Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I rise and ask the House to recognize and congratulate an outstanding Atlanta area small business that has proven to be a model for community leadership and responsibility.

The MetroAtlanta Ambulance Service was recently named the Cobb County Chamber of Commerce 2006 Small Business of the Year. The company provides 9/11 emergency ambulance services and prehospital care for the sick and injured throughout the Atlanta area.

As a medical doctor, I know the importance of reliable and rapid emergency response care, and MetroAtlanta Ambulance provides a service critical to the health and well-being of our community. The company has demonstrated time and again that they are more than just a business. Rather, they have shown an honest, sincere, and repeated desire to lend a hand to others. They took a lead role last year in coordinating ambulance services and logistics for the evacuation of victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Their hard work led to the relocation of 1,300 people from the flood-damaged region.

Mr. Speaker, MetroAtlanta Ambulance Service is a great example of what can be accomplished when sound, honest business practices are coupled with a sincere desire to help neighbors in need.

Congratulations to MetroAtlanta Ambulance.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution.

International Terrorism--when we discuss this very important issue-- an issue of life and death--not just for each of us individually, but for our nation and way of life--it is imperative that we begin our discussion--at the beginning. And that beginning wasn't on 9-11! We've been under attack for at least 30 years.

We did not want this fight--we did not invite this fight--we did not wish to engage in this battle. However, once our enemy crossed over the line--confirmed for us and the world--that they were unwilling to respect international law, respect individual liberty, respect sovereignty of nations--and that they were willing and desirous of engaging in mortal battle--no other option was left to us or the civilized world.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, on January 23, 2005, said: ``We have declared a fierce war on this evil principle of democracy and those who follow this wrong ideology.''

So, this discussion today comes down to a fundamental question--what is the appropriate strategy and tactic to adopt to win the War on Terror?

Will we withdraw and simply defend--a policy of isolation and containment--or will we aggressively combat terrorism--and take the battle to our enemy?

This war is unlike any other in history--without a doubt.

Our enemy has no single home. It recruits and trains its army from nations around the world. The only unifying element is hate--hate for the West--hate for democracy--hate for freedom of religion--hate for liberty.

The only message our enemy understands is force. Period. Terrorists don't negotiate--terrorists don't compromise--terrorists are not interested in peace. To them, that's weakness.

Thankfully we've stayed the course. Thankfully we've persevered in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The greatest threat to terrorism is freedom, liberty and democracy--in the Middle East and beyond.

Today the terrorists are truly on the run.

Last week U.S. and Iraqi forces eliminated Al Qaeda in Iraq's top terrorist--Abu Musab Al Zarqawi. This was accomplished with excellent intelligence--knowing where the bad guys were and when. And this information came from Iraqi civilians--that is a very positive sign.

This important step demonstrates many things: we will hunt down terrorists and eliminate them wherever they are hiding, the shackles of decades long terrorism are being removed from the Middle East, Iraqi security forces are stepping up to the challenge; Iraqi citizens want to be free of terrorists and they are not going to sit idly by.

Success breeds success.

Never has that been more evident than this past week.

While Zarqawi was eliminated--finding him brought a treasure trove of information allowing U.S. and Iraqi forces to dismantle many more pieces of Al Qaeda's puzzle.

Success breeds success.

Iraq just this past week selected 3 more officials--cabinet ministers--to serve in its standing government.

Success breeds success.

It is also important for us to recall and reiterate why we are engaged in this war.

It is imperative during this debate that we re-examine the conditions that required the United States to take military action in Afghanistan and Iraq in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Just a short look at recent history--just the last 27 years--vividly demonstrates the death, destruction and terror brought to Americans by our enemy.

November 4, 1979--Iranian radicals seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held 53 hostages for 444 days.

April 18, 1983--Sixty-three people, including the CIA's Middle East directory, were killed when our U. S. Embassy in Beirut was bombed.

October 23, 1983--simultaneous suicide bomb attacks on American and French compounds in Beirut, Lebanon; killing 242 Americans and 58 French troops.

March 16, 1984--Islamic Jihad kidnapped and later murdered Political Officer William Buckley in Beirut, Lebanon.

October 7, 1985--Achille Lauro Hijacking--terrorists seized the Italian cruise liner and murdered one American invalid in a wheelchair.

April 5, 1986--Berlin Discotheque Bombing--Two U.S. soldiers were killed and 79 American servicemen were injured in a Libyan bomb attack in West Berlin, West Germany.

December 21, 1988--Pan Am 103 Bombing--Pan Am 103 blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland by bomb placed by Libyan terrorists--all 259 people on board were killed.

February 26, 1993--First World Trade Center Bombing--car bomb exploded in an underground garage killing 6 people and injuring over 1000.

November 13, 1995--car bomb explodes at U.S. military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, killing one U.S. citizen, several foreign national employees of the U.S. government and over 40 others.

June 25, 1996--Khobar Towers Bombing--a truck bomb in Dhahran destroys Khobar Towers, a U.S. Air Force barracks, killing 19 U.S. military personnel and wounding 515 people, including 240 U.S. personnel.

August 7, 1998--U.S. Embassy Bombings in East Africa--two coordinated attacks on U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania--killing over 300.

October 12, 2000--Attack on U.S.S. Cole--a small dingy carrying explosives rammed the destroyer U.S.S. Cole, killing 17 sailors and injuring 39.

September 11, 2001--Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Homeland--Two hijacked airliners crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center. Soon thereafter, the Pentagon was struck by a third hijacked plane. A fourth hijacked plane, suspected to be bound for a high-profile target in Washington, crashed into a field in southern Pennsylvania. The attacks killed 3,025 U.S. citizens and other nationals.

Treating these incidents as crimes--not acts of war--and providing reactionary measures rather than moving pro actively--will not work. How do we know? Because that is precisely what we did for decades--and the consequence was 9-11.

The attacks we witnessed that day serve as a reminder of the dangers we face as a nation in a post-9/11 world. We can no longer expect oceans between us and our enemies to keep us safe.

Policy of containment has been proven to be a dismal failure.

Just as the battle in Afghanistan was not simply to remove the Taliban. The battle in Iraq was not simply to remove Saddam Hussein and his murderous regime.

One has to look no further than the action of our enemy to see that we are fighting those who want to bring their brand of terror and fear to our shores.

We must not forget those threats that have been disrupted here at home and on our allies: the West Coast Airliner Plot; The Heathrow Airport Plot; and The Jose Padilla Plot.

The campaign against the United States and its allies is ambitious, simple and clear.

Terrorists will stop at nothing to achieve their distorted sense of reality.

Now, we could have easily stayed out of this conflict . . .

However, giving terrorists free reign would not make us any safer-- history has proven that.

The price would be more innocent lives lost--more bombings--and not an ounce of peace.

We must not be held hostage by terrorism--that is not living in liberty and freedom!

There are defining moments every generation must face. For this generation that defining moment is how we engage in this War on Terror--highlighted by a very different post 9-11 world. When we came to that defining moment--that tragic day--we, as a nation with our allies around the world, decided we would not allow terrorists to win.

The choice is clear, our resolve is clear. We will and must prevail.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. Speaker, international terrorism is an issue of life and death, not just for each of us individually but for our Nation and our way of life.

We did not want this fight. We didn't invite this fight. We did not wish to engage in this battle. However, once our enemy crossed over the line and confirmed for us and the world that they were unwilling to respect international law, respect individual liberty, and respect the sovereignty of nations, and that they were willing and desirous of engaging in mortal battle, no other option was left to us or to the civilized world.

Abu Musab al Zarqawi, on January 23, 2005, said this: ``We have declared a fierce war on this evil principle of democracy and those who follow this wrong ideology.'' So this discussion over the past few days comes down to a fundamental question: What is the appropriate strategy and tactic to adopt to win the war on terror? Will we withdraw and simply defend a policy of isolation and containment, or will we aggressively combat terrorism and take the battle to our enemy?

Now, this war is unlike any other in history. Our enemy has no single home. It recruits and trains its army from nations around the world. The only unifying element is hate, hate for democracy and hate for liberty. Thankfully, we have stayed the course. Thankfully, we have persevered in both Iraq and Afghanistan, because the greatest threat to terrorism is freedom and liberty and democracy in the Middle East and beyond.

And great progress is being made. Last week, the U.S. and Iraqi forces eliminated al Qaeda's top terrorist, Zarqawi. This was accomplished with excellent intelligence, and that information came from Iraqi citizens themselves. A very positive sign. And while Zarqawi was eliminated, finding him brought a wealth of information, allowing U.S. and Iraqi forces to dismantle many more pieces of al Qaeda's puzzle. And Iraq just this past week selected three more officials, cabinet ministers, to serve in its standing government. These are very positive accomplishments.

But it is also important for us to remember what led up to this war, and just a short look at a couple of the incidents over the last 30 years will bring it into focus and vividly demonstrate the death, destruction, and terror brought to Americans by our enemy.

The Iran hostage crisis in 1979, where our hostages were held for 444 days;

1983 suicide bomb attacks in Beirut, Lebanon, killing 242 Americans;

1985, the Achille Lauro hijacking, where an invalid American was murdered in his wheelchair;

1988, Pan Am 103 bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 259 people on board;

February 26, 1993, the first World Trade Center bombing;

1996, Khobar Towers bombing, U.S. Air Force barracks in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. military personnel;

1998, U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, killing over 300;

The year 2000, the USS Cole bombing, killing 17 U.S. sailors;

And then, September 11th.

Now, treating these incidents as crimes and not as acts of war, providing reactionary measures rather than moving proactively will not work. And how do we know? Because that is precisely what we did for decades, and the consequence was 9/11.

The campaign against the United States and its allies is ambitious, simple, and clear. Terrorists will stop at nothing to achieve their distorted sense of reality. We could have stayed out of this conflict. However, giving terrorists free rein would not make us any safer, and history has proven that. The price would be more innocent lives lost, more bombings, and not an ounce of peace. We must not be held hostage by terrorism. That is not living in liberty and freedom.

There are defining moments for every generation. And for this generation that defining moment is how we engage in this war on terror, highlighted by a very different post-9/11 world. When we came to that defining moment, to that tragic day, we, as a Nation, with our allies around the world, decided we would not allow terrorists to win.

Mr. Speaker, freedom isn't free. The choice is clear, our resolve is clear: we must and we will prevail.

Mr. Speaker, what an honor it is for me to stand here today and recognize three outstanding soldiers and citizens, Sergeant Kenneth Kraus, Staff Sergeant Jacob Long, and First Sergeant Michael Matthews. These brave men represent the best our country has to offer. They served in our military and now continue service in Roswell, Georgia, as police officers and city employees.

Just like the freedoms they protect, the heroism and selflessness embodied by our brave soldiers must never be taken for granted. Each and every day these men and women sacrifice for the well-being of Americans and our allies, and they stand on the front lines in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world bringing freedom and hope to millions; and they do so with an unwavering dedication and professionalism.

We must insure that they have not only our gratitude but our genuine support in their continued efforts. Thanks to Sergeant Kraus, Staff Sergeant Long, and First Sergeant Matthews, as well as all members of the United States armed services for their contributions both at home and abroad.

You continue to make our Nation great and our friends and allies around the world secure and free. God bless you.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity once again to come before the House. I want to thank the leadership and the conference for their providing us the opportunity to come and talk this evening for a while and share some views with the Members of the House about a very important topic.

We have coined this on occasion the Official Truth Squad. This is the House Official Truth Squad, the Republican conference Official Truth Squad that grew out of a general frustration on the part of many Members of the freshmen class, 25, 26 strong, who are now about 18 months into our first term in Congress.

And after about 6 months, we met and shared conversation and thoughts about the House of Representatives and where we are going as a Nation. There was some real concern about what we sensed as the politics of division and the politics of deception that seemed to be practiced by many here in this Chamber and across the land, frankly.

So we organized what we called the Official Truth Squad and come to the floor of the House on many occasions, as often as possible, at least try to do it at least once a week. We broadened that participation in the Official Truth Squad, Mr. Speaker, because I think other Members of the conference felt that was an appropriate thing to do, to try to bring some light, shed some light and truth on the issues that we talk about here in the United States House of Representatives, because it is so doggone important to make certain that we have truth and facts when we are talking about issues. Because if you don't have the right facts, the truth of the matter is, it is tough to get to the appropriate solution.

We have adopted a slogan or a quote that we like to call on by the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan and he had a quote that he used often. He said everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own facts, and I think that kind of crystallizes the genesis of the Official Truth Squad and why we felt it was so important to come to this floor and talk about various issues.

So, Mr. Speaker, tonight is a topic that is extremely important, and it is a discussion that is important, and it is a topic that demands the truth.

Tonight, we are going to talk a bit about the war on terror, and it is one of those areas where, yes, people can have their own opinions, and it is important but it is also important to make certain that we think and talk about the facts of the war on terror.

I am going to be joined by a number of colleagues this evening, but I wanted to start off by outlining or by citing actions, events that have occurred in the war on terror. And many people have differing opinions as to when the war on terror actually began, when did the terrorism begin to threaten us. I think it probably was in 1979, and we will talk about that a little bit, but I want to just highlight a list of terrorist activities that I think bring real focus to the war on terror and that, Mr. Speaker, are terribly sobering, but I think they are important as we kick off this discussion about the war on terror.

There are literally tens, if not hundreds, of events that one could cite as being associated with the acts of terrorism around the world, but I would like to just highlight a number of them here.

I am going to go in chronological order. I am going to start in 1961 when the first U.S. aircraft was hijacked on May 1, 1961.

A number of events occurred over the next decade, but we all remember the Munich Olympic massacre on September 5, 1972.

The ambassador to the Sudan was assassinated on March 2, 1973, U.S. ambassador to Sudan Cleo Noel. Other diplomats assassinated at the Saudi Arabian embassy in Khartoum.

There was the attack and hijacking at the Rome airport in December, December 17, 1973.

The United States ambassador to Cypress, Rodger Davies, and his Greek Cypriot secretary were shot and killed on August 19, 1974.

Ambassador to Afghanistan was assassinated on February 14, 1979, and of course, the Iran hostage crisis began in November of 1979 when Iranian radicals seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took 66 American diplomats hostage, holding 53 of them for 444 days.

Grand mosque seizure, November 20, 1979, in Mecca.

U.S. installation bombing, August 31, 1981 in Ramstein, West Germany.

Assassination of President Sadat, the Egyptian President, on October 6, 1981.

Murder of missionaries on December 4, 1981 in El Salvador.

The bombing of the U.S. embassy in Beirut, April 18, 1983. Sixty- three people, including the CIA's Middle East director, were killed. Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

Naval officer assassinated in El Salvador on May 25, 1983.

Bombing of the marine barracks, Beirut, October 23, 1983. There were simultaneous suicide truck bomb attacks made on American and French compounds in Beirut, killing 242 Americans and 58 French troops killed when a 400-pound device was deployed at a French base. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

Facts, Mr. Speaker.

Naval officer was assassinated in Greece, November 15, 1983.

Kidnapping of an embassy official and the murder of political officer William Buckley in Beirut, Lebanon, March 16, 1984.

Restaurant bombing in Spain, April 12, 1984. Eighteen U.S. servicemen were killed, 83 people injured.

TWA hijacking June 14, 1985.

Achille Lauro hijacking, October 7, 1985.

Aircraft bombing in Greece, March 30, 1986.

Berlin discotheque bombing, April 5, 1986, two U.S. soldiers killed and 79 American servicemen injured.

Bus attack, April 24, 1987, 16 U.S. servicemen riding in a Greek air force bus near Athens were injured.

Kidnapping of William Higgins on February 17, 1988. He was kidnapped and murdered by Iranian-backed Hezbollah.

Naples USO attack on April 14, 1988.

Attack on U.S. diplomat in Greece, June 28, 1988. Defense attache to the U.S. embassy in Greece was killed when a car bomb was detonated outside his home in Athens.

Pan Am 103 bombing, December 21, 1988. Pan Am 103 was blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland, by a bomb believed to have been placed by Libyan terrorists, 259 people killed.

And then of course, Mr. Speaker, the first World Trade Center bombing, February 26, 1993, when a car bomb, planted by Islamic terrorists, exploded in an underground garage leaving six people dead and 1,000 people injured.

Something we oftentimes forget or very few people talk about, there was an attempted assassination on President Bush by Iraqi agents on April 14, 1993.

Saudi military installation attacked November 13, 1995.

Khobar Towers bombing June 25, 1996, in Dhahran, killing 19 U.S. military personnel, wounding 515 persons including 240 U.S. personnel.

Empire State Building sniper attack in February of 1997.

The murder of a U.S. businessmen in Pakistan, November 12, 1997.

U.S. embassy bombings in east Africa. August 7, 1998, a bomb exploded at the rear entrance of the U.S. embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, killing 12 U.S. citizens and 32 foreign service nationals

and 247 Kenyan citizens. Almost simultaneously a bomb detonated in Tanzania, killing 7 foreign service nationals, 3 Tanzanian citizens and injuring 1 U.S. citizen and 76 Tanzanians.

It is sobering, Mr. Speaker.

Attack on USS Cole. October 12, 2000, a small dinghy carrying explosives rammed the destroyer USS Cole killing 17 sailors.

Manila bombing in December 2000.

Philippines hostage incident, May 2001.

And then the attack on September 11, 2001, on the U.S. homeland, four planes, two colliding with the twin towers in New York, one crashing in a field in southern Pennsylvania and one crashing into the Pentagon, 3,025 United States citizens and other nationals killed.

Mr. Speaker, you can have opinions about what is going on here, but you cannot dispute the facts. That the war on terror should have begun long ago. The terrorism has plagued our Nation for years. This is a long, long battle, and it is a real war.

So to talk about some of those facts tonight I am pleased to be joined by some very good friends and colleagues. Representative Eric Cantor is the deputy majority whip from the State of Virginia, and he joins us this evening to talk a little bit about the war on terror and to share some perspective during this week when we have had actually some very, very good news and some very good facts come out on the war on terror.

I am pleased to yield to my good friend from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments and his keen perspective and dedication to the support of our men and women in the military who are waging this incredibly important battle and incredibly important war. Thank you so much for your participation tonight in bringing a little light, a little vision and a little truth to the discussion.

We are also joined tonight by Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn from Tennessee who is almost a regular on the Official Truth Squad that brings some truth and light to so many topics, and she has a clear vision as well and a great perspective on the importance of truth in this discussion but also the importance of waging this war on terror, and I am happy to yield to my good friend from Tennessee.

If the gentlewoman will yield.

A couple of points you make are so important for this discussion. One is about the quality and nature of our enemy. It is unlike any enemy we have ever faced because it is not an enemy who is attaining ground or territory. This is an

enemy that hates us because of who we are, what we are, and what kind of government we have. They clearly have stated that democracy is their enemy. It is not a territory.

And you mentioned about the troops being behind our actions virtually 100 percent. I was so heartened to see the President in Baghdad earlier today in the tape we saw and the welcome he received from our U.S. troops. It was just incredibly moving to see our President visit our troops there and to visit the new government in Iraq.

I yield back.

If the gentlewoman will yield once again.

I think it is important because when we talk about opinions and facts, a lot of people have their opinions about the nature of our enemy and what their goal is, but the fact of the matter is you don't have to look too far because you can look to their words. You can look to their words, and we have a quote here from al-Zarqawi, who was finally brought to justice in the past couple of days, and what he said in January of 2005.

These are his words, now. These are not our words but his words: ``We have declared a fierce war on this evil principle of democracy and those who follow this wrong ideology.'' That is the nature of our enemy. That is why it is unlike any enemy that we have ever, ever had before.

And I yield back to the gentlewoman.

I appreciate so much your participation tonight, and I join you in looking forward to our discussion and our debate on Thursday. We will spend the majority of the day here in the United States House of Representatives talking about the war in Iraq and talking about the war on terror and the importance of it and bringing a perspective that I think is so needed for the American people to see and appreciate as we recognize the longevity of the battle that has occurred already and the challenges that we have before us.

I am so pleased to be joined by my colleague from Georgia this evening, Congressman Phil Gingrey, my good physician colleague from Georgia and also congressional colleague from Georgia. He is an individual also who recognizes the extreme importance of the support of our military forces and the gravity of the war in which we are engaged now, this war on terror.

I am pleased to have you join us tonight and yield to you.

I thank the gentleman for joining us tonight, and I appreciate your perspective and your commitment to our servicemen and -women and for the sober reflection that you gave on the situation that we find ourselves in today and the importance, the real importance of this war. And it is a real war. It is a real war, and you know and understand that as well as anybody.

I also appreciate your reminding folks again that on Thursday we will be spending time on this floor discussing the war on terror and the importance of it and why America has found itself in this situation, why it is important that we respond in the way that we have.

When I am at home, I hear people talk about the war in Iraq. And whenever I discuss this with some of my constituents, I oftentimes will say it is important for us to remember that this war in Iraq is really just the battle in Iraq in the larger war on terror. And the gentleman from Georgia just described it extremely well, that the policy of containment that we had used in the past, prior to 9/11, was a dismal failure. And so this is truly a war. It is a real war. It is a real war in which we must engage, and it wasn't of our choosing. It wasn't of our choosing, Mr. Speaker.

I want to spend the final few moments that I have to talk about an issue that is related to the war on terror and the battle in Iraq that we have right now, because you hear so many people say, how are we going to know when it is over? How are we going to know what victory is? How will we know when we win?

It is difficult. I understand that. It is difficult because this, again, is a war unlike any war we have ever had. Victory in Iraq will not come in the form of our enemy surrendering, because our enemy doesn't hold any territory. It is not like they can say, okay, I give up, I am not going to fight any more. And it won't be signaled by a single particular event.

For folks who remember past wars and past ends to past wars, there will be no Battleship Missouri signing. There will be no Appomattox signing. The ultimate victory in the battle in Iraq will be in stages. And I think it is important to point out that these stages have been defined by members of the military and members of this administration and have been articulated by the administration as well as members of the United States House of Representatives leadership and others.

And they have been defined in the short term, in the medium term and in the long term. I would like to run through those briefly because I think it is important for the American people to appreciate that yes, indeed, there are benchmarks that one can follow, and that we have made incredible progress, not just in the war on terror but in the battle in Iraq.

In the short term, we have an Iraq that is fighting the terrorists and neutralizing the insurgency, meeting political milestones, which they have done to a remarkable degree, building democratic institutions and standing up robust security forces. We hear over and over that those security forces number around 250,000, which is truly remarkable. They are destroying terrorist networks and maintaining security and tackling key economic reforms to lay the foundation for a sound economy.

So in the short term, those are the kinds of benchmarks that we should be looking at. Many of them have been accomplished.

In the medium term, an Iraq that is in the lead defeating terrorists and insurgents and providing its own security with a constitutional, elected government in place. Mr. Speaker, that is a medium-term goal that has been described for a number of years and in fact has now been accomplished, providing an inspiring example to reformers in the region, and well on its way to achieving its own economic potential.

And then in the longer term, Mr. Speaker, we will know that victory in Iraq has been obtained when an Iraq has defeated the terrorists and neutralized the insurgency, an Iraq that is peaceful and united and stable and democratic and secure where Iraqis have the institutions and resources that they need to govern themselves justly and to provide security for their own country, and an Iraq that is a partner, a partner in the global war on terror and the fight against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, integrated into the international community and an engine for regional economic growth and proving the fruits of democratic governments to the region.

Mr. Speaker, those are the kinds of benchmarks we ought to be looking at. There won't be a surrender. There won't be a signing. There won't be a waving of the white flag certainly by our enemy. We just hope Members in this body and across the Nation do not wave the white flag. This is an important battle. It is a part of the war on terror. It is imperative that we wage this with the vigor and enthusiasm and the spirit that we saw on the faces and heard in the voices of American soldiers as they greeted President Bush as he made his visit to Baghdad.

Mr. Speaker, America is a wondrous and a glorious nation. Freedom's light is strong here. We are a vessel of liberty and a beacon of hope to so many people around the world. The work that we do here is so important as we continue to provide that American leadership, international leadership, and show that light, show that light of freedom.

I am so proud to have the opportunity to stand here with my colleagues and to highlight some of the truthful and honest efforts that this government, this administration, this House of Representatives is taking to make certain that that vessel of liberty and that beacon of hope rings true around the world.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 421) expressing the sense of Congress and support for Greater Opportunities for Science, Technology, Engineering,

and Mathematics (GO-STEM) programs, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Con. Res. 421.

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

Mr. Speaker, I initially want to start and thank the chairman and staff of the Education and Workforce Committee, and Members on both sides, cosponsors on both sides of the aisle here, for their support and their assistance as we bring this important resolution forward.

A couple of quotes from the Hart-Rudman Commission report in 2001: ``The harsh fact is that the United States need for the highest quality human capital in science, mathematics and engineering is not being met. Another reason for the growing deficit in high-quality human capital is that the American kindergarten through 12th grade education system is not performing as well as it should.''

And then just a year and a half ago, the former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich said, ``The biggest challenge for the United States domestically is to fundamentally, profoundly overhaul math and science education. This is a real crisis.''

Mr. Speaker, in order to sustain America's economic growth and national security, United States must remain at the cutting edge of innovation and ingenuity in such fields as science, technology, engineering and mathematics, often referred to as STEM. And staying at the cutting edge will only happen by putting the right workforce in place for the 21st century.

Creating the 21st century workforce begins by answering the domestic demand for occupations like scientists and engineers. In fact, the demand for scientists and engineers is expected to increase at four times the rate of all other occupations over the next decade.

Already the Federal Government makes a sizeable investment to promote STEM-related occupations through education initiatives. But if the Federal Government is going to continue to have such a role, it makes sense to take a look at the current Federal programs, the total investment of those programs and gauge the effectiveness of those programs.

In October 2005, the Government Accountability Office released a study on Federal STEM programs and concluded the Federal Government funds 207 education programs across 13 separate Federal agencies. In total, those programs cost $2.8 billion in fiscal year 2004. However, only 51 of the 207 programs received $10 million or more, meaning that most received not a substantial investment.

In the study, the GAO went on to conclude that before adopting any changes, it is important to know the extent to which existing STEM education programs are appropriately targeted and making the best use of available Federal resources.

Based upon the recommendations of the GAO, Congress went on to establish the Academic Competitiveness Council in order to identify all Federal education programs with a math and science focus. The primary duties of the council are to determine the effectiveness of each program and identify areas of overlap or duplication.

Now, the rudimentary evidence points to a system that is fragmented and in need of much better coordination. Congress is eagerly anticipating the report of the Academic Competitiveness Council to see how the larger facts bear out, and to that end the Department of Education and other Federal agencies should be commended for their rapid response in creating the council and their aggressiveness in finding the truth.

But as Congress examines the investments made on math and science education, the effort also must focus on duplication and standards of evaluation. Federal resources are precious, and it is the responsibility of Congress to ensure that money is not being thrown at repetitive or duplicative efforts and that these programs can be properly monitored for their effectiveness.

Instead of spreading money around on programs that span the Federal Government and lack an overall coherent plan, Congress must direct the money to the best possible use in a consistent manner. The recommendations of the Academic Competitiveness Council should be closely watched and bring semblance to math and science education programs. This resolution would move us in that direction.

So I urge my colleagues to adopt this resolution. Now is the time to affirm the importance of such an investment, but also to properly evaluate the recommendations produced by the council. As America looks to sustain its economic vitality and national security, investments in the field of science, technology, engineering and math are too important to leave fragmented and without proper guidance.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the ranking member for his support, and yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), the chairman of the Education and the Workforce Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to once again reiterate my thanks to the ranking member and to Mr. Davis for their support and for the support of all the cosponsors on both sides of the aisle who understand and appreciate the importance of this resolution. I am so pleased to stand with both Republicans and Democrats who appreciate that Federal resources are precious, but also that they are finite. It is our responsibility, Congress' responsibility, to provide the oversight and to be certain that hard-earned taxpayer money is wisely spent.

This resolution is truly a win-win. It allows Congress to be certain that the money is being spent effectively, and it reiterates our appreciation and support for increasing the interests in science, technology, engineering and mathematics education.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following correspondence.

Committee on Education and the Workforce, House of

Representatives,

Washington, DC, June 6, 2006.

Hon. Sherwood Boehlert,

Chairman, Committee on Science, Rayburn House Office

Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Boehlert: Thank you for your recent letter

regarding the consideration of H. Con. Res. 421, expressing

support for Greater Opportunities for Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics programs. I appreciate your

efforts to improve the text of the resolution. When the bill

is considered on the floor, the changes you have suggested

will be included in a manager's amendment.

I also appreciate your agreement to not request a

sequential referral and your willingness to forgo

consideration of H. Con. Res. 421 by your committee. I agree

that waiving consideration of H. Con. Res. 421 in no way

diminishes or alters the jurisdictional interest of the

Committee on Science. I will include your letter and this

response in the Congressional Record during the bill's

consideration on the House floor.

Sincerely,

Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

I do.

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

The Department of Homeland Security awarded a contract to a private company for limousine and shuttle services for its employees for $22 million. All of our budget discussions are indeed discussions about priorities, and Mr. Kuhl and I would suggest that this simply is an issue of priorities. This amendment shifts $22 million in funds previously used to pay for limousine services to increase the much- needed FIRE grants program.

Created by Congress in 2003, the SAFER Grants are meant to help communities with career, volunteer, and combination fire departments to meet industry minimum standards and attain 24-hour staffing to provide adequate protection from fire and fire-related hazards, and to fulfill traditional missions of fire departments that antedate the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. These SAFER Grants will help fire departments meet these minimum industry standards prescribed by National Fire Protection Association Standards 1710 and 1720.

It seems to both Mr. Kuhl and to me that our priorities as a Nation should be for FIRE and SAFER Grants and not limousines, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for his comments and appreciate his concerns regarding the wording and the accuracy thereof, and we look forward to working with him as this process moves forward, and I appreciate his support of the amendment.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to take these few short moments and bring a little more positive perspective, a brighter outlook, and hopefully a little more unifying message than we have just heard and, frankly, than we often hear in the United States House Chamber, especially by some of my good friends from the other side of the aisle.

We call this the Official Truth Squad. I thank the leadership and the conference for allowing me to come and share a few words tonight.

The Official Truth Squad grew out of a frustration on the part of the freshmen class of the Republican Conference. We all were elected in 2004, 24 strong, now 26 of us here in the United States House of Representatives. After a relatively few number of months, we grew frustrated with the fact that there was a lot of misinformation and a lot of distortion and a lot of frankly

deception that was going on here. And so what we wanted to do was to put together a group of folks that would come to the House floor and try as best we could to provide some truth, some facts to the situations that we address here in the United States House of Representatives.

We have just gotten back, Mr. Speaker, from a week at home, a district work period, over the Memorial Day week. I heard from constituent after constituent about two big issues. One was illegal immigration, obviously the largest issue we have to deal with as a Nation right now. But the second one in meeting after meeting after meeting with constituent after constituent all across my district on the north side of Atlanta was people asking why on earth is Congress so divided. Why is it so partisan? Why do you have the kind of sniping that goes on? And I am loathe to answer that question because it is so difficult to understand why there are many in this Chamber who are not interested in working positively or productively together. It just boggles my mind.

These are not Democrat problems or Republican problems, Mr. Speaker; these are American problems. And American problems deserve a united Congress working together.

So what you have just heard in the last 15 minutes is an individual who will tell you that, quote, ``this is a Republican Congress problem.'' Well, Mr. Speaker, we do better if we work together. The fact is that it is extremely difficult to get anything moving forward positively in Congress without the support of many different folks. And so we work better when we work together.

What you hear so often is what I call the politics of division. The politics of division is so destructive, they do a disservice to every single one of us in this Nation.

I tried to put some words to the consequences of the politics of division, and I think I have found a quote. I have shared it with you before, Mr. Speaker, and it comes from the Reverend William Boetcker, who was a philosopher and leader around the time of the late 19th century and early 20th century. He described what he said was a social philosophy and he attributed it to Abraham Lincoln. Nobody can actually determine whether President Lincoln actually said these words, but Reverend Boetcker talked about them, and I think they crystallize and capture my concern, my suspicion about what the consequences are of this politics of division that is so destructive.

He said, ``You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You can't help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer, you cannot encourage the brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred, and you cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.

Now, Mr. Speaker, that kind of crystallizes, I think, what is a unifying American philosophy. It is a philosophy that would serve us extremely well here in the United States House of Representatives.

How often do you hear people just castigate out individuals who are more wealthy than others, destroying the rich in an effort to build up the poor. It doesn't work that way, Mr. Speaker. It doesn't work that way. Our system never has. Our system never has done that.

And so the Official Truth Squad tries to bring some credibility and truth to these discussions. We have adopted a motto which is a quote from a wonderful United States Senator, Daniel Patrick Moynihan from the State of New York. And this quote, I think, makes it so that everybody has to be held accountable. And what Senator Moynihan said is that everyone is entitled to their opinion. And they are, and opinions are here in the countless number. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but they're not entitled to their own facts. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but they are not entitled to their own facts, which is why it is so, frankly, troubling, Mr. Speaker, that the Blue Dog group gets up here night after night, week after week and talks about how they want to be fiscally responsible.

You know, we used to say that folks who were politicians that said one thing at home and did something different in Washington weren't being responsive to their constituents. Well, the Blue Dogs have perfected the art of saying one thing in Washington and doing another thing in Washington. And we will use some facts, Mr. Speaker. Here are some facts. You want to talk about facts? During the fiscal year 2006 budget, this was the plan of the Blue Dogs and the Democrats. Instead of being responsible about spending, they offered programs that would have spent 21.5 more billion dollars. You didn't hear that from folks on the other side of the aisle. That is the truth, Mr. Speaker. That is the truth.

How many in new taxes? $54 billion in new taxes. Talk to me now about what the truth is and what is being proposed and what is being said in Washington and what is being voted on in Washington and what is being said back home.

How many mandatory savings? The Republican conference, all on their own, in a very difficult way, because we got no cooperation from folks who will tell you one thing at home, in fact, they will tell you one thing, that same thing in Washington, but they will do exactly the opposite. We gained $40 billion this savings with the Deficit Reduction Act.

Earlier this year, how much mandatory savings on the part of the other side? Zero. Zero, Mr. Speaker. That is the truth. That is a fact. That is not opinion. That is a fact.

The bills that they brought forward, the Blue Dogs, my good colleague just before me, talked about wanting a balanced budget. We have given them an opportunity to vote on a balanced budget. In fact, we did so just 3 or 4 weeks ago here on the floor of the House of Representatives. Not a single one of those 37 Blue Dogs voted in favor of that balanced budget. Not one.

They talk about making certain that you pay as you go, that you only pay for programs that you have the money for. We have offered that on the floor of the House, Mr. Speaker. We do not get the support of the Blue Dogs.

They talk about having a rainy day fund. Doesn't it make wonderful sense to have a rainy day fund because we know year after year after year we will have emergencies like Katrina or other emergencies. There is an average of $20 billion annually where there are emergencies that need Federal money during the course of any given year on average. $20 billion.

So what does the Republican Congress propose that we are being accused of doing? In fact, what we do propose is a rainy day fund in the budget that we just adopted for fiscal year 2007. How many Members of the Blue Dog, how many of those 37 Blue Dogs voted in favor of that rainy day fund? Mr. Speaker, not one. Not one. Same number that we got when we talk about the mandatory savings. Zero. Not one of them support it.

I want to talk about a little positive information about this economy because you won't, you may not hear about it on the nightly news. You may not read about it in your newspapers. You certainly won't hear about it from some folks who want to make certain that they practice this politics of division and this politics of deception.

Did you see the new job figures, Mr. Speaker, last month, the month of May? 75,000 new jobs created. And this economy, over the past 12 months has created 1.9 million new jobs. 1.9 million new jobs. More than 5.3 million new jobs since August of 2003.

The unemployment rate has fallen to 4.6 percent, lower than the average of the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s.

Mr. Speaker, a picture oftentimes says it so much better than any of us can, so let me see if I can show you the picture of that kind of job growth that we have seen over the past 3 years. Here it is on a graph. Here we are in January 2002 with unemployment up at about 5.7 to 8 percent. Here is the job growth at that time. And then on the bottom, we have the number of months going by. We haven't even gotten to this month. But earlier this year, what has happened to the unemployment rate? It has gone down, Mr. Speaker. What's happened to the job growth? It has gone up significantly. Again, 5.3 million new jobs since August of 2003.

So the curious individual, the individual who wanted to solve problems and work positively and productively on behalf of the American people would say well, what happened when this seemed to change, when unemployment

rates began to go down, when the job growth began to go up? What happened? What occurred there?

Well, lo and behold, Mr. Speaker, you know what happened. We had tax decreases, appropriate tax decreases, responsible tax decreases. By making certain that Americans got to keep more of their own money, and when you allow Americans to keep more of their own money, what happens? They spend it and they save it in wise ways and then the economy flourishes. So because of the tax policies of this Congress, of this Congress, and this administration, we have seen increasing job growth and decreasing unemployment.

What else about the economy is going on? Revised reports show the fastest real gross domestic product growth in over 2\1/2\ years in the first quarter. Real GDP growth grew at an annual rate of 5.3 percent in the first quarter. Productivity increased at an annual rate of 3.7 percent in the first quarter. Hourly compensation, real hourly compensation rose at a 3.2 annual percentage rate in the first quarter. Personal income increased at an annual rate of 6.7 percent in April. Since January of 2001, real after tax income has risen by 12.9 percent. Why, Mr. Speaker? Because of tax policies, appropriate responsible tax policies put in place by this Congress, this administration, this leadership. And oftentimes, in spite of what you hear at home, and in spite of what you hear by my friends on the other side of the aisle, oftentimes, more often than not, frankly, without a single individual helping on that side of the aisle.

In fact, they come down and they say these tax decreases, the tax reductions will destroy the economy, will throw people out on the streets. But, Mr. Speaker, you know what happens. What happens is that unemployment goes down, job growth goes up, and in fact, sometimes they will even say that at 1 minute and then they will vote for the same thing that they just said was awful, just said was awful just a moment before that.

Mr. Speaker, truth is so doggone important in the public discourse. Remember, you can have your own opinions, but you are not welcome to your own facts. You have got to talk about facts. And that is why the Official Truth Squad takes the opportunity as often as possible to come down here and talk about facts, talk about facts with the American people because the politics of division again, does a disservice to every single American.

Mr. Speaker, we live in a glorious Nation, a wonderful Nation, a Nation that is still seen by men and women around the world as a beacon of liberty and a repository of hope. I am proud to serve in the United States House of Representatives and to have the opportunity to share a positive, productive perspective and vision with my colleagues, and I hope that we can be joined by more and more colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we work to solve the incredible challenges that we have before us as a Nation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at midnight), the House adjourned until today, Wednesday, June 7, 2006, at 10 a.m.

Mr. Chairman, there are some agreements here. One is that this is a long-standing discussion and battle and it is in ongoing litigation in the court. It is a battle between some States, but I do not know that there is not a whole lot of agreement.

Everybody says that we ought to let the courts decide, but those who are opposed to this amendment begin the double talk at that point.

If this amendment fails, the Corps of Engineers will not be able to follow the court order. On January 6 of this year, the D.C. court ordered the corps to undertake the NEPA process ``as expeditiously as practicable.'' Section 110 that was put in the bill would not allow them to do so.

Curiously, Alabama informally requested that the judge stay the corps from proceeding with the NEPA analysis or updating the water control plans, but she refused to do so.

Alabama itself says let the courts decide, and we agree. Let the courts decide, not an amendment which was inserted into this bill without discussion.

By accepting the language in the Energy and Water Appropriations bill, Congress is inserting itself both into the three-State negotiation on State water rights and a legal issue which has been ongoing.

Support the Deal amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge and applaud the inauguration this past weekend of Iraq's new permanent unity government. For 3 years, democracy has been coming to Iraq, and now it is officially here.

Millions have participated in the process, voting and debating, and now the people of Iraq finally have their own sovereign, democratically elected government. The Iraqis have overcome huge obstacles, uncertainty, threats, violence and fear, but have continued to stand firm for the most noble of ideals, freedom and democracy.

In just 3 years, we have seen a tyrannical oppressive dictatorship removed and a fully sovereign democracy born. Their new government is one of unity with Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis all serving in prominent leadership roles. All the people of Iraq may proudly stand up and say, this is their government, their country, and they will honor and protect it.

Mr. Speaker, the historic significance of this event cannot be overestimated. From this day forward, we must always look at Iraq as a nation of independence, a nation of freedom and a nation of democracy. May it always be.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the continued good work by an Atlanta-based company in helping rebuild the hurricane ravaged gulf coast.

Nine months after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita devastated the area, Home Depot continues to play a lead role in reconstruction. The region remains in need, and to date Home Depot has contributed over $11 million to the relief efforts, and their employees have volunteered countless hours and resources to help rebuild the region. The company has vowed to continue their work to make sure that the region realizes that rebirth. And while it may be easy for a company to pledge support early when the spotlight is on, it is admirable to see Home Depot still out there with hammer and nails in hand months after the media frenzy has subsided.

While time has passed, Home Depot's enthusiasm and compassion for the victims of this disaster has not. It is important to recognize these ongoing efforts and all the people continuing to aid in the recovery.

Mr. Speaker, the gulf coast region remains in need of a helping hand, and Home Depot is an outstanding example of corporate responsibility and compassion.

Mr. Speaker, this Sunday, May 21, 2006, the Congregation Etz Chaim of Marietta, Georgia will mark its 30th anniversary. As the first Jewish congregation in Marietta, Etz Chaim has grown from its beginning in 1975 to be a leader today in the Jewish community of Atlanta.

In celebrating their commitment to faith and service, the congregation is honoring two of their most distinguished members: Judy and Stan Fineman. Over the years, Judy and Stan have dedicated their time and energy to Etz Chaim with a selfless devotion. They share in the excellent reputation and tradition of this congregation, and I applaud their generous contributions to our community.

On this anniversary, we have the opportunity to reflect on the message of excellence and altruism Etz Chaim has brought to Marietta. Spurred by their spiritual leader Rabbi Shalom Lewis and embodied in each individual member, the principles of the message of Etz Chaim are as important today as they were 30 years ago: A ``commitment to our faith and tradition, community service, giving to others, life long learning, and the passing of Judaism from generation to generation.''

It is my privilege to join Congregation Etz Chaim in looking forward to a future of continued growth and service to others.

Mr. Speaker, May is the first annual Ehlers- Danlos Syndrome (EDS) Awareness Month. Unfortunately, this syndrome, which affects nearly 60,000 Americans and 1.5 million people worldwide, is still largely unrecognized by the healthcare community.

In 1986, the Ehlers-Danlos National Foundation was established to research, support, and awareness for those suffering from this potentially debilitating illness. A heritable connective tissue disorder, EDS, in its most severe circumstances, weakens the vascular system making it rupture. This potential for complication is coupled with an inadequate level of funding and recognition which all too often leads to a lack of diagnosis or a misdiagnosis. Early detection is the key to an effective treatment and affords the individual suffering from EDS the opportunity to manage their syndrome and enhance the quality of life.

It is imperative that, in the absence of a cure, we in Congress join hands with the healthcare community to focus more attention on this matter. Accurate detection and sustained treatment will lead to a more fulfilling life for those afflicted with EDS. I am pleased to have this opportunity to applaud the efforts made by the brave men and women living with this illness as well as the countless friends, families and health professionals that have committed their time and expertise.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor a group of true American patriots from Georgia. This past Monday, I had the ultimate privilege to welcome home from Iraq members of the B-Company First Battalion, 108th Armor Regiment of the 48th Mechanized Infantry Brigade.

These brave men and women, known as the Rough Riders, have just returned home after a year-long tour of duty in south Baghdad. The B- Company First Battalion patrolled the streets gathering intelligence, looking for weapon caches, and keeping the peace in a hostile area.

Each of these patriots made remarkably selfless sacrifices for us, for their country, leaving behind family, friends, and careers to protect the liberty and freedoms we cherish in this Nation. It is only because of the brave men and women like the 108th that we are able to enjoy these freedoms. Our level of respect and appreciation for these soldiers should truly know no bounds. We all, as Americans, owe thanks to them and to all our armed services who risk their lives to protect all of us.

Mr. Speaker, the B-Company First Battalion are real-life heroes. We owe them our unwavering gratitude and support. God bless each and every one of them.