Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, today I rise to acknowledge the Division I State Champion wrestling team from my alma mater, Detroit Catholic Central High School. On February 27, 2007, the Catholic Central Shamrocks defeated Rockford 39-24 to hoist their first State championship trophy since 1988. Third-year Head Coach Mitch Hancock, an individual State final winner for the Shamrocks in 2000, saw all 14 of his wrestlers earn a berth to the Individual State Finals. This is the first time in recent Division I history that an entire team has qualified for the Individual State meet. Three Shamrock grapplers brought home State titles to complement the team championship. Following in the remarkable tradition of legendary Catholic Central Coach Mike Rodriguez, who was both coach and mentor to current coach Mitch Hancock, the Shamrocks brought home their eighth State wrestling team title and earned Coach Hancock the Division I honors for Wrestling Coach of the Year.

Madam Speaker, with a season record of 27-4, the 2010 Catholic Central Shamrocks deserve to be recognized for their determination, achievement, and spirit, and we are all very proud of their determination and effort.

Equally, Madam Speaker, I also rise today to acknowledge the Division I State Championship bowling team from my alma mater, Detroit Catholic Central High School. This has been a noteworthy year for the gentlemen at Catholic Central, as the championship marks the fourth State title for the school during the 2009-2010 year. The Michigan High School Athletic Association recognized bowling as an official sport in 2006. Thus, it is impressive how the Catholic Central team has risen to State prominence in a very short time.

Two members of the State championship bowling team qualified for the individual finals, and although they did not ultimately win, they represented C.C. High admirably and honorably. This year, after defeating Salem 1,856-1,824 pins in the quarterfinals, the Shamrock bowlers outdueled Flint Carman-Ainsworth 1,855-1,747 to earn a berth in the finals, setting them up to take on Macomb Dakota. On March 5, 2010, the Catholic Central Shamrocks rolled over Macomb Dakota 1,834-1,565 to earn their first State championship trophy.

Coach Al Bridges saw his bowlers in seventh place after the morning qualifying round, yet in true Shamrock fashion the team kept fighting and refused to give up. As the day wore on, CC kept moving up in the standings, leading by 143 pins after the Baker games. From that point on, the Shamrocks never looked back.

Coach Al Bridges credits good conditioning and a lot of practice for the payoff of winning a championship. In earning their first bowling title, the 2010 Catholic Central Shamrocks deserve to be recognized for their determination, achievement, and spirit.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, the hard work and dedication of each of these State championship teams epitomizes what it means to be a Shamrock. By the teaching of our Basilian fathers, through goodness, discipline, and knowledge, the entire Catholic Central family, including this alumnus, share in their accomplishments.

In recognition of their effort, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Detroit Catholic Central Shamrocks for achieving these State titles and for honoring their devotion to Mary, alma mater. Live and die for CC High.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 872.

We are now a week removed from the President's celebrated health care summit, and we're a day removed from the President's press conference regarding moving ahead on the health care bill despite the wishes of the American people. Prior to the summit, which I referred to as the Shamwow Summit, I was one of the voices urging the Republicans not attend unless the President decided to start from scratch and find a principled basis for compromise amongst both sides. That principled basis was not found, and the principled divide remains.

The House and Senate Republicans went into the summit and they engaged admirably and honestly in the cause of putting forward Republican solutions to health care. Yet, what we found was that afterwards the President has decided to arbitrarily negotiate with himself what he purports to be a bipartisan compromise bill, one which magically has been obtained without the consent of the minority party.

As succinctly summarized by Mr. Charles Krauthammer yesterday, the summit was a Shamwow Summit, and the good faith of those Republicans in the room is now currently being used in a political charade upon the people to prepare them for the proposition that a bipartisan health care bill is before them. I quote Mr. Krauthammer: ``But they,'' the administration, ``wanted to present it to the American citizenry as having tried to reach out. That's why you had the charade of the summit last week, 7 hours of discussion, when it was already pre-cooked that that wouldn't change anything. But that's part of the deal. He,'' the President, ``wants to appear to be offering to incorporate Republican proposals. And now the pivot, which we had today.''

It is important as the health care debate continues that we not lose sight of the principled divide between the two sides. On the one hand, the Democratic majority wants to have government-run, bureaucrat- dictated health care. On the other, the Republican Party wants to have free-market, patient-centered wellness. No amount of taking Republican proposals and sprinkling them onto the faulty premise of a government- run bill will make it bipartisan or will make the Republican proposals effectual, as, contrarily, we will be taking the Democrat proposals and putting them on to a free-market, patient-centered wellness bill. It is a principled divide, one which Abraham Lincoln reminds us: important principles must remain flexible. In this instance, the bridge between the two parties has not been established and the divide remains.

Also within this debate I think it is important to point out a second important aspect. This is not merely about the money. It is about the liberty. We can all talk about costs. We can all talk about coverage. In my view, the current health bill would have a catastrophic impact upon the fiscal condition of the United States, which is already tenuous at best. It is about the American people wanting to make sure they retain these decisions in their hands and that the forces that we see around us throughout the communication and innovation revolutions that empower them to make their own decisions every day at a greater extent than at any time in human history remain in their own hands rather than those of a government bureaucrat.

This is not mere supposition on my part. I cite two recent poll numbers. Referring to the Rasmussen report, only 21 percent of United States citizens believe that this government has their consent. I cite a second sobering statistic: according to CNN, 56 percent of Americans believe the Federal Government is a threat to the freedom of ordinary citizens.

As this health care debate proceeds forward despite the wishes of the American people, we are not only endangering their health care, we are endangering and jeopardizing their faith in their representative institutions, in their belief that this is a government of the sovereign people.

So in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I again point out that there is a principled divide between the two parties: one wants government-run, bureaucrat-dictated health care; one wants free-market, patient- centered wellness. As we move toward the former, the American people's faith in their representative institutions will be continually eroded as they watch in obstinate insistence by this majority and by this administration to pass a health care bill that the American people have said they do not want.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor Corporal Jacob Henry Turbett, a courageous and noble Marine, who died on February 13 at the age of 21. Corporal Turbett lost his life while bravely supporting combat operations in the Helmand Province, Afghanistan.

Corporal Turbett was a member of the Second Combat Engineer Battalion, Second Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force based in Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. He was a 2007 graduate of Canton High School and took part in Civil Air Patrol. He came from a celebrated military family. His grandfather, cousin and two of his uncles were in the Marines. His uncle was in the Navy and his sister, Jaime Turbett, started boot camp in the Navy only ten days before her brother was killed. Corporal Turbett followed in these proud footsteps by completing tours of duty in Bangladesh and Iraq. Additionally, he was stationed in Okinawa, Japan. He was a hard worker, a proud and brave American, and a loving husband to his wife Crystal, whom he married in July 2008. Along with his wife and sister he is survived by his mother, Sheila, his father, Richard and his brother, Joe Marsh, who is a sheriff's deputy in Humboldt County, California.

Corporal Turbett sacrificed everything for his country in Operation Enduring Freedom. To his fellow soldiers, his family and friends, and to everyone who knew and loved him, he was a dedicated member of his community who answered the higher calling to serve his country.

Madam Speaker, during his lifetime, Corporal Turbett enriched the lives of everyone around him by employing energy, leadership, and courage in everything he set out to do. As we bid farewell to this exceptional individual, I ask my colleagues to join me in remembering and honoring his contributions and years of devoted service to his community and our country.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge and honor Margaret Reyez, who is the recipient of the ATHENA award, which honors outstanding women for their leadership.

After a 13-year career at St. Mary Mercy Hospital in Livonia, Michigan, Margaret found her true calling when she became an Information and Media Center Clerk for the Westland Public Schools Student Libraries. In the position she still holds, Margaret promotes literacy and the benefit it brings. Margaret is also a featured history presenter in the dramatic program of Greenfield Village. Appearing as an 1871 era schoolmarm at the Scott Settlement School, Margaret brings history to life and continues her championship of literacy. Certified in 1987 as a coordinator with Rainbows for All God's Children, a support group for children suffering the loss of a parent through death or divorce, Margaret lent her caring heart to the most vulnerable in her community. In 1990, Mrs. Reyez was certified as a Youth Minister, devoting herself to that role at SS. Simon and Jude Church in her hometown of Westland. Margaret Reyez graduated in 2001 from Schoolcraft College with an Associates Degree in Liberal Arts. She is involved in numerous community service programs including the Red Wagon Literacy campaign.

Mother to three adult children and five grandchildren, perhaps the greatest testament to Margaret Reyez comes from her daughter who credits her mother with instilling this in her children, ``You can be and do anything you want to if you just keep trying and don't give up.''

Dedicated to her community, she has tirelessly worked to identify the needs of families within the Wayne Westland School District, and is considered a mentor and role model to women in her community.

Madam Speaker, Margaret Reyez has forged a legacy of commitment and dedication to helping families in the Cities of Wayne and Westland. I ask my colleagues to join me today in honoring Margaret, and I congratulate her upon receiving this honor.

Would the gentleman yield for a question?

Obviously, the President has had a very eventful first year since his inauguration.

Would it not be fair to say that the rush of events and the focus on getting things done has precluded this position from being filled?

Will the gentleman yield again?

I just want to be clear that, despite the fact that there has been no name forwarded--let alone confirmed--for the position at CMS, we do have two appointees of the Marine Mammal Commission.

In fairness, as a Detroiter, it sounds like a Matt Millen draft.

I yield back.

Yes.

To the Chair, the gentleman from Ohio referenced a stimulus bill, which, as we all know, did, in fact, protect AIG bonuses, and was signed into law.

What is also in the stimulus bill is a provision to set up the comparative effectiveness research advisory board--the positions of which have been filled, by the way.

Now, the point of the comparative effectiveness ideology is to have government determine through this board what is most cost-effective in terms of your health care treatment by a concept known as ``life years.'' Is the cost worth it to add X number of years to your life or to improve the quality? Many of us consider that inherently inhumane and not the proper function of a limited government. Yet that was approved in the stimulus bill.

So, like the health care bill which has followed it and that the public is having, as you say, shoved down its throat, I think that, as America continues to find out about the comparative effectiveness research council, they are going to find that equally hard to swallow.

I yield back.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

It's certainly not funny, humorous, when we understand that, recently, we've just heard that the election of Senator Brown from Massachusetts was due to, in many ways, according to the administration, the public's lack of having adequate information about what was in the bill.

We have heard that this administration and this Congress have been too busy acting to do enough talking so that we can do enough understanding as the American people. It would seem to me that, if one wants to make the argument that the American people haven't had sufficient information regarding what's in the bill and why it's

in their best interest, the last place you would wish to hold your meetings regarding that bill would be behind closed doors, out of public sight.

It strikes me that--to use a medical term, actually, a criminal term--do not blame the victim. Do not claim the American people do not understand what's in this bill or that they have not had adequate information when it is you who are, in fact, keeping that information from them, especially because you realize that, when the American people have seen what's in this bill and what you intend to do to have government run their health care and to make some of their most intimate life decisions for them, they've rejected it.

I yield back to the gentleman.

I thank the gentleman. This segues into another point on the chart, the sweetheart deals that were made with big pharmaceutical industries and others to try to get this bill passed. But the converse is the heartless deals that were also made to get this bill passed.

The gentleman has talked about the disparate treatment amongst the States, which helps to explain why the bill is being handled behind closed doors so the public cannot see what Mr. Milbank, thankfully, is able to write under the Constitution.

One of the two heartless deals is the taxpayer funding of abortion which is in the Senate bill. And at this point, I would like to thank our Democratic colleague Bart Stupak for his efforts here to ensure that the House bill carried his provision to prevent the taxpayer funding of abortion. It was a rare moment of bipartisanship and a very difficult issue. He has been a man of strong courage and conviction and held his ground, and hopefully we could still see that provision remain if something is passed.

We have also seen the heartless deal of, as has been mentioned, cutting a half trillion dollars from Medicare. That doesn't sound like a very good deal for the senior citizens.

And in the end, there is also a hidden deal that the American people don't, I think, quite realize the extent to which it is going to hurt them. The deal is this: within these bills is the concept, the quality and continuation of your life and the health care you require to perpetuate it and improve it is tied to the cost to the government.

I want to be clear on this. We discuss this in our Republican House policy pamphlet, ``We, the People,'' which you can see on line at RepublicanHouse.com.

The fundamental tenets of the health care bill before us set forward a heartless deal whereby your life and health care will be determinate upon its cost to the government. And that is because the underlying theory is that government can control health care costs by controlling the supply of health care and your decisions. It is absolutely backwards.

A better deal for the American people would be to realize you have an inherent sanctity and dignity and liberty that allows you to pursue your health and wellness and happiness, absent its cost to the government, as long as you don't hurt other people; and to make sure that we go towards a patient-centered wellness that empowers individuals as consumers of health care to be able to make their own decisions, and allow the free market that is born of that to increase the supply of health care to reduce costs. A far better deal for the American people from their servant government.

I yield back.

If we did, they're not in my district.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

On the point about the sweetheart deals and the disparate treatment amongst the States, we have to remember that in the haste to pass this bill and in the haste of the backroom dealing and the haste of trying to ``incentivize'' their own Democratic colleagues' votes in the Senate, you have to remember that the rule of law applies equally to all individuals. As a free Republic composed of 50 sovereign States, it is critical that all States be treated equally under the law, under the Constitution. In their haste to pass this bill, they are endangering one of the fundamental foundations of a constitutionally based free Republic. That is a very grave mistake to make, no matter how much you attempt to reform anything, especially when dealing with the body politic.

I yield back.

I appreciate that from the gentleman.

I just want to be clear on this. As we put forward in the Republican House Policy pamphlet, We the People, which you can view at Republicanhousepolicy.com, the government doesn't spend what it makes. It spends what it takes. When the gentleman talked about how, if you started a business, you would have startup costs. You would not be able to go out to people and simply take their money and promise them a product later and talk about what a wonderful profit that you have. What we're seeing here is some of the worst of government accounting, where the government goes out and takes your money on the promise of something later and then it tells you that it isn't as expensive as it's going to be.

I yield back.

Will the gentleman yield for a point of order?

I will ask the Chair, is there a House rule against product endorsement or placement in speeches that are delivered here in the Chamber?

I withdraw the request.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. The sky-thigh, 40 percent surcharge on health plans, in an attempt to capture, ``Cadillac'' plans, which we from Detroit prefer to call Lexus plans. The government in the Senate passed a bill that would tax these plans. What they did was, they caught up a whole lot of working people who have collective bargaining agreements from employer-provided benefits. You can imagine that coming from a district like mine, an auto-based district of people who still make things for a living such as cars, this was a very unfair tax to them. It went against the express position of many people in the Democratic Party who, like myself--and I believe the gentleman from Ohio--oppose putting a tax on employer- provided health care benefits.

We've recently seen where the unions had to go to the White House to try to stop this unfair tax from affecting people that they represent. I, for one Republican, am glad that the administration has shown a willingness to back off this tax because I wish everybody would not have to pay this tax. I wish they would go back to the drawing board and get it right. But it goes back to the fact that in the rush to pass this, in a haste behind closed doors to do this, they actually hurt the very working people that so many of us on both sides of the aisle have promised should never have their employer-provided health care benefits taxed.

And if I may very quickly in one moment, I wish to answer your question about vending machines. It goes back to our earlier point. The government is tying your health to the cost to the government. They want to control what you eat because if you eat improperly, it costs them ``money.'' Now I will just remind people, if you don't want the government in your bedroom, you sure don't want them in your kitchen either.

I thank the gentleman. One of the fundamental concepts behind this great Nation is that all power is vested in the sovereign people. It is simply delegated to us, as their servants, to do the work of governance on their behalf. You cannot defy the people who sent you here. You cannot tell your employer who is giving a 2-year, 6-year or a 4-year contract that they don't know what they are talking about, that you know better than they do, and you will take their money to convince them of it over a period in time.

I think that what we have to remember here, the true Achilles' heel is not the American public's lack of understanding about this. It is the Congress' arrogant defiance of the wishes of the American people that have commonsense solutions to problems that affect

their daily lives, especially in a very difficult time of economic recession, with high unemployment, such as in States like mine, Michigan.

When we think about this, it is a very fundamental proposition. Lincoln laid it out a long time ago. Whatever happened in Massachusetts and throughout this country, it's not anger. It's not just frustration. It's not vexation. It's the fact that the American people understand what's happening. They have the information, and they do not give their consent to this radical government-run health care bill that was passed by this House or by the Senate or is threatened to be passed again, because Lincoln was right: Why should there not be patient confidence in the ultimate justice of the people? Is there any better or equal hope in this world? The answer remains no, and I would encourage my Democratic colleagues to heed their wisdom.

I yield back.

I thank the gentleman.

Madam Speaker, a quick point that was raised by our esteemed colleague from Massachusetts about how President Clinton left 4 years of balanced budgets: It was with the assistance of a Republican majority in the Congress, which is an exceptional precedent, you'll remember, as we head to the polls in 2010.

As we address this issue of raising the debt ceiling, let us be charitable in this, the giving season. Let us recall that, as the Democratic Party's argument today is ``the same but more,'' let us look at what they have tried to give the American people over the course of the past year for stocking stuffers.

First, Americans got higher unemployment, higher spending, higher deficits, and higher taxes.

Secondly, senior citizens got a $500 billion cut in Medicare. Terrorists got new rights, new trials, and new cells on American soil, and Federal Government bureaucrats got raises.

I think that we should question our priorities and the direction in which we are taking ourselves before we decide to spend more money on this. It strikes me that it is very justifiable for the American people to watch this debate, to watch the debt ceiling be raised, and to come to the distinct conclusion that the Democratic majority in Congress has proven itself too costly and too crazy too quickly.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to recognize the Michigan Division 1 State High School Football champions, the Detroit Catholic Central Shamrocks. On November 27, 2009, the Shamrocks defeated a fine Sterling Heights Stevenson team 31-21.

The victory earned head coach Tom Mach his 10th State championship in his 34 seasons leading the Shamrocks. The team's hard work, mental toughness, and burning desire epitomizes what it means to be a Shamrock molded by the Basilian Fathers and their mission to teach young men goodness, discipline, and knowledge. Truly this accomplishment is shared by the entire CC family.

Madam Speaker, meeting the challenge with an undefeated record of 14- 0, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Detroit Catholic Central Shamrocks upon winning their Michigan State football championship and for proving they are indeed men of Mary, Alma Mater, who inspires us evermore.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor and acknowledge Detroit Catholic Central Coach Tony Magni and the entire Catholic Central Shamrocks' Cross Country Team on their Division 1 State Championship.

I am a proud graduate of Detroit Catholic Central High School. As a student, I learned how important it was to work hard, seek out knowledge, and fight for the less fortunate. I played sports at Catholic Central, so I know how important sports are in teaching our children the importance of teamwork and motivation.

On November 7, 2009, at the Michigan International Speedway, Shamrock Ricky Galindo came in third at the race and led the Shamrocks all season. The Shamrocks suffered from several injuries early in the season, but Coach Magni never lost confidence in the team's ability to persevere in the end. Not surprisingly, Magni has won five cross country championships since 1983 and is known as an extraordinarily talented coach.

Madam Speaker, Coach Magni and the entire Detroit Catholic Central Shamrocks cross country team worked tirelessly and productively to earn their state championship. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Coach Magni and the Shamrocks for reaching this milestone and recognizing the coach and team's contribution to the community and our country.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, as the health redistribution bill before us attempts to put its skid marks on history, it further proves Democrats are the party of the past. Their antiquated government-run takeover of Americans' health care is as ill-suited to our times as a leeching is to laser surgery.

We do not live on a government-run globe. We live in a people-powered world, one belatedly awakening to America's revolutionary experiment in human freedom and self-government. Today, from the palms of our hands, we can traverse distant strands of Earth to access friends and goods. Why in the world would we put in the palm of a bureaucrat's hand our health care?

Yet, this is precisely what the hoary voices of hidebound ideologues demand; namely, that our generation's innovation revolution and its unprecedented expansion of human empowerment be buried beneath big government.

They are gravely mistaken. Amidst our constantly changing and challenging times during this age of globalization, our generation's innovation revolution is burying big government in the ash bin of history.

Thus, the public and Republicans oppose the Democrat's fossilized model of a mammoth government-run takeover of Americans' health care. Instead, we embrace and harness our generation's innovation revolution to empower Americans as citizens and consumers and advance patient- centered wellness.

Our plan will increase the supply of health care to meet rising demand and reduce costs through such sensible, affordable, and helpful reforms as ending exclusions for preexisting conditions, reforming medical liability laws, expanding Health Savings Accounts, allowing small businesses to band together to provide coverage for employees, permitting health insurance sales across State lines, and incentivizing preventative health care and wellness.

All this can be achieved without trillions of dollars in new spending, taxes, deficit and debt, and without big government controlling your health care decisions.

Trapped in the past, there are those who ignore behind closed doors the opportunities of our age. If Democrats impose their government-run takeover of health care on the American people, the consequences will be higher costs, lower quality, fewer choices, and lost jobs during this painful recession.

But for those with an abiding faith in our free Republic's people and their future, there is a better way--maximizing America's innovation revolution to advance patient-centered wellness in our people-powered world.

Pray we do.

Mr. Speaker, we do not live on a government-run globe; we live in a people-powered world. The massive, radical change that is presented by the health care bill brought forward by this majority constitutes the policies of the past.

Within the communications revolution in the globalized marketplace, one thing is certain: human beings, at a greater extent than at any other time in history, are now able to control more of their lives and their own decisions. True health care reform must not resist these times; they must meld with these times. We need patient-centered wellness through transparency, technology, and a humane and compassionate understanding and help for our fellow citizens. This bill will not do it.

Fundamentally, this bill will bury the American people beneath Big Government at the very time they have a greater chance of empowering themselves and making their own decisions. Let us go forward; let us not go backward.

I thank the distinguished gentleman from New York. In fact, all truth be told, one of the reasons that I'm here is a conversation we once had. The gentleman, Mr. King, said to me, If John McHugh and I left Congress tomorrow, you probably wouldn't have a single good thing to say about either one of us. And I said, No, I would have a lot of good things to say about John McHugh, and I do.

When you first come to Congress, it's a very daunting experience, and as you go on you find out that you are rightly daunted. This is a town where everything is a crisis, everything has to be done in a hurry. And yet there was always one person you could rely on to exemplify Hemingway's definition of grace under fire, which is, ``keeping your head when all those around you are losing theirs.''

John McHugh is the type of person who always could keep his composure and was always open to give you counsel, especially as a young Member of Congress, as to what was going on, why it wasn't always the end of the world, and the way that you could work in a principled, bipartisan fashion to get the job done.

It was sad to see John go, we all know that. But we have all been enriched by our ability to work with him. Our country is certainly going to be well served by him as Secretary of the Army.

As he left, I was reminded of something my father said--I can't say it's an Irish saying; my father was Irish, and he said it, but I don't know that anybody else ever did--he said, Son, as an Irish Catholic, there are three things you usually wind up: You can wind up a priest, you can wind up a teacher, or you can wind up a soldier, but under no, no circumstances should you ever wind up a politician. It is nice to see that at this late stage of his life, John McHugh has improved himself and gone on to leave this Congress and serve with the men and women who defend us.

In closing, I would just like to say, Johnny, we did know ye. We will daily miss you, and we dearly love you. Godspeed in your new role serving our country.

Thank you.

In Michigan, the people know what the most important issue facing this Congress is: It's called jobs. My State has a 15.3 unemployment rate; it is expected to rise. And yet what we see in Congress is an unwillingness of the majority to listen to the concerns of the American people. They want this economy fixed; they want to provide for the livelihood of their families; they wish to pursue their happiness. And yet they watch a Congress that is willfully intent upon passing a partisan, government-run health care bill despite the voices of the American people.

I suggest that if we are to restore sanity and prosperity to these uncertain times, that this Congress start to listen to the voices of their constituents and start to act accordingly. That is why we have a representative government.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in tribute to Congregation Beit Kodesh, which is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year.

In 1958, a small number of intuitive individuals started hosting Shabbat services at the Clarenceville Central Elementary School. This same year, over 200 people attended High Holiday services at the Botsford Inn in Farmington. The following year, the Livonia Jewish Congregation was formally organized. Over the next few years, the Congregation met at several different locations until negotiation with the Jewish Welfare Foundation allowed them to move into the May and Samuel Cohn Building.

Importantly, the Congregation has been served by three Rabbis over the years: Rabbi Nathaniel Steinberg (one year), Rabbi Martin Gordon (twenty-two years) and Rabbi Craig Allen (seven years). When no Rabbi is available, the lay people of the congregation carry out services. Currently, Rabbi Jason Miller, the associate director of the University of Michigan Hillel Foundation in Ann Arbor, is the Rabbinic Advisor.

In 1990, the congregation officially changed its name to Congregation Beit Kodesh in order to recognize members who live throughout the Tri- County area. Two years ago, they combined efforts with Bet Chaverim and began to hold Sunday School classes and activities together at Congregation Beit Kodesh. Notably, students play an important role in these congregations. For example, students attend regular Bar and Bat Mitzvah classes and volunteer at Yad Ezra. In addition, they contribute actively in the community by participating in the Matzos Factory at the Junior Community College, the annual Penny Harvest, and assisting the elderly with various projects. Finally, the synagogue also has an active Sisterhood, which sends relief packages to our soldiers and seeks to advance tolerance in the community.

In addition to being the only conservative synagogue in Western Wayne County, this distinguished congregation was the first in Metropolitan Detroit to elect a woman as president. While receiving very little financial assistance or recognition from the Jewish community, they remain very active and play an important role in the community.

Madam Speaker, for fifty years, Congregation Beit Kodesh has stood as a tribute to the strong efforts of Metropolitan Detroit's Jewish community. As their members commemorate this tremendous milestone, they embody a legacy of distinction and determination. While observing their Jewish customs, this small but significant family synagogue will continue to contribute to the community. Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in commemorating Congregation Beit Kodesh and recognizing their contributions to our community and country.

I thank the gentleman. I know we are heading toward the witching hour, so I will try to put some remarks in a very succinct fashion.

First, I would like to point out some of the principles which undergird our position in support of the Honduran people. One is that we, as Americans, understand our self-evident right to liberty is from God, not the government, and no tyrant nor terrorist can interfere with it. We also understand, as Americans, that our security is from strength, not surrender, and that our greatest strength is the expansion of liberty to others to ensure freedom for ourselves.

We also understand, as is painfully evident with Honduras, that the United States and all free people are targets of tyrants and terrorists, not because of our actions, but because of our existence. The existence of free people, the rule of law, the pursuit of one's happiness in accordance with one's inalienable rights is a threat to all tyrants and despots throughout the world, for their thrones are unstable in the presence of free people and oppressed people who are inspired by such examples.

With the Honduras situation, we see crystal clear that the United States, in many ways in our foreign affairs, has gotten away from these foreign principles and the concepts. The danger, not only to our allies like Honduras, is great.

I pose one example. Can this administration, for the edification of individuals like myself who may not grasp the intricacies and the genius of their foreign policy, explain one thing. What is the difference between women being shot in the streets of Iran for trying to be free and the difference between a constitutional democracy in Honduras following the rule of law to protect itself from a would-be tyrant?

This administration said these situations are distinguishable, because in the instance of the Iranians' murderous regime, that is an internal affair for the Iranian people; yet, when the free

people of Honduras through the rule of law in defense of their constitutional democracy exercised their means of self-defense, we are told that that is of the utmost interest to the United States and we must demand an outcome in accordance with our will and the will of the OAS, which now includes Mr. Fidel Castro, no fan of elections.

Can you tell me why the freedom of the Iranian people is to be left in the hands of their murderers and why the freedom of the Honduran people is to be taken from theirs and put in the hands of butchers like Fidel Castro and others such as Chavez? I eagerly await a response, although I do not know that I will find it edifying, let alone satisfactory. I yield back.