Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 215, legislation that will designate a National Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Automated External Defibrillator Awareness Week. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this bill, and would like to thank my colleague, Mr. Randy Kuhl of New York, for advancing this legislation to help educate the American people about the critical difference cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator training can make in our country.

This legislation has been dear to Mr. Kuhl's heart after a young man in his area, Louis Acompora, died from a blunt impact to the chest while playing lacrosse. Had an automated external defibrillator been available at the time, his life might have been saved. I commend Mr. Kuhl's success as a New York State Senator in working with Assemblyman Harvey Weisenberg from Long Island to advance the New York State law requiring public schools to have at least one such device on school grounds. His hard work has helped save over 35 lives in New York State in the five years since the law's enactment.

Mr. Speaker, heart disease kills more people in our Nation every year than any other medical condition. Sudden cardiac arrest is one of the most time sensitive cardiac conditions for which immediate attention is vital. If cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation are not applied within 5 minutes after sudden cardiac arrest, there is virtually no chance of survival. Approximately 325,000 Americans suffer sudden cardiac arrest each year and more than 95 percent die before ever reaching the hospital.

Mr. Speaker, these statistics are staggering. Sadly, if more Americans were trained in performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation and in using automated external defibrillators, many of these lives could have been saved. Communities with comprehensive automated external defibrillator programs have improved survival rates from only 5 percent to over 40 percent.

Mr. Speaker, this is why it is so critical that we pass H. Con. Res. 215. Having a week dedicated to Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Automated External Defibrillator awareness will increase the profile of this devastating disease, and most importantly, will help save lives. I encourage all my colleagues to support this important resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Republican motion to instruct the conferees on the 2008 Department of Defense authorization act.

Madam Speaker, as we adjourned for the Thanksgiving recess, we witnessed something remarkable. We witnessed the Democratic majority, in working to mollify their liberal base one more time before the Thanksgiving recess, come to the floor pounding their fist declaring that we must not give our troops additional funding without congressional mandated withdrawal guidelines. They recycled the same old rhetoric, seemingly oblivious to the facts on the ground.

Thankfully, the direction of our efforts in the global war on terror is being guided by General Petraeus and others who do understand the momentum that we have garnered; that violence between Sunnis and Shiites has nearly disappeared from Baghdad, with terrorist bombings down 77 percent; that attacks against United States soldiers have fallen to levels not seen since before the February 2006 bombing of the Shiite shrine in Samarra; that United States casualties in Iraq are at their lowest level since March of 2006; and that many military analysts, including some who are opposed to the war, have concluded that the United States and its allies are on the verge of winning in Iraq.

Indeed, Madam Speaker, the distinguished chairman of the Defense Authorization Appropriations Subcommittee just returned from Iraq, and he declared that the surge is finally working. I reference Mr. Murtha from Pennsylvania.

Madam Speaker, this is something the other side doesn't like to discuss, victory in the global war on terror. That is tough to squeeze in with the defeatist rhetoric recited to appease MoveOn.org and Code Pink.

Another thing the Democratic majority never discusses are the consequences of failure, and they have been discussed this morning on our side.

That is why this motion to instruct is so important, Madam Speaker. It is critical that the House accept Senate provision 1536 and recognize that failure in Iraq would mean a collapse of a democratic Iraqi Government, likely leading to mass killings and genocide in that nation; certainly emboldening al Qaeda; regional instability; Iran and Syria determining the course of Iraq's future; and Israel being pushed into the Mediterranean Sea, just as Ahmadinejad called for.

These are the consequences of defeat and these are the reasons why Congress must commit to a strategy that will not leave a failed state in Iraq and why Congress must not pass, indeed, not pass legislation that risks demoralizing and undermining our military, as they are indeed on the verge of victory in Iraq.

So, Madam Speaker, the Democrats are zero for 40 in trying to compel this precipitous withdrawal from Iraq. With this motion to instruct, I ask them for once to get on the right side. Join not just the Republicans, but, more importantly, our brave men and women in the military, and give victory a chance.

Madam Speaker, I encourage all my colleagues, let's vote ``yes'' on the motion to instruct.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank the gentleman from Washington, our friend, Representative Inslee, and of course Representative Nathan Deal.

I am proud to be here to support this resolution, H.R. 710, in honor of our colleague, the late Dr. Norwood. Representative Inslee described the magnitude of the issue. I wasn't even aware that there were, as a physician, maybe I should be, but over 90,000 people who are on a waiting list, and a fourth of them each year get transplants, and only a very small number get a transplant from a living donor, as Representative Inslee pointed out. And of course Representative Deal just explained to us exactly what this cross-living donor program, how it would work. So it is an easy bill, Madam

Speaker, to support for our late and dear friend and colleague, Dr. Charlie Norwood.

Earlier this year we passed a bill honoring Dr. Norwood by naming a VA Medical Center in Augusta, Georgia, the heart of his congressional district, in honor of the great work that he did on behalf of our veterans.

I think my colleagues, Madam Speaker, know that Charlie Norwood served as a dental officer in Vietnam, in combat, got two Bronze Stars, I think a medical combat award. He was a great spokesperson on behalf of our veterans.

But also, in regard to health care, before I was even thinking about running for this great office that I hold now, Madam Speaker, Charlie Norwood had that Patient Bill of Rights. I think a lot of my colleagues would remember that. Madam Speaker, you indeed probably were here at that time. And so this is just another opportunity for us, not just to honor Dr. Norwood, but to realize that he worked so diligently on behalf of veterans issues and health care issues. So it's a great honor to be here today.

And I'll tell you, on a personal note, my colleagues, Madam Speaker, I have a senior legislative assistant, Josh Waller, whose dad, Jerry, last year died while on a waiting list for a liver transplant. That was awfully painful for me to watch that happen to the dad of one of my great staff members. So this is a wonderful opportunity for us to do something really good for these people that Representative Deal, Representative Inslee described that are on these waiting lists, that suffer dialysis. And as Representative Deal pointed out, the Senate amendment just changed it a little bit so that other organs, other than kidneys, indeed, Dr. Norwood himself, as Representative Inslee pointed out, was the recipient of a lung transplant. Unfortunately, it did not work for him. But God bless him. And I'm proud to be here today to support this bill. I urge all of my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 1104, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in strong opposition to H.R. 4156, the so-called Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations of 2008, because in fact, Mr. Speaker, the bill should be called the Disorderly and Irresponsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act.

Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. What we are debating tonight, disguised as a genuine bridge fund to sustain operations in the global war on terror, is nothing more than another defeatist measure intended to placate the Democrats' liberal base as we approach this Thanksgiving recess.

The Democratic leadership apparently has decided it's more to stand with the Out of Iraq Caucus, MoveOn.org and Code Pink than with our brave men and women in uniform. Rather than funding our soldiers' needs and delivering a decisive blow to the terrorist campaign in Iraq, the Democrats are again conditioning the funding on a date certain for withdrawal.

At a time of sustained progress by our forces, Mr. Speaker, it seems that what is great news for America and for our troops is consequently bad political news for a Democratic majority who has literally bet the farm on a defeatist agenda.

Just last weekend, Prime Minister Maliki stated that violence between Sunnis and Shias has nearly disappeared from Iraq, disappeared from Baghdad, with terrorist bombings down 77 percent.

The Washington Post reported that attacks against United States soldiers have fallen to levels not seen since the February 2006 bombing of the Shia shrine in Samarra. And an Investor's Business Daily article detailed that military analysts, including many who are opposed to the war, have concluded that the United States and its allies are on the verge of winning in Iraq. And, thankfully, United States casualties in Iraq are at their lowest level since March of 2006, Mr. Speaker. Now is not the time to risk impeding the progress we are making. Now is the time to continue building on the turnaround we have made, and to state unequivocally that we are on the verge of victory in Iraq and that we will finish the job.

Mr. Speaker, we cannot give in to the terrorists' extremist views and sinister plans for the Middle East and the world. And we certainly should not send a message to the terrorists that such a capitulation will begin in 30 days and will wrap up by December of 2008.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on tying funds for our troops to a date certain withdrawal from Iraq. I urge all my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this dangerous bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 2156, the so- called ``Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations of 2008.'' Because, in fact, this bill is a ``disorderly and irresponsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act.''

Let me be very clear, Mr. Speaker. What we are debating today-- disguised as a genuine bridge fund to sustain operations in the Global War on Terror--is nothing more than another defeatist measure intended to placate the Democrat's liberal base as we approach the Thanksgiving recess.

The Democratic leadership has decided it is more important to stand with the ``Out of Iraq Caucus,'' MoveOn.org and Code Pink than with our brave men and women in uniform. Rather than funding our soldiers' needs and delivering a decisive blow to the terrorist campaign in Iraq, the Democrats are again conditioning the funding on a date-certain withdrawal.

At a time of sustained progress by our forces, Mr. Speaker, it seems that what is great news for America and for our troops is consequently bad political news for the Democrat majority and their defeatist agenda.

Mr. Speaker, a July New York Times editorial authored by Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack stated ``We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. . . . The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in General David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference.''

In September, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker spoke optimistically about the future of Iraq citing concrete progress. Acknowledging we still had a long way to go, they recognized we had achieved tactical momentum and were building momentum toward local reconciliation. Indeed, local Iraqis were turning against extremists.

Last weekend Prime Minister al-Maliki stated that violence between Sunnis and Shi'ites has nearly disappeared from Baghdad, with terrorist bombings down 77 percent. The Washington Post reported that attacks against U.S. soldiers have fallen to levels not seen since before the February 2006 bombing of a Shi'ite shrine in Samarra. An Investor's Business Daily article detailed that military analysts--including many who are opposed to the war--have concluded that the U.S. and its allies are on the verge of winning in Iraq.

And thankfully, U.S. casualties in Iraq are at their lowest level since March 2006. Now is not the time to risk impeding the progress we are making. Now is the time to continue building on the turn-around we have made and to state unequivocally that we are on the verge of victory in Iraq, and that we will finish the job.

Mr. Speaker, let me remind my colleagues of the consequences of giving up on Iraq: the collapse of a democratic Iraqi government, likely leading to mass killings and genocide in the nation; an emboldened al-Qaeda; regional instability; Iran and Syria setting the course of Iraq's future; and Israel being pushed into the Mediterranean sea.

The stakes are too high for political posturing. Ayman al-Zawahiri has said ``the Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals. The first stage: expel the Americans from Iraq.''

Mr. Speaker, we cannot give in to their extremist views and sinister plans for the Middle East and the world. And we certainly should not send a message to the terrorists that such a capitulation will begin in 30 days and will wrap up by December of 2008.

Mr. Speaker, never have I been so glad that we've got General Petraeus leading our troops in Iraq and not the Democratic leadership of this house. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on tying funds for our troops to a date-certain withdrawal from Iraq. I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, as we approach Veterans Day, I proudly rise to honor a Georgia native, Lieutenant General David Poythress, who has served the State of Georgia as our adjutant general since 1999.

Two weeks ago, I attended the change of command ceremony for General Poythress as he stepped down from his post as commander of the Georgia National Guard.

General Poythress's long and distinguished military career began at Emory University in Atlanta, where in 1967 he received his law degree, and he graduated as a distinguished military graduate of the Emory ROTC program.

After graduation, Mr. Speaker, General Poythress served 4 years on active duty with the United States Air Force

as a judge advocate officer, including 1 year as chief of military justice at Da Nang Air Force Base in Vietnam.

Upon returning to civilian life, General Poythress remained in the Air Force Reserve, serving as a judge advocate officer in various positions of increasing responsibility. In 1991, General Poythress returned to active duty to oversee the reserve legal officers during Operation Desert Storm and Desert Shield. He was promoted to brigadier general in 1994, and to major general in July of 1999.

It was in 1999 that General Poythress took over as the adjutant general of the State of Georgia, where he has commanded 12,000 personnel of the Georgia Army National Guard, the Georgia Air National Guard, and the Georgia State Defense Force now for nearly a decade.

Mr. Speaker, in 2006, General Poythress became the first adjutant general in Georgia's 273-year history to wear a third star as a lieutenant general. And for the past 8 years, General Poythress has led Georgia's Guard through some historic changes, and our men and women have performed admirably under his leadership.

Not only has General Poythress made a major impact on our Nation's military, but he has also been an irreplaceable asset, Mr. Speaker, to the State of Georgia. General Poythress spent much of his civilian career in public service to the citizens of our great State. He served first as deputy state revenue commissioner, then secretary of the State of Georgia, and finally, commissioner of labor in Georgia. Needless to say, General Poythress's retirement will leave huge shoes to fill in the State of Georgia.

Over the past several years, Mr. Speaker, I have enjoyed getting to know General Poythress and his lovely wife, Elizabeth, as personal friends, and I appreciate their singular dedication to our Guardsmen.

Last year, Mr. Speaker, I even had the opportunity to travel to Iraq with the general, and we met with Georgia's 48th Brigade Combat Team. I know it must have been a joy for General Poythress to see his troops and General Rhodheaver serving our Nation so honorably, but also a painful time, as he remembered the 26 fallen soldiers from the 48th who were lost in some of the most dangerous combat in the Sunni Triangle outside of the city of Baghdad.

Through all of the struggles, including the difficult task of assisting Louisiana in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, General Poythress has led Georgia's Guard with the strength of a commander and the heart, Mr. Speaker, of a public servant.

And so I ask my colleagues tonight, join me in honoring Lieutenant General David Poythress for his dedicated service to defending the State of Georgia and the United States of America.

Madam Speaker, as all Members rise to salute our veterans just 5 days from now, I'm appalled that the Democratic majority is holding these veterans hostage by combining a bill that we passed in this House 5 months ago to increase funding for our veterans, as they pointed out in regard particularly to health care, $6 billion, and the President is ready to sign that bill. But, no, the Democratic majority wants to hold that bill and our veterans hostage so they can pass a bloated-up, pork-laden, Health and Human Services-Labor bill that increases spending over the President's request by $9 billion.

I think this is a deplorable thing, and I have called for the end of it in House Resolution 786, which would change the rules of the House so that no House could ever combine our MilCon-Veterans Administration budget again with any other appropriations bill. It would have to pass as a stand-alone bill.

Let's quit playing politics with our veterans.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Arizona's yielding, and I appreciate the gentleman bringing up a point of order

against the rule. And to take away that opportunity to raise a point of order against the conference report, Madam Speaker, where there are air-dropped earmarks, in this case I think the gentleman said nine, I still remember the calls from the Democratic leadership, led, of course, by Madam Speaker, Speaker Pelosi, when the Democrats won control of the House by virtue of the elections almost exactly a year ago, that this would be the most open, honest, and transparent Congress in history.

Madam Speaker, I just want to give you a quote from Speaker Pelosi promising fiscal restraint if Democrats win. And here's the quote:

``Breaking with many Democrats, Ms. Pelosi also spoke out against earmarking billions of dollars for home-State projects, a practice she calls a `monster' that hurts Congress.'' And here is what she said: `` `I'd get rid of all of them. None of them is worth the skepticism, the cynicism the public has . . . and the fiscal irresponsibility of it.' '' And that was in the Wall Street Journal, July 13, 2006.

Another quote from Madam Speaker Pelosi: ``We will bring transparency and openness to the budget process and to the use of earmarks and will give the American people the leadership they deserve,'' Nancy Pelosi, press release, December 12, 2006.

Madam Speaker, this is absurd. And, again, I commend the gentleman from Arizona for calling attention to this. Where is the openness? Where is the transparency? What good do we have in regard to a point of order so that we can look at these conference reports? Where are the 2 days that we are supposed to have to look at them? So it is taken away from us. What good does it do if the Rules Committee waives all points of order?

So I commend the gentleman. He's absolutely right. We need to have some true transparency in this body.

I thank my colleague from Georgia, Dr. Price. Certainly the posters that he has got up there, Mr. Speaker, that I call our colleagues' attention to, I might just touch on that issue in regard to the tax on tobacco product, particularly cigarettes, that increase in that tax, just 61 cents a pack, I believe that would bring the Federal tax on cigarettes to a dollar a pack. But the Heritage Foundation and others have looked at that and said, well, how many new smokers would you need to have to raise the $70 billion that would actually not completely pay for this massive expansion of SCHIP that Democrats have recommended? And the number, Mr. Speaker, is 22 million, as Dr. Price's poster so vividly points out.

That's right. And that means the ones that are already addicted, the poor grandparents and parents of these children that can't break that habit, and some of them, Mr. Speaker, and I know my colleagues appreciate this, are the poor members of society, for some reason that have developed that smoking habit. And we are going to put the burden on them, plus 22 million. And some of those 22 million, this is the irony of this pay-for that the Democrats have come up with, some of these very children, maybe some of the 5,000 that I delivered who are old enough to go buy cigarettes, they will have to be addicted to help pay for this massive expansion so that their younger brothers and sisters can get health insurance funded by the Federal Government. It makes absolutely no sense. I really appreciate Dr. Price bringing this leadership hour to us as part of the Truth Squad, the ongoing Truth Squad, because the truth just needs to be told. And I think the important thing for our colleagues to understand and anybody within shouting distance to know that Republican Members of this body, and our President, George W. Bush, is all for children and providing health care for children. If he wasn't, would we be spending $35 billion a year on the Medicaid program for children's health insurance? Absolutely we would not. The President even has recommended that because it is estimated that 750,000 children, we cover 6,750,000 in that income bracket that my colleague from New Jersey was talking about, the 100 to 200 percent of the Federal poverty level have fallen through the cracks, so the President said, look, let's increase this spending $25 billion over 5 years, let's increase it 20 percent and a little bit more money in there for inflation. But, instead, the Democrats come with a bill to increase the spending by 140 percent to $60 billion. In fact, in their original bill, the CHAMP Act, they wanted to increase it to $90 billion.

As Dr. Price points out, in this new bill the $60 billion version, that is covering 53 percent of all children in this country either on the Medicaid or the SCHIP program. Well, there is something wrong with that. There is no question about it. We don't need to be paying the health insurance for children from families who are making $62,000 a year. In some instances in the State of New York, it may be up to $83,000 a year. That's what we're railing against, this unnecessary, massive expansion. We Republicans and the President want to renew this program. It's a good program. We need to increase the funding. The President possibly would be willing to even go a little more than a 20 percent increase. But the only justification the Democrat majority can have for this type of increase is just what was already alluded to, a march toward a single-payer national health insurance program. In some of their rhetoric in regard to Medicare and wanting to start covering people at age 55, you see where the gap gets smaller and smaller, and then all of a sudden you're covering from cradle to grave

everybody in this country run by the government.

So I thank the gentleman from Georgia, my colleague from Georgia, my colleague from Cobb County, for leading this time. I know there are a number of other speakers that are here that want to weigh in on this. We just need to keep fighting. We will get this bill right. But we need to do it in a bipartisan way.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank the gentleman from Arizona, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. We heard, Mr. Speaker, earlier from Mrs. Blackburn, also a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. These Members are on the Committee of Jurisdiction from whence the bill came.

Unfortunately, their only input into this CHAMP legislation, as the Democrats originally phrased it in their acronym, their only opportunity, the Republican members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, is to be here on the floor during this Special Order hour to try to educate Members on both sides of the aisle. The gentleman from Arizona has been on the committee for a number of years, and he knows of what he speaks.

Mr. Speaker, talking about this issue of the pay-for, now, the PAYGO idea was the Democrat's campaign pledge, that if they had a new program or they expanded an existing program, and this is an expansion of an existing program, that they would pay for it. They would pay for it by either cutting spending somewhere else or raising taxes.

So this is one of those programs. This is a renewal of a program that has worked very well. It needs some additional funding. I don't think any of us would argue about that. Republicans, as well as Democrats, can support a reasonable renewal and expansion of the Children's Health Insurance Program.

But this is such a massive expansion that the Democrats found themselves in a bind. Mr. Speaker, to this day, they find themselves in a bind, and the bind is they are trying to pay for this with a massive increase, a tax increase, sin tax, if you will, on tobacco, especially cigarettes at 61 cents a pack.

As the gentleman from Arizona pointed out and as my colleague the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Westmoreland, it would require 22 million additional people, grandparents, parents, and, yes, indeed, even the children, to start smoking, to pick up the smoking habit.

Mr. Speaker, I delivered 5,200 babies over a 31-year career as an OB/ GYN physician, and I would hate to think that some of those kids who are in their late teens or early twenties now, would have to be puffing away so they could pay for a health insurance program for their little brothers and sisters. Now, that makes a whole lot of sense, doesn't it?

If the gentleman will yield back, in his chart, my colleagues, it is so telling, because as it points out, this is over a 10-year period, up to 2017, but yet this program, all of a sudden they let it fall off the cliff.

The other chart there in front of my colleague from Texas, if you pay attention to that, again, the cigarette tax continues over the next 5 years, and all of a sudden they slash the funding for SCHIP so that the numbers work.

Because even with the cigarette tax, enticing 22 million additional people to get addicted to tobacco over that period of time, it still falls short of funding the full program by $40 billion. So that is why they say at the end of 5 years, around 2012, all of a sudden there is no money. There is not sufficient money. Even though our young people are addicted to cigarettes, puffing away, trying to pay for the program, it doesn't pay for it. So they use this trick, Mr. Speaker, and I think that is really deplorable.

I will close my remarks by saying this and then yield back to my colleague from Arizona who is controlling the time. I know there are other Members that want to speak.

But the original bill that the Democrats brought to us, the Democratic majority in this house, called for not $60 billion worth of funding on SCHIP, but $90 billion. Thank goodness they were reined in a little bit.

They called that the CHAMP Act. Well, I call it, based on what we have presented here tonight in this disingenuous funding mechanism, I call it the CHUMP Act. The only difference in ``CHAMP'' and ``CHUMP,'' I say to my Democratic majority is you; you, the majority, trying to hoodwink the American public on this bill.

Do what is right. You have an opportunity. The President will work with you. The Republican minority will work with you. Just simply do what is right, and for once, tell the truth.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back to the gentleman from Arizona.

What the gentleman is saying, and I thank the gentleman for yielding once again, because the Democrats are determined, Mr. Speaker, to increase this funding to a point that they get 4 million additional children covered under this SCHIP program.

Under the current law, about 6.5 million children in this country, I think close to 300,000 in my great State of Georgia, are covered under the program. There may be 750,000 kids in that income range of 100 to 200 percent of the Federal poverty level up to $42,000 a year for a family of four, as was pointed out early in the discussion, there may be 750,000 kids that have fallen through the cracks.

That is why the President said let's renew the program and increase the

funding by 20 percent. A 20 percent increase is not chicken feed, Mr. Speaker. That is a lot of money.

But what the gentleman from Arizona is referring to in regard to this cliff, if you all of a sudden try to cover an additional 4 million, where are those kids coming from? Well, they are coming from families who already have health insurance for their kids in the private market. Of course, if you get an opportunity, who wouldn't? You are making $60,000 a year and you are providing health insurance for your wife and yourself and your two kids, and all of a sudden you get an opportunity to get the kids on the government trough and you do that, and then you are used to that wonderful largesse of ``Uncle Sugar'' for 4 years, and all of a sudden you get to the point where there is no funding, who comes off first? They do. That is where they drop off the cliff. I thank the gentleman for pointing that out.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commend Michael Tompkins on being installed as Chairman of the Board of the National Apartment Association. Mr. Tompkins has been a leading advocate for quality rental housing in the state of Georgia for nearly two decades, where he has served on the Atlanta Apartment Association for over 13 years.

Applying his knowledge of the apartment industry, Mr. Tompkins has been an asset to the Atlanta Apartment Association, serving in a variety of roles, including president in 2001. In 2004, Mr. Tompkins served as president of the Georgia Apartment Association.

In addition to the impact Mr. Tompkins has made on the quality of rental property in the southeast, his philanthropic endeavors have also benefited the well-being of our community. He volunteers his time serving on several non-profit organization boards including the Southeastern Trustee for Boys and Girls Clubs, Atlanta Community Food Bank and the Emory University Board of Trustees, to name a few.

Madam Speaker, it is no small wonder that word of Mr. Tompkins' leadership in the advocacy of quality rental housing spread quickly, and he will now take his expertise to the national level, where he will chair an association comprised of more than 51,000 members and responsible for more than 6.1 million apartment homes nationwide.

Madam Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in honoring Michael Tompkins for his commitment to improving the quality of rental homes in this country and representing the interests of renters throughout our nation.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise also in support of H.R. 3877, the Mine Communications Technology Innovation Act.

First, I want to take this opportunity to thank Chairman Gordon, Ranking Member Hall, and all of the members of the Science Committee and the staff who worked so hard to bring this important bipartisan legislation through our committee and to the House floor today.

Madam Speaker, every Member of the House hopes to avoid another catastrophe such as the Sago Mine explosion in West Virginia in 2006 or the disaster at the Crandall Canyon Mine in Utah this past August. And I certainly want to commend my colleague, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson), for introducing H.R. 3877 to address one of the major obstacles to miner safety, and that is, our inability, as he just pointed out, to track miners underground and to communicate with them in the event of such an emergency.

Under the 2006 MINER Act, the Mine Safety and Health Administration, MSHA, and the National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety, NIOSH, receive significant funding to lead an interagency program to develop communication, tracking, oxygen supply and refuge systems for mines. To date, this program has invested over $23 million, and it is steadily progressing towards installation of new, safer communication systems by the year 2009.

As NIOSH and MSHA continue to advance research and development in this area, there was clear bipartisan agreement within the Science Committee that the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, could enhance these efforts by fostering standards for communication equipment in mines and development of those systems through the creation of best practices, measurement services, and research evaluation.

NIST has long been a leader in communications research technology and has the equipment, and it has the expertise to characterize the mine environment and determine what techniques are best suited for these very difficult situations and conditions.

This bill is the product of bipartisan work in the Science Committee, and it creates a basic framework to ensure that the government's research agency works cooperatively, effectively and quickly to improve mine and miner safety.

The world-renowned capabilities of NIST laboratories and the years of study and experience at NIOSH and MSHA can significantly improve implementation of emergency communications and tracking systems in our mines. Improvement in these systems will substantially increase rescuers' ability to find and free miners in the event of a mine catastrophe, as we just outlined, that occurred recently in West Virginia and the great State of Utah.

H.R. 3877 would significantly contribute to the health and the safety of miners by uniting the communications and standards experience of NIST with the ongoing research and the mine environment experience at NIOSH and MSHA.

I want to applaud my colleague, Mr. Matheson, for addressing this issue that he knows so well that is of such utmost importance to his constituents in Utah, as well as mining communities across this country.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation. It will make significant advancements in miner safety.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Children's Health Insurance Program, but not this program and not this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I have spent 26 years of my life as an OB-GYN physician delivering over 5,000 babies. I have a number of reasons to be in opposition to this bill and this rule, but not the least of which is the way the Democratic majority pays for this, how they raise the $71 billion that they are required to in their PAYGO rules. And, Mr. Speaker, that is this cigarette tax of 61 cents a pack. If you crunch those numbers to raise $71 billion to pay for this massive expansion so that Democrats can now cover an additional 4 million children under this program when there are only about 750,000 out there in the 100-200 percent Federal poverty level of not being covered, it makes really no sense. And to pay for it, they would have to have 22 million additional men, women, and, yes, maybe even some of those children I delivered take up the smoking habit. So what kind of sense does that make here? We are trying to provide health insurance for children, but we can only do it if we can encourage 22 million of their grandparents, parents, and, indeed, yes, some of these very children I delivered to take up the smoking habit.

It's like the Pied Piper, maybe being Ms. Pelosi, walking along heading for a cliff smoking cigarettes and all these adults right behind her smoking cigarettes and behind them these little children, and they are headed for that cliff, Mr. Speaker.

This is a terrible bill. I am totally opposed to it. I am not opposed to expanding the program to cover the uninsured that are eligible or even increasing a bit, as the President has said he is willing to increase maybe $10 billion for this program, but I am opposed to the bill. It's wrong.

Let's vote against the rule and against the bill.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I thank Chairman Filner and Ranking Member Buyer, and certainly my colleague, the author of the bill, Congressman Kingston from Savannah.

I want to tell the Congressman that there are no city slickers in Augusta, Georgia. I am an Augusta native. There are probably not any in Savannah either. Maybe they are all in the Atlanta area.

Mr. Speaker, I do rise today in strong support of H.R. 1808 to designate Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Augusta, Georgia, my hometown, as the Charlie Norwood Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

I am proud to stand here today as an original cosponsor of the bill, not just because Charlie Norwood was a great American who loved his country and found any way he could to serve, but also because I had the honor and privilege to serve with him, to personally know Charlie and to count him as one of my close friends.

Charlie, as has already been said, I am just proud to repeat a lot of this, but Charlie was a native son of Georgia, growing up in Valdosta. He graduated from Georgia Southern University in Statesboro. After earning his doctorate in dentistry from Georgetown University, Charlie went on to serve as a captain in the United States Army from 1967 to 1969. During this time he served in Vietnam.

He practiced experimental military dental practice that's now standard operating military procedure for the Armed Forces. He was one of the first dentists to operate in the active combat zone in Vietnam.

In recognition for his service in Vietnam, Charlie was awarded the Combat Medical Badge and two Bronze Stars. After Vietnam, Charlie was assigned to the dental corps at Fort Gordon, the Army base just outside of Augusta, and from then on, Charlie, Gloria and his family made their home in Augusta, Georgia.

In 1994, Charlie became the first Republican to represent Georgia's 10th Congressional District since reconstruction. This landmark election gave us a leader who tirelessly fought for immigration reform, including the Clear Act to eliminate sanctuary cities, and the patients' bill of rights. I will never forget that. I was practicing medicine in Marietta, Georgia, when Charlie brought forth that bill about 10 years ago and did such a great job with reining in managed care. He is always for smaller, fiscally conservative government.

During this time, Charlie never forgot his fellow veterans. He remained an active member of the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the Military Order of the World Wars. And throughout the BRAC process, Charlie's constituents in Augusta could rest easy knowing that Charlie was there fighting for Fort Gordon and the Augusta area Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

Charlie Norwood was a strong American who spent his life fighting for his country, both at home and abroad. For this reason I can think of no one more fitting after which to name the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Augusta.

I urge all my colleagues to remember the selfless sacrifice of Charlie Norwood to America, his deep love for our Nation, by voting in favor of H.R. 1808.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Young Women's Christian Association, or YWCA of Northwest Georgia for their efforts to eliminate the epidemic of domestic violence that transcends all ethnic, racial, age, gender and socioeconomic boundaries.

The YWCA of Northwest Georgia, under the leadership of Executive Director Holly Comer, has made it their mission to bring the issue of domestic violence to the forefront and to educate Georgians on ways to prevent abuse and violence within the home.

Mr. Speaker, the YWCA of Northwest Georgia is not only the sole domestic violence shelter located in the heart of my 11th District in Cobb County, but has also taken a leadership role in combating domestic violence throughout the State of Georgia.

It was, in fact, the YWCA of Northwest Georgia that open the very first shelter for victims of domestic violence in the State of Georgia. Through the ministry of Cobb Shelter, the YWCA has worked together with victims, families, social service providers, and criminal justice officials to stop the spread of domestic violence

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in recognizing YWCA of Northwest Georgia and similar groups throughout the country for their contributions toward making our Nation's homes safer places for our children and families.