big picture of what is happening with the war on terror and reminding us that this is not something that happened last week, last month, last year, or just within the last decade. This is something that started happening four decades ago and has grown more and more and more repetitive in attacks and actions and outward expressions of aggression as we have moved through the past four decades.

Yes, what has happened is we have moved from responding to these terrorist attacks as acts of civil disobedience to getting to the point after September 11 that we said, no, this is not just civil disobedience, this is an act of war. This is now a global war on terror and, indeed, it is important, it is imperative that we win in the battles in Afghanistan and that we win in the battles in Iraq. And as the gentleman from Georgia has mentioned, this is not something that is going to be quick and easy. This is going to be a long fight and a long struggle.

We must be certain that we all realize that our enemy is not an enemy that is located in one single place. There are terrorist cells all around the globe. At this point, yes, indeed, primarily they are drawn into Iraq because of the battle that is there, and that is one of the reasons it is important that we fight and that we win.

As the gentleman from Georgia knows, Mr. Speaker, we are winning. And we hear this from our men and women in uniform. We hear it from them in the stories that they recount to us. We hear it from their families. And we are very, very grateful to every one of these families and every man and woman in uniform who stands and fights and who understands the mission of why we fight.

I would be glad to yield to the gentleman.

Indeed, it is heartening to see that. And what a source of encouragement for those men and women in uniform to be in their day working in Baghdad and all of a sudden they receive the news that their Commander in Chief has flown through the night to come and say thank you to them for that work; thank you for what they are doing for this country.

And as the gentleman just mentioned, we fight because we have an enemy that would destroy what this country is built on. It would destroy what we stand for. It is imperative that we win so that we continue with America as we know America, so that we continue to live our lives in freedom, so that our children go to school not in fear but go ready to learn and with a sense of security, so that we live in our homes, so that we go to work, so that we have our daily life and carry on our business and do it without the fear of being interrupted by terrorist threats, by terrorist strikes, by terrorist fighting that would take place in our streets, in our cities here in America.

Be happy to.

The gentleman is so correct in that, and for them it is a fierce war to bring down the pillars of free enterprise, to bring down those underpinnings of democracy that allow us to be a productive society, that allow us to be a free society.

I know that I join the gentleman from Georgia in looking forward to the debate we are going to have in this body this week, and I want to again thank the leadership for setting aside this time for us to focus once again on why we fight and why we must win and why it is imperative that we have a democratic ally in the Middle East and that we break apart the stranglehold that terrorism has had on that region of the world.

I thank the gentleman for the time, and I yield back to him.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to be joined by some of our colleagues tonight as we begin our discussion in this great body, in this great House talking about the war on terrorism and the global war that we face.

Mr. Speaker, before I began that discussion with my colleagues, I want to take just a few moments and address some of the statements that the minority made during their hour that preceded this. They have talked a lot about spending, and they have talked a good bit about their dissatisfaction with spending.

One of the things that I would like to remind the Members of this body and those that are watching this debate tonight is that much of that spending takes place because of the bureaucracy that has been built in this Congress over the past 50 years.

Now, you go back and you look at what transpired in the 1960s and the way the bureaucracies grew, and the way programs grew. You see all around here that this bureaucracy has been built as a monument to many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. They have put their energy into that. They have put that into growing this government here in Washington. Many of them believe that the government here in Washington knows better than the folks back home. I disagree with that.

I would encourage our colleagues to join with us as we work on waste, fraud and abuse, as we work toward reducing the size of this government. When we passed the Deficit Reduction Act that would have made nearly 1 percent across the board cut, they chose not to cast a vote in favor of that.

But they do enjoy coming and talking about how wonderful they feel it would be to have a debt-free America and a balanced budget, and, yes, that is something we would like to do, but we don't want that budget to be balanced

by raising taxes. We want that budget to be balanced by reducing spending. That is a big part of our focus as we continue to work.

Soon we are going to have a spring cleaning week where we are going to talk about 150 of these different agencies that absolutely need to go through a house cleaning. They need to reduce their size. They need to get their priorities in order, and bureaucrats that are in these buildings need to start responding to the citizens of this great Nation. They should be held accountable, and we are going to press forward on that issue.

One of my colleagues also made a comment about economic growth, and I would invite our Members to look at the economic stats from 1995 and the economic stats from 2005. If you compare those 2 years, what happened in the economy in 1995 during the Clinton years and what has happened in 2005 during the Bush years? What you are going to see is on every single economic indicator, whether you are talking GDP, unemployment rates, economic growth, homeownership, every single indicator, the 2005 economy beats the 1995 economy on every single point.

I would commend that to individuals that are watching tonight, to be certain that they look at those facts, that they look at those statistics and add those numbers.

It was also mentioned on the floor tonight what type of America do you believe in? I always love it when I hear that type of comment. What type of America do you believe in? I think the colleagues that join me here tonight would join me in saying we believe in an America that is strong. We believe in an America that is free. We believe in an America that is compassionate and caring and wants the best, the very best, for all of our citizens. We believe in an America where children can dream big dreams, where they can grow up happy and free and educated and watch those dreams become reality, where they can take hold of their best efforts and say you know what, we are going to make this even better.

We are going to make it better. We really believe in an America that is focused on hope and not focused on fear. We believe in an America that is strong on individual freedom that understands the importance of freedom for being able to freely live, to freely think, to freely work. We know that that requires that we have a secure homeland, and that is why this majority has been focused on our security agenda, being certain that we look at the moral security of this great Nation, the retirement security, the economic security and, of course, the national security of this wonderful free land that is a beacon of democracy to every single nation on the face of the earth.

You know, when you talk about what kind of America you believe in, I love it sometimes when we are visiting with our troops in war-torn areas, and you meet somebody, and they walk up to you, and they say, you are an American. You are an American? You are an American.

There is a certain awe that comes out of their mouth when they look at us and they know we are what they would like to be. We have got something they want. That is something that we have got that they want, that other nations want, is freedom. It is the chance to do and to be and to have your children do and be all that they would hope to be.

That is why the majority is going to take this entire week and we are going to have a discussion with the American people. We are going to bring forth our hopes. We are going to bring forth our thoughts of what is happening in this war on terrorism. We are going to talk about the progress we have made. We are also going to talk about the areas where we want to improve.

Mr. Speaker, we are going to talk about the big picture. We are going to hold a debate on the Republican and the Democrat approaches to winning the war on terror. We are going to compare, and we are going to contrast the different philosophies that each party has toward the war on terrorism. Our military's elimination of al-Qaeda's top leader in Iraq is an auspicious start to this debate. That success should make it clear that winning takes patience, and it takes perseverance. But things that are worth fighting for and things that are worth working for are items that are worth waiting for because we don't live in a world of instant gratification where everything is decided within 30 minutes. Some things take time to do them right.

History has taught us, history has taught us that it is important that when we look at democracy, when we look at working with other Nations that we get this right. It also takes excellent work by our military and our intelligence folks, and God bless them all. God bless them all.

I am especially grateful for our troops from Fort Campbell from the 101st who are in Iraq now and are certainly working diligently on this effort. Many of our National Guardsmen are there, and they are working as well.

I am very grateful to them and to their families.

Last week, we got to see part of the big picture in the war on terrorism more quickly with Zarqawi's death, with the destruction of a major leader in the global terrorist network. The big picture is the U.S. chasing these people down and eliminating them.

It is helping free nations, Mr. Speaker, free nations develop and throw off the shackles of terrorism in the Middle East. This, Mr. Speaker, will be our topic and our discussion for the week.

At this time, I would like to yield to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) who is so focused on protecting this great Nation and our Nation's security.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Iowa, and I am so appreciative that he mentioned that this is not a sometime enemy that we are dealing with. This is an enemy, as he said, that is amorphous. They are located everywhere. Terrorist cells are around the globe, but it is an enemy with an agenda. Their agenda is to end freedom as we know it, and they work at it 24/7. They are an enemy to freedom, and we do know that the Iraqi people are grasping at their chance for freedom.

You know, Mr. Speaker, I think it is really quite important to note that a development that got swamped by the Zarqawi news, but a development that I certainly believe is very critical to our long-term security goals, was that the Iraqi Government's confirmation of its top three security chiefs was last week. You had Sunnis and Shiites standing together as the security chiefs for this nation.

What an enormous step in the right direction, and we have now had tremendously successful elections in Iraq. We have a unified government. We now have 275,000 Iraqi security forces that are in place.

So we do know that we are seeing progress in the right direction. There are no guarantees, but it is steps in the right direction.

At this time, I want to yield to the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Carter, who has Fort Hood in his district. Judge Carter has worked so diligently with our men and women in uniform, and I thank him for coming to talk a little bit about the big picture, about the global war on terror, and why it is imperative that we persevere. And I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate so much how well the gentleman represents his constituents at Fort Hood, and I know he is so very proud of them and the work that they do.

I, likewise, am so very proud of my men and women at Fort Campbell, men and women of the 101st, there in Montgomery County, Tennessee.

How appropriate that the gentleman from Texas referred to them as heroes, because indeed they are. And as they work to gather in the trust and confidence of the Iraqi people, the trust of a little girl who brings the rose from her garden to one of our military men and women, the trust of an Iraqi citizen who takes the key out of a lock of one of Saddam Hussein's former jails and hands it to an American soldier and says, ``Thank you, thank you for my chance at freedom.''

Mr. Speaker, those are the stories that we are hearing day in and day out. They are coming to us from our men and women in uniform who do understand the big picture, who do understand that we have an enemy that would like to change our way of life.

It is imperative that we communicate that message that we are not going to stand for that. We are not going to stand still and let that happen. You know, I think it is really quite interesting that sometimes the liberal elites try to couch this debate about Iraq as to whether it was wrong or whether it was right to go in and free millions of people from Saddam Hussein, whether it was worth it. Many of the leftists think it was not worth it. They would like to just sit down and talk about this. I believe we should put that question aside for a moment because it really does simplify the question of our involvement in Iraq. It oversimplifies it. The question ignores the relevance of Iraq to America's national security framework.

You know, as the gentleman from Texas said, our daily lives, how we go about them, when we are made more unsafe, when our national security is made unsafe by the existence of a hostile and isolated Middle East ruled by murderous thugs and their terrorist supporters, then we have to do something about that. That is a fact. I challenge anybody to come in and argue with that.

The truth of this fact is written in the blood of Americans and the citizens of dozens of other free nations, the people who have been murdered by terrorists, spawned in the Middle East over the past 40 years. Whether anyone believes we should be in Iraq for the sake of freeing an oppressed people is something we could haggle about all night, but it is not the point of our mission there. We should be in Afghanistan, Iraq and in the Middle East actively working to put an end once and for all to the systems of government that have promoted and celebrated brutal attacks on America, on Europe, and in countries across Africa.

If we do not, we are going to suffer again and again. We are in Iraq, we are in Afghanistan because President Bush and the American people decided on

September 11, 2001, that enough was enough. Could we have stayed out? Of course. Could we have continued responding to terrorism as a case of civil disobedience? Of course.

We could have decided to simply contain this region and hope to contain the terrorism that grew there, but that did not get to the root of the problem. And the price of that policy would have continued to be periodic September 11s. That would be the price. This country had to decide whether we were willing to pay this steep price of letting the Middle East continue for another 30 years as it had for the past 30 years.

We have had a real champion of freedom join us in the U.S. House of Representatives this year, another judge from the great State of Texas; and at this time I want to yield to Judge Poe from the great State of Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas. I thank him for mentioning that our men and women in uniform are volunteers and they have chosen to fight.

I, like him, have spent time with these men and women and their families and on Memorial Day talked with the aunt of a young man who came to one of the memorial services. And after I spoke, she came up and with her broken heart she said, Mrs. Blackburn, you're so right, he was there because he wanted to be there and you're so right. He knows, he knew that we were winning, that we are winning the war on terror.

And yes indeed, he understood the mission. Our families, our military families know this, Mr. Speaker, and they know that this Nation has decided not to play hostage, not to be held hostage. Our men and women in uniform are paying the price to fight this war so that we are not having to fight it on the streets of Washington, D.C., or Memphis or Nashville or L.A. or anywhere else in this country. We have made a choice not to be bullied and not to live with the gun pointed at our head. And I give credit to our President. And, Mr. Speaker, I credit the American people for making a tough decision. War is never easy. War is never, ever easy, but we have to remember the big picture in this and that picture is we have to have a democratic ally in the Middle East. This is about freedom and free people. It is about expanded democracy and education. It is about rooting out terrorists and disrupting their networks and their way of working and their beliefs so that they don't import it and place it on us. It is about slowing them down and eventually making it impossible for them to work.

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of talk about whether we are winning or not. And we are winning. But this is not easy. There are going to be a lot of dark days ahead. This is not an easy fight. It is not easy for us. It is not easy for our military men and women and their families. It is not easy for the Iraqi people. And there is a tremendous amount of frustration when they take a couple of steps forward and then a few steps back and a couple of steps forward and another step back. And just as in the past 3 years we have had some victories to celebrate, we have also had some very tough times. But we come to the point of saying, is it a necessary action? And yes, indeed, Mr. Speaker, it is a necessary action. The defense of freedom is a necessary action for our great Nation. It was the only decision that put America on the offensive when it came to the war on terrorism and our national security because freedom is worth fighting for.

As I close the hour this evening and begin this week's debate, I want to focus where I began in talking about the big picture. Ronald Reagan often said, we could bet on hope or we could bet on fear. You can bet on hope or you can bet on fear. He chose to bet on hope. And, Mr. Speaker, I know why. And I know why the American people choose to bet on hope. It is that hope, that desire that lives in our heart for a better tomorrow.

I love quoting Margaret Thatcher and her comment when she talks about America. She would say it is more than a superpower, more than a great Nation. America is an idea. America is an idea. What a great idea it is. It is the idea of freedom. It is the idea of opportunity. It is the idea of hope. And this week we look forward to talking about hope for our future, hope for the future of our children, hope for the future of the Nation of Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 20 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, June 13, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., for morning hour debate.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support this rule and to support the bill, H.R. 5252, the COPE Act as we have called it. And I want to take a moment and thank Chairman Barton and Chairman Upton for their excellent work on this bill. I also want to thank Congressman Wynn who has worked with me on video choice and franchising and on these issues. It has been a bipartisan bill and it has been a 1-year debate, and I thank him for his leadership and his participation on this issue.

I think it is important to note that this bill came out of committee on a strong bipartisan vote, 42-12, and there is a reason that that happened. The reason for that is our constituents know that when we pass this bill that they are going to see greater access to broadband. They are going to have that coming into their communities, and

they are going to have greater access. This is good for them, it is good for their communities, and it is good for economic development in those areas.

Our constituents believe that they have the right, that they should have the opportunity, that they should have the access to something more than one single cable provider, one set of rabbit ears or a satellite; and I agree with them. Government regulation has created the artificial marketplace that exists today, and it is a market that does mean higher prices for our consumers.

There is another point that has been mentioned a couple of times. Some of these so-called D.C.-based groups that lobby for our cities I think have had a little bit of a problem understanding the bill or reading the bill. So I would like to clarify a couple of things there.

New entrants into the video service market would be responsible for the same franchise fees that the incumbent operators pay, and our cities would be receiving those same fees from the new entrants, as well as those incumbent companies. Many times, if you have got an incumbent company, you add one to it that gives you two companies. So you know there is some opportunity there.

New entrants would also provide the same government and education channels. We call those PEG channels. They are going to be included. Cities also maintain control over their rights-of-way.

Now, we know that competition works. We have seen it work in Keller, Texas, and Herndon, Virginia, and in other areas where we have brought in new entrants into the video service market. We know that speeds up broadband. We are 16th worldwide in broadband deployment. So let us speed that up.

Another thing on net neutrality. That is a nice fuzzy sounding name, but if we were to see the amendment being offered today, we would have a net not so neutral and have a Secretary of Internet Access that would be overseeing how we approach that issue. So I would encourage a ``no'' vote on that amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the time.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank our chairman for the good work on the bill, and I want to encourage my colleagues to support this legislation tonight.

My colleague, Representative Wynn, and I began working on the effort to streamline this Nation's franchising rules more than a year ago when we introduced the Video Choice Act. It has been a pleasure to work with him on the issue.

We knew that government regulations were keeping prices high for American consumers; and when I spoke earlier today during debate on the rule, I talked a bit about how competition helps lower prices. I have a chart here to help make that point. This data demonstrates consumer price changes over the past 7 years. Here is the Consumer Price Index. Now take a look at what has happened with cable prices over the past 7 years and how they have soared. This blue line right here is our long distance prices, and then our wireless prices are the green line. So you can see how dramatically our video or cable pricing has outpaced the Consumer Price Index.

Mr. Chairman, the COPE bill will bring competition. It will help lower prices. It will help all entrants, including the little guys, like Ben Lomand Telephone Cooperative in McMinnville, Tennessee.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Markey amendment.

This afternoon I went to the computer and I pulled up Google and then I pulled up Yahoo and in my search engines I put ``network neutrality.'' Interesting what I found.

Well, I found article after article that I certainly believe has their facts wrong, because network neutrality is a term that people can't agree on. Everybody has got a different definition.

Now, while that bothered me, Mr. Chairman, I believe that it is important that we do a couple of things. One of those is I don't think the government ought to tell Google and Yahoo how to rank or present their information. That is not a road that we want to go down. But that is what the Markey amendment would do. It would force companies that build and maintain the networks where the data flows to present and categorize data in packets according to a government standard. Once we have done that, Mr. Chairman, the next thing is going to be having a Secretary of Internet access. I don't believe that is somewhere we want to go.

The COPE bill says that individuals should be able to connect any device to the Internet and access legal content.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage Chairman Barton in a colloquy.

I would like to pose a question concerning the interplay of the National franchise and the anti-redlining provisions of the bill, particularly as they apply to some of the rural telephone companies that are interested in providing the video competition afforded under the bill.

The committee report language concerning redlining that appears on page 23 provides, and I quote, ``A national franchisee is in violation of the provision if it is offering service to parts of a franchised area identified in its certificate but not to another part of the franchised area because of the income of the area.''

Pursuant to that language, Mr. Chairman, would a telephone company that is not providing video service to a part of a franchise area be in compliance with the Act if the reason for not providing video service is that the provider lacks the facilities to make service available in the area? In other words, if the existing footprint of the phone company does not encompass that portion of the cable franchised area, then the provider's decision is not a case of redlining, because the lack of service is not based on the income of the group but rather the lack the facilities by which to provide the service.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

I thank Chairman Barton for his answer, which is important to hundreds of small phone companies. I congratulate you on the bill and look forward to its enactment into law.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me today in recognition of Roy L. White of Shelby County, Tennessee for a lifetime of achievement.

As the founder and chief executive officer of Third Party Solutions, LLC, of Memphis, Roy has been a business pioneer.

The devoted husband of Martha Walton White, father of 6 and grandfather of 12, Roy has dedicated countless hours to the charities, civic organizations and educational institutions that help make our community a better place.

We are grateful for his dedication to helping others. He truly has given back more than he has taken, and I'm not alone in recognizing his contributions. Union University has awarded Roy an Honorary Doctor of Philosophy Degree. It's clear his work is having an impact.

A dedicated and active member of Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis, Roy is setting an example for us all and I want to thank him for that.

Please join me in honoring the life of a beloved Tennessean on his birthday.

Mr. Speaker, last year I had the opportunity to honor Brentwood High and Franklin High as two of our Nation's top schools.

I am proud to say these schools have once again been recognized by Newsweek Magazine for excellence in education. This year Centennial High School in the Seventh District has also been added to the exclusive list.

I want to take a moment to applaud the hard work and dedication it has taken for these schools to achieve such excellence. It's a real team effort and the students, parents, teachers and staff who've dedicated their energy to this success all deserve recognition.

I want to make specific mention of our principals and thank them for their leadership. Brentwood High Principal Kevin Keidel, Centennial High Principal Terry Shrader and Franklin High Principal Willie Dickerson have earned our respect and our thanks, and I hope they'll continue inspiring our kids to work hard and make the most of their education.

Mr. Speaker, one of my favorite lessons in life was something my parents taught me--that you should always give back more to your community than you take. Today I want to take a moment to recognize someone who exemplifies that spirit of giving--Batey Gresham, Jr.

Batey has made volunteer work part of his daily life and we are all the beneficiaries of his effort. He has served as a board member of the Middle Tennessee Boy Scout Council and the Alcohol and Drug Council to name just a few. Batey has supported numerous educational institutions, and joined his wife, Ann, in supporting Chi Omega alumnae activities geared toward developing leadership skills in our community's young women.

The co-founders of a respected architecture, engineering, and design firm, Batey and Ann established an endowed professorship at Auburn's College of Architecture, Design and Construction.

The Greshams are building a wonderful legacy and setting an example for all of us to follow. Our community appreciates their work and I hope you'll join me in applauding Batey and Ann.