Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, this is an incredible turn of events from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle who are now arguing for undocumented people within the confines of this country.

Let me start out by making a flat statement. The RESTORE Act confers no additional rights on undocumented aliens beyond those that they already have under the Constitution or current U.S. law.

You know, there is an old lawyer's adage, and I am not a lawyer but I am told by my friends who are, when the facts are not on your side, you are taught to argue the law. When the law is not on your side, you are taught to argue the facts.

Well, here on the floor like we have in the past, we have our colleagues on the other side of the aisle that are so conflicted as to be humorous if this wasn't such a serious, serious issue for our country and for our national security.

When they complain about not having any input, let me just clear the record and for the record state that they filed 12 amendments with our committee, the Intelligence Committee. Yet, when it came time to offer and proffer those amendments, they only had two. One was on immunity which, by the way, we have never been given the documents to review, so we would not have known what we were granting immunity to the telecom companies for. But that one was of their amendments. The second amendment was to substitute the Protect America Act for the RESTORE Act.

That gives you a clear indication that, today just as in the previous Congresses, the Congressional Republicans were and are in a rush to rubber-stamp every single thing that the administration wanted. And so now when things have changed and we have checks and balances, we have our colleagues who formerly rushed, rubber-stamped anything and everything that the administration wanted to do, now they are using delaying tactics. And so when it is convenient, they argue the law. When it is convenient, they argue the facts.

What is clear, crystal clear, here is that we have to have checks and balances. In order to protect this country, in order to protect our national security, there have to be checks and balances. That's what the RESTORE Act does.

And when they complain about the rule, it is a sham argument. When they complain about not having enough input, it is a sham argument. When they argue the facts, it is because the law is not on their side. When they argue the law, it is because the facts are not on their side. So it is not about truth; it is not even about justice. It is about scoring political victories.

There is a publication here on the Hill that said FISA is coming back up on the floor and it will determine who can maneuver best. You know what, as an American, I am sick and tired of maneuvering. I am sick and tired of people saying we need to work in a bipartisan manner when they work to undermine the process of checks and balances. The American people are sick and tired.

I support this rule. I think we have a great bill here in the RESTORE Act. I think this is something that we need to pass today, take it to conference and start being serious about balancing the tools that our agencies need to protect us with a careful balance of protecting Americans' rights under the Constitution. Vote for this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise once again in support of H.R. 3773, the RESTORE Act. I would also like the Record to reflect that Congressman Baron Hill intended to be listed as a cosponsor of H.R. 3773, and we are certainly grateful for his support.

In early September, at the direction of Speaker Pelosi, the Intelligence Committee and the House Judiciary Committee took up the call to improve the Protect America Act, or PAA. Passed in August, the PAA modified FISA and gave sweeping and unprecedented surveillance powers to the executive branch, while requiring minimal oversight and without providing a meaningful judicial check on the President's use of the new powers.

While we were charged with undoing the excesses of PAA, we also have the mandate to provide our intelligence professionals the legal authorities required to protect the country from our enemies. Six years after the tragic attacks of 9/11, Osama bin Laden remains at large and America continues to face threats from al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. The war in Iraq continues to act as a recruitment tool for all our enemies.

Mindful of these threats, we drafted the RESTORE Act as a bill that we can all support and be proud of. The RESTORE Act arms our intelligence community with powerful new authorities to conduct electronic surveillance of targets outside the United States while maintaining our fundamental liberties. First, it exempts truly foreign- to-foreign communications from any judicial review, even when the communication passes through the United States or the surveillance device is still actually located in the United States. Second, it authorizes the acquisition of foreign intelligence information for all matters of national defense, including information relating to terrorism, espionage, sabotage, and other threats to the national security of our country.

Third, the act clarifies that nothing in the act or the amendments to the act shall be construed to prohibit lawful surveillance necessary to prevent Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization from attacking the United States or our allies. But these powerful authorities are subject to the checks and the balances required by our Constitution.

The RESTORE Act puts the FISA Court back in business where the rights of Americans are at stake. The RESTORE Act tightens overbroad language in the PAA that authorized physical searches of Americans' homes and offices without a warrant. The RESTORE Act restores meaningful, robust, and continuous oversight by the judicial and legislative branches to ensure that the powerful intelligence-gathering tools authorized by the RESTORE Act are being used effectively and within the boundaries set by our Constitution.

In sum, the RESTORE Act provides tools to keep the Nation safe and upholds our constitutional liberties. This debate has gone on long enough, I believe, Mr. Speaker. It has been unnecessarily prolonged bipartisan maneuvering from some in this House. I am sure that we will see more of that partisan gamesmanship tonight. But I urge my colleagues to reject partisan politics in favor of sound policy and support this critically important bill.

I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for the RESTORE Act.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), who serves as the chairwoman of our Subcommittee on Intelligence Community Management.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), our chairman of the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel.

Mr. Speaker, could I ask how much time remains on each side.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time so we can balance the time out with the gentleman from Michigan.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time until we balance out the time.

Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I will now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. Speaker, I think we just saw some shrill out of options articulation there.

I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).

(Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I'm concerned about the self-induced confusion on the other side.

I now yield 1\3/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy) who served in Iraq and also serves with me on the Armed Services Committee, as well as our Intelligence Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to our distinguished majority leader, Mr. Hoyer of Maryland.

Mr. Speaker, this bill, the RESTORE Act, is about balance. It is about putting checks and balances back in the process. It puts the FISA Court back in the process of protecting Americans. It corrects unchecked authority that we gave through the Protect America Act. Some would want us to continue to rubber-stamp what the administration wants. The American people deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, Halloween is over. Why do our colleagues continue to pull ghouls out of the closet? It is now time to talk turkey.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, this is a sham solution in search of a problem. This language is unnecessary, and it would kill this bill. The bill already states that this act and the amendments made by this act shall not be construed to prohibit the intelligence community from conducting lawful surveillance that is necessary, one, to prevent Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, or any other terrorist or terrorist organization from attacking the United States. It also provides the means to protect the United States, any United States person or any ally of the United States from threats posed by weapons of mass destruction or other threats of national security.

Mr. Speaker, the answer to the ranking member's question about undocumented aliens, all they have to do is check section 235 and 287 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. This does not confer any additional rights not provided by the Constitution.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3963, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007.

For the past several months, Congress has debated an issue that should not be considered controversial--the healthcare of our Nation's most vulnerable children. The reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, SCHIP, is vitally important for the Nation and particularly my district of El Paso, Texas, where currently, over 14,000 children in El Paso County are enrolled in the program.

In El Paso, with thousands of children who rely on SCHIP for a scheduled checkup or to receive items like eyeglasses and prescription drugs, this program is critically important. Health care is extremely expensive, and SCHIP is not only vital to children and families, but is important to our health care infrastructure overall. Our health care delivery system in the border region and across the country is already challenged as it is. Cutting SCHIP funding would only result in a greater burden on our hospitals. Without access to doctors for regular checkups and routine appointments, families would potentially wait until health problems reach catastrophic level and then seek care at the local emergency room. This is dangerous for children and families, and would also result in a much more expensive form of health care delivery.

Today's bill reauthorizes SCHIP for 5 years while providing health care coverage for 10 million of our Nation's children. The bill does not expand coverage; rather it allows those currently eligible, but uninsured, the opportunity to enroll. Two-thirds of uninsured children are currently eligible for coverage through SCHIP or Medicaid, and today's bill provides the funding necessary to administer proper outreach to those qualified for the program.

I applaud Mr. Dingell and Mr. Rangel for their leadership in reaching an agreement that included some of the concerns voiced by Republicans who originally voted against the legislation.

The health and quality of life of our children must be a priority, and I firmly believe that this bill addresses the need to provide quality healthcare to our Nation's uninsured children. This legislation received strong bipartisan support in the House, and I call on President Bush to stop playing political games with our children's healthcare.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time.

I rise in support H.R. 3867, the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act of 2007. I would like to give special recognition to our distinguished chairman of the Small Business Committee, Chairwoman Velazquez, for her tireless work over the years on behalf of America's small business owners, many of whom reside in my district of El Paso, Texas.

I would also like to commend Congressman Bruce Braley who, in just his first year in Congress and as chairman of the Small Business Contracting Subcommittee, has proven to be an outstanding fighter for small businesses.

H.R. 3867 expands opportunities for small businesses owned by veterans. And veterans, and in particular disabled veterans who own businesses, are going to be watching very closely how Members vote on this bill here today. It also expands opportunities for women who will also look at how people support their efforts in the small business community. Minorities are watching very closely who votes for this legislation, and all others who constitute the most critical force for economic growth in our country.

While I support this bill as a whole, I today want to speak specifically about the provisions of this bill that modernize and update the 8(a) program at the Small Business Administration. In 1968, Congress established 8(a) to assist small businesses owned by citizens who are socially and economically disadvantaged. Over the years, the 8(a) program has helped ten of thousands of businesses grow and prosper by allowing entrepreneurs valuable access to Federal contracts.

A large part of the program's success is a provision that makes companies with 8(a) certification eligible for smaller government contracts on a sole-source basis. In 1968, those smaller contracts were defined as contracts not exceeding $3 million in value for services or $5 million in value for manufacturing. Unfortunately, in the nearly 40 years since, these limits have barely risen, leaving our small businesses an ever-shrinking slice of the Federal contracting pool.

Earlier this year I introduced H.R. 1611, the 8(a) Modernization Act, to turn the clock forward for the thousands of small businesses that we have unfortunately left behind. This bill does two things: one, it increases the allowable net worth for 8(a) participants; and, two, it increases the limit on sole-source contracts for 8(a) companies.

H.R. 3867 includes both of these essential changes which are important not only to many small businesses in my district, but to countless American entrepreneurs around the country, including our veterans.

Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of it, and I urge all of my colleagues to give it their full support. Again I thank Chairwoman Velazquez for the time to speak here today and for her untiring leadership on behalf of small businesses.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 751, a resolution I have introduced supporting the goals and ideals of National Chemistry Week, which starts today, October 22, 2007.

During the next 5 days, millions of people, particularly students in elementary and secondary schools, will be engaged in chemistry-related activities that show the importance of chemistry to our quality of life. With assistance from American Chemical Society, ACS, staff, thousands of volunteers will conduct these activities in venues from shopping malls, to classrooms, to university labs.

National Chemistry Week was created by ACS in 1987 to draw attention to the positive contributions chemistry makes to our everyday lives. These contributions include helping feed, house, and clothe the world's population; tapping new energy sources; providing renewable substitutes for limited materials; improving public health; strengthening our national security; and protecting our environment.

During this year's 20th anniversary of National Chemistry Week, we are celebrating ``The Many Faces of Chemistry.'' This theme was chosen to emphasize the extensive variety of careers available in the world of chemistry and to honor the tremendous diversity of people who have contributed and will contribute to the advancement of chemistry and all of its branches. This year's theme takes added importance when you consider that a disproportionately low number of minority, underprivileged, and young women students are taking up careers in science and technology.

The inclusion of women and under-represented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields, STEM, is not just important to correct for historical employment inequities, but to provide under-represented minorities an opportunity for prosperity. The increased education and participation of this segment of the workforce is also essential to supplying the American economy with the STEM expertise the country needs to innovate and remain competitive. According to the U.S. Census, 39 percent of the population under the age of 18 is a racial or ethnic minority. That percentage is on a path to pass 50 percent by the year 2050. Yet, in 2000, only 4.4 percent of the science and engineering jobs were held by African Americans and only 3.4 percent by Hispanics. Women constitute over half of the post- secondary students in the Nation, but represent a little more than one- quarter of our science and engineering workforce. We must correct these disparities, and fast.

This is not an issue of compromising high standards. If America is to achieve its strategic objectives in STEM, the enormous potential of groups that are currently under-represented in the STEM fields must be realized through expanded and focused educational opportunity. Some see tension between policies that focus resources on certain groups and the pursuit for excellence, but the simple truth is that the general achievement of excellence is strongly linked to the prevalence of opportunity.

Scientists from these under-represented groups have demonstrated excellence through important contributions to our understanding of the environment and the sciences. Two notable examples include Mario Molina, an atmospheric chemist who received a Nobel Prize for his work establishing the link between CFCs and atmospheric ozone destruction, and Percy L. Julian, who was the first black chemist elected to the National Academy of Sciences and whose work in synthesizing a compound used to treat glaucoma led to his having been ranked by ACS as one of the top 75 Distinguished Contributors to the Chemical Enterprise.

If we are to remain an innovative and economically competitive nation, the face of our high-tech workforce must reflect the true face of America. Our workforce will not be the best America has to offer if we do not ensure that we are taking advantage of all pools of domestic talent. ``The Many Faces of Chemistry'' theme is especially significant because it focuses on promoting diversity, which will help ensure national competitiveness by encouraging broad participation from all sources of talent in the sciences and chemistry.

I thank the American Chemical Society for their work in promoting the chemical sciences and the important role of diversity. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2095 the Federal Railroad Safety Improvement Act of 2007. This bill, introduced by my colleague Chairman James L. Oberstar, provides a long- overdue reauthorization and reorganization of the Federal Railroad Administration. I am proud to count myself as a cosponsor of this legislation.

My district of El Paso has a rich history with the railroad industry. Following the arrival of the railroads in 1881, El Paso experienced enormous economic growth due in part to the railroad connections in the area. Today, my city's connections to the industry persist, and hundreds of my constituents go to work in the rail yards and along the tracks every day. Rail workers and the Americans who live near rail operations deserve the highest level of safety, and the Federal Railroad Safety Improvement Act provides just that.

Roughly 40 percent of all train accidents are the result of human factors, and, of this startling number, one in four results from fatigue. This bill will set new hours-of-service for our railroad workers and will help ensure they follow proper rest and shift periods. Under the proposed measures, personnel would receive at least 10 hours of rest per 24-hour period and would ultimately be limited to no more than 12 consecutive hours of shift work. The bill would also nearly double the number of rail safety inspection and enforcement staff. These changes would hopefully reduce the number of accidents caused by human error and fatigue and would help ensure safer working conditions for the approximately 1,100 rail workers of El Paso and across the United States.

In addition, H.R. 2095 would reorganize the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and rename it the Federal Railroad Safety Administration (FRSA). Over the 4-year period from 2007 to 2011, the FRSA would authorize $1.1 billion for general expenses and grant programs. This legislation has taken into account many of the safety investigations and recommendations of the Department of Transportation, especially regarding human fatigue, defective tracks, and railroad crossings. With the reauthorization of this funding, I am confident that great strides will be made to improve the safety of the railroad industry in the United States.

Mr. Chairman, I ask that my colleagues join me in supporting this important legislation so that substantial improvements in Federal railroad safety can be made nationwide.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, due to an administrative error, the following cosponsors were left off the list of cosponsors for this bill, H.R. 3773: Representative Anna Eshoo from California; Representative Dutch Ruppersberger from Maryland; Representative Dennis Moore from Kansas; Representative Ciro Rodriguez from Texas; Representative Earl Pomeroy from North Dakota; Representative Leonard Boswell from Iowa; Representative Baron Hill from Indiana; and Representative Patrick Murphy from Pennsylvania.

I would like to thank them for their cosponsorship and ask that they be recognized as such, and I would finish up by saying this is a good rule. This is also a good bill that balances the ability to protect our country with the ability to protect the civil rights of its citizens.

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of issues that have been brought up by the other side regarding this bill. First of all, it's important to keep in mind that what we're trying to do with this legislation is to carefully balance providing the tools to the intelligence professionals that are charged with keeping us safe in this country, and this legislation does that, regardless of what comments the other side has made.

Second, and most important, we have to balance it with protecting the civil rights of our citizens. As we talk about protecting this country, we have to keep in mind that this country was founded on the principle of the rule of law. The rule of law protects its citizens.

Under the Protect America Act, as we have seen over the course of the last few weeks, many, many concerns have been raised about the authorities that have been given to the government, authorities that would render our citizens not being able to protect and be secure in our homes and in our possessions.

The Protect America Act has given so many authorities that people are not safe and secure in their own homes. The government can go in there and search their computers, search their residences, and search literally every possession that Americans have. This legislation corrects those deficiencies. This legislation is a careful balance in keeping our country safe, as well as securing the rights of Americans in their homes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, 6 years after the tragic attacks of 9/11, Osama bin Laden remains at large. The minority whip may make light about ordering pizza, but the reality is we still haven't gotten Osama bin Laden and America faces a continuing threat from al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.

Just this week, Admiral Scott Redd, Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said that the Iraq war has created a giant recruiting tool for al Qaeda. When asked if we are safer as a result of our invasion of Iraq, Admiral Redd said, ``Tactically, probably not.''

Mindful of this threat, our committees have drafted the RESTORE Act. I wish to thank Chairman Conyers and members of both committees for their great work in drafting this legislation. The RESTORE Act arms our intelligence community with powerful new authorities to conduct electronic surveillance of terrorist targets around the world, but it also restores essential constitutional protections for Americans that were sharply eroded when the President signed the Protect America Act, or PAA, last August.

Some on the other side want to extend the PAA permanently. That would be a huge mistake. According to expert testimony we have received in our committee, the PAA authorizes warrantless domestic searches of Americans' homes, mail, computers and medical records, as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee observed earlier.

Although we don't have any information at this time that the Bush administration is using this authority in this way, we must guard against the possibility of abuse in the future. Our committee heard testimony that the PAA even allows spying without probable cause on our own soldiers deployed overseas talking to their families back home. That, Mr. Speaker, is wrong.

The RESTORE Act helps restore the balance between security and liberty. The RESTORE Act puts the FISA Court back in the business of protecting Americans' constitutional rights, after the President and Vice President put the court out of business 6 years ago.

Some will try to portray this bill as extending rights to terrorists. We have heard that this morning. That is absolutely false. This bill does not require individual warrants for terrorists such as Osama bin Laden. The bill does not extend fourth amendment rights to foreigners.

What the RESTORE Act does is allow ``block surveillance'' of terrorists overseas with speed and agility. And we will never go dark, because the bill includes an emergency provision that allows surveillance to continue for 45 days, even before the court approves the procedures to protect Americans.

This legislation will restore accountability and oversight in all three branches. It restores regular audits and reports by the Department of Justice, which will be reviewed by the Congress. It also requires an audit of the President's Domestic Surveillance Program and other warrantless surveillance programs.

Perhaps most importantly, it ensures that when an American is the target of surveillance, an individualized warrant is required.

Some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle prefer an approach that would allow the administration to police itself. This simply is unacceptable. If we have learned anything from the past 6 years, it is that unchecked executive power is a recipe for abuse and it has not made us safer.

Mr. Speaker, I have served my country as a soldier in combat in Vietnam, as a law enforcement professional on our southern border, and as a Member of Congress for the past decade. I have seen the great strength of our country; and in my view, the source of that great strength is our Constitution. The RESTORE Act provides tools to keep this Nation safe and upholds our Constitution and our laws. So I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the RESTORE Act.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell), a fellow Vietnam veteran, a member of the House Intelligence Committee.

Madam Speaker, today I would like to commend Dr. Carson Eoyang on completing 33 years of federal service.

Last week Dr. Eoyang retired as the Chancellor of National Intelligence University and the Assistant Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Education and Training. He had served in this position since shortly after the creation of the DNI and endeavored to forge a viable National Intelligence University from the various and diverse education elements of the Intelligence Community.

Among his many accomplishments, Dr. Eoyang most notably instituted much-needed, community-wide policies on curricula and standards, and ensured that all Intelligence Community training courses were available to students from anywhere in the community and not just the hosting agency. He successfully advocated for additional funding for training and education, to include critical linguist and analyst training.

Dr. Eoyang brought a wealth of experience to his time at the DNI. Prior to his service with the DNI, Dr. Eoyang served as the Associate Provost for Academic Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, where he was responsible for academic administration. He also ran the School's executive education programs.

A truly dedicated public servant, Dr. Eoyang previously worked at the Office of Science and Technology Policy at the White House to advance distance learning initiatives and interagency technology collaboration. He has also served as the Director of Training at two federal agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Dr. Eoyang also had significant experience with the intelligence community prior to his assignment at the DNI. Earlier in his career, he served as the Director for PERSERC, the Defense Personnel and Security Research Center, where he conducted research on espionage, security, and counterintelligence.

Dr. Eoyang's long and noteworthy history in management experience was recognized when he was named to the study group for the National Performance Review, the highly respected effort to reinvent government led by Vice President Al Gore.

In addition to his distinguished career in the Senior Executive Service, Dr. Eoyang was a tenured professor of Management at the Naval Postgraduate School, where he taught leadership to the Nation's naval officers. He earned his Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior from Stanford University, and his M.B.A. from Harvard Business School.

Madam Speaker, Dr. Eoyang is an exemplar of all the qualities that I value highly: integrity, professionalism, and commitment to diversity. Dr. Eoyang's superlative career reflects positively on the many agencies and institutions he has touched.

I thank Dr. Eoyang for his service to the nation, and wish him success in his future endeavors. I extend my best wishes to his wife, Kemay, and his children, Mieke, Mason, and Lian, who have supported and encouraged this dedicated, remarkable man in all of his pursuits.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3246, the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act of 2007, which will help spur economic development in my district of El Paso, Texas. I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar for his vision regarding the need and importance of regional authorities for development in areas of the country with huge economic need. For the past three Congresses, I have introduced my bill, the Southwest Regional Border Authority Act, in an attempt to bring some relief to the U.S.-Mexico border and my district of El Paso, Texas. This year, under the leadership of Chairman Oberstar, my bill has been included into his overall legislation. I would also like to thank many of my colleagues who represent districts along the U.S.-Mexico border for their support in the creation of the Southwest Regional Border Authority.

The Chairman's bill would authorize $1.25 billion over the period of FY 2008 through FY 2012 for five regional commissions one of which will be created in the U.S.-Mexico border region. The Authorities would be Federal-State partnerships for providing assistance to economically distressed and underdeveloped areas that have experienced high levels of unemployment, poverty, or out-migration. Three of the commissions would be new and would assist areas in the Southeastern United States and areas along the Mexican and Canadian borders; two of the commissions would replace existing authorities in the Delta and Northern Great Plains regions. The bill would establish uniform administrative structures and responsibilities for the commissions, and authorize the commissions to provide financial assistance for projects and programs in their respective regions to develop transportation and infrastructure, provide job skills training and support business development.

The Southwest border region, as defined in the bill, includes all counties within 150 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border. This region contains 11 counties in New Mexico, 65 counties in Texas, 10 counties in Arizona, and 7 counties in California, with a combined population of approximately 29 million.

According to research compiled by the Interagency Task Force on the Economic Development of the Southwest Border, 20 percent of the residents in my region live below the poverty level, unemployment rates often reach as high as five times the national average, and a lack of adequate access to capital has created economic disparities making it difficult for businesses to start up in the region. Border communities have long endured a depressed economy and low-paying jobs. Our economic challenges partly stem from our position as a border community.

Economic development in border communities is difficult to stimulate without assistance from the Government, private sector, and community organizations. H.R. 3246 would help foster planning to encourage infrastructure improvements, technology deployment, education and workforce training, and community development through entrepreneurship.

Modeled in part after the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Southwest Border Regional Authority and other Authorities would follow four guiding principles:

First, the Authorities would fund proposals designed at the local level followed by approval at the state level in order to meet regional economic development goals;

Second, projects leading to the creation of a diversified regional economy would be prioritized. Currently, states and counties often are forced to compete against each other for limited funding;

Third, the Authorities would be independent agencies. This would prevent them from having to attempt to satisfy another Federal agency's mission requirements when determining which projects to fund; and

Finally, the Authorities would be comprised of one Senate-confirmed Federal representative and the governors of the States of jurisdiction.

For too long, many areas of our country including the southwest border region have been ignored, overlooked, and underfunded. We need to recognize the challenges facing these under-served areas and help them make the most of their many assets. I believe the authorities created in the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act of 2007 would go a long way toward achieving the goal of economic prosperity in some of the poorest regions of our county.

Again, I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar for his leadership on this issue and look forward to the implementation of this important legislation. I ask my colleagues to support this important measure.

Thank you, Congressman Cardoza and Congressman Ross, for your valuable assistance in crafting this important amendment.

I also want to thank our friend, as Congressman Cardoza mentioned, Ruben Hinojosa, who could not join us here this afternoon.

Our amendment stands both for fairness and the integrity of the National Flood Insurance Program.

In El Paso, which is my district, FEMA is currently in the process of issuing new floodplain maps. Initially, the community didn't think much of this exercise because, simply, many didn't know that they had ever lived in a floodplain and didn't expect any problems with this issue.

However, when FEMA asked the Federal agency in charge of flood control, the International Boundary and Water Commission, about the condition of our levees, the answer came back that they were unsatisfactory. The levees were missing a few feet of free board, which is supplemental height and therefore could not be certified, which meant that now members of our community in El Paso were now subject to flood insurance.

That is why this amendment is necessary. That's why we're trying to correct an issue and a problem that everyday people need to wrestle with.

Madam Speaker, it is with great honor that I rise to recognize Mr. Paul L. Foster, the president and CEO of Western Refining Inc. of El Paso, who, with a strong desire to give back to the El Paso community, donated $50 million to the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center. That's right, Madam Speaker--$50 million of his own money.

Foster's selfless contribution, the largest donation given to Texas Tech by an individual in the history of the university, will allow for great advances in border health issues research and various other health care initiatives. The gift will support the recruitment of staff members, finance faculty salaries, and purchase necessary medical equipment. In acknowledgment of his donation, the university named El Paso's 4-year medical school the ``Paul L. Foster School of Medicine.'' Unique to the area, it is the first medical school on the U.S.-Mexico border and only the second new medical institution created in the U.S. in the last 25 years. Although a medical school of such stature and prestige has been greatly needed for the El Paso community for some time, it is now becoming a reality, in part due to Mr. Foster's assistance.

The Paul F. Foster School holds many prospects for medical science and healthcare. Increased specialized physicians coupled with superior medical equipment will allow for substantial economic growth in the El Paso region along with quality health care for my constituents. It will also provide greater incentives for researchers to come to the area and learn about and help solve health issues unique to the U.S.-Mexico border.

A 1979 Baylor University graduate, Foster founded Western Refining Inc. in 1997, which is currently the Nation's fourth largest publicly traded independent oil refinery. Despite his tremendous success, Paul remains modest, humble, and connected to our local community. The magnitude of his generous gift will be felt for generations, yet in typical fashion he seeks none of the attention that such a gift merits.

I have always believed it is critically important that we continue to pave the way for greater healthcare infrastructure in El Paso and along the U.S.-Mexico border, and the 4-year medical school can serve as the cornerstone in this effort. This vision, this dream, is one step closer with the huge charitable contribution of Paul Foster.

As the Paul L. Foster School of Medicine pays tribute to this remarkable philanthropist, I would like to do the same. His contribution to the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center will prove extremely beneficial to the El Paso community and to aspiring doctors and nurses in our region.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3246, the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act of 2007, which will help spur economic development in my district of El Paso, TX. I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar for his vision regarding the need and importance of regional authorities for development in areas of the country with huge economic need. For the past three Congresses, I have introduced my bill, the Southwest Regional Border Authority Act, in an attempt to bring some relief to the United States-Mexico border and my district of El Paso, TX. This year, under the leadership of Chairman Oberstar, my bill has been included into his overall legislation. I would also like to thank many of my colleagues who represent districts along the United States-Mexico border for their support in the creation of the Southwest Regional Border Authority.

The Chairman's bill would authorize $1.25 billion over the period of FY 2008 through FY 2012 for five regional commissions one of which will be created in the United States-Mexico border region. The Authorities would be Federal-State partnerships for providing assistance to economically distressed and underdeveloped areas that have experienced high levels of unemployment, poverty, or out-migration. Three of the commissions would be new and would assist areas in the southeastern United States and areas along the Mexican and Canadian borders; two of the commissions would replace existing Authorities in the Delta and northern Great Plains regions. The bill would establish uniform administrative structures and responsibilities for the commissions, and authorize the commissions to provide financial assistance for projects and programs in their respective regions to develop transportation and infrastructure, provide job skills training and support business development.

The Southwest border region, as defined in the bill, includes all counties within 150 miles of the United States-Mexico border. This region contains 11 counties in New Mexico, 65 counties in Texas, 10 counties in Arizona, and 7 counties in California, with a combined population of approximately 29 million.

According to research compiled by the Interagency Task Force on the Economic Development of the Southwest Border, 20 percent of the residents in my region live below the poverty level, unemployment rates often reach as high as five times the national average, and a lack of adequate access to capital has created economic disparities, making it difficult for businesses to start up in the region. Border communities have long endured a depressed economy and low-paying jobs. Our economic challenges partly stem from our position as a border community.

Economic development in border communities is difficult to stimulate without assistance from the government, private sector, and community organizations. H.R. 3246 would help foster planning to encourage infrastructure improvements, technology deployment, education and workforce training, and community development through entrepreneurship.

Modeled in part after the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Southwest Border Regional Authority and other Authorities would follow four guiding principles:

First, the Authorities would fund proposals designed at the local level followed by approval at the State level in order to meet regional economic development goals;

Second, projects leading to the creation of a diversified regional economy would be prioritized. Currently, States and counties often are forced to compete against each other for limited funding;

Third, the Authorities would be independent agencies. This would prevent them from having to attempt to satisfy another Federal agency's mission requirements when determining which projects to fund; and

Finally, the Authorities would be comprised of one Senate-confirmed Federal representative and the governors of the States of jurisdiction.

For too long, many areas of our country including the Southwest border region have been ignored, overlooked, and underfunded. We need to recognize the challenges facing these underserved areas and help them make the most of their many assets. I believe the Authorities created in the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act of 2007 would go a long way toward achieving the goal of economic prosperity in some of the poorest regions of our country.

Again, I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar for his leadership on this issue and look forward to the implementation of this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise in honor of the Texas Western Miners, the 1966 NCAA championship basketball team that is being inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame today. Texas Western College is now known as the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP), and is in the district that I am honored to represent. The victory of the 1966 Texas Western team made a groundbreaking impact on diversity in sports and civil rights in America, and this team is only one of six to be enshrined forever as a legend of the basketball world.

Texas Western was coached by Don Haskins, ``the Bear,'' who has become an El Paso icon and legend and who was himself inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 1997 as a coach.

The Texas Western team, a tight-knit group of blacks, whites, and one Hispanic, finished the 1965-66 regular season with a 23-1 record. The Miners then played their way to the NCAA championship game. On the night of March 19, 1966, in College Park, MD, history was made when Haskins started, for the first time ever, an all-black lineup in the final NCAA championship game against Adolph Rupp's No. 1-ranked Kentucky Wildcats, an all-white team. The Texas Western team won the national title with a 72-65 victory. More important than the basketball victory was the profound statement that was made that night regarding an issue that was causing great national controversy and strife--civil rights.

The win soon became a symbol for the breakthrough of black athletes into college sports and is an event defined by many as the ``Brown v. Board of Education of athletics''. After the `66 championship, college teams throughout the South began aggressively recruiting black athletes, ending years of shameful segregation. You may recall that the 2006 film ``Glory Road'' is based on the story of the 1966 Texas Western team. Years later, when recounting his coaching successes and historic contribution to civil rights, Haskins said, ``I just played my best guys, like any coach would do.''

This team will be remembered forever. This is a great day for El Paso and for basketball enthusiasts all over the world; a great day to remember the civil rights struggle and some of the strides that have been made; and a great day to recognize and honor the contributions of the 1966 Texas Western NCAA championship basketball team as they are inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame.

I am proud of this team--Bobby Joe Hill (Detroit, Michigan), Orsten Artis (Gary, Indiana), Togo Railey (El Paso, Texas), Willie Worsley (New York, New York), David Palacio (El Paso, Texas), Dick Myers (Peabody, Kansas), Harry Flournoy (Gary, Indiana), Louis Baudoin (Albuquerque, New Mexico), Nevil Shed (New York, New York), Jerry Armstrong (Eagleville, Missouri), Willie Cager (New York, New York), David `Big Daddy' Lattin (Houston, Texas) and their legendary coach, Don ``the Bear'' Haskins, and congratulate them on this slam dunk!

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House, I call up the Senate bill (S. 1927) to

amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to provide additional procedures for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence information and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we bring up tonight the bill that was passed on the Senate side, S. 1927. Although this bill, in my opinion, is not the ideal bill, I think it is important that all of us understand that under the current situation that our country faces with the threat level being high, it is very important that we do everything that we can to keep the American people safe, to reassure people that this Congress is going to do everything it can to provide the administration the tools to keep us safe and secure.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to respond to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, this administration has told us many things, from the beginning with the weapons of mass destruction, to different issues that have had us to the point to where we are tonight. We are here because we are concerned about the safety and well-being of this country. But a number of Members do believe that we have been told many, many things that have not been true.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the chair of the Select Intelligence Oversight Appropriations panel, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).

Mr. Speaker, I think the American people are going to decide for themselves when they read the text of this bill.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from California, a valued member of our committee, Ms. Eshoo.

Mr. Speaker, don't worry, they snooker us all the time.

Mr. Speaker, it's now my privilege to yield to the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee 1\1/2\ minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

(Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to a member of our committee, the gentlelady from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania who serves on the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Sestak.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, the preferable legislation we debated yesterday. Having done that, we are going to do vigorous oversight over this legislation we have debated tonight, and we are going to do our best to bring permanent legislation at the end of September.

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