Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding and rise in strong support of H. Res. 1087.

As this Congress draws to a close, this legislation that I had the privilege of authoring is a source of great personal satisfaction to me, and I cannot help but feel a sense of privilege about being able to have played a part in bringing this important honor to the floor today.

Mr. Speaker, as this session of Congress draws to a close, so draws to a close the storied career of a lion of the House of Representatives, Congressman Henry Hyde of Illinois.

As the chairman of several major committees at the center of repeated national controversies, Henry Hyde, as Members on both sides of the aisle have already said today and know, has been a paragon of dignity, civility, and commitment to principle, and I would add that he has been a lion of the right to life, and this Chamber will miss his roar.

I offer this legislation before us today to name H-139 in the United States Capitol after this storied legislator. It is an act we sometimes do in this body to honor a figure whose public service indicates a significant benchmark or milestone in the history of the House of Representatives, and the career of Henry Hyde certainly speaks for itself.

He is the holder of no fewer than eight honorary degrees from eight separate colleges and universities, in addition to his B.S. from Georgetown and J.D. from the Loyola University School of Law in Chicago.

His service in the Navy took him to Lingayen Gulf, an extension of the South China Sea. Upon returning home, he was elected to the Illinois House of Representatives in 1966 and then to this body, the United States House of Representatives, in 1974 where he has served with great distinction.

Throughout his career, whether it was closed-door White House briefings or high-level meetings with diplomats, Henry Hyde has played a vital role in our Nation's security and in defining America's place in the world, and as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, he has held fair hearings and respected the constitutional rule of law ordained by our Founding Fathers.

But Mr. Speaker, it is the Hyde amendment itself for which the gentleman of Illinois will perhaps be best remembered. He eloquently remarked on this floor on one occasion, ``I look for the common thread in slavery, the Holocaust and abortion. To me, the common thread is dehumanizing people.''

The first Hyde amendment passed in 1976 banning abortions financed by Medicaid and has remained in force ever since. An argument can be made that it is the most important piece of legislation this Congress has considered in the past 50 years, and that would be an argument that I endorse.

Henry Hyde's respect for life extends to his support of other legislation, including sponsorship of legislation to expand the number of women eligible for pregnancy benefits.

Mr. Speaker, quite simply, when I think of Henry Hyde's career and the classic speeches he has given in this Chamber, I cannot help but think of the poem ``Ulysses'' by his favorite poet, Alfred Lord Tennyson. Mr. Hyde once quoted this poem to me verbatim as we sat in this Chamber between votes, and I think it applies to his service and his retirement and his dedication today.

Tennyson wrote:

``Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho'

We are not now that strength which in the old days

Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are

One equal-temper of heroic hearts,

Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.''

Such was the career of this rare leader and the gentleman from Illinois. May God bless his golden years and may God bless all the deliberations that will take place in the Henry Hyde Room in the United States Capitol for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, it is not every day that a fallen soldier is laid to rest 56 years after he was killed in action. But such is the case of Private Charles ``Buddy'' Sizemore.

As a young graduate of Rushville High School in Rushville, Indiana in 1948, Buddy was drafted into the U.S. Army where he was assigned to Headquarters Company, 2nd Battalion, 8th Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division.

Mr. Speaker, it was on October 19, 1950 that the men of the 1st Cavalry, hitching rides with the 70th Tank Division, took the North Korean capital of Pyongyang at great cost. But the advance of the 8th Army resumed despite a shortage of supplies, including winter clothing. Some riflemen had as few as 16 rounds of ammunition.

On November 1, about seventy miles north of Pyongyang, two Chinese divisions attacked and almost completely destroyed the U.S. 8th Cavalry Regiment and the 1st Cavalry Division. Soon thereafter, six Soviet- supplied armies from Manchuria attacked on all fronts. On November 2, 1950, just six weeks after he had left his Rushville home for Korea, Private Buddy Sizemore and his entire battalion were lost.

Fifty-six years later, after much negotiating between the United States and North Korea, forensic teams from the United Nations and the Pentagon have identified his remains, and on October 14th, there will be a full military funeral at the First Baptist Church in Rushville, Indiana for Private Charles ``Buddy'' Sizemore.

Mr. Speaker, the Bible tells us if you owe debts, pay debts; if honor, then honor; if respect, then respect. I rise humbly today to pay

a debt of honor and respect to Buddy Sizemore.

Buddy is a hero whose service and sacrifice will forever be emblazoned on the hearts of a grateful Nation. I offer my deepest condolences to all of those friends and family members who loved and admired this young man.

As this session of Congress draws to a close, so draws to a close, also, the storied career of the Lion of the Right, Henry Hyde of Illinois. As the chairman of several major committees at the center of repeated national controversies, Henry Hyde, as Members on both sides of the aisle know, has been a paragon of dignity and civility and commitment to principle. I would add he has been a lion of the right to life and this Chamber will miss his roar.

I will offer legislation today to name the Rayburn International Relations Committee room after this storied legislator, and I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

When I think of Henry Hyde's career, I think of Ulysess by Alfred Lord Tennyson who wrote:

``Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho' we are not now that strength which in old days moved heaven and earth, that which we are, we are; one equal temper of heroic hearts, made weak by time and fate but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.''

Let us honor this rare leader and may God bless the golden years of the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, 30 years ago, this year, former White House aide Chuck Colson launched Prison Fellowship, now the world's largest Christian outreach to prisoners and their families.

While serving 7 months in a federal prison for a Watergate-related offense, Colson was appalled by the humiliation, drudgery, and hopelessness experienced by his fellow prisoners. After he was released from prison, Colson decided he could not turn his back on the men he left behind. So, in 1976, inspired by his own prison experience and his faith in Christ, Colson began Prison Fellowship.

Since then, Prison Fellowship has become a movement of like-minded citizens who are touching the lives of millions of prisoners and their families here in America and in 114 countries around the world. Prison Fellowship has helped maintain the bonds between prisoners and their families through the amazing Angel Tree program, in which some 7 million children of prisoners have received Christmas gifts on behalf of their incarcerated parent. At the state and national level, Prison Fellowship has also been at the forefront of criminal justice reform, helping states cope with prison overcrowding, fostering victims' rights, combating prison rape, promoting reentry programs, and so much more. By launching the InnerChange Freedom Initiative, Prison Fellowship has helped corrections systems reduce recidivism by working to transform prisoners from the inside out and linking them to mentors and communities of faith once they leave prison.

Clearly, by reaching out to the very men and women our society would like to forget, Prison Fellowship has not only helped former prisoners become productive members of society, it has also made our communities safer places to live.

Mr. Speaker, the Good Book reads ``I was in prison, and you came to visit me . . . I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.''

I find it appropriate today to recognize and celebrate the incredible service that Chuck Colson and Prison Fellowship have rendered not only to prisoners and their families, but also to our communities, our Nation and our world.

Mr. Speaker, all Americans concerned with the reduction of crime and the restoration of lives celebrate both the man and the ministry on the 30th anniversary of Prison Fellowship.

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the gentleman's leadership on this issue. I rise in strong support of the Public Expression of Religion Act; and I do so with particular gratitude to my Hoosier colleague, John Hostettler, who, during the course of his career in the United States House of Representatives, has stood for the freedom of religion as perhaps no other American.

And I say that with understandable parochial Hoosier pride, but I also say it as an objective observation, that the gentleman from Indiana has stood for a constitutional accommodationist view of respect for the expression of religion and its importance in American heritage. Mr. Speaker, I commend him for his outstanding work on this legislation.

In 1976, a statute was passed in this Congress called the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act. Very simply and plainly, this statute was intended to protect the constitutional rights of citizens and level the legal playing field.

Under this Act, a citizen who felt that his or her constitutional rights had been violated could sue a government official or entity and receive attorney's fees if they win.

This was important legislation, and it has served a great public good. But it has also served to catalyze a form of litigation since the advent of decisions by the United States Supreme Court in the 1960s and 1970s that moved away from our historical view that the freedom of religion was not the freedom from religion, and it has become a tool, I say very respectfully, to their cause. It has become the tool of elements who would advance a radical secularist view of the public square in America, and who have used the opportunity to access the public Treasury in the form of attorney's fees to not only finance massive litigations against government entities to scrub our public square of any vestige of reference to God or reference to the religious heritage of the American people, but also it has been used to prevent that day in court from happening.

The availability of massive amounts of attorney's fees have caused many municipalities, even some in Indiana, to relent in their fight to preserve the public display of the Ten Commandments or references to God in the public square because of the local government's inability to access Federal funds to pay their attorney's fees.

So in a very real sense the unintended consequence of the 1976 law was to take a playing field that was imbalanced to one side and make it imbalanced to the other. And today, because of Congressman John Hostettler's leadership in the Public Expression of Religion Act, we are leveling the playing field once again. We are saying to every American who believes in their heart that ``In God We Trust'' should not appear in the well of this Congress as it does behind me, that every American who thinks there should be no reference to religion in the public square whatsoever, it says to every American whose view of the Constitution is that the Establishment Clause is somehow an antiseptic to remove any reference to our religious heritage in this country, it says: The courts are open to you, but the Treasury is not.

As we might say in Indiana, where I was born and raised and lived, that, to put it very plainly, I may fight to the death for your right to hold the views that you hold, but that doesn't mean that I have to pay for it.

And because of Congressman Hostettler's leadership on the Public Expression of Religion Act, we say the courthouse doors are open to anyone who would challenge the public expression by local governors or government officials the acknowledgement of the deep and rich heritage over hundreds and hundreds of years of the American people, who we would say, in this instance, in these cases, the public treasury is not open. Raise your money, bring your challenges, and let the court work its will.

Mr. Speaker, a Nation without borders is not a Nation. In recent days, this Congress has taken important first steps to restore operational control of our borders. I was pleased to support the Secure Fence Act of 2006 and additional measures that we will bring to the floor of this Congress this week.

American people want Congress to put border security first, Mr. Speaker. But border security first does not mean border security only. Congress must secure our borders, but the American people know that securing our borders is a necessary but insufficient solution to the crisis of illegal immigration.

After we secure our borders, Congress must also enact a new temporary worker program, without amnesty, and without creating a new Federal bureaucracy, and I believe we will. We must do no less than secure our border, but we must do more to ensure that we solve this domestic crisis in a manner consistent with law and order and the compassionate character of the great American Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding, and I thank him for his leadership on House Resolution 1000, providing for earmarking reform in the House of Representatives. I also feel moved to thank particularly the House majority leader, John Boehner, for his yeoman's leadership and keeping his word on this issue with Members in our effort to bring this modest but meaningful reform to the floor of the Congress.

Under Article I of the Constitution of the United States, the power of the purse is the power of the House of Representatives. And today we will not yield that power in any way. The Constitution gives this body the ability to spend the money of the American people in ways large and small. House Resolution 1000 simply requires that we earmark the earmarks.

Mr. Speaker, we actually had a cow farm when I was growing up, and I know what an earmark is. It is a tag in the ear of a cow that will tell you whose cow it is. Well, the reality is under the rules that have developed over generations here in the House, we can add provisions to legislation, authorizing bills and appropriation bills,

without adding names. Today by H. Res. 1000 we will simply require that we earmark the earmarks.

Transparency promotes accountability, and this institution would do well to embrace this modest but meaningful step toward greater transparency.

As Jeff Flake, a great leader on this issue, said earlier, it saddens me to see evidence of the low regard that millions of Americans hold the institution of the Congress. It is an historic institution filled with men and women of both parties of goodwill and integrity. By adopting this modest but meaningful earmarking reform today, we will take an important step toward restoring public confidence in the fundamental integrity of our legislative process at the national level.

I urge my colleagues in both parties to say ``yes'' to transparency and greater accountability, say ``yes'' to earmarking reform.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, on September 11 I saw things I never thought I would live to see and pray I will never see again. I was here on Capitol Hill standing under a tree at 10 in the morning as I saw columns of smoke billow out of the Pentagon in what was the first attack on this Nation's capital since 1812. People were running in every direction. Jet fighter aircraft were at virtually treetop level. It was the sight and sounds of war.

And then 10 days later I accompanied more than 100 of my colleagues as we walked through the ashes of Ground Zero and saw the horror of what for all the world was the front door of hell in the ashes of the World Trade Center.

I saw the firefighters launching themselves into a scene there and at the Pentagon that was still aflame. I have seen Americans launch themselves into recruiting stations to respond in the last 5 years. And I also saw one unusual and extraordinary sight which has shaped my career since, and that is on that day, September 11, 2001, I saw Republicans and Democrats completely set aside their differences and work in the national interest, to pray together, to sing together, to set aside whatever might be contentious among us and do that which is necessary to heal our Nation and to launch a counter strike against our enemies. For that day truly, there were no Republicans in Washington, there were no Democrats in Washington, there were just Americans. I live to see that, and it gives me hope as we go into the contentious debates of our time.

In my four trips to Afghanistan and Iraq, I have also seen the extraordinary bravery and commitment of the American soldier. I am convinced that we are winning the war on terror because of the courage and valor of the men and women in uniform, both home and abroad. It is to them that I will close my remarks today.

When I went home that afternoon on September 11 and sat down with my three small children and wife to tell them what was happening, that we were likely going to war, Audrey, my 6-year-old daughter, grabbed me by the leg and said, ``Daddy, if we have to make a war, do you have to go?''

I buckled down on my knee and I gave her a hug and I told her, ``No, daddy's too old.'' But not a day has gone by in the last 5 years, Mr. Speaker, that I haven't thought about all of the daddies and moms and sons and daughters who answered that with a ``yes,'' and some of them with a ``yes'' that rings into eternity.

And so we remember those that fell on 9/11, the victims. We remember the brave soldiers who have fought the war since, and we commend them this day as we remember 9/11.

Mr. Speaker, in my lifetime, no issue has so disturbed our domestic tranquility than immigration reform.

Thanks to the leadership of this House, the American people are convinced we have a serious problem with illegal immigration and the American people know the Senate bill granting amnesty to 12M illegal immigrants is not the answer.

There are many ideas of how we can move forward. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas and I have proposed a compromise that would:

--put border security first and reject amnesty;

--after 2 years of border security only, our plan would set up a new guest worker program using American employment firms outside the United States;

--illegal immigrants would be required to leave the country and apply at these Ellis Island Centers by submitting to a background check and health screening before being issued a 2-year guest worker visa. They also would have to pass an English course to renew it; and

--tough employer sanctions would drive companies and employees into this new system.

Pence-Hutchison puts border security first, and once that is accomplished, it creates a new guest worker program outside the United States without amnesty and without creating a new federal bureaucracy.

Some in Congress think we have done enough. I believe we must do more. Even in this contentious election year, the American people expect us to ``be strong, courageous and do the work'' they elected this Congress to do.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to highlight the importance of basic life-saving skills such as CPR and the Heimlich Maneuver. One of my constituents, Monty Brooks, recognizes the importance of these skills following a frightening experience in August.

On this warm Indiana evening, Monty Brooks and his 9-year-old daughter, Carrington, were spending time together on their porch. Carrington had prepared some leftovers from dinner and after a lull in the conversation, Monty realized something was terribly wrong with his daughter. Carrington clutched her neck indicating that she was choking.

Mr. Speaker, Monty Brooks knows first-hand the importance of basic life-saving skills. Monty is the director of health and safety for the Hoosier Heartland Chapter of the American Red Cross. His experience with Carrington only serves to highlight his longtime understanding that these skills are important.

Monty Brooks put his basic life-saving knowledge to use on that warm August evening. He performed the Heimlich Maneuver on Carrington, dislodging the food and allowing her to breathe freely once again.

I rejoice with Monty Brooks that Carrington is well after this frightening episode. I also commend Monty for his dedication to educating and training others in basic life-saving skills through the American Red Cross preventing the unnecessary deaths of his fellow Hoosiers. Along with Monty Brooks, I encourage Hoosiers and all Americans to get trained and become familiar with basic life-saving skills.

Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity today to join President George W. Bush at the White House, along with colleagues from the House and Senate and, most poignantly, with the families of victims of September 11 as President Bush gave a forceful and fact-based address about the war on terror.

The President declassified today a CIA program that over the last 5 years has resulted in securing vital information in the war on terror from some of the most nefarious characters that we captured, along with Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and others.

The President also announced today that those same individuals, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was the mastermind behind the attack on our country 5 years ago this Monday, will now be transferred to Guantanamo Bay, and the process will begin of facing a military tribunal. Five years hence, we have proven that justice will not sleep for the terrorists in this country.

America remembers 9/11, and today our Commander in Chief spoke truth to the world that justice will prevail.

Mr. Speaker, I come to this floor wishing for a different choice than the one before me. The bill under debate provides permanent estate and gift tax relief--something I have long supported. That is why the choice before us tonight is so difficult. While this bill will provide relief to American farmers and small business owners, it also will do much harm to those very same people and the people they employ because of the irresponsible 41% increase in the minimum wage that it also contains. This increase in the minimum wage is excessive and will hurt the poor and those entering the workforce by reducing the number of entry level positions in our economy.

Minimum wage increases raise unemployment among teenagers, minorities and part-time workers. The minimum wage violates fundamental free market economics. It costs jobs, and I cannot support policies that will take jobs from those who need a paycheck the most.

Any proposal containing a minimum wage increase should be jobs- neutral. If the federal government increases costs for businesses with one hand, it is only right that it reduce costs for businesses with the other. And while this legislation does contain good tax extensions, in totality, it is not jobs-neutral. This increase in the minimum wage will cost American jobs, and I cannot support it.

Additionally, this bill contains unrelated elements added during the eleventh hour. A budget-busting provision is included that converts the Abandoned Mine Land program from discretionary to mandatory spending. The result is an increase in the deficit of $3.9 billion over the next 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to stand before you tonight and say that I could support this bill because more than anyone, I want permanent death tax relief. But, I cannot in good conscience vote for a bill that also contains an excessive minimum wage increase that will hurt small businesses and cost American jobs. And, I cannot vote for a bill that busts the budget by nearly $4 billion over 10 years. Regretfully, Mr. Speaker, for those reasons I stand tonight in opposition to this bill.

Mr. Speaker, a tragic tale of death and sniper shootings over the weekend has turned into a bittersweet success story for law enforcement in my home state of Indiana.

Early Sunday morning, after leaving a relative's hunting party on a Washington County farm, Zachariah Blanton, a 17-year-old Gaston, Indiana native, committed four shootings--two along Interstate 65 in Jackson County and another pair along Interstate 69 in Delaware County.

The previous two left Jerry Ross, age 40 of New Albany, dead and another man injured.

Mr. Speaker, this tale is all too familiar to those living in the 50- mile radius of this very Chamber from which we speak today. For it was October of 2002 when the hearts of the American people were troubled by barbaric acts of terror that felled innocent women, men, and even children, in the vicinity of our Nation's Capital.

Whatever the motivation, the acts of John Allen Muhammad in Washington and Zachariah Blanton are acts of terror. These perpetrators defied civilized behavior and believed they could defy the finest local, State, and Federal law enforcement in the world. How wrong they were.

Mr. Speaker, Zachariah Blanton was apprehended by Indiana law enforcement on Tuesday of this week, just two days after his heinous crimes.

Compared to the sad slayings that paralyzed Washington for nearly two months in 2002, one can only stand in honor and amazement at the quick end to the events of this week in the Hoosier State.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud the coordination efforts of the Indiana State Police with Jackson County officials, but rise with particular deference to Sheriff George Sheridan and his Delaware County Department of whom the residents of East Central Indiana are most proud this morning.

Mr. Speaker, the nation is watching Delaware County and Sheriff George Sheridan, and the nation is impressed.

On behalf of the residents of east central Indiana, I offer a heartfelt thanks to Sheriff George Sheridan and all law enforcement officials across the Hoosier State. God Bless you for your hard work.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding and I thank him from my heart, as a dad of three small children, for Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner, once again, tenaciously achieving measurable gains in the law to protect our families and protect our children in the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act.

I am particularly humbled because title V of this legislation is derived from a bill that I introduced in Congress, the first session, the Child Pornography Prevention Act. As the title states, the intent of my legislation is to prevent American children from becoming victims of pornography because, as we know, child pornography is the fuel that fires the wicked hearts of child predators, in addition to abusing the children involved.

A main tenet of my bill is the addition of language that will fix a technicality that so-called home pornographers have used to evade Federal prosecutions, and it is in this legislation.

Another element of my bill is the addition of a new section to the criminal code, section 2257(a) which adds a recordkeeping requirement that will force producers of sexually explicit material to keep records of the names and ages of their subjects when they are engaged in simulated sexual activity, another measurable gain in the law for children.

Providing law enforcement with the tools to combat child pornography contained in this legislation is a much needed and overdue step that must be taken to protect our kids from those in society who have no decency, no conscience and no shame.

I urge passage of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. It is time to protect our kids. Today, thanks to the leadership of Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner, we take a giant step toward doing just that.

Mr. Speaker, before us today is the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (H.R. 4472). I am a strong supporter of this legislation, and urge and command Chairman Sensenbrenner for tenaciously acting measurable gains for families and children again.

Title V of this legislation is derived from a bill that I introduced in the First Session of this Congress, the Child Pornography Prevention Act. As the title states, the intent of my legislation is to prevent American children from becoming victims of pornography because as we know, Mr. Speaker, the fuel that fires the wicked hearts of child predators is child pornography.

Every day in America, children are exploited in pornography-- sometimes by those closest to them in their homes. In the home, children are forced to pose for pornographic pictures or act in pornographic videos by family members, family friends, caretakers and other trusted individuals who violate that trust. These pictures and videos are posted on the Internet or surreptitiously spread to sexual predators.

A main tenet of my legislation is the addition of language that will fix a technicality that so-called home pornographers have used to evade federal prosecution on child pornography charges. Home pornographers use digital cameras, Polaroid cameras and video cameras to make pornographic pictures and videos of children, and they download child pornography from the Internet onto their home computers. My legislation makes clear that federal prosecutions of home pornographers can proceed in federal courts because their activities impact interstate commerce. This is a fix that must be made now in order to protect children at home.

Another element of my bill is the addition of a section to the criminal code, Section 2257A, which adds a record-keeping requirement that will force producers of sexually explicit material to keep records of the names and ages of their subjects when they are engaged in simulated sexual activity.

Congress previously enacted the PROTECT Act of 2003 against the background of Department of Justice regulations applying section 2257 to both primary and secondary producers. That fact, along with the Act's specific reference to the regulatory definition that existed at the time, reflected Congress' agreement with the Department of Justice's view that it already had the authority to regulate secondary procedures under the applicable law.

A federal court in Colorado, however, recently enjoined the Department from enforcing the statute against secondary producers, relying on an earlier Tenth Circuit precedent holding that Congress had not authorized the Department to regulate secondary producers. These decisions conflicted with an earlier D.C. Circuit decision upholding Congress' authority to regulate secondary producers. Section 502 of the bill is meant to eliminate any doubt that section 2257 applies both to primary and secondary producers, and to reflect Congress' agreement with the regulatory approach adopted by the Department of Justice in enforcing the statute.

My bill goes a step further by requiring that records be kept for lascivious exhibitions--nude photographs and displays. No child should be used in either nude pictures or sexually explicit materials because these items only serve to inflame the prurient interest in child predators. Requiring that records be kept will serve as a deterrent.

Additionally, my bill requires that the records be made available to investigators for inspection. Failure to keep the records or allow inspections is a criminal offense. By strengthening the law in this manner, we will provide both a strong deterrent to the use of children in sexually explicit materials and the necessary tools to law enforcement to investigate and prosecute those who are not deterred.

Finally, the legislation expands the ability of investigators and prosecutors to pursue the people who distribute child pornography. These distributors also will be required to follow the record-keeping provision, and this will provide law enforcement with a powerful tool to use against them. These are devious people who work in cohorts with pornographers to sell child pornography, but who currently can work out of sham corporations to avoid prosecution. My legislation will empower prosecutors with the ability to charge and convict these people.

Providing law enforcement with the tools to combat child pornography contained in my legislation is a much-needed and overdue step that must be taken to protect our children from those in our society who have no decency and know no shame.

Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. It is time to protect our children, and today we take a significant step toward that goal.

Mr. Speaker, before us today is the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (H.R. 4472). I am a strong supporter of this legislation, and urge its passage.

Title V of this legislation is derived from a bill that I introduced in the First Session of this Congress, the Child Pornography Prevention Act. As the title states, the intent of my legislation is to prevent American children from becoming victims of pornography because as we know, Mr. Speaker, the fuel that fires the wicked hearts of child predators is child pornography.

Every day in America, children are exploited in pornography-- sometimes by those closest to them in their homes. In the home, children are forced to pose for pornographic pictures or act in pornographic videos by family members, family friends, caretakers and other trusted individuals who violate that trust. These pictures and videos are posted on the Internet or surreptitiously spread to sexual predators.

A main tenet of my legislation is the addition of language that will fix a technicality that so-called home pornographers have used to

evade federal prosecution on child pornography charges. Home pornographers use digital cameras, Polaroid cameras and video cameras to make pornographic pictures and videos of children, and they download child pornography from the Internet onto their home computers. My legislation makes clear that federal prosecutions of home pornographers can proceed in federal courts because their activities impact interstate commerce. This is a fix that must be made now in order to protect children at home.

Another element of my bill is the addition of a new section to the criminal code, Section 2257A, which adds a record-keeping requirement that will force producers of sexually explicit material to keep records of the names and ages of their subjects when they are engaged in simulated sexual activity.

Congress previously enacted the PROTECT Act of 2003 against the background of Department of Justice regulations applying section 2257 to both primary and secondary producers. That fact, along with the Act's specific reference to the regulatory definition that existed at the time, reflected Congress' agreement with the Department of Justice's view that it already had the authority to regulate secondary producers under the applicable law.

A federal court in Colorado, however, recently enjoined the Department from enforcing the statute against secondary producers, relying on an earlier Tenth Circuit precedent holding that Congress had not authorized the Department to regulate secondary producers. These decisions conflicted with an earlier D.C. Circuit decision upholding Congress' authority to regulate secondary producers. Section 502 of the bill is meant to eliminate any doubt that section 2257 applies both to primary and secondary producers, and to reflect Congress' agreement with the regulatory approach adopted by the Department of Justice in enforcing the statute.''

My bill goes a step further by requiring that records be kept for lascivious exhibitions nude photographs and displays. No child should be used in either nude pictures or sexually explicit materials because these items only serve to inflame the prurient interest in child predators. Requiring that records be kept will serve as a deterrent. Additionally, my bill requires that the records be made available to investigators for inspection. Failure to keep the records or allow inspections is a criminal offense. By strengthening the law in this manner, we will provide both a strong deterrent to the use of children in sexually explicit materials and the necessary tools to law enforcement to investigate and prosecute those who are not deterred.

Finally, the legislation expands the ability of investigators and prosecutors to pursue the people who distribute child pornography. These distributors also will be required to follow the record-keeping provision, and this will provide law enforcement with a powerful tool to use against them. These are devious people who work in cohorts with pornographers to sell child pornography, but who currently can work out of sham corporations to avoid prosecution. My legislation will empower prosecutors with the ability to charge and convict these people.

Providing law enforcement with the tools to combat child pornography contained in my legislation is a much-needed and overdue step that must be taken to protect our children from those in our society who have no decency and know no shame.

Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. It is time to protect our children, and today we take a significant step toward that goal.

Madam Speaker, President Ronald Reagan famously said, ``We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life, the unborn, without diminishing the value of all human life.''

Yesterday the United States Senate passed a bill that authorizes the use of Federal tax dollars to fund the destruction of human embryos for scientific research.

While supporters of the bill argue this debate is a battle between science and ideology, that really misses the point.

If the Castle-DeGette bill returns to the Congress tonight, we will simply decide whether Congress should take the taxpayer dollars of millions of prolife Americans and use them to fund the destruction of human embryos for research.

You see, I believe that life begins at conception; that a human embryo is human life. I believe it is morally wrong to create human life to destroy it for research, and I believe it is morally wrong to take the tax dollars of millions of prolife Americans who believe that life is sacred and use it to fund the destruction of human embryos for research.

This debate then tonight will not be about what an embryo is. It will be about who we are as a Nation and whether we respect fully half of our country. On behalf of those millions of prolife Americans, Mr. President, veto this bill.