Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, Houstonians will never forget October 6, 1999, when the NFL announced that the 32nd NFL franchise had been awarded to American businessman, Robert C. McNair. This adopted Texan will forever be remembered as the man that brought professional football back to Houston.

McNair grew up in Forest City, North Carolina, and graduated from the University of South Carolina in 1958. He and his wife, Janice, moved to Houston two years later. McNair founded Cogen Technologies, which became the largest privately owned cogeneration company in the world. He then sold the bulk of it to Enron in 1999 for $1.1 billion with an eye toward becoming a National Football League owner.

During his nearly two decades as an NFL owner, McNair left a lasting mark on the city of Houston. His leadership and determination brought the NFL back to Houston, built a spectacular stadium, and was instrumental in bringing two Super Bowls to Houston.

Football was not the only good thing McNair gave to Houston. Throughout his life, McNair and his charitable foundations gave more than $500 million to a countless number of scientific, literary, educational, and faith-based organizations. McNair chaired the Robert and Janice McNair Foundation and the Houston Texans Foundation for more than 25 years. Ten years before he became known to most of us and before he was awarded the Texans franchise, McNair and his wife started the Robert and Janice McNair Educational Foundation to ensure all students in his hometown who so desired, would have the opportunity to attend college. Thousands of individuals have now received a better education; changing their lives because of McNair's selfless character.

McNair passed away on Friday, November 23, 2018 at the age of 81. He is survived by his wife, Janice; two sons, Cal and Cary; two daughters, Ruth and Melissa, 15 grandchildren, and two great grandsons. McNair was once asked by the NFL Network how he would like to be remembered. He replied ``I'd like to think that I'd be remembered as an honorable man, as a good Christian man, and that I always did things in a first-class manner and treated people honestly. I think that would be a good legacy.''

Mr. Speaker, Bob McNair lived his life always revolving around four main values: Faith, Family, Philanthropy, and Football. May we all strive to live a life well lived around those kind of values, and to leave a positive impact like Bob McNair.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, Vladimir Putin has again reminded the world that he has no respect for international law, sovereignty of neighboring states, or peace in our world. Since 2014, Russia has illegally occupied Crimea and fueled a war in Eastern Ukraine. That followed Moscow's 2008 invasion of Georgia where its forces still occupy Georgian territory. Now, Russian forces have conducted another act of unprovoked aggression by blocking the Kerch Strait and attacking Ukrainian naval vessels in the Black Sea.

This act of war is just another chapter in Putin's violent conquest of his neighbors' territory. His goal is to restore the power of Russia's imperial past. To do so requires seizing the lands and waters that were once controlled by Moscow and denying the right of free peoples to determine their own fate. Putin, an authoritarian thug, fears the democratic aspirations of nations that have shed the tyranny of the old Russian and Soviet orders. The success of the Color Revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia and their growing integration with the West strikes fear into the heart of a dictator like Putin, who relies on brutality and fear to cling to power. To survive, he has falsely framed the rising tide of democracy in the post-Soviet space as a threat to Russia, when in fact it is only a threat to Putin and his oligarch friends.

The illegal annexation of Crimea and this week's seizure of the Sea of Azov are Putin's attempt to intimidate and undermine Ukraine's nascent democracy. By controlling these key strategic points, Putin believes he can demonstrate that only the Kremlin can ensure security and prosperity in the region and that Europe and America care little for the plight of Ukrainians. Instead it shows that Putin is a belligerent thug who only has violence and despair to offer.

We Americans must stand with Ukraine. The Ukrainian people want to share in the freedom and wealth we long ago secured for ourselves by breaking the chains of foreign tyranny. Americans did not fight alone when we gained our independence, and Ukraine should not be left to fight alone either. We must develop a grand strategy to halt Putin's aggression and liberate the areas he illegally seized. This does not mean a direct conflict between the United States and Russia, but it does require us to act before Putin becomes so confident that he does attempt a direct assault on us or our NATO allies. America has the tools and leverage to thwart Putin's wicked ambitions--it's time to use them.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, the First Amendment is first for a reason. It is the most important right we have as Americans and at the very core of who we are.

Without the First Amendment, freedom of religion, free speech, freedom of the press, freedom in assembly, the rest of the Amendments are meaningless.

The purpose of the First Amendment is to permit free and open discussion about the important issues of the day. It protects the right to speak freely about the two most controversial subjects of the day: religion and politics. This is exactly what was forbidden under King George, and it is exactly why our Founding Fathers chose to make it first among the original 10 in the Bill of Rights.

But, somehow, the speech police have decided to replace free speech with their self-determined fair speech. If it is not fair to them, then it must be banned.

What does fair mean?

Fair means different things to different folks. In some places in our country like Texas, fair is where you take the chickens or prized pig to sell it or eat anything you want to on a stick when it is deep fried.

Fair means different things to different folks. But the word ``fair'' is not in the Constitution. The Constitution protects free speech, not fair speech. It says Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, and the Constitution applies to the elitist speech control police whether they think that is fair or not and whether they like it or not.

Our Founding Fathers established individual rights to protect our liberties, not our feelings. We have become so caught up in the politically correct restriction that everyone has the right not to be offended that we are, in fact, losing the right of free speech.

Where does the Constitution say you have the right not to be offended?

The right of free speech belongs to the speaker and cannot be regulated by the listener because it may be offensive and certainly cannot be regulated by government because it is not fair--fair in the eyes of government.

But our most important freedom is being replaced by fear: the fear to speak openly. Some wish to prohibit the voice and speech of others they disagree with or if the opposing view may be offensive. So the controlists want speech regulated or, to put it bluntly, it must be politically correct.

It is interesting that the one place where diversity of thought, ideas, and speech should be promoted is at our universities. But universities are prohibiting free speech in the name of protecting the students, while at the same time professors say anything they want to say about all issues--the doctrine of free speech for me but not for thee.

To make matters worse, the controlists want government to regulate speech. That is a Stalinist concept. Stalin used government to silence all opposing views, views that offended the government and the elitists. It is not just those in the public eye. Everyone feels they must weigh every thought and decision against who and how it could possibly be offensive to someone, somewhere, somehow. It is ridiculous, and it is a threat to our freedom and our prosperity.

We cannot live in fear of speech. We cannot live in fear to speak.

The Founding Fathers intended free speech to include criticism of the government and to advocate unpopular ideas, including controversial ideas. Freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference of the government and truly debate all issues. But we must not allow that to be lost to this out-of-control, politically correct crowd that only wants to allow speech that agrees with their agenda and, literally, destroys anyone who disagrees.

Law professor Alan Dershowitz said: ``Freedom of speech means freedom for those who you despise, and freedom to express the most despicable views. It also means that the government cannot pick and choose which expressions to authorize and which to prevent.''

Voltaire, who lived at the time of our Revolution, said: ``I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.''

Lively disagreements are the foundation of a free republic.

George Washington said it very well when he said: ``If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.''

America must always remain a free and open space where the marketplace of ideas--even those we detest or disagree with--are freely expressed. It seems our very founding document is at risk of fading into the abyss of history.

The irony of it all is that free speech is becoming anything but free, and that ought not to be. We should all speak out against the controlling speech police.

And that is just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, as we remember the 100th anniversary of the great World War I, it is vital to honor American pilots who fought for freedom in Europe before the United States officially entered the war.

Under the French Air Service, the Lafayette Escadrille was formed. It was an all-American, all-volunteer squadron.

In 1916, 224 Americans formed the unit. They wore French uniforms, and assembled on their biplanes was a courageous Native American chief.

Being a pilot in World War I was deadly dangerous. The life expectancy of an Allied pilot was 11 days. Daily combat operations saw casualty rates of 400 percent. Fifty-one Americans were killed in combat, and the Americans downed 199 enemy planes. They flew in all the major battles over the Western Front's bloody trenches of no man's land.

In 1918, when the United States entered the war, these men of the Lafayette Escadrille were incorporated into the United States Air Service. These young flyboys of World War I were some of America's best. They went over there and flew the skies fighting

for freedom, proudly proclaiming, ``Lafayette, we are here.''

And that is just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, at the remarkable age of 98, Lieutenant Tom Morgan is retiring as the oldest active lawman in the State of Texas and probably the United States. Tom patrols the rivers, bayous, and lakes of Harris County, Texas for the Sheriff's Office.

Tom first volunteered to serve America in 1942 as a marine in World War II. He was in combat and landed on the brutal, bloody beaches of Guadalcanal, Okinawa, and Saipan in the South Pacific.

After getting malaria and after 4 years of war, Tom was reactivated for combat in the Korean war. After those wars, Tom became a pipeline engineer in Houston for 30 years.

Then, at the age of 72, he was hired by the sheriff's department and became the oldest cadet ever to graduate from the academy. For 26 years, he has put on the badge and the gun to protect and serve the people of Texas.

Houston salutes this marine, engineer, and 98-year-old lawman as a person who is a cut above the rest of us.

Happy trails, Lieutenant Tom Morgan.

And that is just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, ISIS fighters are regrouping in the Philippines. It was only a year ago that Philippine forces, with help from the U.S. military, retook the city of Marawi after a bloody five- month siege. Reports now suggest that fresh ISIS foreign fighters have arrived in the area and are preparing to unleash a new wave of terror. America must be prepared to blunt their resurgence.

It should surprise no one, that after the fall of ISIS's so-called caliphate in Syria and Iraq, that the terror group would disperse its fighters and attempt to build a new caliphate somewhere else. Two decades of fighting jihadists has shown they are an adaptive and relentless foe. ISIS itself was defeated by U.S. forces in Iraq almost a decade ago but because of Obama's naive withdrawal, was able to rally new recruits and exploit instability in the Middle East. But we have learned our lessons and will not stand by as ISIS attempts another revival.

We are in a long war with ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other extremists. From Mali to Mindanao, America has stood ready to confront jihadism much as we stood ready to counter communism around the globe during the Cold War. The Philippines is a strategic ally of the United States and we will not abandon our commitments. We must see to it that the Philippines have what they need to crush ISIS's attempted comeback and ensure its lasting defeat.

ISIS's attempts to regroup will not end in the Philippines. Our successes against ISIS remain fragile and, without continued vigilance, can be undone. Our allies must know that the U.S. is prepared to stand with them but also note that it is their fight as well. It is their security that is most threatened by ISIS's crusade of terror. We are in this fight together until the ideology that drives Islamic extremism relegated to history.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, they have been the focus of legend and lore, portrayed on radio shows and the silver screen.

It was this month, in 1835, the new Republic of Texas officially created a law enforcement force of three companies, 56 men each, known as the Texas Rangers. The Rangers wear a star made out of a Mexican cinco pesos coin on their western dress, with, of course, the ubiquitous cowboy hat.

Captain Bill McDonald said it best: ``No man in the wrong can stand up against a fellow that's in the right and keeps on a-comin'.''

They are the oldest law enforcement agency in North America with statewide jurisdiction. These Texas lawmen have always had a certain swagger and a certain awe about them.

Legendary Ranger ``RIP,'' rest in peace, Ford said this: ``They did right because it was right.''

And when the Dallas mayor needed to call in the big guns to prevent an illegal prizefight, Captain McDonald answered the call. As the story is told, the mayor asked: ``Where are the other rangers?''

McDonald replied: ``Hell, ain't I enough? There's only one prizefight.''

Texas Rangers: One riot, one ranger.

And that is just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, I want to express my strong support for this legislation of which I am an original cosponsor. I was proud to work alongside Ranking Member Engel, Mr. Adam Smith, Mr. McCaul, and Representative Keating on this legislation.

Around the globe today, Mr. Speaker, fractured nations are struggling with conflict, violence, and a range of other challenges that degrade security and prevent their internal development.

Weak states and ungoverned places anywhere in the world provide opportunities for terrorism and instability to flourish. As a result, these fragile states become national security concerns for our country.

Mr. Speaker, we need to solve problems in a smarter way so we don't have to constantly deploy America's sons and daughters into harm's way to fight more foreign wars. The United States has been at war consistently for over 17 straight years. Maybe it is time we rethink our philosophy of constant military involvement throughout the globe as a first response to turmoil and unrest.

We need to address the underlying root causes of instability: treat the disease, not just the symptoms. That is what this bill will do. It will require the development of a whole-of-government approach to targeting root causes of instability and conflict in the world's most fragile regions before they require military interventions by the United States.

Instead of parallel efforts that often respond to conflict with short-term solutions, this bill will require long-term, coordinated strategies that make our foreign assistance dollars more effective. It will allow Congress to have more oversight of those foreign aid dollars. The money we spend abroad must be designed to solve problems, not endlessly consume resources by military conflict.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Ranking Member Engel for his leadership on this critical issue. I do urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I also want to take a moment to thank Ranking Member Engel for his friendship and support and his work on the Foreign Affairs Committee since I have been on the committee. I also want to thank Chairman Royce, who will also be leaving Congress at the end of this session, for his work.

As we have said numerous times, if more committees would work in a bipartisan way to solve a specific goal--the long-term interests of the United States being that goal--I think things would be better here in the House. But I want to thank both of these Members for their relationship with me and for working so hard to help America solve these international problems in a bipartisan way.

And that is just the way it is.

Madam Speaker, I want to reiterate that when the Foreign Affairs Committee meets and makes a decision, we do that almost in unison, Republicans and Democrats, looking out for the best foreign policy of the United States. And Chairman Royce and Mr. Engel, Chairman Engel, will do a great job in leading that effort, as you have done in the past when you were chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

I am proud to support Representative Kinzinger's bill, the Preventing Destabilization of Iraq Act of 2018.

For too long, Iraq has been the center of chaos and instability in the Middle East. While much of this is due to terrorist groups, its expansionist, saber-rattling neighbor to the east also bears enormous responsibility for undermining Iraq's sovereignty and security.

Iran is determined, in my opinion, to make Iraq a puppet state of its tyranny. For years, Iran has armed and financed thousands of Iraqi militia fighters loyal to Tehran to spread its influence and fight its foreign wars. Many of these militiamen have American blood on their hands as well as their own countrymen's.

Earlier this year, Iran's proxies in Iraq seized more seats in Iraq's parliament and used violence to crush anti-Iranian protests.

This legislation codifies crucial authorities to target Iran's destabilizing activity.

The bill also includes parts of my Iranian Proxies Terrorist Sanctions bill, which calls for the designation of two of the deadliest Iraqi militia groups backed by Iran: AAH and HHN.

These killers have attacked Americans, including firing rockets at U.S. diplomatic facilities in Iraq as recently as this past August.

They have participated in Bashar al-Assad's slaughter of the Syrian people and expressed a desire to attack Israel. War is in the mind of the Ayatollah.

We must battle Iran in the arenas it hopes to control. Iraq is one of those key arenas.

This legislation is a step towards confronting Iran's conquest of the Middle East.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this important legislation and for the Senate to quickly bring it to the floor to help stop Iran, the world's number one state sponsor of terror, from spreading its violent hate.

And that is just the way it is, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Pakistan is a state that not only harbors extremists but incorporates their wicked ideology into law. For years, Pakistani religious minorities have suffered under the nation's barbaric blasphemy laws, with dozens sentenced to death and many more brutally imprisoned, tortured, or attacked by extremist mobs. The prosecution and treatment of Asia Bibi under this absurd blasphemy law has revealed Pakistan to be governed by radical mobs rather than a fair justice system.

Asia Bibi, whose real name is Aasiya Noreen, has been sitting on Pakistan's death row for nine years for allegedly insulting the Prophet Muhammad when she was told she could not drink from the same cup as Muslims because she is a Christian. For defending herself and standing for universal values of religious liberty and human rights, she was horrifically beaten in front of her five children and condemned to die by Pakistan's courts. Fortunately, Pakistan's Supreme Court has shown some sense of justice and acquitted Bibi because there was no evidence to convict her. Yet her fate remains uncertain. Extremists have protested the court's decision across Pakistan and made clear their violent intent if she is released. In fact, two prominent Pakistani politicians who spoke out in defense of Bibi, were assassinated in 2011, including the only Christian member of Pakistan's cabinet.

However, it's unclear if the Pakistani government will protect her and not cave to extremist demands--as it has so many times before. Right now, Bibi and her family's lives are in danger. Being a Christian in Pakistan already is a huge risk but being one that has simply been accused of insulting Islam is to put a bounty on their heads for which Pakistan's multiple terrorist groups are eager to collect. Bibi's lawyer has already sought asylum for himself and his family in the Netherlands because of the death threats. But Pakistan's new Prime Minister, Imran Khan, has signaled he will appease the extremists by potentially blocking her attempts to flee Pakistan and vowing not to oppose a review of the Supreme Court's acquittal. This is unacceptable and demonstrates that Pakistan's leaders favor extremism over justice.

Perhaps, the only thing worse than Pakistan surrendering its rule of law to extremists is that the United States spends billions of dollars to support this corrupt government. There is no justification for our tax dollars subsidizing persecution of Christians and other minorities. America must end its assistance to Pakistan and send a clear message that its current course towards an extremist state ends in isolation.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, the threat of terrorism remains a deadly challenge for us and our allies around the globe. In the last four years alone, we have seen the ability of terrorist groups--many of which we had thought we had defeated--to evolve and attract thousands of recruits to their violent cause. ISIS, al-Qaeda, Iran, and all their affiliates and proxies are still active and waiting in the shadows for an opportunity to strike again.

Although we have made great progress against these terrorists on the battlefields of Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Afghanistan, our gains remain fragile. Just last week, a report by the Pentagon warned that ISIS fighters have moved underground and are regrouping. We must not become complacent again. We must continue to be vigilant until the ideologies that motivate violent extremism are cast into the dustbin of history.

I applaud the White House's new National Strategy for Counterterrorism. This document drastically changed the U.S. government's perspective on the war on terrorism. It correctly frames the battle in terms of an enduring challenge that must be managed to protect the homeland, instead of a mission that has a beginning and end. It clearly recognizes the broad and diverse challenges we face from terrorism, including Iran's growing network of terrorist proxies and the ability of terrorists to exploit cyberspace.

The strategy prioritizes countering terrorist use of the Internet for radicalization, recruitment, and fundraising. This is a priority I introduced into the State Authorities bill last Congress and I am glad the White House is taking it seriously. The strategy also makes clear that this fight is not America's burden alone. Our international partners play an important role. We can empower them by bolstering their capabilities and increasing cooperation.

That is where the State Department's Counterterrorism Bureau comes in. Created in 1972 in response to the Munich Olympics attack, the Bureau forges partnerships with foreign governments, multilateral organizations, and NGOs to coordinate and advance U.S. counterterrorism objectives that enhance global security as well as our own.

Under that broad mission it has several core responsibilities, including coordinating strategy across the State Department and other agencies, conducting counterterrorism diplomacy, and building capacity of partner nations to address terrorist threats within their own.

Given the enduring threat from terrorism that we and our allies face, it is crucial that CT Bureau does its job effectively and efficiently. It is our job in Congress to ensure that the American taxpayers are getting their money's worth. When we are talking about millions of dollars going towards programs abroad, the people of my district are right to demand how it contributes to their safety and security. This is all the more important given that the Bureau has seen significant funding cuts over recent years. With limited resources every penny must be spent wisely.

For example, the State Department's Inspector General filed a report last year that found much of the antiterrorism assistance we had been given to Pakistan was not being used, including dozens of courses not implemented. I am pleased to hear the Bureau has since repurposed many of the resources that had been sent to Pakistan to other more worthwhile programs. We cannot afford to throw good money after bad. Effective monitoring and evaluation programs are crucial to spotting what is not working and making changes that do.

For instance, we need assurances that the programming initiated and implemented by CT Bureau to prevent radicalization actually works. Is the Bureau still in the business of ``countering violent extremism'' (CVE)? If so, has the Bureau developed any mechanisms to prove that such programming works?

I appreciated the strong comments against Iranian-backed terrorism by the State Department's Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Ambassador Nathan Sales, which were at the Washington Institute on November 13. I am eager to see our government go one step further than just designating the IRGC for terrorist activity. If we mean business, we must go after the Iran's terrorist proxies in Iraq and Syria.

I applaud Treasury's designations of four Hezbollah-affiliated terrorists in Iraq. Now the State Department must follow suit and finally designate groups like Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq and Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba for what they are: foreign terrorist organizations. At the very least, their affiliation with the IRGC should be enough to meet the criteria for designation.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, born in the 1920s, he grew up in the Depression of the 1930s poor, just like many American children in the rural areas.

Fresh vegetables were grown in the family garden behind the small frame house, and his mother made sandwiches for school out of homemade bread. Store-bought bread was for the rich. He grew up belonging to the Boy Scouts, playing the trumpet in high school band, raising rabbits and bees, and he went to church on most Sundays.

In 1944, this 18-year-old country boy who had never been more than 50 miles from home finally found himself going through basic training in the United States Army at Camp Wolters, Texas. After that, he rode the train with hundreds of other American GIs--mostly teenagers, really--to New York City for an ocean trip on a cramped Liberty ship to fight in the great World War II.

As a soldier in the Seventh Army, he went from France on to survive the Battle of the Bulge and through the cities of Aachen, Stuttgart, Cologne, and Bonn.

As a teenager, he saw the concentration camps and the victims of the Nazis. He saw incredible numbers of other teenage Americans buried in graves throughout France, a sobering monument to those soldiers at Normandy.

After Germany surrendered, Tech Sergeant Virgil Poe went back to Fort Hood, Texas, to be reequipped for the invasion of Japan. He was put on a train going to Seattle from where he was supposed to be sent to the South Pacific; but he learned when he arrived in Seattle that Japan had surrendered, so he was ordered back to Fort Hood, Texas. It was there that he met Mom at a Wednesday night prayer meeting service at the Church of Christ.

It has only been in the last 10 or 15 years that this GI, my father, began to talk about World War II. He still would not say much, except he does say that young Americans are still buried in France and they are the heroes.

After the war, he opened a DX service station, where he pumped gas, sold tires, fixed cars, and began a family. Deciding he needed to go to college, he moved to west Texas and enrolled in a small Christian college called Abilene Christian College.

He and his wife and two small children lived in an old converted Army barracks with other such families, and he supported us by working nights at KRBC Radio and climbing telephone poles for Ma Bell, later known as Southwestern Bell.

He finished college, became an engineer, and worked over 40 years at Southwestern Bell Telephone Company in Houston, Texas. He turned down a promotion to transfer to New York City because it wasn't Texas, and he said ``it was no place to raise a family.''

Dad instilled in my sister and me the values of being a neighbor, loving our country, loving our heritage, and trusting in the Good Lord. He still gets mad at the East Coast media. He flies the flag on holidays. He goes to church on Sunday, and he takes Mom out to eat almost every Friday night.

He stands in the front yard and talks to his neighbors, and he can still fix anything. He mowed his own grass until he was 90 years of age, and you better believe he has a strong opinion on politics and world events. He gives plenty of advice to all people, including me, usually at 5:30 in the morning. He has two computers in his home office. He sends emails to hundreds of his buddies all over the world.

Dad and Mom still live in Houston not far from where I grew up.

As we recognize those who served our country this week, we honor not only my dad, but all of those American heroes. Dad is now 93 years of age, and he was one of those individuals. He is the best man I ever met, one of the charter members of the Greatest Generation. I hope I turn out like him, the man I admire the most.

Virgil Poe: a good man, good soldier, good father, and that is plenty for one life.

And that is just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, according to the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center in Houston, Texas, 28 percent of Houston's homeless population are veterans. That is over 3,600 homeless veterans in Houston alone. These same veterans admirably served our nation and have dedicated their lives to the service and protection of the United States.

Across the nation, ``micro homes'' are being used as transitional homes for those in need. A micro home is defined as a residential structure with utilities and built for full time occupancy, in less than 350 square feet. Micro home communities have been created by charities in Austin, Dallas, Detroit, Los Angeles, Nashville, New York, Olympia, Portland, Seattle, and Syracuse. Now, students at Humble lSD are trying to add Houston to that list.

More than 70 students at Summer Creek High School and Kingwood Park High School are working to create a community of micro homes for homeless veterans--designing tiny homes for big heroes. The students have spent the last several months designing the blueprints and a 3D model for the 200-square foot home and working with architects to make sure it works. From paint colors, to roofing, to electrical wiring, they have designed and obtained prices for everything necessary to complete their vision. Unlike usual school projects, this student-led initiative requires marketing to prospective donors and could take years to successfully complete this micro home community. These passionate students have given pitches and presentations to countless potential donors, the City of Humble council members and mayor as well as the City of Houston.

So far, the students, along with the help of faculty and staff, have raised $40,000 to level a piece of land next to the school where they can begin the next phase of constructing the homes. Both Summer Creek and Kingwood Park will build a model tiny home by the end of this school year. The goal is to eventually partner with a nonprofit and also raise money to buy land to place the homes.

Before giving a presentation to potential donors, a senior from Kingwood Park High School, Nicholas Logan, told Texas School Business Magazine: ``It's given me a purpose. I'm not just going to school today. I'm going to school so I can attend a meeting, so I can get the funding to help other people, so they can have a home.'' It is because of the actions of selfless minds like Nicholas, that this great country will be in the good hands of our future leaders.

Good deeds do not go unnoticed. I know that the residents of Lake Houston Area are proud of these students and I applaud not only the students for their tremendous achievements and commend them for giving back to our community, but their parents as well. They are truly making a difference and represent all that is right and good in America.

And that's just the way it is.