Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in solemn observance of Yom Hashoah, commemorating the commencement of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising.

Today the Gateway Monument in the Warsaw Ghetto serves as a fixed memorial to the victims who were herded onto railroad cars for deportation to Treblinka, one of many death camps scattered throughout the European countryside. The Gateway Monument has etched upon its stone the names of four hundred Jews who martyred themselves for the cause of saving the lives of their neighbors and their own children, and to defend their religion from annihilation. However, another great monument exists, but in the form of the retelling of the heroic story of the uprising, one generation at a time.

Mordecai Anielewicz, a young man of twenty-three years, led an army of beleaguered men and women against their oppressors, the Nazi war machine. On this day, Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Day, we celebrate and honor those who offered resistance in a valiant attempt to defy deportation to death camps. Mordecai Anielewicz wrote in his last letter to Yitzhak Cukierman, friend and co-founder of the Jewish Fighting Organization, ``The fact that we are remembered beyond the ghetto walls encourages us in our struggle.''

In our united causes to `Never Forget', nor to repeat the senseless atrocities of the Holocaust, we must be ready to confront similar genocidal slaughter throughout the world. Mr. Anielewicz's heroism and the courage of the over four hundred resistance fighters of the Warsaw Ghetto resistance have earned more than words as their legacy. Our nation and those of the developed world must offer our own resistance to despot leaders who seek to commit murder on the basis of religion or race.

Mr. Speaker, Mordecai was correct in his assessment of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising's impact outside the ghetto walls. Indeed, the resistance has been remembered beyond the ghetto walls, as it has become a testimonial to the human spirit that will be remembered throughout all humanity, for all time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor and congratulate my neighbor and constituent Mr. Ernest Maler, Sr. on the occasion of his 100th birthday. Mr. Maler was born on April 24, 1905 and raised in East Patchogue, New York. The upcoming century milestone is a time to celebrate the numerous achievements of a great American.

Mr. Maler earned his Juris Doctor at New York University School of Law and returned to Long Island so that he could provide exemplary legal service to the people of his hometown. His passion for law is matched only by a love for his family and an affinity for the game of golf.

The 100th birthday is slowly becoming an attainable goal by many Americans as medical science, better living conditions, and more knowledge about fitness and health increase our life expectancy. Today more than 70,000 Americans are 100 years old, and that number is expected to grow dramatically during the next century.

Mr. Maler lived through the great depression, two world wars, and 18 presidential administrations. His first hand experiences are invaluable sources of wisdom and his life accomplishments are inspirational to all Americans. Mr. Speaker I appreciate the opportunity to honor such a noteworthy individual.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my support of the amendment offered by Mr. Castle to strike the Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Siting provision in H.R. 6. The language included in H.R. 6 silences the voices of state governments, local municipalities, and environmental advocacy organizations during the LNG terminal site selection process.

Mr. Chairman, the language in H.R. 6 solidifying FERC's exclusive role in the siting of LNG terminals is entirely unnecessary. Until recently, only one LNG importation terminal existed in the country. There are now five in operation and 6 more have already been approved by federal regulators. The process for selecting sites and approving LNG importation terminals is working and in no way requires removing partial-authority from states. The new FERC rule would be another example of catering to the already too powerful oil and gas industry.

Furthermore, when I cast my vote in support of Mr. Castle's amendment to preserve states' rights and strike this language from H.R. 6, I know that I will also be speaking for many others residing in my district and across the Nation. Numerous organizations and legislative bodies who seek to be heard will speak through my vote, including, but certainly not limited to the League of Conservation Voters, National Association of Counties, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the National Conference of States Legislatures, and so many more.

A quarter-mile long floating LNG importation terminal has been proposed in the Long Island Sound between Connecticut and Long Island. Lawmakers and civic organizations at every level of government in my congressional district have expressed their opposition to this proposal and are furious at the prospect that their voices will be silenced during the FERC approval process. Mr. Castle's amendment, if passed, will allow their opinions to count.

The Long Island Sound is an environmentally unique estuary that needs to be protected. The residents and elected officials of Long Island have fought vigorously for many years and spent millions of dollars to preserve the quality of life that the Long Island Sound offers. Additionally, our tourism and fishing industries, which provide billions of dollars to the state's economy, will be threatened, as fishermen will undoubtedly be displaced.

Mr. Chairman, I will speak for my constituents by lending my support to Mr. Castle's amendment. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan measure.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the cosponsor of this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.

I am pleased to offer the Bishop-Markey-McDermott en bloc amendment this evening along with my colleagues. We have an opportunity within our reach to make a real advancement in energy policy, but we are about to do the unimaginable: pass an energy bill that will do nothing to lower gas prices.

Let me say that again because I think it is important to our constituents who are paying $2.25 or more for a

gallon of gas, this energy bill will not lower gas prices. In fact, according to the Department of Energy, this bill may actually increase future gas prices.

Fortunately, our amendment will help consumers see immediate relief at the gas pump. The Bishop-Markey-McDermott amendment calls on the President to immediately suspend deliveries to the Strategy Petroleum Reserve until oil prices fall below $40 per barrel. When we have done this in the past, the price of oil has dropped anywhere from $6 to $11 per barrel.

The United States should be the global leader in the development of new and innovative technologies. This amendment will encourage the growth of an energy-efficiency marketplace that fosters and incubates new start-ups. This will not only lead to exciting new advances, it will help create good-paying jobs for thousands of Americans.

Our amendment will create a $5 billion emerging-technology trust fund, funding the technologies of the future rather than the further counterproductive subsidies to the oil and gas industries provided for in the underlying bill.

The Bishop-Markey-McDermott amendment would also offer grants to States that meet new standards for efficiency in new building development. Under our amendment, the renewable energy production tax credit will be extended for 5 years. We will provide tax credits for new homes that reduce energy use, as well as tax credits for new and existing commercial buildings to reduce energy use; and we would also offer an investment tax credit for the development of higher efficiency heating and cooling systems.

In short, we offer tax cuts and credits that America will embrace and at the same time create a cleaner and healthier environment for our children. We will allow consumers to make more informed decisions about energy-efficient appliances for their homes or businesses by adding greater meaning to the Energy Star label by mandating that only the top 25 percent of products will carry that label. Currently, according to the Alliance to Save Energy, approximately two-thirds of products are eligible to wear the Energy Star label, rendering the distinction almost meaningless.

Mr. Chairman, let us give Americans in the Northeast and on the West Coast something to cheer about. America needs electricity reliability and protection from fraud and blackouts. H.R. 6 would repeal the Public Utility Holding Company Act. Our act would strike that provision. PUHCA is the only line of defense for millions of taxpayers protecting them from skyrocketing energy costs and greedy corporations. We should not allow utility holding companies to use the profits obtained from their regulated business activities squeezed from their captive rate-payers and pour it down the sinkholes of unregulated businesses. PUHCA should not be repealed; it should be applied appropriately and enforced.

Mr. Chairman, H.R. 6 is anti-taxpayer, anti-consumer, and anti- environment. And I will say it again, it does nothing to lower gas prices. We can do better. The Bishop-Markey-McDermott en bloc amendment offers real incentives for energy efficiency and real relief at the pump.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Yes, I would, Mr. Chairman.

It is, in fact, a drafting error. These efficiency standards were taken from the Senate bill from the 108th Congress and it is a drafting error. The date needs to be updated.

If the gentleman can just give me one second.

Mr. Chairman, I guess what I would say in response is that I understand the questions that the gentleman from Texas is raising and I understand, I guess, the consternation that he has with respect to receiving such a lengthy amendment with little notice. I would only say that the underlying bill is equally complex, equally dense, and that there are sections of the underlying bill that were not subjected to hearings, as well.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 513.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the heroic actions of the members of the 106th Air Rescue Wing. Over the past few days, the Northeast experienced torrential downpours causing massive flooding throughout Sussex County, New Jersey. The rain became so terrible that it washed out the only road connecting tiny Mashipacong Island to the mainland, stranding five residents. In response, Langley Air Force Base scrambled two Pave Hawk helicopters from the Air National Guard's 106th Rescue Wing, which is based at Gabreski Air Force Base in Westhampton, New York. Fortunately, the 106th was able to respond in time; not only did they rescue the five residents, they also rescued one nearby individual on his roof, along with a dog and a cat.

This is the most recent heroic rescue in the storied history of the 106th, and I am proud to commend the men and women of this unit for their selfless dedication to duty and the protection of those in need. The exploits of the members of the 106th were made famous following their actions depicted in the book ``The Perfect Storm''. More recently, during our ongoing conflict in Iraq, the pararescue specialists of the 106th played an integral role in rescuing two downed soldiers flying on the CH-47 Chinook helicopter that was shot down west of Baghdad in November of 2003.

As the only rescue unit of its kind in the Northeast, the 106th has once again proven its unique value to the safety and security of our region and our nation. Mr. Speaker, the 106th has proven its worth time and time again. We all owe a debt of gratitude to the brave men and women of the 106th Air Rescue Wing. I hope we can show that gratitude by letting them continue to serve and protect our nation.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that Congress is again considering reauthorization of the transportation bill. Americans have waited too long and watched our roads and transit systems further deteriorate as Congress and the President stalemate at the expense of travelers and commuters.

Transportation spending is a win-win proposition. It creates jobs and improves safety and efficiency on our roads. While passage of this bill will go a long way towards improving our infrastructure, I, along with most of the members of our community, would have hoped for a larger bill that better reflects the Nation's need for transportation funding.

Real economic stimulus comes from real investment. And by increasing funding to a more appropriate level approaching $375 billion, the amount that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure originally passed, we would begin to address our immediate needs to create tens of thousands of good-paying jobs. We know that each $1 billion of Federal funds invested in infrastructure creates approximately 47,000 jobs and generates $6.2 billion in economic activity, and our economy could certainly use this type of boost.

This bill is first and foremost a jobs bill, and I would urge swift consideration of this legislation so that we do not deny tens of thousands of workers in New York and elsewhere nationwide good jobs. We especially need this boost in New York. The New York metropolitan area has some of the worst traffic in the country, despite a mass transit system that carries one-third of our Nation's transit riders.

I would also like to stress the importance of ensuring that the minimum guarantee formula stays at 90.5 percent. Our transportation policy now directs funding to the areas of the country where it is needed the most. It would be unwise to punish States with aging infrastructure and inefficient mass transit systems by cutting off their funding. There is simply no way to reach a 95 percent minimum guarantee in a $284 billion bill.

I would also like to thank my colleague, the gentleman from upstate New York (Mr. Kuhl), for his amendment naming a section of Interstate 86 after Amo Houghton, a former colleague and a true gentleman.

I would like to thank the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Ranking Member Oberstar) and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for bringing this important bill to the Floor. They and their staffs have produced the best bill possible, given the circumstances, to move our transportation system forward.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman. Let me start by thanking the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) for organizing this time this evening and particularly for her leadership on this and so many other issues of great importance to our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in support of Amtrak, America's national rail system. As a personal beneficiary of the service that Amtrak provides and as someone who represents a congressional district that counts on safe, reliable rail service, I am a strong supporter of providing this vital industry the funding necessary to continue operations.

A healthy Amtrak is an integral part of New York and the Nation's economy and transportation systems. Amtrak offers riders a cost- effective way to travel throughout the country. It has over 2,000 employees, serves over 500 stations in 46 States and owns and operates over 700 miles of shared track throughout the country.

These numbers tell the story. Amtrak is a major industry helping to support families and towns throughout the country, and it requires our support now.

The administration budget proposal to eliminate funding for Amtrak flies in the face of common sense and the President's stated goal of sensibly growing this Nation's economy. The events of September 11, 2001, showed us America's reliance on the rail system and Amtrak in particular. As planes sat grounded everywhere, goods, services and people continued to move, thanks in large part to Amtrak.

The President's budget proposal indicates that with regard to passenger rail, we have not learned enough from that terrible day. There is hardly a more clear example of misguided priorities at the Federal level. Current plans will force a major employer to shut its doors, move people out of secure employment and cripple a transportation system that serves millions of people. We need to abandon this approach that will end national rail service and, instead, look for ways to improve upon our existing structure of supporting rail lines.

Abandoning Amtrak will destroy a system that has never been supported adequately. In comparison to the rest of the world, we rank a miserable 25th on the list of countries that provide commuter rail funding. The U.S. is outpaced by countries like Estonia, Belgium and Slovenia.

It is no wonder that we are debating investment in Amtrak. We have never provided the adequate assistance that would allow Amtrak to operate at full capacity, thereby providing no baseline for comparison now that the President is proposing to eliminate the program.

Over 30 years ago, Amtrak replaced a faltering private rail system failing to provide adequate services. Now, 30 years later, we are attempting to replace an existing public passenger rail system with some undefined private system by stripping funding for a struggling but improving system that America supports. We should not continue this cycle, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this proposal, as it represents an unclear approach to a very serious issue.

Congress continues to focus on funding other transportation modes over Amtrak to the detriment of the rail industry. Amtrak's level of funding represents only 2 percent of the U.S. Department of Transportation's nearly $60 billion budget; whereas over 50 percent of the Department's spending went for highways, and nearly $20 billion went for air travel.

The fact is that America relies on Amtrak to move people. Commuter rail systems would be faced with major roadblocks and possible route elimination if Amtrak lost funding. So we are not just talking about an effect on Amtrak's customers alone. Over 850,000 commuters a day rely on Amtrak or its infrastructure to get to and from work, and it simply makes no sense to eliminate funding for a program that benefits nearly 1 million commuters a day.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to fight for the continued operation of Amtrak by advocating for a budget providing $1.8 billion for fiscal year 2006. I thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) for her leadership on this issue.

The President's budget proposes zero.

And what we need is a budget of at least $1.8 billion.

Indeed they are. This country has a long history of finding the money to support things that it considers to be a priority, and we simply need to come together and say that this kind of passenger rail service is a priority.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my opposition to the President's FY06 budget--a budget that I believe goes against our values as a society. If the proposed budget passes, it would be a disaster for constituents in my home district on Long Island and districts nationwide, forcing working families to make up for many of the cuts in the form of higher State and local taxes.

The American people deserve honesty, and this budget is dishonest by omission, and dishonest in how it portrays the overall budget projections. The President claims that the steep budget cuts he advocates are necessary to cut the deficit in half in 5 years. This is simply not true, and the budget the President proposes fails to accomplish his stated goal.

First, the budget is dishonest by omission. Nowhere in the FY06 budget does the President account for significant costs, including:

Fails to account for the enormous costs of privatizing Social Security as proposed by the President; a whopping $6 trillion over the next 20 years; $754 billion over the period from 2009-2015;

Fails to account for the continuing presence of our troops in Iraq-- the administration knows we are going to approve an Iraq supplemental upward of $80 billion for the first part of this year alone--and an estimated $384 billion over 10 years--yet still omits it in the budget;

Fails to account for growth in interest costs;

Fails to reform the Alternative Minimum Tax that is disproportionately burdening middle income families in my district on Long Island.

As troubling as the glaring budget omissions is the knowledge that the deficit is largely a self-inflicted wound. The President inherited a record annual surplus of $236 billion--which now, 4 years later, has tanked into a deficit in excess of $400 billion. Any attempt at honest accounting suggests that we are looking at a decade or more of similar deficits.

The reason we are faced with an unethical budget is because the President refuses to acknowledge the fiscal irresponsibility of his choices, and will not entertain even the most moderate suggestions, such as repealing only the portion of the tax cuts that benefit the top 1 percent of taxpayers.

Unfortunately this budget builds on a disturbing trend. This administration and the leadership in Congress appear to be intent on valuing wealth over work, thereby placing working families at a distinct disadvantage. The tax policies the President advocates disproportionately advantage the wealthiest to the detriment of working Americans, and working families will continue to bear the brunt of the rising inflation spurred by the rising interest rates.

The Bill Gates' of the world pocketed their tax cut at the insistence of the President. However, this President sees no problem eliminating funding for Perkins Loans in his budget, even though the cost of tuition is rising and will continue to rise as the administration's policies force inflation. As a result of the decision to eliminate Perkins, this year more than 670,000 student borrowers could lose out on loan forgiveness if they become teachers, law enforcement officers or if they serve in the military. This is just one of many examples of valuing wealth over work.

In my district, the budget scales back and eliminates several long- term shore protection projects important to the safety and economic security of Long Island.

The President has no problem zeroing out the Fire Island to Montauk Point Study, just as it nears completion.

The President eliminates funding to dredge the Patchogue River, even though this creates a huge safety hazard for boaters.

The President does not hesitate to slash funding for the Long Island Sound Study Office from $7 million to less than $500,000, even though this is vital to the livelihoods and economy of the east end of Long Island.

The President falls far short of his promise under the No Child Left Behind bill, even though this means that taxpayers will have to foot the bill at the local level to pay for education.

Finally, the President does not seem to mind taxing veterans' health care at $250 per year, and doubling copayments for veterans' prescription drugs, at a time when we should be saluting our veterans.

Our values as a society are not reflected in this budget. We must ban together in Congress to force an honest accounting, and insist upon the restoration of long-term fiscal responsibility to our Nation. It's not enough to talk about compassion--it is high time that we refocus our priorities and show some compassion.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the life and contributions of Civil Air Patrol Cadet 1LT Brian M. Mooney. The Civil Air Patrol, an Auxiliary of the United States Air Force, is dedicated to educating the American public on air related topics and providing emergency services and disaster relief efforts.

During First Lieutenant Mooney's extensive tenure as a Suffolk County Cadet, he exemplified what it means to be a dedicated and passionate member of the Civil Air Patrol. After originally joining the Air Patrol as a member of the COL F.S. Gabreski Squadron in 1998, Cadet Mooney worked hard to help that squadron earn a Unit Citation for 1999. In 2001, First Lieutenant Mooney became Commander of Suffolk County Cadet Squadron 5, where he served diligently until his 21st birthday.

Sadly, First Lieutenant Mooney passed away prematurely on October 16, 2004. First Lieutenant Mooney was truly an individual respected by his community and he will continue to be remembered as someone who always had a kind word for friends and strangers alike. Mr. Mooney's loving family, surrogate mother and all of his friends and compatriots in the Air Patrol will miss his dedication to life and to his duties as a Squadron Commander.

In a fitting and lasting tribute to the many contributions First Lieutenant Mooney made to the Air Patrol organization, I was pleased to learn about a recent decision to rename Squadron 5 after Brian M. Mooney. This will undoubtedly serve as a reminder to young cadets that their unit respects the outstanding works of former Squadron members.

In December of 2000, First Lieutenant Mooney received one of the Air Patrol's highest honors by earning the illustrious General Billy Mitchell Award. Named for BG Billy Mitchell, this commendation represents a significant achievement requiring a strong work ethic and an exhaustive knowledge of aerospace issues.

First Lieutenant Mooney's experience in the Civil Air Patrol could serve as a guide for all young cadets. Early in his tenure, Mooney was elected Vice-Chairperson for the Long Island Group Cadet Advisory Council and following his work there, was elected Chairperson for the LI Group and was named as a Member of the New York Wing Cadet Advisory Council.

First Lieutenant Mooney's work as Commander shows the overwhelming pride that he had in his unit and in his fellow cadets. One year after becoming Commander, Mooney was named Long Island Group's Cadet of Distinction 2002, and during the course of only two years of his service in the Air Patrol, Mooney was responsible for increasing recruitment for his squadron from five to forty-plus cadets.

I can think of few individuals more suitable for recognition by this body. First Lieutenant Mooney's work with the Civil Air Patrol influenced numerous cadets on Long Island and the members of the Squadron now bearing his name will sorely miss him. First Lieutenant Mooney shows that selfless dedication to a cause and dogged pursuit of one's goals reflect positively on the community as a whole.

First Lieutenant Mooney's brief life was filled with extensive contributions to family and fellow cadets alike, and I appreciate the opportunity to commemorate his work in the Civil Air Patrol. I would also urge that the current cadets in the Brian M. Mooney Civil Air Patrol Squadron memorialize First Lieutenant Mooney's achievements by continuing his good works.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the life and contributions of my neighbor and constituent Sergeant Major James Pettaway, Jr. who gave his life in service to his country. SGM Pettaway died this week as a result of wounds he suffered in August during his second tour of duty in the war in Iraq. Only a few weeks after his deployment to Iraq, the convoy jeep he was riding in struck a roadside bomb outside of Fallujah. The explosion killed one man and seriously injured SGM Pettaway, covering 80 percent of his body with burns. After a long fight, he died Sunday at the Brook Medical Burn Center in San Antonio, Texas.

I honor SGM Pettaway for the valiant sacrifice he made for his country. I also honor him for the kind of man he was. SGM Pettaway grew up in the army, enlisting after his high school graduation in 1988. The army changed him, made him stronger, gave him a sense of purpose and fulfillment. Because he was the kind of man he was, he wanted to give back some of what he had been given. He wanted to pass along the life lessons he had learned to others. His supervisor said the army ``changed him from a scatterbrained kid to a caring man.''

After 10 years of active duty, James Pettaway, this caring man and father of an 11-year-old son Brandon, joined a guard unit at the Herman Toulson Correctional Camp in Maryland. He was part of an 88-member guard contingent at the boot camp that houses adult felons. Because he was a caring man, SGM Pettaway took a genuine interest in the inmates' lives and tried to help them benefit from the things he learned in the army. He volunteered for extra duty, took a special interest in their accomplishments and tried to help them lead better lives.

In 2002, SGM Pettaway's reserve unit, the 223rd Transportation Company of Morristown, PA, was called to active duty. He served a year in Kuwait before returning to the United States. Then in May his reserve unit was called again to active duty. This time, his family and friends say, the 37-year-old sergeant did not have a positive feeling about returning to war. But he dutifully answered his country's call one more time. He would not live to see his hometown of Southampton, New York again.

Several of SGM Pettaway's cousins attended Southampton public schools and played on sports teams with my children. His Uncle works with my brother in the landscaping business. His son Brandon played on a Little League team last season with my friend's son. We all mourn his death. He is the first U.S. service member from our town to be killed in the Iraq war.

We cannot ask more of a man than we did of SGM Pettaway. He gave his all. Iraq forced him to learn some of life's most difficult lessons. I honor him for his bravery, his goodness, his service to others, and for the sacrifice he made for his country. I honor his son Brandon, and I pray that the lessons his father learned will not have been learned in vain but will be carried on in the lives of his family and friends.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Lieutenant John F. Finn of the Albany, NY, Police Department. Originally from Port Jefferson, NY, within my congressional district, Lieutenant Finn passed away on February 12 of this year from gunshot wounds received while attempting to apprehend a robbery suspect.

John Finn was a lifelong resident of New York, and after attending Smithtown High

School West on Long Island he pursued an undergraduate degree at SUNY Albany. Following school, Finn began a career in law enforcement marked by innovation and success. A 13-year veteran of the Albany force, John Finn served admirably throughout his career and during that tenure received two lifesaving awards from his department and the 2000 Officer of the Year from the Kiwanis Club. On July 26th, 2004, New York State officially recognized the contributions of Lieutenant Finn by posthumously awarding him the Governor's Police Officer of the Year Award for 2003.

Lieutenant Finn was a model policeman and family man, dedicating his life to protecting others. Finn's commitment to the well being of others remains visible in the good works of the Children and Family Services Unit of the Albany Police Department, which Finn helped create. Lieutenant Finn's surviving family includes his wife Maura McNulty-Finn and daughters Clara and Molly.

During his final days, Lieutenant Finn continued to exemplify bravery and fortitude by fighting hard for nearly 2 months after taking three bullets from a semiautomatic weapon. Thankfully, Finn's murderer now resides behind bars, and in a testament to Lieutenant Finn's affect on the community, nearly 5,000 people attended a public service in his honor.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to extend my deepest condolences to John Finn's family and friends and I am happy to help memorialize this brave man by designating a Federal building in his honor. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, this past weekend we joined with our families at barbecues and picnics to celebrate Labor Day, a day where we honor the contributions of the American workforce. There was a dark cloud over this Labor Day, however, because the administration decided to celebrate workers' accomplishments by rewarding hard-working Americans with one of the largest middle-class pay cuts in history. The decision to undermine overtime pay and enact what could turn out to be the largest middle-class pay cut in history is just the latest in a relentless effort under way in Washington to disregard the economic security of millions of middle-class families.

The regulations that went into effect on August 23 suggest that there are those in Washington who believe that overtime pay is nothing more than a luxury for American workers. The truth is plain and simple. Overtime pay is not a luxury for millions of families. It is a necessity. The changes to overtime pay could seriously reduce the paychecks of over 6 million workers making between $23,600 and $100,000 annually.

For many people, overtime is the difference that pays the rent and buys the groceries. I stand in this Chamber today as a product of overtime. My father worked 80 to 90 hours a week, week in and week out, month in and month out, year in and year out, because he had five children that he wanted to send off to have an opportunity that he never had, the opportunity to go to private college. He and my mother accomplished that, and they accomplished that because of overtime. There are countless families who rely on this kind of additional compensation to meet the needs of their own families.

Some people may say that we should be comforted by the fact that these regulations will not impact workers protected by a collective bargaining agreement. I say that this reasoning is anything but comforting, and workers covered by a union contract will ultimately suffer a reduction in pay. Union contracts will need to be renegotiated, and the regulation changes will make it increasingly more difficult to negotiate fair contracts in the future as workers will now be forced to bargain for overtime protections that were once guaranteed by law.

Previously the law was clear: Those eligible for overtime got time and a half for every hour you worked over 40 hours in a single week. Now that rule has changed, and it will lower the bar for everyone. The amendment we offer today will preserve the protections for the new low- income workers who become eligible for overtime under the new rule. Our amendment will rescind the rule that takes away overtime from 6 million workers so that workers who were eligible before August 23 will once again be eligible.

Let us stop this assault on the economic well-being of middle-class families. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Obey-Miller amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Joseph and Anne Quinn of Smithtown, New York, who will observe their 50th wedding anniversary on August 15th, 2004. Born in New York City, they met as freshmen in college. Joe was a student at Iona College in New Rochelle and Anne attended St. John's University. They were married on August 1, 1954 at St. Joan of Arc Church in Jackson Heights, New York. The Quinns moved to Suffolk County in 1955 when Joe began a thirty-three year career in education with the Middle Country School District. The couple has lived in Smithtown since 1958.

The Quinns have ten children--Kathleen, Terence, Brendan, Marybeth, Patrick, Neil, Regina, Timothy, Lawrence, and Julianne--all of whom are married. They are the proud grandparents of twenty-two.

Joseph retired in January 2003 from a second career as Staff Assistant to Congressman Gary Ackerman. Anne retired in December 2002 from her position as a New York State Taxpayer Service Representative. Mr. Quinn was Chair of the Smithtown Democratic Committee for twenty- two years and is still greatly interested in politics.

The Quinns have been active members of St. Patrick's Parish since moving to Smithtown. They plan to continue travelling all over the country to visit their widespread family.

The Quinns will mark their fiftieth anniversary with a renewal of vows at St. Patrick's Church and a dinner at the Bellport Country Club. Their children have also planned a family trip to Colorado as a reunion to celebrate this landmark anniversary.

I am proud to honor this distinguished couple and their long-standing commitment to the community and to one another.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 308, a bill that I introduced to honor the AMVETS veterans service organization's National Charter Day. AMVETS is an organization that is truly dedicated to helping this Nation's veterans, and I am pleased to see that this Congress is now acting to support this group which consistently works to help the men and women who have selflessly served this country.

I am proud to recognize AMVETS for its dedication to bettering the lives of veterans throughout this country. As we continue our military operations overseas, we must not forget that honoring veterans and their service must be something that we do every day, not just on Memorial Day and Veterans Day. We must always look to recognize and pay tribute to the sacrifices made to the individuals that have stared down the many faces of tyranny with undying dedication to our country.

On July 23, 1947, President Harry S. Truman signed Public Law 216 making

AMVETS the first World War II organization to be chartered by Congress. Today the organization is open to anyone who has served or is currently serving in the Armed Forces, including the National Guard and the Reserves.

AMVETS has a long history of helping veterans; and in a recent year, AMVETS processed more than 24,000 VA claims that resulted in veterans receiving approximately $400 million in owed benefits. As Members of Congress, we all know how important it is to provide this kind of service to America's deserving veterans.

I am pleased that the House will soon adopt this resolution honoring AMVETS National Charter Day, and I hope that this Friday, as we celebrate national recognition of this organization, all Members of Congress will take the time to support their local members of AMVETS.

I am proud to support the five AMVETS posts located in my district, and I am sure that my colleagues share in the feeling of appreciation I have for the thousands of AMVETS members and their families who are dedicated to helping America's veterans.

Madam Speaker, I urge swift passage of this resolution.