Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 150th anniversary of the start of the American Civil War and an important piece of journalism by Ken Burns entitled ``A Conflict's Acoustic Shadows.'' Mr. Burns' article in the New York Times reminds us all of the importance of reflecting upon this pivotal moment in our nation's history.

[April 11, 2011]

A Conflict's Acoustic Shadows

(By Ken Burns)

More than once during the Civil War, newspapers reported a

strange phenomenon. From only a few miles away, a battle

sometimes made no sound--despite the flash and smoke of

cannon and the fact that more distant observers could hear it

clearly.

These eerie silences were called ``acoustic shadows.''

Tuesday, the 150th anniversary of the first engagement of

the Civil War, the Confederacy's attack on Fort Sumter, we

ask again whether in our supposedly post-racial, globalized,

21st-century world those now seemingly distant battles of the

mid-19th century still have any relevance. But it is clear

that the further we get from those four horrible years in our

national existence--when, paradoxically, in order to become

one we tore ourselves in two--the more central and defining

that war becomes.

In our less civil society of this moment we are reminded of

the full consequences of our failure to compromise in that

moment.

In our smug insistence that race is no longer a factor in

our society, we are continually brought up short by the old

code words and disguised prejudice of a tribalism beneath the

thin surface of our ``civilized'' selves.

And in our dialectically preoccupied media culture, where

everything is pigeonholed into categories--red state/blue

state, black/white, North/South, young/old, gay/straight--we

are confronted again with more nuanced realities and the

complicated leadership of that hero of all American heroes,

Abraham Lincoln. He was at once an infuriatingly pragmatic

politician, tardy on the issue of slavery, and at the same

time a transcendent figure--poetic, resonant, appealing to

better angels we 21st-century Americans still find painfully

hard to invoke.

The acoustic shadows of the Civil War remind us that the

more it recedes, the more important it becomes. Its lessons

are as fresh today as they were for those young men who were

simply trying to survive its daily horrors.

And horrors there were: 620,000 Americans, more than 2

percent of our population, died of gunshot and disease,

starvation and massacre in places like Shiloh and Antietam

and Cold Harbor, Fort Pillow and Fort Wagner and Palmito

Ranch, Andersonville and Chickamauga and Ford's Theater.

Yet in the years immediately after the South's surrender at

Appomattox we conspired to cloak the Civil War in bloodless,

gallant myth, obscuring its causes and its great ennobling

outcome--the survival of the union and the freeing of four

million Americans and their descendants from bondage. We

struggled, in our addiction to the idea of American

exceptionalism, to rewrite our history to emphasize the

gallantry of the war's top-down heroes, while ignoring the

equally important bottom-up stories of privates and slaves.

We changed the irredeemable, as the historian David Blight

argues, into positive, inspiring stories.

The result has been to blur the reality that slavery was at

the heart of the matter, ignore the baser realities of the

brutal fighting, romanticize our own home-grown terrorist

organization, the Ku Klux Klan, and distort the consequences

of the Civil War that still intrude on our national life.

The centennial of the Civil War in 1961 was for many of us

a wholly unsatisfying experience. It preferred, as the nation

reluctantly embraced a new, long-deferred civil rights

movement, to excavate only the dry dates and facts and events

of that past; we were drawn back then, it seemed, more to

regiments and battle flags, Minie balls and Gatling guns,

sentimentality and nostalgia and mythology, than to anything

that suggested the harsh realities of the real war.

Subsequently, our hunger for something more substantial

materialized in James McPherson's remarkable ``Battle Cry of

Freedom'' and many other superb histories, in the popular

Hollywood movie ``Glory,'' and in my brother Ric's and my

1990 documentary series ``The Civil War.''

It was an emotional archaeology we were all after, less

concerned with troop movements than with trying to represent

the full fury of that war; we were attracted to its

psychological disturbances and conflicted personalities, its

persistent dissonance as well as its inspirational moments.

We wanted to tell a more accurate story of African-Americans,

not as the passive bystanders of conventional wisdom, but as

active soldiers in an intensely personal drama of self-

liberation.

We wished to tell bottom-up stories of so-called ordinary

soldiers, North as well as South, to note women's changing

roles, to understand the Radical Republicans in Congress, to

revel in the inconvenient truths of nearly every aspect of

the Civil War.

Today, the war's centrality in American history seems both

assured and tenuous. Each generation, the social critic Lewis

Mumford once said, re-examines and re-interprets that part of

the past that gives the present new meanings and new

possibilities. That also means that for a time an event, any

event, even one as perpetually important as the Civil War,

can face the specter of being out of historical fashion.

Explore multimedia from the series and navigate through

past posts, as well as photos and articles from the Times

archive.

But in the end, it seems that the War of the Rebellion, the

formal name our government once gave to the struggle, always

invades our consciousness like the childhood traumatic event

it was--and still is.

Maybe Walt Whitman, the poet and sometime journalist who

had worked as a nurse in the appalling Union hospitals,

understood and saw it best. ``Future years,'' he said, ``will

never know the seething hell, the black infernal background

of the countless minor scenes and interiors . . . of the

Secession War, and it is best they should not.''

``The real war,'' Whitman admonished us, ``will never get

in the books.'' We are, nonetheless, obligated to try.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to the life and legacy of Sergeant Peter Hart, a soldier and New York City Police Officer, who served in the American Civil War.

Sergeant Hard will be remembered for valiantly leaving New York to join in the defense of Fort Sumter in January 1861. Major Robert Anderson, Commander of Fort Sumter, had served with him in the Mexican American War. As tensions between the North and South increased, Major Anderson's wife requested Sergeant Hart join the defense of Fort Sumter. Early in the morning of April 12, 1861 the first shots of the American Civil War rang out. By afternoon the shelling had knocked the American flag from the flagstaff flying over the fort. Sergeant Hart proudly retrieved the fallen flag, climbed up the flagstaff and successfully reattached it. His refusal to allow the flag to lie torn and tattered serves as a symbol of the unwavering spirit of all Americans who defend our Nation in the Civil War.

I offer my recognition of Sergeant Peter Hart on the 150th anniversary of the start of the American Civil War. Sergeant Hart's courage not only inspired the brave men at Fort Sumter. His patriotic spirit and devotion to our Nation continues to inspire Americans today.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans came to Washington promising to change the way Washington works. And what do they give us? This political stunt of a resolution.

They came to the majority in 1994 and shut down the government. They came back to the majority in 2010, and they want to shut down the government, and they want to blame Democrats for doing that. The American people see right through this.

They know that you demanded $73 billion in cuts and we agreed to $73 billion in cuts. Now you're saying you want more. They know that not only do you want more, but you want to add restrictions on a women's right to choose. They keep moving the goal posts further and further to the far, far, far, far right. And it is enough.

Now, I keep hearing my friends on the other side of the aisle talk about their concern about debt and deficits. And we agree. Let me remind my friends on the other side of the aisle that several weeks ago, we offered an amendment that would have reduced spending by asking the top five richest oil companies in America just to forgo this year's portion of their tax subsidy. And they said ``no.''

Let me remind my friends that several weeks ago, we offered to reduce spending by eliminating funding for the Bridge to Nowhere. And they said ``no.''

Keep spending on the top five richest, most profitable oil companies, keep spending on the Bridge to Nowhere, but privatize Medicare for senior citizens. Make them tighten their belts, make them sacrifice. But when it comes to our friends in the special interests, spend, spend, spend.

We see right through it. The American people see right through it. It's time to do what we offered to do, which is to meet you where you wanted to meet us until you moved those goal posts.

Enough, Madam Speaker.

Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize those with Tourette Syndrome on the occasion of the Tourette Syndrome Association's annual National Advocacy Day, which was Thursday, March 31, 2011.

Tourette Syndrome is a neurobiological disorder characterized by involuntary tics. It often goes undiagnosed, but the Association estimates that some 200,000 people in the United States are known to have the disorder. No definite cause has been found, but research points to abnormal metabolism of a key brain hormone, spurred by a gene that is likely inherited. There is about a 50% chance of a parent with Tourette Syndrome passing it along to their child and sons are three times more likely than daughters to exhibit symptoms of Tourette Syndrome.

On Thursday I met with a young man from my district, Jared Bloch, who passed along a letter written by his brother Tyler, who suffers from Tourette Syndrome. Below is the text of the letter, but I wanted to quote one part: ``I love myself no matter who I am. Tourette's is an obstacle I can overcome and it helped me become a much better person.'' Tyler is wise beyond his 12 years. I hope he can serve as a role model for those with Tourette Syndrome and I hope his family can serve as an inspiration for all of those who know someone with Tourette Syndrome.

Hello. My name is Tyler Bloch, I am 12 years old, and my

brother (Jared Bloch) is one of the ambassadors you talked or

will talk to. I was diagnosed with Tourette's syndrome in 2nd

grade and currently I am in the 7th grade. The main reason I

am writing this letter is because I wanted to tell you how TS

affects my life and how it affects others.

Throughout elementary school and middle school I was always

questioned. ``Why do you do that?'' ``Why do you twitch like

that?'' The only response I could say was, ``I don't know.''

I was always afraid to tell people about my condition because

I thought people would laugh. Although TS does not affect my

academics, it affects my self control. I would always have

the urge to rant at the top of my lungs, but I couldn't.

Every day I had to wait until I return home to get my

energies and tics out.

My family has a tough time coping with all the mayhem in

the house, but they try their best to ignore my loudness and

annoyingness. Once a week I would see a psychiatrist and or a

psychologist to try to help me. It is very hard to try to

find a local and experienced psychologist that could help me.

My mom always tries her best to find one. I would never

really want to go, but I had to in order to help my family

and me. I always feel horrible for my family because I tend

to be very annoying. I clap loudly; yell loudly, get

distracted, worry, and all these things are very harsh on my

family.

I never mean any of these annoying behaviors, but that was

the way I was built. Nothing can stop it. On the bright side,

Tourette's eventually goes away, but for now I will have to

try to do my best.

This program means a lot to me and I appreciate all your

hard work and dedication to the TSA. Thank you so much and

you have no idea how this makes me feel. It shows that there

is hope and that other people care. I could not ask for a

better family. They love me, always try their best to help

me, make me laugh, and that is the perfect combination of a

well-rounded family. I love myself no matter who I am.

Tourette's is an obstacle I can overcome and it helped me

become a much better person. Without TS I would not be the

person I am today so this condition makes me myself and there

is nothing I would change about that.

Sincerely,

Tyler S. Bloch.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a number of talented and dedicated high school students in my district who were chosen to be Semifinalists in the Intel Science Talent Search (STS) as well as one who was named as a Finalist. These students are the future of our nation's research and I am so proud to recognize them today.

Jonathan Aaron Goldman attends Plainview-Old Bethpage John F. Kennedy High School in Plainview, NY, and Intel has named him a STS Finalist for his research project ``Evidence for Link between Native Reading Language and Internal/External Scanning Processes.'' Jonathan will come to Washington, D.C. in March to participate in a final judging session

and will compete for the top award of $100,000. While in D.C., he will display his work to the public as well as meet with notable scientists and the other 39 Intel STS Finalists. Being recognized as a Finalist is an extraordinary honor and I know Jonathan will be successful in his future endeavors.

I also want to recognize the Intel STS Semifinalists from my district. Long Island is fortunate to have so many quality schools with dedicated teachers who guide talented students to success. The following students were chosen from among 1,744 entrants to receive a $1,000 award for their outstanding research. In addition, their schools receive $1,000 to further excellence in scientific education. I am impressed not just by their scientific knowledge but also by their superior commitment to the scientific process. These young students represent the bright future of American innovation, science and research and I look forward to hearing more from them in the future:

Kendra Cornejo, Norman Cao, and Sharon Mary Varghese of Brentwood High School; Arpon Paul Raksit and Marni Jordyn Wasserman of Commack High School; Rachel Paula Gerber of Half Hollow Hills High School East and Dianna Hu of Half Hollow Hills High School West, both in Dix Hills; Jonathan Michael Nachman of Plainview who attends North Shore Hebrew Academy High School in Great Neck; Pamela Anne Wax of Harborfields High School in Greenlawn; Ishwarya Ananthabhotla of Kings Park High School; Adam Joshua Getzler, Jonathan Aaron Goldman, Jonathan Abraham Goldman, and Alexander Herbert Kusher of Plainview-Old Bethpage John F. Kennedy High School; and Gary Scott Rosenblatt, Karen Sikka, Harris Jacob Weber, and Deanna Ruxi Zhu of Syosset High School.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the lives of three veterans who passed away this past weekend.

Mr. Kerry Dudkewic of Smithtown, NY, was 62 years old and a Vietnam veteran and lost his battle with cancer on Friday, February 25, 2011. This past January he was finally given confirmation from the VA that his many ailments were indeed connected to his service and were caused by exposure to Agent Orange. Kerry knew he was very sick and wanted his wife to obtain survivor benefits upon his death. Kerry's commitment to serving others was exhibited throughout his life and I am so grateful I was able to help him in return before his passing.

Mr. Arnold A. Bocksel of Syosset, NY, was a 97-year-old WWII veteran and passed away on Sunday, February 27, 2011, of natural causes. Arnold survived the Bataan Death March and three and a half years in a Japanese prison camp. Arnold was awarded several medals, including the Bronze Star and the Prisoner of War Medal. Arnold suffered from service-related injuries and in 2010 he was awarded a check from the VA to make his home handicapped-accessible. Arnold was truly a hero and I was so proud to help get him the support he earned and deserved.

Finally, Mr. Seamus Byrne of Smithtown, NY, was tragically struck by a car and killed on Sunday, February 27, 2011, while walking home with his wife Michelle after celebrating his 33rd birthday with friends. Seamus served with the New York Army National Guard Fighting 69th Infantry Regiment and was awarded a Purple Heart for injuries sustained while serving in Afghanistan. I am so saddened by this, knowing Seamus was finally getting his life back in order after his injuries and knowing his family was finally getting their husband and dad back to normal. Seamus is survived by his 10-year-old son Seamus, his 3-year- old daughter Ashley, and his wife, who is a nurse and tried to save him after he was struck.

Again, I am honored to have had these great men in our community and am grateful for the service they provided to our nation.

Mr. Speaker, I am emphatically opposed to using the U.N. to single out Israel for criticism on the issue of settlements, whether that criticism is in the form of a resolution or a statement. Should a resolution criticizing Israel come before the Security Council, the United States should clearly veto it. To the extent that we have disagreements with Israel on policy matters, we should find a way to express those differences in private, just as we would with our other close allies. The Administration has to understand that we stand by our friends through thick and thin.

Let's be clear; the issue isn't settlements; the issue is negotiations. Israel froze settlement construction for ten months last year. Israel has shown it is ready to take risks for peace. The onus is on the Palestinian Authority. If Palestinians object to settlements or oppose building permits--negotiate.

Israel, a friend and ally of the United States, is located in a dangerous neighborhood. Anyone who has recently watched the news or read a newspaper has seen the collapse of multilateral talks on Iran's nuclear weapons program, Hezballah's successful effort to topple the government of Lebanon, and a wave of unrest spreading throughout the Middle East. Given the threats facing Israel, the long friendship between our two nations, and Israel's strategic importance to the United States, it is critical that the U.S.-Israel relationship is strong at all levels of our government.

The United States is in the middle of a ten-year commitment of military aid to Israel and I hope that the long tradition of strong bipartisan support in Congress to fully fund this commitment, even at a time of fiscal constraint, continues.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor someone in my district who has given much to those in need. Lorraine Boccio of Huntington Station, NY, has recently been diagnosed with stage 3 pancreatic cancer and I'd like to take a moment to share some of the good work she has done.

Lorraine works in customer service at a local supermarket but spends her spare time committed to service as well. Every year she collects and mails packages to troops overseas and holds annual events for veterans on Memorial Day and Veterans Day. These events bring out hundreds of veterans and Lorraine conducts the fundraising, planning, and execution of these events. She also attends funerals and wakes of fallen troops on Long Island and collects cards from schoolchildren in the South Huntington School District for veterans.

Lorraine is also fiercely supportive of her local police and fire departments. For the holidays in December 2001, Lorraine collected and distributed food, clothing and toys to all of the children in Huntington who lost a loved one in the September 11 attacks. She takes every opportunity to honor her local police, fire, and EMS workers, including organizing fundraisers, visiting those who are injured, and paying tribute to those who served in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks.

Finally, throughout the year Lorraine organizes food drives, ``adopts'' families with troubles such as a child with an illness or a house fire, and donates food and supplies to Huntington's Little Animal Shelter.

Lorraine brightens the lives of her neighbors every day while working in customer service at her day job and helps anyone and everyone in need in her community. I wish her all the best for a speedy recovery and hope that the community to which she has given so much supports her in the fight of her life.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the amendment which would provide more funding to New York under the Urban Areas Security Initiative. I am proud to cosponsor this amendment with my colleague from New York.

The Republican's funding bill that we are debating today is, in many ways, putting the future of our Nation at risk. But the cuts made to Homeland Security grants are literally putting our communities at risk and in harms way.

Under current funding levels, the Urban Area Security Initiative provides grants to 64 metropolitan areas, including New York City. As we are all keenly aware, New York City is at the top of the target list for terrorists wanting to strike our country. It is clear that we must do what we can to rein in spending by the federal government, and this requires making difficult choices, but New Yorkers and the American people rely on homeland security measures to keep them safe on their way to work, home or while touring New York City.

I believe that we have to make smart choices, and cutting $12 million that could help New York City prevent the next terrorist attack on this country is not a smart choice. But there is a way to protect our Nation's most-vulnerable targets without adding to the deficit and the amendment I have offered today with my good friend and colleague from New York accomplishes both goals.

Our amendment limits the number of metropolitan areas that are eligible to receive Urban Area Security Initiative funds, increasing the share each eligible city receives. Currently, this Continuing Resolution that my colleagues on the other side of aisle have brought to the floor cuts funding for these critical grants by $87 million. New York City officials estimate this cut will result in a loss of $12 million for the city. That means $12 million less for important technology investments; $12 million less for critical personnel; $12 million less for training for police and firefighters; $12 million less for ongoing counter terrorism operations and overall emergency preparedness.

Mr. Chair, less than ten months ago, Faisal Shahzad attempted to set off a car bomb in Times Square, putting at risk the lives of thousands of New Yorkers, along with visitors from across the country and around the world. The risk to New York City is real and we must remain vigilant.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment and ensuring that the funds we are spending on the Urban Area Security Initiative are going to the cities that are the most at risk.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment by my distinguished colleague from California.

This isn't that complicated. It all gets down to the lesson that we all learned in grammar school: Honesty is the best policy. Not more complicated or not more complex than that. Honesty is the best policy.

There is not a Member of this Chamber, Mr. Chairman, who doesn't believe in the First Amendment. I believe in the First Amendment. I believe that in a democracy you can say almost anything you want about almost anybody. You have the right to say what you want. But people have the right to know who is funding your message.

When people turn on their television sets and they see a political commercial making outlandish claims, they deserve to know whether that commercial is being funded by a foreign-owned corporation. They deserve to know whether that commercial is being supported by a special interest group. They deserve to know when they're watching a commercial about how evil a candidate is whether it is being funded by a special interest that is trying to defeat that particular candidate because that particular candidate supports the Environmental Protection Agency, supports clean air, supports clean water, and whether a special interest is trying to defeat that candidate because they want to dismantle the EPA. They have the right to know when one of those commercials permeates our airwaves whether those commercials are being funded by a special interest, for example, that wants to dismantle Federal inspections of meat because those Federal meat inspections are impinging on the bottom line of that particular special interest.

And so this is simply about the right to know. This is simply about upholding our right to say what we want when we want about whom we want but making sure that the American people, no matter what side of the aisle you're on, understand who is behind that message. This says that the American people and the American taxpayers shouldn't be unwittingly subsidizing dirty campaigns and secret donations. And that is why this amendment is so important, because the American people and taxpayers have the right to know and because honesty is the best policy.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and service of Mr. William Henry Quick, a retired firefighter who worked for two months at Ground Zero and who passed away of lung disease on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 at the age of 55. Mr. Quick worked for Ladder 134 in Far Rockaway, Queens, and lived on Long Island.

Mr. Quick worked for the FDNY for almost half of his life and did not hesitate to leave his vacation and rush to Ground Zero after the 9/11 attacks. He worked there from September 12, 2001 and only stopped two months later when he hurt his knee while working through the rubble. He returned to work in January of 2002 but developed a series of lung infections, which ultimately forced his retirement in January of 2003.

Mr. Quick is a hero in every sense of the word. He worked at Ground Zero without questioning the risks to his own health. He spent his whole adult life in public service working for the FDNY. He leaves behind his wife, Lisa, and twin 17-year-olds Ryan Mary and William Henry II. I grieve for them and want them to know that their sacrifice will not be forgotten.

I thank my friend.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this bill. This vote establishes who you are for. Are you for insurance company profits, or are you for the middle class? I'm for Hannah Watson of Bay Shore, Long Island. Hannah was born with spina bifida. She had multiple surgeries and a kidney transplant before the age of 12. At 12 years old, 3 months after her last surgery, her insurance company told her that she had reached her annual cap and they would not pay for additional treatment. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, Hannah was able to finally get on her parents' insurance at an affordable rate with no lifetime caps.

This health care act was for Hannah Watson. Well, I hear people saying, do you know what? I don't have spina bifida. Why should I care? Well, Hannah did not choose to have spina bifida. Nobody makes that choice. The health care act helped Hannah. It helped her neighbors. It helped others. Why would you want to look at Hannah and say, We are repealing those protections, Hannah?

I'm for Catherine Marquardt of North Babylon. Catherine had breast cancer; and as she was recovering from breast cancer, her insurance company told her that it was a preexisting condition and they would no longer pay for her treatment. Now, I hear people say, well, why should I care? I'm not Catherine Marquardt. I don't have breast cancer. One out of every nine women in America has breast cancer. You know somebody who has breast cancer. Why would you want to say to them, That is repealed, that consumer protection is repealed, you are on your own?

And finally, Mr. Speaker, I understand the notion that this is not a perfect bill, and there are things that we can improve. My friends on the Republican side are in the majority; and if they can think of ways to improve it, I believe we should work with them. But this is not improving it. This is repealing it. This is repealing every word of it. This is repealing every vowel of it. This is repealing every consumer protection of it. This is repealing it for every one of us, for Hannah and Catherine, for one out of every nine women who has breast cancer and for all Americans with preexisting conditions. And it ought not be repealed.

I thank the gentleman.

I thank the gentleman from Arizona for yielding.

Madam Speaker, the violence in Tucson and the shooting of my very good friend Gabby Giffords is not a time for partisanship and it is not a time for politics. It is a time for reflection, and I have three brief reflections to share with my colleagues.

I knew Gabby pretty well. We weren't best friends, but we were good friends. I was with her and her husband, Mark, on the day that Mark proposed to her. We were in New York, and Gabby and I had several events to do. And Mark kept asking if Gabby could leave early, and I kept saying no. And finally, Mark said, There is no choice. She's leaving early.

I later learned that the reason that she had to leave these events early was because Mark took her to the Merchant Marine Academy in Kings Point and proposed to her. Most of my constituents now know Gabby Giffords. Few know that this important day in her life occurred on Long Island.

Second reflection, I believe that Gabby would have been uncomfortable with the attention that she is getting today and over the past several days. I believe she would want Americans more focused on the 9-year-old girl who was killed, on the Federal judge who was killed, on the congressional staffer who lost his life, on the others who were killed and wounded.

And my final reflection is this: I believe that we should reject the notion that Gabby's colleagues in Congress need to hide from our constituents, that we should reduce our exposure. This is not the time for us to hide from our constituents. This is the time for us to reassert our connection with our constituents. And this isn't the time for us to hide our opinions.

This is a time for us to reassert our opinions, but to do it without vilifying one another. There is a way to have opinions without necessarily demeaning one another. We have the right to our opinions, but not to be called any more or less of an American with a different opinion.

Opinions and the expression of those opinions are the essence of democracy. They are American. And it is fitting that Gabby Giffords on this floor, at that podium last week, read the First Amendment in the Constitution, which talks about our right to have opinions.

We should continue to express those opinions but do it in a way that would make our children proud of us, do it in a way that is respectful and tolerant. That is exactly what Gabby Giffords did while she was here, and it is exactly what she will do when she returns.

Section 4: ``The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of the insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of the 9/11 Health and Compensation Act.

We all know where we were on that fateful morning. If we were lucky, we were safe and with loved ones and far from Ground Zero.

But there are thousands of others who were not so fortunate, and who are reminded of those attacks every day--whether that's because they lost a family member or a friend, or because they cannot breathe after spending weeks cleaning the rubble of our fallen Twin Towers.

It is those first responders whose health we have a solemn obligation to watch over, and they number in the thousands--over 13,000 sick World Trade Center responders, more than 53,000 whose health is being monitored and 71,000 who were exposed to poisonous toxins.

They are firefighters, police officers, EMTs, construction workers and volunteers--just people who saw a fire and ran towards it to see how they could help--ran into the fire--and they remain in need.

They come from every single state in the Union and nearly every Congressional District. The health of these men and women is truly a national duty. With this bill, we can fulfill that duty.

It establishes the World Trade Center Health Program to monitor and treat responders whose injuries were caused by exposure to airborne toxins or any other adverse condition resulting from the attacks, and ensures that there is a network of health care providers around the country to care for anyone enrolled in the program. The bill also sets up the World Trade Center Survivor Program to provide screenings, treatment and follow-up monitoring to survivors and those living in the surrounding areas.

No one asked these men and women to go do what they did. They shouldn't have to ask us for quality health care. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise as a cosponsor and strong supporter of H. Res. 1765 because this resolution affirms the imperative for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Palestinian efforts to pursue declarations or recognitions of statehood outside of the peace process are unacceptable. This threatens compromise and a peaceful solution.

I thank Chairman Berman for offering this important resolution and my colleagues in the House for calling on Palestinian leaders to cease all efforts at circumventing the negotiation process. Only through this direct Israel-Palestinian dialogue can we move forward to compromise and lasting peace. Unilateral declarations do not support this process, but rather threaten peace and deepen conflicts.

It is time to focus on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Any attempts to bypass negotiations threaten the security and survival of the State of Israel, and the creation of a viable and democratic Palestinian state.

I firmly believe that a lasting compromise can be reached through direct negotiations and compromise. That is the way forward for Israelis, Palestinians, and the United States. Secretary of State Clinton had it right when she noted that ``it is only a negotiated agreement between the parties that will be sustainable.''

That is why I strongly oppose any Palestinian efforts to unilaterally declare statehood and abandon efforts for a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Today, I am pleased that there is bipartisan agreement that the House of Representatives must do everything in our power to reaffirm the need for a peace process and to move these talks forward toward a lasting solution.