Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss Social Security and the current efforts to fundamentally change the nature of this important retirement security and collective insurance program. I want to focus specifically on the impact of these efforts with respect to younger workers.

For years, my generation has been told that Social Security would not be there for us when we reach retirement age. We have been told that we are fools to count on expected Social Security benefits when planning for our own retirement; and lately we have been told that if we divert a portion of our contributions into private accounts it will somehow shore up Social Security's balance sheet while improving the return on our investment.

But those claims simply are not supported by the facts.

Make no mistake, the Social Security program faces some challenges over the next 50 to 75 years. There are a number of proposals currently being developed to try to address these problems while encouraging private savings. And I am committed to working in a bipartisan manner to support smart targeted solutions that are fiscally sound; that do not require slashing of scheduled benefits; and that do not add to the Federal deficit. But I have serious concerns with any proposal, including that of the administration, to privatize or establish personal accounts within Social Security.

First, such proposals require substantial mandatory benefit cuts to retirees; and, second, they require massive amounts of borrowing to finance the transition costs, a fiscally irresponsible plan at a time of record deficits. Despite claims to the contrary, these benefit cuts will be particularly significant to younger Americans.

The Social Security System's own actuaries estimate that the average 48-year-old will see his or her benefits reduced by 10 percent if the privatization plan is implemented. The average 18-year-old can expect a 33 percent, and by some estimates a 40 percent, reduction in benefits by the time they retire in 2052 with this risky privatization plan. The average 28-year-old will see his or her benefits reduced by 26 percent.

As a member of our Nation's younger generation of workers, I know we can do better, and I know that my generation and younger generations will not be duped into believing that Social Security faces a crisis, especially as the details of privatization plans and the structuring of proposed private accounts are made clearer.

Rather than slashing the benefits of those who are at the beginning of their careers, we should empower them to take control of their retirement security in order to enhance private savings and give them the tools to manage their financial futures with confidence and certainty. Rather than add trillions to a growing national debt, a debt

increasingly owned by foreign countries, we should act in a way that is fiscally responsible. And at a time when it is harder to qualify for pension benefits, Congress should undertake meaningful pension reform rather than continuing to weaken the three-legged stool of a solid and well-rounded retirement plan.

Mr. Speaker, Congress needs to take the long-term difficulties facing Social Security seriously, but we must be fair and comprehensive about our solutions. It is irresponsible to characterize Social Security's fiscal situation as one of imminent collapse. In order to make good decisions about the future of the program, we must engage in an honest debate about the longer-term problems facing Social Security, and that includes a real and accurate accounting of the cost of privatization as we debate the budget over the upcoming months.

The data on the proposals to privatize Social Security show that private accounts do little to improve the financial health of the program. Indeed, the massive transition cost, an estimated $1.4 trillion over the first 10 years and another $3.5 trillion over the following decade, will hasten the date of Social Security's insolvency.

Importantly, even without changes, without any changes, Social Security will be able to pay full benefits for nearly 40 years, according to the more conservative estimates of Social Security's own actuaries. After that, Social Security will continue to pay 75 to 85 percent of scheduled benefits. So, clearly, younger workers and future generations are not going to be inheriting a Social Security System that is bankrupt.

I share the concern of many independent commentators that efforts to fix Social Security through privatization will ultimately do more harm than good. What we need is a broader debate about real retirement security. If we approach that debate with an open mind and the resolve to strengthen Social Security as well as enhance opportunities for private savings, we can ensure that generations of Americans can look forward to spending the best years of their lives without worrying about how to pay for their basic needs. Americans of all ages deserve nothing less.

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee--and on behalf of thousands of veterans in South Dakota--I rise this evening with serious concerns about what the President's budget means for our nation's veterans.

As Congressman Strickland and other of my colleagues have expressed, fulfilling the government's obligations to our veterans is a moral issue that reflects our national character. At a time in our nation's history when we are asking young men and women for tremendous service and sacrifice, we must send a clear message to them and their families that veterans' health care is considered an ongoing cost of national security during times of both war and peace. That consideration should be reflected in the President's budget, but it is not. With a new generation of veterans coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan, now is the time we should be proving that a promise made is a promise kept. At a time of tight budgets, it all comes down to priorities, and the needs of our country's veterans should be at the top of the priority list, not at the bottom.

I am concerned about what the President's budget means for the men and women who have fought to protect our individual and collective freedoms and what the budget means for the dedicated doctors, nurses and other personnel in VA medical centers and clinics across the country who strive to provide quality health care to our veterans. The plans to assess annual enrollment fees for certain veterans who desire to access care from the VA and to increase co-pays for veterans' prescription medications are unacceptable.

Our veterans deserve better than this budget, and that is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of Ranking Member Lane

Evans' Assured Funding bill. We should take veterans' health care funding out of annual budget fights as a top priority for our nation.

This weekend, as I return to South Dakota, it will be my honor to take part in a homecoming ceremony for the 147th Artillery unit from the northeast part of the state. As I meet these brave men and women, I will thank them for their service and exchange handshakes and hugs with them and their family members. Every member of Congress should be able to tell the troops when they return, with certainty, that our government will live up to its obligations in recognition of their service to the country. It is the right thing to do. And we will continue to fight for those who have served.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision Act of 2005.

South Dakota's Wind Cave National Park was one of our nation's first national parks and is one of the jewels in our national park system. President Theodore Roosevelt signed the legislation creating Wind Cave National Park on January 9, 1903. With that act, Wind Cave became the first cave in the world to be designated as a national park.

The cave itself, after which the park is named, is one of the world's oldest, longest and most complex cave systems, with more than 114 miles of mapped tunnels. To this day, cave enthusiasts continue to explore the cave and map new passages. In fact, Wind Cave has very recently become recognized as the fifth-longest cave in the world. It is well known for its exceptional display of boxwork, a rare, honeycomb-shaped formation that protrudes from the cave's ceilings and walls.

While the cave is the focal point of the park, the land above the cave is equally impressive, with more than 28,000 acres of grasslands, forests, and streams. The park is one of the few remaining mixed-grass prairie ecosystems in the country, and is a National Game Preserve that provides a home for abundant wildlife such as bison, deer, elk and birds.

The Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision Act will help expand the park by approximately 20 percent in the southern ``keyhole'' region. The current landowners are willing sellers that would like to see it protected from development and preserved for future generations. The land is a natural extension of the park, and boasts the mixed-grass prairie and ponderosa pine forests, including a dramatic river canyon. The addition of this land will enhance recreation for hikers who come for the solitude of the park's back country. It will also protect archaeological sites, such as a dramatic buffalo jump, over which early Native Americans once drove the bison they hunted.

This plan to expand the park has strong support in the surrounding community. Most South Dakotans recognize the value in expanding the park, not only to encourage additional tourism in the Black Hills, but to permanently protect these extraordinary lands for future generations of Americans to enjoy.

Governor Michael Rounds has expressed his support for the park expansion and both Senators in South Dakota's delegation, Tim Johnson and John Thune, are introducing companion legislation in the Senate to expand the park boundaries.

I believe that this expansion can be achieved without a reduction in the acreage accessible to the public for hunting, and without a loss of tax revenue to county governments. Also, I would look to the National Parks Service to tackle issues like chronic wasting disease and deal with them effectively. These are reasonable concerns that should be met as this process moves forward.

Wind Cave National Park has been a valued American treasure for more than 100 years. We have an opportunity with this legislation to expand the park and enhance its value to the public so that visitors will enjoy it forever. It is my hope that my colleagues will support this expansion of the park and pass this legislation in the near future. .

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with my colleague, Representative Barbara Cubin of Wyoming, to introduce a piece of legislation that we believe is vitally important for the ranchers of our states and for consumers across the country.

On December 29, 2004, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced regulations that would enable certain countries, including Canada, to qualify as ``minimal-risk regions'' for the disease bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE. Thus, on March 7, 2005, Canadian cattle will again be allowed into the United States after a 19-month moratorium on those animals due to a BSE outbreak in that country. Since the announcement of that rule, the government of Canada has discovered and confirmed two additional cases of BSE in that country's cattle herd. Despite this fact, USDA has not announced an intention to reexamine the rule or to postpone the date that it will open our borders to Canadian cattle.

Language to require country-of-origin labeling (COOL) for certain meat and perishable agricultural products was included in the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, also known as the 2002 Farm Bill. Under that law, this provision was set to become operational on September 30, 2004. Unfortunately, Congress has postponed the implementation date for COOL until September 30, 2006. Even more distressing, opponents of COOL have begun an effort to replace the mandatory COOL program with a voluntary one.

Mandatory COOL is important policy for several reasons. First, it would distinguish American meat products from those that are being imported into this country. This would enable American ranchers and pork producers and others to promote domestically produced meat products that rancher in my state believe are superior to meat and live animals produced in other countries.

Secondly, it will give American consumers information that they have repeatedly stated they want about the origin of the meat that they buy at the grocery store. American consumers know where virtually all of their consumer goods are manufactured, but not something as important as the food that they provide for their families. They want this information and they should have access to it.

Providing consumers with access to country-of-origin information becomes particularly important in light of our Department of Agriculture's intention open the border to animals from a country that has recently found multiple cases of BSE.

This bill would prevent USDA from opening the Canadian border to cattle imports until after a mandatory COOL program is up and running. Consumers want this information, and producers will benefit from having this information available. It is good policy and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to honor the life of PFC Gunnar Becker who died January 13, 2005 while serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Every Member of the House of Representatives has taken a solemn oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. While we certainly understand the gravity of the issues facing this legislative body, PFC Gunnar Becker lived that commitment to our country. Today, we remember and honor his noble service to the United States and the ultimate sacrifice he has paid with his life to defend our freedoms and foster liberty for others.

Gunnar, who had been serving in Iraq since February 14, 2004, was part of the 1st Infantry Division of the U.S. Army. He is described as hardworking, full of energy, and funny. Family and friends say he was doing what he wanted to do in life--giving back to the country that gave him so much.

The lives of countless people were enormously enhanced by Gunnar's compassion and service. Gunnar, who represented the best of the United States, South Dakota, and the Army continues to inspire all those who knew him and many who did not. Our Nation and the State of South Dakota are far better places because of his service, and the best way to honor him is to emulate his devotion to our country.

I join with all South Dakotans in expressing my sympathies to the family of PFC Gunnar Becker. His commitment to and sacrifice for our Nation will never be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Tribal Parity Act today. This bill would fully compensate the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe and the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe in South Dakota for the lands that they lost in the last century as a result of the federal government's construction of the massive dams on the main stem of the Missouri River.

The 1944 Flood Control Act cost these tribes much in terms of lost land. It also took an enormous toll on the people of both tribes and their economies. It is critically important that we seek to fully reimburse these tribes for the lands they lost.

The Lower Brule Sioux Tribe and the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe are both constituent bands of the Great Sioux Nation. Both border on the Missouri River in central South Dakota and are connected by the Big Bend Dam.

Congress created a trust fund for the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe in 1996, and a separate trust fund for the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe in 1997. These trust funds sought to compensate the tribes for the value of their land that is now permanently inundated as a result of the construction of the Big Bend Dam. Unfortunately, the formula that the General Accounting Office used to calculate amount of compensation for both tribes was substantially different than the formulas that it has used to calculate damages for many other similarly situated tribes. The result was unfair and inadequate compensation trust funds for these tribes.

Parity for these tribes would mean an ability to actively work for the betterment of their communities. It would mean adequate roads and improved community facilities. It would mean better health care and newer schools. It would mean attracting commercial business and improving the local economy. Most importantly, it would mean a real chance for these tribes to provide future generations with the tools that so many of us take for granted.

I would ask all of my distinguished colleagues to support the Tribal Parity Act and work with me to enact legislation that would fairly and appropriately compensate members of the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes. I ask you to do it because of the tremendous positive difference it would make in the lives of those affected--and because it is the right and fair thing to do.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to honor the life of PFC Sheldon Hawk Eagle of Eagle Butte, SD. Private First Class Hawk Eagle was killed November 15, 2003 while serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom. On November 20, 2004, friends and family in Eagle Butte will pay tribute to Sheldon and recognize the one year anniversary of his death with a memorial dinner and walk in his honor.

Private First Class Hawk Eagle graduated from the Cheyenne Eagle Butte High School, in Eagle Butte, SD, in May of 2001. He enlisted in the U.S. Army in 2002, and graduated basic training from Ft. Sill, OK, later that same year. In 2003 Sheldon became Air Assault qualified and was assigned to the 101st Airborne Air Assault Division. He was deployed to Iraq in March, 2003.

Sheldon, whose Lakota name is Wanbli Ohitika, or Brave Eagle, is a descendant of the Lakota leader Crazy Horse, who helped defeat LTC George Custer at the Battle of Little Big Horn. Sheldon joined the Army while visiting his sister in North Dakota and dreamed of becoming an elite Army Ranger. While both humble and quiet, Sheldon's sacrifice speaks loudly about his character.

The lives of countless people were enormously enhanced by Sheldon's compassion and service. Sheldon, who represented the best of the United States, South Dakota, and the Lakota people, continues to inspire all those who knew him. Our Nation and South Dakota are far better places because of his life, and the best way to honor him is to emulate his commitment to our country.

I join with all South Dakotans in expressing my sympathies to the family of Private First Class Hawk Eagle. His commitment and sacrifice to our Nation will never be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the veterans bills being considered today and to thank and congratulate my colleagues, especially the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Smith), the gentleman from Illinois (Ranking Member Evans), the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown) and the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud) and their staff for their hard work and commitment to these important bills. I want to commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez), my colleague and friend, as well for his distinguished service on the Committee on Veterans Affairs.

I express my strong support today for the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act which includes two measures I introduced earlier this year to extend important veterans programs scheduled to expire.

The first of these measures is a provision to extend to 2010 the Veterans Administration's Native American Home Loan pilot program. This program directs home loans to eligible Native American veterans who wish to purchase, construct or improve a home on tribal trust lands. This extension will allow more veterans living on tribal trust lands to take advantage of this important benefit over the next 6 years.

Since the inception of this pilot program in 1992, the Department of Veterans Affairs has made more than 400 direct loans to Native American veterans, including loans to 17 veterans from my State of South Dakota. These loans are important tools for helping Native Americans purchase, construct or improve homes in Indian country.

The second measure which I introduced extends to 2009 the requirement that the Advisory Committee on Former Prisoners of War submit biennial reports to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on the programs and activities of the Department of Veterans Affairs that pertain to former prisoners of war.

The Advisory Committee on Former Prisoners of War reviews Department policies and makes suggestions to improve compensation, rehabilitation programs and health care benefits for former POWs. Passage of the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act would require reports from the Advisory Committee on former POWs every 2 years through 2009, a 5-year extension of current law.

Thanks again to my fellow members of the Committee on Veterans Affairs and all staff for their work on these important bills. At a time in our Nation's history when we are asking men and women in our Armed Forces for greater sacrifices, we must make sure we provide the services promised to our veterans. I look forward to supporting these measures and continuing to work with my colleagues to ensure they receive the benefits they have earned and deserve.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening in opposition to this proposed rule. I begin by saying that I fully support the emergency spending that is contained in H.R. 5212. The people of Florida and throughout the Southeast deserve the assistance contained in that bill. The reason for my strong opposition to the rule is simple. It does not treat all disasters equally, and thereby it does not treat all deserving Americans equally.

The recent hurricanes are catastrophic weather events. They certainly do constitute emergencies, and the losses sustained should be compensated as such. However, droughts are catastrophic weather events as well, as my distinguished colleague from Nebraska pointed out. The only difference being, they are not as visually striking. They ease in gradually over the course of weeks and months and even years. They do not have names. They do not rip roofs off the buildings. They do not make good TV and, therefore, breaking-news coverage. None of the major news networks has sent reporters to Faith, South Dakota, to cover the ongoing drought.

But that does not make drought any less devastating both financially and emotionally for the people that are affected. I oppose the Neugebauer amendment to this rule because it helps suffering farmers by raiding farm programs, programs that may not be favored by some but programs that as negotiated in 2002 are an important part of our national farm policy. The Neugebauer amendment would rob Peter to pay Paul, and I oppose it.

This rule should be rejected so that we can offer a fair amendment to the legislation, the proposal by my distinguished colleague from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) that enjoys bipartisan support. I have cosponsored this legislation because I believe that it takes the correct approach, the fair approach. It would treat all weather-related disasters equally. I urge my colleagues to defeat this rule and to support the Stenholm alternative.

Beyond these prepared comments, I must say that those in South Dakota whose livelihoods depend in large measure on the weather, that are involved in farming and ranching, are sick and tired of politics being played with this important issue. They deserve better. They deserve equal treatment. They deserve emergency disaster assistance.

Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce the Oglala Sioux Tribe Angostura Irrigation Project Rehabilitation and Development Act. This legislation authorizes much-needed efficiency improvements to the irrigation facilities at the Angostura Unit, a Federal Bureau of Reclamation dam on the Cheyenne River in South Dakota. These improvements will restore critical water resources and promote economic development on the nearby Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.

This bill provides important resources to the citizens of South Dakota and the Lakota people of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. It

authorizes funds to carry out the Bureau of Reclamation's recommended improvements to the irrigation facilities at the Angostura dam. The dam provides substantial economic benefits to many South Dakotans. It provides irrigation to 12,218 acres of land which benefits ranchers and agricultural producers in the area, and it supports an important recreational boating and fishing industry which is enjoyed by many of our citizens.

Until now, however, the Angostura dam has failed to provide any of these economic benefits to the members of the Oglala Sioux Tribe who live just 20 miles downstream of the dam on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. The Oglala Sioux Tribe has long relied on the resources provided by the Cheyenne River, which forms part of the northern boundary of its reservation. Long before the dam was constructed as part of the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Project, the Tribe relied on the river as an important economic resource. Since it was completed, however, the dam has taken an enormous toll on the Tribe. The dam curbed the Cheyenne River's natural flow, reducing water quality on the Reservation, diminishing natural riparian habitats, adversely impacting fish and wildlife and forcing important Tribal agricultural enterprises to shut their doors.

The bill implements the Bureau of Reclamation's preferred alternative in its revised water management plan for the Angostura Unit, which calls for improved efficiencies in irrigation operations that will free up additional water resources for both existing water users and the Tribe. In addition, the legislation would authorize the creation of a trust fund to compensate the Tribe for the devastating economic impacts and loss of natural resources caused by the operation of the dam. The fund will be used to promote economic and infrastructure development on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and enhance the education, health and general welfare of the Oglala Lakota people.

The bill is a companion to S. 1996, which was introduced by Senator Daschle on December 9, 2003 and is co-sponsored by Senators Johnson and Inouye. S. 1996 was recently reported favorably to the Senate by the Committee on Indian Affairs.

I hope that my distinguished colleagues will take up and pass this legislation quickly. It will allow all of us in South Dakota to better use our natural resources, while keeping our solemn commitment to deal fairly and honorably with the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the Lakota people of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. I ask for your help and support in moving it forward.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the emergency supplemental appropriation that will provide financial relief to the residents of Florida that have suffered from the devastation of Hurricanes Charley and Frances. Tragically, this disaster has cost several lives. It also has cost the State of Florida billions of dollars and threatened the livelihood of countless Floridians. I am pleased to voice my support for this legislation.

I am particularly pleased to support this bill because of my perspective as a South Dakotan. We have never suffered a hurricane in my home State--it is one of the many blessings of living in South Dakota. We do, however, suffer from our own brand of weather-related disaster that can be just as economically devastating as a hurricane and be spread over an even wider geographic area. This weather phenomenon is known as a drought.

Over the past several years, many counties in my home State have suffered from severe drought. In fact, the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture has declared 30 counties as drought disaster areas this year alone. Right now, USDA estimates that more than 53 percent of my State is either short--or critically short--of topsoil moisture.

Droughts have ramifications across the entire economic spectrum and social fabric of the State. South Dakota is extremely reliant on the ability of our farmers and ranchers to harvest the bounty of the land and turn that into a profit. Without rain, grass does not grow and watering holes go dry. This forces ranchers to liquidate assets--their cattle herds. Without rain, corn, wheat, and other grains do not grow and farmers have no crop to market at the end of the year.

A successful harvest turns into new clothes, college tuition, home improvements, and farm equipment. The profit that farmers and ranchers receive from the land circulates up and down the main streets of South Dakota's small towns. It pays the mortgages and salaries of thousands of small merchants and service providers. A drought can devastate an economy in exactly the same way that a hurricane can.

I urge my colleagues to support the well-deserved relief that this bill will provide for the victims of these hurricanes. It is the right thing to do. In doing so however, I also request that, if you hear about those suffering quietly from the effects of a drought, you are aware of how devastating this can be and will support relief for this type of weather disaster as well.

Mr. Chairman, yesterday the House of Representatives narrowly defeated an amendment to the fiscal year 2005 Commerce, Justice and State Appropriations bill that would have increased funding for the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program by $106 million.

I voted in favor of this amendment because I believe it is critical to restore cuts that this bill makes to the COPS program. COPS has been a critical part of our nation's effort to put more police officers on the streets in order to reduce crime and improve homeland security. Given the increased security needs our country faces, there is no question that the COPS program is needed now more than ever.

This was a difficult vote because funding to pay for this amendment was taken from the Census Bureau, which is charged with the important responsibility of counting the American population. I fully support the mission of the Census Bureau. It is particularly important to ensure that the Bureau has the resources it needs to count hard-to-find populations, including Native Americans in South Dakota. Because of inadequate housing and high levels of poverty, Native Americans are traditionally undercounted by the Census. This means that they often do not receive their fair share of federal resources desperately needed to provide jobs, health care and education.

It is important to note that this bill provides the Census Bureau with a $149 million increase in funding over last year's level. The amendment would have shifted $106 million of these funds to the COPS program, thus restoring COPS to last year's level of funding while still providing the Census Bureau with an overall increase in funding. I felt that this approach was fair, and that it would improve homeland security and public safety while still ensuring that the Census can carry out its mission.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3980, the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Act of 2004. In an average year, more than 1,000 tornadoes are reported in the United States. With winds that can reach in excess of 200 miles per hour, these storms cause an average of more than 80 deaths and over 1,500 injuries per year.

In South Dakota, we have our fair share of severe weather. In the summer months, this takes the form of violent thunderstorms that often contain powerful winds. In fact, barely 1 year ago, South Dakota experienced the worst tornado outbreak in its recorded history. June 24, 2003, will be forever known in South Dakota as ``Tornado Tuesday.'' In one 24-hour period, we had a confirmed 67 tornadoes touch down in the State.

This ``superstorm'' produced over 350 weather warnings, and at least one tornado reached F-4 status, meaning it had winds reaching over 260 miles per hour. Miraculously, no one lost his or her life on this day, but at other times we have not been so lucky.

On May 30, 1998, a category F-4 tornado pummeled the small community of Spencer, South Dakota. The town of 400 residents was almost totally destroyed and six people lost their lives.

We have also experienced loss on my State's Indian lands. On June 4, 1999, a deadly tornado swept across the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. One person was killed and the property damage was widespread. More than 1,000 people were left temporarily homeless.

Because the people of South Dakota have seen firsthand the devastation that tornadoes and strong straight-line winds can bring, I am proud to support this legislation. It would create incentives for Federal agencies to work together to address the threats caused by wind damage. It would also improve our understanding of windstorms and how they create such intense devastation.

I believe that we need a proactive approach that will mitigate the damage caused by these remarkable natural events. This bill will save lives, result in decreased property damage and reduce the overall cost of Federal disaster relief.

I appreciate the bipartisan efforts of my colleagues, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer) in moving this important legislation forward, and I urge all Members of this House to support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of H.R. 4345, which will provide an increase in the home loan amount for veterans. As a new Member of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I am pleased to speak in support of this bipartisan measure.

As has been mentioned, H.R. 4345 would increase the amount of the VA loan guarantee to 25 percent of the Freddie Mac loan amount for a single-family home, and automatically increase the amount whenever the Freddie Mac amount was changed. This has the effect of matching the VA loan guarantee to that of Freddie Mac. As importantly, the bill generates savings of $288 million over 10 years.

This bill will impact veterans in South Dakota and around the country. Some areas, such as San Diego, have much higher real estate prices. However, I believe our veterans, no matter where they choose to live, should have an equal opportunity to obtain a home loan from the Department of Veterans Affairs. This bill will provide that opportunity.

As the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud) noted, this bill contains provisions identical to those included in section 301 of H.R. 1716, which I have proudly cosponsored. While I am new to the Congress, I recognize the need to provide for the costs associated with improved benefits for veterans. The $288 million in savings from this bill would free up the resources for Congress to pay for many of the provisions in H.R. 1716, which will benefit the 76,000 veterans in South Dakota and millions of United States veterans who have served in wartime and in peacetime.

I would like to thank our chairman, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for welcoming me to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs as well as for their work on this bill. I look forward to working with them and others to provide for our Nation's veterans.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today as a member of the Resources Committee, and South Dakota's lone Representative in this body, to commend my friend Mr. Rahall for his efforts to protect places sacred to Native Americans.

During the course of the debate on this bill, we've heard a lot of talk about striking a balance between protecting the environment and allowing for smart development. Those balances are often tough to strike. I hope we can all agree, however, that burial sites for all people should be treated with respect.

South Dakota is home to thousands of Native Americans, and I share their deep desire to protect sites important to their heritage. This amendment does that.

Because this amendment is specific to the Interior bill, it is my understanding that it will not affect the operation of the Missouri River dams. It is important to all South Dakotans, including our tribal communities, that

the United States Army Corps of Engineers operate the dams in a way that protects Native American remains and sacred sites, and continues to provide affordable electricity, reliable drinking water supplies, and recreational opportunities to all South Dakotans.

Again, I thank Mr. Rahall for offering this important amendment and I look forward to serving with him on the Resources Committee to continue to find ways to protect sacred sites.