Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Khojaly massacre by Armenian armed forces on February 25-26, 1992 in the town of Khojaly in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. Khojaly, now under the occupation of Armenian armed forces, was the site of the largest killing of ethnic Azerbaijani civilians in the course of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict.

Khojaly, once the home to 7,000 people, was completely destroyed. Six hundred thirteen people were killed, of which 106 were women, 83 were children and 56 were purported to have been killed with extreme cruelty and torture. In addition, 1,275 people were taken hostage, 150 went missing and 487 people became disabled. Also in the records maintained, 76 of the victims were teenagers, 8 families were wiped out and 25 children lost both of their parents while 130 lost one of their parents. According to Human Rights Watch and other international observers, the Armenian armed forces were reportedly aided by the Russian 366th Motor Rifle Regiment.

At the time, Newsweek magazine reported: ``Azerbaijan was a charnel house again last week: a place of mourning refugees and dozens of mangled corpses dragged to a makeshift morgue behind the mosque. They were ordinary Azerbaijani men, women and children of Khojaly, a small village in war-torn Nagorno-Karabakh overrun by Armenian forces on 25- 26 February. Many were killed at close range while trying to flee; some had their faces mutilated, others were scalped.''

As part of the Khojaly population that tried to escape, they encountered violent ambushes that led to abuses, torture, mutilation and death. The Russian organization, Memorial, stated that 200 Azerbaijani corpses were brought from Khojaly to Agdam within four days.

Time magazine published the following description: ``While the details are argued, this much is plain: something grim and unconscionable happened in the Azerbaijani town of Khojaly 2 weeks ago. So far, some 200 dead Azerbaijanis, many of them mutilated, have been transported out of the town tucked inside the Armenian-dominated enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh for burial in neighboring Azerbaijan. The total number of deaths--the Azerbaijanis claim 1,324 civilians have been slaughtered, most of them women and children--is unknown.''

The extent of the cruelty of this massacre against women, children and the elderly was unfathomable. This anniversary reminds us of the need to redouble efforts to help resolve the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. The United States as a Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group should continue to stay engaged in the resolution of this protracted conflict.

Mr. Speaker, Azerbaijan is a strong ally of the United States in a strategically important and complex region of the world. I ask my colleagues to join me and our Azerbaijani friends in commemorating the tragedy that occurred in the town of Khojaly.

I thank the gentleman from Michigan, Ranking Member Conyers.

Madam Speaker, this is a very important bill, and I appreciate the efforts put in it by Ms. Slaughter and Mr. Walz, who have championed this for over many, many, many years, and I appreciate the Republicans for coming in with a bipartisan effort.

The bill has, indeed, been improved by the Senate; and it was improved through the honest services statute that was added to it, which our committee debated and passed, I believe, in good fashion. I don't know if it was unanimous or not, but that was one of the most important aspects, in my opinion, of this bill.

There are public officials throughout this country who have abused their position of trust, and using their position for personal gain has hurt all of government. The honest services statute used to be a vehicle by which U.S. attorneys could go after them. The Supreme Court ruled that there was a defect in that law. That has been corrected in this bill, which means we have more effective ways to clean up folks who are using public service for their own benefit, and are able to restore public trust in public officials, from the courthouse to Congress. Further, it makes clear that nobody can use their inside information here to be making money in the stock market or in other places, all of which destroys the public trust which we hold.

This Congress is so, so, so, so much better than the ratings the public gives it. Some of it is because of a few bad apples, and some of it is because of a misunderstanding about what we do. This bill will go a long way toward cleaning up Congress and local officials and the appearance of impropriety, which is as important as impropriety. We need to be like Caesar's wife, beyond reproach, and this bill will do a lot towards it.

I take my hat off, again, to Ms. Slaughter, the champion of this bill, and Mr. Walz, who have done so much. And I am proud to be one of the original nine.

Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Madam Speaker, may I have unanimous consent to ask one brief question that's pertinent to this bill?

Yes, please. For 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, what the public saw today in the House of Representatives was a STOCK Act sold short. Unfortunately, what could have been an outstanding bill was changed by the Republican leadership by taking the two most important aspects put in the Senate bill out. One was a public corruption provision that would have allowed prosecutors to prosecute, from the courthouse to the Capitol, public corruption. This was something Senator Leahy had, and in the House it was Representative Sensenbrenner, a Republican, passed unanimously by the Judiciary Committee. But for some reason unbeknownst to me, it was stripped by the leadership of the Republican side out of the bill. Democrats didn't have an opportunity to participate in the drafting of the bill, and what was the work of Louise Slaughter and Tim Walz was hijacked from them.

Another important provision was the political intelligence provision. It was taken out by K Street lobbyists working with the leadership-- late. That should not have been taken out.

The two best parts of the STOCK Act were sold short, and the American public should have had better today. We passed something, but not what we should have done.

Mr. Speaker, Wednesday, the 1st of February, begins Black History Month; and on that day I introduced a proposal to have a Congressional Gold Medal issued to civil rights workers--not to each one individually, but collectively.

Black History Month celebrates the history of African Americans in our Nation, and a Gold Medal for civil rights workers is so appropriate because the people who fought for civil rights had to fight their own government to get the rights that were embedded in the Constitution for others, which specifically said that they were three-fifths people and that slavery should exist in this country, and the Jim Crow laws that were passed and approved by this Congress and by the State legislatures continued that for another hundred years.

So the people like John Lewis and Robert Filner, who serve in this House, the people who engaged in the sit-ins and the marches, that challenged our system and showed it to be wrong and forced it to change itself, not just Dr. King but the Julian Bonds and the farmers and the Ennises and the Belafontes, they deserve recognition. They should be recognized by this Congress for what they did because they took a wrong in America and they righted it, and they continued to serve and make this country greater for all people based on the principles of the United States Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, which don't really fulfill their destinies without the efforts of the civil rights workers who've made the work of Jefferson and our Founding Fathers true.

Mr. Speaker, last night was the State of the Union, but it was also the State of the American family, for family values were much on display like I have never seen before in this room. We had the President of the United States and his beautiful wife, Michelle, who have a beautiful family

and certainly exhibited family values. And we had Gabby Giffords and her marvelous husband, Mark Kelly, who have shown family values. Two couples in America that are beautiful and have shown what vows mean and what for better or worse mean. They know a marriage is forever.

They also are great Americans who want to bring this country together. And the President properly said our country is great. We're doing better. We have improved since the Bush years in so many areas and are putting our country on a course toward economic employment, preservation of the middle class, shared responsibility, and fairness.

I urge everybody, in the spirit of family values that the President and Representative Giffords and their families exhibit, to join together as an American family and move this country forward and keep America number one.

Madam Speaker, this weekend a movie opened in America that is really unlike any other movie. It is a significant movie because it is about a group of gentleman who won the Congressional Gold Medal, the Tuskegee Airmen. They were the first black airmen in the United States military history.

It's part of black history; but beyond black history, it's American history. Because as I watched the movie yesterday in Memphis, in a largely African American crowd, I realized this was a story about America's progress and fulfilling its promise and about the problems we've had and have had to overcome.

The Tuskegee Airmen were men that wanted to fight for their country in World War II, but they weren't allowed to because of segregationist policies that we had at the time. The military wasn't integrated, and they didn't think African Americans were capable of serving as pilots and weren't allowed to do so. They had an experimental group set up in Tuskegee, Alabama, the Tuskegee Institute, to train black Army personnel who wanted to be pilots. They succeeded, and they formed the Tuskegee Airmen. They had many obstacles, but they beat the odds and they succeeded. They rose to the challenge. They dispelled myths that African Americans weren't courageous enough, weren't skilled enough, weren't smart enough.

On Friday, at the request of the family, I spoke at the funeral of Lieutenant Colonel Luke Weathers, Jr. Lieutenant Colonel Weathers was from Memphis originally and died in Tucson, Arizona, at age 90. He was one of the first Tuskegee Airmen. He was buried on Friday at Arlington National Cemetery with full military honors, family present, seven horses--six drawing the carriage and the riderless horse--a military flyover, 21-gun salute passed, an American hero being laid to rest in hallowed ground, sacred ground, Arlington National Cemetery.

Lieutenant Colonel Weathers not only had to fight the Germans and fight for his country, he had to fight his country to be accepted and benefit in the basic rights that we all take for granted. To learn about Lieutenant Colonel Weathers and the Tuskegee Airmen is inspiring. And during Black History Month, we will reflect and we celebrate other struggles and accomplishments of many African Americans in our history, African Americans who came here in about 1620 as slaves and didn't get freedom from slavery until 1865, and then didn't get real freedom until Jim Crow laws were overturned in the 1960s. The vestiges of slavery and Jim Crow still live with us. Those who overcame those obstacles and broke down barriers were heroes and need to be recognized in the middle of month of February.

At one time, they said African Americans couldn't play baseball, and Jackie Robinson showed them wrong. They said African Americans couldn't be quarterbacks, and Doug Williams and others showed them wrong. They couldn't be coaches. Bill Russell took the Celtics to championships, and Tony Dungy in 2007 won a Super Bowl championship. They couldn't be pitchers and certainly couldn't play tennis. Well, Arthur Ashe showed them wrong. In golf, there is nobody in the world better than Tiger Woods.

And, you know, it's amazing that in this day and time, there are still barriers to be broken. At one time, people thought that an African American couldn't be President of the United States, wouldn't be capable of such. Well, we know that's wrong; but, unfortunately, there are still people in this country who think that the President can't be their President because of his race. Some even refer to him as a ``food stamp President.'' We know that code is wrong. I would ask anybody who thinks that way or has those thoughts to know that they are backwards thinking, just like the people were in the 1940s who said that black people couldn't participate in our military and couldn't fly for our country and that the Red Tails couldn't shoot down the Germans and protect our bombers, as they did. Those days are past.

I would ask everybody to see the movie, remember the Tuskegee Airmen, realize how far our country has

come, and get beyond any bigotry that we have in ourselves. This is a Nation of tolerance and diversity, and we must celebrate it. I encourage everybody to learn about black history and the Tuskegee Airmen, our great vehicle.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of John T. Fisher II, an unsung hero of the Civil Rights Movement. John T. was born on February 10, 1934 and became a community leader who spent his life working on racial equality in Memphis, Tennessee and around the world.

John T. Fisher II earned his Bachelor of Science in Commerce from the University of Virginia. Afterwards he entered into Officer training with the U.S. Marine Corps. After serving two years as a Marine in Okinawa, Japan, he returned to Memphis and assumed the presidency of the John T. Fisher Motor Company which was founded by his grandfather in 1907 and was one of the original Chrysler franchises in the country. By 1968, John T. operated a highly successful car dealership and once sold a car to Elvis Presley. Even so, he risked his reputation by being one of the few white businessmen to support the sanitation strike that brought Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to Memphis. In the days after the assassination of Dr. King, John T. did not hesitate in trying to bring the Memphis community together. Working with clergy members and professionals of all races, he invited all members of the community, regardless of race, to join in a peace rally called ``Memphis Cares,'' which 6,000 people attended.

Mr. Fisher's ethical and religious convictions took him to work with the Council of World Churches in Geneva, Switzerland where he worked with the Faith and Society Committee and the Finance Committee. His task was to lead the divestment of all World Council financial holdings in South African companies that supported apartheid. This work moved him across Europe where he attended seminars and coordinated meetings with the World Council and eventually was asked to be a delegate to the 5th Assembly of World Council of Churches in Nairobi, Kenya in 1975.

In 2001, at age 67, John T. accepted a post at the Regional Medical Center at Memphis as Vice President for Development where he oversaw the MED Foundation. During his time there, he was credited with raising millions of dollars for the MED and was influential in building The Rehabilitation Hospital of Memphis (RHM). Today, RHM delivers comprehensive acute care, inpatient rehabilitation and outpatient treatment. RHM is a complement to the Elvis Presley Memorial Trauma Center, the Firefighters Regional Burn Center and serves the same five- state region in which the MED serves.

John T. Fisher II remained deeply committed to the community. He served as Chapter's Warden and Bishop's Warden at St. Mary's Episcopal Cathedral, Chairman of the Board of Trustees and Board of Advisors at St. Mary's Episcopal School, and on the boards of the Memphis Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Memphis Arts Council, the Better Business Bureau, the Committee of Southern Churchmen, the Center for Urban Ministry, and the Wake Forest University Divinity School Board of Visitors. In addition to these responsibilities, he was a founding director of the Metropolitan Inter-Faith Association (MIFA). Today MIFA continues to unite the Memphis community and address the challenges of poverty by engaging the community to sustain the independence of seniors, transform the lives of families in crisis, and equip teens for success.

John T. will be remembered for his many contributions and accomplishments. Those who knew him best will also remember him for his collection of ``words to live by,'' which he kept in his wallet to reference at any time and any place. Some of his favorite quotes were ``Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood,'' ``. . . Leadership is the willingness to state an opinion, the motivation to commit to a project, and the ability to make difficult choices . . .'' and ``quality is never an accident; it is always the result of intelligent effort.'' He used these quotes to reflect upon vision, leadership and quality, all of which embodied his lifelong work.

John T. Fisher II passed away on Friday, December 30, 2011, at 77 years of age. He is survived by his wife, Jean Carter Fisher, his three children: Jean Kelley Fisher, Suzannah Fisher Ragen, and John T. Fisher III, five grandchildren, his sister, Billie Fisher Carr Houghton and close mentor, Lewis Donelson of Memphis.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the many accomplishments and contributions of John T. Fisher II. His was a life well-lived.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the life and legacy of former Memphis State men's basketball coach and President of Hoops, L.P., Gene Bartow. Coach Bartow was born on August 8, 1930 in the tiny town of Browning, Missouri. Mr. Bartow graduated from Browning High School in 1948 and Northeast Missouri State College in 1952. After serving in the U.S. Army for two years, Mr. Bartow earned his master's degree from Washington University in St. Louis and did additional graduate work at the University of Southern California.

Mr. Bartow began his coaching career at the high school-level before moving first to Central Missouri State University and later to Valparaiso University. In 1970, the Memphis State Tigers, who had posted a dismal 3 and 45 conference record since joining the highly regarded Missouri Valley Conference in 1967, hired Mr. Bartow as their head coach. The Tigers went 18-8 in Bartow's first season as head coach and made the National Invitational Tournament, NIT, the following year. Despite never having won an National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA, tournament game, the Tigers reached the NCAA Championship Game in 1973, playing valiantly but ultimately falling to the John Wooden- coached and Bill Walton-led UCLA Bruins. That same year Bartow was voted NCAA Coach of the Year by his peers.

Coach Bartow left Memphis State in 1974 to coach the Fighting Illini at the University of Illinois for one season before succeeding the revered John Wooden at UCLA in 1976. After amassing a 52-9 record and leading the UCLA Bruins to the Final Four all in just two seasons, he left for the University of Alabama at Birmingham, who had offered him complete control in building an athletic program as athletic director and head basketball coach. At the time, UAB had no teams in any sport. In just its second year of existence, Coach Bartow's UAB team made the NIT tournament; they followed it up with seven consecutive NCAA tournament appearances. Birmingham Southern athletic director Joe Dean, Jr. stated, ``Coach Bartow started an entire Division 1 athletic program from scratch, and by his fourth year he had the basketball program in the Elite Eight of the NCAA Tournament. No other school in the history of college athletics has done anything like that in such a short period of time.'' It is no wonder that he was dubbed ``The Father of UAB Athletics.''

Coach Bartow's storied 36-year coaching career produced 647 wins and 353 losses, and only two losing seasons. He was elected to 10 different Halls of Fame, including the National Collegiate Basketball Hall of Fame, and he will be inducted into the Tennessee Sports Hall of Fame in May. UAB renamed its basketball arena the Bartow Arena in 1997.

Gene Bartow was loved and revered by many for his contributions to the city of Memphis. University of Memphis basketball coach Josh Pastner commented, ``The best description I can give of Coach Bartow is he was as nice a human being and as good a human being as you'll find.'' George Lapides, former sports editor of the defunct Memphis Press-Scimitar and a longtime friend of Bartow, observed, ``When you consider what a gentleman Gene was, in addition to what he did for this city in the early '70s when this city was so racially divided after the assassination of [Dr.] Martin Luther King, Jr., he might be the top sports figure in Memphis history.'' His contribution to cancer research will continue, for each year the University of Memphis and UAB play the Gene Bartow Classic, which donates 2 dollars for every ticket sold to the Coach Gene Bartow Fund for Cancer Research.

I will remember Gene Bartow as a class act, a gentleman and one of the finest people to ever grace our city. Mr. Barlow passed away on January 3, 2012 at 81 years of age. He is survived by his wife of 59 years, Ruth, daughter, Beth B. Long, sons Mark and Murry, brother, Russell and eight grandchildren. Beloved throughout the basketball world, Mr. Bartow is perhaps best remembered for his class, humility, integrity, and genuine love not just for his players but for every person he met. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the life, contributions, and legacy of Gene Bartow. His was a life well-lived.

We've witnessed a shell game played here on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Republicans talked about having voted for an extension of the unemployment compensation and for extending the payroll tax, but what they gave with the right hand they took from the left. They said, We give you this, but we cut your benefits to 59 weeks of your unemployment compensation.

They all voted against the Affordable Care Act. So in this bill as well, if you have a preexisting condition, they want you not to get health care as you can today. If you're 26 years of age or younger, it would be that you can't get on your parents' insurance policies, which you can today because of the ACA. Also, the doughnut hole would be closed, which it is because of the ACA, but they're against that because they wanted to cut funds to put the America Cares Act into operation.

The fact is that Senate Republicans and Democrats didn't vote for a 60-day extension. They voted for time to get together and do a 1-year extension. That's what we need. They had wiser heads. You saw a good reason not to have term limits. First-year Members are acting as if they know everything; and in a petulant way, they have jeopardized millions of Americans.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very sad day for the American people. There was an opportunity with the Democrats in the Senate and the Republicans in the Senate. Eighty-nine of them, including my senior Senator, Lamar Alexander, Senator Heller, a former colleague, a classmate in this class, Senator Lugar, Senators Collins, Snowe, and others came together. They said, We need to protect the American people, protect the opportunity to see doctors when you're on Medicare, get unemployment insurance and keep the tax breaks. They came together and said, Let's do it for 60 days. We can come back later and then we can work on it for the rest of the year. They knew what was possible within the time allotted to it.

Unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side don't realize what time makes available. There is no possibility of the Senate coming back and having a conference committee. They are saying ``Bah, humbug'' to the compromise and the bipartisanship that we saw in the Senate.

It's an unfortunate day for the American people, and I'm sorry for my folks who will not be able to get doctors to treat them, unemployment compensation, or a tax break.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Judge H.T. Lockard, born Hosea T. Lockard on June 24, 1920. Judge Lockard was a civil rights leader, hero and pioneer who fought alongside giants to bring racial equality to Memphis, Tennessee and the surrounding area. He grew up on a small farm near Henning, Tennessee before deciding to attend LeMoyne College in Memphis in 1940.

Prior to completing his studies at LeMoyne College, Mr. Lockard chose to postpone his education to serve his country in the Army Medical Corps during World War II which included three and half years in North Africa, Italy, France and Germany. After his discharge in 1945, he continued his studies at Sorbonne University in Paris before returning to LeMoyne where he attained his bachelor's degree in 1947. After finishing at LeMoyne, H.T. Lockard was not allowed to attend a Tennessee law school due to segregation. Undeterred by challenges he faced in Tennessee, he pursued his Juris Doctorate by attending Lincoln University Law School in St. Louis, Missouri where he graduated in 1950. While in law school, H.T. Lockard observed that conditions for African-Americans in St. Louis were far better than those in Tennessee. After much debate, he made the tough decision to move back to Memphis where he began practicing law and working with the National Association of the Advancement of Colored People, NAACP, to improve race relations in Memphis.

Mr. Lockard once recalled how at a NAACP meeting, the topics of police brutality and segregation in public facilities were like music to his ears. He said, ``. . . Good music, because that's what I wanted to get involved in and help bring about the change . . . I was ready to roll up my sleeves and go and ready to tackle anything that needed to be tackled.'' In 1955, he assumed the presidency of the Memphis Branch of the NAACP and served in that position until 1958. H.T. Lockard headed up their legal committee and contributed to national efforts. During this time, H.T. Lockard was joined by Russell Sugarmon, Vasco and Maxine Smith, Jesse Turner, Billy Kyles and the late Benjamin Hooks and A.W. Willis. Together, these stalwarts of the civil rights movement fought for and won many victories including desegregating Memphis Street Railway Co., public buildings, restaurants and the University of Memphis, formerly Memphis State University.

H.T. Lockard broke significant barriers and paved the way for future African-American politicians in Memphis. In 1964, Mr. Lockard became the first African-American to hold elective office in Shelby County by being elected to the Shelby County Quarterly Court, now known as the County Commission. He then became active in local African-American political clubs and played a key role behind the scenes as an advisor on civil rights issues to President Lyndon B. Johnson. H.T. Lockard was appointed to serve as Administrative Assistant to Tennessee Governor Buford Ellington from 1967-1971 thereby becoming the first African- American cabinet member in the State of Tennessee. In 1975, H.T. Lockard became a Criminal Court judge and served until 1994.

Judge Lockard later served as a board member of the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis from 1989-1999. He gave much of his time to the Memphis Charter Commission, a non-partisan group that reviewed the city Charter and made recommendations for changes to be presented to the citizens of Memphis through voter referendums. Mr. Lockard was awarded the Benjamin L. Hooks Award by the Memphis Bar Foundation in 2010 in recognition of his lifelong commitment to social justice and his prominence on the national stage.

Some of his closest colleagues and friends recounted his dedication to the civil rights movement while he was a lawyer and president of the NAACP. The late Vasco Smith, a former Shelby County Commissioner, said ``. . . Lockard was pretty much the whole show. He did an outstanding job, and he probably laid the foundation for a lot of things that happened later on.'' His wife, Maxine Smith, a former executive secretary of the Memphis Branch of the NAACP described him as the inner circle of the civil rights movement in Memphis. Former General Sessions Court Judge Russell Sugarmon commented on H.T. Lockard saying ``When he put his mind to something, he was a plow. He dug in and dug in and wouldn't let up . . . If Lockard was on the other side, you'd better be prepared.''

Judge Lockard was an exceptional judge, leader and gentleman. I had the pleasure of meeting him in 1970 when he and I supported Senator Stan Snodgrass for Tennessee governor. In addition to the legacy he leaves behind, I will remember Judge Lockard for his service to the community and his dedication to the bench. As an admirer of classic cars, I will also remember his convertible Thunderbird.

Judge Hosea T. ``H.T.'' Lockard passed away on December 12, 2011 at 91 years of age. He leaves to memory his wife of 49 years, Ida Walker Lockard; three brothers, Emmitt Lockard, Albert Lockard Jr. and Lorenza Lockard; and one sister, Lydia Morgan. Mr. Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in honoring the life of Judge H.T. Lockard. Judge H.T. Lockard will be remembered by many. His was a life well lived.

Mr. Speaker, I awoke this morning to unfortunate news. A friend of mine and one of the world's most brilliant writers and intellects, Christopher Hitchens, passed away yesterday.

Christopher Hitchens was a brilliant man who was a writer and a provocateur. You may not have disagreed with him, you may not have agreed with him, but I think everybody knew that Christopher Hitchens was well-versed on the subject on which he spoke and could express it in a way unlike any other. I don't think there was a more erudite, knowledgeable individual on the face of this Earth.

He has left us.

To me, he was a good friend. He made my visit to Washington here easier. To his friends, he was loyal, gracious, and fun. To his foes, he was a feared enemy, a feared foe.

The world was lucky for his being here, and I was lucky for my life intersecting with his. The world shall miss him, a life well lived.

Rest in peace, my friend.

Madam Speaker, today is the 220th anniversary of the passage of the Bill of Rights. It was declared Bill of Rights Day by Franklin Roosevelt back in the forties and it's an anniversary that's too often overlooked.

Ken Paulsen, the President of the First Amendment Center in Nashville, Tennessee, at Vanderbilt University's campus and the American Society of News Editors, recently wrote that the Bill of Rights is ``a document that guarantees core personal liberties, including freedom of expression and faith, a fair judicial process, the right to bear arms, and protection against unreasonable government seizures . . . yet almost no one takes time to reflect on the importance of December 15th and the anniversary of these fundamental freedoms,'' and particularly what they really are. That's why I wanted to come to the well today and spend a few minutes reflecting on this amazing document and the freedoms that we derive from it.

It's easy to take our Bill of Rights for granted. Of course we have the right to speak our minds. We don't live in fear that the police will break down our doors without exigent circumstances or a warrant. It would be ridiculous to imagine a church of America to which we all must belong and to which we must worship according to its dictates; but you only need to look across the globe to the Arab Spring and elsewhere to see millions of people protesting and risking their lives just to have a taste of the freedoms we take for granted, and you realize how fortunate we are.

When the Constitution was ratified, there were very few individual rights guaranteed. It was mostly about setting up the structure of government. But Thomas Jefferson and others argued that the Bill of Rights was necessary to protect individuals from their government. Think about how wise the Founders were to ensure that the very government they were establishing would not encroach on certain fundamental liberties of the people. As Jefferson wrote in letter to James Madison, ``a bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on Earth.''

Since Jefferson was not part of that Constitutional Convention, James Madison took up the task of drafting a bill of rights. After much debate and compromise, 10 amendments were approved and added to the Constitution. Right at the very beginning, we find the bedrock of the Bill of Rights, the great five freedoms of the First Amendment: religion, freedom of speech, press, to peacefully assemble, and petition of government. Those are the most basic freedoms we have, but they're not always without controversy.

From the so-called ``War on Christmas'' to government-led prayer in school, we continue to debate what the free exercise of religion and the establishment clause meant. And that is not new.

Thomas Jefferson found himself deep in the war over religious liberty as well. In response to attacks that he was insufficiently religious, he wrote in a letter to Benjamin Rush, ``For I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.'' He went on to explain in his famous letter to the Danbury Baptists that there is ``a wall of separation between church and State'' since ``religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God.''

But that does not put the issue to rest. We continue to wrestle with these issues today. But the Bill of Rights, particularly the First Amendment, is what enables us to work our differences out peacefully through the democratic process.

We have the right to speak our mind without fear that the government will stifle dissent. We have the ability to hold our government accountable with a vibrant free press because an informed citizenry is what keeps democracy strong. And we have the right to protest when we're dissatisfied with our government.

Whether it's actions by the Tea Party or the Occupy movements, the people are exercising their right to assemble and petition their government for redress of grievances. As elected officials, it's up to us to consider their causes while also protecting their rights.

I remember back in 1993 when I was a Tennessee State senator, in one week I stood on the legislative plaza and I defended the Second Amendment urging the passage of Tennessee's right to carry bill, and the next week I was on the plaza supporting a woman's right to choose, which comes through the

Ninth Amendment. No two people of either of those rallies were the same; they were indeed very different. But what they were advocating was both in the Bill of Rights, and both supported such and the Bill of Rights supported them.

I have devoted much of my career to fighting for fairness in our criminal justice system. It's the Bill of Rights that builds fundamental fairness into that system, particularly the Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments. It guarantees that we'll have a reasonable bail, a fair chance to prove our innocence, have a lawyer, be able to question witnesses, and, if convicted, we won't be subject to torture or other cruel and unusual punishments.

The Bill of Rights embodies the core values of this Nation: freedom, fairness, justice, and equality.

We need to remember, though, that we have not always upheld those values. For example, the Fifth Amendment guarantees that we won't be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. But many of the same people who drafted the Bill of Rights and the Constitution owned slaves, treated them as property, and gave them no rights whatsoever. It took almost 100 years to abolish slavery and almost another 100 years to get beyond the Jim Crow laws that continued such.

We must honor the Bill of Rights and respect it for what it has done and recognize it today.

I thank Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and others who gave us the Bill of Rights; and I swore upon the altar of God, eternal hostility toward all forms of tyranny over the mind of man.

We must always strive toward that ``more perfect union'' discussed in the preamble of the Constitution.

That's why we should be thankful for the organizations that fight each day to defend the Bill of Rights and our freedoms.

You may not always agree with them, but groups like the ACLU, People for the American Way, and the Freedom Forum, are on the front lines defending our rights, even when it means taking unpopular positions.

Every day, we're touched by the Bill of Rights, but too often we fail to recognize its importance.

I hope my colleagues, and all Americans, will take time today to think about the Bill of Rights and how lucky we are to live in a country that guarantees us the liberty and freedoms enshrined in that document.

Over the last 3 years, much progress has been made in an effort to recover from the economic fallout, the Great Recession that the President inherited from the previous administration. More needs to be done to stabilize our economy and create jobs for the millions of Americans still out of work.

That progress may get derailed this week if the Republican majority refuses to extend tax cuts for 160 million Americans and unemployment benefits for 1.3 million Americans.

You'd think congressional Republicans who routinely label Democrat as the ``party of taxes,'' which is something Oliver Wendell Holmes said was the price we pay for civilization, that's what taxes are, would eagerly support tax cuts for 160 million Americans; but they don't. I'm buffed.

But you listen to the other side, they've got all kinds of reasons. They've got extensions. They've got all kinds of riders. The bottom line is it's a political fight to defeat the President of the United States. It's been their agenda since he was elected.

Every day my Republican colleagues come to the House floor to call for lower taxes, particularly for the millionaires. They call them the job creators. Yet, when the time comes to support a Democratic payroll tax proposal that lowers taxes and creates jobs, Republican support is not found.

Under the Democratic proposal, a family making $50,000 a year and struggling would save $1,500 next year.

But this tax cut does more than put money in the pockets of more than 160 million hardworking Americans and ensure they won't see a tax increase. It also creates jobs. Mark Zandi, the previous Republican Presidential candidate John McCain's economic adviser, said that expanding the payroll tax cut for employees would create 750,000 jobs. Conversely, he said the failure to do so would cost a million jobs.

But, apparently, tax breaks for those people, 160 million Americans, and creation of those jobs is not enough for my colleagues on the Republican side. They need more enticement to support a payroll cut.

So what's the red meat that gets them to do this?

They have to break their pledge. They made a pledge to America. They said they wouldn't put extraneous legislation together with other legislation to pass a mass bill. It would circumvent the will of the people. They promised to advance major legislation one issue at a time, but Republicans violated this pledge this time by stuffing anti- environmental riders into a must-pass payroll tax bill.

While cutting taxes for 160 million Americans seems like something Republicans would unequivocally support, the GOP leadership felt they had to violate that pledge and cram divisive riders into the bill to get support from people who want to put a potentially dangerous line in environmentally sensitive areas of pipeline that has shown repeatedly a failure to be done in an appropriate way, something that has been said would be a carbon bomb being set off and the end of the global warming fight. It would end the game.

Despite their claims that the riders would create jobs and stimulate the economy, reality doesn't align with those arguments. The reality is they would destroy our economy, our environment, and the lives of thousands of Americans.

The Boiler MACT provision in the bill would delay air toxin rules for at least 3\1/2\ years. That would result in 28,350 premature deaths, 17,000 heart attacks, nearly 19,000 hospital and emergency room visits, more than 1.2 million days of missed work, and 150,000 cases of asthma attacks.

The health benefits of these regulations are estimated to save up to $67 billion and save all of those lives. It's astonishing the Republicans would consider delaying a public health rule that

would prevent 8,000 premature deaths a year and save up to $67 billion, the sweetener that was needed to try to get these tax breaks for 160 million Americans.

I urge my colleagues to see the folly of their ways and pull these harmful riders out of the bill, to stop their effort to just defeat President Obama, and do what's right for the American public--to create jobs and to help people on unemployment, which will stimulate our economy.

In their Pledge to America, they describe what they called ``circumventing the will of the American people.'' That's what they're doing today. The will of the American people is not to have deaths and injuries, health and environmental policies destroyed, but to create jobs and to help people through this difficult recession.

I would ask that we defeat this bill, come back, work together, and do what's right for the American people.

I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for the time. I also want to thank the gentleman from Texas, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, for the way he runs his committee. He is an outstanding chairman and a gentleman.

And I appreciate the fact that in this bill, on which the gentleman from Virginia has given much of the argument that I, otherwise, would have made about its failings, that Mr. Smith did accept an amendment to take the possession charges out of it. So possession of drugs is not in it, and that was an improvement.

But, nevertheless, one of the amendments that we did discuss in committee that still bothers me is that the activities could have been entirely legal in the country where they took place. Amsterdam or Holland--Holland is the country which I was thinking of--the Netherlands. And we discussed it in committee. Mr. Scott mentioned medical marijuana being legal in Canada as well as in Israel. But a lot of drugs are legal and transactions in Holland. And if two Americans talked on the phone about going to Holland and buying some marijuana and maybe trading it with somebody else in Holland where it would be legal, it would be a violation of the law in the United States based on this particular statute. And that's what's called an overly broad law, when it captures conduct that it really isn't intended to do.

I don't think--and I hope that the people who voted for this didn't intend for it to criminalize speech when the actions in the country where the act took place were legal. I hope they wouldn't have been thinking that. And on the Judiciary Committee, in particular, we should be very, very circumscribed in what we pass because we're taking people's liberty from them. And ``liberty'' is one of the words inscribed up here, I think, in front of the panel. It is one of the things America holds so dear.

This Thursday, we are going to be celebrating the 220th passage of the Bill of Rights. And the Bill of Rights gives people the freedom of speech and

quite a few freedoms from government oppression and government activities.

To suggest that this is a loophole, I think, is a mistake. I think it was not intended by this Congress to criminalize behavior, particularly behavior that was legal in the country where it took place.

In the situation that the gentleman from Texas describes, where some people got together in Miami to discuss drugs from Colombia that were flown from Venezuela to France and purchased in the Netherlands, Italy, and elsewhere, I don't think that they were in Miami because they thought that was a loophole. I think they were in Miami because they liked Miami. And why wouldn't you? Miami is a great place. They weren't there because it was a loophole. They just happened to be there. And I don't think anybody foresaw that as being illegal conduct. They could have discussed that in Paris or in Caracas or anywhere else. They didn't facilitate the crime, per se. What they did was illegal in all those different countries, and they could have been prosecuted there.

I would submit to you, also, that this Nation and this world almost came to its knees because of derivatives and financial instruments created here in the United States, created here--not just talked about on Wall Street. But it had a global effect because those derivatives affected banks in Europe and all around the world. And as we almost came to our knees because of the criminal activities of people making lots of money with greed, Gekko greed, other people around the world suffered as well economically. But we're not rushing here to criminalize talks between people in Washington and Wall Street and people in Paris about derivatives, about subprime loans, about ways to make money at the expense of poor people and possibly bring the world to its knees economically; that, we're not discussing. But we are discussing the possibility of putting people in jail for going to Amsterdam and talking about buying some marijuana.

Something smells foul, and that's why I oppose the bill.