Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I object.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

I would like to acknowledge the gentlewoman's hard work to clean up this part of the District of Columbia.

Our bill provides $276.5 million in the Environment Restoration Account, formerly the Used Defense Site Account. The Department has the authority to provide funding to those projects that it deems of the highest priority and that pose the greatest risk to environmental and human health.

If the Department believes that funding such a study as the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia suggests is important, the Department has the ability to do so. For these reasons, we do oppose the amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

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

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

I rise to oppose the amendment and associate my remarks with those of the ranking member. We are talking about the dependents of the U.S. military. And when you visit military bases, some of these schools are deplorable. When we make a commitment to a young person in the military, and they are married and they have children, they ought to be able to go to schools on their military base that are of high standards.

I would be happy to yield to the gentleman if he wishes.

Reclaiming my time, I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the gentleman from Arizona's amendment, which would cut $3.6 billion from the Overseas Contingencies Operations budget.

The committee believes that the Army's fiscal year 2012 operation and maintenance requests for Overseas Contingencies Operations may be overstated due to unrealistic planning assumptions. However, due to the great deal of uncertainty of the justification for the Army's O&M budget request, the committee added an appropriations account, the Overseas Contingencies Operations Transfer Fund Account, and shifted $5 billion of funding from the Army into this account.

This account gives the Secretary of Defense flexibility to reprogram these funds for unforeseen requirements which emerged during 2012. For example, if redeployment from Afghanistan were to be accelerated--and some would suggest it should be--there will be a very significant increase in personnel and equipment transportation costs in fiscal year 2012.

Examples of requirements, which emerged during the year of budget execution in prior years, include funding for the MRAP vehicles, the mine resistant ambush protected vehicles, additional body armor that was needed, and other force protection things, joint, what we call joint urgent operational needs. And, of course, there are always spikes in fuel costs.

So for these and many other reasons, Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment and urge others to do so as well.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

We would like to commend you for your amendment, and we would be willing to accept it.

I would be pleased to enter into a colloquy on behalf of Chairman Young with you, sir.

Chairman Young and the committee thank the gentleman from Illinois for bringing this matter to our attention, and we share his concern for the protection of all classified data. We believe the threat from cyberattacks is real and is growing. We commend the gentleman for his leadership in this area, and we will be happy to work with you and the ranking member to ensure that our troops and Nation maintain control of all classified data.

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

First of all, the committee would like to thank the gentleman from Illinois for his service in the Air National Guard, and obviously his service in Congress. The gentleman from Illinois has made a compelling argument, and we are prepared to accept his amendment. However, we want to be clear that we will continue to study the issue as we support the continued advancement of the safety of all of our pilots. We just want to make that understood. It needs more study. We are in support of your amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I object.

Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's amendment.

Madam Chair, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

The rule states in pertinent part:

``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''

The amendment gives affirmative direction in effect.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's amendment.

Madam Chair, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

The rule states in pertinent part:

``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''

The amendment gives affirmative direction in effect.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

I move to strike the last word.

I associate my remarks with the ranking member from Washington State in opposing this amendment.

NATO is a strong ally. We have a multiple-year generational commitment to NATO. We do a lot of joint projects, a lot of research and development that is jointly developed, and we need their support and they need our support.

I rise in opposition to Mr. Broun's amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in favor of the amendment.

I have been very much involved in peer-reviewed prostate cancer research in my home State. I have certainly made a commitment to that community to support additional funds. We are willing to accept the gentleman's amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I move to strike the last word.

We accept the gentleman's amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill; therefore it violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part:

``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''

This amendment proposes to state a legislative position, and I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of the point of order, and I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman has an amendment to reduce the overseas contingency operation--aka the war on terror--by $33 billion. She intends for this amendment to support, as she says, an orderly withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. However, such a reduction would, in fact, severely disrupt and suspend a redeployment from Afghanistan. The magnitude of her funding reduction would also threaten the ability to support troop pay and safety.

The committee has provided funds to begin the redeployment of troops in Afghanistan. If the redeployment from Afghanistan were to be accelerated, there would be significant increases in personnel, equipment, and transportation costs in fiscal year 2012.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment and urge others to do likewise.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I rise in opposition to the amendment.

We oppose this amendment for the same reason we opposed the gentlewoman's amendment from California on the last. It would be highly disruptive to our troops and, I think, put them at great risk for their personal safety. So we oppose the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I move to strike the final word.

I rise in opposition to the amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from California for any comments he may have.

I continue to be opposed, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman's amendment would essentially cap funding for military bands at $200 million and reverse a decision of the body earlier this evening.

The band's main mission is music, with a secondary wartime mission for security. Band members train for security, and given the shortage of guards, security is often the band members' go-to-war mission. Every soldier is taught their basic combat skills and can secure the perimeter.

The Department of Defense strongly believes that military bands are vital to recruiting, retaining, and community relations, and that they provide patriotic, inspirational music to instill in soldiers, sailors, and airmen the will to fight and win, and foster the support of our citizens and promote national interests.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment and urge others to oppose it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate myself with your remarks and those of the ranking member. This is a good bipartisan bill carved out of an allocation that I would have preferred be higher; but we, too, on this subcommittee must do our part to lower the Federal deficit.

This bill deserves our strong support because, as the chairman said, and others, it has an important pay raise in there for all of our troops who are volunteering. It also provides more first-class medical care for those that are injured. It provides more money for ships, 10 new ships--two of them being Virginia class submarines--additional money for fighter aircraft, which are badly needed, and as was mentioned earlier, $1.5 billion for the National Guard equipment for both overseas and home State missions. Remarkably, this money was not requested by the administration.

I also want to take a minute to reflect on the collective bipartisan frustration many are feeling with the administration's handling of the Libyan operation, another of what we might call ``overseas contingency operations.'' We will debate the nature of our national interest on Libya tomorrow as we consider measures that go to the heart of Congress' constitutional role to declare war.

But here this evening this committee is in the process of developing an incredible spending program for fiscal year beginning in October. I understand there are no funds designated for Libyan operations in this bill. However, in reality, this Libyan mission, whether NATO-led or not, is heavily dependent on U.S. assets, and these assets must be accounted for by our committee.

We are all aware that our chairman, Mr. Young--and he referred to it in his remarks--since April 1 sought information from the administration about, first, the nature of the mission in Libya; two, the cost of the mission; three, the length of the mission; and, four, any anticipated changes to the mission. We are also aware that the President finally responded with his June 15 letter to Congress in which he reports that the Department of Defense has spent over $750 million over the last 3 months, $10 million a day in Libya. Mr. Chairman, the President errs when he fails to provide this committee with accurate, timely, and precise information about any mission.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I support this mark, I support this bill, and I thank the chairman and the ranking member and the committee staff for the great work they've done.

I rise in support of the Homeland Security appropriations bill.

As a member of the committee from a 9/11 State, I work daily to ensure that our State and Nation are prepared to meet any and all potential Homeland Security threats, whether those threats come from natural events or from activities of violent international extremists.

One month after Osama bin Laden was brought to justice, we cannot ignore the fact that terrorists are plotting and planning at this very moment to harm Americans everywhere. They're waiting for us to let down our guard so they can attack our communities and our neighbors.

Mr. Chairman, it remains a dangerous world. We must remain vigilant.

However, we must also remember that one of the greatest threats to our national security is our growing $14.3 trillion national debt. We've heard that from our civilian and military leaders. Consequently, our subcommittee has carefully examined the President's $43.5 billion request, and we have had to make some hard choices. I congratulate Chairman Aderholt and Mr. Price for making those choices.

In this context, I must say for the record I am concerned about the extent of the reductions to FEMA's State and local grant programs included in the bill. With that said, and a lot more could be said, I also recognize that we have already made substantial investments in these important areas for over 9 years.

Mr. Chairman, I support the chairman's intent to force the Department to make tough decisions on spending. It's imperative that a Department with over 230,000 employees and dozens of agencies and directorates under its jurisdiction, that they make the hard choices. This bill will ensure that the Department is accountable for taxpayers' dollars. We have witnessed the infusions of many millions of taxpayers' dollars over the last 9 years.

And, lastly, as one of the three appropriators that are liaisons to the Intelligence Committee, I note that the bill fully funds the President's requested funding increases for intelligence gathering activities at the Department of Homeland Security. I support the bill.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Jewish Family Service of Metro West, based in Morris County, New Jersey, on the occasion of its 150th Anniversary.

Jewish Family Service (JFS) began its community assistance during the 1860s as the Hebrew Benevolent and Orphan Asylum dedicated to helping orphans and the needy in Newark, New Jersey. Over the past 150 years, JFS has become a well known, comprehensive, social service agency which reaches more than 3,500 families each year. JFS proudly serves Essex, Morris, Sussex, Union and Hudson Counties with offices located in Florham Park, Livingston and Jersey City.

JFS is an inclusive, non-discriminatory agency offering more than 40 wide-ranging programs including, counseling, support groups and eldercare. Counseling is provided for individuals or families who are struggling with communication difficulties, life transitions, loss or abuse. Support groups for eldercare, those with Aspergers and those facing parenting issues and divorce are also available. All services are preformed by highly skilled staff members consisting of clinical social workers, case managers, psychologists and psychiatrists. The dedication of the JFS staff is continually affirmed through their prompt and compassionate support.

JFS promotes family relationships with services such as family play therapy, parenting workshops and adoption services. Putting their clients and families at the center of their team-based approach helps strengthen positive family values. JSF also supplies a 24-hour crisis response line, offers financial assistance, debt management and volunteer services.

As one of New Jersey's oldest and well-respected family service agencies, the Jewish Family Service of Metro West clinical social work team offers the experience, expertise and compassion that deserves to be recognized.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Jewish Family Service of Metro West as it celebrates its 150th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Great Swamp Watershed Association (GSWA) locat in Morris County, New Jersey, which is celebrating 30 years of successful natural resource protection in the Great Swamp Wildlife Refuge.

Thousands of years ago, the melting waters of large retreating glaciers formed a massive glacial lake called Glacial Lake Passaic. Over the years, the lake drained to leave wetlands, which form a part of the Great Swamp in New Jersey. This federally-protected land is home to a large variety of plants, animals, and humans, as well as several federally-designated threatened species.

After the creation of the Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge in 1964, a small group of citizens became concerned with protecting and improving water resources in the ten municipalities that bordered the Great Swamp. In 1981, this grass-roots group created the GSWA in order to protect the land and water in these towns. Through its efforts, the organization has acquired fifty-three acres of property in the area surrounding the Refuge, while working to preserve local streams and maintain local water quality.

The GSWA has grown from its roots to include 2,200 members in over 40 New Jersey municipalities. Today, the organization continues to protect environmentally sensitive land through land acquisition and promoting the strengthening of environmental regulations in New Jersey. With the support of its staff, trustees, and many valuable volunteers, the Association helped develop the first-ever water quality standards for the Great Swamp Watershed, which aid scientists, policy makers and local officials in protecting water resources from further degradation and in restoring those resources that have been harmed. Although the GSWA's work is centered primarily within the towns directly served by the Great Swamp Watershed, the results of its persistence extend to the more than one million people in Northern New Jersey who obtain their drinking water from the Passaic River.

In addition, the GSWA fosters environmental awareness and provides environmental education for children and adults throughout the state. Over 1,500 students have benefitted from its three-dimensional watershed model that illustrates how individual and group actions affect water quality in the local area. The organization invites teachers to participate in programs that show them how to use their own school grounds as areas for environmental education. The GSWA also offers several family programs within the watershed that introduce area residents to the natural history in their own backyards. In providing these programs, the GSWA teaches communities of the ecological value of the Great Swamp watershed, as well as the importance of restoring the property and protecting it from land development.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Great Swamp Watershed Association for its 30 years of dedicated work on behalf of the great State of New Jersey.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Florham Park Memorial First Aid Squad of Florham Park, New Jersey on celebrating their 60th Anniversary as of May 30th, 2011.

On May 30th, 1951 the Florham Park Memorial First Aid Squad was dedicated in fond

tribute to those who served or gave their all in our defense.

The all-volunteer Florham Park Memorial First Aid Squad provides service 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. They cover 7\1/2\ square miles and service 12,600 residents along with businesses, schools, colleges, assisted living facilities, local streets and highways, as well as provide mutual aid to neighboring towns.

The Florham Park Memorial First Aid Squad is a non-profit organization financially supported only by donations; comprised 100 percent of volunteers. Students, professionals and retirees from all walks of life lend time to serve their community. Auxiliary members also volunteer on committees to preserve the house and grounds, as well as organize special social events.

The Florham Park Memorial First Aid Squad handles approximately 1,200 calls per year. A typical crew includes an experienced chief, an EMT-B and driver, and a probationary member (who has served less than 6 months on the squad). Responsibilities of the crew on call include, remaining in town during the shift, inspecting ambulance and equipment, and responding to 911 calls, along with drills and instruction.

Aside from time responding to calls, volunteers of the first aid squad complete numerous hours of rigorous training preparing for any situation that may arise. Their selfless donation of their time, tireless commitment to service and compassion for others sets these volunteers apart from others.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Florham Park Memorial First Aid Squad as they celebrate their 60th Anniversary.

I thank the chairman for yielding, and I rise in support of this reauthorization.

Mr. Chairman, I also rise to pay tribute to the dedicated men and women of our intelligence community. Their work is not an easy job in the best of times, but over the last 10 years, they've carried an especially heavy day-to-day burden. They work long hours under tremendous pressure, mostly in obscurity, to ensure that Americans are protected everywhere. They are the unsung heroes of national security, and we owe them more than we can possibly repay.

My colleagues, as a Member of the House from a ``9/11 State,'' I take very seriously the findings of the 9/11 Commission. One of the key recommendations of the commission was the need to improve coordination of the numerous congressional committees charged with overseeing and funding the intelligence community and its many activities.

To this end, I commend Chairman Mike Rogers for including me as part of the intelligence team in his committee. I would also like to thank Chairman Hal Rogers of the Appropriations Committee for seeing fit to appoint me as one of three liaisons to the Intelligence Committee. We are working closely with the Intelligence Committee to eliminate the daylight that has existed in the past between these two important committees and the legislation that's produced.

The bill Chairman Rogers and Mr. Ruppersberger have constructed does ensure that our intelligence community has the tools and resources to analyze, predict, respond, and counter all the threats to America and Americans. I commend them for their effort. I am proud to be part of their team.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I come to the floor to recognize the great success of strong local schools working with dedicated parents and teachers. I rise today to congratulate and honor a number of outstanding high school artists from the 11th Congressional District of New Jersey. Each of these talented students participated in the 2011 Congressional Arts Competition, ``An Artistic Discovery.''

Their works of art are exceptional.

Seventy-six young men and women participated. That is a wonderful response, and I would very much like to build on that participation for future competitions.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the three winners of our art competition. First place was awarded to Andrea Ibarra from Ridge High School for her work, ``Max.'' Second place was awarded to Grace Cheung from Ridge High School for her work, ``Journey Through Equus.'' Third place was awarded to Rachel Fico from Madison High School for her work, ``Within Reach.''

Honorable Mentions were awarded to: Alexi Corham from Montville Township High School for her work, ``Alter Ego;'' Jacob DeBoer from Pequannock High School for his work, ``Venison Stew;'' Kasia Kalemba from Boonton High School for her work, ``Gone But Still Here;'' Lillian Thomann from James Caldwell High School for her work ``The Metro.''

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize each artist for their participation by indicating their high school, their name and the title of their contest entries for the official Record.

Boonton High School: Kasia Kalemba, ``Gone But Still Here;'' Zenab Khan, ``The Dreams Within A Dream;'' Samantha Kutnik, ``Packanack Lake, NJ;'' Rosalita Smith, ``America Works.''

Bridgewater-Raritan High School: Nicole Thomas, ``Bella.''

Chatham High School: Zakary Blake, ``Weight;'' Antonia Chan, ``Carnival of Hearts;'' Brittany Leonard, ``Nirvana.''

Dover High School: Christian Aroca, ``My Culture;'' Gissell Gonzalez, ``My Heritage;'' Angela Perkins, ``Celebration;'' Ying Jing Zheng, ``Pride Before Destruction.''

Hopatcong High School: Jara Werner, ``The Faces of Money.''

James Caldwell High School: Angela Filan, ``The Rebel Within;'' Lillian Thomann,``The Metro.''

Livingston High School: Christina Furman, ``Never Forget;'' Joanne Horng, ``And then they invented satellites;'' Kiley Mannion, ``Freedom;'' Danielle Stecki, ``Faded Glory.''

Madison High School: Amanda Evans, ``Zen;'' Rachel Fico, ``Within Reach;'' Amy Lando, ``Buddy;'' Vendela Larsson, ``Chloe.''

Millburn High School: Monica Carty, ``Up Close Gallery;'' Annie Dolan, ``Edith & John;'' Emily Draper, ``Tidal;'' Chanthia Ma, ``Winter Solstice.''

Montville Township High School: Dillon Chen, ``42nd Street;'' Alexi Corham, ``Alter Ego;'' Victoria Eng, ``Indonesian Still Life;'' Minjoo Kim, ``Abandoned Sisters.''

Morris Catholic High School: Gianna Riccardi, ``Alice;'' Jana Marie Cariddi, ``I'm Alive;'' Carissa Kelly, ``Joe Ufer Goes to Say Anything;'' Alexander Kuchta, ``Safe Sex;'' Ciara Mesevage, ``Stressed.''

Mount Olive High School: Sarak Berek, ``Untitled;'' Felix Izquierdo, ``Japanese Dream;'' Dia Saito, ``Skyliner;'' Lauren Wisnewski, ``Subconscious.''

Oak Knoll School of the Holy Child: Maclain Riccardi, ``Oak Leaves;'' Tian Mauer, ``Room With A View;'' Abigail Rollenhagen, ``Sunken Ship.''

Parsippany Christian School: Jessica Carducci, ``Love Is All Around;'' Troy Costa,``A Mother's Love;'' Austin Dimare, ``Dream in Color;'' Mariah Urban, ``Mademoiselle.''

Parsippany High School: Ashley Del Rio, ``Untitled.''

Pequannock Township High School: Stephanie Baryla, ``Angry Man;'' Rachel Ciavarella, ``Red Peppers;'' Jacob De Boer, ``Venison Stew;'' Emily Grimaldi, ``Love is Just Another Weapon.''

Pope John XXIII High School: Meredith Cahill, ``Will you play with me?'' Michelle Puglio, ``Maura.''

Ridge High School: Benjamin Callahan, ``Survive;'' Grace Cheung, ``Journey Through Equus;'' Andrea Ibarra, ``Max;'' Mike Sommer, ``Not Today.''

Roxbury High School: Jimmy Le, ``Details in Lines;'' Jonathan Melicharek, ``One word spoken, one decision made, one life taken;'' Ariel Mizrahi, ``I'm Shattered;'' Ashley Wolff, ``C.C. Self Portrait.''

Sparta High School: Jessica Ciona, ``Blue Shoe;'' Sydney Liebman, ``Missy's Stare;'' Meghan Salmeri, ``Spring in Washington;'' Stephen Vocaturo, ``Montego.''

Veritas Christian Academy: Ionela Corforte, ``Complex Simplicity.''

Watchung Hills Regional High School: Sophie Armenante, ``Orchid;'' Sofia Lizza, ``Organic;'' Lauren Merrill, ``Great Swamp 2011;'' Carolyn Thornton, ``Avonlea.''

West Morris Mendham High School: Carolyn Aluotto, ``Crystal Cantanta;'' Genevieve Asselin, ``Applause;'' Dana Barlock, ``Cradel Us;'' Hannah Lang, ``Ocean Treasures.''

Whippany Park High School: Run Wang, ``Secret Letters.''

Each year the winner of the competition has their art work displayed with other winners from across the country in a special corridor here at the U.S. Capitol. Thousands of our fellow Americans walk through the exhibition and are reminded of the vast talents of our young men and women. Indeed, all of these young artists are winners, and we should be proud of their achievements so early in life.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in congratulating these talented young people from New Jersey's 11th Congressional District.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the First Reformed Church of Pompton Plains located in Morris County, New Jersey which is celebrating its 275th Anniversary.

Forty years before the birth of our Nation, a small band of Dutch farmers gathered together in a new land. It was there that the First Reformed Church of Pompton Plains was dedicated on April 7, 1736, under the pastorate of the Reverend Johannes Van Driessen. The church prospered in its early years, with a membership of 72 by the spring of 1738. A new building was erected in 1771 on land donated by Theunis Dey. This new church building, the first in the community, was located on what is now the Newark-Pompton Turnpike, the site of the present church.

Throughout the years, the church grew physically and spiritually. One hundred years after it was built, the church was enlarged and improved under the leadership of Reverend John Van Neste Schenck. The church was rededicated on November 22, 1871, seven months after its 100th anniversary. It was also on that day that the church family mourned the passing of their energetic minister.

Addressing the needs of members near and far, several small chapels were built. The first, known as Grace Chapel, was built next to the church for the purpose of education. Other chapels were located in various nearby communities, including Wayne, Lincoln Park, and Towaco. Throughout the years many chapels came to form independent churches, most of which remain a part of the Reformed Church of America.

The 1900s brought tremendous growth to the church. With more people joining the congregation, the financial status of the church enabled the construction of a ``church house'' in 1926, and a fellowship hall, known as ``Friendship Hall'' in 1965. But the period also brought tragedy. On October 24, 1937, the sanctuary was almost completely destroyed by fire. While the actual cause of the inferno was never determined, faulty wiring seemed probable. The tragic loss, however, brought out the invigorating spirit of the congregation and its dynamic minister, the Rev. Eugene H. Keator. A year and a half later, on April 7, 1939, a new building, larger than the old, with a new steeple and bell, was dedicated. This remarkable historic Christopher Wren-style edifice was completed debt-free.

In 1953, the church acquired the 1788 stone Mandeville home, a one- time Pompton Plains post office, adjacent to the church proper. Today it is the church manse. Along with the sanctuary and Grace Chapel, it is presently undergoing consideration for inclusion in the State and National Historic Registries.

The remains of soldiers from the Revolutionary War to the present find their final resting place in the church cemetery. A walk about the grounds provides a glimpse into the church's vital part in our Nation's rich history. This year, in remembrance of the 150th Anniversary of the Civil War, the church will dedicate veteran's markers identifying more than 600 of our American heroes.

The First Reformed Church of Pompton Plains is a community of faith with ``Open Doors, Open Hearts and Open Hands.'' During this special year, under the spiritual leadership of Reverend Kathleen Edwards Chase, may their spirit continue to rise.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating The First Reformed Church of Pompton Plains as they celebrate its 275th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the amendment offered by my colleagues Messrs. Garret, Engel, Andrews, and Himes.

Since the publication of the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) ``preferred alternative'' for the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project, I have sponsored and cosponsored several similar amendments that have sought to rectify this deeply flawed project that will increase aircraft noise over Northern New Jersey.

Throughout my tenure in Congress and the New Jersey legislature, I have been a staunch advocate for reducing aircraft noise. I have attended dozens of public hearings, had meetings with officials from the FAA, and responded to thousands of calls from constituents whose lives have been affected by existing air traffic patterns and related noise.

While the safety of passengers is paramount, and the vitality of the air transport system is important, people on the ground have a right to a quality of life with a minimum exposure to aircraft noise overhead.

I understand the need for improving the efficiency of our Nation's aviation infrastructure to better accommodate the high demand for flights.

However, the FAA has continually turned a ``deaf ear'' to the issue of aircraft noise, which affects all citizens on the ground, regardless of whether they travel by plane or not.

Again, I have long fought against such noise increases. In particular, I strongly opposed the FAA's original redesign proposal in 2005, which would have had substantial noise increases throughout the New Jersey and New York metropolitan areas.

The FAA's amended plan included some noise reductions from their original proposal, but did not go far enough.

Now, despite strong opposition from Members of Congress and citizens throughout the

region, the FAA is plowing ahead with its redesign plan, despite its flaws with respect to increased aircraft noise exposure. The FAA must cease this flawed redesign plan and come back to the drawing board to develop a proposal that strikes the proper balance between airspace efficiency and preventing noise increases, as well as any other environmental impacts.

I urge the FAA to carefully consider alternatives that accomplish this goal. We must not forget about the ``silent majority'' of constituents on the ground!

I urge support for this amendment and any effort to reduce the impact of aircraft noise above New Jersey.

Mr. Speaker, as you know I had been granted medical leave to recover from hip replacement surgery for the legislative weeks of March 28 and April 4. While I was unable to place recorded votes on legislation considered by the House, I would like to state what my votes would have been.

On Tuesday, March 29, the House considered H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act of 2011, introduced by Representative McHenry of North Carolina. On rollcall vote No. 194, H. Amdt. 199 offered by Representative Hanna of New York, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 195, H. Amdt. 204 offered by Representative Jackson Lee of Texas, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 196, H. Amdt. 206 offered by Representative Maloney of New York, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 197, the Motion to Recommit with Instructions offered by Representative Larsen of Washington, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 198, on Passage, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Wednesday, March 30, the House considered H. Res. 186, introduced by Representative Bishop of Utah, Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 471) to reauthorize the DC opportunity scholarship program, and for other purposes. On rollcall vote No. 199, on ordering the Previous Question, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 200, on Agreeing to the Resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 201, on Approving the Journal, I would have voted ``yes.''

Also on March 30, the House considered H.R. 471, the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results Act, introduced by Speaker Boehner. On rollcall vote No. 202, H. Amdt. 209 offered by Delegate Norton of the District of Columbia, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 203, the Motion to Recommit with Instructions offered by Representative Cummings of Maryland, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 204, on Passage, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Thursday, March 31, the House considered H. Res. 189, introduced by Representative Webster of Florida, Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 658) to amend title 49, United States Code, to authorize appropriations for the Federal Aviation Administration for fiscal years 2011 through 2014, to streamline programs, create efficiencies, reduce waste, and improve aviation safety and capacity, to provide stable funding for the national aviation system, and for other purposes. On rollcall vote 205, on Agreeing to the Resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

Also on March 31, the House considered H.R. 872, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, introduced by Representative Gibbs (OH), under a suspension of the Rules. On rollcall vote 206, on Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, I would have voted ``yes.''

Further on March 31, the House began consideration of H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011, introduced by Representative Mica of Florida. On rollcall vote 207, H. Amdt. 210 offered by Representative Mica of Florida, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 208, H. Amdt. 216 offered by Representative Garrett of New Jersey, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 209, H. Amdt. 217 offered by Representative DeFazio of Oregon, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 210, H. Amdt. 218 offered by Representative Hirono of Hawaii, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 211, H. Amdt. 225 offered by Representative Capuano of Massachusetts, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 212, H. Amdt. 226 offered by Representative Gingrey of Georgia, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Friday, April 1, the House considered H. Res. 194, offered by Representative Woodall of Georgia, Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1255) to prevent a shutdown of the government of the United States, and for other purposes. On rollcall vote 213, On Consideration of the Resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

Also, the House continued consideration of H.R. 658. On rollcall vote No. 214, H. Amdt. 235 offered by Representative Pearce of New Mexico, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 215, H. Amdt. 236 offered by Representative Schiff of California, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 216, H. Amdt. 228 offered by Representative Sessions of Texas, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 217, H. Amdt. 229 offered by Representative LaTourette of Ohio, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 218, H. Amdt. 232 offered by Representative Shuster of Pennsylvania, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 219, the Motion to Recommit with Instructions offered by Representative Sanchez of California, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 220, on Passage, I would have voted ``yes.''

The House then resumed consideration of H. Res. 194. On rollcall vote No. 221, on Ordering the Previous Question, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 222, on Agreeing to the Resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

The House then considered H.R. 1255, the Government Shutdown Prevention Act of 2011, introduced by Representative Steve Womack of Arkansas. On rollcall vote No. 223, On Motion to Recommit with Instructions, offered by Representative Walz of Minnesota, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 224, on Passage, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Monday, April 4, the House considered H.R. 1246, to reduce the amounts otherwise authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for printing and reproduction, introduced by Representative Allen West, under a Suspension of the Rules. On rollcall vote 225, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Tuesday, April 5, the House considered H. Res. 200, introduced by Representative Woodall (GA), providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 37) disapproving the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission with respect to regulating the Internet and broadband industry practices. On rollcall vote No. 226, on Ordering the Previous Question, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 227, on Agreeing to the Resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 228, on Approving the Journal, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Wednesday, April 6, the House voted on a Motion to Adjourn by Representative Jackson of Illinois. On this rollcall vote No. 229, I would have voted ``no.''

The House then considered H. Res. 203, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 910) to amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change, and for other purposes, introduced by Representative Sessions of Texas. On rollcall vote No. 230, On Ordering the Previous Question, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 231, on Agreeing to the Resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 232, on Approving the Journal, I would have voted ``yes.''

Also on Wednesday, the House began consideration of H.R. 910, the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, introduced by Representative Upton of Michigan. On rollcall vote No. 233, H. Amdt. 240 offered by Representative Jackson Lee of Texas, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 234, H. Amdt. 241 offered by Representative Jackson Lee of Texas, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 235, H. Amdt. 244 offered by Representative Murphy of Connecticut, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 236, H. Amdt. 245 offered by Representative Waxman of California, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 237, H. Amdt. 247 offered by Representative Polis of Colorado, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 238, H. Amdt. 248 offered by Representative Markey of Massachusetts, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 239, H. Amdt. 249 offered by Representative Rush of Illinois, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 240, H. Amdt. 250 offered by Representative Doyle of Pennsylvania, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 241, H. Amdt. 251 offered by Representative Kind of Wisconsin, I would have voted ``no.''

On Thursday, April 7, the House considered H. Res. 206, offered by Representative Foxx of Virginia, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1363) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes; and waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules. On rollcall vote No. 242, on Ordering the Previous Question, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 243, on Agreeing to the Resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 244, on Approving the Journal, I would have voted ``yes.''

Also on April 7, the House considered H.R. 1363, the Department of Defense and Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, introduced by Representative Rogers of Kentucky. On rollcall vote No. 245, Table Appeal of the Ruling of the Chair, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 246, on Motion to Recommit with Instructions offered by Representative Owens of New York, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 247, on Passage, I would have voted ``yes.''

Then the House completed consideration of H.R. 910. On rollcall vote No. 248, on Motion to Recommit with Instructions offered by Representative McNerny of California, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall vote No. 249, on Passage, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Friday, April 8, the House considered H.J. Res. 37, Disapproving the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission with respect to regulating the Internet and broadband industry practices, introduced by Representative Walden of Oregon. On rollcall vote No. 250, On Consideration of the Joint Resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 251, Table Appeal of the Ruling of the Chair, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall vote No. 252, on Passage, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Saturday, April 9, the House considered H.R. 1363, Making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes, introduced by Representative Rogers of Kentucky. On rollcall vote No. 253, on Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendment, I would have voted ``yes.''