Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 6003, the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, legislation that would authorize $14.9 billion in funding for Amtrak over the next 5 years.

Rail service has integrated small communities with large cities across the country providing opportunity for economic expansion, increased mobility, and environmentally sound transit. Since Amtrak was founded in 1971, our country has benefited from organized, reliable and safe service to individuals commuting to and from work and individuals using rail service for extended travel. With the skyrocketing costs of airline flights and gas prices at over $4 a gallon, individuals are relying more and more on rail service.

It is no exaggeration to say that rail service is the lifeline from which New Jersey's state economy draws nourishment. Our region's employers--small, medium, and large--depend upon an integrated rail operation to enable many of their employees to get to and from work. Clients, potential clients, and business partners use the train to come to New Jersey. Our local entrepreneurs use Amtrak to pitch their ideas and sell their products outside of our home state.

For the last 12 years, Amtrak has been suffering from a lack of federal support and for the last 6 years it has been operating without Congressional authorization. In order to keep from going out of business, Amtrak was forced to delay necessary repairs and security improvements, freeze the salaries of its employees, rescind on employee pensions and go billions of dollars into debt. The legislation before us today would authorize the funding necessary to improve Amtrak's operations throughout the country and bring our country's rail service into the 21st Century.

H.R. 6003 authorizes $14.9 billion for Amtrak over the next 5 years. $4.3 billion of which would be used for capital grants to help Amtrak afford to make necessary repairs and upgrades to the Northeast Corridor. It would also allow Amtrak to procure new rolling stock, rehabilitate existing bridges, as well as make additional capital improvements and maintenance over its entire network.

As a regular Amtrak rider, I appreciate the professionalism and service that customers enjoy every day. Amtrak's hard working employees, including the over 1,300 employed in New Jersey, have continued to provide high quality service despite Amtrak's payroll freezes and pension problems. The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act would provide Amtrak with $3 billion in operating grants, which would help Amtrak make good on its promises to these employees. A portion of these funds would be used to pay employees salaries, health costs, and overtime pay. It would also help Amtrak pay for increasing fuel costs, facilities, maintenance and train operations.

This legislation would also create a new State Capital Grant program to provide grants for States for intercity passenger rail capital projects. In New Jersey the demand for public transportation has skyrocketed, with NJ Transit providing 900,000 trips per weekday on its trains, buses and light-rail vehicles. H.R. 6003 would authorize over $2.5 billion in grants to states over the next 5 years to help organizations like NJ Transit pay for the capital costs

of facilities and the equipment necessary to provide new or improved intercity passenger rail.

The Passenger Rail Investment Reauthorization Act would provide $1.7 billion annually to help Amtrak pay off the debt it incurred when Congress drastically cut its funding in 2000 and 2001. Amtrak has aggressively targeted this debt, paying down $600 million from 2002 through 2007. This bill would help Amtrak take further steps to reduce its debt, and allow Amtrak to focus its resources on improving existing services and making additional capital and operational improvements.

H.R. 6003 would bring American passenger rail into the 21st century, authorizing $1.7 billion for the construction of eleven high-speed rail network spanning the entire Nation. The first of which would be a high- speed rail corridor between Washington, D.C. and New York City. Countries like France, England and Japan have greatly improved the experience of commuters through the utilization of high speed corridors. This would lead to more efficient public transportation and help the over 1.5 million New Jerseyans who use Amtrak spend less time commuting and more time at home with their families.

Supporting public transportation especially passenger rail, should be a crucial element of our national effort to slow the rate of global climate change and reduce our dependence on foreign fuels. Passenger rail consumes 21 percent less energy per passenger mile than automobiles and 17 percent less than airplanes. It releases half the amount of greenhouse gases per passenger mile as both air and car travel. The continued operation of Amtrak is an essential component of easing traffic congestion, reducing wear and tear on roads, protecting our environment and preserving open space in New Jersey and across the country.

Rail service is a fundamental component of our Nation's continually growing transportation system, and Amtrak has demonstrated the capacity of integrated rail service to expand economic opportunity, commuter options, and make vital contributions to the fabric of our communities. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6003.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for this amendment and for yielding me time. He is very diligent in looking after the concerns of the people of his area in Pennsylvania, and in this amendment, I must say it also benefits--would benefit the people of New Jersey as well.

When you look at the numbers where Amtrak is setting record highs for numbers of users--25 million users last year--and look at how in New Jersey the State rail system is breaking ridership records for the 6th straight year with over 900,000 trips per weekday on its trains, buses, and light rails, and you match that with the increased costs of commuting by internal combustion cars, it should be apparent that Amtrak should do everything it can to attract riders on these underused routes; and that is exactly what the Murphy-Schwartz-Holt amendment seeks to do.

It would require Amtrak to re-examine the service cuts that it's made at two stations to see if it would be feasible to increase services at those stations. They can do this through service and pricing. I hear from my constituents about this. One constituent, John, who commutes from Princeton Junction, summed it up by saying Amtrak seems to be driving customers away. It has negative effects, including increased automobile traffic and consequences on the environment.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I thank Mr. Murphy for preparing it.

Mr. Speaker, a budget is a moral document that demonstrates our values and priorities. I want to congratulate Chairman Spratt for again bringing forth a budget that represents values of which we can be proud. This budget would make real investments in education, hometown security, veterans' programs, healthcare, and research and development while bringing the budget back to surplus by 2012.

I am pleased that this Fiscal Year 2009 budget continues to follow the pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) principle that the House restored at the start of the 110th Congress. This ensures that every new dollar of spending is offset and will not worsen the deficit. Although the budget resolution does not set the taxes or appropriation money, it does lay out the plan for the coming years to spend money and to raise revenues.

The budget would require the Ways and Means Committee to find the savings required to prevent millions of new Americans from having to pay the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), which has slowly morphed into a middle-class tax hike. More families in Central New Jersey are affected by the AMT than anywhere else in the country. Last year, Congress prevented nearly 23 million Americans, including more than 88,000 in the 12th Congressional District, from paying the AMT in 2008. Without action on this issue even more Americans would be affected by the AMT in the future.

With the price of oil now over $130 a barrel, this budget would make a significant investment in our Nation's energy future by providing $7.7 billion for renewable energy, energy efficiency, and other energy programs. This is $2.8 billion--or 55 percent--more than the Fiscal Year 2008 budget. In doing so, the budget would reject the President's budget cuts to energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, and instead invest $2 billion in new programs to create ``green collar jobs.''

Mr. Speaker, this budget honors our commitment to our Nation's children by investing in education. The budget would provide $8.4 billion above the President's request--new funding that could support vital programs like Head Start, special education, school improvement programs, and Title 1. The budget also would help make college more affordable and accessible for students in New Jersey and throughout the country by increasing funding that could support Pell grants, Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants, and programs that broaden access to Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

Facing difficult and uncertain economic times, this budget would invest in job creation and job training. In addition to investing in programs to create ``green collar jobs,'' we reject the President's cuts to Community Development Block Grants and his proposal to eliminate four job training programs. We also look to a long-term economic growth strategy, one that invests in science and research and development. This budget would support our Innovation Agenda by increasing funding for the America COMPETES Act, which authorized robust funding for research at the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy's Office of Science.

Our budget also addresses the fact that our Nation has more Americans than ever living without health insurance, including over nine million children. We would include funding to provide up to $50 billion for children's health insurance. This would help insure millions of children. Likewise, our budget recognizes the importance of Medicaid and Medicare and would reject the President's harmful proposal to cut Medicaid by $94 billion and Medicare by $479 billion over ten years.

Mr. Speaker, I'm proud of this budget's commitment to making America more safe and secure. Notably, we would provide additional funding to implement the 9/11 commission recommendations, including required 100 percent screening for shipping and air cargo. We would also place a greater emphasis on funding nuclear nonproliferation programs, one of the most severe threats to our security.

Additionally, we would restore funding for vital first responder programs, including the State Homeland Security Grant Program (cut $705 million), Firefighter Assistance Grants (cut $463 million), Byrne Justice Assistance Grants (eliminated all formula funding), and COPS (cut $599 million).

This budget continues our commitment to fully fund veterans' health care by providing $48.2 billion for 2009, which is $4.9 billion (11.4 percent) more than the 2008 level. In fact, it would provide $3.3 billion more than the President's budget for 2009 and $39 billion more over five years. Consistent with past practice, the President's budget actually cuts funding after the first year. This budget also would allow the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to treat 5.8 million patients in 2009, including an estimated 333,275 Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, many of whom suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injuries, or blast-related injuries. Additionally, the budget rejects the health care fee increases imposed by the President's budget, which total $2.3 billion over five years, including a new enrollment fee and pharmaceutical co-payment increases. Finally, this budget increases funding to speed disability claims processing, so that VA can continue to reduce its backlog.

I would like to recognize the budget's impact on voting reform. Implementing a nationwide requirement for independently auditable, and audited, vote counts is a priority of mine. As such, I was deeply disappointed that the President's budget made no request for funding under Title II of the Help America Vote Act. Approximately $560 million of the funding authorized under that Title remains unappropriated, and jurisdictions across the country could use that funding to improve the accuracy, integrity and security of their voting systems, as well as improve the administration of elections generally. Additionally, I was disappointed to see that the President requested only half of what remains authorized to fund disability access grants to ensure polling place accessibility. As we continue to debate the budget, we should address these budget shortfalls.

Mr. Speaker, this budget reflects values for which we can be proud. We reject cuts to important healthcare, education, veterans, and national security programs while maintaining our commitment to fiscal responsibility. By adopting this budget and supporting the designated funding levels throughout the appropriations process, we would be investing in priorities important to our future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution and commend my colleague, Eddie Bernice Johnson, for introducing it and the chairman of the Science Committee for bringing it forward.

This resolution expresses the sense of Congress that increasing American capabilities in science, mathematics, and technology education should be a national priority. And I must say, I hope Members on the other side of this aisle will avoid distracting us with red herrings across the trail and debating other diverting matters such as drilling and digging in the United States and stick to this topic which is of critical importance.

Since first coming to Congress almost a decade ago, I stressed the need for a new major national effort to improve science, mathematics, and technology education. I'm a product of the science revolution in the United States that occurred following the launch of Sputnik in 1957. And today, as this resolution notes, we must recommit ourselves to creating a new generation of scientists, engineers, and mathematicians, and just as important, indeed more important, we need to build a general public that is literate and comfortable with science, math, technology.

I would ask at this point to include in the Record a copy of a recent op-ed essay entitled ``Put a Little Science in Your Life'' by Brian Greene, professor of physics at Columbia and author of The Elegant Universe. He discusses the importance of science in everyone's lives, not just scientists.

[From the New York Times, June 1, 2008]

Put a Little Science in Your Life

(By Brian Greene)

A couple of years ago I received a letter from an American

soldier in Iraq. The letter began by saying that, as we've

all become painfully aware, serving on the front lines is

physically exhausting and emotionally debilitating. But the

reason for his writing was to tell me that in that hostile

and lonely environment, a book I'd written had become a kind

of lifeline. As the book is about science--one that traces

physicists' search for nature's deepest laws--the soldier's

letter might strike you as, well, odd.

But it's not. Rather, it speaks to the powerful role

science can play in giving life context and meaning. At the

same time, the soldier's letter emphasized something I've

increasingly come to believe: our educational system fails to

teach science in a way that allows students to integrate it

into their lives.

Allow me a moment to explain.

When we consider the ubiquity of cellphones, iPods,

personal computers and the Internet, it's easy to see how

science (and the technology to which it leads) is woven into

the fabric of our day-to-day activities. When we benefit from

CT scanners, M.R.I. devices, pacemakers and arterial stents,

we can immediately appreciate how science affects the quality

of our lives. When we assess the state of the world, and

identify looming challenges like climate change, global

pandemics, security threats and diminishing resources, we

don't hesitate in turning to science to gauge the problems

and find solutions.

And when we look at the wealth of opportunities hovering on

the horizon--stem cells, genomic sequencing, personalized

medicine, longevity research, nanoscience, brain-machine

interface, quantum computers, space technology--we realize

how crucial it is to cultivate a general public that can

engage with scientific issues; there's simply no other way

that as a society we will be prepared to make informed

decisions on a range of issues that will shape the future.

These are the standard--and enormously important--reasons

many would give in explaining why science matters.

But here's the thing. The reason science really matters

runs deeper still. Science is a way of life. Science is a

perspective. Science is the process that takes us from

confusion to understanding in a manner that's precise,

predictive and reliable--a transformation, for those lucky

enough to experience it, that is empowering and emotional. To

be able to think through and grasp explanations--for

everything from why the sky is blue to how life formed on

earth--not because they are declared dogma but rather because

they reveal patterns confirmed by experiment and observation,

is one of the most precious of human experiences.

As a practicing scientist, I know this from my own work and

study. But I also know that you don't have to be a scientist

for science to be transformative. I've seen children's eyes

light up as I've told them about black holes and the Big

Bang. I've spoken with high school dropouts who've

stumbled on popular science books about the human genome

project, and then returned to school with newfound

purpose. And in that letter from Iraq, the soldier told me

how learning about relativity and quantum physics in the

dusty and dangerous environs of greater Baghdad kept him

going because it revealed a deeper reality of which we're

all a part.

It's striking that science is still widely viewed as merely

a subject one studies in the classroom or an isolated body of

largely esoteric knowledge that sometimes shows up in the

``real'' world in the form of technological or medical

advances. In reality, science is a language of hope and

inspiration, providing discoveries that fire the imagination

and instill a sense of connection to our lives and our world.

If science isn't your strong suit--and for many it's not--

this side of science is something you may have rarely if ever

experienced. I've spoken with so many people over the years

whose encounters with science in school left them thinking of

it as cold, distant and intimidating. They happily use the

innovations that science makes possible, but feel that the

science itself is just not relevant to their lives. What a

shame.

Like a life without music, art or literature, a life

without science is bereft of something that gives experience

a rich and otherwise inaccessible dimension.

It's one thing to go outside on a crisp, clear night and

marvel at a sky full of stars. It's another to marvel not

only at the spectacle but to recognize that those stars are

the result of exceedingly ordered conditions 13.7 billion

years ago at the moment of the Big Bang. It's another still

to understand how those stars act as nuclear furnaces that

supply the universe with carbon, oxygen and nitrogen, the raw

material of life as we know it.

And it's yet another level of experience to realize that

those stars account for less than 4 percent of what's out

there--the rest being of an unknown composition, so-called

dark matter and energy, which researchers are now vigorously

trying to divine.

As every parent knows, children begin life as uninhibited,

unabashed explorers of the unknown. From the time we can walk

and talk, we want to know what things are and how they work--

we begin life as little scientists. But most of us quickly

lose our intrinsic scientific passion. And it's a profound

loss.

A great many studies have focused on this problem,

identifying important opportunities for improving science

education. Recommendations have ranged from increasing the

level of training for science teachers to curriculum reforms.

But most of these studies (and their suggestions) avoid an

overarching systemic issue: in teaching our students, we

continually fail to activate rich opportunities for revealing

the breathtaking vistas opened up by science, and instead

focus on the need to gain competency with science's

underlying technical details.

In fact, many students I've spoken to have little sense of

the big questions those technical details collectively try to

answer: Where did the universe come from? How did life

originate? How does the brain give rise to consciousness?

Like a music curriculum that requires its students to

practice scales while rarely if ever inspiring them by

playing the great masterpieces, this way of teaching science

squanders the chance to make students sit up in their chairs

and say, ``Wow, that's science?''

In physics, just to give a sense of the raw material that's

available to be leveraged, the most revolutionary of advances

have happened in the last 100 years--special relativity,

general relativity, quantum mechanics--a symphony of

discoveries that changed our conception of reality. More

recently, the last 10 years have witnessed an upheaval in

our understanding of the universe's composition, yielding

a wholly new prediction for what the cosmos will be like

in the far future.

These are paradigm-shaking developments. But rare is the

high school class, and rarer still is the middle school

class, in which these breakthroughs are introduced. It's much

the same story in classes for biology, chemistry and

mathematics.

At the root of this pedagogical approach is a firm belief

in the vertical nature of science: you must master A before

moving on to B. When A happened a few hundred years ago, it's

a long climb to the modern era. Certainly, when it comes to

teaching the technicalities--solving this equation, balancing

that reaction, grasping the discrete parts of the cell--the

verticality of science is unassailable.

But science is so much more than its technical details. And

with careful attention to presentation, cutting-edge insights

and discoveries can be clearly and faithfully communicated to

students independent of those details; in fact, those

insights and discoveries are precisely the ones that can

drive a

young student to want to learn the details. We rob science

education of life when we focus solely on results and seek to

train students to solve problems and recite facts without a

commensurate emphasis on transporting them out beyond the

stars.

Science is the greatest of all adventure stories, one

that's been unfolding for thousands of years as we have

sought to understand ourselves and our surroundings. Science

needs to be taught to the young and communicated to the

mature in a manner that captures this drama. We must embark

on a cultural shift that places science in its rightful place

alongside music, art and literature as an indispensable part

of what makes life worth living.

It's the birthright of every child, it's a necessity for

every adult, to look out on the world, as the soldier in Iraq

did, and see that the wonder of the cosmos transcends

everything that divides us.

There is no denying that America is losing ground and global competitiveness to countries that are making the necessary investments in education and research and development. We owe our current economic strength, our current national security, our current quality of life, to the investments of past generations.

However, the Federal Government has failed to fund adequately research, development, and innovation. Investment in these areas ensures that American people will continue to benefit from opportunities of the rapidly growing global economy and its inherent foundations.

In August of 2007, this body passed into law, as my colleague from Texas pointed out, a comprehensive competitiveness package, the America COMPETES Act, which was based on disturbing findings of the National Academies' report, ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm,'' that our Nation is severely underinvesting in engineering and the physical sciences.

Unfortunately, the fiscal year 2008 budget fell short of the required goal. Without taking a bold, different approach in this year's appropriation cycle, Congress will be delivering a blow to our future economic security and competitiveness.

I thank gentlelady for introducing this legislation. I hope we pay heed.

Will the gentleman yield?

Will the gentleman yield?

Quite simply, the reason gasoline prices are so high today--of course there is international speculation--is there's demand from other countries; there's the falling value of the dollar. Principally, it is because, in past decades, we failed to wean ourselves from fossil fuels. We have failed to make the investment in research and development that would make that possible. You're talking about drilling in Alaska.

If I may continue.

If the gentleman would yield.

It's the wrong argument. We are here to talk about the future that we will get from investment in research and development.

If the gentleman will yield.

We will not get out of this problem by doing more of the same that we have been doing.

Madam Chairman, I thank Mr. Kildee.

And to my friend from California, I would say if we wanted to use this time for a discussion of both fiscal responsibility and which side of the aisle has done better with respect to individuals with disabilities and title I, boy, that's an argument that we would gladly take on.

But that's not the topic here. The topic here is the green schools program, and energy costs are the second highest operating expenditure for schools after personnel costs.

The two gentlemen from California were talking about how this is wasteful spending. I'll tell you what's wasteful. About a third of those $8 billion annually that schools spend on energy could be saved.

What this legislation does, it provides help for local schools and States to invest in energy-saving design and technology, which will provide not only better learning conditions but save billions of dollars.

So this actually is beneficial from a fiscal point of view, as well as an educational point of view.

I thank the gentleman. And I thank him and Chairman Miller for incorporating parts of my ``Green Schools'' bill in this legislation.

I just wanted to make two more points, that under this bill States must develop a database of energy usage in public school facilities. I'm really pleased that this includes language that requires schools to report on their carbon footprints.

Also, we've included a provision to ensure that veteran-owned businesses receive the same contracting preferences as minority and women-owned businesses. As the war continues to swell the veteran population, it's our duty to help to ensure that returning soldiers have jobs to return to.

This is good legislation. I urge its passage. I thank the gentleman for putting together such good legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for, once again, asking me to join him in the effort to refocus our military spending priorities toward more useful purposes. You know, one of the craziest ideas I've ever heard is that we should deploy this missile defense system as a way to test it. It should be tested before it's deployed. And I can tell you, even if it worked, it would never be so reliable that we would think of it as leak-proof, that it would actually change our strategy. So it just becomes another expense.

And simple strategic analysis tells us that a provocative yet permeable defense is destabilizing, and really leads to reduced security for all.

What we do here is provide over $600 million for the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, much more in keeping with the real threat that faces us, and money for the Second Line of Defense Initiative and other programs aimed at nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

We would also provide $100 million for the care and support of wounded soldiers and their families, and $300 million more to address the National Guard and Reserve shortfalls, especially for homeland security activities. This is a commonsense amendment. I urge its adoption.

Mr. Chairman, I thank Mrs. Tauscher for her wise leadership.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment is unwise and, at the very least, premature. Existing Department of Energy Reports and reports from outside consultants, such as the JASON group, have made it clear that our existing nuclear weapons will be viable for decades. It makes no sense to begin construction of a new generation of nuclear weapons. It is not necessary, and worse, it would be harmful to our security.

In light of our efforts to convince other countries to abstain from pursuing nuclear weapons, a pressing, indeed critical, national need for our security to persuade other countries to abstain going forward with Reliable Replacement Warhead programs would not make sense. It was defunded last year by the Appropriations Committee largely for some of these reasons I have outlined.

Finally, the United States has not recently conducted a comprehensive review of its nuclear posture, and no construction of new nuclear weapons or major alterations of the DOE lab complexes should be made until such a review is completed.

Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to oppose the Pearce amendment.

Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chairman, this is a straightforward amendment with a simple purpose: To ensure the video recording of each strategic intelligence interrogation of any person in the custody of the Department of Defense, except for personnel and troops in the field conducting battlefield interrogations. The video recordings would be kept at the appropriate level of classification and could be used to get maximum intelligence benefit of the interrogation, and the judge advocate general would develop guidelines for the recording and retaining of the recordings. I think it is important for our national security that we make this provision law.

I yield 2 minutes to an Iraq war veteran, a former officer in the Judge Advocate General Corps who understands this very well, the need for it, and will speak, Mr. Patrick Murphy from Pennsylvania.

May I ask the remaining time.

I yield 30 seconds to the gentlelady from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Madam Chairman, I thank the gentlelady.

It is becoming standard for interrogations all over this country, I have a list here from the 50 States, for enforcement and prosecutorial interrogations where it is required. In fact, it is required in New Jersey, Alaska, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota. And it is required for a variety of reasons, not just for the protection of the detainees or the protection of the interrogators, but to get maximum benefit from the interrogation.

Under this amendment, the judge advocate general would develop guidelines to ensure that the required video recording is sufficient to protect both the abuse of detainees and to protect the identity of the interrogators from unauthorized disclosure. This is standard practice.

I yield to the chairman of the committee, who can speak not only from his position as Chair but from his experience as a prosecutor, the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the Conference Committee for its hard work on the Farm Bill, and for all of the improvements the final bill makes to existing nutrition, conservation, organic farming and other important programs. But I also must express my great disappointment that, in this year of record crop prices and soaring agricultural profits, we have let a precious opportunity go by to implement real reform to the extremely outdated commodity and price support programs in the bill.

The good news today fills a long list. According to the USDA, more than 11 percent of U.S. households are food-insecure. Today, we will approve more than $10 billion in funding for programs that provide American families with low cost, healthy food, including more than $1 billion for The Emergency Food Assistance Program and more than $1 billion for the USDA Snack Program. This bill also increases the minimum benefit for food stamp recipients and excludes retirement and education savings accounts from the assets to be considered in determining eligibility. And I am particularly pleased to see that it includes $5 million in funding annually for Community Food Projects grants, which funding I have previously urged Congress to maintain and which I engaged in a colloquy about with the gentlelady from Connecticut Ms. DeLauro in connection with the Fiscal Year 2008 Agriculture Appropriations Bill.

Similarly, the bill before us today will authorize almost $8 billion in conservation funding, including increasing funding for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program by $3.4 billion, adding more than $1 billion in new funding for the Conservation Security Program, reestablishing the funding level for the Wetlands Reserve Program at $1.4 billion, and doubling funding for the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program. And I was especially pleased to see that the House- passed provision that would have restricted USDA conservation programs from encouraging farmers to reduce their use of toxic pesticides in implementing integrated pest management programs was removed from the final bill, and I would like to thank the two dozen Members who joined me in sending a letter to the Conferees to request that the pesticides discrimination provision be removed.

The Farm Bill supports organic farmers by providing $22 million in funding for the USDA's organic certification cost share program, which defrays the costs that organic producers incur when seeking organic certification, provides $5 million in funding for organic marketing data, and authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to make payments of up to $20,000 per year, capped at $80,000 over six years, to a producer for conservation practices related to organic production or the transition to organic production. I have long supported facilitating the conversion to organic farming, and was delighted to have the support of this chamber when it voted in favor of my amendment to the Fiscal Year 2007 Agriculture Appropriations Bill to more than double the funding for the Organic Transitions Research program.

Therefore, although I will be voting in favor of this bill today, for all of the good that it will do, I note that there is still a substantial amount of good that it should have done, and will not. Although the commodity programs in the bill account for less than 13 percent of the Farm Bill funding, and represent a decrease of $60 billion compared to the last Farm Bill in 2002, we could have, and should have, done better.

First, although cuts to direct payments totaled $300 million, that represents a decrease of less than one percent to the $50 billion program. At the same time, subsidies for commodities such as soybeans and wheat have actually increased, despite the fact that prices for those commodities have also increased--by more than 100 percent and 200 percent, respectively, since 2002. The House-passed Farm Bill would have guaranteed $840 million in funding for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program over five years, but in the final bill the program was cut to one tenth that amount--only $84 million. According to news reports, the amount of international food aid provided represents less than 1 percent of the Farm Bill's total cost, while at the same time the bill preserves the trade-distorting subsidy programs that make it virtually impossible for farmers in developing nations to compete.

And finally, I was troubled to learn that an 11th-hour change was inserted into the bill by the Conference Committee, despite it not having been debated or voted on in either Chamber, that would negate a U.S. Court of Appeals, DC Circuit ruling mandating disclosure of USDA data relevant to producer compliance with subsidy programs. In reaching its decision, the Court stated that ``there is a special need for public scrutiny of agency action that distributes extensive amounts of public funds in the form of subsidies and other financial benefits.'' No title of the Farm Bill has been more hotly debated than the commodity title, the original justifications for which have all but evaporated over time, and thus it troubles me that a provision that not only goes to the very heart of that matter but also appears to fly squarely in the face of a recent court ruling on the subject is being put before this body without debate or a specific vote on the merits. In fact, I intend to request a hearing on this last-minute language.

Therefore, this is one of those decisions that is not clear cut. On balance, I feel that the good news in the Farm Bill outweighs the bad, although not by much. I want to commend my colleague from Wisconsin Mr. Kind for his continuing leadership in working to develop a Farm Bill that more equitably reflects our modern day needs and economic realities, and I want him to know that I look forward to working with him and others in the future to address the shortcomings of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Obey for his leadership in crafting this bill and bringing it before the House. In brief, I wanted to let my colleagues know that the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, which I chair, has been involved in this process. Our role has been to ensure that any intelligence programs included for funding in this supplemental package have been reviewed for their appropriateness and value to our troops in the field.

While the Department of the Defense is focused on Iraq and Afghanistan, the professionals in the Intelligence Community are focused on threats there and elsewhere around the world. A good intelligence system can save lives by preventing war, or, should war come, by helping to win the war as quickly as possible. We must ensure that the troops in combat get the best real-time intelligence and at the same time that policymakers get solid, independent, insightful intelligence about countries, trends, and potential conflicts around the world. I look forward to providing another update on our work once the base DoD appropriations bill is completed later this spring.

Regarding Iraq, I recently returned from a trip to that deeply troubled country. American troops are performing superbly in Iraq under continually difficult conditions. While in Baghdad, I met with soldiers--including those from New Jersey--and told them they deserve not just our gratitude, but all of the support they need when they return to help them get on with their lives. The situation in Iraq, however, is not in the power of our soldiers to control, as events have repeatedly shown.

It is impossible to hide the fact that the limited security gains achieved since last fall have not been matched by political reconciliation on the part of the Iraqis. The uneven performance of the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) during the fighting with the Mahdi Army in late March 2008 has called into question the viability of the ISF as a national defense and police force, despite our having poured billions of dollars into the ISF.

Unfortunately, Iraq's central government continues to lack legitimacy in the eyes of its people, as the recent spasms of violence in Basra, Baghdad, and elsewhere in the country have clearly shown. No amount of American lives and money can erase that legitimacy gap. It is clear that the Iraqi government is unwilling or unable to take the steps necessary to reach a political settlement that will end the violence, and that is why I supported the amendment to this supplemental spending bill that would set a start date for our withdrawal from Iraq. It is important for us to take decisive action to end our combat involvement in Iraq and refocus our efforts on destroying al Qaeda and eliminating the conditions that breed international terrorism and refocusing our resources on pressing domestic and international needs.

While we continue our efforts to extricate our troops from Iraq, we must also prepare to help them once they return home and begin transitioning to the civilian world. I strongly support the provision in this bill that expands the education benefits veterans receive under the GI bill to restore the promise of a full, 4-year college education, and make the veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan part of an American economic recovery, just like the veterans of World War II were.

This bill also contains provisions to help America's most vulnerable citizens survive the current de facto recession our country is experiencing. The bill extends unemployment benefits for workers who have exhausted their benefits by up to 13 weeks in every State as well as an additional 13 weeks in States with high unemployment. Also included in this bill is the Protecting the Medicaid Safety Net Act of 2008 (H.R. 5613), which places a moratorium on seven Medicaid regulations that would cut services to seniors, families, and those with disabilities as well as cut payments to safety net providers. These are compassionate measures that are fully off-set, and I am glad they are in this bill.

However, I can't help but observe, Mr. Speaker, that these needs would have been met long ago if our country had not been forced to waste billions of dollars on a war of choice that should never have been fought. I will continue to do all I can to help end our involvement in Iraq and redirect our Nation's priorities and resources where they belong--on meeting the needs of our people.

Madam Speaker, as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the founding of Israel, I am proud that the United States and Israel have built a strong, unique, and special relationship.

It took the United States, under President Harry Truman's leadership, only 11 minutes after Israel had been declared a state to officially welcome her into the community of nations. After, President Truman said, ``I had faith in Israel before it was established, I have faith in it now. I believe it has a glorious future before it--not just another sovereign nation, but as an embodiment of the great ideals of our civilization.''

The creation of the State of Israel was a bold step in May of 1948. The first prime minister of Israel, David Ben-Gurion, once said that ``courage is a special kind of knowledge: the knowledge of how to fear what ought to be feared and how not to fear what ought not to be feared.'' It is from such courage that the State of Israel was formed and from which Israel continues to maintain its vibrant and strong democracy today. We can all learn examples from the struggles that the citizens have endured and the grief they have overcome to remain a democratic outpost in the Middle East.

The achievements of the Israeli people and their government over the past 60 years are remarkable. For instance, when it comes to education, well over half of Israelis aged 20- 24 are enrolled in one of the country's institutions of post-secondary or higher education. Healthcare is guaranteed by law--for all Israelis--from infancy to old age. As for agriculture, the country produces almost 70 percent of its food requirements--from land that was once not remotely capable of sustaining crops or livestock. Finally, despite the growing demand for expansion of farmland and industrial centers, the Israeli government has set aside land for 150 nature reserves and 65 national parks throughout the country, with several hundred additional sites in planning. While these achievements are each remarkable in their own right, they are only a sample of what Israel has accomplished in a mere 60 years.

As a lifelong supporter of our most important ally in the Middle East, I have had the pleasure of traveling to Israel. These visits have only reinforced my strong conviction that Israel, like all states in the world, has the right to respond in self-defense to protect her sovereignty and citizens.

As chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations Special Intelligence Oversight Panel, I know that Israel has been a loyal and cooperative partner in combating terrorism. Our country has a lot to learn from Israel and her experiences with acts of terrorism.

As Israel continues to face threats from her neighbors, America must continue to stand with her. Additionally, a strong American relationship with Israel is essential for regional stability. We have a responsibility to help Israel stand up to and prevent terrorist attacks. Last year, I supported $2.4 billion in military assistance for Israel, and will continue to support additional U.S. foreign assistance for Israel.

I also strongly believe that the United States must remain actively engaged in ensuring a peaceful settlement of the current conflict between the two parties.

It is essential that the United States become more involved diplomatically to help diffuse conflicts like the one in Lebanon two summers ago and help move the parties to a broader settlement that will defang the militant and terrorist factions and will result in a peaceful Middle East and a viable two states.

Much work remains unfinished. We are all troubled by the daily rocket attacks by Hamas from Gaza against innocent civilians in Israel. Israel clearly has a right to defend herself against these deadly attacks. This has been yet another unique year for Israel, full of challenges that were admirably met.

I am pleased to join with the Jewish community of New Jersey and all Americans in celebrating 60 years of Israel's existence as a beacon of democracy and hope in the Middle East. I look forward to future anniversaries, and to the day when Israel and her citizens can live in peace without fear.

Mr. Speaker, recently I met with veterans in New Jersey, some of whom had served in the Second World War, and earlier in the day that I met with them, I had returned from a fact-finding trip to Iraq with Representative Thompson of California, a colleague on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

I told these veterans that they would not recognize this war in Iraq. From a technological standpoint, the kind of battlefield sensors and intelligence analysis capabilities available to our troops in Iraq are so far beyond anything that was fielded by the military in the Second World War or, in fact, even in more recent conflicts. That's the good news.

The other thing that they would not recognize, the not-so-good news, is that unlike say the Second World War, the United States cannot control the outcome in Iraq or achieve success because we do not know who the enemy is and what constitutes success.

While part of our trip involved classified briefings in which we examined how the intelligence community is supporting our troops, we also had the opportunity to meet at length with General David Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker to discuss the situation on the ground, including the status of the political reconciliation among Iraq's warring factions. The two gave a positive report and spoke of a great deal of progress.

Two outstanding patriots, a good general, a good diplomat, but the presentation that America is making progress toward a successful outcome in Iraq makes sense only if we continually redefine what we mean by success. And for over 5 years, we've been redefining both our rationale for invading Iraq and how we propose to measure success.

First, it was to go after those responsible for 9/11. Then it was to remove Saddam Hussein from power and track down his WMDs. And then it was to bring stability to the region. And then it was to bring free elections and bring all the warring factions together in a model of democracy for the Middle East. Then it was to create a road to peace in Israel through Iraq. And then it was to give the Iraqis more time to organize their government. Now, it seems to be to reduce the number of members of al Qaeda in Iraq, the AQI, which was, of course, zero before it all started.

These repeated rationalizations and redefinitions serve no one's interests, particularly the interests of our men and women of our Armed Forces who we've sent in harm's way in Iraq.

In Baghdad, I met with active duty soldiers, including some from New Jersey. American troops are performing superbly in Iraq under difficult conditions. As I told them, they, and the New Jersey National Guard members who will be deploying later this year, deserve not just our gratitude, but all the support they need to do their job, the wherewithal they need to do their job, and I would say just as much support when they return home as veterans.

Of course, we want our soldiers to succeed. We want the Iraqis to be peaceful and prosperous. We want terrorists and other enemies of the United States to be defanged and defeated. But for that to happen, it must be in Iraq, at least the Iraqis, the Iraqi political factions who must take the lead in ending their civil war.

It's impossible to hide the fact that the limited security gains achieved since last fall have not been matched by political reconciliation on the part of the Iraqis.

Unfortunately, Iraq's central government continues to lack legitimacy in the eyes of its people, as the recent combat in Basra and Baghdad have clearly shown. It is clear that the Iraqi government is, so far anyway, unwilling or unable to take the steps necessary to reach a political settlement that will end the violence.

One of the reasons I voted against the war resolution to go into Iraq in the first place was that Iraq was not a threat to the United States in the wake of the 9/11 attacks and that attacking Iraq would unleash forces we could not control. I was not alone in making those arguments, which tragically have been validated by events.

My latest trip to Iraq has, sadly, reinforced my belief that success is being redefined only once again, and what we need to do is to take decisive action to end our combat involvement in Iraq and refocus our efforts on destroying al Qaeda and eliminating the conditions that breed international terrorism and refocusing our resources on pressing domestic and international needs.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3221, the Foreclosure Prevention Act.

At the end of last year, home foreclosure rates rose to the highest level in 20 years. Every day more than 7,000 people file for foreclosure, and it is predicted that predatory lending practices and sub prime mortgages will cause one in every thirty-three homeowners to foreclose on their mortgages in the next 2 years.

This is not an issue that is merely affecting those who have defaulted on their mortgages and their lenders; it is having a ripple effect throughout the economy. It has resulted in a nationwide decrease in housing prices of 12.4 percent, and 10 percent of Americans now owe more money on their mortgages than their homes are worth. It has caused a decrease in consumer confidence and corresponding decrease in consumer spending. It has contributed to a steep increase in job losses in housing related industries such as manufacturing, construction and related industries. These job losses combined with the loss of consumer confidence could reduce economic activity by over 150 billion dollars in 2008.

This is a crisis, and it is time, it is past time, that the Federal Government step in and help those that are suffering. H.R. 3221 would provide mortgage refinancing assistance to keep families in their homes, protect neighboring home values, and help stabilize the housing market. It would expand the Federal Housing Administration to help borrowers who are at risk of losing their homes to refinance into lower-cost government-insured mortgages that they can afford to repay. H.R. 3221 ensures that this will be done responsibly, by requiring lenders and mortgage investors to take significant losses in order to participate in this program and by requiring borrowers to share a portion of any resale of a refinanced home with the government.

H.R. 3221 also provides 11 billion dollars in tax incentives to help Americans purchase a first home or hold onto the ones that they already have. This includes tax credits to first-time homebuyers, an additional 10 billion dollars in mortgage revenue bonds for states,

and improves access to low-income housing. It also includes a provision that I wrote to allow homeowners who currently do not itemize their Federal tax returns to take an additional standard deduction for the state and local property taxes that they pay. The Temporary Tax Relief Act creates an additional standard deduction of $350 for single filers and $700 for joint filers for state and local real property taxes paid or accrued. This legislation will complement efforts that have already been implemented on the state and federal level to help address the housing crisis.

I am proud that several organizations in my home state of New Jersey have stepped in to provide services and assistance to New Jerseyans who are at risk of losing their homes. One of the shining examples of this is Legal Services of New Jersey. LSNJ created the Anti-Predatory Lending Project 5 years ago to provide legal services to borrowers victimized by predatory lenders. LSNJ's hardworking lawyers have helped almost 500 families who were facing foreclosure receive legal assistance. I would like to commend LSNJ for the work that they have done on behalf of the residents of my central New Jersey district and for all New Jerseyans who have been at risk of losing their homes.

H.R. 3221 and the companion bill that the House of Representatives will be considering, H.R. 5818, the Neighborhood Stabilization Act are a bold step towards addressing the mortgage crisis and the resulting economic downturn, and I urge my colleagues to support them.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady.

Today all of our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Burma. The deaths and destruction caused by the cyclone Nargis which hit Burma over the weekend are still being discovered. Recent reports indicate that maybe 10,000 were killed and hundreds of thousands left without shelter and clean water. Yet despite this horrific natural disaster, the Burmese junta has announced it will go ahead with the scheduled sham constitutional referendum this Saturday.

Today, we are considering our resolution to condemn the Burmese regime's undemocratic constitution and the scheduled sham referendum to legitimize that constitution. As the sponsor of H. Con. Res. 317, I want to thank Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen, who are both lead sponsors of the resolution, for their support in helping to move this.

We sometimes ask, and our constituents sometimes ask, whether governments are relevant to our daily lives, to their daily lives. Well, certainly here we see a negative example of what a difference a government can make. The ruling junta did not warn the people, so I understand, of the oncoming cyclone. They have done little to provide humanitarian assistance.

I strongly encourage our State Department to heed the calls of the international community and provide whatever emergency humanitarian assistance the Government of Burma will accept. I do recall visiting Burma several decades ago following an earthquake that devastated Pagan, and the willful unwillingness of the military dictatorship then to accept international help.

I have long been interested in Burma and the future of the Burmese people. I first traveled there some decades ago, and I was struck by the amazing damage and destruction that a despotic antidemocratic government can inflict on an economy, on a country and on the people.

Under military rule since 1962, Burma was once called the ``rice bowl of Asia'' because of its rich resources, its fertile land and its productive people. But with the ruling junta, its promise and its potential have steadily declined. This promising country's resources have been channeled into supporting the military, and it is now one

of the most impoverished countries in the world.

Prior to this week's scheduled sham constitutional referendum, the junta has allowed an election once before. In 1990 the National League For Democracy, the NLD, led by Aung San Suu Kyi, won an election landslide. Yet despite the NLD winning four out of every five parliamentary seats, the regime locked up the NLD winners, and to this day Aung San Suu Kyi remains under arrest. For her bravery, courage and her fight for true democracy in her home country, she has been awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace. Yet 18 years later, this Nobel laureate remains locked away.

Those are among the reasons that this House today is considering, and should pass, this resolution to condemn the Burmese regime's undemocratic constitution and the sham referendum to legitimize it.

The Burmese people are determined to enjoy the same rights and freedoms that so many across the world, take for granted. The heroic efforts of the opposition leader and Peace Prize winner and others have given hope to victims of terrible oppression, and they deserve our support. This resolution sends a strong signal to the people of Burma that we stand with them in their struggle for democracy. The resolution denounces the one-sided totalitarian and illegal act by the junta to try to legitimize military rule through their unilaterally drafted constitution.

The monks who were detained following the September Saffron Revolution and all other political prisoners and prisoners of conscience should be released. The resolution urges President Bush to call on the world community not to accept or recognize the junta's constitution.

When several of us Members of Congress held a meeting here of the Human Rights Caucus on the Saffron Revolution to hear testimony from the monks who stood up in a nonviolent way to one of the most despotic regimes in the world, the monks told a gripping and heart-rending tale. They called on Congress to approve this resolution as soon as possible, and today the House answers that call.

Earlier this year, for a joint session of Congress, I invited a young man, Richard Chio, a refugee from Burma and a resident of my congressional district, to sit as my guest here in the gallery of this House. He sat and watched the State of the Union address, having resettled only months before in the United States with the help of Lutheran Social Services of New Jersey. He told me that this day in Washington ``was like living in a dream.'' It was the most amazing day in his life to see that a government like ours could exist, because he knew nothing like that in Burma.

Richard's story and the countless others remind us of why now, more than ever, especially following the devastation of this cyclone in Burma, the people of the United States need to stand with the people of Burma and oppose the junta.

This referendum later this week would be a sham, a fake, pretend; it would be bogus, fraudulent, spurious, phony. Use whatever word you want. But it would not be democratic. It would not be to the benefit of the people of Burma who want a true democracy.

I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their support and the many cosponsors of this resolution. I also want to thank Eric Richardson with Mr. Berman and Dennis Halpin with the ranking member for their assistance in preparing this resolution. I also want to thank the U.S. Campaign for Burma and Jen Quigley for the excellent work they do every day and have done year in and year out to promote democracy in Burma.

I urge passage of this resolution.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, in countries all over the world, journalists are assisted, in fact, often dependent on local assistance, such as Dith Pran was to Sydney Schanberg, who was working for The New York Times. Such assistance often goes unrecognized.

But Dith Pran did not go unrecognized. His life would be noteworthy if only because of his survival. After the foreign military forces left southeast Asia, and horrific genocide and slaughter enveloped Cambodia, Dith Pran faced a situation that is hard to believe. He would be noteworthy also because of his excellent work as a photographer and photojournalist, but he is most noteworthy and truly admirable because of his work to bring the horrors of the genocide of Cambodia and of genocide anywhere in the world to the attention of the public. It was my honor and good fortune to know Dith Pran.

He covered stories and events in the New Jersey and New York area, and I saw him fairly often. He even accomplished the challenging achievement of sometimes making me look good on film. He was hardly a movie star, but he was always cheerful. In his daily contacts, looking through those smiling eyes, it would be hard to imagine the horrors that were back in his mind.

For months each year, after hours, on weekends, before students, before policymakers, before any audience that would listen, he used his experiences effectively to teach the horrors that humans can do to humans and to work for justice, truth and reconciliation in Cambodia and other countries around the world.

After each mass murder and genocide in history, some have said ``Never again.'' After the Nazi death camps, after Rwanda, after each genocide, we say never again.

Let us all hope, that the example of Dith Pran and his story will help us take action so that truly never again we will see the kind of horror that Dith Pran saw.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 49, which expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that there should be established a National Letter Carriers Appreciation Day.

In 1775, Members of the Second Continental Congress established the Post Office Department, the predecessor of the Postal Service and the second oldest Federal department or agency in the United States. For the past two centuries, the United States Postal Service has evolved and changed as the United States has grown. Today, the Postal Service delivers hundreds of millions of messages each day to more than 141 million homes and businesses. Behind the delivery of each of these letters is the hard work and dedication of a letter carrier.

Letter carriers deliver more than 43 tons of mail per year, which averages out to about 2,300 letters, cards, and circulars per carrier per day. Six days a week, rain or shine, hurricane or blizzard, our Nation's 705,000 carrier letter carriers and 98,000 non-carrier employees faithfully contribute to our economic strength and vitality through their timely and efficient delivery of mail.

I have spent hours walking mail routes with the letter carriers in New Jersey. I have seen first hand how dedicated postal employees are to ensuring the timely and safe delivery of mail and tying together our local communities. These letter carriers should be applauded for their service to all Americans.

I urge all of my colleagues to support H. Res. 49 and acknowledge the hard work and dedication of the letter carriers in your congressional district.