Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3564, Regulatory Improvement Act of 2007. The administrative conference was first created inside the Department of Justice by President Kennedy. Later, it was moved out of the Department of Justice by President Johnson. The mission was a private partnership to discuss administrative law and regulatory system and how to make it better. Supreme Court Justices Breyer and Scalia served on the Conference before becoming Justices and both have testified in the past for its re-authorization. This bill reauthorizes the Administrative Conference. I support this bill and I encourage my colleagues to do likewise.

The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS), an independent agency and advisory committee created in 1968, studied U.S. administrative processes with an eye to recommending improvements to Congress and agencies. From 1968 to 1995, the ACUS issued approximately 200 recommendations, most of which have been at least partially implemented. Congressional funding for ACUS was terminated in 1995.

ACUS's recommendations were published periodically in the Code of Federal Regulations prior to 1995. Little known ``outside the Beltway,'' ACUS was a unique entity. Comprised of between 75 and 101 individuals drawn from agencies, academia, and the private sector, the Conference was classified as both an independent agency and a federal advisory committee. Organizationally, it consisted of a Chair, a Council, and an Assembly. The Chair, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for a five-year term, was responsible for the day-to-day activities and supervision of the 18 permanent staff. The Council, which functioned like a board of directors, consisted of ten members appointed by the President for three-year terms, five of whom were always current senior federal officials. The Assembly was made up of the Chair, the Council, and the other members of the Conference, a majority of whom had to come from government service. All of the members (other than the Chair) served without compensation.

The primary, although not exclusive, function of the Conference was to study administrative processes with an eye to recommending improvements to Congress and the agencies. It performed this function by commissioning studies by law professors expert in the administrative process that then were reviewed by one of six standing committees: adjudication, administration, governmental processes, judicial review, regulation, and rulemaking. The recommendations developed by committees of the Conference would be considered for adoption by the Assembly in plenary sessions, which were typically held twice a year.

The improvements occasioned by the Conferences recommendations are legion. Inasmuch as the Conference never had the power to impose its recommendations on unwilling subjects, the fact that so many of its recommendations bore fruit is a testimony to their intrinsic sense. Some, like the Conference's recommendation in 1968, its first year of operation, to eliminate a jurisdictional amount in suits under the APA, were followed by Congress in passing new legislation. Another example is its recommendation to provide administrative penalty authority to agencies to increase the effectiveness of agency enforcement activities at lower cost, first proposed by the Conference in 1972 and since adopted by Congress in over 200 statutes. A third is its 1980 recommended solution to unseemly races to the courthouse in rulemaking appeals, adopted by Congress in 1988.

Other recommendations, like the Conference's early recommendation to eliminate the exemption from the APA's notice-and-comment requirements for rules relating to public property, loans, grants, benefits, and contracts, were sufficiently influential to lead agencies to adopt the recommendations on their own. Its recommendation in 1988 on Presidential Transition Workers' Code of Ethical Conduct were used by President Bush as the basis for his transition standards of conduct, and the Clinton administration likewise followed what had become standard procedures. From 1968 to 1995, the Conference issued approximately 200 recommendations, most of which have been at least partially implemented.

Probably the area in which the Conference had its greatest influence was in introducing and supporting the use of alternative dispute resolution techniques in agency practice. Its recommendation in 1982 provided procedures by which agencies could negotiate proposed regulations, and it followed the recommendation with support and encouragement to agencies to experiment with this new technique. Ultimately, Congress adopted the Negotiated Rulemaking Act in 1990, virtually copying the procedures contained in the Conference's original recommendation. Similarly, in 1986 the Conference issued the first of some fifteen recommendations on using alternative means of dispute resolution in agency adjudications. In 1990 Congress again followed the Conference's lead and enacted the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act. Recognizing the Conference's leadership role in this area, that Act gave the Conference the principal role for coordinating and promoting ADR in the federal government.

Another area in which the Conference had a major influence involved its study of Presidential review of agency rulemaking undertaken during the Reagan administration. This was a subject that had the potential to become highly partisan, but the Conference's reputation for neutrality and expertise enabled it to review the practice, generally validate its exercise, and makes certain recommendations to improve its openness and public acceptability. Because of the Conference's track record of useful and expert studies of the administrative process, all the regulatory reform bills considered by the Senate in the last session included provisions for the Conference to study the effects of the legislation.

The Conference's contribution to administrative law and procedure was not limited just to studies. Drawing on its expertise, ACUS issued numerous publications designed to assist agencies in their administrative processes. For example, in 1972 the Conference published the first edition of its Manual for Administrative Law Judges (now in its 3d edition); in 1978 it published its Interpretive Guide to the Government in the Sunshine Act; in 1981 it issued Model Rules for Agency Implementation of the Equal Access to Justice Act. The latter two of these documents were responsive to Congress' requirement for agencies to consult with the Conference in implementing these statutes. In addition, the Conference has published sourcebooks on Federal Administrative Procedure, Negotiated Rulemaking, and Alternative Dispute Resolution, as well as the Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking.

Finally, in recent years, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Congress authorized the Conference to lend its expertise to newly emerging democracies in their creation of administrative law and procedures. As a result, the Conference sponsored seminars in the Ukraine, Hungary, the People's Republic of China, and South Africa.

The ABA has long been a strong supporter of the Conference, and over the years the Conference and the Section on Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice have enjoyed a close and mutually supportive relationship. This bill reauthorizes the administrative conference.

I support this Act and encourage my colleagues to support it also.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this legislation that honors an individual of unprecedented stature and achievement. This leader was a fighter who stood boldly on the front lines of democracy to fight for liberty and equality for all. This legal giant is none other than the late Thurgood Marshall.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said that we all can be great because we all can serve. It is my responsibility to pay tribute to the late great Thurgood Marshall who served our Nation by transforming it.

The late Thurgood Marshall put in place mechanisms to elevate the United States to its greatest potential. As a result, all Americans presently can reap the benefits of Thurgood

Marshall's arduous travail. One of his greatest victories was his work in the landmark Supreme Court case of Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. In Brown, the Supreme Court ruled that ``separate but equal'' public education was unconstitutional because it could never be truly equal.

Marshall's arguments before the Supreme Court were myriad and historic. In total, Marshall won an unprecedented 29 out of the 32 cases he argued before the Supreme Court.

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy appointed Marshall to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On June 13, 1967, President Johnson appointed Marshall to the Supreme Court following the retirement of Justice Tom C. Clark. In appointing Marshall, President Johnson declared this was ``the right thing to do, the right time to do it, the right man and the right place.'' He was the 96th person to hold the position, and the first African-American.

Today I stand before you, as many of my colleagues do, as a proud product of Thurgood Marshall's vision for equal access to education. Because of Thurgood Marshall's profound vision, one's access to education is no longer dependent upon the color of their skin or their income, but upon the demonstration of their academic promise, and scholarly merit and capability. Notwithstanding Marshall's legendary achievements in civil rights, America has much work to do. In thinking of our progress, I am reminded of the Bible in Jeremiah 8:20, ``The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved.'' America has reaped the harvest of Marshall's life, Marshall's life is now past, and America has much work to do in civil rights. American people are not yet saved. The problem of this century, as it has been in past centuries, is still the problem of the color line. America has made great strides in this regard. Nonetheless, America still has work to do.

Although there are still some barriers to overcome, Thurgood Marshall removed the road block that stymied America from being as good as its promise. Thurgood Marshall also impacted the international community. Mr. Marshall was asked by the United Nations and the United Kingdom to help draft the constitutions of the emerging African nations of Ghana and what is now Tanzania. It was felt that the person who so successfully fought for the rights of America's oppressed minority would be the perfect person to ensure the rights of all African citizens, both Black and White, in these two former European colonies.

Being the right man or woman at the right time is no easy task. There is no room for passiveness or reluctance to action. Following in the tradition of the late Thurgood Marshall, we, the representatives of the United States citizenry, are the right people at the right time. Although our current battles differ slightly from those of Thurgood Marshall, we are faced with our own battles which include, the economy, creating affordable housing, immigration, Iraq, the pursuit of energy independence, and making sure that our veterans are properly taken care of.

The precedent that the late Thurgood Marshall set, in fighting to make the U.S. as great as its promise, should be our motivation to pass good legislation to protect the rights of American people as we honor and recognize his dedication and achievements on this 100th anniversary of his birth.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in recognizing a true hero, Thurgood Marshall who died on January 24, 1993, at the age of 84. Let us honor his dedication and achievements as we recognize his contributions to the struggle for equal rights and justice in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 1182 introduced by my distinguished colleague from California, Representative Filner. This important legislation seeks to express the sense of the House of Representatives that American flags flown on Federal Government buildings and on Federal property be made in the United States.

On June 14, 1777, the Stars and Stripes were officially adopted as the national flag of the United States. Francis Scott Key was so inspired by the sight of the American flag still flying over Baltimore's Fort McHenry after a British bombardment that he wrote the ``Star-Spangled Banner'' on September 14, 1814. The American flag has 7 red and 6 white horizontal stripes; these stripes represent the 13 original States.

The flag still has its field of blue, which represents the Union and contains 50 stars, one for each State. Many brave men and women have fought and died for the freedom that this flag represents. The sight of this banner brings feelings of joy, courage, pride, and unity for all Americans. Therefore, it should be the sense of the United States House of Representatives that all American flags flown over Federal buildings be entirely produced in the United States.

For more than 200 years, the American flag has been the symbol of our Nation's strength and unity. It's been a source of pride and inspiration for millions of citizens. And the American Flag has been a prominent icon in our national history. On June 14, 1777, in order to establish an official flag for the new Nation, the Continental Congress passed the first Flag Act, ``resolved that the flag of the United States be made of thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the Union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field, representing a new Constellation.''

Between 1777 and 1960, Congress passed several acts that changed the shape, design and arrangement of the flag and allowed for additional stars and stripes to be added to reflect the admission of each new state. Executive Order of President Eisenhower dated January 3, 1959-- provided for the arrangement of the stars in seven rows of seven stars each, staggered horizontally and vertically. Executive Order of President Eisenhower dated August 21, 1959--provided for the arrangement of the stars in nine rows of stars staggered horizontally and eleven rows of stars staggered vertically which made official the design of the flag that we know today.

Therefore, we should not reserve the right to make our Nation's flag at home, where blood was shed by brave men who had a vision for a free country rooted in democracy and justice. Although we may outsource many things, I support that we preserve the integrity of the symbol that serves as the very essence of our national anthem. This anthem serves to remind us of the United States flag, also known as the Star-Spangled Banner, which waves over the land of the free and the home of the brave. When we rise to pledge allegiance to our country, we place our hand over our beating heart; then we sing the delicate notes of the Star-Spangled Banner, but most of all we fix our gaze upon our Nation's flag. This time of reverence serves as a moment of introspection. Not until we fully come to grips with ourselves can we apply the wisdom that is needed to gather solutions for international issues.

Our Nation was founded upon the principles of liberty, equality and justice, which are reflected by the symbol of our Nation's flag. Therefore, I strongly support this powerful resolution that says that flags flown on Federal Government buildings and on Federal property be made in the United States. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.

I thank the distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee and the manager of the minority side, as well as the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Conyers; the ranking member, Mr. Smith; the subcommittee Chair, Mr. Scott; and the ranking member, Mr. Gohmert.

As a member of the subcommittee on crime and a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, I rise with great enthusiasm to support H.R. 5057, the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008.

And I salute Mr. and Mrs. Smith. This is not a new bill to me. Congresswoman Maloney has worked very hard and has engaged the many women of the Congress to look at this issue in many, many different ways. We thank you, Debbie Smith for your courage, and we thank you for your bravery.

This is an important initiative. There are many improvements that have made this bill even better, but had it not been for Debbie Smith and her courage, we would not be where we are today.

As my colleague has already said, this bill was named for Debbie Smith who was kidnapped in her Virginia home and raped by a stranger. The Debbie Smith DNA backlog grant bill authorized grant money to States to collect samples from crime scenes and convicted persons.

This legislation also allows us to conduct DNA analysis and enter these results into a comprehensive national database. Debbie Smith's attacker remained unidentified for over 6 years, until a DNA sample collected from a convicted person serving time in Virginia State prison revealed his involvement in her rape. Although eventually identified, the 6 years between crime and identification allowed Ms. Smith's attacker to engage in more criminal activity.

What is the purpose and value of this legislation? It is to ensure that the perpetrator, the person who has acted in a violent and heinous way, is tried and convicted in a direct and fair and just manner, and that this individual is taken off the streets in order not to harm anyone else.

I am very gratified that we have expanded this legislation and that it is also an opportunity not only to ensure that those who have committed the crime are ``doing the time'' but to make sure that DNA is accurate and untainted for a fair and just results.

I support this legislation, and therefore, I offered a successful amendment that would require the Attorney General to evaluate the integrity and security of DNA collection and storage practices and procedures at a sample of crime laboratories throughout the country to determine the extent to which DNA samples are tampered with or are otherwise contaminated in such laboratories. This is crucial. A person who should be convicted and is still walking the streets, can create more danger, and those who have been tried and incarcerated on contaminated DNA deserve a fair and just recommendation of their case. Contaminated DNA helps no one and this amendment corrects that problem.

The sample should be a representative sample and should include at least one lab from each State. My amendment would require the Attorney General to conduct this evaluation annually, and the Attorney General would be required to submit the evaluation to Congress. This amendment is necessary, and it authorizes some $10 million over a 5-year period to allow this process to occur.

In Harris County, Texas, and other places around the Nation, DNA evidence was contaminated and wrongfully used to convict persons based upon faulty evidence. An investigation into the crime lab in Houston, for example, revealed that bad management, undertrained staff, false documentation, and inaccurate work cast doubt on thousands of DNA-based convictions. Investigators raised serious questions about the reliability of evidence in hundreds of cases they investigated and asked for further independent scrutiny and new testing to determine the extent to which individuals were wrongly convicted with faulty evidence.

Two individuals, Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Joshua Sutton, were victimized by this faulty DNA process. Both served time in jail and were released when their cases were properly reviewed.

This is evidence that my amendment helps an already good bill, which will help victims like Mrs. Smith, but it also provides the added integrity to this system.

My amendment ensures that Congress will exercise the appropriate oversight over the DNA Data Collection Program. It will ensure the integrity and security of the DNA collection and storage procedures. It is my hope that my amendment will minimize wrongful convictions and will make the DNA storage and collection process more reliable.

When such a sacrifice has been made by someone as brave as Mrs. Smith, along with the work that has been done by my colleague, Congresswoman Maloney, and this Congress, it further enhances the Nation's criminal justice system. We all agree, the criminal justice system should convict those who have done these dastardly acts, incarcerate them through a fair process of justice. And then, those who are innocent, make sure that the criminal justice system has the tools to insure them not guilty through transparent DNA evidence.

This is the way the American's justice system should be. We want this open fair system as much for Harris County, Texas, as we want it for Los Angeles, Chicago, and other places around the Nation.

This bill is a bill of integrity and fairness, and it upholds the fair justice system of the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, this act authorizes funding to eliminate the large backlogs of DNA crime scene samples awaiting testing in State forensic labs. I am in support of this bill.

In recent years, law enforcement agencies have realized the critical value that DNA evidence has in quickly solving cases. Often, a DNA sample result can scientifically link a perpetrator to a crime or prove a defendant's innocence with virtual certainty. Many of the Nation's Federal and State criminal forensics laboratories currently are overwhelmed with innumerable samples awaiting DNA analysis.

Named for Debbie Smith, who was kidnapped in her Virginia home and raped by a stranger, the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program authorized grant money to States to collect samples from crime scenes and convicted persons, conduct DNA analyses, and enter these results into a comprehensive national database. Debbie Smith's attacker remained unidentified for over six years, until a DNA sample collected from a convicted person serving time in a Virginia State prison revealed his involvement in her rape. Although eventually identified, the six years between crime and identification allowed Ms. Smith's attacker to engage in more criminal activity.

Reauthorization of the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program will help law enforcement throughout the Nation. It will facilitate the development of a comprehensive national data base against which samples from current crime scenes can be compared. It will allow laboratories to reduce the currently unacceptable delays in processing DNA samples. Finally, it will provide law enforcement and prosecutors strong tools to quickly identify and prosecute criminals, minimizing the costs of investigation and prosecution, the possibility of prosecuting the wrong person and the possibility of future heinous crimes.

Recognizing that the backlog of biological evidence that had to be entered in State databases was preventing law enforcement officials from solving many of the Nation's most heinous crimes, like the tragedy that befell Debbie Smith, Congress passed the DNA ``Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000'' (P.L. 106-546). The bill authorized the Attorney General to make grants to eligible States to collect DNA samples from convicted individuals and crime scenes for inclusion in the Federal DNA database, Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), and to increase the capacity of State crime laboratories. The act required the Bureau of Prisons and the military to collect DNA samples from convicted individuals and forward these samples for analysis, and required the FBI to expand its CODIS database to include the analyses of these DNA samples.

The act also amended the criminal code to require all defendants on probation or supervised release to cooperate with the collection of a DNA sample. The act expressed the sense of Congress that State grants should be conditioned upon the State's agreement to ensure post- conviction DNA testing in appropriate cases; and that Congress should work with the States to improve the quality of legal representation in capital cases. Finally, the act authorized an unspecified amount of appropriations to the Attorney General to carry out the act.

In 2004, DNA backlog elimination was incorporated into the Justice for All Act of 2004'', P.L. 108-405 and was renamed the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program, which became Title II of P.L. 108-405. While the act authorized $151 million for each fiscal year 2005-2009, Congress did not appropriate any money until FY 2008, at which time it appropriated $147.4 million.

The Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program expires at the end of FY 2009. H.R. 5057, the ``Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act,'' which has strong bipartisan support, would renew the law and authorize $151 million for each fiscal year 2009-2014. H.R. 5057 specifies that not less than 40 percent of the total amount awarded in grants must be used for DNA analyses of samples from crime scenes, rape kits and other sexual assault evidence, and in cases that do not have an identified suspect.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5057, the ``Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008'' (reauthorizing Title II of P.L. 108-405). This Act authorizes funding to eliminate the large backlogs of DNA crime scene samples awaiting testing in State forensic labs. I am in support of this bill.

In recent years, law enforcement agencies have realized the critical value that DNA evidence has in quickly solving cases. Often, a DNA sample result can scientifically link a perpetrator to a crime or prove a defendant's innocence with virtual certainty. Many of the Nation's Federal and State criminal forensics laboratories currently are overwhelmed with innumerable samples awaiting DNA analysis.

Named for Debbie Smith, who was kidnapped in her Virginia home and raped in nearby woods by a stranger, the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program authorized grant money to states to collect samples from crime scenes and convicted persons, conduct DNA analyses, and enter these results into a comprehensive national database. Debbie Smith's attacker remained unidentified for over six years, until a DNA sample collected from a convicted person serving time in a Virginia State prison revealed his involvement in her rape. Although eventually identified, the six years between crime and identification allowed Ms. Smith's attacker to engage in more criminal activity.

Re-authorization of the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program will help law enforcement throughout the Nation. It will facilitate the development of a comprehensive national data base against which samples from current crime scenes can be compared. It will allow laboratories to reduce the currently unacceptable delays in processing DNA samples. Finally, it will provide law enforcement and prosecutors strong tools to quickly identify and prosecute criminals, minimizing the costs of investigation and prosecution, the possibility of prosecuting the wrong person and the possibility of future heinous crimes.

Recognizing that the backlog of biological evidence that had to be entered in State databases was preventing law enforcement officials from solving many of the Nation's most heinous crimes, like the tragedy that befell Debbie Smith, Congress passed the DNA ``Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000'' (P.L. 106-546). The bill authorized the Attorney General to make grants to eligible States to collect DNA samples from convicted individuals and crime scenes for inclusion in the federal DNA database, Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), and to increase the capacity of State crime laboratories. The Act required the Bureau of Prisons and the military to collect DNA samples from convicted individuals and forward these samples for analysis, and required the FBI to expand its CODIS database to include the analyses of these DNA samples.

The Act also amended the criminal code to require all defendants on probation or supervised release to cooperate with the collection of a DNA sample. The Act expressed the sense of Congress that State grants should be conditioned upon the State's agreement to ensure post- conviction DNA testing in appropriate cases; and that Congress should work with the States to improve the quality of legal representation in capital cases. Finally, the Act authorized an unspecified amount of appropriations to the Attorney General to carry out the Act.

In 2004, DNA backlog elimination was incorporated into the Justice for All Act of 2004'', P.L. 108-405 and was renamed the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program, which became Title II of P.L. 108-405. While the Act authorized $151 million for each fiscal year 2005-2009, Congress did not appropriate any money until FY 2008, at which time it appropriated $147.4 million.

The Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program expires at the end of FY 2009. H.R. 5057, the ``Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act,'' which has strong bipartisan support, would renew the law and authorize $151 million for each fiscal year 2009-2014. H.R. 5057 specifies that not less than 40 percent of the total amount awarded in grants must be used for DNA analyses of samples from crime scenes, rape kits and other sexual assault evidence, and in cases that do not have an identified suspect.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 3218, the ``Criminal History Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2008''. First, I would like to thank my distinguished colleague, Adam Schiff of California, for introducing this much-needed piece of legislation. This bill will amend the ``PROTECT Act of 2003'' by extending for six months the currently expiring Child Safety Pilot Program. This program will allow certain volunteer organizations to obtain national and state criminal history background checks on their volunteers. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this act.

The ``Criminal History Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2008'' is critical because it will ensure that our Nation's children remain safe from predators and sex-offenders. By allowing volunteer organizations working with children the option of State and Federal background checks, we protect our children from our greatest fear: that the very organizations that set out to help our children, inadvertently harm them.

The ``PROTECT Act of 2003'' was aimed at defending children from the horrors of exploitation, abuse, and abduction. Yet, if we fail to act now, the act's 60-month ``Child Safety Pilot Program'' will expire. We cannot afford to leave volunteer groups without this critical tool, and in the process leave countless children at risk.

Upon enactment, the ``Criminal History Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2008'' will extend by 6 months the ``Child Safety Pilot Program'', and will allow certain volunteer organizations to continue utilizing the national and state criminal history background checks. With passage of this act, we take one step forward to a day when all the children of our Nation are safe from the harms and horrors of abuse.

Currently in the US, there are over 100,000 cases of child abuse, abduction, or exploitation, each year. It is imperative that we do not allow this number to escalate out of carelessness. Why should we allow an extra Amber Alert to occur when it would be so easy to prevent?

The Amber Alert Network which was first implemented in the State of Texas is an important element in attaining a truly secure environment. This system is part of an additional level of protection. Yet, programs like Amber Alert lose their significance when they are not accompanied by meaningful precautions. The background checks that the ``Criminal History Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2008'' makes possible, allow us to stop Amber Alerts before they happen.

I have always seen the safety of children as an issue of tremendous importance. Whether it is through this bill, protecting children from sex-offenders, or in recent legislation such as H.R. 3397, safeguarding children against lead-poisoning, or in other acts improving school safety, I believe that the well-being of our children must be one of our foremost concerns.

I urge my colleagues to support this act to protect the children of Texas' 18th and the children of our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, for your leadership in bringing this very important bill to the floor. I support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. This bill is good and it is necessary.

The bill is sponsored by Mr. Klein and has bi-partisan support. It has 21 cosponsors, including the following Judiciary members: Chairman Conyers, Chairman Scott, Mr. Chabot, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Wexler, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Sutton, and Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

A child goes missing every 40 seconds. The successful recovery of missing children often requires a quick response. In 1997, Sherry Friedlander, the founder of A Child is Missing (ACIM), saw the need for a rapid-response program to persons who go missing, especially in situations that do not involve abductions. In response to this need, she established ACIM, a national non-profit organization that offers free assistance to law enforcement 365 days of the year, 24 hours per day. The program is not limited to children, but extends to elderly persons (suffering from senility or Alzheimer's), mentally challenged or disabled individuals and college students.

When law enforcement receives a call regarding a missing person, the first-responder can immediately call ACIM for help. The officer provides critical information to ACIM, such as the person's age and description and the last time/place seen. ACIM uses that information to record a message that, within minutes, is sent via phone to 1000s of locations within a radius of the last sighting of the person. Through their computer mapping system, ACIM also can identify ``hot spots,'' such as water or wooded areas.

ACIM complements the Amber Alert program by providing different services. While Amber Alert focuses on children who are abducted, ACIM covers all ``persons'' who go missing, including situations where criminal intent may not be at issue. Amber Alert uses television and highway signs to broadcast information about the abducted child and the related vehicle, while ACIM uses a rapid response telephone alert system and covers cases where there is no vehicle involved. The ACIM notification system often can respond more quickly than the Amber Alert program.

ACIM would use the requested money to operate and expand the existing ACIM office in Florida, to develop Regional Centers for on-site training and communication with local law enforcement, to maintain and expand their computer and phone technologies, and to assist the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the AMBER Alert Coordinator, and appropriate law enforcement agencies with training.

H.R. 5464 authorizes $5 million annual grants for 2009 through 2014 to A Child is Missing Alert and Recovery Center (ACIM) to assist law enforcement in the rapid recovery of missing children and other individuals.

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses and look forward to their testimony. I hope that we can ensure the health and safety of the young and the elderly--two vulnerable populations--whose rights I have long championed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 231 to reauthorize the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, Byrne-JAG, Program at fiscal year 2006 levels through 2012. The Byrne- JAG monies are supposed to be used to make America a safer place. I support the reauthorization, and I would urge my colleagues to do likewise.

Why Byrne-JAG is Necessary

Byrne-JAG allows States and local governments to support a broad range of activities to prevent and control crime and to improve the criminal justice system, which States and local governments have come to rely on to ensure public safety. They support: law enforcement, prosecution and court programs, prevention and education, corrections and community programs, drug treatment, planning, evaluation, technology improvement programs, and crime victim and witness programs, other than compensation. In short, they are an indispensable resource that States use to combat crime.

Recent Cuts in Byrne JAG Funding

Unfortunately, in fiscal year 2008 the Byrne-JAG program was cut by two-thirds. Although Congress authorized over $1 billion, only $520 million were appropriated for fiscal year 2007. The appropriation was then drastically reduced to $170.4 million in fiscal year 2008, and the President has proposed further cuts for the fiscal year 2009 budget.

Past Problems with Byrne JAG

The trend to reduce the grant funding may result, in part, from instances where Byrne-JAG funding has been abused. For example, in 1999 Byrne-JAG funding was used in the infamous Tulia outrage in which a rogue police narcotics officer in Texas set up dozens of people, most of them African-American, in false cocaine trafficking charges. In other instances, jurisdictions used the funding to fund task forces focused solely on ineffective, low-level drug arrests, which has put the task force concept-and the diminished standards of drug enforcement that it has come to represent--in the national spotlight.

The most well-known Byrne-funded scandal occurred in Tulia, Texas where dozens of African-American residents, representing 16 percent of the town's black population, were arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to decades in prison, even though the only evidence against them was the uncorroborated testimony of one white undercover officer with a history of lying and racism. The undercover officer worked alone, and had no audiotapes, video surveillance, or eyewitnesses to collaborate his allegations. Suspicions eventually arose after two of the accused defendants were able to produce firm evidence showing they were out-of- State or at work at the time of the alleged drug buys. Texas Governor Rick Perry eventually pardoned the Tulia defendants, after four years of imprisonment, but these kinds of scandals continue to plague the Byrne grant program.

These scandals are not the result of a few ``bad apples'' in law enforcement; they are the result of a fundamentally flawed bureaucracy that is prone to corruption by its very structure. Byrne-funded regional anti-drug task forces are Federally funded, State managed, and locally staffed, which means they do not really have to answer to anyone. In fact, their ability to perpetuate themselves through asset forfeiture and Federal funding makes them unaccountable to local taxpayers and governing bodies.

The scandals are more widespread than just a few instances. A 2002 report by the ACLU of Texas identified 17 scandals involving Byrne- funded anti-drug task forces in Texas, including cases of falsifying government records, witness tampering, fabricating evidence, stealing drugs from evidence lockers, selling drugs to children, large-scale racial profiling, sexual harassment, and other abuses of official capacity.

Texas is not the only State that has suffered from Byrne-funded law enforcement scandals. Scandals in other States have included the misuse of millions of dollars in Federal grant money in Kentucky and Massachusetts, false convictions based upon police perjury in Missouri, and making deals with drug offenders to drop or lower their charges in exchange for money or vehicles in Alabama, Arkansas, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Wisconsin. A 2001 study by the Government Accountability Office found that the Federal Government fails to adequately monitor the grant program and hold grantees accountable.

Amendment Considered But Not Offered

Because of these abuses, I would have offered an amendment when this bill was considered at the Full Judiciary Committee markup. My amendment would have addressed the responsible use of Byrne-JAG monies. Specifically, my amendment would have required that a State that receives Byrne-JAG money should collect data for the most recent year for which such funds were allocated to such State, with respect to:

(1) The racial distribution of criminal charges made during that year;

(2) the nature of the criminal law specified in the charges made; and

(3) the city of law enforcement jurisdiction in which the charges were made.

My amendment would have required a condition of receiving funds that the State should submit to the Attorney General the data collected by not later than one year after the date the State received funds. Lastly, the report should be posted on the Bureau of Justice Statistics website and submitted to the Attorney General.

My amendment is good because arrests will be transparent and the light of day and public airing of any problems will be the greatest disinfectant. My amendment is an attempt to make law enforcement more responsible, more accountable, and more just in their dealings with persons of all races and backgrounds. My amendment is but a small price to pay to rid the Nation of scandals and disasters that occurred in Tulia, Texas and elsewhere.

My amendment, which I would have offered, would provide oversight and accountability. It is not burdensome. It will not prevent the States from collecting and funding programs under the Byrne Grant program. My amendment does, however, shed light on any maladies that might exist in the system. Once we see the problems, we can fix them. My amendment is responsible and aims to make the Byrne-Grant program a better program by ensuring that the funding is used appropriately and is used with oversight.

No More Tulias

While I support the Byrne-JAG reauthorization, I would also urge my colleagues to also support my bill, H.R. 253, No More Tulias: Drug Law Enforcement Evidentiary Standards Improvement Act of 2007. This bill also enhances accountability with respect to the use of Byrne-JAG monies.

First, it prohibits a State from receiving for a fiscal year any drug control and system improvement (Byrne) grant funds, or any other amount from any other law enforcement assistance program of the Department of Justice, unless the State does not fund any antidrug task forces for that fiscal year or the State has in effect laws that ensure that: (1) a person is not convicted of a drug offense unless the facts that a drug offense was committed and that the person committed that offense are supported by evidence other than the eyewitness testimony of a law enforcement officer or individuals acting on an officer's behalf; and (2) an officer does not participate in a antidrug task force unless that officer's honesty and integrity is evaluated and found to be at an appropriately high level.

Second, H.R. 253, No More Tulias, requires that states receiving Federal funds under the No More Tulias Act to collect data on the racial distribution of drug charges, the nature of the criminal law specified in the charges, and the jurisdictions in which such charges are made. I urge my colleagues to support my No More Tulias Act so that we can quickly bring the bill to markup.

I also urge my colleagues to support Byrne-JAG.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, as I indicated earlier in the afternoon, H. Con. Res. 381 was being debated and that is the honoring and recognizing the dedication and achievements of Thurgood Marshall on the 100th anniversary of his birth. Let me thank Congressman Payne for his legislative initiative, the House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers and Ranking Member Mr. Lamar Smith.

I stand here today as a living example of the legacy and the leadership of Justice Thurgood Marshall. Who would have thought as he broke the color line in Brown versus Topeka Board of Education that he would have opened the doors of opportunity for those from the East to the West and from the North to the South?

Most people don't know that America during the 1950s and earlier than that continued to be a segregated America. It did not matter where you lived. Thurgood Marshall had the courage to take this case to the United States Supreme Court. And the Warren court had the courage and rightness of mind to be able to establish an equal education for all.

I applaud Thurgood Marshall who was appointed to the Court of Appeals by President John F. Kennedy and ultimately the first African American to sit on the United States Supreme Court. He was one who understood justice. He was one who recognized the equality of all people. He was one who recognized that America is better when it reflects and appreciates its diversity.

Thank you, Justice Marshall, for the freedom and the opportunity you have given even to me.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 1312, ``Commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Space Foundation''. I would like to thank my colleague Doug Lamborn of Colorado for putting forth H. Res. 1312. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation, and to commemorate the 25 years that the Space Foundation has spent endeavoring to advance our knowledge and understanding of space.

This deserving piece of legislation will (1) recognize the contributions made by the Space Foundation; and (2) commemorate the Space Foundation's 25 years of excellence and support to the Nation.

This resolution not only draws attention to the Space Foundation's many years of excellence and service, but it also recognizes the profound effect that a group of nonpartisan, pioneering individuals has had in helping to inspire, enable, and propel humanity to greater heights. For as a great pioneer, Neil Armstrong, once said, ``That's one small step for man; one giant leap for mankind.''

The Space Foundation has played a significant positive role in exploring, advancing and developing our understanding of space. The nonprofit foundation has done this by embracing all aspects of space including commercial, civil, and national security. In the current national and commercial environment in which

space is often at the forefront of security or innovation, the work that the foundation does in promoting space education programs in all 50 States is critical. Furthermore, the Space Foundation's advocacy of peaceful and positive uses of outer space is crucial. Indeed, as John F. Kennedy, speaking in Houston, noted, ``We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people.''

Houston has long been at the center of the American exploration of space. The Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center in Houston has been NASA's center for human spaceflight activities. Houston has served as the Mission Control Center for every space mission since Gemini IV and directs all space shuttle and International Space Station Missions. The Johnson Center is also home to astronaut training, and Houston is a hub of scientific and space-related research. Houston's connection to space exploration has made evident to me the potential for growth and discovery that space holds. This connection has also inspired in me a great amount of respect and support for those organizations and individuals who pursue an awareness of space for the fostering of a peaceful and prosperous world.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation with me. I believe that what the Space Foundation has accomplished through more than 25 years of diligent service is more than deserving of such a commemoration. Through their efforts in improving our commercial, national, and theoretical uses and understanding of space they have undoubtedly helped better our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1313, Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the first American Woman in Space, Dr. Sally K. Ride. This legislation gives us the opportunity to extend our appreciation and gratitude for Dr. Ride's excellence in service to the Nation as an astronaut, educator, and advocate for the next generation of women scientists and engineers. I would like to thank my distinguished colleague from Texas, Congressman Lampson, for introducing this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, Sally K. Ride of Los Angeles, California, a physicist by training and an accomplished athlete, was selected as a National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, astronaut candidate in 1978, as part of the eighth class of NASA astronauts and one of only six women in the class. On June 18, 1983, Dr. Ride was lofted into space aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger as part of the STS-7 crew, making her the first American woman in space. As a representative from ``Space City Houston'', I am personally inspired by Dr. Ride's accolades and triumph over the status quo.

The STS-7 crew launched two communications satellites from the shuttle and accomplished many first steps for the United States space program, including the first release and capture of a satellite using the shuttle's robotic arm, the first demonstration of a shuttle's flight in formation with a free-flying satellite, and the first United States-German cooperative material science experiments aboard the shuttle, as well as the conduct of other science experiments.

On October 5, 1984, Dr. Ride courageously made her second spaceflight as a mission specialist on STS 41-G, a mission that demonstrated the ability to refuel satellites in orbit and launched NASA's Earth Radiation Budget Satellite, which spent over 20 years providing valuable scientific data on the Earth's absorption and re-radiation of solar energy. However, training for Dr. Ride's third spaceflight assignment ceased after the tragic loss of the Space Shuttle Challenger and her crew in 1986. Following this, Dr. Ride was called to serve on the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident.

Refusing to let the tragic loss of her crewmen deter her from her passion, Dr. Ride continued to serve the Nation's space program with distinction, authoring the 1987 report, Leadership and America's Future in Space, and serving on the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. As an educator, author of children's books, and advocate for the next generation of women in science, mathematics, and technology, Dr. Ride's work has contributed to the wellbeing of our youth.

Dr. Ride has worked tirelessly and passionately to encourage young women to follow the sciences, mathematics, and technology by promoting science festivals, camps, and other opportunities through which young women can acquire hands-on learning about science.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in recognizing Dr. Sally K. Ride. This legislation gives us the opportunity to extend our appreciation and gratitude for Dr. Ride's excellence in service to the Nation as an astronaut, educator, and advocate for the next generation of women scientists and engineers.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1315, Commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA. As we mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the United States space program, this legislation reaffirms the ever growing and changing role of NASA, providing resources to carry the agency forward with its ambitious agenda of research, exploration, and discovery. I would like to thank Congressman McCaul for introducing this important legislation, as well as the Science Committee Chairman for his leadership in bringing this bill to the floor today.

I have long supported NASA and I have offered an amendment to H.R. 6063, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2008.

My amendment clarifies that the NASA Outreach and Technology Assistance Program will include small, minority-owned, and women-owned businesses. It would also give preference, in selection of businesses to participate in the program, to socially and economically disadvantaged small business concerns, small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans, and HUBZone small business concerns.

Mr. Speaker, today's resolution will allow NASA to continue to push the boundaries of what is possible, keeping our Nation on the forefront of innovation and exploration. After the Columbia disaster, NASA stands at a pivotal moment in its history. It is the responsibility of this Congress to ensure. that the future of NASA is one of continued progress. Space exploration remains a part of our national destiny. It inspires our children to look to the stars and dream of what they too, one day, may achieve. Space exploration allows us to push the bounds of our scientific knowledge, as we carry out research projects not possible within the constraints of the planet Earth. As a Nation, we have made tremendous strides forward in the pursuit of space exploration since President John F. Kennedy set the course for our nation in 1962, calling it the ``greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked.'' Despite the setbacks of recent years, including the tragedy that befell

the Space Shuttle Columbia, NASA and the American people have refused to abandon the pursuit of knowledge of our universe. On October 1, 1958, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration began operation. At the time it consisted of only about 8,000 employees and an annual budget of $100 million. Over the next 50 years, NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory have been involved in many defining events occurred which have shaped the course of human history and demonstrated to the world the character of the people of the United States.

Many of us remember how inspired we were when on May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy proclaimed: ``I believe this Nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. ``The success of the United States space exploration program in the 20th Century augurs well for its continued leadership in the 21st Century. This success is largely attributable to the remarkable and indispensable partnership between the National Aeronautics, and Space Administration and its 10 space and research centers. One of these important research centers is located in my home city of Houston. The Johnson Space Center, which manages the development, testing, production, and delivery of all United States human spacecraft and all human spacecraft-related functions, is one of the crown jewels of the Houston area.

Today, NASA is the Nations' primary civil space and aeronautics research and development agency, and its current activities employ over 18,000 Americans. Today's legislation reaffirms the fundamental operating principles of NASA, emphasizes the importance of NASA leadership in a range of endeavors such as Earth observations and research, aeronautics reach and development, and an exploration program.

Always on the forefront of technological innovation, NASA has been home to countless ``firsts'' in the field of space exploration. America has, countless times, proven itself to be a leader in innovation, and many technologies that have become part of our everyday lives were developed by NASA scientists. The benefits of NASA's programming and innovation are felt far beyond scientific and academic spheres. Space technologies provide practical, tangible benefits to society, and NASA provides valuable opportunities to businesses in our community.

I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation, and in support of the future of American innovation and exploration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 4461 to promote and enhance the operation of local building code enforcement administration across the country by establishing a competitive Federal matching grant program. I would first like to thank my distinguished colleague, Representative Dennis Moore of Kansas, for introducing this important legislation. This legislation will provide grants to qualified local building code enforcement departments to increase in the quality and availability of service provided by the departments. These grants will be provided by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development on a competitive basis provided that the potential grantees can demonstrate need and develop plans for the use of the funds, local governmental actions, public outreach, and enforcement.

In disasters all around the country, studies have shown that a significant portion of the damages could have been prevented by rigorous enforcement of building codes. In studies of the damaged caused by Hurricane Andrew in 1992, researchers found that a quarter of the storm's damages could be attributed to a combination of shoddy workmanship and a lack of enforcement of the building code. The California Seismic Safety Commission's investigation into the damage caused during the 1995 Northridge earthquake in southern California found that much of the damage could have been avoided if building codes had been enforced. We cannot allow the same tragedies to occur time and again. About 2 million homes are at risk from coastal storms, 10 million from flooding, 25 million from wind hazards, and 50 million from earthquakes. So much of the damage caused by these disasters is preventable; we just have to provide resources to local authorities to take the appropriate steps.

By passing this bill, we are sending a message that this is not right. It is not right that a home or a school full of children is destroyed because builders used inferior concrete to save money. We cannot afford to be lax when the safety of all American citizens is at stake. The injury or death of a single person in a preventable accident cannot be tolerated.

In this bill, the funds granted to local building code enforcement administrations would be used to increase staffing, provide staff training, increase staff competence and professional qualifications, support individual certification or departmental accreditation, or for capital expenditures specifically dedicated to the administration of the local building code enforcement department. We can ensure through the screening process that the funds go to communities that both need them and have plans to use them. Departments that receive funds under this program will be required to match a certain percentage based on population unless the department can show significant economic distress in the area they serve. Furthermore, this bill increases the departments' accountability. Grant recipients are obligated to fully account and report for the use of all grants funds and provide a report to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development on the effectiveness of the program.

This bill will serve to increase the safety of all Americans and the confidence they have in the structure of the buildings they use everyday, from their place of employment to the schools where their children learn to the homes they sleep in at night. By spending now, we will reap the benefits for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3329, the ``Homes for Heroes Act.'' I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and to support our troops in their efforts to obtain homes. I thank my friend Congressman Al Green for this thoughtful legislation

This important piece of legislation amends the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act to establish in the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) a Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs to: (1) ensure veteran access to HUD housing and homeless assistance programs; (2) coordinate all HUD programs and activities relating to veterans; and (3) serve as a HUD liaison with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

This legislation, directs the HUD Secretary to provide assistance to private nonprofit organizations and consumer cooperatives to expand the supply of supportive housing for very low-income veteran families (that is, families with incomes not exceeding 50 percent of the area median income ).

H.R. 3326, amends the United States Housing Act of 1937 to: (1) make housing rental vouchers available to homeless veterans; and (2) include veterans in public housing planning.

Excludes veterans' benefits from income for purposes of HUD assisted housing rental determinations.

This legislation requires the Secretary to: (1) make grants to nonprofit entities for technical assistance in sponsoring HUD housing projects for veterans; and (2) report annually to specified congressional committees and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on HUD activities relating to veterans.

I firmly believe that we should celebrate our veterans, and I remain committed, as a Member of Congress, to ensuring that we respect our veterans. Veterans have kept their promise to serve our nation; they have willingly risked their lives to protect the country we all love. We must now ensure that we keep our promises to our veterans.

Currently, there are 25 million veterans in the United States. There are more than 1,633,000 veterans living in Texas and more than 32,000 veterans living in my Congressional district alone. I hope we will all take the time to show appreciation to those who have answered the call to duty. As the great British leader Winston Churchill famously stated, ``Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.''

With the approval of legislation on June 1, 1954, November 11th became a day to honor American veterans of all wars. Later that same year, on October 8th, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, himself a decorated veteran of war, issued the first ``Veterans Day Proclamation'' which stated in part: ``In order to insure proper and widespread observance of this anniversary, all veterans, all veterans' organizations, and the entire citizenry will wish to join hands in the common purpose.'' It was with that endearing spirit that America celebrated the first Veterans Day.

We must always remember the debt that we owe our fallen veterans that have paid the ultimate sacrifice. From the four surviving World War I veterans known to be living in the United States, to the over 300,000 veterans of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom we expect to see by the end of 2008. Our gratitude must continue to be unwavering to our soldiers and veterans.

In the words of President John F. Kennedy, ``As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.'' It is not simply enough to sing the praises of our nation's great veterans; I firmly believe that we must demonstrate by our actions how proud we are of our American heroes.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. I believe it is necessary for the nation to act now so that we all can pay respect, tribute, and homage to the lives of the armed services veterans who have fought to keep America free and have fought to make sure that all people and nations partake in the universal freedoms that we find so important in this country. These individuals have given so much and have paid us the ultimate sacrifice: the sacrifice of their lives. The least that we can do, is ensure that these veterans are able to secure homes when they return home from battle. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this legislation. H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message Preservation Act, requires the preservation of certain electronic records by Federal agencies, requires a certification and reports relating to Presidential records, and requires that the information be readily retrieved through electronic searches.

E-mail, because of its nature, presents challenges to records management. First, the information contained in e-mail records is not uniform: it may concern any subject or function and document various types of transactions. As a result, in many cases, decisions on which e-mail messages are records must

be made individually. Second, the transmission data associated with an e-mail record--including information about the senders and receivers of messages, the date and time the message was sent, and any attachments to the messages--may be crucial to understanding the context of the record. Third, a given message may be part of an exchange of messages between two or more people within or outside an agency, or even of a string (sometimes branching) of many messages sent and received on a given topic. In such cases, agency staff need to decide which message or messages should be considered records and who is responsible for storing them in a recordkeeping system. Finally, the large number of federal e-mail users and high volume of e- mails increase the management challenge.

Preliminary results of GAO's ongoing review of e-mail records management at four agencies show that not all are meeting the challenges posed by e-mail records. Although the four agencies' e-mail records management policies addressed, with a few exceptions, the regulatory requirements, these requirements were not always met for the senior officials whose e-mail practices were reviewed. Each of the four agencies generally followed a print and file process to preserve e-mail records in paper-based recordkeeping capabilities. (Among other things, a recordkeeping system allows related records to be grouped into classifications according to their business purposes.) Unless they have recordkeeping capabilities, e-mail systems may not permit easy and timely retrieval of groupings of related records or individual records. Further, keeping large numbers of record and nonrecord messages in e- mail systems potentially increases the time and effort needed to search for information in response to a business need or an outside inquiry, such as a Freedom of Information Act request. Factors contributing to this practice where the lack of adequate staff support and the volume of e-mail received. In addition, agencies had not ensured that officials and their responsible staff received training in recordkeeping requirements for e-mail. If recordkeeping requirements are not followed, agencies cannot be assured that records, including information essential to protecting the rights of individuals and the Federal Government, are being adequately identified and preserved. H.R. 5811 ensures that these records will be kept properly. I support this legislation and urge my colleagues to do likewise.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 1260 supporting the goals and ideals of ``National Internet Safety Month''. I would first like to thank my distinguished colleague, Representative Melissa Bean of Illinois, for introducing this important legislation. The bill reaffirms our commitment to the safety of our children when they use the internet and the importance of providing information and training to develop skills to use the internet safely.

We all know what an amazing tool the internet is. We can do everything from taking classes to reconnecting with old friends online. But despite this, the internet has many flaws.

In America, 93 percent of children ages 12 to 17 use the internet, but how wisely do they use it? Studies have shown that approximately 24 percent of students in grades 5 through 12 have hidden their online activities from their parents and 61 percent of them admit to using the internet unsafely or inappropriately. Even when they aren't looking at inappropriate material, children are picking on one another. 43 percent of teens ages 13 to 17 have experienced cyber bullying within the past year. This must stop.

It saddens me that a wonderful resource like the internet can be used in such a damaging way. Cyber bullying is a serious epidemic that must be addressed by all levels of government. Unlike regular bullying, where there is often physical damage, cyber bullies leave their victims with lasting emotional trauma. With the high level of connectivity our children now have, it is nearly impossible for them to escape these new bullies. We owe our children more.

It is up to us to teach our children the difference between right and wrong in life and this principle should not be ignored when dealing with the internet. In passing this resolution, we are telling parents that the children need guidance and that it is their responsibility to provide that guidance.

And we can help the parents in their task. 61 percent of parents want to be more involved in the internet safety of their children. It is simply a matter of giving them the tools they need to get involved. When we pass this legislation, we help parents, educators, Internet service providers, and volunteers to increase their efforts to raise the level of awareness for the need for online safety in the United States.

The Houston public libraries have recently adopted a budget that would allow them to provide all their branches full internet access. In doing so, however, they added a limitation: the computers in the children's section would have filters to prevent them from accessing inappropriate material. This is an example the rest of the nation needs to follow. We can all take simple actions like installing filters and monitoring internet use to make our children safer.

I urge my colleagues to pass this resolution and establish our support of internet safety. Tell communities around the nation we need to follow the example of Houston's public libraries and consider the children when designing policies. Tell communities that progress needs to be made.