Floor Statements

Offered By: Mr. Rogers of Michigan

Amendment No. 19: Page 39, line 21, after the first dollar

amount insert ``(reduced by $4,700,000)''.

Page 39, line 25, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced

by $4,600,000)''.

Page 40, line 10, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced

by $4,700,000)''.

Page 45, line 16, after the dollar amount insert

``(increased by $14,000,000)''.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, Iraq is the central front in the war on terrorism, despite what you hear and, despite the pointing out of problems in a very difficult task, we ought not to be asking politicians here in Washington, we ought to be listening to our enemy.

Osama bin Laden, quote, this third world war is raging in Iraq. The whole world is watching this war. It will end in victory and glory, or it will end in misery and humiliation.

With what you have talked about earlier, Mr. Chairman, from that letter from Zawahiri to al Zarqawi, he went on to say that prophet in the heart of Islam world, specifically Egypt, neighboring states of the peninsula and Iraq, they have declared war against the United States and all those who seek to find democracy and peaceful solutions.

Terrorist Abu Nidal found safe haven in Iraq and was killed in Baghdad in 2002. Zarqawi and his network were operating in Baghdad and the Kurdish-controlled region of Iraq a year at least before the start of the war. As a matter of fact, from that base of operations, they executed the assassination of an American diplomat in Jordan in 2002.

Our troops found a suicide vest factory that had 800 suicide vests equipped and ready to go in south Baghdad in April of 2003. Iraq was on the State Department sponsor of terrorism list. Saddam Hussein paid $25,000 cash to the family of suicide bombers in Israel.

You know, with every sacrifice made by our great American soldiers, for every girl that now walks in Iraq and Baghdad and goes to school, for every young mother that goes to a medical clinic to get treatment where there was none before, for every dead terrorist in Iraq, we make progress every day.

One platoon sergeant in Iraq, and I quote, I have yet to speak to an American here who thinks we are losing. Trust me, no soldier wants to be here. No one wants to cut and run either. Leaving would send the wrong signal to our enemies.

There are only two groups of people who want America to leave and withdraw in humiliation, Mr. Speaker, from Iraq.

President Bush met with the Shiia, the Sunnis, the Kurds just recently, just this last week. None of them, even the Sunnis, wanted the United States to leave. As a matter of fact, they asked for reassurance that we would stay with them in this difficult and tough struggle for freedom.

That would leave only the terrorists who want an early American withdrawal and some politicians in this town.

I would listen to what our enemies said when Zarqawi declared, ``We have declared a bitter war against the principle of democracy and all those who seek to enact it.'' They will kill American families at any given opportunity.

I would say, Mr. Speaker, that we should stand with our soldiers. We should stand with our families here that helped take the fight to the terrorists overseas. We should stand for victory, and we should stand with the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I am a little bit saddened by the comments of the gentleman from Illinois. You know, our enemies do not have a first Tuesday in November plan. They have a plan for a caliphate. They have well established themselves to murder Christians, Jews, Muslims, women, and children. They will behead you, they will shoot you, they will blow you up. They do not care.

To have the talk of rhetoric, because the electricity isn't where it is, let's come home in defeat; because the oil isn't going exactly the way we would like it, let's come home in defeat; that is no standard for victory.

What is the standard for victory? Where were we 4 years ago? Let us look at it in the global war, this World War III that Osama bin Laden declared in his own words. Pakistan, 4 years ago, was the only government supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan. They were working against the United States in Afghanistan. They supported, financed, gave as much comfort as they could to the enemy to produce terrorists, to attack Americans and Westerners all over the world. In Iraq, we know that Zarqawi was there a year before the war; that they used that operation to kill an American in Jordan, a diplomat of great service to our country. In Libya, they had a nuclear weapons program and self declared they would share it with anyone.

So 4 years later, not because I gave a great speech on the House floor but because very brave men and women put on the uniform and fought the terrorists with a military uniform so our children wouldn't have to fight it in a school uniform here at home, and now what has happened? Pakistan has joined us in the fight against terror. There are our allies just 4 years later in hunting down al Qaeda.

Afghanistan is now an ally in the war on terror. Their intelligence services, their military, as a matter of fact just this morning, launched a 10,000 troop crackdown on terrorists. This morning. Last week, Iraq launched a 70,000 security personnel crackdown on terrorists. This week, they are our allies now in the war on terror.

Libya. That is the components of the nuclear weapons program of Libya. It is now in the possession of the United States of America. They gave it to us not because we stood here and debated but because we had brave men and women with boots on the ground who showed courage and commitment and said we will take the fight to you. We will not allow you to take the fight to us.

Which country would you have go back? Which one would you say, ah, it wasn't important that they became an ally? Four Muslim nations have stood up against the ravages and the terror and the brutality of terror today because of actions our brave soldiers take overseas.

So don't get confused in every little problem that happens, and there are a lot of them. Sir, you served in Vietnam. You know this challenge. They are great, they are hard, and sometimes they are disappointing, yes. But at the end of the day, every great victory, every great victory ends with our heads held high and safety and security for the United States.

Let us not come home in humiliation. Let us not tell all of those families that their loved ones died in vain because we have a November time frame and not a time frame for victory.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, on the legislative day of May 19, 2006 the House voted on a procedural motion to H.R. 5385, the Fiscal 2007 Military Construction-VA Appropriations Act. On House rollcall vote No. 173, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the eighth graders at KIPP Ujima Village Academy, a top performing middle school in northwest Baltimore. KIPP is an acronym for Knowledge is Power Program and is part of a network of free college-preparatory public schools in under-resourced communities throughout the United States. Established in the summer of 2002 in Baltimore, these eighth graders at KIPP are recognized as the first graduating class at this outstanding school.

These students have spent the past 4 years completing a rigorous program. The school day begins at 7:30 a.m. and ends at 5:30 p.m. They also participate in a mandatory 3-week summer program and attend educational activities on Saturdays throughout the school year.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that these students and their families face challenges, with more than 87 percent qualifying for free or reduced-price lunches. Yet, there are no entrance requirements or selection criteria. The students are chosen through a lottery of all students who live in the zone and want to attend the school.

The results, though, are remarkable: Students excel academically, develop confidence and leadership skills, and experience the world through local and out-of-State field lessons. And after 4 years at KIPP, many of these students have earned acceptance to competitive college preparatory high schools throughout Maryland. In fact, KIPP Ujima Village Academy has one of only two Baltimore City public middle schools that achieved Adequate Yearly Progress in 2005.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join with me in recognizing the KIPP Ujima Village Academy eighth graders on their graduation and in wishing them the best of luck in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good friend and colleague, a former veteran and great servant to his country, Mr. Reyes, for your help and your impetus and your leadership on this particular bill. We could not have done it without you and your leadership. Thank you, sir.

To Chairman Buyer, thank you very much for your time and counsel and your hard work and dedicating your staff to making this happen here this evening.

To Senators Frist and Craig, thank you very, very much for your quick action, your good work, your wise counsel and actually improving the bill a tad bit as they send it back to this Chamber.

The majority leader and the Speaker deserve our thanks as well for understanding the importance of this. We do not do things fast around here, and I think our Founding Fathers thought this was a pretty good idea. But this is one that we came together on a bipartisan effort and realized this we must quickly rise up to stand with the families who are grieving with the loss of great American patriots.

I just want to tell quickly, Mr. Speaker, the story of why this happened and why we got here, at least one example of many examples.

I visited a young family down at Brook Army Medical Center in Texas. Three great American soldiers who were from Michigan, a National Guard unit, were attacked by an IED and were recovering from some very severe wounds. You go down and you get to meet their families, and they are bonding together to support their loved ones who are literally fighting for their lives every single day.

Unfortunately, of course, at that time, SGT Joshua Youmans succumbed to his wounds and died. Prior to that, just a week before, after he had come back, he got to hold in his hands for the first time his daughter before he passed away. His wife was the most courageous woman I have ever met during that whole time. So we gather up to go to the celebration of the life of SGT Joshua Youmans, a time to celebrate his service, his sacrifice, the family's grieving, a community's thanks and appreciation for service given to their country.

When you pull up, you see this pretty hateful stuff. On the outside of the church were protestors who were taunting and harassing the family, this young widow, her young daughter McKenzie, their family, trying to walk in and give some dignity and respect and celebration to a life of a great American who signed up on his own to defend this Nation because he believed and a family's celebration of their love for him and the joys that they experienced in his short time on this Earth.

What a contrast it was. When she got up to give the eulogy for her husband, protesters outside yelling hateful chants, harassing, saying, ``Thank God for the death of SGT Joshua Youmans,'' flags wrapped around their feet as they paraded and shouted.

Through all of that, this very courageous woman who had just lost the love of her life gets up to eulogize her husband. One side of the church is packed with the National Guard unit, some of the toughest, greatest Americans you will ever have the privilege to meet. Without a dry eye in the house, she proceeded to tell of her love for her husband and how proud she was that she was an Army wife and how she could not wait to look in the eyes of her daughter and tell her about the great patriot, a great American, a great hero, her father, the one she would never get to know.

We knew that day that we must do better by those families. They deserve the right to bury their loved ones in peace and with dignity. This is really America's time to stand up and say to every member of the United States military, to every family who worries every single day, this is America's time to put their arms around those families and protect them and give them the right that they deserve to peacefully and with dignity pay their last respects to great American heroes.

I want to thank all of the folks who have worked so hard on this, even my staff member Andy Keiser, who dedicated an immense amount of time to make this happen. This happens shortly before Monday. What Monday is, is that day where we stand up and say, we remember and we are thankful for all the sacrifices for all of those who came before us to make this country great and have given their lives in defense of our Nation.

This bill is important for so many reasons. It protects the families here. It certainly protects the first amendment here as well. But it also sends a very clear signal to the men and women risking their lives today that we will not forsake you. We will stand by you. And we will give you your last rights, God forbid it should happen. And we will stand with the families of America who have lost so much and deserve our love, our respect and America's dignity.

Thank you all for participating in this. And again, I just want to thank you, Mr. Reyes, for your hard work, your dedication and your passion for this issue and your passion for America's soldiers. Thanks for doing it.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Buyer for his counsel and his leadership working through this bill. I greatly appreciate it. I know certainly the families do as well.

To my good friend and colleague, Silvestre Reyes, thank you for lending your leadership and your voice and assistance and counsel on this very important piece of legislation. Thank you for your service, not only for the military but the Border Patrol and now to the people of your district back home. I certainly appreciate it.

Mr. Chairman, this started for me when I attended the funeral of Sergeant Joshua Youmans, a very brave and great American who gave his life defending freedom in Iraq; and as I arrived to the funeral to the chants and the taunting and some of the most vile things I had ever heard, it was almost staggering to me that someone would take the time and energy to show up and preach that kind of hateful speech upon some very vulnerable individuals as they went into the church to mourn the loss of a great American patriot.

What struck me that day is this very young widow who got before a very packed church service to lay her honored husband to rest and told the story about how this soldier, before he passed away, had the privilege of holding his daughter for the first and only time. She talked about how proud she was of her husband and what he had done for his country, how proud she was to be an Army wife and how she could not wait to tell her young daughter, McKenzie, the courage and sacrifice of a great American, her husband, Joshua Youmans.

You juxtapose that with what they had to go through, this gauntlet of terror, people taunting and jeering and saying the most hateful things you possibly can imagine, and I walked out of that church that day knowing that we as Americans can and must do better by these families. This is their chance to stand up and mourn the loss of a family member.

A father once told me that at a service of his son he knew that this was the moment between sanity and insanity for him, and you can imagine that when people stop by and grieve and support and love and comfort these families, when America steps up to put their arms around these families to say that we love you, we support you and we respect you and we appreciate your sacrifice, it means the difference in that father returning to sanity after the burial of his son or, in this case, the burial of the husband.

It is so important that we stand by the men and women who sacrifice so much, and this bill does that. It protects the first amendment. They can

still preach their vile hatred, if they want to do that an hour before and an hour after; but, again, it also creates a bubble. It creates a hub of American people around these families to give them the right, which they so richly deserve, to grieve in peace and have the dignity and the honor to lay their loved ones to rest in peace.

I can say it no better, Mr. Speaker, than so many people who e-mailed me, almost 30,000 people from Baghdad Iraq to Brighton, Michigan, my hometown and told stories of why this was so important, some of them very moving.

I will read you one now: ``Over the last 6 months my unit has taken over 30 casualties in some of the most vicious areas south of Baghdad. The thought of their families having to face protestors after their memorials incites a rage I have never known before. These protestors mock all that we have accomplished here, the lives that have been forever changed, and the lives that have been lost, using our most valued doctrines of faith and freedom as their defense. I cannot thank you, and Congress, enough for your dedication to this effort. I can only hope that your colleagues will join you in this battle. Mr. Speaker, so many have. Signed, Sergeant Ashley A. Voss, Baghdad, Iraq.''

I will share another letter from a grieving mother.

``Thank you for creating and seeking to help grieving families of our American heroes. My husband and I support this act 100 percent. Our son, Sergeant Trevor Blumberg, was killed in action in Iraq on September 14, 2003. We know the pain and horror in losing a heroic son; no less than to have to face cruel, inhumane people who cannot dignify your time of grief. Please continue to place these families in America's hearts and minds. Nothing less is deserved.''

That was from Janet M. Blumberg, a proud parent of an American hero.

Thanks to all who support the act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the efforts of Caledonia Township and the American Red Cross to save the life of Sheriff's Deputy Keith Hansen, who was severely injured while serving in the line of duty.

Deputy Keith Hansen was critically injured when a suspect crashed his vehicle into Hansen's patrol car during a high speed chase in Caledonia Township. He received multiple severe injuries in the crash.

To survive, Deputy Hansen required more units of blood than the hospital could provide. The American Red Cross and the citizens of the Caledonia Township responded with an immediate blood drive and fund- raiser. Within one day, the community donated more than fifty units of blood and collected a significant amount of money to help save the life of Deputy Keith Hansen.

The efforts to save Deputy Hansen's life reflect the best of the American spirit; neighbors uniting to save the life of an injured officer who is sworn to protect them.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Deputy Keith Hansen for his service, and the citizens of Caledonia Township and the American Red Cross for helping to save his life. They are truly deserving of our respect and admiration.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to compliment you, your staff, and that of both the ranking member and the majority on a job well done on this bill.

The challenges that we face came from the 1990s, and many of the problems the ranking member even pointed out were a different direction set, a different policy set from where they wanted our intelligence services to go. They went so far as to say back then that we don't even want you to talk to somebody who is a bad character or may be an embarrassment to the United States. So they did the honorable thing; they shut down their human operations. They followed the law and the policies of the United States. If you would have asked an intelligence official back then, they would have told you it was a bad idea. We shouldn't have done it.

Today, through the leadership of this committee and this chairman, and the folks who are out in the field today trying to rebuild our human intelligence, it is nothing short of miraculous. These people are incredibly talented, and I think we miss that sometimes. We miss it in the halls here and in the debates in committee. And by the way, we have debated ad nauseam many of the issues brought up today on these things, as we should in that context. But these are great people who could do a myriad of other things: make more money. A lot of them came to the CIA, and they took pay cuts because they believe in what they are doing. And they are risking their lives today for this country and for our safety.

I had the great privilege to reenlist a young soldier in a very remote part of the world in a small, dinky little room with all the windows taped up and with a small American flag hanging behind us because that is all we could find, because he believed. He said, yeah, this is hardship, but I believe in my country more than I believe in anything.

So when we talk about the problems of intelligence and the policies of the past, let us not forget one thing: when you bump into somebody whose morale is low, it isn't because of the work that they are doing. They are off the charts excited about making a difference for their country. It is because policymakers back here use words like ``illegal wiretap,'' even though they have never been briefed into the program at all and have no concept of what it is; because they say ``Abu Ghraib'' like it paints everybody who has ever been involved in an interrogation as doing something wrong and breaking the law.

Shame on us if we allow this to continue to happen and affect the morale of people who are risking their lives on work that is so precious to our safety, security and liberty. We ought to applaud them today, and this bill, I think, does that.

Mr. Chairman, again I want to applaud you and thank you for your work. And I want to caution all the Members of this Chamber: we shouldn't be more worried about winning in November than we should be about winning the war on terror. We should stand with these people, tell them we are proud of them, tell them we are proud of the work they are doing, and thank you for signing up to defend the greatest Nation on the face of the Earth.

Let this squabbling go by. We know that the folks who have come down on this floor, and it has shocked me today, Mr. Chairman, that some would even come out here after getting the full brief and describe a program in terms that they didn't describe it in the privacy and the security and with the confidence of previous briefings. This is the wrong time to do that.

Let us continue to work together. We have done it so well in those committees. I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to standing up for the very people who risk their lives today defending this great country and going after probably the toughest enemy we have ever seen.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the accomplishments of Viola Van Dorin, who served in the armed forces as a nurse during the Second World War.

Viola Van Dorin, as well as her late husband, Forrest Van Dorin, both valued their patriotic obligation to enlist in our nation's military shortly after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. After her exemplary service in the Army Nurse Corps, Viola devoted herself to preserving the memory of World War II by donating more than 240 items to the Michigan Historical Museum in Lansing. She currently lives in Jackson, Michigan.

Violet began her career as a nurse, graduating from the Sparrow Hospital School of Nursing in 1935. She worked at the Michigan State College Hospital, and then moved on to private practice with Dr. Kenneth Hodges and Dr. Kenneth Johnson. She excelled as both an office receptionist and an assistant to the physicians. Vi had the opportunity to even star in a film during the prewar period, a documentary called The Case History of Lucy X, which was the first to educate the public and medical professionals on the contagious disease tuberculosis.

In 1942, Vi was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the Army Nurse Corps and assigned to Torney General Hospital in Palm Springs, California. There she met her future husband, then a dashing young Sergeant in the Army. They married on June 7, 1943, and their marriage lasted until Forrest's death in 2003.

In 1944, Vi was assigned to the 82nd General Hospital unit and transported to Wales where the unit helped rehabilitate wounded soldiers. Before the end of the War, Vi was promoted to First Lieutenant and received several citations: the American Theater Ribbon, three Overseas Service Bars and a Victory Medal. She and her husband were reunited in 1946, and they settled down in the Lansing area. She and Forrest had a son, Ken Van Dorin, as well as three grandchildren: Rebecca Louise, Natalie Ann and Robert Kenneth.

Violet's service in both the military and the medical field has demonstrated her commitment to serving our nation, caring for others, and preserving historical treasures. She should also be commended for her tireless devotion to preserving the memory of World War II and honoring the sacrifices of our veterans. Across Michigan's counties and communities, her legacy will be realized long into the future. I am pleased to know her remarkable story, and to share it with my Congressional colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Violet Van Dorin, a citizen and a veteran truly deserving of our respect and admiration.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the Cardoza amendment and thank the Member for working with us. This does improve the bill and makes very, very clear that we are going to have an expedited review for cancer-causing agents or reproductive effects or birth defects.

The reason we have an expedited review here, as we have said many times, those State laws in effect remain in effect until they get an affirmative ruling from the FDA, so those would remain in place until they get a scientific ruling from the FDA, and then we would have the benefit of that information shared with all 50 States, all 50 States' children, all 50 States' men and women who call America home.

I thank the gentleman for working with us and in supporting this fine bill.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, one of the things that we have heard over the course of this debate, and we have had lots of it, almost as many hours of debate as there are pages in the bill, one of the things that we realized along the way is that there was concern about the bioterrorism. We firmly believe that the bill is adequate to deal with those issues. But to try to make sure everybody had a comfort level, we felt it was important to at least acknowledge that we were going to have the DHS and the HHS sign off on this legislation before it takes effect, that there would be no hindrance in defense of bioterrorism when it comes to our food supply. It is not a difficult thing, it is really a commonsense measure. We hope that alleviates some of the concerns we have heard mentioned, and I urge this body's support on this particular measure.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown).

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to make clear, there has been a lot of misinformation on that bill. I was a former FBI agent. One thing I learned, we used to call it the brick agent, the guy that is out on the street. You don't want to have to ask permission to take an exigent circumstance under control. You don't want to do have to do that.

This bill protects State, local and Federal Government action in cases of bioterrorism. We would have not have drafted a bill that would have done otherwise. I think what you are misinterpreting is the fact that once they take an action, they have to tell the FDA.

Why that is a good idea is because if they find there is an area where there is adulteration or poisoning, let us say, in Oregon or someplace else, there

might be another place that they can go and short-circuit that problem somewhere else in the country. It is good policy to have that notification that there was food that was adulterated or poisoned or a victim of bioterrorism that needs to be addressed at that national level. Take the action, tell the Feds so they can get that information across the rest of the country.

This is the right thing to do. I would urge the rejection of the Waxman amendment, which I think makes it more confusing, not less.

Mr. Chairman, this debate has certainly turned some interesting corners in the last few weeks, and again we are fast approaching as many hours debating as there are pages in the bill; 226 cosponsors and 59 Democrats joined in a bipartisan effort for national food safety labeling, a pretty powerful thing.

I commend Mr. Waxman for standing up and saying that we need national nutrition labels across the country. Why? Because the periodic tables in California are not any different than the periodic tables in Michigan or Maine or Florida, thank goodness. Science is science is science.

If we are going to protect pregnant women, if we are going to protect children, if we are going to protect mothers and fathers, if we are going to be for apple pie and Chevrolets, then we ought to do it in all 50 States, because a chicken grown in Louisiana is going to end up on a plate in Michigan; peas grown in Florida are going to end up in Louisiana; crawfish is going to come north and west and south, and we are going to send navy beans south, and we grow some good ones up there in Michigan. We have cherries that are going to go all across the country. This is an interstate matter.

I can't think of anything more important than our food safety. I have heard so much misinformation, even today. ``It is going to wipe out the laws to protect consumers.'' Wrong. This bill will not do that. ``The AGs are all for this bill for the right reason.'' Two of the issues that they talked about, preempted in their letter, were factually incorrect. It wasn't right. They were making the wrong argument. They were wrong.

Sulfites in Michigan, I happen to agree with you. And I will tell you what; if they are bad for Michigan citizens, I think they are bad for all of the other 49 States. If you are traveling to see your mother and you have a sulfite problem, if you are in Michigan today, you are fine. If you are in Ohio, you are not going to do so well. That is wrong. We can do better. This bill says we can do better.

I appreciate your passion for these issues. I don't think we are all that far apart about wanting food safety. I don't. I think how we get there is the problem.

So to have personal attacks and charges of backroom deals and those things is wrong. I think you know it is wrong. I think we have come to the point in the bill where you run out of facts and you start going in a different direction.

This bill is about protecting the food safety of every American in this great country. I think we ought to set aside maybe some of those differences that we have and acknowledge this is the right thing to do, like we did on nutritional labeling, like we did when we set the standards of what food gets to be called organic, a Federal standard. Why? Because we felt it was important enough to have a Federal standard for the protection of every American, not just California, not just Florida, not just Michigan.

Mr. Chairman, I have been a little disappointed with the tenor of debate at times in this particular engagement on something I think is so important and so critical to our safety, our food safety. I would urge this body to reject this amendment. It tries to carve something out to confuse consumers,

which is exactly where we don't want to go. That is just not a place that we want to go.

Mr. Chairman, I think we know at the end of the day this is the right thing to do. As a matter of fact, even in the letters sent in from State bureaucrats and the trial lawyers who oppose this bill they are saying, well, national labeling is okay, but we have some other concerns. Why? Because you can't make a good argument about why uniform labeling across the country for the protection of citizens and what they put in their body is a good idea. What do we hear? Adulterated food or poisoned food, you usurp our ability. No, that is protected in this bill.

If we are going to argue about what we are doing, let's argue on the facts, the correct facts. I think we all probably at the end of the day know this is the right thing to do.

I am going to ask you to step aside from what you think you need to do, step off your talking points, and say let us do something that is good for America. Don't worry about politics and all the other people that get involved sometimes outside of this building. Worry about what is right for the people of America. You will come to the right conclusion.

If you look at the facts that are wrong consistently in your arguments, you are going to be with us. I appreciate your care and concern. I know you are going to be with us at the end of the day.

I urge Members to vote in support of the bill and against the Capps amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's intention here. But, again, the facts of the case are this: The toxicity level of those fish, if it is higher or lower in any particular place, the threshold that makes it toxic is the same.

It is the same for people in California. It is the same for people in Texas. It is the same for people in Michigan. So what we are saying is, yes, this is a very important issue, and we need to make sure that we understand what that toxicity level is. And if there are unique challenges to any particular State, that State can apply through the FDA for that particular area. We have even built provisions into the bill to take into consideration.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida.

Well, again, the State can apply for those warning labels. There is nothing in here that prevents that from happening. And, again, if it is good for a woman in Texas or Missouri, or fill in the blank, it is good for all 50 States. The toxicity level will not change. The danger of that toxicity level will not change.

Let me tell you what else happens, and we need to be real careful about this, because we need to blend all science and remove emotion, because this is what we found happened. It was an interesting study, and I would encourage the gentlewoman to read it. It is the Tufts Health and Nutrition Letter that recently reported on several studies that documents some of the government warnings about mercury in fish can do more harm than good. It is interesting why.

They reported that the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis conducted this study, which concluded that if Americans cut their consumption of fish by one-sixth, as they did after the mercury-focused 2001 warning, an additional 8,000 deaths per year will occur annually from heart disease and stroke.

What we have found is that you have to got to blend good science, remove the emotion, because in some cases it would be appropriate to consume fish because it is healthy. There are some of those fish oils that are very good for you.

And what they found is, listen, you guys are doing more harm than good. You are killing 8,000 more people a year because we have an obesity problem in America, we have a health consumption problem in America. This is causing more harm than good. So we have got to find that balance.

I argue that good science is good science. Again, if we apply the periodic tables in all 50 States uniformly as we should, with scientific lenses, we are going to come to the right conclusion to protect every pregnant woman in America.

Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman and I want to thank our 59 Democrat cosponsors. I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns) and the chairmen, Chairman Barton and Chairman Deal, for the work that they have done on this very important piece of legislation.

I will say today that you will see great political theater, and I have the greatest respect for the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) and normally the great substantive debate that is put forth, but what we are going to see today are a lot of half-truths, or no truths at all or not even getting close to what this bill really does.

If you truly care about the health of the pregnant woman who is driving from Michigan to Florida to Illinois to meet family members all through that journey, then when she goes to that store to pick out some food, the label for her safety and the safety of her child ought to be the same. It should not be any different, the science that says that Illinois ought to label a safety provision in food; I cannot think of anything more important than the safety of our food ought to be the same.

Because you know what? Science in California or science in Alaska or science in Florida is no different. The periodic tables are the same in Michigan as they are in Florida, as they are in Maine, as they are in New York. If it rises to that level where somebody with good science and scientists who

care passionately about the safety of food and what we put in our bodies, to say we better tell people about this safety hazard, if it is good enough for one State's children, it is good enough for 50 States' children.

Matter of fact, one of the examples that my good friend mentioned about the Florida citrus example is not preemptive because it has nothing to do with food safety. You are going to hear this again and again and again today, that we are somehow doing something awful and not letting them protect their citizens. That simply is not true.

Matter of fact, if they have a standard based on good science that says, hey, we think that this food ought to have this warning label, then come to the FDA, show us the science, so we can share it with the rest of the country. Is that not the right thing to do? Do you not want to protect the children of all our 50 States? Absolutely you do.

So I will say to you, let us subside with the political theater, the half-truths, the scare tactics and say we are going to embrace what we know is the right thing to do, a single standard. It is very much a common-sense issue. You are not going to find any family in America who thinks we ought to have 50 States and 50 different organizations trying to determine what is safe in our food and what is not.

The same way we do with nutritional labeling, we went through and said the Federal Government better set some standards if we are going to have a consistency in all 50 States. It was widely supported, as this bill is bipartisanly supported.

We said, hey, we better set an organic standard so we can tell all of America that we have got one standard that rises to the ability to label it as organic. Today, we are saying food safety rises to that same level. Every American, every mother, understands it. I am sure my colleagues on the other side will as well.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the accomplishments of Richard DeVos, a Michigan citizen who exemplifies the American spirit of entrepreneurship and community leadership.

As Richard DeVos celebrates his 80th birthday, we reflect on his many achievements as the co-founder of Amway Corp. with his lifelong friend and business partner, the late Jay Van Andel, as well as his many selfless contributions to his state, community, and fellow citizens.

The author of three books, ``Believe!,'' ``Compassionate Capitalism,'' and ``Hope From My Heart: Ten Lessons for Life,'' Richard also is a public speaker with an international following. After receiving a heart transplant in 1997, he took on the additional responsibility of serving as chairman for the Speakers Bureau for United Network for Organ Sharing.

Richard has owned several professional sports franchises, including the Orlando Magic of the National Basketball Association.

Richard and his wife, Helen, support many hospitals, colleges and universities, arts organizations and Christian causes in their hometown of Grand Rapids, Michigan, and also numerous organizations in their adopted community in Central Florida.

A veteran of the U.S. Air Force, Richard and his wife Helen have raised four children and have 16 grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Richard DeVos as, on his 80th birthday, we acknowledge his life-long vision, compassion, and commitment to the American people and his home state of Michigan. Richard DeVos is truly deserving of our respect and admiration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the accomplishments of George Weeks, who is retiring after more than a quarter century of serving the people of Michigan as their journalistic eyes and ears on the comings and goings of their elected officials.

George Weeks is well-known and highly regarded in Michigan where, as a journalist, author of several books, and columnist, he has chronicled the actions of Michigan leaders in local, state and federal government.

During his career, George served in Michigan and in Washington, DC for 14 years as a reporter, bureau chief, and foreign correspondent for United Press International (UPI). In Washington, he covered the White House, State Department and Pentagon, and was a panelist on radio and television shows, including NBC's ``Meet the Press.''

From his days as a Michigan State University (MSU) student working as a stringer for both The Detroit News and UPI, George's career has spanned the terms of at least 7 U.S. Presidents and 5 Michigan Governors. In fact, George interrupted his journalistic career to work as press secretary and later Chief of Staff for Michigan Governor William Milliken.

Thankfully, George's love of journalism brought him back to The Detroit News as a columnist where he has become a Michigan icon, writing about politics as well as state and federal issues with insight and historical perspective. His commitment to quality journalism has made him a highly respected favorite with readers across the state.

The good news for Michigan readers and admirers of George is that while he may be stepping down as a regular Detroit News columnist, he still plans on writing occasional columns and also will be taking time to pursue some of his other writing interests.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring George Weeks for the role model he is to young journalists just starting out, and for his integrity and commitment as a leader in his chosen field. He is truly deserving of our respect and admiration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the accomplishments of Richard (Dick) Ryan on his retirement from the Detroit News where he has spent nearly 40 years reporting on Washington, writing about Presidents, politics and the people who make this Nation tick.

For the people of Michigan, Dick Ryan was the observer and scribe of many of America's most momentous national events, and many with international impact.

Dick was there when President Reagan called on Gorbachev to ``tear down'' the Berlin Wall, and when President Nixon stepped down and Michigan's own, Gerald R. Ford, was sworn in as President of the United States.

It was through Dick's eyes and with his words that Detroit News readers learned about more than 36 years of Presidential political campaigns, the visits of world leaders to the White House, America's part in world events, including the peace agreement signed at Camp David in the late 1970s, and of the demise of one President under impeachment and the survival of impeachment by another.

Highly respected by his readers and his peers, Dick leaves the Detroit News with a legacy that is unparalleled. His time as, in his own words, ``an eyewitness to history,'' is a remarkable record.

Dick Ryan's years of service to his readers and our Nation are legendary and we wish him well as he undertakes a new mission: retirement, enjoyment of his family, and an opportunity to write at his leisure.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Richard (Dick) Ryan as he begins this new adventure in life. He is truly deserving of our respect and admiration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 150th anniversary of the founding of Saint Johns, Michigan. Saint Johns was established by John Swegles and a team of state officials and land speculators who purchased and platted Saint Johns based on information about a new railroad depot in Michigan. These speculators selected the site in 1853 looking to create a new town along the Detroit & Milwaukee Railroad, however it was not until 1856 that the railroad arrived in Saint Johns.

Today, Saint Johns in affectionately known as Mint City, USA. The State of Michigan produces nearly enough mint flavor to make 6.9 billion sticks of chewing gum each year, the majority of which is produced in and around Saint Johns in Clinton County, MI. Every August, Saint Johns' mint heritage is celebrated with an annual mint festival.

Mr. Speaker, the City of Saint Johns has a rich history and a vibrant future. I ask all my colleagues to join me and the citizens of Saint Johns in recognizing the sesquicentennial of this historic Michigan city.