Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor E. David Foreman, Jr., who is retiring after a life of dedicated service in both the private advocacy sector and to the Republican Party.

David has had a long history of service to both the Republican Party of Virginia and the Republican National Committee. This record is well documented and has come full circle from his initial role as chairman of the Fairfax County Republican Party from 1970 to 1976 through his most recent role as the party's senior consultant.

During his political career, David also served on numerous exploratory, steering, advisory and finance committees for countless Republican candidates for local, State, and national office. Most notably, David was chairman of Americans for Bush in 1990 as well as chairman of the Credentials Committee at the 1996 Republican National Convention.

It was easy for ``those in the know'' to recognize that Mr. Foreman was a true player in local and national politics. David has been featured in the Who's Who in American Politics, Who's Who in Washington, Who's Who in Virginia Politics, as well as Who's Who in Politics in the South and Southwest.

David's love for politics complimented his knack for policy. This was demonstrated through his extensive work as a congressional and administration lobbyist for numerous American corporations. Through his role as founder and president of Foreman & Associates, David was able to effectively represent his clients in their interactions with State, local, and Federal officials as well as all Federal agencies.

While compiling this impressive legacy of private and political service, David was a loving and dedicated husband to his wife Rosemary Foreman, and father to his two children, Sheryl Olecheck and E. David Foreman III.

Madam Speaker, in closing, I ask my colleagues to join me in applauding E. David Foreman, Jr., and congratulating him on his deserved retirement after a distinguished career of service.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3. We are all aware of the potential embryonic stem cells hold for mankind. It could very well be that these cells prove to be the Rosetta stone of medical research--allowing us to break the code on some of the worst afflictions: Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, juvenile diabetes.

We must acknowledge, however, that there is much we don't know about embryonic stem cells, and we are mistaken if we believe great cures are right around the corner. But we will never know either the true potential--or the dangers of stem cell related treatments if our scientists are overly constrained.

I understand the concerns of those who question the ethics of embryonic stem cell research, and agree that we must not throw caution to the wind at the hint of miraculous cures. Indeed, left unconstrained, this type of research could lead to dangerous outcomes.

That is a key reason why I support the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. It provides essential ethical guidelines to which federally funded researchers must adhere. It would be far preferable to have the Federal Government setting standards in this field rather than a hodge-podge of states and private entities. In fact, I believe that the National Institute of Health's rigorous ethical guidelines would prove to be more protective of human life than individual states or private entities. Remember, embryonic stem cell research is not illegal, and individual states have already moved forward on their own. It is crucial that the Federal Government lead the way.

I supported President Bush when he announced his plan to allow federally funded research on 60 pre-existing stem cell lines. But we now know that only 21 stem cell lines are available for research. These 21 have significant shortcomings that make them of dubious value.

Federally funded U.S. researchers are at a technological disadvantage as they lack access to newer stem cell lines. This is causing concern that some of the top stem cell biologists will move into non-federally funded research, or even move overseas. We should not allow this to happen.

There are a great many difficult questions that attend this debate. However, I can not look in the eyes of a couple whose child is suffering from a debilitating disease and tell them that I am doing everything possible to stop their child's suffering without supporting this legislation.

I believe expanded Federal funding of embryonic research is the right course to take--a view shared by increasing numbers in both parties.

I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007.

I believe this bill is an important step in making the United States a leader in all facets of the stem cell issue--both scientifically and ethically.

Madam Speaker, today I am re-introducing with my colleague Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton the District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act. This legislation has now been considered through several Congresses. It is no longer a novel idea. Nevertheless, the need for this legislation is stronger than ever and I call on the Congress to pass it without delay. We can't credibly struggle to make other parts of the world safe for democracy if we continue to deny it to residents of our Nation's Capital.

This bill pairs two injustices in such a way as to create a politically neutral solution for both. The first injustice--that the citizens of the District of Columbia have no direct representation in the House of the United States Congress--has existed since Congress took away representation in 1800. The second injustice--the failure to count all of the residents of Utah in the last Census--is more recent. Historically, it takes just this kind of marriage to create a viable solution.

We had a great deal of success in moving this bipartisan legislation last Congress. In our committee, a strong majority of both parties voted to pass this legislation. Over the last 3 years, it has been gratifying to watch members of my own party consider the problem and accept this solution. We now have the support of conservatives, moderates, and liberals. Unfortunately, we were unable to get the bill to the floor in the rush that ensued last December.

Ironically, it was a rush to pass legislation that created this problem in 1800. In the lame duck session following the election of Thomas Jefferson of Virginia as president and the Whigs to the majority in 1800, Federalists rushed to pass legislation to set up some structure for the District of Columbia. Congress was silent on District voting rights in spite of having granted voting rights to District residents 10 years earlier in the Residence Act that created a Federal district.

Now, over 200 years later, Congress has before it a principled and workable compromise solution. This bill does two simple things. It treats the District of Columbia as a congressional district for the purposes of representation in the House of Representatives, and permanently increases Congress to 437 members.

After 3 years of research, it is clear that Congress does have the authority to grant the District a seat in the House of Representatives. This House, which we refer to as the ``People's House,'' represents the people of the several states. Some scholars have tried to parse the phrase to mean that state residents only are represented.

But when this phrase was drafted there was no Federal District. The ``People of the Several States'' means all Americans.

Congress has recognized this by allowing Americans living overseas to vote in House elections despite the fact they are no longer residents of any state. Overseas Americans are allowed to vote in their last state of residence even if they never intend to return to that state.

There always seems to be some reason to keep from doing a good thing. In our personal lives we all put off the easy act of common graciousness because we're busy or because we're tired or because someone treated us unfairly. This makes sense at the time, but in the end we are all poorer for missing the opportunity.

The same is true with this legislation. Maybe you don't like the permanent increase in the size of Congress. Maybe you want to protect ``states rights'' in redistricting. Maybe you wish this addressed the Senate as well. Maybe you just don't know for sure what the Sixth Congress intended when they created this problem.

I would ask every member of this body to look up for a minute and look at the people we live with here in the District. Is there anything really gained by refusing them direct representation in the Federal Government? I say no.

It is time to make a change in the way this District is governed. It is time to tell the 550,000 District citizens that we recognize their inalienable right to participate in the decisions that affect their lives every day.

Let's not--once again--miss the chance to do the good thing. Justice should no longer have to wait.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2, and in support of the Republican motion to recommit.

Americans deserve a decent minimum wage, but we cannot simply ignore the fact that somebody has to pay for it. In many cases, small businesses are the ones who must bear these costs.

The Democratic bill we consider today gives absolutely no consideration to small businesses at all. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, providing two-thirds of

new job creation. They cannot, however, simply create money out of thin air. A small business might have been struggling to pay health care premiums for its workers. With this resolution, they may well now be unable to do so.

My Democratic colleagues frequently voice their strong support for small businesses. I don't understand why they cannot then acknowledge that this could be a burden and offer some help in the form of tax incentives.

My vote for this motion to recommit and against the underlying bill is intended to send a message to the other body that a minimum wage increase is only half of the equation. I am confident the other body will work in more of a spirit of compromise and recognize the concerns I mention here today. Indeed, I look forward to considering legislation that does contain common sense provisions that will protect our small businesses' competitiveness.

I urge my colleagues to vote for the motion to recommit to and if necessary against final passage.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2, and in support of the Republican motion to recommit.

Americans deserve a decent minimum wage, but we cannot simply ignore the fact that somebody has to pay for it. In many cases, small businesses are the ones who must bear these costs.

The Democratic bill we consider today gives absolutely no consideration to small businesses at all. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, providing two thirds of new job creation. They cannot, however, simply create money out of thin air. A small business might have been struggling to pay health care premiums for its workers. With this resolution, they may well now be unable to do so.

My Democratic colleagues frequently voice their strong support for small businesses. I don't understand why they cannot then acknowledge that this could be a burden and offer some help in the form of tax incentives.

My vote for this motion to recommit and against the underlying bill is intended to send a message to the other body that a minimum wage increase is only half of the equation. I am confident the other body will work in more of a spirit of compromise and recognize the concerns I mention here today. Indeed, I look forward to considering legislation that does contain common sense provisions that will protect our small businesses' competitiveness.

I urge my colleagues to vote for the motion to recommit to and if necessary against final passage.

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

Mr. Speaker, though he served as President for only 2\1/2\ years, Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr., leaves a legacy of leadership and service that will endure for years to come. As the 38th President of the United States, he is remembered as a man whose integrity and decency would be the salve needed to heal a deeply divided country during one of the most politically turbulent periods in our Nation's history. He is also remembered as a loving and loyal husband, family man, and friend.

Born on July 14, 1913, in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Gerald Ford graduated from the University of Michigan and excelled in both academics and athletics. He was voted the most valuable player on the football team his senior year at Michigan, which led to offers to play for the Chicago Bears and the Green Bay Packers.

Despite these offers, Ford decided that law would be a better career choice. He attended Yale University Law School, graduating in the top 25 percent of his class while working as a football and a boxing coach.

It was at Yale that he would receive his first taste of national politics, volunteering on Wendell Willkie's 1940 Presidential campaign.

His rise in Michigan politics was put on hold when he joined the United States Navy in 1942 to serve in the Second World War. He served valiantly on the aircraft carrier USS Monterrey until 1946, attaining the rank of lieutenant commander.

1948 was a banner year for Ford as it was the year he was elected to the House of Representatives, with over 60 percent of the vote, the lowest margin he was ever to receive. It was also the year he would marry Elizabeth ``Betty'' Bloomer, who would become one of his most ardent campaigners and mother to their four children.

Ford served in the House for distinction and honor for 25 years, where his contributions earned him a reputation as a Congressman's Congressman. Even though his highest aspiration was to be Speaker of the House, he never got the chance. He did, however, hold the highest Republican post in a Democratically controlled Congress by being elected the minority leader in 1965.

He held that post until 1973 when he was appointed by President Nixon to replace Spiro Agnew as Vice President of the United States of America amid allegations of corruption.

After Nixon's resignation on August 9, 1974, Gerald Ford became the 38th President of the United States and has the distinction of being the only person to serve as but never be elected by the populace to either the Presidency or the Vice Presidency.

As President, he followed a steady, sensible course to cope with the Nation's economic problems. He is credited with halting double-digit inflation and lowering unemployment. He also worked to solidify President Nixon's accomplishments in China and ended U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.

Under his leadership, the United States signed the final act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, commonly known as the Helsinki agreement, which ratified post-World War II European borders and supported human rights, and is now regarded as having helped bring down the Soviet Union.

Maybe most importantly, his wisdom, courage and integrity restored the faith of the American people in the executive branch of government. His time in office is remembered for restoring trust and openness to the Presidency.

His courageous and difficult decision to pardon President Nixon may have cost him the election. However, it is now regarded as being in the best interest of the Nation, allowing it to move forward and recover from a tumultuous time.

After leaving the Presidency, Ford became an international ambassador of American goodwill, a noted scholar and lecturer, and a strong supporter of the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan. And together with his wife, Betty, he was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal in 1999 in recognition of their dedicated public service and outstanding humanitarian contributions to the people of the United States.

Also in 1999 Ford received the Medal of Freedom, the Nation's highest civilian award, for his role in guiding the United States through the turbulent times of Watergate, the resignation of President Nixon and the end of the Vietnam War, and for restoring integrity and public trust to the Presidency.

Gerald R. Ford, the President and the man, embodied many fine characteristics that we as Americans value: honor, integrity, decency, hard work and kindness. For this, I ask my colleagues to join in honoring his legacy by supporting this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the author of this resolution, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers at this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of Sydney Tally for her tireless commitment to better the lives of active duty servicemembers, retirees, veterans, and above all their families through a distinguished career with the National Military Family Association.

Widely known and beloved in military circles, this Air Force daughter and Navy spouse trained as a nurse and pursued her specialty in public health nursing before becoming a full time mother and volunteer after the birth of her first child. Among many service endeavors, she freely devoted her time serving as teaching assistant, Brownie and Girl Scout leader, Red Cross pediatric nurse, and president of four naval officers' wives clubs.

In 1983, she joined the NMFA government relations staff and served as vice president of the department from 1987 to 1990 before rising to the position of first paid professional staff member and director. She also sat on the NMFA's board of governors until her recent passing. Mrs. Tally used her leverage through this organization to benefit military families everywhere. Her focus on the military family drove her in creating the Military Coalition. Women, infants, and children found nourishment after her advocacy secured legislation for an overseas nutrition program targeted specifically for military families.

Mrs. Tally received numerous awards and recognitions for her altruistic work, including the Military Coalition's Award of Merit, a Certificate of Appreciation from the Defense Commissary Agency, 1993 Defense Transition Services Award from the University of Central Florida, and recognition of her outstanding citizenship by the Military Chaplains Association.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank Mrs. Tally for her life's work and continuing legacy that brought forth significant awareness of the needs of military families. I call upon my colleagues to join me in recognizing her accomplishments, and in sharing our condolences with her family and friends.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6407) to reform the postal laws of the United States, as amended.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6407, the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. This is the first major overhaul of the Postal Service since 1970. The House passed its version of postal reform in July of 2005 by a vote of 410-20. The Senate passed its version in February by unanimous consent.

This bill is the product of months of negotiations between the House and the Senate and the administration. It is also the culmination of more than a decade of hard work and study, not to mention a great deal of bipartisan negotiation and cooperation.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is the product of months of negotiations between the House, the Senate and the administration. It is also the culmination of more than a decade of hard work and study, not to mention a great deal of bipartisan negotiation and cooperation. The landmark legislation solves the structural, legal and financial constraints that have brought the postal service to the brink of utter breakdown.

The postal service is the center of a $900 billion industry, employing 9 million workers nationwide. Each year, the U.S.P.S. processes and delivers over 200 million pieces of mail to more than 130 million households and businesses in the United States, but the last major overhaul of the statutes governing the postal service occurred in 1970 before the Internet and e-mails and faxes, before letters became snail mail, before the deregulation of the airline industry, before competitors like FedEx even existed.

Today, this critical component of our Nation's economy is being challenged by a variety of factors, including increasing volume, insufficient revenue, mounting debts and new technologies such as the Internet advertising, electronic bill payments, e-mails and faxes.

As a result, the GAO has included the postal service on its high-risk series since 2001. This compromise will reverse the death spiral at the postal service and bring the postal service into the 21st century.

I want to take this opportunity to thank Congressman John McHugh of New York who recognized the need for comprehensive postal reform legislation when he became chairman of this subcommittee at the beginning of the 104th Congress and has championed reform tirelessly. I also want to thank Henry Waxman and Danny Davis for their dedication to this subject and their willingness to cooperate in a bipartisan manner.

I want to thank the principal sponsors in the Senate, Susan Collins of Maine and Tom Carper of Delaware. Without their leadership and dedication, this compromise would not have been possible.

Finally, I want to thank the many members of our staff who have worked on this important issue: Jack Callender, Ellen Brown, and Mason Alinger of my committee staff; also Robert Taub of Congressman McHugh's staff who has dedicated years of his life to this cause; and also Phil Barnett, Denise Wilson, and Naomi Seiler of Congressman Waxman's staff; Jill Hunter-Williams of Congressman Danny Davis' staff; and Ann Fisher of Senator Collins' and John Kilvington of Senator Carper's staff.

I also want to thank all those individuals in the administration that have actively and tirelessly participated in the negotiations to help us reach this point today, especially Michael Bopp, Jeff Sharpe and Chris Frech.

Mr. Speaker, all the stakeholders in this legislation, postal employees, financial services companies, major marketers, have been rigorous in urging Congress and the administration to complete this bill. No one thinks it is perfect. This is the nature of compromise, but everyone, especially all Americans who use stamps, will be significantly better off with this legislation than they would be without this long overdue package of reforms.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh).

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

Mr. Speaker, let me just say again, this legislation mandates transparency in the Service's finances, costs, and operations, creates a modern system of rate regulation, establishes fair competition rules, and a powerful new regulator to oversee operations. It addresses the Postal Service's universal service operation in the scope of the mail monopoly; it institutes improvements to the collective bargaining process; it also puts a reasonable rate cap on it for the mailers, the first-class mailers and across the board for Americans who use the postal system. I urge my colleagues to adopt it and support this.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee for agreeing to work with me on H.R. 6407 and I ask that our letters of exchange be inserted into the Record.

December 8, 2006.

Hon. William M. Thomas,

Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your December 8, letter

regarding the Committee on Ways and Means jurisdictional

interest in H.R. 6407, the Postal Accountability and

Enhancement Act, and your willingness to forego consideration

of H.R. 6407 by your committee.

I agree that the Committee on Ways and Means has a valid

jurisdictional interest in H.R. 6407 and that the committee's

jurisdiction will not be adversely affected by your decision

to forego consideration at this time. In addition, I will

support your request for the appointment of outside conferees

from the Committee on Ways and Means to a House-Senate

Conference committee on this or similar legislation should

such a conference be convened.

As you have requested, I will include a copy of your letter

and this response in the Congressional Record during

consideration of H.R. 6407 on the House floor. Thank you for

your assistance as I work towards the enactment of H.R. 6407.

Sincerely,

Tom Davis,

Chairman.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 4050) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 103 East Thompson Street in Thomaston, Georgia, as the ``Sergeant First Class Robert Lee `Bobby' Hollar, Jr., Post Office Building''.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days

within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 4050, offered by the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Westmoreland. This bill would name a post office in Thomaston, Ga. to honor Sgt. First Class Bobby Lee Hollar, who was killed in action while serving our nation in Iraq.

Sergeant Hollar was the kind of man who makes it possible for Americans to live in freedom and his service to his country was nothing short of remarkable. He was a Tank Commander in the U.S. Army National Guard before joining the 108th Calvary Division in Griffin, Georgia. For seven years following that, he worked within the 82nd Airborne Division out of Fort Bragg and Colorado Springs. He believed passionately in what he did, and at the young age of 35, he died entirely too young.

I would also like to note here that naming this post office in honor of Sergeant Hollar is quite befitting, as he dedicated several years of his life to the Postal Service before returning to the military and deploying to Iraq. Friends and family from every part of his life remember his kindness, his spirit, and the way he put his heart and soul into everything he did. We are so fortunate for the bravery and allegiance of people like Sergeant Hollar, and it is with gratitude for his dedication and service that I support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 843, the Combating Autism Act of 2006. This bill would amend the Public Health Service Act to combat autism through research, screening, intervention and education.

I have been greatly concerned by the significant increase in autism rates in our country. As a member of the House Coalition for Autism Research and Education Caucus, I have tried to take an active roll in improving the government's response to this epidemic. I am pleased we are considering this legislation today.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) places a terrible burden on the families of those afflicted. Autism is growing at a rate of 10-17 percent each year, and we must take action before it becomes even more of a health crisis. The earlier we identify autism, the more options we have to help a child.

The Combating Autism Act of 2006 would authorize $405 million in funding for autism research the National Institutes of Health over five years, and would require the director of NIH to develop and implement a plan for autism research by April 1, 2008. Passage of S. 843 would give $185 million to Autism Centers of Excellence, which provide continued support to examine causation, diagnosis, early detection, prevention, control, intervention and a cure for autism. The bill would also authorize $15 million for fiscal 2007 for the Centers for Disease Control and their surveillance and research programs.

Combating autism is imperative because it affects one in 166 children and persists through adulthood. By learning the signs, a child can begin benefiting from one of the many specialized intervention programs. We must provide Federal funding to ensure that research, education and prevention are possible.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I hope that all Americans can continue to unite to form a collective voice for the autism community. I ask that my colleagues join me supporting S. 843, the Combating Autism Act of 2006.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail.

This 2,300-mile trail retraces the waterborne route of Captain John Smith, who charted the Chesapeake Bay 400 years ago. The route stretches from the head of the Bay at Havre de Grace to the mouth at Cape Charles, and would enable visitors to explore Captain Smith's tracks, all of which helped to lay the foundation for our beloved Nation.

The journey of Captain John Smith dates back to June 2, 1608, when he and 14 English colonists set out from Jamestown to explore the Chesapeake Bay. The journey took over 3 months to complete and was marked by its success as the first thorough exploration of the Bay area. It was also key in discovering that the Chesapeake Bay did not open up into the Pacific Ocean. Additionally, Captain Smith's map of the Chesapeake opened up the area to thousands of European settlers, who may not have come to America otherwise.

The Chesapeake Bay has a rich and unique heritage, and deserves to be commemorated through passage of this historic water trail. It is only fitting that such a man and such a discovery be a part of Jamestown's 400th commemoration next year. The proposed trail would consist of a circuit of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, of which Captain Smith explored. It would allow visitors, families, school groups and civic organizations to retrace a route of great historic significance. It would also serve to encourage good environmental stewardship of the area to ensure its permanence for future generations.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank the Chesapeake Bay for the impact it has had on its region and the Nation. I ask that my colleagues join me supporting H.R. 5466 and ensure the establishment of the historic Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail.

I rise today to honor to Mr. Anthony J. ``Tony'' Zagami on the occasion of his retirement after 40 years of dedicated public service to the legislative branch and to our Nation.

I first met Tony in the mid-1960s, when we both served as pages in the United States Senate and attended the Capitol Page School. Tony continued his service to Congress while working his way through college and law school. He received a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Maryland School of Business and Public Administration, and a Juris Doctor from the George Mason University School of Law. He served in a variety of positions before leaving Capitol Hill in 1990 to become general counsel to the Government Printing Office, the agency responsible for producing the Congressional Record. He worked tirelessly to improve and modernize the organization.

Tony has been active in many professional, civic and social organizations, including the American and Federal Bar Associations, the U.S. Capitol Historical Society, the National Italian American Foundation, the Make-A-Wish Children's Foundation of Greater Washington, and the U.S. Senate Staff Club, of which he served as a board member and counsel. He is an elected official and former chairman of the U.S. Senate Federal Credit Union Board of Directors, as well as the past president of the Capitol Hill Chapter of the Federal Bar Association.

Throughout his many years on Capitol Hill and at GPO, Tony was known for his dedication and commitment to public service. He has been the recipient of numerous awards and recognitions, among them being listed in Who's Who in Washington and Who's Who In American Law. His vast experience and knowledge will be greatly missed.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Anthony J. ``Tony'' Zagami and wishing him the best of luck in all future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Muhammad Yunus of Bangladesh, winner of the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize.

Dr. Yunus is a visionary in the effort to improve the economies of the developing world. He first began his revolutionary work in 1974 during a widespread famine in his native Bangladesh. Then an economics professor at Chittagong University, Dr. Yunus began experimenting with different ways to help the poor. He struck upon the concept of microcredit, the provision of very small loans to poor individuals to start or improve basic businesses.

Although desperately poor, those to whom Dr. Yunus lent money proved to be dependable clients and could be relied upon to repay their debts. When local banks declined to make small loans of this sort, Dr. Yunus founded the Grameen Bank in order to do it himself. To date, the Grameen Bank has disbursed more than $5.3 billion to nearly seven million borrowers, most of whom have no collateral.

Dr. Yunus' objective is to rid the world of poverty, and his microcredit concept has indeed showed promising results. Roughly half of Dr. Yunus' clients have achieved basic economic objectives: a home with a metal roof; clean drinking water; a sanitary latrine; warm clothes for winter and mosquito netting for summer; about seventy-five dollars in a savings account; and schooling for the children. Upon this foundation, one can envision a world in which the scourge of poverty is banished.

Dr. Yunus' achievements have long been praised; it is fitting that he has finally received the high honor of the Nobel Prize. I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating Dr. Yunus on this occasion.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Concurrent Resolution 483, 109th Congress, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of the late Joel T. Broyhill, former Congressman for Virginia's 10th district.

Congressman Broyhill was born in Hopewell, Virginia on November 4, 1919. His family moved to Arlington in 1937, when his father relocated his building and real estate firm,

M.T. Broyhill and Sons, to the area. He attended Fork Union Military Academy as well as George Washington University.

Before he took his seat in the House of Representatives in 1953, Congressman Broyhill served in World War II, where he became a decorated Captain and commanded a rifle company. During the Battle of the Bulge, he was captured by the Germans. However, he rejoined the advancing U.S. forces six months later after he and a fellow soldier escaped from a prisoner of war camp. Among his military awards was a Bronze Star.

Upon his return from World War II, he joined his father's real estate firm, becoming a partner and general manager of the company. He was president of the Arlington Chamber of Commerce, Chairman of the Arlington County Planning Commission and in 1950 was elected president of the Arlington Republican Club.

In 1952, he won his seat in Congress on his 33rd birthday. Congressman Broyhill was known as an effective politician with a boyish grin and an easy conversational manner. A strong advocate for Federal workers and the postal service, Congressman Broyhill was especially well known for the way he attended to the needs of his constituents. The Washington Post accredited this personalized service to Congressman Broyhill's sense of kinship with his constituents stating, ``He is, simply, one of them. He is a war hero turned postwar booster, a hell- of-a-fellow''.

On a personal level, I cut my teeth working on Joel Broyhill's campaigns. I attended his election night parties at the Old Broyhill Building on Lee Highway and remember the long night in 1964 when he narrowly escaped the LBJ landslide, as well as his huge victory over Clive Duval in 1966, when he came on the stage and exclaimed ``How Sweet It Is''.

After leaving office, Congressman Broyhill returned to his family's real estate and investment business, which developed several neighborhoods in Northern Virginia. He remained engaged in politics and served as campaign manager for John W. Warner's successful first campaign for Senate in 1978.

Congressman Broyhill's first wife, Jane Marshall Bragg, died in 1978. He is survived by Suzanne Broyhill, his wife of 25 years; three daughters, Nancy, Jane and Jeanne; a stepdaughter Kimberly; four grandchildren; and three great-grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to pay tribute to the life and work of Congressman Joel T. Broyhill, and express my deepest condolences to all who knew and loved him.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Crestwood Elementary School in Fairfax County, Virginia as it prepares to celebrate its 50th anniversary.

Since its establishment in 1956, Crestwood Elementary School has committed itself to lofty standards of academic and extracurricular excellence. Over the years, as the Springfield area has expanded and diversified, Crestwood has followed the community's example.

In 1950, the Springfield area consisted of nothing but woods and a few farms and houses. Edward Carr bought much of the land and in 1950 started to build the first planned community in northern Virginia. He gave some land to the community for the school and the first community pool was built here because of the land he donated. The area grew slowly, with few community resources. Little League was started in 1955. There were no schools here until 1956. All of the school children had to go out of the area. In those days, Springfield was the outermost edge of the Washington area.

Since its inception, Crestwood Elementary has been an integral part of the Springfield, Virginia, community. Originally costing $595,585, when the school was constructed there was one telephone booth per street, milk and bakery items were delivered weekly to residents, and the primary mode of transportation was the train. Over the past 50 years, the Crestwood community has become a very progressive community in the heart of the Springfield area and educates hundreds of students each year. With the addition of the Family Resource Center, Crestwood is a true community school working with parents and children building a better future for the entire Crestwood community.

The mission of Crestwood Elementary School is to offer each student the skills, knowledge, and experiences necessary to be successful students and productive members of society. The staff envisions a school where academic excellence is paramount, the arts are celebrated, cultural and linguistic diversity is honored, and all learners meet their personal academic goals. Over the years ethnic and cultural diversity have brought a unique spirit to the school, as it continues its commitment to academic excellence.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank Crestwood Elementary School faculty and staff for the immeasurable contributions they have made to the community by shaping today's youth and tomorrow's future. I congratulate the school on its successes over the last 50 years and I wish it more successful years in the future. I ask that my colleagues join me in applauding this outstanding and distinguished institution, as well as the committed faculty and students.