Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to spend the next hour as the designee of the minority leader on the Republican side to talk about what we heard here in this Chamber last night beginning about 8:15 in prime time from the President of the United States regarding health care reform.

I am pleased to be joined by at least one of my colleagues, and there may be others that come during the hour. Congressman John Fleming from the great State of Louisiana will be joining me and we will be talking about what went on last night. We may even want to address some of the comments that our Democratic colleagues have just made on this House floor during the previous hour in regard to their enthusiasm for a public plan, indeed their enthusiasm for a single-payer system, national health insurance, if you will.

So this gives us a great opportunity. That is what makes this body so great, that we can agree to disagree in a respectful way. The three members of the Democratic majority that were just speaking to our colleagues are good friends that I have great respect for, the gentlewoman from California, the gentleman from Minnesota, the distinguished gentleman from Michigan. We just happen to totally disagree on this issue. That is why we are here.

That is what this is all about, is to take an opportunity to point and counterpoint, folks remember that, Crossfire and things we see on television. You are from the right, you are from the left; you are Republican, you are Democrat; you are conservative, you are liberal. Your viewpoints on what is best for the country are going to vary. Sometimes they are going to be 180 degrees apart, and, surprisingly enough, there are occasions on which we agree on issues almost 100 percent. But on this issue, there is serious disagreement.

I want to just talk a little bit about how the President started his address to this joint session of Congress, and, of course, in prime time to the Nation, on H.R. 3200, the bill that has passed the committees in the House, not passed the whole House, but also the bill that passed the Senate Health Committee. The President talked about that last night.

Typically when the President comes before a joint session of Congress, it is going to be in this Chamber, because this is the bigger Chamber, as our colleagues know. The Cabinet members come in, and there are additional chairs put out here down front for them, for members of the Supreme Court, for any retired Members of Congress who may want to come. Of course, the galleries were completely full last night. Madam First Lady was sitting over here on this side, and it was quite a setting.

I don't think any of us really knew, except maybe the Democratic leadership and some of the Democratic majority party, knew ahead of time what the President was going to say. Sometimes we get a draft of the speech, and on this particular occasion we didn't.

When we sat down in our seats and the magic hour was approaching, at just after 8 p.m. last night these cards, these laminated cards, were passed out by the clerks of the House. I want my colleagues to notice, and, of course, you did see it last night, but there is some script on the front, but there is nothing on the back. So it is not really a two- pager. It is a one-sider, if you will. The bottom line, it is just a thumbnail sketch of what the President was going to say to us.

We typically have, when we sit down, a copy of the speech, and not just a draft, the very speech that the President is going to make right here standing behind that podium as he reads that off of his teleprompters so we can follow word by word, and, indeed, if he is speaking slower by necessity, so we can read ahead and in a typical situation know what he is going to say maybe a page ahead or a page and a half ahead.

Not last night. You absolutely did not know what to expect. I know what I hoped to hear him say, and many people asked me about that, both before and after the speech.

But what did you expect, Congressman Gingrey? You are a doctor. You practiced OB/GYN medicine for 26 years in your district in northwest Georgia, Cobb County and Marietta. You delivered 5,200 babies. You have been in the practice of medicine for 31 years. You have been up here now seven. You sit on the Energy and Commerce Committee where this bill, this H.R. 3200, my colleagues, I just happen to have it, a fresh copy of it, I think 1,100 pages, pretty thick, kind of hard for me even to hold. You know, what do you think about the bill?

After the August recess, when everybody went home, this bill passed the Energy and Commerce Committee. It passed the Ways and Means Committee, and it passed the Education and Labor Committee, very narrowly, strictly upon party lines, and we went home for the August recess. That is when things really got exciting.

Typically, during the month of August, Members are in their district. They are seeing constituents, maybe one on one, more typically in a townhall meeting setting. On a busy, day you might see 50 people or 75, and rarely 100 if the weather is perfect.

Well, during this August recess, which lasted about 5\1/2\ weeks, all across the country congressional Members, Senators, Members of the House, Republicans, Democrats, Independents that held these townhall meetings were seeing 10 times the attendance that they would normally see. So instead of 50, I was seeing 500. Instead of 100, I was seeing 1,000. And this was true, I think, in every district.

My colleagues, you know that your constituents were either going to those townhall meetings, trying to talk to their Members, or they were watching on C-SPAN or they were watching on CNN or Fox News and they were seeing what was going on. And it was clear, it was clear that most of the people at those townhall meetings were our senior citizens. The ones I held, six or eight or nine, there were a few scatterings of young people, but maybe they were off working or at ball games or it wasn't on their mind like it was senior citizens.

But those senior citizens were there because they were very concerned about how this new bill, this big one, H.R. 3200, it is called the America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, what it was going to do to their health care coverage.

And in particular, their concern was a provision in that bill, a provision in that bill that calls for the creation of an exchange, where people who do not have health insurance, maybe they have lost their job and in so doing, have lost the health insurance, or possibly they work for a company. The bottom line is that those seniors that were showing up are very concerned about how you pay for this bill and why the need for the Federal Government to sell health insurance and compete with the private marketplace for the business of these people that don't have insurance.

The bill calls for setting up these exchanges where people can go in their State, online typically, and shop for a health insurance policy, and several companies you can think of, my colleagues think of Blue Cross/Blue Shield, or Wellpoint or Cigna or Aetna or any of the insurance companies that have health insurance as part of that product line, and look and see what they offer, what your needs are in regard to your health, what medications you need to be on, and what the coverage is, and who the doctors are, in fact, that accept that particular policy.

You know in a community who you want to go to, who you want your wife to go to for obstetrical care, who you want your children to go to for pediatric care, and so you pick and choose. And also you look at the doctors. Do you know them or do they have a good

reputation? What they charge for standard obstetrical care or for the removal of an appendix, or for the repair of a fracture. Are they competitive? And that system, ladies and gentlemen, my colleagues in the Chamber, would work very well.

And it has worked very well in regard to the prescription drug plan that our Medicare beneficiaries receive now under the prescription drug plan that we passed back in December of 2003, without government interference, without government setting the price control, because if you let the government participate as a competitor on the field--and yet at the same time, they are the referee, they set all the standards in regard to what has to be covered, not just by them, but every insurance offering that's competing in that exchange and what they can charge.

So the Federal Government gets a tremendous unfair advantage and eventually what will happen is what the President has promised us repeatedly would not happen. What the President has promised is that if you like the insurance that you have, if you like the health insurance that you have, you can keep it and nobody can take it away from you. Now, that's a pretty bold promise that the President has made. But the fact is in this exchange, where you have a government plan competing, and then you have an administrator of all this called the Health Choices Administrator, not unlike the Social Security Administrator, a very, very powerful new bureaucrat comes along and says to Corporate America, what you are offering in the way of health insurance to your employees, even though they're very happy with it, is not adequate because we have made a decision that it needs to cover X and it needs to cover Y, and it needs to cover Z, and you don't cover one of those three, or you don't cover two of those three.

Or this Health Choices Administrator could also say, we have decided that nobody in any one year is going to pay more than a certain amount of deductible or copay, or in the aggregate, out-of-pocket expenses. And we notice, Mr. Employer, that even though the people that work for you are very happy with what they have, many of them have signed up for a very low monthly premium with a fairly high deductible, maybe $4,500, maybe $5,000 a year, but they have this catastrophic coverage so that if they get run over by a truck, or get hurt on their motorcycle, then this catastrophic picks up and they do not end up in bankruptcy.

A lot of young people, my colleagues, a lot of young Americans who are healthy; who may be working in their very first job; who are trying to pay for a car; who are paying off a student loan that could be as much as $125,000; who are trying to rent an apartment; who, indeed, may be just trying to pay down on an engagement ring for their fiance, and they are healthy, they take care of themselves, they don't smoke, they don't drink, they exercise, they run marathons, their parents are in great health, no family history of cancer, no family history of diabetes, heart disease, both sets of grandparents are now well into their 90s, they have the Methuselah gene, and we're going to say to them, the Federal Government is going to say to them, this plan that you have that works so well for you is not adequate according to what we have determined.

We, Uncle Sugar, we've made a determination that your plan is not adequate, Mr. Employer, and you're just going to have to either put in a whole new policy for these workers or you're going to have to pay a fine of 8 percent of their salary into this exchange.

So what happens then eventually all of these people, the Lewin Group estimates that as many as 110 million could lose their coverage even though they like it, and they can end up in this exchange; and pretty soon the government, which is competing in that exchange, will force all of the other competitors out, and you will have that many more people in a government-run Medicare/Medicaid-like program.

Now, if that's getting to keep what you like, then maybe you can sell me some oceanfront property in Arizona. My colleagues, it clearly is not what the American people want. And that's what they told us so clearly during these townhall meetings. I mean, I don't know what the President, my colleagues, I don't know what the President was doing during the August break. Maybe he and his family took a little vacation. I hope they did. But I expect that he was watching a little television, but maybe not. Maybe he was himself giving speeches and listening to his own speeches, but not watching these other townhall meetings and seeing these ladies and gentlemen with a little gray around their temple saying what are you about to do to our Medicaid program? What's this business we hear about you cutting Medicaid $500 billion? Mr. President, last year we spent 480 billion on Medicaid. If you're going to cut it 500 billion over the next 10 years, isn't that more than 10 percent a year cut?

And under Medicare right now, we know it's a good program, but it doesn't cover catastrophic care; it doesn't give us coverage as far as annual physicals. We have to be sick to go in and get our claim honored under Medicare, unless of course we signed up for Medicare Advantage, which 20 percent of us did. And, oh, by the way, what is this $170 billion cut to Medicare Advantage, a 17 percent per year cut in a very popular program to pay for this idea of insuring everybody when those who are chronically uninsured only amount, my colleagues, to about 5 percent of our total population? Even the President is beginning to admit that.

And it would be like saying, you know, I've just found out that the ice maker in my refrigerator has gone on the blink. And I got a little estimate and I went by Sears or Home Depot, and I found out that it's going to cost me about $350 to replace that ice maker. So you know what I think I'll do? I think I'll spend tens of thousands of dollars remodeling my kitchen. I mean, that makes a lot of sense doesn't it? It's kind of like the old adage of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The bottom line is there are so many things that we can do to reform our health care system without going to this single-payer national health insurance program. The President, Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, last night, in the very first few minutes of his speech, he lamented the fact that since the days of Theodore Roosevelt, the early 1900s, that we have not passed meaningful health care reform. And then he referenced who? He referenced two distinguished Members of this body, former Member John Dingell, Sr. from Michigan, current Member John Dingell, who has served in this body for over 50 years, a great Member, former chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, now emeritus chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. And he said, you know, these two gentlemen, father and son, in every Congress for the last 45 years, I think he said, have introduced this bill to reform our health care system. Well, my colleagues, the President was expressing his great regret that that bill had not passed, and that bill was a single- payer national health insurance program just like Canada, just like the UK. Uncle Sam government bureaucrats running everything.

And that's what the President was disappointed in, the fact that we had not passed that. I say thank God we have not passed it, even though we have great respect for these Members. Congressman John Conyers, long-serving Member from Michigan was just on the floor a few minutes ago talking about a very similar bill that he introduces in every Congress. So that's what we're talking about. These are the things that I wanted to discuss with my colleagues this evening. I want to take a little time now to pass the gavel, the mike, if you will, to my friend from Louisiana, Dr. Fleming, and we're going to continue over this hour to discuss this hugely, hugely important issue to the American people. And I yield to Dr. Fleming.

If my colleague will yield just for a minute----

--you mentioned a fact check, Dr. Fleming, and I have a number of those facts here on the poster board, on the easel. I think what I'll do is uncover the first one, and I'll let you comment in regard to the first fact that he mentioned last night.

My colleagues, you may not be able to see that well nor may Dr. Fleming, but here is what it says. This is a quote from our President.

``I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits--either now or in the future.''

Congressman, can you see the true fact on that?

Reclaiming my time, I certainly agree with you.

The President talked about not spending one penny to add to the deficit, and this $239 billion shortfall in the pay-for is after cutting Medicare by $500 billion, as you have heard from me and from Dr. Fleming, and after taxing the rich, whoever they are. I think, unfortunately, the rich are a lot of small business men and women who create most of the jobs in this country. They're taxing them anywhere from 1 to 5 percent, and are trying to raise an additional $800 billion.

So, even with the $800 billion worth of new taxes and the $500 billion cut to the Medicare program, especially to Medicare Advantage-- and Dr. Fleming would, I'm sure, verify this--fully 20 percent of Medicare recipients today, my colleagues, choose the Medicare Advantage program as the delivery system because they get more care. Dental care is covered. Hearing aids are covered. Annual physicals are covered. There is a catastrophic cap. None of that is true under traditional fee-for-service Medicare unless, maybe, if you have an expensive supplemental policy.

So that was the first fact. Congressman, if you will let me unveil, if you will, fact number two.

My colleagues, this fact-check is this--and again, we're quoting from the President's speech last night, not 12 hours ago: Nothing in this plan will require you to change the coverage or the doctor that you have.

Now let me repeat that because this is an important fact check: Nothing in this plan will require you to change the coverage or the doctor that you have.

Congressman.

Reclaiming my time, even if they wanted to keep it, it would no longer be there for them because if you cut it to the bone--and this cut in Medicare Advantage is like 17 percent a year--the insurance companies that offer that product will just simply say, I'm sorry. We're shutting our doors, and you're going to have to go find yourself a doctor who will accept you under Medicare fee for service.

Well, again, reclaiming my time, this is a point that I made earlier, Mr. Speaker. Again, I want to repeat it to our colleagues, this business about, if you like what you have, that you can keep it--you may want to keep it. As an example, we'll use Medicare Advantage. But you may be prohibited from keeping it because it's not offered anymore.

It's the same thing with regard to, if you work for an employer, Mr. Speaker, and if that employer says, Look, you know, we've got a menu. That's the way it works. That's the way it works for the Federal Employee Benefit Plan.

For those of us who work for the Federal Government, you have choices of five or six things that you might want--a high option, a low option, a standard option. You might want dental coverage. You might not. You might want eye coverage. You might not. You might, indeed, want a low premium, a very low monthly premium with a high deductible combined with a Health Savings Account. A lot of Federal employees choose that. A lot of employees for these large companies choose that, whether we're talking about Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola, Lockheed, whatever. They have those as their choices.

But the Federal Government is under this massive new bureaucracy with, I think, 53 different agencies making decisions under the Department of Health and Human Services. Mr. Speaker, the ones with the strongest voices would be these health choices administrators who could say--now, there will be a grace period up till--what?--about 2013, I think, Dr. Fleming.

But at that point, they could say to a company, Gosh, I notice that you've got a lot of your employees who have picked the high deductible-low premium plan, these young workers who are just out of college or just out of high school. Well, you know what, Mr. Employer? We're not going to approve that because we have decided that nobody can spend that much money out-of-pocket in any one year. That's one of our requirements. So you're going to have to come up with something entirely different and, yes, more expensive.

That's what Representative Fleming was saying, Mr. Speaker, that the employer is going to say, You know what? It's not worth it to me. Heck, I'll just pay the 8 percent fine for each of these employees, and I'll let them go into this government plan.

So you're talking about, if you like what you've got, you can keep it. You can keep it until you can't keep it, and that's going to be in 2013.

Of course I'll yield.

I thought we could go to the next fact then. Again, I'm quoting from our President last night.

``Not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.''

I think he spoke the truth there because I don't think there's any money left in the Medicare trust fund. I think past Congresses for many years have spent that money like crazy. As we all agree, I think, every Member, every constituent, certainly every Medicare recipient would say that that trust fund ought to be lockboxed and that it should not be touched for any Federal expenditure except for the solvency of the Medicare plan.

So, yes, I agree with him, that not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.

The fact, of course, is not just the trust fund. He's taking money right out of the hide of the Medicare program, not the fat but the muscle and the sinew and the cartilage and the bone; $500 billion out of Medicare.

Then he went on to say that he promised that, if his bill does not save money, more cuts will come. Hear me, Members, who might happen to be on Medicare--and your constituents surely are--more cuts will come.

Now, the next fact: The President earlier in the speech said this-- and I wondered if he was listening. I don't know what he was listening to during the month of August, but this is his quote from his speech last night to this joint session and to the television audience--to all of the Americans.

``A strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option.''

What's the fact, Dr. Fleming?

Well, and, again, in regard to the facts, when we went home for the August recess, President Obama, his overall approval rating--and, let's face it, politicians pay attention to polls, and, certainly, our Commander in Chief and the highest politician in the country is the President of the United States, and he pays attention to his approval rating, and it dropped over 10 percent in a 5-week period of time and 57 percent of the people in the country when we left here the first of August were in favor of this health reform plan, but now it's down to 42 percent. So, again, that fact check, I think, is very important.

My colleagues, the point we are getting to is this, based on the speech that the President gave last night, it's pretty clear to me, it's pretty clear to this Member, to this physician Member, that the President has not listened. He may be listening to Ms. Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, he may be listening to Mr. Reid, the majority leader of the Senate; he may be listening to Charlie Rangel, who chairs the Ways and Means Committee. Possibly he is listening to Henry Waxman, the chairman of the committee that I serve on, Energy and Commerce; or maybe his friend from California, George Miller, who chairs the Education and Labor Committee in the House; and maybe he is listening to Chris Dodd, the Senator from Connecticut, who chairs the Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions Committee, the health committee in the United States Senate.

But he is not listening to the American people. We have come to not expect, my colleagues, him to listen to the loyal minority and to give the minority truly an opportunity to participate on the front end of having input in these very important bills. We are talking about 17 percent of our economy is health care.

And John Fleming and Phil Gingrey, together, probably have 70

years of clinical experience, Mr. Speaker, in the practice of medicine. And I am talking about where you see patients. I am not talking about writing papers or teaching at some ivory tower medical facility, I am talking about in urban and rural America, seeing patients across all aspects, financial, socioeconomic, ethnicity, with all kinds of problems.

And our specialties are different. And yet we have got these 70 years of clinical experience that we should have, could have, would have brought to the table. And not once were we invited. So the President is listening to somebody, but he is not listening to some experts that could help him, and he is sure not listening to the American people.

The American people said very clearly, and, again, when I wasn't holding town hall meetings, I was watching them. I was a C-SPAN junkie. You know, I was an insomniac. I'm a senior citizen, so I don't sleep a lot.

And the people were saying, Mr. President, no government-run health care, don't cut senior care to pay for this health reform. We don't need to remodel the kitchen. We just need to fix the ice maker.

Don't raise the deficit. We just heard that your guy, Mr. Orszag, the director of the Office of Management and Budget at the White House, your man, you put him there, he is a brilliant economist, and he just said that over the next 10 years your deficit spending, your red ink is going to total $9 trillion. Now, ladies and gentlemen, my colleagues, we are currently $11 trillion in debt in this country, 11 plus 9 is 20. That's about $45,000 worth of debt for every man, woman and child.

And we are going to do this massive health reform change and spend another $1.5 trillion when, yes, 14,000 people every day are losing their jobs and something like 5 million have lost their jobs since February when we passed the economic spendulus and Recovery Act that was going to stop unemployment at 8.5 percent and start growing jobs. Unemployment now is 10 percent, and we haven't grown a job yet.

The American people said don't raise the deficit. The American people said health care choices, not government dictates. The American people said bipartisan compromise. Mr. President, you are not listening.

Well, just a few additional points to be made, Mr. Speaker, and my colleagues. The truth behind the Democrats' health care proposal, 5.5 million more jobs will be destroyed just by the business tax proposals in this plan.

As I pointed out, 114 million Americans could lose their current health insurance, so much for if you like what you have you can keep it; $500 billion in Medicare cuts, 20 percent increase in seniors' Medicare prescription drug premiums, $800 billion in new tax hikes, and that's just the beginning.

Now, my colleagues, many times on the majority side of the aisle, you have said, the Republicans are the Party of No. Well, at first I took umbrage to that. It's almost like a member of our side of the aisle in a moment of passion made a statement last night that he regretted and apologized to the President, when this issue of whether or not this new health care benefit and these subsidies would be going to illegal immigrants. That invokes a lot of passion in a lot of people in this country, including Members of this body.

And when I hear the Democrat majority say we are the Party of No, I get upset about that, or at least I used to. And now I realize that maybe we are the Party of No, Mr. Speaker, but it's spelled k-n-o-w. And we do know. We do have a plan. We do have a second opinion, if you want to put it in medical parlance. We have a second opinion on everything that comes through this Congress. We had a second opinion on energy reform, Mr. Speaker.

We reject the cap-and-tax, cap-and-trade scheme that would cost every family at least $2,500 a year more in electricity costs when China and India with their 2.5 billion people get off scot free because they are a so-called developing nation. They are developing all right, they are eating our lunch, that's what they are doing. And they are taking away all of our manufacturing jobs.

Mr. Speaker, we have an idea, we have a second opinion on energy, we have a second opinion on how to reform health care. No, it's not 1,100 pages, it's 260 pages. It's called the Empowering Patients First Act. It's not H.R. 3200. It's H.R. 3400. And this is just one of four, or maybe five Republican bills that are alternatives, second opinions, that can solve this problem in a bipartisan way without breaking the bank.

But do you think we get an opportunity to have a hearing on these bills? Do you think we have an opportunity to have our amendments vetted? Do you think when whatever comes before this floor so that all the Members can vote on it, that any Republican will have an opportunity to either offer a bill or even an amendment?

I have as part of this bill an amendment on liability reform that every year that we Republicans controlled the House, it would pass. And it probably would save the cost of health care $150 billion a year, because doctors wouldn't be doing all these unnecessary, defensive tests, which can be downright dangerous to patients.

So, yes, this is a second opinion. And yet you won't hear much about it, except from us, an opportunity like this, my colleagues, and we take this opportunity.

Maybe when some of our Members have already, you know, headed for the airport and can't wait to get home to their families and their children and grandchildren, I certainly can't blame them for that. But this is our only opportunity, Mr. Speaker.

That's why Dr. Fleming and I are here to make sure that you understand that we are not the Party of No. We are the Party of K-n-o- w.

I would like at this point to hear from my friend from Louisiana.

I thank you for those comments, and I certainly agree with you. The President did say that. He said if you've got a good idea, bring it to me. And I would say this to the President because we do, as John Fleming said, we do have

some good ideas, not just the two of us but Members on both sides of the aisle. The more conservative Members on the Democratic side, the Blue Dog Coalition of 52 members, they need to be heard, and I think thus far they've been heard, but they've been ignored at the same time.

And what I would say to the President as we wrap up this hour, Mr. Speaker, this is what I would suggest to the President. We've all heard the expression around here--in fact, I think the late Senator Kennedy was famous for this; maybe he coined the phrase--``Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.''

Now, if President Obama thinks that H.R. 3200, the big bill with the public plan in it, is perfect but the American people, in a very resounding way, have said, ``Mr. President, we don't want the public plan because we fear that that's just a Trojan horse and it's two steps towards a single-payer national health insurance where you have rationing such as they do in Canada and the UK,'' then the President could--and I wish he had last night said to us--``Well, we can't pass what I think is the perfect, because American people are afraid of it. I feel that they're wrong. I fear that they've been scared. I fear that they've gotten misinformation. But nevertheless, they've spoken pretty clearly, and the Members on both sides of the aisle have heard because they came back to Washington and they told me, and I'm just going to have to pull that public plan option out and let's get together with the Republicans in the Senate and in the House and let's draw up a new bill and let's do the `not perfect but the good.' ''

And Dr. Fleming, Representative Fleming mentioned a couple of things. Equalize the tax treatment so that everybody gets discounted health care. Absolutely put in the subsidy for people who are not poor enough to qualify for our safety net programs like Medicaid but they don't have enough income to purchase health insurance for them and for their children. They get government subsidies based on a sliding scale.

Make the insurance companies accept people with preexisting conditions. Don't let them put caps on how much coverage you get in any one year. If you get real sick in any one year, whatever the bill is, the insurance company should pay it after you paid your copay and your deductible. Maybe the next 5 years they won't have to pay anything and you won't have any claims.

And let's create these high-risk pools across each and every State where people with multiple illnesses can get coverage at a reasonable rate and, yes indeed, help those who need help with subsidies both from the State and from the Federal Government.

Just a few--let people purchase health insurance across State lines where maybe they're cheaper. If you live in--as I did for a long time-- in Augusta, Georgia, it was just a half a mile across the river to North Augusta, South Carolina. Why can't people go across State lines and purchase health insurance? They can do it to buy a gun or a television set.

So again, all of these provisions are in the bill H.R. 3200, which I showed you just a second ago. Here it is.

So, Mr. President, in your opinion--not in ours--but in your opinion, this may not be the perfect, but I tell you what, it's darn good. And if we can get together in a bipartisan way for the American people and let's get this done and then let November 2, 2010, take care of itself. And as far as your political future, Mr. President, let's let 2012 take care of itself. Let the American people be the judge. But let's get this done in a bipartisan way and let's, for once, listen to the American people.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will yield back.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding. It pains me in a way to be on the floor tonight to join with Representative Carter and Representative Westmoreland, my colleague from Georgia who just spoke, and Representative Virginia Foxx, a great Member on our side of the aisle from North Carolina, and the gentleman from Texas, another gentleman from Texas, another judge from Texas, which we will be hearing from in a few minutes.

But as painful as it is, Madam Speaker, to discuss a subject of this manner and this magnitude, I think it is important that we do it. I think it is important that we have the courage to do it, because I think the American people are watching what we do.

I think that this recent district work period, the month of August, the traditional time when Members are back in the district meeting with their constituents holding these town hall meetings, and this is something that didn't just happen this August, by the way, Madam Speaker, it has been a tradition probably, I don't know, for 100 years. People this year though, while we might typically have 25 or 50 or on a really good day 75 people, it was 500 and 1,000 and 1,500 and it was unbelievable how engaged the American people are now, who want desperately to be heard.

Madam Speaker, this business of ``being out of control'' and ``being a gang'' and ``being a mob,'' no, no. They are patriots, is what they are, Madam Speaker. They are mostly seniors who are worried about losing their coverage under Medicare.

When they hear, particularly if they are on Medicare Advantage, that that program is going to be cut about 17 percent per year over the next 10 years, I think $170 billion taken out of that one program, where 20 percent of seniors, by the way, like that so much that that is what they choose to receive their health care is Medicare Advantage and not Medicare fee-for-service.

So the point I am making is people are outraged. They are so frustrated that powerful Members of Congress are not listening to them. And it is not always their Member, but it is the leadership. It is the committee chairs that have control over significant pieces of legislation, such as the America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, H.R. 3200.

They know that Mr. Waxman is chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, where most of the bill was written. They know that Representative Charles Rangel from New York, a long-serving Member since 1971, chairs the most powerful Ways and Means Committee. They know that George Miller, the gentleman from California, a long-serving senior Member, chairs the Education and Labor Committee. So they are very frustrated and want to be heard.

So here we are talking tonight about grave concerns that we fellow Members have in regard to the ethical standards and behavior of people in this body who are in the highest positions. My goodness, the two most powerful standing committees of the House of Representatives are probably the Appropriations Committee and the Ways and Means Committee. On the one hand, the Appropriations Committee is charged with spending the $3 trillion or so a year in the Federal budget, and the Ways and Means Committee, led by the chairman, is charged with raising the money to fund all these Federal Government programs.

People are getting a little concerned and upset with $787 billion stimulus packages and deficit spending in the year 2009 of $1.8 trillion, and a deficit that is calculated, not by me, not by my Republican colleagues, but by the Office of Management and Budget, which is the number cruncher, the Ph.D. economists hired by and who are part of the Obama administration, that says that over the next 10 years there is going to be $9 trillion of deficit in the aggregate, that much more debt, $20 trillion worth of debt at the end of the next 10 years. So people are very concerned about the integrity, the honesty and the fair play of these powerful Members.

Our colleague from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) is so outstanding, and she was talking just a few minutes ago about the Old Testament and Moses and the commands, and she can turn a phrase better than I think most every Member in this body.

But, I was reading recently in the Old Testament in the Book of Deuteronomy, and Moses was saying to the Jewish people, look, God gave me these laws to give to you. These are not suggestions, these are commands, and you are not to add to them and you are not to take away from them. You are to follow them exactly as God has commanded and has given that command to me to give to you. Well, you know, that is pretty sacred stuff, the ultimate sacred stuff, I should say.

But here in the House of Representatives, the rules of behavior, the standards of official conduct, indeed, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, are pretty darn sacred too, Madam Speaker. And they are not suggestions. They are really there so that every Member is treated fairly, from the least to the greatest, from the freshman Member to the Member that has served 35 years and is chairing one of the most powerful committees in this House of Representatives.

So when we see things like this and what Representative Carter has brought out in regard to these new findings of, oops, I just overlooked $600,000 worth of income, it was a stock account that I had forgotten about, well, you know, you don't forget about things like that. You don't forget about it.

To make sure, Madam Speaker, that everybody understands, when we have to fill out these financial disclosure reports on an annual basis as required by the standards of official conduct, my chief of staff will come to me and say, Congressman, we need to go through this 401(k), this IRA that you have had when you were working as a physician, and, of course, it is kind of frozen now because you are not continuing to put any money into it, but we have to look at every mutual fund and go through each one and see on each individual stock within a mutual fund, and you may have six or eight or ten different mutual funds in a 401(k) or an IRA, and my chief of staff says to me, Congressman, every stock in this, you have to list whether it gained money or lost money, whether something was bought or something was sold.

It is very time-consuming and rather painful, but it is for a good purpose, because the American people want to know, they want to be able to look in a very transparent way. They want to know who are the wealthiest Members of Congress, and they also want to know who are those who have absolutely no assets, no wealth other than their annual salary they receive from the taxpayer from this House of Representatives.

It's a point for a lot of people to try to understand that, to follow the dollar and see where maybe influences are applied and why people vote in the way--or if there's any suggestion that someone might cast their vote based on contributions or anything of that sort and that no one is in here enriching themselves at the expense of John Q. Public who is struggling every day just to maintain a job and to feed his family and support his children and hope that they get to go to college some day. And unfortunately, in this deep recession that we're in, some 6 million have lost their jobs over the last couple of years.

So this is a very, very serious issue that Judge Carter, Madam Speaker, brings before us, and I think that the gentleman from New York who chairs this powerful committee should step aside while the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct is doing its investigation.

Now, to his credit, he asked the committee to look into this over a year ago. But, Madam Speaker, I feel that he should have stepped aside at that point. But now here we are a year later and all of a sudden this additional ``Oops, I forgot.'' Well, you know, if he won't voluntarily do this, then I think it's the responsibility of the leadership, and ultimately the leadership of this body, Madam Speaker, as you know, is the Speaker whose seat you're sitting in right now as her designee this evening. And she will be there tomorrow night sitting right beside the

President of the Senate, the gentleman from Delaware, Mr. Biden, and of course we will be hearing from President Obama. We don't want this body, this House, this Chamber to be tainted.

And I think it's time for the gentleman from New York to be strong. Maybe he will be found to have not violated any ethical rules of this Chamber. We're not certainly putting him on trial here tonight, and I'm sure my colleagues would agree with that, but I think it's the right thing to do. I think it's courageous for Judge Carter to bring this forward. And none of us are perfect, but every one of us needs to be honest with the American people and explain our actions or have others who are officially designated to do that look into it and let's get to the bottom of it.

With that, I will yield back to my friend from Texas.

If the gentleman would yield for just a second.

You've hit on a point I've got to address.

The President spoke to the American schoolchildren today, and I think the President did a fine job. The speech, I know early on there may have been concerns about curriculum recommendations, that sort of thing, but I heard the Secretary of Education over the weekend, Secretary Arne Duncan, talk about this upcoming speech, and I couldn't agree more with what he said on Sunday morning; very logical, made sense to me. And the President, of course, gave a very powerful speech to America's schoolchildren and taught just what Judge Carter just mentioned about personal responsibility and doing the right thing even when it's tough, even when it's hard to do that.

And golly, if our leaders in the highest positions of our country can't do that, how can we expect kids in the fifth grade to do it? How can I expect my 11-year-old twin granddaughters who are in the fourth grade--and I talk to them all the time about the personal responsibility of going a little beyond what's required, doing more, getting up earlier if you need to to do your homework, turn that television off at night or that video game. The President said the same thing, and I commend him for that.

But he's talking to all of us, Madam Speaker, about personal responsibility and doing the right thing.

You know, I don't know--and I will yield back quickly, Judge. But it may be that the gentleman from New York, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, wishes his boss, the Speaker of this House, would ask him to temporarily step aside while this investigation was ongoing. Maybe he doesn't want to do it himself. He's a World War II veteran, a Korean war veteran, in fact, a hero. I read part of his book. As has been mentioned here earlier, he's a very likable individual, without question. You can understand how he keeps getting reelected with such overwhelming majorities. But he may, as a soldier, as a hero, he may feel that, gosh, you know, I don't want to be the one to step aside, but I sure wish my boss would tell me to step aside.

So, as you point out, there are two people here that have a responsibility. And I'm glad you brought that up, because that's--I mean, you know, it was Harry Truman, a Democratic President, back in 1948 or so, who says, Hey the buck stops on my desk. Well, the buck stops on the Speaker of the House of Representatives' desk in regard to this issue.

I yield back.

Madam Speaker, I submit the following:

[From the Marietta Daily Journal, July 28, 2009]

What Happened to Medical Charity of Years Past?

(By Cecil Toole, MD (Ret.))

Re Bill Kinney column, ``Cobb's sick getting well, thanks to

Good Samaritan,'' July 19 MDJ

In 1961 or 1962, I met the original ``Good Samaritans'' of

Marietta and Cobb County, when I joined their group as a

visiting resident in obstetrics from Piedmont Hospital in

Atlanta. All of them were on the staff of a forgotten

Kennestone Hospital in Marietta, where they conducted many

free pre-natal clinics, free medicines for eligible patients,

and free deliveries for those same patients in a hospital

that agreed to not charge ``clinic patients'' for hospital

service.

Those mysterious and economically foolish services were

done by charitable doctors such as Dr. Meaders, Dr. Reilly,

Drs. George and Murl Hagood, Dr. Remer Clark, Dr. Colquitt,

Dr. Mussara, Dr. Pete Inglis, Dr. Mainor, Dr. Parker, Dr.

W.H. Perkinson, Dr. Looper, Dr. Clingbell, Dr. Stafford, Dr.

Mitchell, Dr. McClure and Dr. Clonts, to name a few, without

ever sending a bill to their ``clinic patient.'' Ineligible

patients might be sent a bill through a collection agency.

(And by the way: the IRS never-ever allowed such ``charity''

done by those same doctors, to be deducted.'') I was

fascinated to learn how those doctors survived Economics 101

when none of their clinic patients needed, or carried,

``affordable health insurance.''

At Piedmont Hospital where I was a resident, the hospital

took care of all of the hospital expenses of the unwed

mothers from the Florence Crittenden Home. I was also told

that none of them had ``health-insurance.'' I can tell you

this. As far as the TLC (Tender Loving Care) given to the

``clinic-patients'' and the ``private patients,'' the

treatment from the staff and the nurses was identical. The

care was always excellent.

I hope if you ever get to meet the genius who invented

``affordable health care,'' that you will remember to ask

this question, ``Does charity have a place in today's health-

care?'' The ``Obama Bidens'' don't want, or need, your

charity. They insist on asking everybody, including the

jobless, the helpless and the hopeless, to pay cash for their

own ``health-care'' even if the cash has to be a personal

loan from the government.

Just to show their good intentions, if those indigent

groups can't repay their ``medical care'' loans, the great

socialist government will identify and prosecute them, for

the crime of ``unpaid debts.'' Aren't medical science and

``health-care,'' when mixed with Socialism, wonderful?

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks as well as in accordance with Clause 9 of Rule XXI, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3326, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3326

Account: Research, Development, Test, Evaluation, Army

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Georgia Institute of Technology

Address of Requesting Entity: Institute of Bioengineering and Bioscience, 315 Ferst Drive, NW, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0363

Description of Request: The $3,000,000 included in H.R. 3326 for the Center for Advanced Bioengineering and Solider Survivability (CABSS) will focus on research in advanced tissue and bone regeneration and wound care and treatment issues relevant to military trauma care. Fundamental research advances in these areas can lead to technologies and techniques for better immediate clinical combat care as well as address long term care issues involving limb loss, tissue and organ damage, facial and dental injuries, and reconstruction.

Specifically, the $3,000,000 in funding will be paid out at pre- negotiated rates in accordance with Department of Defense policy. Specifically, funds will be used to: establish a seed grant program to identify novel technologies for treatment of musculoskeletal defects following trauma, develop oriented nano-fiber meshes for treatment of neurologic defects following injury to the extremities, develop biodegradable shape memory polymers for treatment of large bone defects, develop biodegradable shape memory polymers for craniofacial reconstruction, and test the effects of sustained delivery of osteoinductive proteins in tubular nanofiber mesh scaffolds on functional repair of large segmental bone defects.

Georgia Tech will continue to leverage this request to obtain funding from other sources. The Georgia Research Alliance has pledged additional money to the project for infrastructure and equipment, and past Congressional funding has been leveraged to successfully obtain funding from DoD's Orthopaedic Trauma Research Program and its Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine, as well as funding from the Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3326

Account: Research, Development, Test, Evaluation, Army

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Printpack, Inc.

Address of Requesting Entity: 2800 Overlook Drive NE, Atlanta, GA 30345-2024

Description of Request: The $1,000,000 added to H.R. 3326 will be used to develop new and innovative packaging and processing technologies for the Warfighter's combat rations. These funds will result in the ability to provide greater variety and more nutritional rations with longer shelf-life and reduced production costs.

The objective of this effort is to develop advanced thermal processing techniques based on the utilization of non-foil materials for military ration packaging. The importance of developing non-foil packaging materials will

serve as a precursor to the next stage of the R&D effort to investigate new and enhanced thermal processing techniques--specifically, Enhanced High Pressure Processing (EHPP) and Microwave Sterilization (MW) technologies. The EHPP and MW processing technologies have numerous advantages over conventional thermal processing; however, these processes cannot be used on current foil packaging because they cause blistering and flex cracking of the foil packaging material. Therefore, to achieve the advantages of advanced EHPP and MW processing, it is essential to use state-of-the-art, non-foil packaging materials.

The development of advanced, non-foil packaging materials and utilization of innovative EHPP and MW processing techniques will result in the provision of rations with the following beneficial and enhanced qualities: greater variety, better taste, more nutrition, longer shelf- life, lower overall production costs, environmentally friendly, less volume and waste. The FY10 effort will consist of three stages and is budgeted as follows: Stage 1: Blistering ($0.14M), Stage 2: Flex Crack Resistance ($0.26M), Stage 3: EHPP & MW Trials ($0.6M).

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3326

Account: Research, Development, Test, Evaluation, Defense Wide

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Scientific Research Corporation

Address of Requesting Entity: 2300 Windy Ridge Parkway, Suite 400, Atlanta, GA 30339

Description of Request: This program will utilize recently developed Wavelet Packet Modulation (WPM). The $1,000,000 included in H.R. 3326 will be used to implement design modifications for limited rate initial production, including form factor packaging changes for ruggedization and for integration with signal intelligence systems. Additionally, production readiness for integration with existing communications systems will occur. Finally, module testing will be subjected to continued assessment and utility testing on multiple platforms.

The enhanced modules will then undergo a final government Production Readiness Review, paving the way for subsequent deployment. Covert WPM Communications Modules as communications links for multiple platforms, including unmanned aerial systems, provide a critical solution to special operations warfighters that require the ability to communicate covertly without detection.

Funding is required for hardware and software engineering, integration, and testing (64%); specialized equipment (21%); specialized software (13%); and travel to U.S. Special Operations Command and to military test sites (2%). This request is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of the U.S. Special Operations Command Special Operations Tactical Systems Development program.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3326

Account: Other Procurement, Army

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Meggitt Training Systems

Address of Requesting Entity: 7340 McGinnis Ferry Road, Suwanee, GA 30024

Description of Request: The ARNG combined arms simulation training system began in 1996, and presently there are 266 fielded Combat Skills Marksmanship Trainers (CSMT) systems. All have been or are in the process of being upgraded. The ARNG has an immediate requirement to supply its soldiers with newer and more advanced training technology, since simulators are an integral part of the training requirement. Since the Army no longer supports the ARNG with training simulator systems, Congress has consistently provided funding for these systems upgrades. ARNG itself has contributed funds of its own--$4.5 million in FY07 and $1.2 million in FY08.

The ARNG's immediate need is to upgrade the remaining fleet of CSMT systems, and the plan includes acquiring approximately 1,200 new weapons. The $4,000,000 included in H.R. 3326 will continue the multiyear upgrade and modernization of existing firearms simulation systems in the Army National Guard necessary to meet the validated system standard.

The ARNG has defined modernization as paramount to resolving an immediate mandatory small-arms training need in support of the Guard's role in a global war on terrorism and homeland security. The Army's Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training & Instrumentation (PEO STRI) has validated the upgraded system as a U.S. Army standard for use by the ARNG.

The CSMT system includes U.S. Army-specific courseware and training scenarios that address new and complex tactical situations and provide soldiers with the ability to conduct weapons, judgmental, and military training in a tactical environment built on geo-specific terrain databases. The CSMT simulates tactical small unit defensive and offensive situations such as security operations, fire & maneuver, and hostage & clearing operations in built-urban areas. Small unit leaders use the system to conduct mission planning and rehearsal. The system's embedded scenario authoring capability allows the user to quickly author a scenario reflecting emerging doctrinal and/or mission requirement changes.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3326

Account: Research, Development, Test, Evaluation, Army

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: CryoLife

Address of Requesting Entity: 1655 Roberts Boulevard, NW, Kennesaw,

Madam Chair, I rise today to discuss an issue vital to American air superiority.

First, I want to thank Chairman Murtha and Ranking Member Young for their tireless efforts in support of those who bravely defend us at home and abroad.

While there is much to applaud in this bill, I am very concerned about any steps to remove advanced procurement funds for the F-22A Raptor. Currently, H.R. 3326 contains $370 million for long lead supplies needed to procure 12 F-22 aircraft in fiscal year 2011. Preserving this funding, Madam Chair, is absolutely critical.

Unfortunately, President Obama and Secretary Gates have expended great capital in recent weeks to ensure that the F-22 program ends at 187 aircraft once and for all. However, their position is not driven by military requirements but, rather, by budget constraints.

The facts are that the F-22 has a flyaway cost of $142 million--this is a 35 percent decrease since its inception--and the next F-22 will actually be cheaper than the next Joint Strike Fighter.

Madam Chair, is this how we should determine how best to defend our Nation and to ensure American air superiority, or should we rely on the results of over 30 air campaign studies that have been conducted over the last 15 years, which validate a requirement for far more than 187 F-22 Raptors to replace the original force of 800 F-15 A-D Eagles?

We should also listen to those who fly these fighters, Madam Chair. A June 9, 2009, letter from General John Corley, the commander of Air Combat Command, states, ``At Air Combat Command, we have held the need for 381 F-22s to deliver a tailored package of air superiority to our Combatant Commanders and provide a potent, globally arrayed, asymmetric deterrent against potential adversaries. In my opinion, a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our current national military strategy at high risk in the near to mid-term.''

Madam Chair, General Corley goes on to state, ``There are no studies that demonstrate 187 F-22s are adequate to support our national military strategy.''

I would like to submit this letter for the Record, Madam Chair.

Department of the Air Force,

Headquarters Air Combat Command

Langley Air Force Base, VA, June 9, 2009.

Hon. Saxby Chambliss,

Russell Office Building, U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Chambliss: Thank you for your letter and the

opportunity to comment on the critical issue of F-22 fleet

size. At Air Combat Command we have held the need for 381 F-

22s to deliver a tailored package of air superiority to our

Combatant Commanders and provide a potent, globally arrayed,

asymmetric deterrent against potential adversaries. In my

opinion, a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our current

national military strategy at high risk in the near to mid-

term.

To my knowledge, there are no studies that demonstrate 187

F-22s are adequate to support our national military strategy.

Air Combat Command analysis, done in concert with

Headquarters Air Force, shows a moderate risk force can be

obtained with an F-22 fleet of approximately 250 aircraft.

While OSD did not solicit direct input from Air Combat

Command, we worked closely with our Headquarters in ensuring

our views were available. We realize the tough choices our

national leadership must make in balancing current

warfighting needs against the fiscal realities our Nation

faces.

The F-22, a critical enabler of air dominance, plays a

vital role and indispensable role in ensuring joint freedom

of action for all forces and underpins our ability to

dissuade and deter. Thank you for your continued support of

the US Air Force and Air Combat Command.

Sincerely,

John D.W. Corley

General, USAF Commander.

I also would like to submit for the Record a letter that I sent to President Obama and to Secretary Gates. It's signed by 199 of my House colleagues. It concludes that continued F-

22 production is in the national economic interest of the United States.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, January 21, 2009.

President Barack Obama,

The White House,

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. President: The Fiscal Year 2009 National Defense

Authorization act requires your certification on continued F-

22A Raptor production by March 1, 2009. We strongly urge your

certification of continued production of this vital program.

Continued F-22 production is critical to the security of

our nation. The F-22 is the nation's most capable fighter and

the world's only operation 5th generation fighter aircraft in

full-rate production. It is the weapon system we need to

respond to potential adversaries who are increasing their air

combat capabilities both in terms of technology and numbers

of aircraft. Several nations have announced that they are

developing stealthy, twin-engine, high-altitude, 5th

generation fighters that will reach production within the

next five to ten years. Additionally, sophisticated and

highly lethal air defense systems such as the SA-20 and S-

300/400 are proliferating worldwide.

Our nation has committed to procuring a total of just 183

F-22 aircraft. We are convinced that this number is

insufficient to meet potential threats. After accounting for

test, training, and maintenance aircraft, only about 100 F-

22s will be immediately available for combat at any given

time. Given that over 30 air campaign studies completed over

the last 15 years have validated a requirement for far more

than 183 F-22 Raptors to replace the original force of 800 F-

15 A-D Eagles, it is clear that such a lean F-22 fleet is not

consistent with America's national security interest.

The F-22 is a model production line. Since full-rate

production began, the unit flyaway cost has decreased by 35

percent. If this certification is delayed, layoffs will begin

as this critical supplier base shuts down. Once we begin to

lose the F-22 industrial base that was created with billions

of dollars of investment over many years, it will quickly

become virtually impossible to reconstitute a production

capability.

The F-22 program annually provides over $12 billion of

economic activity to the national economy. As our nation

faces one of the most trying economic times in recent

history, it is imperative to preserve existing high paying,

specialized jobs that are critical to our national defense.

Over 25,000 Americans working for more than 1,000 suppliers

in 44 states manufacture this aircraft. Moreover, it is

estimated that another 70,000 Americans indirectly owe their

jobs to this program.

The Honorable Phil Gingrey, MD (GA-11); The Honorable Kay

Granger (TX-12); The Honorable Neil Abercrombie (HI-

01); The Honorable John Dingell (MI-15); The Honorable

Danny Davis (IL-07); The Honorable Chet Edwards (TX-

17); The Honorable Todd Tiahrt (KS-04); The Honorable

Thomas Price (GA-06); The Honorable Norman Dicks (WA-

6); The Honorable David Scott (GA-13); The Honorable

Bill Young (FL-10); The Honorable Jack Kingston (GA-

01); The Honorable Mac Thornberry (TX-13); Honorable

Hank Johnson (GA-04); The Honorable Ellen Tauscher (CA-

10); The Honorable Sanford Bishop (GA-02)

The Honorable Ben Ray Lujan (NM-03); The Honorable Brian

Higgins (NY-27); The Honorable Gresham Barrett (SC-03);

The Honorable Christopher Carney (PA-10); The Honorable

Timothy Bishop (NY-01); The Honorable Bill Shuster (PA-

09); The Honorable Dean Heller (NV-02); The Honorable

Jim McGovern (MA-03); The Honorable Shelley Berkley

(NV-01); The Honorable John Barrow (GA-12); The

Honorable John Larson (CT-01); The Honorable Phil Hare

(IL-17); The Honorable John Sullivan (OK-01); The

Honorable Ander Crenshaw (FL-04); The Honorable Adam

Putnam (FL-12); The Honorable Mike Rogers (AL-03); The

Honorable Michelle Bachmann (MN-06); The Honorable Doug

Lamborn (CO-05); The Honorable Mary Bono Mack (CA-45);

The Honorable Mike Rogers (MI-08); The Honorable Larry

Kissell (NC-08); The Honorable Anna Eshoo (CA-14)

The Honorable Mike Simpson (ID-02); The Honorable Steve

LaTourette (OH-14); The Honorable Alcee Hastings (FL-

23); The Honorable Greg Walden (OR-02); The Honorable

Corrine Brown (FL-03); The Honorable Collin Peterson

(MN-07); The Honorable Robert Andrews (NJ-01); The

Honorable Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL-21); The Honorable

Mark Souder (IN-03); The Honorable Rick Boucher (VA-

09); The Honorable Joe Barton (TX-06); The Honorable

Chris Smith; (NJ-04) The Honorable Brian Bilbray (CA-

50); The Honorable Gary Miller (CA-42); The Honorable

Ciro Rodriguez (TX-23); The Honorable Tom Latham (IA-

04); The Honorable Jerry Moran (KS-01); The Honorable

Peter Viscolosky (IN-01); The Honorable Jo Bonner (AL-

01); The Honorable Donald Manzullo (IL-16); The

Honorable Don Young (AK-At Large); The Honorable Peter

Roskam (IL-06)

The Honorable Mario Diaz-Balart (FL-25); The Honorable

Dave Camp (MI-04); The Honorable Kevin Brady (TX-08);

The Honorable Paul Broun (GA-10); The Honorable Chris

Murphy (CT-05); The Honorable Parker Griffith (AL-05);

The Honorable Paul Sarbanes (MD-03); The Honorable

Steve Scalise (LA-01); The Honorable John Carter (TX-

31); The Honorable Pete Olson (TX-22); The Honorable

Connie Mack (FL-14); The Honorable Eric Cantor (VA-07);

The Honorable Peter King (NY-03); The Honorable Zack

Space (OH-18); The Honorable Patrick Kennedy (RI-01);

The Honorable Ginny Brown-Waite (FL-05); The Honorable

Tom Price (GA-06); The Honorable Madeleine Bordallo

(GU); The Honorable Ted Poe (TX-02); The Honorable Bill

Posey (FL-15); The Honorable Jim Marshall (GA-08); The

Honorable Louie Gohmert (TX-01)

The Honorable Henry Brown (SC-01); The Honorable Jim

Langevin (RI-02); The Honorable Debbie Wasserman-Shultz

(FL-20); The Honorable Kristen Gillibrand (NY-20); The

Honorable Rob Bishop (UT-01); The Honorable Dean Heller

(NV-02); The Honorable Michael Arcuri (NY-24); The

Honorable Robert Brady (PA-01); The Honorable John

Barrow (GA-12); The Honorable Michael Burgess (TX-26);

The Honorable Suzanne Kosmas (FL-24); The Honorable

Mike McCaul (TX-10); The Honorable Artur Davis (AL-07);

The Honorable Joe Wilson (SC-02); The Honorable Jim

Himes (CT-04); The Honorable Joe Courtney (CT-02); The

Honorable Dan Boren (OK-02); The Honorable Patrick

McHenry (NC-10); The Honorable Charlie Wilson (OH-06);

The Honorable Kenny Marchant (TX-24); The Honorable Sue

Myrick (NC-09); The Honorable Wally Herger (CA-02)

The Honorable Harry Teague (NM-02); The Honorable Chellie

Pingree (ME-01); The Honorable Steve King (IA-05); The

Honorable Lynn Westmoreland (GA-03); The Honorable Paul

Hodes (NH-02); The Honorable Sam Graves (MO-06); The

Honorable Leonard Boswell (IA-03); The Honorable Duncan

Hunter (CA-52); The Honorable John Adler (NJ-03); The

Honorable Gus Bilirakis (FL-09); The Honorable Michael

McMahon (NY-13); The Honorable John Linder (GA-07); The

Honorable Kendrick Meek (FL-17); The Honorable John

Kline (MN-02); The Honorable Allen Boyd (FL-02); The

Honorable Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01); The Honorable Mary

Fallin (OK-05); The Honorable Robert Aderholt (AL-04);

The Honorable Zach Wamp (TN-03); The Honorable Bobby

Scott (VA-03); The Honorable Loretta Sanchez (CA-47);

The Honorable Rodney Alexander (LA-05)

The Honorable Dave Reichert (WA-08); The Honorable Dennis

Moore (KS-03); The Honorable Mike Turner (OH-03); The

Honorable Daniel Maffei (NY-25); The Honorable John

Culberson (TX-07); The Honorable Mike Conaway (TX-11);

The Honorable Bob Latta (OH-05); The Honorable Richard

Neal (MA-02); The Honorable Pete Hoekstra (MI-02); The

Honorable Pete Sessions (TX-32); The Honorable Tom

Rooney (FL-16); The Honorable Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-

08); The Honorable Dan Lipinski (IL-03); The Honorable

Steve Austria (OH-07); The Honorable Patrick Murphy

(PA-08); The Honorable John Boozman (AR-03); The

Honorable Kevin McCarthy (CA-22); The Honorable Joe

Donnelly (IN-02); The Honorable Elijah Cummings (MD-

07); The Honorable Buck McKeon (CA-25); The Honorable

Nathan Deal (GA-09); The Honorable E. B. Johnson (TX-

30)

The Honorable Joe Baca (CA-43); The Honorable Dan Burton

(IN-05); The Honorable Elton Gallegly (CA-24); The

Honorable Frank Lucas (0K-3); The Honorable Joe Crowley

(NY-07); The Honorable Harold Rogers (KY-05); The

Honorable Rosa DeLauro (CT-03); The Honorable Frank

LoBiondo (NJ-02); The Honorable Bennie Thompson (MS-

02); The Honorable Steve Rothman (NJ-09); The Honorable

Jim Costa (CA-20); The Honorable Dan Lungren (CA-03);

The Honorable Dana Rohrabacher (CA-46); The Honorable

Nick Rahall (WV-03); The Honorable John McHugh (NY-23);

The Honorable Ralph Hall (TX-04); The Honorable Lamar

Smith (TX-21); The Honorable Tim Holden (PA-17); The

Honorable Bob Filner (CA-51); The Honorable Maurice

Hinchey (NY-22); The Honorable Trent Franks (AZ-02);

The Honorable Mark Schauer (MI-07)

The Honorable Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-09); The Honorable

Tim Ryan (OH-17); The Honorable Grace Napolitano (CA-

38); The Honorable Maxine Waters (CA-35); The Honorable

Darrell Issa (CA-49); The Honorable Jeff Miller (FL-

01); The Honorable Mike McIntyre (NC-07); The Honorable

Dutch Ruppersberger (MD-02); The Honorable lleana Ros-

Lehtinen (FL-18); The Honorable George Radanovich (CA-

19); The Honorable Gregg Harper (MS-03); The Honorable

Doc Hastings (WA-04); The Honorable Christopher Lee

(NY-26); The Honorable Carolyn McCarthy (NY-04); The

Honorable Dennis Rehberg (MN-At Large); The Honorable

Randy Forbes (VA-04); The Honorable John Shimkus (IL-

19); The Honorable Steve Israel

(NY-02); The Honorable Mike Ross (AR-04); The Honorable

Steve Buyer (IN-04); The Honorable Paul Tonko (NY-21)

The Honorable Tom Cole (OK-04); The Honorable Donna

Christensen (VI); The Honorable Sam Johnson (TX-03);

The Honorable Brian Bilbray (CA-50); The Honorable John

Fleming (LA-04); The Honorable Mike Coffman (CO-06);

The Honorable Henry Cuellar (TX-28).

Madam Chair, I ask all of my colleagues to reject the Obama administration's posture on the F-22 and to support continued F-22 production as we consider this bill.

Mr. Speaker, Members on both sides of the aisle are in favor of health care delivery reform. We want universal access. We want universal coverage. But what the Democratic majority has given us in their rush to get something through this body by the end of the week is 1,100 pages of universal nightmare, and this is not what the American people want.

They don't want these long lines, these long queues, this rationing of care. They don't want nonelected government bureaucrats telling health care providers what they can give and what they can offer and what they can prescribe to take care of their patients.

Mr. Speaker, we can come together in a bipartisan way and rewrite this H.R. 3200 and do it for the American people, bring down the cost of health care, and promote universal access. That is what we need to do. We need to do it in a bipartisan way, and I recommend to the Democratic leadership, let's go back to the drawing table.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1513, legislation that would provide a short term extension of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. While I wish that our colleagues in the Senate would have taken up the House-passed H.R. 2965 before the programs' scheduled expiration on July 31, I believe that it is imperative that we act quickly so as not to lose the ability to help small businesses, who are the biggest job creators in our country.

Small business drives U.S. economic growth and innovation. These companies make up 99.7 percent of all U.S. employers and employ nearly half of all Americans not working for the government. In addition, small businesses employ 39 percent of high-tech workers such as scientists and engineers, and produce 13 to 14 times more patents per employee than do large firms.

Mr. Speaker, the SBIR and STTR programs were created to provide critical funding to these companies so they could conduct R&D that they otherwise would not be able to afford. These programs also provide further funding to commercialize promising technology resulting from this R&D.

Since their inception in 1982, these programs continue to provide over $2 billion in grants and contracts each year and have provided the start-up funding for hundreds of small businesses in the United States.

In my own State of Georgia, Georgia Tech provides assistance to small business initiatives across the State, and as a result, companies have received over $244 million in SBIR and STTR grants since the programs' inception. In my northwest Georgia district alone, over $3.3 million in SBIR grants were awarded in fiscal year 2008.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this month, both Chambers of Congress passed respective legislation to fully reauthorize the SBIR and STTR programs. It is my hope that after we return from the annual August recess, we can work in a bipartisan and bicameral way to pass this important reauthorization. These programs have been effective in providing government assistance to small businesses to help more people in our country achieve the American Dream. We need to ensure that both SBIR and STTR are extended until September 30 so that we can continue to foster small business development in the emerging technology-based global economy--while we work with our Senate colleagues for a full reauthorization.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this short-term extension by voting in favor of S. 1513.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of H. Res. 483, a resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Veterans of Foreign Wars Day.

The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) traces its origin back to 1899 when veterans of the Spanish-American War and the Philippine Insurrection founded local organizations to secure benefits for their service. Fifteen years later an umbrella organization was created named the VFW of the United States, and by 1936 it had a membership of 200,000 veterans and was chartered by Congress.

Mr. Speaker, the VFW's motto is ``honor the dead by helping the living.'' These brave veterans, who have served their nation in wars on foreign soil, are now constantly improving America at home by their service to the community and all living veterans. The VFW has been instrumental in establishing the Veterans Administration, the enactment of two GI bills, and building support for expanded educational benefits for active-duty service members, as well as our Guard and Reserve forces. They have done a remarkable job improving medical centers for all of our returning service men and women. Further, the VFW participates in more than 13 million service hours throughout different communities across the nation and donates $2.5 million in college scholarships to high school students every year.

Mr. Speaker, the brave men and women who sacrificed in the past for our present freedoms deserve our fullest support. Those who have served our nation represent the best our country has to offer, and we must honor them.

Accordingly, I would also like to say a special thank you to the veterans in my district, the 11th of Georgia. Post 4911 of Rome, Post 5376 of Calhoun, Post 6688 of Summerville, Post 5408 of Acworth, Post 7402 of Buchanan, Post 5262 of Kennesaw, Post 2681 of Marietta, and Post 7404 of Carrollton have all admirably served our community and our nation, and they deserve our utmost appreciation for their lifetime of dedication to the Armed Services and our veterans.

It is appropriate that we recognize the dedication and honor of the Veterans of Foreign Wars today in this chamber, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks as well as in accordance with Clause 9 of rule XXI, I am submitting the following information regarding the earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3288, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2010.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3288

Account: Federal Aviation Administration--Airport Improvement Program

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Richard Russell Regional Airport

Address of Requesting Entity: 304 Russell Field Road, Rome, GA 30165

Description of Request: This entire $250,000 will be used to make the Taxiway C configuration consistent with the approved Airport Layout Plan. The realigned Taxiway C will reduce the possibility of runway incursions and back taxiing on the primary runway. In addition, a portion of the closed Runway 14/32 will be converted to usable taxiway pavement, and grading work will also be performed in this midfield area to meet runway safety area standards.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3288

Account: Federal Highway Administration--Interstate Maintenance Discretionary

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Georgia Department of Transportation

Address of Requesting Entity: #2 Capitol Square, Atlanta, GA

Description of Request: The entire $750,000 will be used for the preliminary engineering of a fully directional interchange at Third Army Road and Interstate 75. This project is critical to Bartow, Cobb, and Paulding Counties as they work collaboratively to address the serious traffic problems in this part of the region. This project will allow residents of three counties access to the interstate without having to travel through Cobb County. At the present time, drivers in this area must travel through Cobb County, significantly increasing traffic congestion on both main thoroughfares and residential streets. This part of the region has accident and injury rates higher than the state average in Georgia. In addition, commute time is increased and air quality is negatively affected. The project falls within the boundaries of the air quality non-attainment area of metropolitan Atlanta.

This project will run through Paulding, Cobb and Bartow Counties reconstructing Third Army Road north of the existing roadway from the interchange to U.S. 41. The existing Third Army Road would remain to facilitate local access to the residential properties in the area. The interstate ramps would extend along I-75 for approximately 1,500 feet. Feasibility and justification reports conducted have indicated that there would be significant improvements in traffic safety, mobility, and congestion in the region if this interchange was constructed.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3288

Account: Housing & Urban Development--Economic Development Initiative

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Paulding County Industrial Building Authority

Address of Requesting Entity: 240 Constitution Boulevard, Dallas, GA

Description of Request: The entire $250,000 will be used to construct the Paulding County Technology Model Building which is a key piece to the development of the Airport Industry and Technology Park, a component of the Paulding Forest Initiative for which the County received the Economic Development Administration's Award for Excellence in Economic Development in 2007. The Airport Industry and Technology Park is in a key location for aerospace and technology development as it is surrounded by the major cities of Atlanta, Birmingham, and Chattanooga and located adjacent to the first new general aviation airport designed to accommodate the Very Light Jet industry. This project is the result of a joint venture between the County, the Cities of Dallas and Hiram, and the Industrial Building Authority.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks as well as in accordance with Clause 9 of Rule XXI, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3293, the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3293

Account: Department of Health and Human Services; Health Resources and Services Administration

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Cobb County (GA) Government

Address of Requesting Entity: 100 Cherokee St, Marietta, GA 30090

Description of Request: The Cobb County (GA) Government will assist in building a 22,000 sq. ft multipurpose senior center with limited healthcare services. The center is accessible to both private and public transportation, will offer a variety of programs and services, and will be the first multipurpose senior center within the city limits of Marietta.

The Center will accommodate services, programs and activities for seniors and the issues that affect them. Health and wellness programs including nutrition, fitness, lifestyle, and diabetes care, education and issue-related seminars such as Medicare, identity theft, fraud, grandparents raising grandchildren, and Alzheimer's, volunteer opportunities, advocacy, and socialization opportunities will be offered

As individuals experience longer life-expectancy, health and wellness play an even bigger part in our lives. The proposed Multi-Purpose Senior Health Center will offer limited health services as well as opportunities for improved physical, mental, and social health.

The $500,000 included in H.R. 3293 will be used for renovation and development of an existing building and for necessary equipment. Specifically, the Fiscal Year 2010 federal funds will consist of the following budget items: Construction--Architect Fees: $136,000; Facade, Parking, and Landscaping: $212,500. Equipment--$151,500.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3293

Account: Department of Health and Human Services; Health Resources and Services Administration

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Floyd Medical Center

Address of Requesting Entity: 304 Turner McCall Boulevard, Rome, GA 30165

Description of Request: The counties in Northwest Georgia in Floyd Medical Center's service area (Floyd, Chattooga, and Polk) have a high rate of breast cancer-related mortality. While the State of Georgia is on par with national averages--with roughly 20% of breast cancer cases being terminal--two of these counties have terminal breast cancer rates of 26% in Polk County and 25% in Chattooga County. Unfortunately, there is currently not a single dedicated Breast MRI machine for the hospital's service area.

Floyd Medical Center will procure, operate, and maintain a state-of- the-art dedicated a Breast MRI machine to provide 2,800 screenings for patients who would otherwise have to travel two hours to the nearest facility with a Breast MRI machine. This machine will be incorporated into Floyd Medical Center's new Breast Cancer Center, which serves as a single point-of-care by providing a full spectrum of cancer diagnosis, prevention, and treatment services.

The $250,000 included in H.R. 3293 will be used in its entirety for the procurement and installation of the dedicated Breast MRI machine. This specifically includes purchasing the MRI equipment, software used in the digital imaging of screenings and biopsies, shipping and installation of the unit, and initial training for technicians and physicians.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3293

Account: Department of Health and Human Services; Health Resources and Services Administration

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Gordon Hospital

Address of Requesting Entity: 1035 Red Bud Road, Calhoun, GA 30701

Description of Request: Gordon Hospital in Calhoun, Georgia is committed to meeting the needs of patients and increasing access to medical records. It is the common goal of hospitals, healthcare industry, and the private and public sector to increase the use of electronic medical records. In fact, health IT policy was passed as a part of the larger stimulus package, earlier this year although the bulk of the funding was provided for incentives for those who have already adopted, instead of funding for implementation.

Connecting medical providers to provide a more comprehensive medical history of a patient not only lowers healthcare costs but also leads to quicker diagnosis and treatment of patients. Therefore, Gordon Hospital is seeking federal aid to purchase a Community Electric Medical Record System. This system will allow for easier interface with doctors consulting patients in a variety of specialties and also allow easier access to medical records for our patients.

The $150,000 included in H.R. 3293 will be used in its entirety for the purchase of Community EMR Software.

Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey

Bill Number: H.R. 3293

Account: Department of Health and Human Services; Health Resources and Services Administration

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Kennesaw State University

Address of Requesting Entity: 1000 Chastain Road, MD 0101, Kennesaw,

Mr. Speaker, 2 days after the Senate voted to strip funding for an additional seven F-22 Raptors from the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, it seems that critical information may have been withheld that could have influenced the outcome of this vote; an internal Pentagon oversight board report has revealed that full rate production of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter may be delayed.

Given that the need to transition to the F-35 was cited by several Senators who voted to terminate the F-22 program, it is indeed troubling that this information was held internally until after the F- 22 vote earlier this week. If the Pentagon had been forthright with the facts, there is a very strong chance that the hearts and the minds of several Senators might have been changed and the funding for the additional F-22s may not have been stripped.

The news that the F-35 will again be delayed only further strengthens the argument for continued production of the world's only fifth- generation fighter in full-rate production, the F-22 Raptor.

I hope that as we move forward with negotiations between the House and the Senate on the future of the F-22 program, the Pentagon will make every effort possible to ensure that Congress is fully briefed on the facts and what they mean for the future of American air dominance.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 123, recognizing the historical and national significance of the many contributions of John William Heisman to the sport of football.

John Heisman was born in Cleveland, Ohio in 1869 and was raised in Titusville, Pennsylvania where he began playing football as a young boy. At that time, football was not played as it is today, but instead it resembled more of a rugby match. In 1887, Heisman left his home town for Brown University, where he participated in club football with his classmates. However, two years later he transferred to the University of Pennsylvania to pursue a law degree. Even though Heisman was outsized at 5'8", he continued his collegiate career playing varsity football for three years at guard, tackle, center, and as an end.

John Heisman was nearly debilitated from being struck by lightning and in turn had to take his final exams at the University of Pennsylvania orally to achieve his law degree in 1892. From there, he received his first coaching position at Oberlin College, where he led the team to an undefeated season in its second full season at the school. Clearly, Heisman had found a niche in coaching football, and his illustrious career was just beginning.

His coaching career continued with stints at the University of Akron, Auburn University, Clemson University, the University of Pennsylvania, Washington and Jefferson College, and Rice University. However, while his coaching career extended from 1892-1927, his most memorable years were from 1904-1919 when he coached at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, GA. At Georgia Tech, Heisman had an astounding record of 102-29-6, and even held three undefeated seasons with 33 straight wins. Heisman went on to retire from the game he loved and so heavily influenced in 1927 at the age of 62. Even though Georgia Tech is my own alma mater, I think that every football player, coach, and fan will recognize that Heisman's record of achievement deserves our praise.

John Heisman's retirement did not last long as he moved to New York and found time to write about his experiences and served in various advisory positions. Because of his influence on the athletic community there he was asked to serve as the first Athletic Director of the Downtown Athletic Club in New York City on May 23, 1930. While serving in this capacity, Heisman organized and founded the Touchdown Club of New York, and later the National Football Coaches Association.

The Downtown Athletic Club insisted that Heisman design a voting system to honor and award the best collegiate football player of each year. Because of his humble love and respect for the game of football, he initially did not want to design such a system due to his misgivings about promoting a player over the importance of teamwork. However, he later noted that it would be a consummate team accomplishment to have such an award for one of its players. The first Downtown Athletic Club Award was given to Jay Berwanger in 1935, but John Heisman would be unable to award this distinguished honor to another young man in 1936 as he contracted pneumonia and passed away later that year. Shortly thereafter, the Downtown Athletic Club renamed their renowned trophy after its founder, calling it the Heisman Memorial Trophy.

Mr. Speaker, John Heisman has had a lasting impact on the game of football, and he undoubtedly inspires young men each year. The Heisman Trophy Award is the most sought after accolade in college football, and those who have honorably achieved that distinction will forever remember the accomplishments of the man that bears its name. Heisman molded the game of football to include the ``hike'' from a center to a quarterback, and he claimed his most notable achievement was enacting the forward pass into the rules of the game; both of which are staples of today's sport of football. I applaud John Heisman and recognize his lifetime of service and accomplishment in the game of football.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution, and I yield back.

Offered By: Mr. Gingrey of Georgia

Amendment No. 15: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Gingrey of Georgia

Amendment No. 16: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Sec. 524. None of the funds made available in this Act may

be used to implement subsections (a) and (c) of section 7131

of title 5, United States Code.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a fellow Georgian, Command Sergeant Major (CSM) Neil Russell, on his retirement after more than 38 years of service in the Georgia Army National Guard. CSM Russell's dedication to duty and service throughout his career has led to numerous accomplishments that he will undoubtedly carry with him forever as he moves into the next phase of his life.

CSM Russell began his military career with the Georgia Army National Guard when he graduated high school in 1971, and he has been humbly serving our nation in this capacity ever since. His military education includes the Fire Direction Computer Course, the Equal Opportunity and Race Relations Course, the NCOES Advance and Senior Courses, the Battle Skills Course, the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy Course, the U.S. Army Command Sergeants Major Designee Course, and the Bradley Infantry Crewman Course at numerous military installations across the country. These experiences laid the course for an illustrious career for CSM Russell. He also holds an Associates Degree in Science from Brunswick Junior College and a Bachelor of Science from Excelsior College in Albany, NY.

CSM Russell served in the 118th Field Artillery Brigade in Savannah, GA as a Fire Direction Specialist and Operations NCO until August of 1981, when he was assigned to the Service Battery 2nd Battalion, 214th Field Artillery as the Battalion Supply Sergeant. In May of 1985, he was transferred back to the 118th Field Artillery Brigade. He remained there until September of 1992 when he was transferred to the 1st Battalion, 118th Field Artillery Battalion as the Battalion Operations NCO, and in May of 1999 he was selected and transferred to the 122nd Rear Operations Center (ROC) as the unit Operations Sergeant Major. Finally, in May of 2005, CSM Russell was selected and reassigned as the JFHQ Command Sergeant Major for the Georgia Army National Guard, and he has honorably served in this capacity until his retirement.

CSM Russell trained at the National Training Center in Ft. Irwin, CA with the 1st Battalion, 118th Field Artillery in 1996 and has participated in numerous OCONUS exercises while serving in the 122nd ROC. In November of 2000, he mobilized with the 122nd ROC in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. The 122nd ROC became the basis around which a task force was created to establish, coordinate, and manage the civil affairs mission in Afghanistan. In January of 2002, CSM Russell deployed with the task force to Kabul, Afghanistan, and he functioned as the Task Force Command Sergeant Major until June of 2002, when he re-deployed. This task force was awarded the Joint Meritorious Unit Award for exceptional achievement for the period between November of 2001 and July of 2002.

Throughout his illustrious career, CSM Russell has been presented the Georgia State Active Duty Ribbon, the Georgia Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal with Service Star, the Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal, the Armed Forces Reserve Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the NCO Professional Development Ribbon, the Army Reserve Component Overseas Training Ribbon, the Humanitarian Service Medal, the Joint Services Achievement Medal, the Army Achievement Medal, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, and the Bronze Star Medal. Each one of these medals and ribbons signify the admirable service that CSM Russell has graciously displayed in his career in the Georgia Army National Guard.

CSM Russell has made a lasting contribution to the capability of today's United States Army National Guard. His superior performance of duties highlights the culmination of more than 37 years of honorable and dedicated Army National Guard service. My home state of Georgia and our nation are proud of CSM Russell's exemplary professional competence, sound judgment, and total dedication to duty. He has reflected great credit upon himself and has always upheld the highest traditions of the Army National Guard. I wish Neil and his family all the best in their future endeavors as he enters into a well-deserved retirement after such a distinguished career of service.