Mike Ferguson

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the Congressional Record regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009:

1. Micro Electrical Mechanical Systems (MEMS) Technology and Plastic Armor.

Applications Account: Army Research, Development, Test and Evaluation.

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Picatinny Arsenal.

Address of Requesting Entity: Picatinny Arsenal, Picatinny, NJ 07806- 5000.

Description of Request: Funding in the amount of $1.6 million will be used by Picatinny Arsenal in collaboration with Bell Laboratories and the New Jersey Nanotechnology Consortium for research and development of body armor materials using nano technologies, Micro Electrical Mechanical Systems (MEMS) and new plastic armor composites. The development of MEMS technology focuses on lightweight, low power technologies that enable the implementation of new capabilities in current armament and equipment as well as next generation solutions for the war fighter.

2. Strattice Dermal Matrix Research.

Account: Army Research, Development, Test and Evaluation.

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: LifeCell Corporation.

Address of Requesting Entity: One Millenium Way, Branchburg, New Jersey 08876-3876.

Description of Request: Funding in the amount of $2.4 million will be used for research and development of skin graft technology, with the goal of developing an off-the-shelf transplantable graft from porcine tissue for combat casualties with full-thickness burns and other skin and dermal deficits. The project is a 3-year research and development program seeking to evaluate the potential for grafting of the scaffold onto full-thickness dermal wounds with full integration and regeneration of intact skin. This scaffold will provide a platform technology for development of other products for repair of tissue loss, meeting significant unmet medical needs in both military and civilian trauma.

Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank my friend and colleague, Mr. Crowley, for working with me on this resolution, and I appreciate his leadership on the floor today. I want to thank Chairman Berman of the committee and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen for their strong support in helping us bring this resolution to the floor today.

This Congress is committed to protecting and preserving the cultural heritage of all national, religious, and ethnic groups, including sacred sites such as the cemeteries here in the United States and around the world.

There are over 20 bilateral agreements between the United States and foreign governments assuring the protection and preservation of cultural property. However, in recent months, the bilateral agreement between the United States and Lithuania has, unfortunately, been broken.

We're disappointed that there has been a lack of meaningful action by the Lithuanian Government in preserving the Jewish cemetery in the Snipiskes area of Vilnius, Lithuania. Instead of preserving this site, the government in Lithuania has allowed an apartment complex to be built over the assumed boundaries of this particular cemetery.

Now, cemeteries are sacred sites and are established to remain undisturbed in perpetuity, and the sanctity of a cemetery is determined by the bodies and the families of those bodies that are buried in them. This resolution expresses this body's deep commitment to preserving these sacred cultural sites. Those buried there and their families deserve nothing less than that.

As I close, I just want to again thank the chairman of the committee, my friend from New York (Mr. Crowley) and the ranking member of the committee, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. I also want to thank my legislative director, Mandy Tharpe, who worked very hard on drafting this legislation, and all the members of the staff for helping us with this important resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, today we have a stark contrast between the Republican approach to solving the energy crisis in our country and the liberal Democrat and the radical environmentalist approach to solving the energy crisis in our country.

We are going to look at two different pieces of legislation, the American Energy Act written by Republicans and some of our friends on the Democratic side, and the Democrats and radical environmentalist no- energy plan that we will have to vote on today.

Because it might not be easy to see this chart, I am going to go down this chart.

Real offshore exploration for new energy: Republicans say yes; Democrats say no.

Renewable energy without raising your taxes: Republicans say yes, Democrats say no.

Real oil shale exploration to find new energy: Republicans say yes; Democrats say no.

Drilling off the Arctic coastal plain: Republicans say yes; Democrats say no.

Emission-free nuclear energy to help us find new electricity and power: Republicans say yes; Democrats say no.

Clean coal technology: Republicans say yes; Democrats say no.

Increasing our refinery capacity in our country: Republicans say yes; Democrats say no.

The Democratic energy plan is a sham. Vote it down.