Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing legislation that provides an important extension of the Commodity Exchange Act of 1934. This legislation focuses on energy transactions that perform a ``significant price discovery function.'' The legislation also addresses fraud and retail transactions in foreign exchange markets. It gives the Commodities Futures Trading Commission broader authority to prosecute fraud in other commodities such as heating oil.

Americans have lost confidence in our energy markets--particularly in the futures market. I have spoken with many constituents who are skeptical about the price of gasoline and heating oil prices. Many consumers strongly suspect these prices are being manipulated.

Over the past year, we have seen historical increases in the prices of gasoline and heating oil. Our colleagues in the Senate have done significant analysis on this issue, and their findings have been supported by reports published by the GAO and in the fall of last year.

At the end of last year, Triple-A, AAA predicted that these spring months would see a decrease in oil and gas prices between the busy winter and summer travel seasons. Yet, prices remain around all-time highs, despite relatively constant inventory levels.

Residents of New Jersey and throughout the country have struggled with heating bills, businesses are having difficulty with their electricity and transportation costs and this situation does not appear to be improving.

To fix this situation requires complex answers, but it is becoming patently clear that speculation in the unregulated exempt commodities market is working to increase energy prices.

Providing transparency to these dark markets is long overdue. Today, I ask that all of my colleagues will support this legislation, which is very closely aligned with a Senate Amendment to the Farm bill, which had bipartisan support and was passed by a voice vote.

Quoting the Energy Market Oversight Coalition, ``To restore public confidence, all energy markets must be fair, orderly, and transparent so the prices paid by consumers reflect the true supply and demand.''

In order for our futures markets to work, and our financial system as a whole, there is a pressing need for transparency. The CFTC exists for a specific reason and the work they do is vital to the operations of our economy. However, it cannot accomplish its mission if there are markets that it cannot monitor.

This legislation addresses this troubling gap in the law and will ensure the solvency of our financial system and energy markets.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the people of the Borough of Roseland, County of Essex, New Jersey, as they commemorate the 100th anniversary of the incorporation of their community.

In 1908, the residents of the Roseland Community, displeased with the services they were receiving, took action to separate themselves and their town from the Township of Livingston. During this time, many communities throughout the State of New Jersey decided to separate from larger townships and the time was right for the residents of Roseland to make a change.

The completion of the Morristown and Erie Railroads in 1904-1905 had made it possible for residents of Roseland to work in neighboring cities, while enjoying life in the country. During this time, the Borough purchased water supply lines and installed electric home and street lighting which further enhanced life in Roseland. And by the 1920s, Henry Ford's methods of mass production of the automobile changed the development of Roseland forever.

After World War I, new houses went up, many residents now owned cars and Roseland flourished. At this time, the Borough outgrew its country- style living and joined the more urban society we know today. The Great Depression and World War II brought with them some hard times for the people of Roseland, but the residents proved that as a community they could survive. When called to serve their country, all residents accepted their responsibilities, in both military and civilian service, and did their part. After victory, the pride felt all over the Nation was especially strong in Roseland.

In the following decades, Roseland's development continued. During this time, great improvements in community services and facilities were made. Roseland is now thriving with a prosperous business and corporate center, excellent schools, recreational facilities and a strong sense of community.

Madam Speaker, for the past 100 years, the Borough of Roseland has prospered as a community and continues to flourish today. By all accounts, it will continue to thrive in the future, and I ask you, Madam Speaker, and my colleagues to congratulate all residents of Roseland on this special 100th anniversary year.

Madam Speaker, every year, more high school seniors from the 11th Congressional District trade in varsity jackets for Navy pea coats, Air Force flight suits, and Army brass buckles than most other districts in the country. But this is nothing new--our area has repeatedly sent an above average portion of its sons and daughters to the Nation's military academies for decades.

This fact should not come as a surprise. The educational excellence of area schools is well known and has long been a magnet for families looking for the best environment in which to raise their children. Our graduates are skilled not only in mathematics, science, and social studies, but also have solid backgrounds in sports, debate teams, and other extracurricular activities. This diverse upbringing makes military academy recruiters sit up and take note--indeed, many recruiters know our towns and schools by name.

Since the 1830s, Members of Congress have enjoyed meeting, talking with, and nominating these superb young people to our military academies. But how did this process evolve? In 1843, when West Point was the sole academy, Congress ratified the nominating process and became directly involved in the makeup of our military's leadership. This was not an act of an imperial Congress bent on controlling every aspect of Government. Rather, the procedure still used today was, and is, a further check and balance in our democracy. It was originally designed to weaken and divide political coloration in the officer corps, provide geographical balance to our armed services, and to make the officer corps more resilient to unfettered nepotism and handicapped European armies.

In 1854, Representative Gerritt Smith of New York added a new component to the academy nomination process--the academy review board. This was the first time a Member of Congress appointed prominent citizens from his district to screen applicants and assist with the serious duty of nominating candidates for academy admission. Today, I am honored to continue this wise tradition in my service to the 11th Congressional District.

The Academy Review Board is composed of six local citizens (several of whom are distinguished veterans) who have shown exemplary service to New Jersey, to their communities, and to the continued excellence of education in our area. Though from diverse backgrounds and professions, they all share a common dedication that the best qualified and motivated graduates attend our academies. And, as true for most volunteer groups, their service goes largely unnoticed.

I would like to take a moment to recognize these men and women and thank them publicly for participating in this important panel. Being on the Board requires hard work and an objective mind. Members have the responsibility of interviewing upwards of 50 outstanding high school seniors every year in the academy review process.

The nomination process follows a general timetable. High school seniors mail personal information directly to the Military Academy, the Naval Academy, the Air Force Academy, and the Merchant Marine Academy once they become interested in attending. Information includes academic achievement, college entry test scores, and other activities. At this time, they also inform my office of their desire to be nominated.

The academies then assess the applicants, rank them based on the data supplied, and return the files to my office with their notations. In late November, our Academy Review Board interviews all of the applicants over the course of two days. They assess a student's qualifications and analyze character, desire to serve, and other talents that may be hidden on paper.

This year the board interviewed 38 applicants. Nominations included 10 to the Naval Academy, 8 to the Military Academy, 5 to the Merchant Marine Academy, and 5 to the Air Force Academy--the Coast Guard Academy does not use the congressional nomination process. The recommendations are then forwarded to the academies by January 31, where admissions staff reviewed files and notified applicants and my office of their final decision on admittance.

As these highly motivated and talented young men and women go through the academy nominating process, never let us forget the sacrifice they are preparing to make: to defend our country and protect our citizens. This holds especially true at a time when our Nation is fighting the war against terrorism. Whether it is in Afghanistan, the Iraq, or other hot spots around the world, no doubt we are constantly reminded that wars are fought by the young. And, while our military missions are both important and sometimes dangerous, it is reassuring to know that we continue to put America's best and brightest in command.

Academy Nominees for 2008, 11th Congressional District New Jersey

Air Force Academy

Chelsea A. Bailey, Chatham, Academy of Arts Science &

Engineering.

Phillip XG Choy, Basking Ridge, Ridge H.S.

Kenneth A. Natelli, Andover, Lenape Valley H.S.

Ethan J. Proll, West Caldwell, Trinity Christian School.

William D. Thimmel, Pompton Plains, Don Bosco.

Merchant Marine Academy

Michael C. Jones, Basking Ridge, Ridge H.S.

Leslie M. Martin, Parsippany, DePaul H.S.

Jack A. Morado, West Caldwell, St. Benedicts Prep.

Evan Prill, Boonton, Boonton H.S.

Matthew J. White, Bloomingdale, Butler H.S.

Military Academy

Brian P. Greely, Lake Hopatcong, Pope John XXIII.

Travis Hughes, Randolph, Randolph H.S.

Vincent J. Lally, Sparta, Sparta H.S.

James J. Mariani, Fairfield, West Essex H.S.

Mark E. McConnell, Lake Hopatcong, Jefferson H.S.

Alexander G. Pagoulatos, Basking Ridge, Ridge H.S.

Jason S. Rothamel, Basking Ridge, Ridge H.S.

Brendan J. Ward, Chatham, Chatham H.S.

Naval Academy

William B. Brundage, New Vernon, The Pingry School.

Aaron Z. Dewitt, Mendham, W. Morris Mendham H.S.

Katherine S. Drainsfield, Bridgewater, Bridgewater-Raritan

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Greater Somerset County Chapter of the American Red Cross! On Thursday, November 15, 2007, this vibrant organization will mark its Ninetieth Anniversary.

The American Red Cross, a humanitarian organization led by volunteers and guided by its Congressional Charter and the fundamental principles of the International Red Cross Movement, provides relief to victims of disasters and help people prevent, prepare for and respond to emergencies.

Jean-Henry Dunant is credited as the original founder of the Red Cross. The International Committee of the Red Cross was formed on February 17, 1863. Operations were well underway overseas when the American Red Cross was first founded nearly twenty years later, on May 21, 1881 by Clara Barton.

The Red Cross has a long history of providing aid in emergencies. Food, shelter, and medical assistance are offered to victims of fires, floods, and other catastrophes. In addition to disaster aid, the Red Cross sponsors blood drives; conducts CPR and first aid training; teaches swimming; provides AIDS education; and serves as a link between service men and women and their families during emergency situations.

By an act of Congress on January 5, 1905, the American Red Cross was granted a charter designating it as a nationwide agency through which the American people voluntarily extend assistance to people in need. The national headquarters, located in Washington, DC, implements policies and procedures that govern Red Cross activities, provides administrative and technical supervision, and offers guidance to its national organization, composed of local chapters and geographical regions.

The Greater Somerset County Chapter, American Red Cross evolved into its current configuration after undergoing numerous transformations and mergers. The Bound Brook Chapter was chartered in April 1917 and a few weeks later, the Somerville Area Chapter also came into being.

In March 1958, Manville was incorporated into the Somerville Area Chapter, and in June 1964, the Somerville and Bound Brook chapters merged to form the Raritan Valley Chapter. In 1994, this chapter reached its current configuration when the Raritan Valley Chapter merged with the Somerset Hills Chapter to become the Greater Somerset County Chapter.

The Greater Somerset County Chapter has historically relied on the utilization of a small staff, 428 volunteers that represent 98 percent of the chapter staffing and private authorized instructors to deliver high quality programs and services to the community. For 90 years, Somerset County has been provided continued access to 24/7 emergency and disaster services, Armed Forces Emergency Services (AFES), blood donation programs, preparedness education, health and safety training and medical transportation services.

Madam Speaker, I am privileged to honor the Greater Somerset County Chapter of the American Red Cross. I urge you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the members of this valuable, dynamic organization for their ninety years of service! Again, I offer my praise and thanks to their dedicated trustees, administration, support staff, and volunteers who work tirelessly on behalf of those in need.

I rise in strong opposition to this legislation, the process that brought it here tonight, but not to the money that is badly needed for our troops in the field.

For each of the last 3 years, the Defense appropriations bill, ably led by Chairman Young and Chairman Murtha, has included a straightforward bridge fund to cover the cost of ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Indeed, the continuing resolution we passed last month gave our military access to the bridge funding until November 16. This funding allowed our warfighters, all volunteers, the ability to fuel their Stryker vehicles and Humvees, restock their ammunition, resupply their mess halls, power the systems that allow them to keep in touch with their families at home, and even to ship their new MRAP vehicles to the battle zone so they may be better protected from IEDs. And yes, protect their fellow soldiers and innocent Iraqis.

But bowing to antiwar sentiment, the majority leadership pointedly chose to keep this important bridge funding out of the defense bill that we approved last week.

So while our brave warfighters are hard at work in Iraq in a hellish environment, they find they have to watch their own backs from those in Washington who want to choke off funding for their missions, both military and humanitarian.

I submit that this deliberate attempt to starve our operations in Iraq threatens the very safety of those troops and the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. No, Mr. Speaker, we should be sending to the President a clean bridge fund that does not tie the hands of commanders in the field and allows them to build on their undeniable successes in recent months in Iraq. Cutting money does tie their hands, limits those commanders' options, as does the setting of date certain.

My colleagues, the ill-advised process this House started last week is not without its costs. While Congress deliberately procrastinates, and some say throws roadblocks in front of our brave warriors battling violent international terrorists every day, military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan will run out of money, causing the Department of Defense to borrow from other important programs to support their operations.

I am told this process could completely drain the Army's operations and maintenance accounts by the end of next January.

In fact, it is my understanding that the Deputy Secretary of Defense has warned that the military would have to start preparing in December, next month, to close domestic military facilities, lay off civilian workers, and delay contracts if the bridge funding is not provided. This could have very damaging consequences for those communities privileged to host a military installation.

Mr. Speaker, I am also troubled that this bill requires the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq and slaps restrictions on the mission of U.S. troops, again, both military and humanitarian.

This harkens back to what was recently described by the junior Senator from Connecticut as the ``narrative of defeat and retreat.'' As Senator Lieberman said yesterday, and I quote, ``Rather than supporting General Petraeus and our troops in the field, antiwar advocates in Congress are instead struggling to deny or disparage their achievements, and are now acting, once again, to hold hostage the funding our troops desperately need and to order retreat by a date certain, regardless of what is happening on the ground.''

I would remind my colleagues that even the Iraq Study Group warned us against setting arbitrary deadlines. We should let the troops and their commanders do their work.

I have always maintained that our brave troops' service in Iraq should be as short and as safe as possible. This legislation does nothing to advance either of these goals. I urge rejection of this bill.

General Leave

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in support of the rule and this conference report.

I want to commend Chairman Murtha and Ranking Member Young for the great work they do together each and every year on behalf of our young soldiers and their families, and the great staff that works in a nonpartisan manner for all of those soldiers and families.

The challenge laid before our subcommittee every year, and this year is no exception, is to strike the appropriate balance between present and future needs.

Clearly, we must provide the necessary funding to support our courageous young warfighters, troops in and out of the current fight, and their families and do it as soon as possible.

In this regard, I'm pleased, as others have mentioned, that we fully fund a pay raise for our troops. We also provide an additional $2.5 billion for family support activities, more counselors, teachers, day care providers, better housing.

This bill also contains significant increases in many Defense health accounts and provides funding to improve military mental health and post-traumatic stress syndrome programs.

It includes new efforts on preventative medicine in the Department of Defense and extra medical research. It contains $1.9 billion to erase the shortfall in the military's TRICARE medical program. It fully funds flying hours and home training.

But, Mr. Speaker, our committee has also applied its best judgment as to how we look to the future and how our Nation will confront adversaries in future conflicts.

This bill provides, as others have said, nearly a billion new dollars to upgrade the equipment of our National Guard and Reserves for both military and home State civil operations.

This bill fully funds the end strength increases for the Army and the Marines.

It moves the F-22 Raptor program forward and retains important language that bars its foreign sale.

The bill advances the Joint Strike Fighter program and directs production of a second engine.

Mr. Chairman, if I'd written this bill, I might have written some sections differently. For example, I wonder if we've gotten it right with respect to the future combat systems, the Army's signature modernization program. That's the Army's future, and we need greater investments in that area.

And lastly, Mr. Speaker, I join with many others in being very concerned that this conference report does not include a bridge fund to support our deployed warfighters. I understand that the House may bring a freestanding bridge fund to the floor next week.

However, I believe it's a mistake to attempt to pass a downsized, stand-alone bridge fund wrapped in so much red tape and conditionality so as to force the President to veto. While this may serve some ends, it slows the process of getting needed support for those who are literally on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But all in all, this is an excellent package, worthy of our support. Again, I congratulate Chairman Murtha and Mr. Young for all they do each and every year, and I support the rule and I support the conference report.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

Mr. Speaker, this motion to instruct is straightforward. It instructs the House conferees to recede to the Senate on a provision in the Senate-passed bill that would prevent the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from using funds to initiate civil action against an organization which requires its employees to speak English at work.

This provision was motivated by a lawsuit filed earlier this year against the Salvation Army. In that particular case, the EEOC sued the Salvation Army over its policy that its employees speak English. The lawsuit sought hundreds of thousands of dollars in monetary and punitive damages.

What is more troubling is that when you look at the history of this issue, you will find a Federal court ruling almost 4 years ago that upheld the Salvation Army's policy that employees speak English at work. You will also find that the Salvation Army gave the two employees a year to learn English before it took action to terminate them.

The EEOC has an important mission, one which we all support.

The EEOC currently has a tremendous backlog of pending cases, approximately 46,000, a number that the Commission estimates will grow. At a time when the EEOC is struggling to fulfill its mission, cases like this lead one to questions about the Commission's ability to set priorities.

By insisting on the Senate amendment, we are sending an important message to the EEOC that we expect them to prioritize their actions and work diligently to address the major discrimination issues facing the American workers.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the motion and reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the motion.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this agreement and thank the gentleman for yielding.

Foreign trade is vital to the United States economy and to my home State of New Jersey. Since 1945, the world's markets have become progressively more open thanks in large part to leadership exhibited by our own country. Our Nation's citizens have benefited. Ambassador Susan Schwab, our United States Trade Representative, indicates that U.S. annual incomes are $1 trillion higher because of these trade promotion agreements, which equates to $9,000 per year for the average American family. In just the last decade, such free trade agreements have helped raise our Nation's gross domestic product by nearly 40 percent and add more than 16 million jobs.

Additionally, trade creates more and better jobs. Manufactured exports support over one in six manufacturing jobs, an estimated 5.2 million jobs in the United States. Agricultural exports are responsible for 926,000 jobs. Interestingly enough, U.S. jobs supported by exports pay American workers more, an estimated 13 to 18 percent above the national average.

In my home State, international trade is a driving force in our economy. In 2006, merchandise exports from New Jersey were valued at $27 billion, which places us ninth among all 50 States and represents a $10 billion increase since 2002. Such increases benefit not just New Jersey's manufacturing sector, but also positively impact transportation, logistics and warehouse activity across our State. It is also worth noting that in 2006, New Jersey exported $53 million in goods to Peru.

Indeed, a recent report presented to the New Jersey Commerce and Economic Growth Commission states, ``New Jersey has the greatest opportunity of any State to prosper in the new global age due to its location within the global and continental grid and its systems-wide resources.''

Beyond the economic benefits, trade builds important international partnerships that encourage security and prosperity abroad. This agreement, while relatively small in comparison to others, as well as other pending agreements with Colombia and Panama, present vital opportunities to expand our economic freedom, fight narco-terrorism, expand export opportunities, and build strategic alliances with key allies in the Americas.

In addition, this agreement would eliminate tariffs for U.S. companies, expand trade in areas such as textiles and agriculture and give our own financial services companies more market access. Failure to execute this pact and others like it would not bode well for our ability to take advantage of vast global markets. Indeed, as others have said, over 95 percent of the world's consumers are outside the United States.

But more importantly, limiting foreign trade counters America's long- held belief in free enterprise and open markets. We can compete as a nation in the global marketplace if we reject protectionism and continue to remove barriers to free and fair trade with countries around the world. If not, we will only have our own politics and shortsightedness to blame for the outcome.

I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this agreement.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Employment Horizons of Morris County, New Jersey, a vibrant organization I am proud to represent! On Thursday, October 18, 2007, Employment Horizons is celebrating its 50th anniversary.

Founded in 1957, Employment Horizons is the premiere, not-for-profit agency providing comprehensive employment, training and job placement services to persons with disabilities in the greater Morris County area.

Employment Horizons, formerly known as the Occupational Training Center of Morris County, was founded by a group of concerned parents who wanted to expand work and personal growth opportunities for their children with disabilities. During the 1950s and 60s, those with disabilities had very few options available to them and special education services were just evolving. Work centers, such as their packaging and assembly unit, were developed at that time to provide disabled adults with a place where they could earn money and maintain their self-respect. Over the years the agency has experienced rapid growth in the number of and breadth of services provided to meet the needs and choices of the individuals they serve, both on-site as well as in the community, as well as to meet the changing needs of the business community.

As a social business enterprise, the agency seeks to provide high- quality, competitively priced, services to the business community through their commercial operations while, at the same time, furthering their mission to ``assist people with barriers to employment to achieve their individual vocational objectives and establish self-sufficiency in the community.''

Over the past 50 years, Employment Horizons has established relationships with hundreds of businesses and created training and employment opportunities for thousands of individuals who require special assistance to obtain employment.

Madam Speaker, I am privileged to honor Employment Horizons. I urge you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the members of Employment Horizons for their fifty years of service! Again, I offer my praise and thanks to their dedicated trustees, administration, support staff, volunteers and active parents who work tirelessly on behalf of Employment Horizons' children.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

I rise in strong opposition to this rule and the underlying legislation.

I stand before the House as a member of Mr. Holt's new House Special Intelligence Oversight Panel and as a lifelong resident of New Jersey, a State which is still feeling the heartrending damage of September 11, 2001. We will never forget what happened that day, and I work each and every day to prevent another such attack.

I recognize that achieving the proper balance between our national security and our civil liberties is a real challenge, but we must also recognize that our war against violent international extremists is the first conflict of the information age.

With our technical assets and expertise, the United States is far better at gathering information at this point in history than our enemies. This is an advantage we must exploit to better protect the American people from those who would do us harm.

Then why are we on the floor debating a rule on legislation that essentially amounts to unilateral disarmament on our part?

Last August, Congress enacted the Protect America Act, legislation that sought to modernize the old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, and closed dangerous loopholes that prevented our intelligence community from monitoring overseas communications between al Qaeda members and other terrorist groups plotting and planning their next attack on U.S. citizens and our interests at home and abroad. These were not conversations involving Americans. These were communications between foreign targets overseas.

Director of National Intelligence McConnell asked Congress to ``make clear that court orders are not necessary to effectively collect foreign intelligence about foreign targets overseas.'' I repeat, ``foreign intelligence about foreign targets overseas.''

But this new proposed legislation would not only undo the progress made by the Protect America Act, but it would do further damage to our collection efforts.

Since it was enacted in 1978, FISA never required our government to acquire court orders for foreign communications of persons reasonably believed to be outside the United States. This bill would require such a court order, thus gutting 30 years of foreign intelligence collection.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, I understand that achieving the proper balance between our national security and our civil liberties is a challenging task. I believe the Protect America Act achieved this goal. The bill required a warrant to target a person in the United States but allowed U.S. intelligence agencies to listen to foreign persons in foreign countries.

Why is this important? Because speed matters in a war on terrorism, where terrorists are using our communications networks, not theirs, in order to try to harm us. This is not about politics. It's about ensuring that we give our security personnel the tools they need to help protect our families from future terrorist attacks.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I fear the RESTORE Act will live up to its

name. It will restore our intelligence community to the days when their hands were tied and they could not monitor the communications of al Qaeda members and other terrorists overseas without lengthy legalistic procedural delays.

Terrorism is an international threat that requires (international) technology to solve.

I urge my colleagues to restore our intelligence community's hard- earned technological advantage over al Qaeda and their murderous comrades. Protect America.

I urge defeat of this rule and rejection of the underlying legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Caldwell Public Library, serving the Borough of Caldwell, Essex County, NJ, a vibrant community that I am proud to represent! On October 12th, the good citizens of the borough will celebrate their library's 90th anniversary with a rededication and the dedication of the Gene and Kathryn Collerd Local History Resource Room. The Caldwell Public Library, an Andrew Carnegie Library dedicated in 1917, is situated on Bloomfield Avenue, diagonally across from President Grover Cleveland's Birthplace Memorial, a national historic site.

On October 1, 1906, at a regular meeting of the Borough Council, a communication was received from the Caldwell Borough Improvement Association, requesting the Borough to assume the responsibility of operating and supporting a public library.

The following year, 1907, Professor Hedden, Superintendent of Schools, requested the Caldwell Borough Council submit to the voters a referendum to establish a free public library under the State Library Act. The councilmen endorsed the necessary requirements, and at the November elections, the Act was passed by the voters. The State Library Commission accepted and approved the proposed charter.

On June 8, 1908 a letter from the Carnegie Library Foundation offered a sum of $7,500 to construct a library. To meet the grant's specifications, the town was required to provide an appropriate lot, plus $750 or 10 percent of the grant annually to sustain the library.

For the next 9 years, the library board was confronted with problems which hindered the construction of a new edifice. Acquiring a suitable location was the principal issue. West Caldwell resident Mr. George W. Canfield generously donated $2,000 toward the purchase of a site for the library. With this contribution, and donations from other interested persons, a total of $3,000 was raised to purchase a site.

On October 12, 1917, the Caldwell Library was formally dedicated by Mayor Peck, who was also President of the Library Board of Trustees.

Gene Collerd recorded much of the history of this area over the course of his life (1913-2004), and this Collerd Collection, to be housed in the Gene and Kathryn Collerd Local History Resource Room, will be an invaluable resource to not just the Caldwells, but beyond.

Madam Speaker, I urge you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Caldwell Library on the celebration of its 90th anniversary!

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Connecticut for yielding and for his work and for my colleague Scott Garrett's work in keeping the issue of increased airline noise before the public. Throughout my tenure in the House, I have been an advocate for reducing aircraft noise over northern New Jersey. I have attended dozens of public hearings, had meetings with officials from the FAA and responded to literally thousands of my constituents who are angry about aircraft noise. This new plan, in fact, increases aircraft noise over northern New Jersey.

I have been a strong proponent of the redesign for airspace over New York and New Jersey. The first such design was conducted by the FAA, and through the appropriations process, I think we got $60 million for it. But in the process, the FAA has not adequately addressed the issue of aircraft noise. While this amendment doesn't deal directly with that, I am hopeful that this committee and other Members of Congress will push the FAA to

concentrate on the issue of aircraft noise, because as we are concentrating on airline safety, we need to remember that people have to live in the area.