Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, our Nation is suffering. While many citizens are living paycheck to paycheck, energy prices have been rising, affecting the daily lives of Americans, getting to their jobs, getting children to school, and causing the cost of goods to increase significantly due to rising transportation costs. Rising energy costs affect individuals, families, and businesses, both large and small.

We must gain control of energy prices, and must do so in a reasonable and rational manner, with an eye toward the future and a plan which accomplishes energy independence while respecting our environment and providing real relief to individuals, not promoting yet another program that benefits Big Oil, at the expense of the taxpayer.

There are very real differences between Democrats and Republicans when we talk about energy issues. We are in the mess we are in now because the interests of Big Oil have, for far too long, been given priority over the needs of our citizens. Big Oil has reaped the rewards. Even now, while Americans struggle for ways they can reduce their individual energy consumption, ways they can survive while the price of gasoline, home energy costs, groceries, indeed almost everything has outstripped their income, the Republicans are touting a plan that, according to yesterday's and today's New York Times editorials, would do little to increase the supply or reduce the price of oil.

The New York Times editorial: ``It would do little to increase the supply or reduce the price of oil. Oil companies already have access to nearly 80 percent of all American offshore oil that is technically recoverable. This bill would probably open up less than half of the remaining 20 percent, amounting to approximately two-thirds of 1 percent of all globally recoverable sources. The Department of Energy has already stated that the effect on prices would be insignificant.''

The very party which has led us down this path of dependence on Big Oil, that has repeatedly squelched innovation and interest in renewable resources and alternative forms of energy, now wishes to save us with the simple mantra: Drill, baby, drill.

According to another New York Times op-ed published yesterday, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and from currently restricted offshore sites could translate into an extra million barrels of oil a day in the year 2025. That is 17 years from now, Madam Speaker. Please note that. An extra million barrels in 2008 or 2009? No. 2025.

Sure, it takes time to make real change. But 17 years from now we can expect the Republican fix to result in lowering the price of crude by only 1.3 percent. So the party of Bush and Cheney, the party of Big Oil, the party that Texas gave us, is going to fix the situation they have created just 17 years from now, and with a 1.3 percent cut. In the meantime, Big Oil's profits will continue to rise.

The Republican record on energy programs which have helped Americans is poor indeed. Let's look at the facts and decide if we need another Republican energy plan.

According to the Energy Information Administration, the price of gas is now $3.65, up from $1.46 when President Bush took office. A 150 percent increase. The price of gas was $2.29 when Republicans adopted their energy plan. Today, it's a 59 percent increase. $3.65.

Republican energy policies have resulted in record profits for oil companies. The five largest companies have posted profits of $556 billion from 2001 to 2007, including $123 billion in 2007 alone. Yet, Republicans have voted against nearly every energy initiative brought to the House floor.

Madam Speaker, I submit to you we must do everything we can, and examine every option in our efforts to help American citizens and to change our energy culture. Yes, we must look at drilling, but we need to be responsible in our approach and ensure that we are making decisions that actually achieve our goals, and our goals must be to help the taxpayers, not the oil corporations.

We must look at alternative forms of energy, we must look at renewable energy, we must look at every aspect of energy consumption before we act. There are real differences here, and I hope Congress will do the heavy lifting and make the difficult choices necessary to do what is right for the American people.

It's long past the time for rhetoric. It's time to tackle this real challenge and come up with real solutions, not short-term fixes, which will lead the American public, once again, footing the bill for Big Oil.

Madam Speaker, today the New York Times had another editorial. The New York Times' independent observations:

``Voters are furious at high gas prices. Republicans are happily pandering at their anger. Congress has sensibly renewed the moratorium each year for the last 26. Unfortunately, these are not sensible times, which means that congressional Democrats, particularly House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, must try hard to make the best of a bad situation. The situation, briefly, is this: The Republicans have been bludgeoning the Democrats with the claim that Democrat opposition to offshore drilling is to blame for high fuel prices and that drilling is the answer, or one answer, to the country's dependence on foreign oil. We find it hard to imagine that they really believe what they say. Drilling will have no impact on fuel prices for at least 15 years, if then, and any number of efficiency measures will do more to reduce the country's dependence than drilling for America's modest offshore reserves. But the chant of drill, baby, drill, is playing far too well. Ms. Pelosi's compromise deserves support.''

Mr. Speaker, last month, the City of Memphis and the world lost a great entertainer and humanitarian in Isaac Hayes. Today on this House floor, we will pass H. Res. 1425 memorializing my good friend and a great world citizen who was an actor, a musician and a humanitarian.

Isaac Hayes, like Elvis, came to Memphis from the rural Midsouth, a poor person who was raised in the cotton fields and came to Memphis and got his education at Manassas High School. Elvis went to Sam Phillips and Sun Records. John Lennon said before Elvis there was nothing, but after Elvis there was Isaac Hayes. Isaac Hayes put a new form to music, pretty much created hip hop, received Oscars and Grammys and produced his signature song ``The Theme From Shaft,'' which began a kind of a new genre of music.

He was a wonderful human being to be around. He inspired greatness and wrote great songs with his dear friend and co-composer, David Porter, ``Hold On I'm Comin' '' and other great songs by Sam and Dave. ``Black Moses'' will be remembered for years to come. We're fortunate he has come our way and lent his talents to the world. We'll miss him. He was my friend.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to reference today's New York Times editorial, not a Member of this body but the editorial page. It is titled, ``Ms. Pelosi Compromise.''

``This is obviously not the best moment for Congress to rush through an energy bill. The country is caught up in a heated Presidential campaign. Voters are furious at high gas prices. Republicans are happily pandering to that anger, while the Democrats fear it. And at the end of this month, just before Congress heads home for the election recess, the long-standing moratorium on offshore drilling is scheduled to expire--providing an opportunity for more grandstanding.''

The editorial continues that ``these are not sensible times, which means that Congressional Democrats, particularly House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, must try hard to make the best of a bad situation.

``The situation, briefly, is this: the Republicans have been bludgeoning the Democrats with the claim that Democratic opposition to offshore drilling is to blame for high fuel prices and that drilling is the answer, or one answer to the country's dependence on foreign oil.

``We find it hard to imagine that they really believe what they say. Drilling will have no impact on fuel prices for at least 15 years, if then, and any number of efficiency measures will do more to reduce the country's dependence than drilling for America's modest offshore reserves. But the chant of 'drill, baby, drill!' is playing far too well on the campaign trail for the Republicans to let the facts get in the way.

``The Republicans have offered bills that would provide broad access to the Outer Continental Shelf and in one case allow drilling as close as 12 miles from shore. So Ms. Pelosi is taking no chances. As early as Tuesday she is expected to unveil what she advertised as a grand compromise. The bill would allow drilling in all of the Outer Continental Shelf beyond 100 miles offshore from States that permit it.''

The bottom line: ``Ms. Pelosi's compromise deserves support. If it fails, the Democrats must fight to renew the moratorium. Otherwise, there could well be oil rigs within 3 miles of American shore.''

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the New York Times.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor our departed colleague the Honorable Stephanie Tubbs Jones.

Many have attested to Stephanie's contagious smile and fierce loyalty to her friends. I always respected and admired her. I can honestly say that she was a nice and professional colleague. We spoke for the last time a couple of weeks ago at the Congressional Black Caucus's Annual Retreat in Tunica, Mississippi. I feel a sense of gratitude for our meeting. We talked. We embraced. Stephanie expressed her congratulations for my success as a freshman legislator. She spoke fondly of her time in Memphis as she visited her family there.

Over the past decade, Stephanie was an undeniable force in Congress. She broke barriers in 1998 by being elected the first African American woman in Congress from Ohio. She persisted over the years and was appointed to the powerful Ways and Means Committee. She served with a sense of pride as the chairwoman of the House Ethics Committee.

Stephanie and I co-sponsored a great deal of legislation together. On July 29, 2008, we unified as Members of Congress and passed H. Res. 194: the formal apology for government's involvement in slavery and Jim Crow. Stephanie was one of my earliest co-sponsors. She was a community conscious legislator. She fought for the people and sponsored legislation on issue areas ranging from community economic development to enfranchisement and retirement security.

I am forever grateful that my last interaction with Stephanie concluded with a deep and meaningful hug. My only regret is that Stephanie and I will not have the opportunity to work together in the future.

Madam Speaker, quite a few speakers today have spoken about 9/11, and we'll have services at the Pentagon and the Capitol memorializing that day. It is the Pearl Harbor, the December 7, of our generation; and it's a day when partisan politics shouldn't take place and, hopefully, won't today in this Chamber or anywhere else.

We're all Americans. We're not red Americans or blue Americans, Democrats or Republicans, but Americans. And I think we need to think about the victims. We need to think about the first responders, the police people and the fire people who gave their lives and rushed into those buildings, the emergency personnel and the sheriffs' deputies who protect us every day. And we need to think about the first counterterrorists, the passengers on Flight 93, that took control of that flight that was otherwise destined for either this great historic United States Capitol or the White House and would have caused death or injuries to people such as you and me, Madam Speaker, who are in this House today and would have been here in 2001. We need to thank the counterterrorists on Flight 93. Never forget them, and never forget the victims of 9/11.

God bless America.

Mr. Speaker, it's a bit confusing sometimes to listen to the rhetoric. The Republicans have had the Presidency now for nearly 8 years, and they have had the majority in this House since 1994, I think. And if you watched the Republican convention, you would think they were the Democrats talking about change and the problems we have in Washington. They're so against Washington, it's the Washington they have created and cultivated. And the corruption that we've seen here has mostly been on that particular side of the aisle. The failure of our having a children's health plan, which this country should have as a cornerstone of its policy, was the fault of the Republican side that was more interested in tobacco interests than children's interests. And too many times we see the corporate interests of the oil corporations take over the interests of the American society and getting us to be truly energy independent.

I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that the parties have differences, but if you want change, you want the Democratic Party. Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus, whom our minister prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a Governor.

I thank Congressperson Jackson-Lee and Congressperson Cummings for their work on this resolution.

It is important that we remember our history, and we teach our history to our school children and our adults as well to know how far this country has come and where it has come from. There are things that have happened in history in this country and around the world that are not things that we are proud of. Nevertheless, we learn from them and we grow.

This is not the perfect Union that we hope it to be one day, but it is a more perfect Union each year. And amendments to the Constitution and laws have changed to make this a better country.

Earlier in this session, this Congress passed, by voice vote, an apology for slavery and Jim Crow, a long time in coming, but something that should have occurred and did occur. I hope that my colleagues in the Senate will pass the same resolution.

This is in the same vein, in remembering that this country did allow slavery for many years, and Jim Crow laws to follow. But while we did allow it, there was a time that it was outlawed, and there were efforts to suspend it and to stop it. And this ship and the people that manned the ship, captained the ship and served on the ship, did their jobs in seeing that the slave trade was defeated off the African coast.

It is appropriate that this ship be maintained as a museum and a tribute to those gentlemen and to the cause that they served, and to remind people of some of the horrors in our history, but the improvements that we have made. And I compliment Congressman Cummings on bringing the resolution, and the people involved in the City of Baltimore and elsewhere in preserving the USS Constellation.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to have my name removed from H.R. 1619 as a sponsor.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It is with pride that I introduced this resolution with 120 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle, and it is with pride that I serve as a Member of this institution and this building that was built with slave labor and for which the new Visitors Gallery will be known as Emancipation Hall. It was the gentleman from this side of the aisle, the party of Lincoln, Representative Zach Wamp from my State, and this side of the aisle, Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr., who eloquently spoke to a subcommittee of which I am a member urging the remembrance and recognition of the work of the slaves who helped construct this magnificent Capitol Building and have the entryway named Emancipation Hall.

This country had an institution of slavery for 246 years and followed it with Jim Crow laws that denied people equal opportunities under the law. There was segregation in the South and other places in this country at least through the year 1965 when civil rights laws were passed.

There were separate water fountains for people marked ``white'' and ``colored''; there were separate restaurants; there were separate hotels; there were job opportunities that were not available to African Americans; there were

theaters that were segregated. It is hard to imagine today in 2008 that such a society existed and was sanctioned by law, that the laws of this Nation provided for segregation and enforced fugitive slave laws.

In fact, the history of slavery goes not just through the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to our Constitution, but, as so eloquently written just yesterday in the Baltimore Sun in an editorial by Mr. Leonard Pitts, Jr., that slavery existed up until about World War II, but it was a form of slavery where people were bought and sold for debts. It was slavery by another name.

In a book called ``Slavery by Another Name'' by Douglas Blackman, a correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, he talked about a convict leasing system in the South where poor black men were routinely snatched up and tried on false, petty or nonexistent charges by compliant courts, assessed some fine they could not afford, and then put into the servitude of an individual who bought them. This system continued up until World War II.

The fact is slavery and Jim Crow are stains upon what is the greatest Nation on the face of the Earth and the greatest government ever conceived by man. But when we conceived this government and we said all men were created equal, we didn't in fact make all men equal, nor did we make women equal.

We have worked to form a more perfect Union, and part of forming a more perfect Union is laws, and part of it is such a resolution as we have before us today where we face up to our mistakes and we apologize, as anyone should apologize for things that were done in the past that were wrong, and we begin a dialogue that hopefully will lead us to a better understanding of where we are in America today and why certain conditions exist.

In 1997, President Clinton talked to the Nation about the problem that this country had with race, and he wanted a national dialogue. He considered an apology for slavery. I happened to run into President Clinton at that time at the Amtrak station here in Washington and discussed with him having an apology for Jim Crow as well as slavery. I encompassed that in a letter dated July 2, 1997, that as a State senator from Tennessee I wrote to President Clinton.

In that letter, I urged him to have a slavery apology and a Jim Crow apology, and to mark it on the 30th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, an event that tragically took place in April of 1968 in my city, and that the appropriate time for President Clinton to have that apology would be on that 30th anniversary.

In going through my papers as I was elected to Congress, I found this letter and I thought about it and I said to myself, ``You are a Member of Congress. You don't need to wait on a response from the President of the United States, which, my friend, the President's office failed to make a response. I can take action myself.'' So I introduced the resolution in February of 2007, with 120 sponsors joining me as time went on. It is important on this day that we admit our error, that we apologize.

I have been in this body and voted with the rest of the body on a unanimous voice vote to encourage, this past year, the Japanese government to apologize for its use of Chinese women as comfort women during the war, and not a voice was raised questioning that resolution which passed unanimously on us calling on a foreign country to apologize for its use of comfort women.

Twenty years ago, this Congress passed a bill apologizing for the internment of Japanese citizens during World War II. In fact, subsequent to the consideration of this resolution, the distinguished lady from California (Ms. Matsui) has a resolution recognizing and celebrating the 20th anniversary of the passage of that bill.

This Congress did the right thing in apologizing for the imprisonment of Japanese Americans during World War II and in encouraging the Japanese government to apologize for the use of comfort women. But the fact that this government has not apologized to its own citizens, African Americans, for the institution of slavery and for the Jim Crow laws that followed, and accepted that fact and encouraged changes in our dialogue and understanding and the actions of this country to rectify that, is certainly a mistake, and today we rectify that mistake.

This is a symbolic resolution, but hopefully it will begin a dialogue where people will open their hearts and their minds to the problems that face this country from racism that exists in this country on both sides and which must end if we are to go forward as the country that we were created to be and which we are destined to be.

So it is with great honor that I speak on this resolution and urge the Members of this body to pass this historic resolution, recognize our errors, but also recognize the greatness of this country; because only a great country can recognize and admit its mistakes, and then travel forth to create indeed a more perfect union that works to bring people of all races, religions, and creeds together in unity as Americans, part of the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the time, and I urge my colleagues to vote unanimously to pass this resolution today.

Mr. Speaker, my prosecutors at home wrote me on several occasions asking me to support this particular bill. This school helps all of the prosecutors throughout this country in their efforts to fight crime, and if we don't have this school and the instruction it gives our district attorney generals, I think we all lose.

So I just wanted to add my voice to Mr. Spratt's and others in this House and hope that we can continue the Byrne Center and help in our fight against crime, which ravages people all over this country but greatly in my district and in many inner cities. And unless we have strong prosecutors and others in the criminal justice system, we won't be successful in that fight.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 3295) to amend title 35, United States Code, and the Trademark Act of 1946 to provide that the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, shall appoint administrative patent judges and administrative trademark judges, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

Intellectual property accounts for billions of dollars in our Nation's economy. The success of this industry largely depends on the protections afforded them by the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the decisions made by administrative patent and trademark judges.

In 1999, the process by which administrative patent and trademark judges are appointed was modified as part of the American Inventors Protection Act. That act, which provided greater accountability and efficiencies at the Patent and Trademark Office, transferred the power to appoint these judges from the Secretary of Commerce to the Director of the U.S. PTO.

Recently, however, concerns have been raised as to the constitutionality of the Director making such appointments. Already, at least two U.S. PTO decisions have been challenged on this basis.

We firmly believe that appointments made by the Director are constitutional. Nevertheless, in order to remove any doubts, the House and Senate has reached identical bills to respond to these concerns. H.R. 6362, sponsored by Howard Berman, John Conyers, Lamar Smith, and Howard Coble, and S. 3295, sponsored by Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter, make three changes to the administrative judge appointments process. Today, we take up the Senate bill, which passed the Senate last week by unanimous consent.

First, S. 3295 restores the statutory appointment authority to the Secretary of Commerce.

Second, it allows the Secretary to retroactively appoint administrative judges who have been acting as de facto judges. The appointments would be effective as of the date the judges were originally appointed by the Patent and Trademark Office Director.

And third, the bill provides a de facto officer defense to counter challenges to the United States Patent and Trademark Office decisions made by these administrative judges prior to their retroactive appointment.

This legislation is intended to ensure certainty in the market and to end unnecessary litigation and the consumption of judicial resources on an issue over which there should be no dispute.

But should these judgeships be found to be unconstitutional and not de facto officers, the courts should remand the affected cases back to the U.S. PTO panels so that they may dealt with expeditiously.

Given the importance of intellectual property to our Nation's economy, years of uncertainty as the courts determine the constitutionality of the appointments process would be devastating.

The sponsors of H.R. 6362 and S. 3295 have provided a way through this uncertainty. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, the bill also makes a technical change to insert the term ``deputy director,'' the term in current use, in place of ``deputy commissioner,'' an outdated term mistakenly used in the 2002 bill. Because related terms no longer appear in the underlying statute, this change could not be properly executed in the 2002 bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1324) requesting that the President focus appropriate attention on neighborhood crime prevention and community policing, and coordinate certain Federal efforts to participate in National Night Out, which occurs the first Tuesday of August each year, including by supporting local efforts and community watch groups and by supporting local officials, to promote community safety and help provide homeland security.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 1324, which will press the President to focus appropriate attention on neighborhood crime prevention and community policing. The resolution also asks the President to coordinate certain Federal efforts to participate in National Night Out.

Neighborhood crime is a major concern for many Americans across our Nation. While our police departments are generally as professional and responsive as they can be, preventing neighborhood crimes comes from the efforts of us all.

Community-based programs involving law enforcement, school administrators, teachers, parents, and other citizens are among the most effective ways to reduce violence and crime in our neighborhoods.

Neighborhood Crime Watch groups and Citizens on Patrol groups, for example, can be an integral part of a police department's effectiveness in making our neighborhoods safe. The presence of concerned citizens walking their neighborhoods, in contact with police, help prevent communities from becoming targets for drug dealers. Just as patrol is the great deterrent that police use, patrol can be a deterrent that citizens use. With more potential witnesses on the streets, citizens are much less likely to be robbery victims.

National Night Out is a unique crime prevention event that helps to highlight the importance and effectiveness of community participation in crime prevention efforts. This special event allows citizens, businesses, and local law enforcement officers, along with Federal, State and local officials, to participate in community crime prevention programs.

Last year, more than 35 million people in more than 11,000 communities across America participated in National Night Out. This year marks the 25th anniversary of this special event.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Stupak for leadership on this issue. And I ask my colleagues to support National Night Out.

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

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 3294) to provide for the continued performance of the functions of the United States Parole Commission.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, S. 3294, the United States Parole Commission Extension Act of 2008, would authorize the United States Parole Commission for another 3 years.

Under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, criminal defendants sentenced for Federal offenses committed on or after November 1, 1987 serve determinate terms and are not eligible for patrol.

Since the elimination of Federal parole in 1987, the Parole Commission has been reauthorized on four prior occasions. Current reauthorization is set to expire October 31, 2008.

The Commission has jurisdiction over Federal offenders sentenced before November 1, 1987, as well as DC offenders sentenced before August 4, 2000. The Commission also has jurisdiction over an increasing number of DC offenders on supervised release.

Should the Commission not be reauthorized, the Department of Justice is concerned that Federal inmates who were sentenced prior to 1987 will begin to file motions for release under the Sentencing Reform Act. This act requires inmates sentenced before 1987 to be given release dates 3 to 6 months prior to the Commission's expiration. This is why it's imperative that Congress act immediately to reauthorize the Parole Commission.

Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6295) to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit operation by any means or embarking in any submersible or semi- submersible vessel that is without nationality and that is navigating or has navigated into, through or from waters beyond the

outer limit of the territorial sea of a single country or a lateral limit of that country's territorial sea with an adjacent country, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous material on the subject matter of the bill under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6225, as amended, a bill authorized by my colleague Mr. Dan Lungren of California to address the growing problem of self-propelled semi-submersible or fully submersible vessels used for criminal purposes. Not the Hunley, in fact.

According to the United States Coast Guard, international drug traffickers are using these vessels to transport illegal drugs to the United States. They are typically large enough to carry 24 metric tons of contraband, can travel up to 3,500 miles, and are designed so that the crew members can readily sink them within scant minutes of being spotted, thereby making it virtually impossible for authorities to intercept illegal shipments and bring the smugglers to justice.

These vessels sail under no country's flag. They are not registered. They are usually camouflaged and constructed to avoid radar detection, with all but a few inches hidden below the water line.

The Coast Guard estimates that these vessels now account for 32 percent of all maritime cocaine flow to the U.S. from pan-American sources. And they could just as easily carry even more dangerous cargo, posing a serious national security threat.

In recognition of this threat, this bill makes it a felony to operate such a vehicle on the high seas or across our border without national registration and with intent to avoid detection, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

The version of the bill we are considering reflects a number of improvements developed by Congressman Daniel E. Lungren, Senator Biden, and Senator Lautenberg in consultation with the Coast Guard and the Department of Justice. I would like to commend them all for their leadership on this important legislation.

I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

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

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

I want to thank Mr. Lungren for bringing this issue to the surface.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be withdrawn as a cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 362.