Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the DRILL Act, H.R. 6515. We continue to hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that opening up more Federal lands to oil and gas drilling will be the magic bullet that will solve our energy crisis. They continue to try to mislead the American people into believing that drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, OCS, and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will bring instantaneous relief to American families desperately seeking help with painful gas prices. There is no easy solution to this crisis, and it is widely accepted that drilling in OCS would save only pennies per gallon, more than a decade down the road. It is unseemly that my colleagues would continue to take advantage of the suffering of Americans to promote their own political aims.

Currently 81 percent of the oil and gas deposits known in our Nation's Federal lands is available to be leased for drilling. Sixty- eight million acres, approximately 75 percent, of the lands open for drilling both onshore and offshore currently are leased by oil companies who are not using them for production. It is estimated that these leased but unused lands could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly doubling U.S. oil production and cutting oil imports by a third. This includes the 20 million acres with an estimated 10.6 billion barrels of oil in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, NPR-A, currently available for drilling but most of which is lying unused.

The DRILL act would require oil companies to certify to the Department of the Interior that they actively are developing on the lands that they have already leased. If these oil companies are not producing on these lands, they either would have to relinquish these leases or start producing on them before they could apply to lease additional lands. It would encourage expedited oil production by requiring the Secretary of Interior to offer at least one lease sale annually in NPR-A. H.R. 6515 would require the Secretary of Transportation to extend the Alaskan oil and gas pipeline to NPR-A, and require the President to make improvements to the existing oil and gas pipeline so that we can export oil more expeditiously. Finally, the DRILL Act would prevent the export of Alaskan oil and gas so that this supply is available for American consumers.

This is common sense legislation, and I urge my colleagues who keep shouting ``drill, drill, drill'' to support it. We do not need to open up more lands to oil and gas drilling when they are not utilizing the leases and resources they already have.

This is only a short term solution to America's energy needs. Currently we produce 3 percent of the world's oil and consume 25 percent. Unless we find a way to dramatically reduce our consumption we will never be able to drill our way to energy independence. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to develop a long term solution to this crisis.

I thank the Chair, and I rise in support of the bill.

The work in the Intelligence Committee is some of the most difficult work that goes on here in the House, behind closed doors, necessarily with little public input, but we are blessed with a good staff and a good chairman. We never forget that our work is about people, about the safety of the American people and about the hardworking, brave people of the intelligence community.

H.R. 5959 contains some useful provisions that are designed to strengthen congressional oversight. Among these is a fence of 75 percent of covert action funds, fenced until each member of the House and Senate intelligence committees has been fully briefed.

I think it would be sufficient to say that this administration has taken a cavalier attitude toward its legal obligations to keep the committees fully and currently informed.

This bill would require the CIA Inspector General to conduct audits of all covert action programs regularly. It would increase critical research and development activities and improve foreign language capabilities. It would prohibit the use of contractors for CIA detainee interrogations.

It would clarify what ``fully and currently informed'' in the law means for briefing Congress so that all information necessary for Congress would be provided, and it explicitly requires that all committee members be notified in general, not just selected members.

It requires guidelines for the implementation of a multilevel security clearance to increase linguistic and cultural expertise. It would require reports on the use of contractors, on workforce diversity, on foreign language proficiency, on the protection of intelligence officers' identities.

There are a number of good features. This is a good bill that strengthens our oversight of the intelligence community. We do have a long way to go to provide the kind of oversight needed after many years when the intelligence community got almost every wish, billions of dollars with insufficient justification.

I do support the bill and urge that my colleagues do as well.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I need not be long.

This is a straightforward, simple amendment that I hope will be without controversy. My amendment to the Intelligence Authorization Act would require the Director of National Intelligence to inform all recipients of the October 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear program of any new intelligence on this subject that has emerged since the publication last fall.

The October 2007 NIE was prepared with new and, I would say, improved procedures and provided us with insights into the status of the Iranian nuclear program. As you know, Mr. Chairman, the intelligence process is not static. This amendment is designed to ensure that Congress and others in the executive branch get the very latest information on Iran's nuclear program in a timely fashion and developed with good intelligence procedures.

I believe I have no other speakers, but I will reserve my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5803, a bill that would reimburse States and localities to make paper backup ballots available for this November 2008 election.

I compliment Representative Lofgren for introducing this measure which would allow more Americans to vote than might otherwise be able if their only option was failed electronic voting. The bill would also allow more Americans to vote when facing long lines, something that has been documented widely.

Passing comprehensive election reform to help ensure the accuracy, integrity, and security of our electronic voting systems and other voting systems has long been a priority for me. At the beginning of the 110th Congress, I introduced legislation to establish national standards of verifiable elections. That bill has not received a floor vote despite support from a bipartisan majority of Members.

So in January of this year, many of us introduced simplified, optional legislation that would reimburse States that convert to paper ballot voting systems, offer backup paper ballots, and/or conduct random audits in this fall's election. Unfortunately, following opposition from the White House, the vote broke mostly on party lines and the bill was not passed.

After our opt-in legislation was not passed, I urged Congress to reconsider this issue, and so I am pleased that the House Committee on Administration has incorporated part of our legislation into the bill on the floor today. This is a useful step.

The ability to vote is the most important right as it is the right through which citizens secure all of our other rights. Yet public cynicism is rampant, and could cripple our democracy.

Increasing the availability of paper ballots, however, is only one of the steps that we must take to address the documented problems faced by voters and election officials.

I will continue to work with Ms. Lofgren and others to ensure that Congress does all it can to protect the integrity and accuracy of our elections, and to give voters confidence in their system. Each election each year in recent years, cynicism has grown among voters. I hope my colleagues will join in the continuing effort to provide verifiable, reliable, confident voting.

Mr. Chairman, as a longtime cosponsor, I rise in support of H.R. 1286, the Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route National Historic Trail Designation Act. Students of American history are intimately familiar with the Battle of Yorktown, in which French and American soldiers forced the surrender of British General Lord Cornwallis, effectively handing victory of the Revolutionary War to the American Colonies.

However many Americans are less familiar with what preceded it--a harrowing nine state, six hundred mile journey of more than 6,000 allied soldiers from Newport, Rhode Island, through my home state of New Jersey to Yorktown, Virginia. Many historians identify this march led by George Washington, General of the Continental Army and French General Count Rochambeau along a network of roads, trails, and waterways as critical to the American victory at Yorktown and the eventual creation of the United States.

In Philipsburg, New York on August 14, 1781, having learned that a large fleet of French naval vessels was heading from the Caribbean Sea to the Chesapeake Bay, Washington and Rochambeau discarded plans to siege New York City and march to Southeastern Virginia, where another celebrated Frenchman the Marquis de Lafayette and his 5,000 troops were outmaneuvering Cornwallis, forcing his British troops to bunker down in Yorktown. With little time to prepare, Washington and Rochambeau led more than 6,300 American and French troops on a southward march to Virginia.

H.R. 1286 is an important piece of legislation that comes at a critical time. Despite strong grassroots support from organizations like the National Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route Association, and efforts at the state and local level, many historical sites associated with the American Revolution will be lost to development and suburban sprawl. This bill would designate the route as a National Historic Trail, allowing the National Park Service to preserve and link together sites along the trail. Moreover, this designation would preserve this important piece of America's heritage using existing roads and rights of way--without the federal acquisition of private lands.

Preservation of the Washington-Rochambeau route will allow American citizens and visitors alike to gain a greater appreciation of the magnitude and improbability of the American victory as well as the important and often forgotten role our French allies played in securing American independence. Americans need a sense of history and an understanding of history now more than ever. This trail tells an important story in American history, and I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6377, the Energy Markets Emergency Act of 2008.

This bill is an important first step in reaffirming the authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to regulate excessive speculation in the energy futures market. There are many reasons that the cost of a barrel of oil has risen so dramatically in the last few years, including increased demand from developing nations, instability in oil-producing nations, the weakening of the dollar, and price gouging on the part of the oil companies. The recent surge in gasoline prices should serve as an urgent reminder that we immediately need to change the way that we produce and use energy.

Nonetheless, consumers should not suffer unnecessary increases in gasoline prices that don't reflect actual changes in supply and demand. I have heard from economists that excessive speculation has added anywhere between $20 and $60 to the price of a barrel of oil. The Bush administration has an appalling record on oversight, and they have allowed the CFTC to become powerless to regulate the commodities market. The CFTC has emergency powers at its disposal, and this bill mandates the use of this authority. In addition to curbing speculation, the CFTC must prohibit the outright fraud and abuse currently being perpetrated on the market.

Closing the loopholes that have allowed dark energy markets to flourish is just one step toward addressing our current energy crisis. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this important bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6251, the Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act.

Over the last few months we have frequently heard claims from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle that we need to open up more Federal lands to oil and gas drilling, the magic bullet that will solve our energy crisis. They have told the American people that Democrats and environmentalists are protecting our Nation's most sensitive and special environments at the expense of the American people. They have claimed that opening up land in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) would quickly help bring down the price of gas. Not only are these claims misleading American families desperately seeking help with skyrocketing gas prices, they are completely false.

Currently 81 percent of our Nation's Federal lands are available to be leased for the purpose of oil and gas drilling. Sixty-eight million acres of the lands open for drilling both onshore and offshore currently are leased by oil companies who are not using them for production. It is estimated that these leased but unused lands could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly doubling U.S. oil production and cutting oil imports by a third. Existing leases can also come online much faster than any newly leased lands, which would save only pennies per gallon, more than a decade down the road.

I would like to commend my colleague from West Virginia, Representative Nick Rahall, for introducing H.R. 6251, the Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act. This legislation would require oil companies to certify to the Department of the Interior that they are actively developing on the lands that they have already leased. If these oil companies are not producing on these lands, they either would have to relinquish these leases or start producing on them before they could apply to lease additional lands. Also my colleagues who say ``drill, drill, drill'' should support this legislation and they should stop talking about drilling on our environmentally sensitive coastlines and wildlife refuges until oil companies have gone as far as they can towards on these currently leased lands.

This legislation is common sense and I urge my colleagues to support it. There is no logic to opening up more land to oil and gas drilling when we are not utilizing the leases we already have. Of course this legislation is not a long term solution to America's energy needs. Currently we produce 3 percent of the world's oil and consume 25 percent. Unless we find a way to dramatically reduce our consumption we will never be able to drill our way to energy independence. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to develop a long term solution to this crisis.

Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 6052, the Savings Energy Through Public Transportation Act of 2008, H.R. 6052.

As gas prices continue to skyrocket to over $4 a gallon, commuters are increasingly abandoning their automobiles in favor of public transportation. New Jersey's public transit agency, NJ Transit, is breaking ridership records for the sixth consecutive year, with over 900,000 trips per weekday on its trains, buses, and light-rail vehicles. In the first 3 months of this year, public transit trips nationwide increased by 85 million over last year's numbers. Amtrak set record highs for its service with over 25 million users last year. This increase in use not only takes cars off our overburdened roadways, it conserves energy, decreases our greenhouse gas emissions, and helps our economy.

However, mass transit agencies are also suffering from soaring gas prices, increased demand for their services, and decreased operating budgets. Transit agencies are paying 44 percent more for diesel fuel than they were at the beginning of this year, and almost half of bus operators and more than two-thirds of rail operators have increased their fares.

The Saving Energy Through Public Transportation Act of 2008 would help State and local mass transit authorities meet the increase in demand and allow them to provide a cost-effective alternative to driving. This legislation would authorize $1.7 billion in grants for mass transit agencies to upgrade and expand their transit services without having to further increase their fares.

By taking public transportation the average American household could save $6,251 and help reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 4,800 pounds per year. However, commuters need affordable, reliable access to public transportation if they are to utilize these benefits. This bill would help make public transit more available to commuters, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6275, the Alternative Minimum Tax Relief Act of 2008.

Forty years ago the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) was originally enacted to ensure that wealthiest Americans--like everyone else--paid their fair share of taxes. Prior to the enactment of the AMT, the wealthiest Americans were exploiting loopholes in the tax code to circumvent their societal obligations. However this tax, which was intended for a few hundred of the wealthiest Americans has never been adjusted to account for inflation. Through inflation and tax-rate creep the AMT has become a middle class tax hike.

We have been unable to pass a permanent fix to the AMT to prevent middle class Americans from fearing that they will get hit by the AMT every year. More families in Central New Jersey are affected by the AMT than anywhere else in the country. Over 33,000 of my constituents already pay the AMT, under the current law, and an additional 88,000 of my constituents would be subject to the AMT if we do not act to prevent the patch from expiring. American families are already suffering from skyrocketing gas and food prices that they did not build into their family budgets. Compounding this financial burden with an unexpected and undeserved tax hike would hit New Jersey families hard. Yet, that is what will happen if we do not take action today.

Mr. Speaker, I have long been concerned with the growing debt that we are passing on to the next generation and have often called for a revision of the AMT that will not increase our national debt. The Alternative Minimum Tax Relief Act of 2008 makes good on our promise to the American people that we will not spend money that Congress does not have. This legislation will offer more than 25 million families relief from the AMT without adding to the deficit. This will be achieved by promoting tax compliance, removing inequities in the tax code, and decreasing government subsidies to oil companies.

While I support this legislation, we need a permanent fix to ensure that this tax intended for the wealthiest Americans is not passed down to middle income Americans and do so in a fiscally responsible way.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank Majority Leader Hoyer and Representative Sensenbrenner for introducing the ADA Restoration Act last summer. ``I am a cosponsor of this bill and I am pleased that the House is considering this important legislation.

This July will mark the 18th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act, ADA. Unfortunately, as testimony before the House Committee on Education and Labor made clear in recent years, the Supreme Court has narrowed the scope of this law and created a new set of barriers for Americans with disabilities. Under this narrow interpretation, individuals with diabetes, heart conditions, epilepsy, mental retardation, cancer, and many other conditions have been denied their rights under the ADA because they are labeled as ``too functional'' to be considered ``disabled.''

This legislation would restore protections for disabled Americans under the ADA and I am pleased that the bill we are considering today is supported by the disability community as well as the business community. This bill will reaffirm the ADA's mandate for the elimination of discrimination on the basis of disability and allow the ADA to reclaim its place among our Nation most important civil rights laws.

I am proud that my home State of New Jersey has enacted our own strong protections against employment discrimination or individuals with disabilities. My State's experience belies the claims made by some of the bill's opponents that this legislation is overprotective of individuals with disabilities.

In March, I hosted a roundtable discussion in New Jersey with representatives of disability organizations and individuals with disabilities and with representatives from corporate human resources departments. From that discussion, I drew information indicating that the Federal legislation is needed and that it could be implemented effectively.

At that discussion I heard from Jack, an employer in my district who was hesitant when approached by the ARC of New Jersey about hiring individuals with disabilities. Yet, today he now says they are some of his best employees.

Our Nation has come a long way since the passage of the ADA, from when the halls of Congress were not even accessible to disabled members. But, we have much progress yet to make to ensure that the American dream is truly accessible and available to all Americans.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6346, The Federal Energy Price Gouging Prevention Act.

Today, my constituents in Central New Jersey are paying on average $3.98 at the pump, over a dollar more than they were paying at

the beginning of the year. Increases in gas prices have affected every sector of the economy. We are paying $2 more whenever we get a pizza delivered, $10 more for lawn mowing services, $1.70 for shipping packages, an extra penny for every letter that we send, and these are just a few examples of the effects of gas price increases on the economy at large. As American families suffer, oil companies continue to rake in record profits. It is essential that we prevent price gouging, speculation, and profiteering by those who would take advantage of our energy predicament and guard against harm to commuters and struggling families.

Current law does not have a mechanism for allowing the investigation and punishment of individuals and corporations that are artificially inflating the price of energy. H.R. 6346 would grant the Federal Trade Commission the authority to investigate and punish those who engage in price gouging. H.R. 6346 would finally provide a clear definition of price gouging so that the FTC can prosecute the worst offenders, specifically those companies with more than $500,000,000 in sales per year. It would strengthen the criminal penalties for price gouging to up to $150 million for corporations, and fines of up to $2 million plus jail sentences of up to 10 years for individuals. Finally, it would redirect the fines assessed to help fund the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).

Unfortunately, we are seeing examples across the country of unscrupulous individuals taking advantage of consumers during this energy emergency. Last week, New Jersey's Attorney General Anne Milgram released the results of an investigation that uncovered over 350 ticket worthy instances of gasoline price manipulation after a survey of 1,000 gas stations in the state. Among the citations issued were: 62 violations for the pump not accurately measuring fuel, 46 violations for per-gallon prices being different on each side of the pump, 37 violations for fuel grades not posted, 26 violations for inaccurate octane ratings, 19 violations for inaccurate total sale price calculation and 14 violations for multiple price changes in a 24-hour period. States like New Jersey are already taking action to prosecute gas price manipulation on a small scale; however, they do not have the means necessary to prosecute large-scale offenders. It is past time that Congress gives the FTC the tools it needs protect American consumers from these egregious violations at the pump and the legislation before us today takes an important first step towards achieving this goal.

Passing H.R. 6346 would help to prevent price gouging and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. However this bill is merely a short term solution to our long term energy needs. There are no easy answers to the fluctuating gas prices. We are paying at the pump today for flawed decisions made years ago. That is why we must work to implement strategies that will lower demand for oil in the long term.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Judiciary Committee for yielding me time to speak about this.

Unfortunately, the negotiators who brought this bill to the floor bought into the flawed assumptions of the Bush administration that because we live in a dangerous world, we must now redefine the fourth amendment and thus the fundamental relationship between the government and its people.

If this bill becomes law, it will perhaps be the only lasting legacy of the Bush-Cheney administration's overhaul of national security policy, a congressionally blessed distortion of congressional checks and balances. It permits massive warrantless surveillance in the absence of any standard for defining how communications of innocent Americans will be protected; a fishing expedition approach to intelligence collection that we know will not make Americans more safe.

Its court review provisions are weak and narrowly defined. I know some of those who negotiated this bill say that some court review is better than no court review. That is only true if the judge's hands aren't tied in the review process. They are in this bill.

There is a fundamental American principle that those who search, seize, intercept and detain should not be the ones who decide who are the bad guys.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Anne Clark Martindell, former American Ambassador to New Zealand and New Jersey State Senator, who died last week at the age of 93. Her lifetime of public service is worth honoring here, because she was not only an outstanding public servant, a generous benefactor of good causes, and a talented and gracious woman, but she proved that it's never too late to show your mettle, to be your best self and to use your ability and drive to make the world a better place.

Born into a family of means in 1914, Anne Clark lived a comfortable and sheltered life. She attended private schools and entered Smith College in 1932. She took to higher education immediately and decided that she would go on to law school. When she told this to her father, who by the way was a prominent attorney who later became a Federal Judge, he demanded that she leave school, because ``no man would want to marry an educated woman''!

Anne returned to Princeton, married George C. Scott, Jr. shortly thereafter and the couple had a daughter and two sons. This marriage ended in divorce and she later married Jackson Martindell, publisher of Who's Who. This marriage produced another son, Roger Martindell, who carries on the tradition of community service as a member of the Princeton Borough governing body, and is my friend and neighbor.

The dormant seed of her desire to make a difference, to do more, to participate in the betterment of the community, came alive--was fertilized--by her strong opposition to the conditions surrounding our involvement in the Vietnam War. When Anne Martindell's brother, the journalist Blair Clark, become Eugene McCarthy's campaign manager in 1968, she began to raise money for the campaign in New Jersey and was selected as a delegate to the tumultuous 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago.

Anne Martindell liked to say she never did anything real until she was in her 50's. She was 54 years of age when she began her political career. On her return home from the convention, where she had been recognized as one with the ability to clearly articulate her strong opinions and to fearlessly champion what was, at that convention an unpopular point of view, she was asked to serve as Vice Chair of the New Jersey Democratic State Committee.

The (always) female Vice Chair of the party was considered at that time a mere figurehead, but that was not Anne Martindell's style. She is legendary for having arrived at a meeting of the male power brokers where she was told she wasn't welcome, because they used salty language that she wouldn't like. ``I don't give a blank (here insert your favorite 4 letter word) what kind of language you use'', she said, ``I'm coming in.''

Anne Martindell was asked to run for State Senate in 1973, in what had been traditionally a Republican district. She won the election, making her one of the first women to serve in New Jersey's upper house.

It was a very different world when Anne Martindell went to the New Jersey legislature (an example of which was that women were so little thought of in the Legislature, that there still were only men's rooms in both Chambers and caucus rooms--the women legislators used the public facilities). Although fathers did not still think higher education would spoil their daughters' chances at marriage, there was still a lot to be done to support and increase women's participation in community life. She worked on primarily women's issues, education, and the environment. She served as Chair of the Education Committee and a member of the powerful Appropriations Committee. As Chair of the Budget Subcommittee for Higher Education, she sponsored a law to increase loans for higher education. She wanted to make it more available to those who didn't have the means, but had the desire and thirst for more learning. She understood that very well.

She also continued to show her feisty side by introducing a resolution stating that it was the sense of the New Jersey Senate that enough evidence was available to institute impeachment of the President and that Congress ought to get on with it.

She was a Carter delegate to the 1976 Democratic National Convention and campaigned vigorously for him in New Jersey. After his election, she left her Senate seat and became director of the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), part of the State Department's Agency for International Development. In 1979 she was nominated for the ambassadorship to New Zealand and Western Samoa and served in that capacity until 1981.

She was the first female ambassador to New Zealand and once again ran into some resistance, but her political instincts, coupled with grace and charm, endeared her to the people and she in turn treated them with respect and affection. It was in New Zealand that she met the man she called ``the love of my life''--the New Zealand painter Sir Tosswell Wollaston and they remained close until his death in 1998.

Last year, at the age of 92, she returned to Auckland, New Zealand to attend a meeting of the Partnership Forum and was greeted with great warmth. The American Ambassador in New Zealand has hailed her this week as one whose legacy as Ambassador lives on in the hearts of the people.

But then, Anne Martindell was always doing extraordinary things. And she didn't like to leave things undone. So it was no surprise to her friends when a decade ago she re-enrolled at Smith College, attended classes, studied with students who could have been her great- grandchildren, and graduated in 2002 at the age of 87. In honor of her outstanding life and work, she got her undergraduate degree along with an Honorary Doctor of Laws degree. Poetic justice, don't you think?

Annie Martindell is mourned by her family: daughter, Margery Luther of Ann Arbor Michigan, sons, George C. Scott III of Richmond, Virginia; David C. Scott of Princeton, and Roger Martindell, 9 grandchildren, 6 great grandchildren and a brother, J. William Clark of Great Barrington Massachusetts. She is also mourned by her many friends in Princeton, and throughout New Jersey, and across the broad swath of lives she has touched.

Anne Martindell was on a book signing tour for her new book--the appropriate title of which is Never Too Late--when she was stricken with her last illness. It breaks my heart to think she will never get a chance to autograph my copy. I will miss her phone calls with good advice, her strong opinions on current events, and her ease of friendship. Anne Clark Martindell has taught us all a valuable lesson about opportunities and readiness to recognize a call to action whenever it appears in our lives. And it is never too late to take that message to heart.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor of H. Res. 1237, a resolution recognizing the importance of the Juneteenth anniversary celebrations held nationwide on June 19th. On that date 145 years ago, Union forces led by General Gordon Granger arrived at Galveston, Texas, bringing news of the Confederate surrender and enforcing, after two- and-half long years, the Emancipation Proclamation. Americans across the country commemorate this day with celebrations, discussions, and family picnics. In my own state of New Jersey, Juneteenth is celebrated at churches, community centers, and family gatherings across the state. This day marks a time for people to come together, enjoy the company of friends and family, and reflect on the past. It is a time of somber tribute to the struggles of slavery conjoined with a cheerful and celebratory attitude towards the future and the opportunities afforded by that great proclamation.

I strongly support H. Res. 1237, which recognizes the significance of the Juneteenth anniversary and proclaims the sense of Congress that history should be regarded as a means for understanding the past and solving the challenges of the future. I rise to honor the celebration, and to honor the myriad contributions that African-Americans have made to American society and culture in the years before and since. African- Americans have honored this country with their service and dedication as inventors, teachers, artists, musicians, first responders, soldiers, doctors, and statesmen and countless other professions. They rose from the bonds of servitude and yet, facing discrimination at every step, have continued to persevere. The longevity of the Juneteenth celebration is an enduring testament to the strength of these Americans in the face of tremendous adversity and bears witness to the virtue of celebrating diversity.

I must also rise today to recognize the obstacles that still face us. Juneteenth evokes reflection on a dark chapter in our Nation's history, and reinforces that which we already know: the struggle for equality is far from over. The joyous celebration of the emancipation of the slaves of Galveston, followed by decades of inequality under Jim Crow, serves to remind us all of the need to remain committed to our original principles and the belief in liberty and justice for all. While our history has at times failed to live up to these founding ideals, it is important that we remember our past. So that we may better ourselves and our country, we must bear closely the lessons of history as we strive for progress.

Today, Juneteenth is the longest-running celebration of the end of slavery in the United States. Its durability alone illustrates its significance. For that reason, Madam Speaker, and for all the reasons above, I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting H. Res. 1237.

Madam Speaker, I regret that the House is taking up a supplemental funding measure for the war in Iraq without tying that funding to a withdrawal requirement. I was in Iraq last month and had the chance to speak at length with General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker about the situation in that country. There is no disputing that our casualties are down, and that is due in no small part to General Petraeus's revised military approach to the conflict. But the purpose of the surge wasn't simply to reduce our casualties; it was to give the Iraqis time to resolve their political differences via dialogue, not car bombs. That has not happened, and there is no reason to believe it will happen. Indeed, the only thing Iraq's warring factions seem to agree on these days is that they oppose permanent U.S. bases in Iraq. This no-strings-attached funding measure will only make matters worse, which is why I cannot support it.

I am pleased to be able to support the new GI Bill. For the first time in over 60 years, our returning veterans will have a truly robust educational benefit waiting for them. We all know how successful the original GI Bill was and how much it contributed to fueling our country's economic and social progress it the decades after World War II. We need to make that kind of investment in our people once again. No one can dispute our veterans have earned it and no one can dispute the long term benefits our society will reap from implementing a new GI Bill. I look forward to seeing it become law.

This bill also provides a desperately needed 13-week extension of unemployment benefits for people who are struggling to find work in this tough economy. Since last year, the number of Americans seeking employment has swelled by 800,000 while the economy has lost 260,000 jobs.

In addition, the legislation blocks the implementation of dangerous Medicaid regulations that the Bush administration has issued which would cut $20 billion from Medicaid. I oppose these regulations and will continue to fight to protect the Medicaid program and the millions of Americans who rely on it for access to health care services.

Finally, the $400 million in funding for science included in the bill represents a downpayment in our continued effort to provide a robust investment for science, research and development, and innovation. By making a strong investment, we will support research that will help contribute to the Nation's long term economic growth.

Madam Speaker, I was unable to be present for votes on June 9 or 10. For the information of my constituents and my colleagues, I want the Record to reflect how I would have voted on the following votes I missed.

On rollcall 388, on H. Res. 1255 expressing support for designation of June 2008 as National Safety Month, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 389, on H. Res. 1243 expressing the immeasurable contributions of fathers in healthy development of children, supporting responsible fatherhood, and encouraging greater involvement of fathers in the lives of their children, especially on Father's Day, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 390, on H. Res. 127 recognizing and celebrating the 50th anniversary of the entry of Alaska into the Union as the 49th State, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 391, ordering the previous question on H. Res. 1253, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 392, on agreeing to H. Res. 1253 the rule providing for consideration of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act for 2008, H.R. 6003, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 393, on H.R. 6028 the Merida Initiative to Combat Illicit Narcotics and Reduce Organized Crime Authorization Act, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 394, on H. Res. 1063 marking the 225th anniversary of the treaty of Paris of 1783, which ended the Revolutionary War, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 395, on H. Con. Res. 318 supporting the goals and ideals of the International Year of Sanitation, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 396, on H. Con Res. 336 honoring the sacrifices and contributions made by disabled American veterans, I would have voted ``yes.''