Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution marking the 20th Anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. I am proud to be a co-sponsor of this important legislation.

On April 26th, 1986 the Chernobyl Nuclear Facility's Reactor Number Four exploded, releasing over 100 tons of radioactive material in what remains the world's worst nuclear accident. We may never know the full extent of the damage this accident has done to the health of people living in the surrounding areas or to the environment. It is clear, though, that the deaths attributable to the Chernobyl disaster number in the thousands and that millions of people in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus have been exposed to radioactive contamination.

It is important as we remember the victims of Chernobyl that we also recognize the ongoing consequences of the disaster and the work that still needs to be done. We must continue to help those people in the areas affected by radioactive fallout. The populations exposed to this fallout have experienced significant increases in thyroid cancer, still births and birth defects, as well as economic hardship resulting from the impact of the disaster on local economies.

The United States must also continue to support the Chernobyl Shelter Fund and the Shelter Implementation Plan. A new shelter for Reactor Number 4 is essential to mitigating further health and environmental consequences from the radioactive materials inside the facility. To date, the U.S. has pledged over $200 million to the Shelter Fund, helping to ensure that this work will be completed.

The resolution before us supports these efforts, and recognizes that although this disaster occurred two decades ago, there is still much more we must do to help the Government of Ukraine and the affected populations cope with its consequences. I urge all of my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Molly Goodman as she and her family commemorate the tenth anniversary of her victory against ovarian cancer.

Mrs. Goodman, like so many women stricken with this disease, never suspected that her abdominal and gastrointestinal pain concealed a Stage 3 ovarian cancer diagnosis. The cancer, which had spread from Mrs. Goodman's ovaries to parts of her abdomen, was discovered during a surgery to remove her gall bladder.

We can only imagine the worry that must accompany such a diagnosis. The five-year survival rate for Stage 1 ovarian cancer is approximately ninety percent. This figure drops, drastically and devastatingly, to a fifteen to twenty percent chance of survival once the cancer has elevated to Stage 3. Mrs. Goodman was fortunate not only to receive immediate surgery and chemotherapy to treat the disease, but also to qualify for a limited protocol providing a second round of chemotherapy. No signs or symptoms of the cancer's reoccurrence have since appeared.

I commend Phil Goodman, Molly's husband, for using this ten-year milestone, one of joy and reflection, to contribute to the National Ovarian Cancer Coalition. By sharing Mrs. Goodman's story, the couple not only celebrates Mrs. Goodman's survival, but also raises awareness about the severity of ovarian cancer.

We here in Washington need to do our part to raise awareness about risk factors and early warning signs for ovarian and other gynecologic cancers. In this Congress and the last, I introduced Johanna's Law: The Gynecologic Cancer Education and Awareness Act, which would require the federal government to take action to increase early detection of gynecologic cancers and ensure that other women never have to go through what Molly Goodman did. Our bill currently has over 230 cosponsors, and we are doing everything we can to make it law.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me recognizing Molly Goodman on this momentous occasion and to share in her hope that we continue to make progress in diagnosing and defeating this terrible disease.

Mr. Chairman, we stand here today with a historic opportunity to improve higher education in this country. The average tuition and fees for four-year public colleges have risen over 40 percent since 2001. The average student now leaves school with $17,500 in debt. Above anything else, it is absolutely essentially that any legislation reauthorizing the Higher Education Act help make a college education more affordable, so that we can expand this great opportunity to more young people across the country. I know this issue is immensely important to many of my constituents in Michigan.

Unfortunately, the misnamed ``College Access and Opportunity Act of 2005'' does absolutely nothing to reduce the costs of a college education. When Pell Grants were first enacted to help low-income families, it covered 72 percent of the average cost of a four-year public college, today it pays for only 30 percent. This bill would increase the maximum amount a Pell Grant could cover by a pathetic $200 while the President's proposed budget continues to flat fund this vital program.

It is now just two months after this Republican Congress voted to cut Federal student aid by $12 billion--the largest cut in the history of the program. Most of the cuts in mandatory spending in that bill were generated by cutting back on excessive lender fees on student loans. Yet instead of investing this additional revenue into scholarships and reductions in student loan fees, Republicans chose to put this money towards tax cuts for the super wealthy.

At a time when we are faced with fierce global competition from countries like India and China, it is absolutely essential that we invest in higher education. Last year China graduated more English- speaking engineers than we graduated here the United States. I wonder how it is that the majority would have us believe that an investment in tax cuts for the very rich would help us to remain an economic superpower.

A report by Michigan's Lt. Governor John Cherry's Commission on Higher Education and Economic Growth spelled out how Michigan's economic future is directly linked to our ability to accelerate the completion of degrees of higher education. Two-thirds of the jobs created in the next decade will require post-secondary education and training. I wonder how it is that the majority believes that cutting student loans will make it easier for the thousands affected by the manufacturing jobs crisis in Michigan.

Republicans here in Congress would have us believe that $12 billion in cuts to the student loan program and reauthorizing the Higher Education Act are unrelated. I say they couldn't be more out of touch.

Democrats have offered an alternative. This substitute would begin to reverse the damaging cuts made to student aid by cutting interest rates on loans for low and middle income students in half starting in July of 2006. This would lower the cost of college by $2.4 billion for students and their families. This measure is a down payment on the future of our Nation's students who are, after all, the key to the success of our Nation in the days that come. I will vote against this harmful legislation today, and in favor of the Democratic substitute.

Madam Speaker, you know, the question is straightforward. Why would anybody favor a tax cut, about half of which goes to people making $1 million a year over preventing a tax increase for 17 million Americans, most of whom are middle class? Why would anybody do this?

Well, my friend from Michigan (Mr. Camp) says that it is broad-based, the capital gains and dividend provision, more so than AMT. But most of that broad base receives very little, while a small minority of that broad base receives very much. So the broad base is really poor rhetoric.

I guess the second answer is, we will do it later, the AMT. We will do it later. I wish you would get up and tell us how you pay for that right here and now, right here and now.

I will yield to you if you want to say.

I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

How would you pay for AMT?

So you are claiming that it would all be paid for through reconciliation?

But you don't take care of the basic issue that we referred to here, and the answer is that you will pay for it by more deficit. That is what you are going to do.

The President's budget already projects a national debt of $11.5 trillion, it is hard to say that, $11.5 trillion. You are going to make things worse and worse and worse. Your fiscal irresponsibility sees no bounds. You come here today defending a tax cut years away from now, half of which more or less goes to people making $1 million, when 17 million people face this year a tax increase. You have blinders on. I think everybody who votes against this motion can expect this to be brought up these coming months as well as on the floor today.

Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in support of this for the reasons that they have all given. What happens in Ukraine is important for its people, obviously. It is important for its neighbors. It is important for us in the United States, and I think really in the world. Let me just state why I think it is important in terms of its economic and democratic development.

Clearly it has met the requirement in Jackson-Vanik as to immigration. Jackson-Vanik was an amendment to a trade bill, and so it is relevant for us to look at the economic and democratic developments within Ukraine. The Jackson-Vanik instrument is our opportunity in the Congress to deal with the accession of countries to the World Trade Organization, and that is why we have withheld PNTR in several cases until we were satisfied in terms of the WTO accession agreements and could participate in the development of those agreements.

The U.S. has now negotiated with Ukraine a WTO accession agreement, and it is satisfactory. I think it will be mutually beneficial. I think also it will spark further reforms within Ukraine, both economic and also, I think, help the evolution of democracy within that country. So this is an important moment in terms of the economic role of Ukraine and the evolution of its democratic processes.

Let me say another word, if I might quickly, about the importance. We have been working on this legislation for a number of years. In proposals that we have placed on the record, that we have introduced, we have talked about various aspects of our relationship with Ukraine, and various doings within Ukraine, both human rights, how it treats its workers and many other aspects.

All of these aspects are not covered in this legislation, but I do think this legislation points out the importance of Ukraine to continue its democratic evolution. There are challenges ahead. I have had the chance to talk with constituents, with the large Ukrainian-American community in the 12th District.

And I want to close with this. To echo what Mr. Lantos has said, and others, what happens in Ukraine is important, as I said, not only for its people, but really for the whole world. The Orange Revolution really resounded throughout the globe. It was an important moment for all of us, and so is its progress in terms of human rights and in terms of the elimination of anti-Semitism within Ukraine.

Mr. Speaker, so I join in this effort, and I urge that we all support it.

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the chairman said, this isn't games playing. This is not partisanship. This is a plea for serious attention to a real problem on a bipartisan basis.

Yesterday, General Motors announced that it will freeze its guaranteed benefit pension plan for salaried employees and replace it with a defined contribution plan in which employees take the risk.

This is what we are saying in part four of our motion: If the conferees follow the direction set by the current House and Senate pension bills, there will be far more announcements like GM's in the future.

The changes in both the House and Senate bills would dramatically increase the chances of companies having to make large, unexpected contributions by making pension funding more volatile, the risk that GM, struggling with manufacturing challenges the U.S. Government has failed to consider, decided it could not afford.

It would mean companies facing challenges even less serious than General Motors' will make the same decision GM did. In a survey, 60 percent of

chief investment officers for large pension plans said that changes like those in the House and Senate bills would lead them to cut benefits or freeze or terminate their pension plans. Despite our repeated requests, the administration has failed to tell us how their proposals would affect specific industries.

Our motion includes a critical provision instructing conferees to drop those provisions which would encourage healthy companies to freeze or terminate their pension plans. Those provisions include the shift to a yield curve, take away what is called smoothing, classifying companies as at-risk based on credit ratings, as in the Senate bill, and provisions regarding advanced funding.

Look, we are putting our motion forward for a simple reason: If your goal is to force employees to terminate their pension plans, leaving their workers on their own to face a risky and uncertain future, vote against the motion. But if your goal is to preserve the defined benefit pension system for workers, as well as the continued competitiveness of the companies they work for, do in fact vote for this motion to instruct.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 32, the ``Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act.'' This legislation responds to a serious and growing problem: the trafficking of counterfeit goods.

We've all seen movies in which someone buys what looks to be an expensive Rolex watch from a street vendor, only to find out later what they've really purchased is a cheap imitation that doesn't even keep proper time. Lately, it's the DVDs of the movie themselves that are increasingly likely to be counterfeit. In the area of pharmaceuticals, counterfeit drugs are now being sold in this country and around the world. The packaging makes them look like the real thing, but the pills inside often lack the active ingredient people are relying on to treat their illnesses, or contain the wrong active ingredient altogether. According to the Food and Drug Administration, upwards of ten percent of the drugs worldwide are counterfeit. In some countries, it is estimated that more than half the drug supply is made up of counterfeit drugs.

The trade in counterfeit goods has also had a negative impact on the automobile industry, including the auto parts industry. People buy what they believe are name-brand parts, like brake pads and spark plugs, only to find that they spent good money on counterfeit goods that do not meet safety and performance requirements. Beyond the obvious safety problem for consumers, the trade in counterfeit parts costs the automotive parts industry an estimated $12 billion a year. This is a heavy loss to a U.S. auto parts industry that already faces immense challenges.

The fact of the matter is that--whether it's counterfeit DVDs, video games, medicines, auto parts, or handbags--the United States economy is losing millions of dollars in tax revenue and tens of thousands of jobs because of the manufacture, distribution, and sale of counterfeit goods.We need new tools to deal with this growing problem, and that's what this legislation does. This bill expands criminal penalties to include those who traffic in counterfeit labels and packaging, setting fines of up to $2 million and a prison sentence of up to ten years for those who intentionally sell or distribute counterfeit labels and other false packaging. It also requires the offender to make restitution to the owner of the mark. In addition, the bill requires the forfeiture of any property derived from the proceeds of the violation, as well as any property used in connection with the offense.

I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this needed legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ms. Sandy Germany, National President of the Ladies Auxiliary to the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States.

Ms. Germany is being honored for her commitment and dedication to veterans all over our country who have served with bravery and honor in our Nation's conflicts. As a Life Member of Kiehler-Pippen Auxiliary #5658, her involvement hits close to home with her own father, Pete Frauenhoffer, who served in the Army Air Corps in World War II, her brother, Ronald, who served two tours in Vietnam in the United States Air Force and her son, Curtis, who has been in the military since 1986 serving in the U.S. Army in Korea and recently in Iraq.

The Ladies Auxiliary to the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States is dedicated to the principle of freedom for all people around the world. The organization's plans for 2005-2006 include helping veterans and their families by caring for their children at the VFW National Home for Children, providing special assistance through the Rehabilitation Program, volunteering in VA Medical Centers, sending care packages to the troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait and Qatar, and teaching young people about the responsibilities of citizenship.

Ms. Germany was elected and installed as National President of the Ladies Auxiliary to the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United

States at its 92nd National Convention in Salt Lake City, Utah, on August 25, 2005.

She has served in many positions for the organization, including Auxiliary President. As District and State President, she earned Runner-Up Outstanding President of the Year. She also served as National Junior Girls Units Director, as National District Council Member #8, and eight years as State Secretary.

Ms. Germany is also a life member of the VFW National Home for Children and belongs to the American Legion Auxiliary and the Military Order of the Cooties Auxiliary.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Sandy Germany, a woman who has dedicated herself to all veterans, our community and the State of Michigan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the career of Harry Lester upon his retirement as the Director of District 2 of the United Steelworkers of America.

Mr. Lester has dedicated his life's work to the well-being and safety of steelworkers. The son of a West Virginia coal miner, who was tragically lost in a mining accident, Mr. Lester grew up to be a leading advocate for protecting the rights of steelworkers through the creation and preservation of decent wages, health benefits, workplace safety regulations, and education opportunities.

Mr. Lester began his career as an engineer with the McLouth Steel Corporation in Trenton, Michigan, in 1954 and rose to national attention in the 1980s for his leading role in the fight to save the company from bankruptcy and to preserve the jobs of its 3,600 steelworkers. As the USWA District Director and a member of the McLouth Steel Board of Directors, Mr. Lester orchestrated in 1988 the largest employee stock buyout of the time. While the company ultimately closed its doors in 1994, he has never ceased in his efforts to preserve the United States' steel industry and to provide for the rights of USWA members.

Notably, Mr. Lester engineered a Voluntary Employee Benefit Association plan and negotiated Cooperative Partnership Agreements between USWA members and National Steel Corporation. As steel companies consolidated, Mr. Lester worked at the negotiating table to guarantee that these protections were not lost. The language he ensured in these negotiations for workplace health and safety was recognized by the Supreme Court as the standard for workers. He has extended his championing of workers' rights into negotiations with Dow Chemical, National Standard, Quanex, and DSC, Ltd.

In addition to his commitment to his fellow workers, Mr. Lester has been a vigorous citizen of Michigan and is deeply committed to improving education and health in the State of Michigan. He and his wife established the Harry E. & Mary E. Lester Scholarship Fund for Steelworker Children to provide scholarship opportunities for the children of steelworkers in District Two. He was appointed by three governors to serve on the Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority's Board of Commissioners and serves as a board member to many distinguished organizations, including the United Way of Michigan, the Michigan State AFL-CIO Board, the National Kidney Foundation of Michigan, and the Greater Detroit-Area Health Council. Mr. Lester initiated and co-chairs the Annual Downriver Community Prayer Breakfast in Southgate, Michigan, and holds the rank of ``Ambassador'' for the Detroit Muslim Temple of the Shrine. Recently, Mr. Lester was granted an Honorary Doctorate Degree in Humanities from Michigan State University.

Harry Lester often stood at the intersection of workers' rights and public policy. He understood that federal trade policy, and especially unfair trade practices of other nations, dramatically impacted the industry in which he worked and he was tireless in his efforts to impact change in Washington, DC. He also understood the real impact of federal policies on workers and their families when it came to retirement security, pensions and health care. He was passionate and articulate both in terms of impacting legislation, and informing his membership of the importance of those policies on their work and family life.

Mr. Speaker, I have been privileged over the years to work with Harry Lester, to observe his leadership and to call him a friend, I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to Harry Lester for his decades of tireless and effective service to our Nation's workers.

Mr. Speaker, I am so glad to be here with my colleagues Supporting Goals and Ideals of National Mentoring Month.

As House Resolution 660 so accurately states, ``mentoring is a centries-old concept, through which a dependable adult provides guidance, support, and encouragement to help a young become a responsible, productive adult.'' It goes on to conclude that when properly carried out mentoring ``helps young people stay in school and improve academically, boosts self-esteem and communication skills, and improves the chances of going on to higher education.'' I could not agree more.

In Michigan, we proudly recognize the contributions made by Mentor Michigan, led by Governor Jennifer Granholm, and the First Gentleman Dan Mulhern. Two individuals who lead by example and serve as mentors themselves. I was recently privileged to join the First Gentleman at a presentation on mentoring at the First Presbyterian Church in Mt. Clemens, Michigan where he spoke passionately and effectively not only about the meaning of mentoring in his own life but the broader impact it has for our Michigan community.

This program exemplifies what happens when government and community actively work to make certain all of our youth develop lasting relationships with individuals who are stable and caring. By developing a state-wide network of mentoring programs, Mentor Michigan has fostered support and unity among programs that accomplish what so often gets overlooked, encouragement and guidance of youth. Mentoring programs throughout the state are work in conjunction with Mentor Michigan to promote three simple values.

First, that every child has the right to a stable, caring adult in his or her life. It is so easy to take this for granted. In Michigan, over 237 programs connect youth with high quality mentors that are dedicated to helping children reach their aspirations and guiding them through fulfilling their needs. Mentor Michigan recruits and connects dedicated mentors with effective programs.

Second, everyone is responsible for the well being of our children including individuals, businesses, nonprofit and faith-based organizations, education institutions, and government. ``It takes a village to raise a child,'' says an old African proverb, and Mentor Michigan knows that a safe, well developed network of resources is a vital way to show that community involvement matters in shaping the way young people see the world. Mentors satisfy needs and programs that value mentors such as Mentor Michigan should be commended.

Third, volunteering is a significant way for people to enrich their lives by giving of themselves to children in their community. Youth energize the world around them and working with youth energizes the individuals who take up the challenge. Over 99 percent of Michigan's mentors have recommended mentoring to others. Mentor Michigan programs provide Americans the opportunity to develop young leaders of tomorrow.

Michigan is the only state with such a focus on tracking and assessing its mentoring programs. It is estimated that over 30,000 Michigan youth benefitted from having a mentor in 2005. I feel privileged to know such outstanding devotion to the generation of tomorrow and very proud to honor it today.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in recognizing the great contributions mentoring programs make every day to a better America of tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, this issue was put so squarely, and I think clearly, in the answer of Secretary Snow when he testified in the Senate. He was asked why the White House had put a higher priority on the investment tax breaks than relief from an alternative minimum tax. His answer, and I quote, ``because lower taxes on dividends and capital gains more broadly benefit taxpayers than AMT relief.'' That is the position of the administration. So what they are saying is that tax relief dividends and capital gains, we are talking now about 2009 and 2010, not this year, next year or the year thereafter, that that is more important when over 50 percent of the benefit goes to people making a million dollars a year, that is more important than the impact of the AMT not in 2009, 2010, but this year, on 19 million taxpayers. That is really the issue.

Now, we hear all kinds of arguments. Mr. Thomas kind of says, well, those AMT people are kind of wealthy people. A lot of them are not, nowhere near the million bucks made by the people who are the 53 percent who gain in 2009 and 2010.

And then, well, it said, okay. More taxpayers receive capital gains in dividend reduction, that is true, most of them are in lower middle income brackets, but most of the money goes to people making a million bucks a year. That has never been challenged.

Well, then the answer is, Mr. Camp, we are going to do both. Tell us how you are going to do both. Tell us. Stand up now and tell us. How are you going to pay for both?

I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. Speaker, I take back my time.

How are you going to pay for both? The Senate said they could not pay for both and that is why they put the AMT in. We voted for AMT relief, the 400-some, because we wanted the issue to stay alive and for the conference committee to act responsibly, civilly and to have the AMT in there. How are you going to pay for both? Tell me how you are going to pay for both.

No, no. Do not tell me what you will not do. Tell me what you will do.

Tell me. I think the answer is, Mr. Camp, that you do not intend to pay for both. What you hope to do is to have some AMT relief, later on, unpaid for, in addition to 2009 and 2010 provisions on capital gains and the like. You do not have any intention to pay for both because you cannot do it. This is a further example of the fiscal irresponsibility of the majority in this Congress.

Mr. Speaker, last night the President of the United States said, ``Wise policies such as welfare reform have made a difference in the character of our country.''

What you are doing on the Republican side, I am afraid, is in character. It is not class warfare on our side, it is your warfare against the children of America.

It is not our definition, it is CBO's and I quote from a letter of January 31 to Mr. Rangel: ``As requested by your staff, CBO has reviewed the child support provisions in the conference agreement for S. 1932, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, and we have determined that those provisions contain an intergovernmental mandate as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.'' That is what CBO says.

And CBO says something else. That this conference report, with the changes you have made, will lead to a reduction in the amount collected for the kids of America in child support of $8.4 billion. That is CBO, not Democrats saying that.

So I just want to tell everybody who is thinking of voting for this conference report, you should expect now, next week, June, July, August, September, October, and yes, in November, the citizens of this country and of your district, will be asking you to justify how you cut funding for child support in a way that would lead to the kids of your district and America combined losing $8.4 billion in child support. That is kids who need it, families who need it, from people who owe it.

Yes, as the President said yesterday, there are some wise policies that make a difference in the character of our country, not what you are doing today.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Does the gentleman deny point blank the estimate of CBO, we do not control it, that this bill will lead to a reduction of $8.4 billion in child support for the kids of America? Do you deny the CBO estimate?

Mr. Speaker, what irony. This is the Deficit Reduction Act. We just heard; what was the deficit in November? $83 billion. You have the gall to come here and talk about deficit reduction? $83 billion in one month. Your priorities are clear. You do not bring up the tax bill tonight because you are afraid to combine a bill that cuts $20 billion, over half of which goes to people making 1 million bucks a year, with these budget cuts.

Mr. Speaker, we scared you off, some of your intentions on child support, which would have resulted in $24 billion less over the next 10 years collected for the kids of America. You have now reduced it to $8.4 billion. That is how much less children are going to receive. And the irony is that the States that are hurt the most are the States that are best performing. And then when it comes to welfare reform, in the 1990s, many of us worked together to change our laws. We did it in a way that provided adequate child care and Medicaid. President Clinton would not sign the bill until those provisions were in there.

You could not get an immediate welfare reform package through the Senate, so what you have done is to stick it in this bill. That is what you are doing.

The child care provision, only about $1 billion. It would take $11 billion for

the States, if the States met the work requirements, $11 billion more in child care, and you do not help at all in terms of health care. What you do is change the formulas so that there is going to be on the States a cost in order to meet this in the next 5 years of over $8 billion.

So you are going to hurt the States, you are going to hurt kids of a parent or parents who are moving from welfare to work, and you are going to provide totally inadequate child care for those people who are moving from welfare to work.

Your priorities are very clear, very clear, a tax cut for millionaires and hurting the kids of the United States of America. Frankly, I do not care what time of the year it is; it is bad every day of the year to do that, and I hope we will turn this down.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the distinguished career of Mitch Kehetian.

Known as the ``dean of Detroit-area journalism,'' Mitch Kehetian's career in journalism dates back to 1953 with roots stemming from Allen Park, Michigan. Beginning as a ``copy boy'' for the Detroit Times, Mr. Kehetian served diligently as reporter and editor working his way through the journalism establishment. After his tenure at the Times, he joined the Citizen-Journal of Columbus, Ohio then returned to Detroit at the Eastside News. In 1969, Mr. Kehetian accepted a job as the Warren reporter and bureau chief of the Macomb Daily.

Serving as a reporter, managing editor, and editorial page editor at the Macomb Daily for over 30 years, Mr. Kehetian brought an intense, lifelong interest in politics, public service and government to his coverage, especially their impact on citizens and communities. His wide-ranging attention to international, national, and local affairs and his personable yet direct manner drew attention and admiration from the halls of all types of houses--from Macomb to the White House.

Mitch Kehetian loved and believed in the work of journalism. He was a reporter's reporter committed to the news, and the trusted role of the ``newsman'' in our country. Michigan was better off with his reporter's eye and his editor's pen at work in our community. His dedication to his work allowed him to enjoy mentoring young and aspiring journalists often at the beginning of their careers. Mr. Kehetian served as both the President and as a member of the Board of Directors of the Detroit Press Club, and as President of the Metro Detroit Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists. In 2002, the Society bestowed its highest honor upon him, ``Lifetime Achievement Award.'' He has also been awarded countless journalism awards from the Associated Press, United Press International, Michigan Press Association, to name just a few.

Mr. Kehetian is also a proud family man and a proud Armenian- American. Mr. Speaker, it has been my personal privilege to know and be in regular touch with Mitch these last decades. He combined enough distance from people in public life to be objective and enough closeness to create friendships. So I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Mitch Kehetian, a distinguished journalist and a friend, for his years of dedicated service to journalism and the communities and citizens he served and in wishing him good health and happiness in the next phase of his life.

Mr. Speaker, just quickly, to follow up what Mr. Skelton has talked about, the Defense authorization bill was signed, and here is what I read in CQ: ``House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter confirmed through a spokesman that he inserted the provision,'' this is totally extraneous, apparently, if that happened after the signatures, ``at the behest of House leadership.''

And this is a quote: `` `Hunter reserves the right to support the leadership team,' said Harald Stavenas, his spokesman.''

Get the authorization bill on the floor.