Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the way to support the troops is to give them what they need on the battlefield, and what they need when they return home from their service to reset--or rest and fix the force for future missions.

This government must be accountable to our troops and their families, the only people actually carrying the burden for these wars today . . . along with our children, for whom we are leaving the cost.

Today's bill provides much needed money for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan . . . policy that requires accountability from the Administration . . . and funding to heal the readiness of our troops.

It is not the best bill we could get, but you never have a perfect bill.

But the predicament we are in now demands we support this bill.

We have so many emergencies on our doorstep now . . . mostly because the last Congress refused to see the negative impact operations in Iraq had on our military readiness, leaving us vulnerable as a nation . . . and leaving important national business undone.

Support for the troops is entirely about giving them what they need to fight the battles we've committed them to fight . . . and this legislation does just, with one eye on the future . . . something previous Congresses failed to do.

I wish the Congress would have put more energy into readiness oversight over the past 5 years to prevent the current situation . . . but all we can do today is go forward.

I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting our troops--and this funding for them.

Today's bill addresses many of these readiness concerns, with additions above the President's request to support our troops, including:

$2 billion more to address the current readiness crisis of our stateside troops, including ensuring that they are better equipped and trained;

$1.1 billion more for military housing allowances;

$3 billion for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles for troops in Iraq ($1.2 billion above the President's request);

$1.6 billion for body armor;

$9.7 billion to train and equip Afghan and Iraqi security forces.

It also fully funds the BRAC accounts so communities like the Coastal Bend of Texas--and others adversely affected by base closure decisions--can plan appropriately for that eventuality.

So many Americans are coming home alive--yet traumatized in their minds or bodies--to an extent we have never seen before. The scandalous treatment of heroes at Walter Reed--and the fact that it took a newspaper story to change it--is testament to the gigantic challenges facing military and veterans' health care.

The Supplemental includes funding for new initiatives to enhance medical services for active duty forces and mobilized personnel, and their family members (appropriating $2.1 billion more than the President requested.) These initiatives include:

$900 million for Traumatic Brain Injury care and research and PTSD treatment and research;

$20 million for facility improvement at Walter Reed.

The bill includes $1.8 billion over the President's request to address the health care needs of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and the backlog in maintaining VA health care facilities, including:

$30 million for at least one new Level I polytrauma center;

$9.4 million in operations costs for new polytrauma residential transitional rehab programs;

$10 million for additional transition caseworkers;

$10 million for blind rehab programs;

$100 million for enhancements to mental health services;

$20 million for substance abuse treatment;

$8 million for polytrauma clinic support teams;

$25 million for prosthetics;

$228.9 million in additional funds to treat veterans from both wars.

This bill is an excellent starting point for this new Congress to begin the long overdue oversight of the defense department. We are far ahead of the past Congresses in giving our troops the true support they need--with appropriate funding and acknowledgment of the strain and burden of Iraq.

While the ideal situation for Congress is for the authorizing committee to determine policy, that's coming very soon. I am grateful to Chairman Murtha for the extraordinary lengths we've gone to in this bill to protect our soldiers by certifying their readiness, protecting the military readiness of the United States.

While this bill is not perfect, it is an extraordinary first step.

As the Readiness Subcommittee Chair, let me offer the House some perspective on the current state of our readiness:

In the National Intelligence Estimate declassified on Feb. 2, the U.S. intelligence services note that--absent a remarkable reversal of fortunes in Iraq--they find that ``the overall security situation will continue to deteriorate at rates comparable to the latter part of 2006.'' Further, the NIE determines: ``even if the violence is diminished . . . Iraqi leaders will be

hard pressed to achieve sustained political reconciliation in the time frame of this estimate''--which is 12-18 months.

The NIE goes on to say that if the U.S. were to leave Iraq, a greater, wider civil war would erupt, saying: ``the ISF [Iraqi Security Forces] would be unlikely to survive as a non-sectarian national institution, and neighboring countries might intervene openly in the conflict.''

Now, common sense tells me that will be the case whenever we leave . . . today, manana, this summer, next year . . . or 50 years from now. Whenever we leave Iraq, the unclassified intelligence estimate guides us on what we can expect. Our choice is in how long we remain . . . and how many more brave and patriotic volunteers--who carry the battle for this Nation--are lost in Iraq.

Today we have a chance to begin that change--in the purest way we can support the troops . . . men and women, and their families, who are alone in carrying the burden for the Iraq war.

The readiness of our next deployers--our ability to be prepared for current and future threats--is diminished due to the war in Iraq. We've worn out our force and their equipment, and that has huge implications for our ability to handle the threats to come.

The GAO has looked at this . . . and come away saying the Army itself ``cannot determine the extent to which the existing inventory reflects what the Army needs'' . . . and GAO notes that: ``until these strategic and management challenges are addressed, the Army will face uncertain risks should new conflicts occur.''

GAO also reports that all services ``have drawn heavily from their prepositioned stocks to support [the ongoing wars]'' . . . and ``these sustained military operations are taking a toll on the condition and readiness of military equipment and the Army and Marine Corps face a number of long-term challenges that will affect the timing and cost of equipment repair and replacement.''

GAO concludes: ``the Army's decisions today have profound future implications for the entire department and potentially affect our ability to respond to a conflict.''

Last year, Congress established a Commission on the National Guard and Reserves, which has also reported back to us. They tell us point blank: ``DoD's failure to appropriately consider National Guard needs and funding requirements has produced a National Guard that is not fully ready to meet current and emerging missions.''

The Commission says more pointedly: ``The lack of sufficient and ready equipment is a problem common to active and reserve components.

In particular, the equipment readiness of the Army National Guard is unacceptable and has reduced the capability of the U.S. to respond to current and additional major contingencies, foreign and domestic.''

Army Chief of Staff Schoomaker told the Commission: despite the readiness of troops overseas, ``88 percent of the forces that are back here in the U.S. are very poorly equipped today in the Army National Guard.''

The Commission also noted that state governors ``have become increasingly concerned about whether their National Guard forces would be available to respond to emergencies here at home.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to lament the tragedy that has held our attention and broken our hearts nationwide as we hear more and more about the massacre at Virginia Tech this week . . . And I thank my friend the gentleman from Virginia for bringing this resolution to the floor today.

Sometimes a child of this nation is pathologically disturbed beyond control or even hope of understanding that murderous pathology . . . but in the events that follow horror--Columbine, or 9-11, or the massacre at Virginia Tech . . . or standing on a faraway battlefield . . . or even the spectacle of being the object of nation ridicule . . . our children have inspired us with their guts and their fast reactions in the face of numbing shock.

They reacted well to events that defied understanding, and touched our hearts and gave us a glimpse of our future. Our nation is in the hands of these extraordinary young people, all over the nation . . . those almost too young to remember Columbine, tempered by their early teenage prism of 9-11. This nation should find our comfort in the lessons from our children: adversity brings hope and when the worst of humanity shows itself, the best of humanity raises up to heal together.

Just now, there are thousands of facts still unknown about the Virginia Tech massacre . . . thousands of second guesses about all manner of the university response . . . and certainly thousands of questions and many more stories to come.

Today, I join parents from South Texas and around the nation as we pray for the students that were lost in Blacksburg, for their families . . . and for the millions of students and parents now psychologically wounded by the reality that students in college are hardly safe from dangerous minds and wounded souls.

To the families of those who lost loved ones, whose loved ones were wounded, and for the families of those students at Virginia Tech mourning their friends . . . know that this House--and the larger American family--are praying for them and standing with them at this most difficult moment. We are also praying for the family of the gunman; and we urge that there be no retaliation for these hideous acts.

When a parent sends a child to college, we are so proud. We are also worried about the choices they will make as they leave the safe harbor of our homes and neighborhoods . . . but today, there's a whole new horror to contend with.

As we learn more in the coming weeks, my colleagues and I are committed to finding new solutions to the monumental problems our schools and colleges face in protecting the safety of our children. And we will remain forever sobered by the fact that nothing can ever completely protect us--or our children--from a madman intent on killing.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join the chorus of voices in commending the achievements of the Rutgers University women's basketball team and applauding the character and integrity of their student-athletes in the face of unmitigated outrage and public humiliation.

This is to thank these young women--and their coach--for the life lessons they taught all of us, both on and off the basketball court. Their stoic dignity and remarkable grace under tremendous pressure and embarrassment were nothing short of a central moment in our national life.

I may be the only one who didn't listen to Don Imus' radio show--I've never been a fan of talk radio, particularly talk radio that exists to exacerbate the pathology of hate speech among us that pointedly seeks to diminish our fellow citizens because of race or gender.

Many people find that funny. I don't . . . and submit that if something is truly funny, everybody laughs. When an audience sucks in their breath in horror, they are not amused.

Free speech? Of course it is, and anybody in this country can say anything they want to, anytime they wish, and they can be as hateful or mean as they choose to be. But, Imus' show went out over the public airwaves--owned by all of us--and was supported by advertisers at MSNBC and CBS. Free speech does not mean you can hurt people over the public airwaves, and it does not mean advertisers must continue to support that hateful speech. So let us not blur the issue on that.

The young ladies of the Rutgers women's basketball team overcame all the odds to get to the final game of the NCAA women's championship, and they came heartbreakingly close to winning the national championship. Their grace and extraordinary sportsmanship was first evident at that game and afterwards . . . then under the glare of the national spotlight as objects of Imus' cruel ridicule.

It is important to note here that it was the advertisers on Imus' show that showed the most backbone in pulling their ads, essentially saying: our consumers don't appreciate this, goodbye. Had they not pulled their ads, Imus would have completed the familiar cycle of apology and continued ridicule of women and minorities in the name of humor.

The advertisers could not help but be moved by the image of these student athletes calmly relating how the words that hurt so much affected them. Their quiet dignity moved this nation--and was the exact opposite image of a shock jock trying mightily to hold onto a job so he could continue to make fun of them and many other minorities.

I thank these young women--and the leadership of their coach--in teaching all of us a lesson in how this nation treats all our citizens, how we use the public airwaves, and the power of consumers with advertisers in winnowing out that which is hateful entertainment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the premiere component of today's forces, our Nation's Special Forces including soldiers, sailors and marines. These are the forces we turn to when we must do the impossible, do it quietly, and do it smartly. I am proud to commend them on their 20th year of service to this Nation.

Our Special Forces were born of necessity in the aftermath of the aborted military operation attempting to rescue American hostages held in Iran. Since that time, they have been the very tip of our spear; they are the first forces to go into the dangerous places, and it is upon their resilience and brilliance that rest our success or failure in the early going of any operation to which we have committed our military forces.

The past 25 years have seen a marked shift in the operational spectrum of threats, and Special Ops is our answer to unconventional warfare, counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, strategic reconnaissance, civil-military operations, psychological operations, humanitarian assistance and search and rescue.

Special Forces are so important to the current conflicts in which we are engaged, they are the lead combatant command, covering both wars.

Special Forces is populated with many individuals recognized for distinction and valor, including 48 Congressional Medals of Honor. While bombs and bullets are our blunt force, the Special Forces is our scalpel. They are forged in four common truths: Humans are more important than hardware; Special Forces cannot be mass-produced; quality is better than quantity; and capable Special Forces cannot be created after an emergency.

Today we honor that mindset, and thank these Special Forces for their leadership and bravery. We also honor their families, who offer them tremendous support while they are deployed.

Madam Speaker, Hispanic veterans represent our love of this nation . . . they represent the best of our community . . . and their service is a frequent path to greater opportunities for them and their families.

I am a veteran, inspired by another veteran who inspired so many of us: Dr. Hector P. Garcia who created the GI Forum, a powerful platform that represents Hispanic veterans who labor on the battlefield for our nation. Dr. Hector Garcia was a personal hero to me.

He served the nation on the battlefield . . . and he served us again by making people understand that a soldier is a soldier--that race makes no difference among Americans, particularly when they wear the uniform of the United States. If he were here today, he would have a great deal to say to PBS about the omission of Hispanics when putting together a special on WWII.

WWII was the moment in time when Hispanics found their place in U.S. society and found our voice in demanding equality among troops . . . and elsewhere in the American family. And it was Dr. Hector's audacious vision that began a decades-long march in advancing civil rights, voting rights and school desegregation for Hispanics in Texas and around the nation.

Here's how it all began . . . the family of Felix Longoria--a brave and fallen U.S. soldier from WWII--wanted his body buried at Three Rivers Cemetery in Three Rivers, Texas. Yet segregation's profound and evil roots ran deep in the heart of Texas then, reaching all the way into cemeteries, and Longoria's burial was refused; he was not white and could not be buried alongside those with whom he had fought in the war.

Dr. Hector laid bare the raw racism inherent in the U.S. after this nation fought a global war to protect democracy and our way of life, when even cemeteries were segregated. The fight to bury this war hero was successful and that effort begat the GI Forum, the very first Hispanic civil rights organization in this nation.

I was so pleased that--after the Hispanic Caucus engaged PBS in a serious conversation about the lack of inclusion of the story of Hispanics in the story of WWII--PBS understood the enormity of that decision. They will now include the extraordinary exploits of Hispanic warriors in the story of the last declared war our nation fought.

Yet, it was not only WWII in which Hispanic Americans were heroes in securing freedom; there were many examples of Hispanic war heroes throughout our history. Today we should also honor our forefathers who played a large part in making--and then keeping--the United States free and democratic; for as long as there has been a United States, Hispanics have played major roles in building our country and defending it.

From the American Revolution that freed the United States from England--to today's operation against al Qaeda--Hispanics proudly and bravely served the United States. When the Colonies on the East Coast of what is now the United States rebelled against England, Hispanics played a pivotal role.

As Governor of the Louisiana Territory, General Benardo de Galvez sent money, gunpowder, rifles and other supplies to General George Washington to aid in the revolution. He later served gallantly in the War for Independence by capturing both Mobile and Pensacola--at a pivotal point in the war.

Captain Jorge Farragut came to the United States to seek his fortune by fighting the British--first in the Revolution, then in the War of 1812--as part of the U.S. Navy.

Hispanics also raised special collections and taxes to aid the fight for independence. After the Revolution was won, Mexican pesos aided in the construction of St. Peter's Church in New York City to celebrate the end of the war. As in the Revolution, Hispanics served proudly in each war and conflict in which the United States participated.

In the course of that service, 38 Hispanics have been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, our country's highest award for military bravery and service.

In the Civil War, David Glasgow Farragut, son of Jorge Farragut, won fame as a Union hero by blockading Southern ports, destroying Rebel ships anchored in New Orleans, and by capturing Mobile for the Union.

His contributions prompted Congress to create the title of Rear Admiral to reward him as the first man to ever hold that rank. Farragut was commissioned Vice Admiral in 1864, then Admiral in 1866.

Federico Fermandez Cavada, a Lieutenant Colonel for the Union Army, fought bravely at Gettysburg. Rafael Chacon also served with the Union Army, and attained the rank of Major.

Santos Benavides--originally from Laredo--fought for the Confederacy. His rank of Colonel was the highest of any Mexican-American Army officer in the Civil War.

Major Manuel Antonio Chavez forced the Confederate Army to retreat down the Rio Grande, preventing the rebels from carrying out their plans to seize the gold mines of New Mexico and California.

Lieutenant Colonel Jose Francisco Chaves of the Union Army assisted in recapturing Albuquerque and Santa Fe.

One of the most interesting soldiers in the Confederacy was Loretta Janet Velazquez, who fought disguised as a man. Upon discovery and discharge, she continued her service as a Confederate spy.

In 1973, Lieutenant Colonel Mercedes Cubria retired from the Army-- she was the first Hispanic woman to achieve that rank. Hispanics served bravely for the cause of freedom and democracy in World War I, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam.

Around 500,000 Hispanics served the United States during World War II, and it is on the shoulders of these great men that the rest of us could see the future.

In the years to come, when the military service of Hispanics is viewed through the prism of history, there are certainly a number of young Hispanics whose service to this nation in this new war will distinguish themselves among great U.S. warriors in the 21st Century.

Mr. Chairman, today we begin the process of keeping our promise, our unique moral responsibility to the troops returning home to their families' arms.

Many of those warfighters are deeply wounded in body, mind and soul, and it is our responsibility to care for them, to treat their bodies and their minds.

I want to thank Chairman Skelton for his work in marking this bill with great speed, also the ranking member, Mr. Hunter, and the House leadership for moving this bipartisan bill so quickly.

This legislation provides more funding for caregivers at military hospitals along with training and oversight to guarantee that America's wounded troops will also receive committed quality care.

When we marked this bill in the Committee on Armed Services, I added an amendment which places a 1-year moratorium on all unannounced public-private competitions for work performed at medical facilities. It also requires a report from DOD on each competition still underway to allow Congress to understand the actual cost savings, and the effects of contracting on the quality of work and the workforce personnel before allowing the contracting to go forward.

Like many of my colleagues, I am a frequent visitor not only to Walter Reed, but to Bethesda as well. In the aftermath of the investigative series about the substandard services and housing at Walter Reed, it turns out that the mismanagement of the health care of our troops had much to do with a flawed contracting process.

This bill imposes a 1-year moratorium on future A-76 competitions at the Department of Defense for work at medical facilities. The problems we discovered with the contract at Walter Reed Army Medical Center are only the tip of the iceberg. At the moment Walter Reed should have been ramping up to care for the increased number of wounded warriors, they were single-sourcing a maintenance contract and watching some of their best talent walk out the door as they were caring for a large and growing number of patients.

In a September 2006 memo, the garrison commander admitted that he had difficulties in retaining and hiring skilled personnel.

This came about for several reasons: DOD wanted to contract out the maintenance work; the proposed firings of former workers; and, of course, BRAC.

We need to step back and review whether contracting is the right way to find cost savings and efficiencies for military medical facilities. And we must make certain that we have not sacrificed service or performance of the health care mission for our wounded fighters.

I urge my colleagues to pass this bill to reform the administrative process and restore the confidence in the integrity and efficiency of the disability evaluation system and begin a better transition of servicemembers to the Department of Veterans' Affairs programs.

Madam Speaker, the nation--and South Texas--lost a valuable patriot today with the passing of longtime Port Isabel municipal judge and community leader Eliseo B. Vega. Known affectionately as ``Cheo,'' Judge Vega died following a lengthy illness.

Judge Vega was an extraordinary caring and hardworking man. He was a familiar face in the Port Isabel area and was a political powerhouse. Despite his several setbacks due to illness, when most would think that he couldn't pull through, the man just kept going and wouldn't miss working. He was a man of great faith and loved life fully. He loved life so much he didn't want a sad funeral, so we will celebrate his life this week.

His life touched so many people. Judge Vega was best known for his role as judge in the municipal court system. His lengthy judicial career, beginning in 1971, spanned generations. He was what you wanted a judge to be: fair and even-handed. He understood people, he understood justice, and he stood at the intersection of both.

Prior to his legal and judicial career, the Judge was a banker and also served in a law

firm. He was the senior vice president of Merchants Marine Bank in Port Isabel for two decades, and as a public relations liaison for Linebarger Goggan Blair and Sampson, LLP Law Office . . . explaining the law long before he took the bench.

Judge Vega was also an educator. The Point Isabel Independent School (PIISD) District Junior High School complex bears his name to honor his role for his 33 years (1969-2001) as a PIISD school board trustee. He was also a trustee for the South Texas Independent School District since Feb. 2005.

He had also been inducted into the Rio Grande Valley Walk of Fame in February 2005 and the Point Isabel Independent School District Hall of Fame in 2002.

As a civic leader, Vega served as an officer or member of many economic, education, and public service organizations including: the Port Isabel/South Padre Island Chamber of Commerce, Port Isabel Urban Development Board, Texas Association of School Boards, National Association of School Boards, Salvation Army Service Unit, Port Isabel Jaycees, Port Isabel Volunteer Fire Department and the Port Isabel/ South Padre Island Lions Club. He was also a lifetime member of Our Lady Star of the Sea Catholic Church.

Judge Vega was married to Olga Medina Vega, who was his boss for 40 years, and the love of his life. The couple had six children and ten grandchildren. The children are: Joe Eliseo, Albert, Nelda, Armando, 0lgaisela, and Arlene.

Madam Speaker, Members of the House, I ask you to join me in expressing our condolences to Judge Vega's family--and the larger South Texas family--who lost a giant of a man in Judge Vega.

Mr. Chairman, a government of the people only works when transparency and accountability are the watchwords of the day. This is vital when it comes to contracting. Democracy suffers when our government spends taxpayer money on contracts that can include fraud, waste, and abuse.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in defense-related contracts that are single-sourced

and rarely overseen. Our troops don't have the equipment they need in the field; and taxpayers are losing billions in fraud and abuse in contracts.

The bill before us today ends waste in Federal contracting, by reducing the use of no-bid contracts, mandating disclosure of no-bid contracts and contract overcharges, and closing the revolving door between government procurement officials and private contractors. The wasted money would be far better used to improve readiness needs-- currently in deep crisis.

We have to reconstruct our military that has been decimated by the Iraq war. A good beginning to that long and difficult task is providing open competition in contracting in order to provide the best services for our military in both wars.

Congress has exposed a pattern of reckless spending, poor planning, and ineffective oversight in contracting that has resulted in the waste of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars in no-bid contracts for Halliburton and for contracts for Hurricane Katrina.

This legislation builds on the progress we are making to return to the basic principles of fiscal responsibility and to restore Congress's role as a check and balance to the Executive Branch, particularly on training and equipping of our troops, in order to make this government more accountable to the American people.

Specifically, the legislation would change Federal acquisition law to require agencies to limit the use of emergency no-bid contracts and to increase transparency and accountability in Federal contracting in an effort to protect the taxpayers' money. To restore accountability in the Federal contracting process, the bill would instruct agencies to minimize the use of no-bid contracts, promote the use of cost-effective fixed-price contracts, and limit the duration of no-bid contracts awarded in emergencies to one year.

It also promotes transparency by requiring public disclosure of the rationale for using no-bid contracts, and requiring agencies to report to Congress on overcharges in contracts. To improve the integrity in contracting, the bill closes the revolving door between government procurement officials and private contractors.

Spending on no-bid contracts has more than doubled under the Bush Administration with a 75 percent increase in spending on contracts that reward companies for every taxpayer dollar spent, not saved with more than $2.4 billion squandered on no-bid contracts for Halliburton in Iraq, with another or the other $23 billion for other abuse-prone contracts. That money lost to fraud and abuse would have gone a long way in equipping our troops in the field.

Mr. Chairman, our military readiness is in crisis in no small measure due to the waste, fraud and abuse that is inherent in how this government has awarded contracts in Iraq and elsewhere. I ask the House to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 584, a bill introduced by my friend Gene Green of Houston, which names the Department of Education Headquarters Building in Washington, DC, after President Lyndon B. Johnson.

President Johnson's legacy is vast and mostly underappreciated. He was a visionary in terms of groundbreaking social legislation that literally changed the way this country elected leaders, treated one another in the workplace, and educated our children.

President Johnson passed away over 30 years ago, and is survived by his First Lady, Lady Bird Johnson. Despite the groundbreaking work in education and so many other levels, no Federal buildings bear his name in the national Capital area.

In May 1964, Johnson called for a nationwide war against poverty and outlined a vast program of economic and social welfare legislation designed to create what he termed the Great Society. Central to his vision of a nation no longer hindered by poverty and hate was an education for every child, no matter what their economic status.

During his time in office, President Johnson passed over 60 education bills, including the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, the Higher Education Act of 1965, and created the Head Start Program. Taken together, these legislative feats form the basis of public education in the United States today.

President Johnson grew up in San Marcos, TX, seeing abject poverty all around him and seeing the power scheme that separated white children from Hispanic and African-American children. From his earliest days, he concluded the only true equalizing influence in our Nation was through an equal education for all Americans, no matter what their skin color or their economic status.

The Department of Education headquarters building on Maryland Avenue, SW., in Washington, DC, has no name on it today. Bearing the name of our 36th President would be a fitting tribute to the life and legislative accomplishments in education of the Johnson presidency.

While novel in his day, the Johnson administration's policy to place a national priority on education is supported by large majorities of both parties today, illustrating the long-term righteousness of Johnson's cause.

Truly, the only silver bullet to equalize people in this Nation is education. That was LBJ's vision, and perfecting that vision should be our duty in the 21st century.

I thank the gentleman from Texas for his work in bringing this bill to the floor today.

Madam Chairman, when overzealous employers opposed to union organizing can exert undue pressure on workers, the whole idea of workers having a say in their own future means nothing.

The Employee Free Choice Act supports working families by eliminating pressure from employers, who will no longer be able to demand a second election after a majority of workers have already voiced their will. This bipartisan legislation has 234 cosponsors and is supported by 69 percent of the American people . . . and it is long overdue.

Workers will retain their right to voice their will on union organizing, either through the standard methods of holding an election or turning in pledge cards. Employee Free Choice Act merely eliminates subsequent--or ``do-over''--elections forced by employers.

In addition to eliminating ``do-over'' elections, the bill also strengthens employer-union mediation and arbitration provisions, and it strengthens penalties for violations of the union organizing process. Workers must have the ability to make their union decisions without hostility directed towards them. Those that flout the law should be held accountable.

Despite several years of economic growth and high corporate profits, middle-class American families have actually lost ground--squeezed between stagnating incomes and rising costs for health care, education, and housing.

Giving workers a free choice to join together to bargain for better wages, benefits, and working conditions is a critical step to easing the squeeze and strengthening the middle class. The current system for forming unions is badly broken and undemocratic, with employers routinely intimidating, harassing, coercing--or even firing--workers who support a union.

Responsible employers already voluntarily recognize a union when a majority of workers sign up for one. It is time that all workers have this free and fair choice in selecting their representative, so they have a fighting chance to bargain for better wages, benefits and working conditions.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill--and I hope the Senate will follow us quickly--to put real teeth in the law by strengthening the penalties for discrimination against workers who favor a union.

Mr. Speaker, today we are here to pay tribute to the life of the late Governor of Texas, Dorothy Ann Willis Richards. And I want to thank Chairman Waxman, the majority leader, and my good friend, Danny Davis, for bringing this bill to the floor, and my colleagues for taking time from their busy schedule to do what we are doing today.

America and the State of Texas both suffered a great loss on September 13, 2006, when Ann Richards met our Maker after a brave struggle with cancer.

Growing up as the son of migrant workers in segregated South Texas, I was painfully aware of the power dynamics in place that placed those of privilege high above the working poor. Ann Richards sought to turn that tide around. During her service as Governor of Texas, she appointed more females and minorities than any Governor by far.

It was Ann's spunk and her dedication to the people of our beloved State, all the people, that earned her love and admiration of millions of Americans.

Following her philosophy of life in public service, ``well-behaved women rarely make history,'' Ann's charm and passion for life propelled her far in the history books.

A lifelong public servant, Ann began her career as a Texas school teacher. She later served in Austin as Travis County Commissioner and Texas State Treasurer prior to being elected State Governor in a historic campaign.

During her entire public service career, Ann remained a teacher, teaching Texans that the advantage of working together benefited the economy of our State. Even today she still teaches us.

Ann Richards is remembered today and always not only for her accomplishments, but also for the way she carried them out. Her disarming wit and wisdom won opponents time and time again. Her big as Texas hair, hearty laugh, piercing blue eyes, and smiling face are unforgettable. She was one of those people you just couldn't help but like, and today I am so happy that they gave us time to honor a great American, a great Governor, and a great friend, Ann Richards.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bipartisan resolution.

I could ask a question, were we ready to go to war? I don't think so.

I just want to put a little of the history of Iraq in context. And we probably remember these names, Specialist Edgar Hernandez, Specialist Joseph Hudson, Specialist Shoshana Johnson, PFC Jessica Lynch, PFC Patrick Miller and Sergeant James Riley. They were all members of the 507th Maintenance Company that went missing after an Iraqi ambush in Nasiriya on March 23, 2003.

They were a maintenance company. They weren't supposed to be in front of the infantry. And, of course, we understand this is war and there is a confusion.

They were taken prisoners. But this illustrates for us again that we were not ready for this war from the beginning. We went in with too few soldiers, who, by the way, were not greeted with flowers or parades. This administration went against the recommendations of the Chief of Staff of the Army, General

Shinseki, who said, you know what, we need no less than 250,000 troops to overwhelm the enemy. So what happened? We went in with less than that. What was the goal? To go straight to Baghdad. And we left the left flank, the right flank completely open. Not only that. With thousands of ammunition dumps all over the place in Iraq, you know what? They were ready for war. They were ready for us. But we were not ready for them. Because a lot of things went wrong in this war. The intelligence was flawed. It was wrong. And, my friends, I am saying this because we cannot afford to make a another mistake such as this.

I was just at a hearing about an hour ago, 2 hours ago, and let me read to you what the Chief of Staff of the Army, Schoomaker, said just a few moments ago. He said, ``After years of insufficient investment in the Army, many of our units were underequipped and not ready for deployment, especially in our Reserve units. To meet combatant commanders' immediate wartime needs, we pulled equipment from across the force to equip those soldiers deploying into harm's way, a practice that we are continuing today to meet current operational needs.''

My friends, we are at war. We support our soldiers. The men and women in uniform are in dangerous places around the world to do their duty on behalf of all of us, military, civilian, Republicans, Democrats, and independents.

This resolution is very simple: Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and Congress disapproves of the decision of the President of the United States, George W. Bush, who announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.

Now, it is going to take more than 21,000 soldiers. You have got to send support troops. So I think sometimes I wonder whether if we could just pause or take time off so that we could regroup or correct the mistakes. But you can't do that when you are in the middle of two wars.

This is a different mission, and we ask our soldiers to do the best that they can, and then we say that we need for the Iraqis to stand up so we can stand down. My friends, if we cannot even equip our military, how can we expect to equip the Iraqis so that they can stand up?

Madam Speaker, due to my attendance at a memorial service in my district, I was unable to cast the following rollcall votes. Had I been present, I would have voted as indicated below.

Rollcall No. 74: ``yea''.

Rollcall No. 75: ``yea''.

Mr. Speaker, today is a day when being in the majority is about paying for the very long list of mistakes from the last (Republican) Congress that simply refused to pay the bills.

Well, this Congress will not proceed down that road. Before we can begin the regular funding process, we have to pay the bills the last Congress ran up, then did not pay. That's where we are today. And it is a position none of us are happy about.

There is a long list of items that should be in this CR that would have benefited the people in my south Texas Congressional district, but since the previous Congress could not be bothered to pay the bills, we will have to begin again to put these in our appropriations bills this year.

Among the many items that will now go unfunded is an improvement to help speed up repair of helicopters coming home from and going back to Iraq and Afghanistan at the Corpus Christi Army Depot.

The items that this CR is not funding are not the wasteful spending that characterized the last several Congresses. The items we are cutting here are important national priorities for the health, education and well being of our children and the less fortunate among us, as well as defense priorities for the Nation.

Just this morning, I chaired my first Readiness Subcommittee hearing--a joint hearing with Tactical Air and Land Subcommittee--where we heard time and time again about how much more help the depots needed to repair the equipment our soldiers in the field need so very much.

Not including the funding for helicopter repair at CCAD is part of the price we--as a nation--are paying for the disregard the previous Congress showed for the readiness of our troops, and for the disposition of the job Congress is elected to do.

Mr. Speaker, it is enormously fitting that we honor our much-loved colleague by naming a post office after him. Lane Evans epitomizes all that Members of Congress should be: smart, dedicated to the founding principles of our Constitution, a tough-as-nails fighter, a veteran, and a deeply kind man.

He represented Illinois' 17th District with excellence and vigor. Lane took care of his constituents as though they were family . . . and he commanded great respect among those for whom he toiled in Congress.

A former Marine, Lane served with distinction; then served his country in Congress with that same dedication, integrity, and humility. His service experience largely shaped his career and legacy in Congress.

His tireless efforts on behalf of our Nation's veterans led to a successful fight for compensation of veterans exposed to Agent Orange early in his Congressional career. As Ranking Member of the Veterans Affairs Committee, Lane expanded benefits for women veterans, pushed for additional medical care for veterans suffering from PTSD, supported veterans' outpatient clinics, and crafted legislation to attend to homeless veterans.

Lane knew the bottom line for his neighbors in Illinois was an economy that rewarded their effort, so he worked hard to promote economic growth and equal access in rural communities. He was a giant on the House Armed Services Committee and brought new jobs to the Rock Island Arsenal.

Understanding both the national security implications and the resource for Illinois farmers, Lane advocated ethanol-producing resources in his district and championed increased development and use of ethanol and biofuels in Illinois.

Not only does Lane inspire all of us who are familiar with his service, but his courageous and brave battle with Parkinson's disease have inspired all of us, plus the millions of Parkinson's sufferers around the nation. Lane is precisely the type of public servant that we all strive to be.

In his work in Congress, in his love and work for the people of the 17th district, and for our nations' veterans, Lane embodied the Marine motto, Semper Fidelis (``Always Faithful'').

Mr. Speaker, I love Lane like a brother, and I'm proud to support this bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located in Rock Island, Illinois, as the ``Lane Evans Post Office Building.''