Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, first I rise in support of this bill, and I am pleased that our troops are being supported with the funding necessary.

But I also rise in my capacity as ranking member of the Emerging Threats Subcommittee of the Homeland Security Committee to make an important observation about this supplemental appropriations bill.

The funding included in the prior supplemental that would have provided $800 million for advancing the national strategy for pandemic influenza are not in this supplemental. I'm perplexed as to how the strategic threat to this Nation of a pandemic influenza outbreak declined in the past 2 weeks. We all voted to include it then, and now it is gone.

I bring this up to remind all of us that emerging threats are best addressed with preparation before the outbreak. Once an outbreak occurs, it is too late. I cannot tell you the day or week when the pandemic influenza will occur, but all the experts agree that it will. Our only strategy, therefore, is to prepare now so we will be ready when it does happen.

We run catastrophic risks in delaying this pandemic influenza preparation, and I strongly encourage the House to include this funding in the next appropriations vehicle. The risks here are simply too great to postpone our preparations.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of an important amendment to H.R. 1427. As we all know, the underlying bill creates an Affordable Housing Fund. In addition, the bill provides for the establishment of an Affordable Housing Trust Fund, should Congress decide to create one in the future. All the moneys from the Affordable Housing Fund would then be transferred into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

While I have serious concerns that a fund like this creates the opportunity for fraud, waste and abuse, and detracts from the bipartisan goal of GSE reform, I would like to commend the chairman of the Financial Services Committee for including in the bill a list of prohibited uses for the housing fund grants. These prohibitions include political activities, advocacy and lobbying.

I know that my friends on the other side of the aisle agree with me when I say that government grants should not be used to fund political activities of any sort. If they didn't, they would not have included it in this bill.

My amendment simply applies the exact same restrictions on any future trust fund. While an argument can be made against this amendment that the prohibitions are implied in the text of the bill, it is important in my view that when we are dealing with the taxpayers' dollars that we are as clear and explicit as possible.

I thank the chairman.

I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

I thank the chairman.

Offered By: Mr. McCaul of Texas

Amendment No. 20: Page 154, line 3, after the period insert

the following: ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law,

assistance provided using amounts transferred to such

affordable housing trust fund pursuant to this subsection may

not be used for any of the activities specified in clauses

(i) through (vi) of subsection (i)(6).''.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to tell the Nation about one of the finest and most dedicated members of America's law enforcement community, and one of the best sheriffs to ever have served in the 10th Congressional District of Texas.

For 29 years, the good people of Lee County, Texas, trusted Joe Goodson to be their sheriff. He passed away last month, but left those he protected with a safe, friendly and God-fearing community.

Sheriff Joe, as he was known to the thousands of people who called him a friend, worked hard, not just for the people of his county, but for all Texans and for all Americans.

His fellow Texas sheriffs chose him to lead the Sheriffs' Association of Texas. He was a member of the Auto Theft Task Force, the Narcotics Task Force, and he was the head of the cold case review people team.

But it wasn't just that he was among the finest lawmen in Texas that made Sheriff Joe so well liked and so respected. Sheriff Goodson always treated others the same way he wanted to be treated, and the thousands of people who knew him respected him for it.

Law enforcement ran in Sheriff Joe's blood. His dad, Vernon Goodson, served as sheriff in Lee County for 25 years before his son Joe was elected and took over the position. And as Buddy Price, the editor of the Giddings Times and News in Lee County, will tell you, they were both dedicated to their jobs and loved the people they served. While they both enforced the law vigorously, they also used commonsense and resolved situations peacefully whenever they could.

One of the things Sheriff Joe is best known for is a responsible, some would even say the conservative way in which he ran his sheriff's office. He saw the money entrusted to him and his deputies as the people's money. He ran a tight ship and accounted for every dollar his department spent.

But once again, I have to go back to who Sheriff Goodson was as a person.

As his family will tell you, one of the things he loved most was leading the Blue Santa Program to provide gifts for needy families during the Christmas season. He helped raise money for Blue Santa with auctions, and he even served as an auctioneer.

To Joe's wife, Robyn, and Joe's entire family, and to the good people of Lee County, you have the thanks of a grateful Nation. We are indebted to you, and we mourn your loss.

So to the good Lord above, I hope you are ready for one more angel up there because Sheriff Joe is on his way.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today not in opposition to

what this legislation stands for, but out of concern for what this legislation fails to include.

Numerous provisions that were part of the authorization bill which were approved unanimously and reported by the Committee on Homeland Security were removed from the legislation that is before us today. And these provisions were largely eliminated without any real policy justification for their removal. Never in the history of the Homeland Security Committee has such an action been done.

One of these provisions stripped from the authorization bill before us today was based on a piece of legislation I introduced which authorizes the National Bio and Agro Facility, or NBAF. The text of this legislation was unanimously approved at the Committee on Homeland Security authorization bill markup.

I am at a loss as to why my colleagues across the other side of the aisle unilaterally decided to eliminate the NBAF provision from this bill, especially when some of my Democratic colleagues on the committee, including Chairman Thompson, were original cosponsors of the NBAF legislation.

The need for the NBAF is clear and immediate. Its establishment is crucial to defending our Nation from agroterrorism and naturally occurring animal diseases. Currently, there's not one Biosafety Level 3 and BSL 4 livestock laboratory in the United States, and the NBAF provision would have authorized a facility to fill that gap.

DHS is conducting a site selection process right now. Eighteen sites have been looked at across the country, one close to my district at Texas A&M. They are investing significant resources in the competition.

I'd also like to note that some of the other sites being considered lie in or near districts represented by Democratic colleagues.

Congress has already provided $46 million for pre-construction NBAF activities, and yet, DHS currently does not have the legal authority it needs to even procure the land.

Because the enactment of this legislation is crucial to the establishment of the NBAF and to defending the Nation against the threats of agroterrorism, and because this legislation was eliminated from the authorization bill before us, I urge my colleagues to work to move forward in a bipartisan way to help secure our homeland and to pass H.R. 1717.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support this bill and thank Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall, a fellow Texan, for their hard work and leadership on this issue.

I think we can all agree on the importance of ensuring America is competitive in science and engineering. As the National Academy of Sciences report ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm'' warned, this country is in danger of losing its leadership role in these fields.

Last year I sponsored the Research For Competitiveness Act to address this issue. Unfortunately, that legislation did not come to the floor of the House after being passed by the Science Committee. However, I am pleased in this Congress in a bipartisan fashion to note that H.R. 363 incorporates sections from last year's bill that establish early-career grants for young scientists and engineers. These grants will encourage scientists and engineers in the early stages of their academic careers to establish innovative lines of research. This approach continues the successful model of partnership between the Federal Government and America's universities.

As you know, many of the technologies we enjoy today, such as breakthroughs that enabled e-commerce to become a reality in the 1990s, are based on research initially conducted at universities like the University of Texas in my hometown of Austin.

When we fund programs such as these, we are investing in minds and helping create the next generation of America's high-tech workforce. Therefore, I strongly support this legislation and urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill.

I want to thank my colleague from Texas, Mr. Green, for introducing this bill. It has been a real honor to work with you on this bill. I am proud to be a lead sponsor and to have played a role in terms of whipping votes on my side of the aisle and getting this bill to the floor of the House where it stands today.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this important piece of legislation which honors a former President of the United States and his commitment to better educate the future generations of America.

Today, we will vote to name the Department of Education building in Washington, D.C., the Lyndon Baines Johnson Federal Building. And, by doing so, we honor a son of Texas who left a positive mark on me, my family, the State of Texas, and this country.

Born on August 27, 1908, in Stonewall, Texas, Lyndon Johnson's family knew that he was destined to do great things. The future President got his experience in Washington first as a secretary to Congressman Richard Kleburg. Shortly after that, Johnson met Claudia Alta Taylor, a woman the world has come to affectionately know as Lady Bird.

In 1937, after the death of Congressman James Buchanan, Lyndon Johnson entered a special election for the 10th Congressional District of Texas, a district which I am proud to represent today. Representative Johnson beat nine other candidates to win the seat, an experience that I can personally relate to.

In addition to his tour of duty during World War II, LBJ would spend the next 23 years in the Congress as both a Congressman and Senator. During his career in the Congress, Johnson would serve as Senate minority and Senate majority leader. As President Kennedy's Vice President, Johnson served as the chairman of NASA and the Presidential Space Committee.

Lyndon Johnson early on earned a reputation for getting things done for the betterment of our Nation, and he used that intensity to lead America to land a man on the moon and continue America's dominance in space.

But it was Lyndon Johnson's steady and calming leadership after the assassination of President Kennedy which helped to lead our Nation through one of its most turbulent and tragic hours.

Taking the experience he had gained from his younger days as a teacher, President Johnson focused on working with the Congress and passing several landmark education bills. These initiatives served as a foundation for a new standard of education in America. Among them were programs such as Head Start, the first Federal aid to public schools and the first Federal student loan programs.

President Johnson recorded in his memoirs, he said, ``I remember seeing in the folder of reading material I took to my bedroom one night, the account of a 62-year old man who learned how to write his name after years of making an X for his signature. He was so excited that he sat for a whole hour just writing his name over and over again.''

Johnson said, ``Reading about this man whose life had been so enriched, I was almost as excited as the man himself.''

Now, that sums up so much of the man President Johnson was. In his story, our striving for increased opportunity and education took shape and became real and valid. It is this love and dedication to education that makes this bill the ideal way, in my view, and my judgment, to honor President' Johnson's memory.

While President Johnson will always be remembered as a champion of the

Civil Rights Act, it was President Johnson's wish that the education papers from his Presidency be the first set of records to be made public because he believed, and I quote, in his words, ``You can't get your civil rights without your education.'' This is why, in my judgment, he will always be known as the first ``Education President.''

One of the greatest honors I have had during my tenure in the Congress was the opportunity to sit down with Lady Bird Johnson, who I am proud to have as a friend and a constituent. I spoke with her about my intention to see this bill through the Congress and have the Department of Education named for her husband. And the excitement and the gratitude in her eyes that she responded with will be a memory that I will cherish for the rest of my life.

As the Representative of President Johnson's former congressional district, I have been inspired by his dedication to the American people. I specifically look back to his work in supporting the space program and education as I consider ways to further improve our great Nation.

So I urge my colleagues to honor this great Texan and to support the Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Act.

May God bless Lyndon Johnson, and may God bless our national treasure, Lady Bird, may God bless Texas, and may God bless the United States of America.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

First, Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the chairman of the committee and the ranking member for their important work on this bill. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I certainly see the importance and value of what we are doing here today.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment which requires the Secretary of the Treasury to include in his reporting information the rate of taxation in the United States as compared to other countries and how that would affect the investments examined by CFIUS.

And while I support the underlying bill, this amendment improves on the oversight requirements included in it. It requires the report to include information on how taxation affects foreign investment in the United States. Congress will be better informed on how our actions make it harder or easier for foreign countries to invest in our critical infrastructure.

The report is also required in the text of the bill, and this amendment merely ensures that we, as a Congress, know all the information we need to perform effective and better oversight.

The underlying bill is about how foreign investment affects national security, and there is no way to understand why foreign investments would be made here, or what it would do to our economy, without understanding the economic factors such as taxes.

I ask my colleagues to support this amendment and support a thorough report that examines all the factors affecting foreign investments in the United States.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment which requires the Secretary of the Treasury to include in his reporting information on the amount of regulation in the United States, as compared to other countries, and how it affects the investments, the foreign investments, examined by CFIUS.

I support the underlying bill. This amendment simply improves on the oversight requirements. By requiring the report to include information on how burdensome regulation affects foreign investment in the United States, I believe Congress will be better informed on how our actions in the Congress can either make it harder or easier for foreign countries to invest in our critical infrastructure.

It is already required in the text of the bill. This would ensure us better oversight capability.

The underlying bill again is about foreign investment. I believe foreign investment affects national security. Issues relating to taxation and regulation certainly impact the foreign investments that are made both in this country and outside.

I ask my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to simply conclude that, and the chairman is certainly an expert and a leader in terms of financial security issues. Certainly he would recognize that our viability as an economic superpower is vitally important in this country as we look at countries like China and India.

So I do believe it is relevant. I believe our ability to globally compete is not just an economic issue, but really is an issue of national security.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment, which requires the Secretary of the Treasury to include in his report information on the net effect of foreign investment on American jobs.

While I support the underlying bill, this improves our oversight capability and gives the information to Congress that we need on how jobs will be impacted by foreign investment. Congress will be better informed on how our actions lead to the creation or outsourcing of American jobs overseas. This report is already required in the text. This amendment will ensure we have better oversight.

The underlying bill is about, again, how foreign investments affect national security. There is no way to understand why foreign investments would be made here or what it would do to our economy without information, understanding the effect on jobs that foreign investments would have. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment.

And I would like to respond, if I may, that it is hard to imagine how our taxation and regulatory process is not related to foreign investment. And when we look at taxation, regulatory policies in this country, and when we look at jobs, particularly jobs being outsourced in countries like China and India, when we talk about viability, I appreciate the chairman's arguments and the gentleman from New York and the gentlewoman from New York, but it is hard for me to differentiate and dissect how national security is not impacted by our economic security and economic viability. If we are not a global superpower anymore, if we are not economically viable in this country, if we are losing jobs in this country, if our taxation and regulatory burden is so cumbersome that we are discouraging investment, including foreign investment in this country, I would argue that we are impacting our national security.

It is hard for me to conceive why the Congress wouldn't want this kind of information in evaluating our national security policies as they relate to economics. And the chairman, again, is an expert on financial security. I don't understand why you wouldn't want this information.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

You correctly state the issue and the purpose of the bill, and that is a fear of discouraging foreign investments. And I would argue that our system of taxation and regulatory burden in this country has a direct impact on foreign investments.

And the loss of jobs, outsourcing of jobs is a national security issue, in my view.

Mr. Chairman, this is a healthy discussion, a

healthy debate. This bill is about foreign investment. This bill is a reporting requirement, hardly an outrageous request; I think a very sound request to the contrary on, as the gentleman stated, what are the barriers in this country to foreign investment?

It is hard for me to completely dissect our security and viability from one of national security, which is apparently what the gentleman from Massachusetts is attempting to do. I think they go hand in hand. I think we need to look at our ability to compete globally in this country. And when we do that, we are talking about national security. And when we talk about that issue, we have to examine our taxation and regulation policies in this country. And we have to look at the impact that these investments are having on jobs in this country. It is hard to tell the American people that their job is not an area of importance; it is important to our economic viability and security, and I would argue, I know the gentleman disagrees, that it is important to our national security.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman from New York.

Again, this bill is about foreign investment. Is the gentleman arguing that our economic policies in the United States have nothing to do with foreign investment?

Mr. Chairman, just in a very short conclusion, I think we are ready to move on, but it is a healthy debate that we are having.

The relevance, as the gentlelady from New York mentioned, of jobs and national security, the relevance of our taxation policies and our economic policies and regulatory policies and our economic security does directly impact our national security in this country.

I fully support the underlying bill. It is needed legislation. It is a great piece of legislation. I commended the chairman and ranking member for this bill in response to the Dubai Ports issue. But, again, I don't think we can look at this, and why wouldn't we want this information in the Congress? Our taxation policy in this country or regulatory burden, does that have an impact on foreign investment? Why wouldn't we want that information in the Congress? Wouldn't we want to know whether foreign investment one way or the other impacts jobs in this country? I would argue that is a healthy examination that is useful information for the Congress in examining our economic viability as a superpower, our economic security in this country, which again is a national security issue.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Offered By: Mr. McCaul

Amendment No. 5: Page 30, line 17, strike the closing

quotation marks and the second period.

Page 30, after line 17, insert the following new paragraph:

``(4) Contents of report related to barriers to investment

into the united states.--In order to assist the Congress in

its oversight role of ensuring the national security of the

United States by ensuring a healthy investment climate, the

President, and such agencies as the President shall

designate, shall include in the annual report submitted under

paragraph (1) a detailed discussion of factors, including the

effective rate of taxation on entrepreneurs and businesses

and other sources of capital in the United States as compared

to other countries, that affect the number of filings,

changes in the types of business sectors involved in filings,

and changes in the number of investments originating from

specific countries.''.

Offered By: Mr. McCaul

Amendment No. 7: Page 30, line 17, strike the closing

quotation marks and the second period.

Page 30, after line 17, insert the following new paragraph:

``(4) Contents of report related to barriers to investment

into the united states.--In order to assist the Congress in

its oversight role of ensuring the national security of the

United States by ensuring a healthy investment climate, the

President, and such agencies as the President shall

designate, shall include in the annual report submitted under

paragraph (1) a detailed discussion of factors, including a

detailed discussion, including trend information on the

number of jobs in the United States related to foreign

investment resulting from covered transactions, that affect

the number of filings, changes in the types of business

sectors involved in filings, and changes in the number of

investments originating from specific countries.''.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of our troops and in support of victory in Iraq.

It is hard to ignore the inconvenient truth that this ill-timed measure will aid the terrorists and depress the morale of our soldiers who are fighting to defeat them. It also sends a wrong message to our troops at exactly the wrong time. They are carrying out their mission, as I speak, while we here in the Congress are condemning them.

It amazes me that at the same time General Petraeus was confirmed by the Senate, this resolution was introduced condemning his counterinsurgency plan for victory.

Never in our history has this country sent a war leader into battle, while condemning the very mission that he and the Armed Forces will be leading.

Make no mistake, this resolution is the first step towards cutting off funding for our troops. As a consultant to the Iraq Study Group, I supported the findings that failure is not an option, and that a troop surge is necessary for security and stability. I also supported the recommendation that a political and diplomatic surge is essential for peace.

The time for evaluating the success or failure of this endeavor will come soon enough, but now is not the time to be sending a message to friend and foe alike that we no longer believe in the mission.

But many in this country and many in this Chamber insist it is in America's interest to surrender and retreat from our obligation to help Iraq build a stable democracy. They say that, knowing full well the consequences of an early American withdrawal.

And what are those consequences? Chaos, instability in the region, and, in al Qaeda's own words, a threat that America has never seen before.

Recently, the ambassadors from Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia told me that ``if the U.S. fails here, it will be catastrophic. We are in this together. They will come after us and then they will come after you.'' And then they will come after you.

Recently, after meeting with them, I had to say to myself, how will history then judge us; that when we stood at the brink, we chose retreat over advancement, surrender over victory, and defeatism for our children and for future generations?

Let us remember the words of President Kennedy, when he said: ``Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty.''

Where is the party of President Kennedy today? This resolution sends a clear message across the Islamic jihad world that we will not bear any burden, that we will not oppose any foe, that we have lost our will, that they have won, and that they can come and they can get us.

I believe Abraham Lincoln summed it up best by saying that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion, that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain.

As Members of Congress, the most sobering job that we have is to comfort the families left behind in a time of

great loss and a time of war. I have stood by, like many of my colleagues, to honor those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for freedom. We all stand here today indebted to those brave Americans and their families.

And because those heroes and those families cannot speak on the floor of the House, I would like to share some of their words here with you today. And these are the words of Janet Norwood, a constituent, a Gold Star Mother, whose son, Byron, was killed in Fallujah while serving in Iraq. And she said: In the past I have always had great hope for this country. But, for the first time, during the State of the Union address last month, I had real doubts. I had doubts about our winning this war on terrorism. She said, When President Bush used the word ``victory,'' only half of the room stood to applaud. My heart sank. It was obvious to me at that moment that party affiliation was more important to some than victory over evil and the sacrifice our son and other sons have made.

Well, to Janet and all the other Gold Star Mothers, I say, I couldn't agree more. And as Abraham Lincoln said, a house divided cannot stand.

September 11 changed our lives forever. But the war on terror started long before that. The year 1979 changed the world. When Iran took our embassy hostage, the seeds of Islamic jihad were spread all over the Middle East.

These seeds planted hatred and contempt for freedom in the souls of men like Osama bin Laden. In 1983, they murdered our marines in Beirut. In 1993, Ramzi Yousef and his al Qaeda associates bombed the World Trade Center. They were supposed to fall that day, but that day would come later.

They struck the Khobar Towers in 1996. They bombed our embassies in Africa. They defeated us in Somalia. And they deliberately attacked the USS Cole.

Each time we failed to respond. And then came September 11. It was as if the United States was a sleeping giant. And not until the bloodiest alarm of 9/11 did the giant finally awake. And America cannot afford to go back to sleep again.

``It is hard to ignore the inconvenient truth that this ill-timed measure will aid the terrorists and depress the morale of our soldiers who are fighting to defeat them.'' It also sends the wrong message to our troops at the wrong time. They are carrying out their mission as I speak, while we here in Congress are condemning it.

The time for evaluating the success or failure of this endeavor will come soon enough, but now is not the time to be sending a message to friend and foe alike that we no longer believe in this mission.

It amazes me that just as General Petraeus was confirmed by the Senate, this resolution was introduced condemning his counter- insurgency plan for victory.

``Never in our history has this country sent a war leader into battle while condemning the mission that he and the armed forces he will be leading have been asked to complete.''

Make no mistake; this resolution is the first step towards cutting off funding for our troops. As a consultant to the Iraq Study Group, I supported the findings that a troop surge is necessary for security and stability. I also supported the recommendation that a political and diplomatic surge is essential for victory.

But many in this country, and many in this chamber, insist it is in America's interest to surrender and retreat from our obligation to help Iraq build a stable democracy. They say that, knowing full well the consequences of an early American withdrawal.

And what are those consequences--

Chaos. Instability in the region. A threat that America has never seen before. A threat that we will not be able to blindly put our head in the sand and wish it to go away.

Al Qaeda has openly said that they consider Iraq the central front in the ``Third World War.'' Their goal is to create a Caliphate with Baghdad as its capital. Their plan is to then conquer the rest of the world and force all humanity to submit to Radical Islam.

The National Intelligence Estimate released last month stated, ``If Coalition forces were withdrawn rapidly . . . this almost certainly would lead to a significant increase in the scale and scope of sectarian conflict in Iraq.''

Our allies agree. The Ambassadors from Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia recently told me, ``If the U.S. fails it will be catastrophic. We are in this together . . . they will come after us and then they will come after you.''

How will history judge us then? That when we stood at the brink we chose retreat over advancement, surrender over victory, and defeatism for our children and for future generations.

Let us remember the words of President Kennedy when he said:

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill,

that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any

hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the

survival and the success of liberty.''

Where is the party of President Kennedy today? This resolution sends a clear message across the Islamic Jihad world--that we will not bear any burden--that we will not oppose any foe--that we have lost our will--that they have won--that they can come and get us.

We are better than that.

We are Americans--the same Americans who defeated the most powerful country in the world at the time to win our independence.

We are the same Americans who defeated Fascists in Japan, Germany and Italy.

We are the same Americans who defeated the scourge of the Soviet Union, liberating millions more.

Now we face yet another challenge--defeating the jihadists and an ideology of hate. But our colleagues on the other side of the aisle say ``We will support the War on Terror, except where the terrorists have chosen to fight it.''

Our previous struggles were not easy, they were hard and required great sacrifice. Yet all of these challenges were met, and victory was won, and the world is a better place because of it. This struggle is the same. If we give up now, we betray not just the Iraqi people, and not just our place in history, but those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice.

I believe Abraham Lincoln summed it up best by saying:

. . . that from these honored dead we take increased

devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full

measure of devotion--that we here highly resolve that these

dead shall not have died in vain . . .

As Members of Congress, the most sobering job we have is to comfort the families left behind in a time of great loss, in a time of war. I have stood by, like many of my colleagues, to honor those who have paid the ultimate price for freedom. We all stand here today indebted to those brave Americans and their families. They are true heroes.

Because those heroes and their families cannot speak on the Floor of the House, I would like to share some of their words today. These are the words of Janet Norwood, a constituent and Gold Star Mother, whose son Byron was killed serving in Iraq. She said:

In the past, I have always had great hope for this country,

but for the first time, during the State of the Union Address

last month, I had real doubts about our winning this War on

Terrorism. When President Bush used the word ``victory'' and

only half of the room stood to applaud, my heart sank. It was

obvious to me at that moment that party affiliation was more

important to some than victory over evil and the sacrifice

our son and others have made.

To Janet and all of the other Gold Star Mothers, I say, ``I couldn't agree more.'' As President Lincoln once said, ``A House Divided Cannot Stand.''

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I want to thank Chairman Langevin and Ranking Member Rogers for their leadership on this issue, and I am proud to have been a coauthor of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 599, a bipartisan bill to help protect and encourage companies that develop antiterrorism technologies. This bill helps implement the Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies, or SAFETY Act. The SAFETY Act was passed as part of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and basically it encourages companies to develop antiterrorism technology by limiting their liability in the event of a terrorist attack.

As part of the oversight provided in the 109th Congress, the Homeland Security Committee determined that the SAFETY Act better protected the American people, and over 60 new technologies have been approved for coverage under the SAFETY Act in areas such as radiation detection, facility protection and passenger screening.

Unfortunately, in order to qualify for SAFETY Act protection, companies must go through a cumbersome application process rife with red tape. This bill cuts that red tape by requiring DHS to streamline their process and make it more effective.

In my district there are a number of companies developing antiterrorism technologies, including detection and identification systems. By limiting their potential legal liability, this bill will help them develop new technologies to address the real and constant threat of a terrorist attack.

This bill represents a commonsense, bipartisan approach, and I applaud my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, an approach to streamline government and make it friendlier to the American people. By doing this, we will make it easier for government and the private sector to work together to make America safer.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, on Rollcall No. 6 with family in town I was given insufficient notice of the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the following poem for the Record.

Those Aren't Crocodile Tears

(By Albert Carey Caswell)

Those aren't Crocodile Tears!

Those are real! As it's for their great fine friend, such

heartache they now feel!

As the Crocodiles all in prayer, throughout the world so

prepare . . . for their hero to so kneel . . .

As this day our Hearts Lie Down Under,

As The World and her Animal Kingdom have lost their great

thunder, their fine son of wonder!

As The Lions they too so mourn, for this man of love so warm,

their Savior . . . as they stop to ponder.

All the Animals are crying, as upon them their tears now lay

lying

All because this their fine Hero, their True Champion . . .

their True Friend lays dying

All of those sad elephant's ears are drooping, in the oceans

. . . the whales, sad songs are crying!

But, Steve you will never be extinct,

Forever in our hearts, in our souls, in our minds, in our

memories, you'll live on as of you we so think!

With you, life was all it's crocked up to be . . . with your

heart of happiness ever to us such joy did bring.

FULL OUT, from life you never sipped, but drank . . . as how

a life should be lived as no doubt,

With the heart of a child, as you lived To So Save The Wild .

. . showing us all what living is all about!

Because you loved and so cared, as with the World your Aussie

heart of a lion so shared throughout.

You Steve, You Great Big Koala Bear . . . Our Teddy Bear of

Love . . . A Ray of Light . . .

A Thing of Joy, Reaching For The Stars . . . What is Right! A

Shooting Star, So Very Bright!

You thought you were just a bloke, I think not! . . . God,

put you on this earth to bring your light!

To Teach Us!

To So Deep Inside, In All Of Our Hearts To So Reach Us!

To show us all the true meaning of love and life, husband &

wife, child or crocodile, you beseeched Us!

Oh Crockeeee, Oh how you showed us how life should be lived,

As to this our world, and her entire animal kingdom . . . Oh

Crockeeee, the gifts to her you'd give!

You are gone, but not forgotten . . . as forever and a day

upon this earth in our hearts you shall live!

For once, you were The King of The Jungle . . .

But, more so . . . A Prince of Love and Peace . . . of

kindness, of what it is in our world she so surely

needs.

For on this day, with your loss in so many ways, all God's

Children and his Animals now for you so bleed.

Because, to our world you never took . . . You Gave!

In your life, and most magnificent family . . . the meaning

of love . . . you so portrayed!

As The World & her most beloved Animals you so fought for to

save, as was your fine life's crusade.

Steve, today . . . you're reached the Top!

As an Angel in The Army of our Lord, fighting for the

destruction of the Animal Kingdom to so stop!

The first thing you will do, is return to earth to that

stingray who killed you . . . and let his heart not

sob.

But, the hardest pain of all . . .

Is what all of us so saw, how much you loved your family and

they so too you!

Knowing, that little girl and boy, and fine wife and loved

ones, will together miss such splendid joy . . . You!

But, really you're not gone!

As they will carry you in their hearts from dusk to dawn!

Until, the years pass by . . . and together with tears in

eyes . . . in Heaven you'll rejoin and will live on!

Those aren't Crocodile Tears!

Dedicated To A Most Magnificent Man . . . who taught all of

The World's Animal Kingdom

A Messenger to all of us from Our Lord, about Love, Life and

Living!

Crockeeee . . . God Bless You Steve, May your Family find

peace!

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 100 birthday of Mabel Burch Norwood. Mabel was born on September 20, 1906 in Del Valle, Texas to John Clarence Burch and Ida Mae Jones.

On February 8, 1924 Mabel married James Edward Norwood. Together they had 6 daughters, Marie Roberts, Betty Ball, Harriet Humphrey, Dorothy Burchard, Earline Hocker and Barbara Parr. She has 14 grandchildren, 15 great grandchildren, 11 great, great grandchildren, 3 great, great, great grandchildren and 47 living descendants. What an accomplishment.

In the earlier years of her life, Mabel enjoyed staying home raising her family. She also enjoyed teaching Sunday school at Haynie Chapel United Methodist Church where she taught for 41 years.

On this, her 100th birthday, I know I speak for her family, friends, my constituents and the Members of the House of Representatives in wishing her a very happy birthday.