Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to give the American people an update regarding what the House has done to implement the Small Business Bill of Rights.

Small businesses create 70 percent of all new jobs. In April of 2005, the House passed the Small Business Bill of Rights which provided a blueprint for Congress to help small businesses create new jobs. As the author of this legislation, I am pleased to report that the House has done its job in 2005.

In April, the House passed legislation repealing the death tax to allow family-owned small businesses to survive.

In July, the House passed association health plans to help small businesses with the skyrocketing cost of health insurance.

Also in July, the House passed four OSHA reform bills to help small businesses with red tape relief.

In October, the House cracked down on frivolous lawsuits by passing the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act and the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act, which I authored.

Currently, all of these bills are stuck in the Senate and time is running out. I urge the Senate to act now to help small businesses by passing these legislative initiatives.

Mr. Speaker, the bureaucrats are at it again. First, they came up with the idea of selling off 300,000 acres of our precious national forest lands, including 1,000 acres of the Ocala National Forest in my district. They made this reckless budget proposal without any input whatsoever from Members of Congress or the American public.

After the fact, 130,000 Americans wrote in to oppose this proposal. This week, the United States Department of Agriculture bureaucrats arrogantly told the press they want to move forward anyway, despite Congress and the American public. The pathetic attempt of the Department of Agriculture bureaucrats to sell our national forests is financially short-sighted and environmentally reckless.

You can lead a bureaucrat to water, but you can't make him think. Well, we are going to do the thinking for you and reject this insane proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the legislation. I represent Orlando, Florida, the world's number one vacation destination. It would devastate our tourism-based economy if gas prices ever reached $4 a gallon. Similarly, it would also hurt tourism if there was an oil spill right next to our beautiful beaches.

This legislation strikes the appropriate balance of protecting Florida's beaches with a 100-mile buffer while also reducing our dependence on foreign oil. That is why it is supported by Governor Jeb Bush and The Washington Post editorial board.

The most significant aspect of this bill is that it gives Florida home court advantage on all future decisions regarding offshore drilling. For the first time in history, there will be a 100-mile buffer around the entire State of Florida, controlled by Floridians.

Here is the math: Floridians make up 100 percent of the State legislature, but only 5 percent of the U.S. Congress. Would you rather have Florida offshore drilling decisions made by a Florida State representative from Clearwater or by a drill-happy U.S. Congressman from Texas?

Mr. Speaker, it is easy to demagogue this issue by saying we should do nothing if the bill isn't perfect. Well, here is some straight talk. We don't have the luxury of doing nothing. If we don't act, drilling will be allowed only 3 miles off Florida's east coast beaches. On the other hand, if we do act, we will get 100 miles of protection for all of Florida's beaches and put future decisions about drilling in the hands of Floridians.

Mr. Speaker, opposition to this bill on environmental grounds is not justified. First, the industry's safety record for exploration is impressive. For example, oil rigs in the western half of the Gulf of Mexico endured Hurricane Katrina without any spills.

Second, according to the Washington Post editorial board, not allowing any drilling whatsoever past the 100 mile mark may increase the danger of oil spills because it means more incoming traffic from oil tankers, which are riskier than oil rigs. As you recall, the Exxon- Valdez accident was an oil tanker, not an oil rig.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and on the bill, and I commend Congressmen Putnam and Richard Pombo for getting this bill in the strike zone.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill.

Mr. Chairman, opposition to this bill on environmental grounds cannot be justified.

First, the industry safety record for exploration is impressive. For example, oil rigs in the western half of the Gulf of Mexico endured Hurricane Katrina without any spills.

Second, according to the Washington Post editorial board, not allowing any drilling whatsoever past the 100-mile mark may increase the danger of oil spills, because it means more incoming traffic from oil tankers, which are riskier than oil rigs. As you recall, the Exxon Valdez accident was an oil tanker, not an oil rig.

It is for these reasons, among others, that Governor Jeb Bush of Florida has endorsed this bill, as has the Washington Post editorial board. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, the more people learn about Ted Kennedy's immigration bill, the less they like it. Let me give you four examples.

First, before we build a border security fence on our own U.S. property, we must first consult with the Mexican Government to make sure it is okay with them.

Second, using a fake Social Security card is a felony in this country. If an American citizen does it, he goes to jail. If an illegal alien does it, he gets to collect Social Security benefits based on past illegal conduct, and even gets a chance at citizenship.

Third, when it comes to in-state college tuition, illegal aliens get it, but U.S. citizens from out of State pay higher tuition rates.

Fourth, illegals who become so-called guest workers would get the higher union-level prevailing wage on private construction contracts, something even U.S. citizens don't get.

Mr. Speaker, we should first secure our borders and enforce the law, not appease the liberal constituency of Ted Kennedy by accepting his pathetic bill.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5603) to temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5603.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5603, the Second Higher Education Extension Act of 2006. This bill will provide a clean extension of the Higher Education Act for 3 months. This bill enjoys bipartisan support and is cosponsored by the chairman and ranking members of the full Education Committee and the Higher Education Subcommittee.

On March 30, 2006, the House of Representatives completed its work and passed the College Access and Opportunity Act to fully reauthorize the Higher Education Act. We strengthened Pell Grants, improved the Perkins Loan program, and expanded access for millions of American students.

However, the Senate has not yet acted to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. The Senate should soon act to pass the reauthorization bill so we

can have these important higher education reforms signed into law during this session of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, this is a clean extension that will allow the important programs of the Higher Education Act to continue past their current June 30, 2006, expiration date until September 30, 2006. Programs like Pell Grants and Perkins Loans are the passports out of poverty for millions of American students. We must not break our commitment to higher education.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 5603.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California, the chairman of the full Education and Workforce Committee, Mr. McKeon.

Mr. Speaker, I also yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5293, the Senior Independence Act of 2006. This bipartisan legislation would renew the Older Americans Act, which is our Nation's primary Federal program overseeing the delivery of services to our Nation's elderly.

As chairman of the Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness, I am particularly supportive of the assistance the act provides to our seniors seeking employment. This act includes the Senior Community Service Employment Program, a community-oriented employment-based training program for low-income older Americans. It provides work experience and training opportunities to older individuals to help them prepare for unsubsidized employment. Program participants receive experience through job placements in a wide variety of occupations and industries.

In a nutshell, this legislation helps seniors to help themselves by providing them with valuable job training and placement assistance to get jobs.

I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 5293.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give the American people some straight talk on why we need to permanently repeal the death tax.

The death tax causes one-third of all family-owned small businesses to liquidate after the death of the owner. It is also an unfair tax because the assets have already been taxed once at their income level.

If Congress doesn't act to fix this problem, then in the year 2010 the death tax will be zero. But in 2011 the death tax will go back up to 55 percent in tax rates.

The only family-owned business in America that knows for sure whether their leader will die in 2010 is The Sopranos.

The uncertainty of the death tax makes it impossible for people to write their wills or do their estate planning.

On April 13, 2005, the House acted to permanently repeal the death tax. On June 8, 2006, the Senate fell just three votes short. I urge the Senate to try again to develop a permanent solution to the death tax so we can fix this problem once and for all this year.

Mr. Speaker, I have just returned from visiting our troops in Iraq. I have seen the damage Zarqawi inflicted. I visited the areas where Zarqawi lived and terrorized people. And I have met the brave soldiers who ultimately tracked him down and killed him.

I visited Amman, Jordan, where Zarqawi killed 60 people by bombing three hotels. I toured the special operations command center in Iraq with General Stan McCrystal a three-star general in charge of tracking down Zarqawi. All over the walls of the command center were posters of Zarqawi.

I flew in a Black Hawk helicopter around the area of Ba'Qubah where Zarqawi was ultimately located. I also toured Baghdad where Zarqawi intimidated the U.N. by bombing their headquarters and where al-Jazeera TV once broadcast a videotape showing Zarqawi personally beheading an American citizen.

I was with President Bush at the White House on June 7 when he got the message that al Zarqawi had been killed. However one feels about the war in Iraq, realize that our troops deserve our support 100 percent. God knows they have earned it.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Coble for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, I have just returned from visiting our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I witnessed the impact of Zarqawi up close and personal. I have seen the damage Zarqawi inflicted. I visited the areas where Zarqawi lived and terrorized people, and I met the brave soldiers who ultimately tracked him down and killed him.

It was Sunday evening, May 28, 2006, and I was in Amman, Jordan, with a small delegation of six Congressmen. As I walked through the metal detector to enter the hotel's lobby, I thought of Zarqawi. It was here, in Amman, Jordan, that Zarqawi, a native of Jordan, killed 60 people by bombing three hotels on November 9, 2005.

The next day was Memorial Day, Monday, May 29, and I was in Iraq visiting with our troops. Once again, my thoughts turned to Zarqawi. I toured the Special Operations Command Center with General Stan McCrystal, a three-star general in charge of tracking down Zarqawi. All over the walls of the command center were posters of Zarqawi. General McCrystal and his team were confident that they would get Zarqawi, and they briefed us on their efforts.

That same day I flew in a Blackhawk helicopter around the area of Ba'Qubah where Zarqawi was ultimately located. I also toured Baghdad, where Zarqawi intimidated the U.N. by bombing their headquarters and where al Jazeera TV once broadcast a videotape showing Zarqawi personally beheading an American citizen.

A week later, on Wednesday, June 7, I was at the White House with a few other Members of Congress to brief President Bush about what we saw in Iraq. At exactly 3:57 p.m., National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley slipped a note to President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Condi Rice. President Bush read the note, smiled and winked at Condi Rice. Zarqawi was dead.

General McCrystal later personally went to the scene and determined for himself that Zarqawi had officially been killed. President Bush already called General McCrystal to thank him and his troops, and today Congress thanks them as well.

Mr. Speaker, Amman, Jordan, is a long way from my hometown of Orlando, Florida. Tonight, thousands of people in Orlando will walk into hotel lobbies without having to go through a metal detector, unlike the hotels in Amman, Jordan. Why? Because our soldiers are taking the fight to the terrorists, like Zarqawi in the Middle East, so the rest of us can live freely in the United States.

However one feels about the war in Iraq, realize that our troops deserve our support 100 percent. God knows they have earned it.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on House Resolution 861.

Mr. Speaker, I just returned from Afghanistan. I went there to personally thank our troops and to speak directly with President Karzai and our generals to see how things are going. They told me that the U.S. and Afghan forces are working successfully side by side against the Taliban fighters and al Qaeda terrorists.

They are also working together to build roads, bridges, and schools to help change hearts and minds over the long term. As I rode down the streets of Kabul, I saw little boys and girls skipping on their way to school, carrying their American book bags. When the Taliban was in charge, there were no girls in school, and the country had an 80 percent illiteracy rate.

Now there are 6.7 million Afghan children in school. I met with several of the 68 women who were recently elected to Afghanistan's Parliament. They are excited about their new-found freedom and democracy. The Taliban are hoping that democracy in Afghanistan will fail so they can return to power. But the people there have tasted freedom and they like it.

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

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4894. This is a commonsense piece of legislation to protect our schoolchildren from being exposed to convicted pedophiles on a daily basis. Isn't it a matter of common sense that a school in my hometown of Orlando, Florida, can do a nationwide criminal background check to make sure that its janitors, coaches and schoolteachers are not convicted pedophiles from New York, Massachusetts, California, or Texas?

Well, that is not happening right now. What does happen is they perform a background check in-state to make sure that someone hasn't been convicted in Florida of being a pedophile, and they perform a background check in 26 other States that signed on as part of a reciprocity agreement in 1998. What they don't check, however, is if anyone has a pedophile conviction from 24 other States, including the largest States in this country, States like California and New York and Texas and Massachusetts.

I became involved in a mentoring program as a volunteer back when I was practicing law called the Compact Mentoring Program. I personally went out and recruited 700 individuals in my community to be mentors to kids who were at risk of dropping out of high school.

My number one fear is that one of those people I recruited may be a convicted pedophile from another State. We didn't have the tools to do anything about it.

Congressman Jon Porter's bill gives us the tools to do something about it. I think this bill should get an award for the most commonsense piece of legislation we have considered all year.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 4894.

Mr. Speaker, the killing of al-Zarqawi is the most important victory in Iraq since capturing Saddam Hussein. Al-Zarqawi was the Osama bin Laden of Iraq. He was al Qaeda's leader in Iraq. He personally beheaded American hostages on national TV. He bombed U.N. headquarters in Iraq and hotels Jordan.

I was with President Bush yesterday at the White House at the very moment he got the message that al-Zarqawi was killed. At exactly 3:57 p.m., National Security Advisor Steven Hadley told President Bush and also handed a note to Vice President Cheney and Condi Rice that he had been killed. President Bush looked at the note, smiled and winked at Condi Rice. I knew something big had just happened.

I have just returned from Iraq, where I personally met with the people who tracked down al-Zarqawi. I met with General Stan McChrystal and his Special Operations team at their command center. All over the walls of the command center were posters of al-Zarqawi. They told us they were close to getting him and they would get him.

Well, they did get al-Zarqawi, and today the world is a safer place. Thank God for our troops.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding.

I rise today in support of H.R. 5252, and I want to discuss the so- called net neutrality provisions. The free Internet that we have today will remain free. If you can go there today, you will be able to go there tomorrow. If you would like to be able, in the future, to immediately download full-length movies and high definition video games and you are willing to pay for that greater bandwidth to do that, you will have the freedom to make that choice as well. If we take away these choices, it will be like trying to send a golf ball through a garden hose in terms of clogging up the bandwidth for everyone.

In a nutshell, it seems to me that more consumer freedom and less government regulation is the better approach. If down the road the telecommunication companies improperly restrict access to the Internet and the FCC fails to act, then we can drop the hammer on them. Until then, it seems like imposing new regulations on the Internet is a case of Big Brother being a big pain in the behind.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 5252.

I rise today in support of H.R. 5252, and I want to discuss the so- called ``Net Neutrality'' provisions.

I don't understand why we need new laws for a problem that doesn't yet exist. I've heard that some high-tech companies, like Yahoo and Google, are worried that certain cable or phone companies might block, or limit, consumers' internet access.

At this early stage, it seems to me that the market place will take care of that issue real quick. Consumers simply will not continue to purchase service from a provider that seeks to block or restrict their internet access.

For example, when I'm at my home in Orlando, Florida, I use Google and Yahoo nearly every day, and I get my high speed internet access through my local cable company, Bright House. If Bright House restricted my access to either Google or Yahoo, I would switch to my local phone company, BellSouth, so fast it would make your head spin. In other words, competition is what will keep companies on the straight and narrow.

The free internet that we have today will remain free. If you can go there today, you will be able to go there tomorrow.

If you would like to be able, in the future, to immediately download full-length movies and high-definition video games, and you're willing to pay for the greater bandwidth to do that, you'll have the freedom to make that choice as well.

If we take away these choices, it will be like trying to send a ball through a garden hose in terms of clogging up the bandwidth for everyone.

In a nutshell, it seems to me, that more consumer freedom, and less government regulation, is the better approach. If, down the road, the telecommunications companies improperly restrict access to the internet, and the FCC fails to act, then we can drop the hammer on them.

Until then, it seems like imposing new regulations on the internet is a case of Big Brother being a big pain in the behind.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 5252.

Mr. Speaker, I have just returned from Iraq where I had the privilege of spending Memorial Day with our troops from Florida. I went to Iraq for two reasons: First, to say thank you to our troops for their service; and, second, to see for myself how things were going in Iraq by meeting with our generals, our soldiers, and the Iraqi leaders.

The day I was there was quite hot, 115 degrees, and it was violent. Forty people were killed while I was there, including one U.S. soldier and two CBS news employees. I was so impressed with the bravery of our soldiers. For example, one soldier had his helicopter shot out of the sky. Upon landing, he replaced the blades in the helicopter with brand- new blades and went right back into battle.

Regardless of how you feel about the war in Iraq, realize that our troops are in harm's way, they are performing very bravely, and they deserve our support 100 percent in the U.S. Congress.