Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I also want to thank my colleague from Michigan for his kind words. He and I have worked on a number of Great Lakes issues together, and it has been a pleasure to work across the aisle on something that really benefits the people of this country.

I am very pleased today that we are taking up this bill. It is another great day for the Great Lakes. Today we renew and expand upon one of the most effective Federal environmental cleanup programs ever, the Great Lakes Legacy Act.

All of us have heard about Superfund and all of the tremendous cost overruns of that program. When we wrote this original Legacy Act some years ago, we made sure to keep the issues out of the courts, and make it a very efficient program, and that is exactly what has happened.

The Great Lakes, we all know, comprise the largest source of fresh water in the world--20 percent of the earth's total and 95 percent of the surface fresh water in the United States. The Great Lakes also provide drinking water, transportation, and recreation to millions of people. Approximately 30 million people drink the water of the Great Lakes in the United States and Canada.

However, the Great Lakes are endangered by contaminants from years of industrial pollution that have settled into the sediments of the tributaries, the rivers and streams, that flow into the lakes. These pollutants degrade the health of both humans and wildlife, and they disrupt the beneficial uses of the lakes. The longer we take to clean up these areas, the greater the likelihood that the sediment will be transported into the open waters of the Great Lakes, where cleanup is virtually impossible.

To address this problem, I introduced the original Great Lakes Legacy Act in the 107th Congress. With bipartisan support, the Congress passed and the President signed this bill in 2002.

The Great Lakes Legacy Act authorizes the EPA to clean up contaminated sediments in designated areas of concern in the Great Lakes. These areas of concern are designated by the EPA and are defined as any ecologically degraded geographic area that requires remediation. Currently, there are 43 areas of concern throughout the Great Lakes and 31 of those are either wholly or partially located within U.S. waters.

The Great Lakes Legacy Act has made tremendous progress in cleaning up contaminated areas. Of the 31 areas of concern in U.S. waters, four remediation projects have been completed, one project is underway, and six more are currently being monitored and evaluated. Since 2004, the EPA estimates that almost 1 million cubic yards of contaminated sediments have been removed from our Great Lakes tributaries. These sediments are saturated with toxic substances such as mercury, arsenic, chromium, cadmium, polychlorinates, better known as PCBs, and lead.

However, more cleanup work remains. The U.S. Policy Committee for the Great Lakes has identified 75 remaining contaminated sites. The Great Lakes Legacy Act expires in just a few days. In order to ensure this vital cleanup continues, Congressman Jim Oberstar and I introduced this bill. The bill has 45 bipartisan cosponsors and passed the Transportation Infrastructure Committee by voice vote.

In order to speed up efforts, this bill triples the authorized funding level from $50 million to $150 million per year. If fully appropriated, this has the potential to delist all of the U.S. areas of concern within the next decade. These funds will continue to be leveraged with a 35 percent non-Federal cost share with locals, businesses, environmental groups, and so forth.

The bill also makes a limited number of changes to the original Legacy Act that were jointly recommended by involved parties, and will vastly improve the bill.

The toxic pollutants from our industrial past have plagued the Great Lakes region for far too long. By voting for the Great Lakes Legacy Reauthorization Act, we can ensure that critical cleanup efforts in the Great Lakes continue.

In closing, I want to thank Chairman Oberstar, Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Mica and Ranking Member Boozman for all of their great work on this bill and their dedication to preserving our greatest fresh water resource.

I also want to thank staff members Ryan Seiger, Ben Webster, John Anderson and Jon Pawlow, and also Ben

Gielow on my staff. It has taken a lot of hard work, but it is a great bill and I am proud to present it. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in supporting the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1207, which would enable House staff to receive their pay stubs electronically and encourages the CAO to make further technological improvements that would enable employees to make changes in withholding, deductions or deposits electronically.

Increasingly, individuals are using technology to keep track of their financial information, and putting key data such as compensation information online will assist many in their efforts to keep track of their finances.

With the impact of junk mail, paper bills and other items delivered via postal mail, reducing the amount of wasted paper, even by a single item each month, would be good for the environment and likely will be a welcome change for many employees.

In this spirit of developing online tools for House staff, I also introduced an amendment to this bill that would direct the CAO to allow employees to make changes in withholdings, deductions, or deposits electronically. Not only would this service be of great use to employees, but it would also lessen the burden on payroll counselors who currently make these types of routine adjustments manually, which would in turn free them up to handle more complex questions that are not suited to a self-service model.

I am pleased that the committee voted unanimously to accept the amendment. I thank the chairman for his leadership in bringing this bill to the floor. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H. Res. 1207.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlelady from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. Speaker, I have no further comments on the bill, but I do have further comments to make.

In particular, all of us have spent 5 weeks or thereabouts home with our constituents and were impressed at how seriously our constituents and the Nation is taking the energy crisis that we face. There is a huge concern about this, particularly with the cost of gasoline.

In one example, a young woman in my district lives on a farm. It's hard today to make a living on a farm, and so she has a job off the farm as well. Their only vehicle is a pickup with, of course, very poor gas mileage. And she's faced with a position where the cost of driving to work is almost greater than the pay that she receives. This is one small example, and I believe that it is absolutely urgent for the House of Representatives to address this issue.

There are several bills out there regarding the energy crisis. There's been a lot of discussion about it. I think the only way I can summarize it after looking at the various bills is to say, what we really need is all of the above. Some members are focused totally on drilling, some are totally focused on alternative forms of energy, some on conservation. But what we really need is a comprehensive bill which addresses all of the above, because we are in a situation where we cannot depend on oil for very many more years.

Back in 1954 scientists predicted that by 1970, American oil production would peak, and they were right on the mark. In 1970, American oil production peaked. It's been going down ever since.

That same research projected that in about 2005, or 2010, world oil production would peak, and it looks like we've entered that period, and that's one reason why prices are going up.

We clearly have to develop the resources we have in this country. We clearly have to develop alternative forms of energy, particularly related to solar. An incredible amount of solar energy hits the Earth every day from the sun, to the point that in one year we get more energy from the sunlight hitting our planet than is contained in all of the resources of energy and the fossil fuels that are in the Earth.

So clearly there are ways to address this. We must address this. I just want to speak out and say it's absolutely essential for us to develop new approaches to energy. We certainly ought to put the money into developing alternative forms of energy. We have to put the money into developing drilling techniques that are safe, environmentally safe, and are not going to pollute the waters if they are offshore. We really have to take this seriously.

And I think it's reached the point where we can't just throw spitballs or snowballs at each other, but must simply say that we have to do all of the above approaches to energy production, and develop legislation that does that. I am concerned that the legislation being proposed by the leadership of the House will not do all of the above. It will only do part of it.

So I urge all of the Members to work together to really solve this problem and show the people of this country that we can deal with an important problem like this. And it's my pleasure to raise this issue, and we will continue discussions on that in the House.

As we know, the minority party discussed it every day in the House during the recent recess, out of a sense of disappointment that we had taken the August recess without first dealing with the energy bills that were available for us to consider. We should carry that on and make sure that we do address this issue, especially before we adjourn for the next recess.

I thank the group here for listening, and I hope this will result in some action on the part of the House of Representatives.

I don't believe I have any further speakers, and if the gentleman from Pennsylvania doesn't, I will, at this point, yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 6608, the House Reservists Pay Adjustment Act. I thank Chairman Brady for his leadership on this issue, and I'm proud to join with him as a cosponsor on this important bill.

The men and women of the United States Armed Forces make many sacrifices to protect our freedom. They are asked to spend time away from their families, to put themselves in harm's way, and, in the case of some House staff, to accept a salary that is less than what they would normally earn in civilian life during the period that they are on active duty. The gap in pay experienced by these servicemen and women often causes undue hardship on themselves and their families and increases the already heavy burden placed upon them as they leave for battle.

I am pleased to be able to find any reasonable method of assisting House staff, who are also members of the military, with the personal sacrifices they are asked to make to defend their country. This bill would compensate active servicemen and women for the difference in their combat pay and their official House salaries. These individuals have found not one but two careers that serve the public, and they should not experience a financial penalty for doing so.

I congratulate Chairman Brady for introducing this bill, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 6608.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I have another speaker. Myself.

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

Continuing with the discussion of energy, Mr. Speaker, let me just say I have a deep interest in the topic and have had for many years. Most of my colleagues here remember and recognize that I am a physicist, and physicists deal with energy all the time.

One of the biggest problems that we address is that energy is intangible. The public simply doesn't recognize what it is, how its obtained, what the limitations are, and so forth; and I think we should do a better job of educating them about these problems.

Another aspect is that energy is critical to every aspect of life.

As an example, we talk about the agricultural revolution. But very few people recognize that the agricultural revolution, even though attempted a number of times many, many years ago, did not actually succeed until people learned to domesticate their animals so they could do the plowing and thresh the wheat and so forth.

The second major revolution in history is the industrial revolution, once again directly tied to the use of energy. It's the first use of nonhuman and nonanimal energy with hydropower to drive the mills, later coal to drive the steam engines and so forth. And so the major revolutions in history took place in connection with the use of energy and the development of new forms of energy.

We are now at a critical point in our life as a Nation and as a planet. If we do not recognize the changes required in our energy use, we are going to retrogress. Instead of advancing, we will lose the advantages we have from our copious amounts of energy and end up in a state where we have less energy than we had before. This will have disastrous economic effects, unless we change our direction.

If you look back over history, virtually every recession has been tied to a dramatic increase in the cost of energy, which is something that we also have occurring now.

So this is a serious problem, something that should be addressed immediately, and should not wait for next year. There are a number of excellent proposals out there from both parties. I would hope that we would winnow these out and come up with proposals that truly accomplish what we have to do, and that is to preserve our standard of living by developing new sources of energy, certainly developing those that we already have and know about which we are not really using properly.

It's essential that we do this, but this isn't going to happen by itself. We need help from the Congress to lay down the guidelines for the people in the energy industry, to researchers in the national

labs and other labs to really tackle this problem and come up with new ideas.

I don't care if it's wind energy, which happens to be a part of solar energy; whether it's wave energy, which is also derived from solar energy; or whether it's photovoltaic cells. Naturally it helps that very soon photovoltaic cell research will be so good that we will have photovoltaic shingles on every house because we can make them at a cost that eventually will be less than that of the asphalt shingles. If we do that, every house becomes a power-generating system, and much of the electrical needs of each homeowner can be met just by the use of solar shingles on the roof of their home.

This would be a tremendous boon to our country. Relatively free energy; you just buy the shingles which you have to buy anyway, and you get essentially free energy out of it.

So there are many options that we should be pursuing, and we should be encouraging and helping as a Congress, so that we can help the public that is becoming desperate about what to do about the cost of energy and the price of energy.

So I sincerely hope our Congress will tackle this issue and deal with it, and meet the needs of the public and of the planet at the same time.

With that, if you have no further speakers, I'm pleased to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6475, which would establish the Daniel Webster Congressional Clerkship Program within the House of Representatives.

Instituting this program will create a talented pool of young attorneys within the House at a fraction of the cost of obtaining similar talent through the hiring process. Many of these exceptional individuals will become leaders of their chosen profession. By offering them a judicial clerkship, we may even inspire some to embark upon a congressional career in lieu of life in a law firm or corporation.

For these young men and women, the ability to obtain a judicial clerkship in the very body where laws are created will be an invaluable experience. For the House, it will be a chance to tap into the best and brightest legal minds just as they begin their careers.

While we cannot offer the same compensation package that many top law firms offer, we can offer an opportunity to experience the legislative process in a way that is only possible within the Halls of Congress. Whether they continue their careers in the private or public sector, a greater knowledge and appreciation of the legislative process would be enormously useful to the participants in this program as they become part of the fabric of our Nation's judicial system.

I thank my colleagues on the House Administration Committee, and especially thank Congressman Lungren and Congresswoman Lofgren for introducing this bill.

At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

Mr. Speaker, I wish to commend the gentlewoman from California and the gentleman from California on this bill. I think it's an excellent idea. And I have good grounds for saying that because, as I mentioned earlier, I'm a scientist, and the scientific societies of America, for a number of years, have been supporting fellowship programs in which scientists will come and spend one year in the House of Representatives, and thereby learn something about how laws are made. And it has had a profound effect on the scientific community in this country and it has also had a profound effect on the Congress. Some of my best employees have come from that program. If they have worked in the

Congress for a year, either in my office or another office, and I have an opening, they fit in beautifully because so many of the issues I deal with are scientific. So I'm sure this clerkship proposal will be an outstanding program.

And I, frankly, think six clerkships is too little, especially for both Chambers. And I hope that some day we're talking in terms of perhaps 20 or 30 for the two Chambers together because I'm sure it is going to be successful.

With that, I yield what time he may consume to the gentleman from California.

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

First of all, let me say a few more words about energy, and perhaps your speaker will be here by that time.

But I first want to say, I think your clerkship program is an excellent idea. And I think it would have been wonderful if your clerks could have heard this discussion that you just had with the gentleman from California.

It's just exactly the sort of experience that they should have, and it will certainly benefit them. But I have always been impressed with the court clerks that I have encountered over the years, some of whom are good friends of mine whose entire career changed and was shaped by their experience in clerking for someone, whether it was at the State court of appeals level or the Federal judgeship level. So this without a doubt is going to be a very important bill.

I also would like to make a few concluding remarks about the energy issues, as I outlined a little while ago. This time I want to mention two sources that are wonderful energy resources, and that we should use more often and more wisely. They are energy resources, that have been in this Earth for many, many years, ever since its creation. First is nuclear; second is geothermal. Both are ample sources of energy if used properly. Both are essentially free in the sense you're not paying anyone for the energy; you're just paying for the equipment and process to extract the energy. And when nuclear energy fell on bad times in the United States almost 30 years ago and basically no one was going to build another reactor in the United States, I said this is going to last one generation because it's a decision based on emotion, not on reality or on the facts. And that's precisely what is happening now. After one generation, we are recognizing that we made a mistake at that

point, whereas France has put 80 percent of their electrical power in the hands of the nuclear reactor business and India has done 90 percent. They have been using nuclear power successfully at reasonable cost with no dangers, no accidents, and this indicates that we can do the same. I think that would be immensely useful.

I am particularly perturbed with the current trend to use more and more natural gas to generate electricity. You can imagine what this is going to do to the price of energy for homeowners who heat their homes with natural gas, who are going to have to pay more as natural gas becomes in shorter supply because the power plants are using such copious amounts of it. In addition to that, I note that natural gas, frankly, is too valuable to burn. It's an invaluable feedstock for the petrochemical industry, and the more we use it for other purposes, the more we increase the price of natural gas for manufacturing purposes, we reach a point now where almost all the new fertilizer factories in the world are being built in other countries, not in America, because the price of natural gas here is getting so high that it's too expensive to make fertilizer out of natural gas in our Nation, so it is manufactured in other countries.

We have made a number of mistakes in our energy policy. I would hope this Congress, before the end of this session, would resolve this, set us on a new track, so that we would once again return to an era of cheaper energy, and that our Nation may prosper and our people may be able to keep warm.

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

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

Madam Speaker, it is my distinct pleasure to rise today in commemoration of the 100th anniversary of Our Lady of Sorrows Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan. On Saturday, September 13, 2008, a centennial dinner will celebrate this extraordinary milestone, and it is a privilege to recognize and honor Rev. Theodore J. Kozlowski and the congregation of this remarkable church for the model of Christian service and the beacon of hope they have offered to the Grand Rapids community over the past century.

From the first mass celebrated on September 20, 1908, by their young energetic priest, Father Salvatore Cianci, Our Lady of Sorrows was founded primarily to provide for the growing Italian community in Grand Rapids. Meeting in the basement chapel of St. Andrew's Cathedral, this fledgling church offered the opportunity for Italians to worship and continue their faithful prayer life in the language of their childhood. Through the devoted efforts of Fr. Cianci and the small but very dedicated congregation, a dream became reality on Easter Sunday 1921, when a new structure intended as a temporary church, and also a second building intended to house a future school, were blessed and dedicated. Even though the Great Depression prevented the parish from fulfilling its dream of a permanent house of worship for almost 40 years, Our Lady of Sorrows School did open its doors for the first time on September 25, 1922, with 56 students in attendance. Certainly this was an exceptional accomplishment for a church which originated from the hard work and perseverance of just a handful of Italian immigrant families.

A long, faith-filled journey has led the congregation of Our Lady of Sorrows to now carry out the same legacy of their Italian forefathers for the growing Hispanic population in our community. Today, as this parish reaches out to each member and to a larger, more diverse community with loving acts of kindness, they continue to enrich and inspire those who are touched by their works. Our Lady of Sorrows is well known and widely respected for bringing a greater understanding of all cultures within the Catholic Church to others throughout the greater Grand Rapids area.

This extraordinary anniversary reminds all of us that wonderful things do happen when we seek to serve and glorify God. Reflecting on the many struggles and joys Our Lady of Sorrows has faced during its first century of service to the Lord, it is the perfect time to reaffirm and strengthen our own faith, recognize the call to reach out to others, and share the power of God's love. I am proud to represent the many parishioners of various races and ethnic groups who call Our Lady of Sorrows their church home, and am grateful to this congregation for their illuminating example of God's kindness. I am honored to extend my best wishes for a memorable, grace-filled celebration of a century of caring concern and service to the Grand Rapids community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the conference report on the Higher Education Opportunity Act. As a conferee on this bill, I am very pleased that we have a final bill before us. I want to thank Chairman Miller and Ranking Member McKeon for all their hard work on this bill, and I especially thank them for including provisions that are very important to people in Michigan.

Higher education is vitally important for students entering the workforce and for the global competitiveness of this country. This bill will ensure students have better access to higher education, and that they have received a high quality educational experience when they receive their degree. Now that a college degree is the bare minimum requirement for so many jobs, the need for better access is stronger than ever.

Let me comment on some specific provisions in the bill.

In 2007, Representative Blumenauer and I joined together to introduce the Higher Education Sustainability Act (H.R. 3637). I commend Representative Blumenauer for his leadership in ``greening'' colleges and universities, and I am grateful that he allowed me to partner with him on an issue that is so dear to my heart. I am very pleased that provisions of our bill have been included in the conference report, especially now when energy prices and shortages are on everyone's mind.

Simply put, sustainability is meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. As population growth, urban development and growing energy use place stress on our ecosystem, it is imperative that we develop innovative and successful sustainable operations and programs.

Colleges and universities are in a unique position to foster new knowledge, evaluate policies and discover new technologies to address sustainability. Sustainable operations and programs on university campuses include water and energy conservation, recycling, and academic programs such as engineering courses that encourage innovative product designs, e.g., alternative fuels for cars, other new energy sources, and new types of packaging that use fewer natural materials.

The conference report contains two key sustainability provisions. First, it convenes a Summit on Sustainability with higher education experts working in the area of sustainable operations and programs. The Federal Government and university and business leaders are encouraged to identify best practices in sustainability by promoting current efforts, enhancing research and identifying opportunities for partnerships to expand sustainable operations and academic programs. Also, it authorizes the Sustainability Grant Program. The Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, is authorized to award grants to colleges and universities to establish sustainability research programs, such as developing new alternative energy sources. It also allows schools to implement sustainability practices on campus.

The conference report also contains an important study of distance education. It requires the Secretary of Education to contract with the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a scientifically valid study of the quality of distance education, as compared to traditional, campus-based education. With so many students using distance education and a huge Federal investment in helping students attend college, it is critical that we effectively evaluate new modes of instruction to ensure that our students are receiving a topnotch education.

Finally, the conference report contains an array of provisions related to science, technology, engineering and math, collectively ``STEM'', education. Notably, it includes the National STEM Database to allow students with an interest in the STEM fields to more easily find financial aid. Also, it authorizes important loan forgiveness for college graduates pursuing careers in the STEM fields, and it authorizes the Mathematics and Science Scholars Program to award scholarships to students pursuing STEM majors. Now, more than ever, we must increase the size of our STEM workforce to maintain our competitiveness and national security.

In closing, I support this conference report since it helps students and makes many overdue improvements to the Higher Education Act. I urge all Members to vote in support of it.

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

I rise today in support of H. Res. 1360, which would honor and commemorate the selfless acts of heroism displayed by the late Detective John Michael Gibson and Private First Class Jacob Joseph Chestnut of the United States Capitol Police.

It is hard to believe that it has already been 10 years since the tragic chain of events that took the lives of two heroes, Jacob Joseph Chestnut and John Gibson, who were killed in the line of duty when a deranged gunman stormed this very building on July 24, 1998. And how well I remember that day. I had just left the Capitol, gone to the airport to fly back to Michigan, and as I entered the airport building, I saw on TV the ambulances, the gentlemen being carried out, and what a sad event that was.

Jacob Joseph Chestnut, who was affectionately known as ``J.J.,'' was an 18-year veteran of the Capitol Police force, just months away from retirement. A husband and father of five and a Vietnam vet, Chestnut was remembered at the time of his passing to have been extremely proud to be able to continue to serve his country by working in the United States Capitol. After a 20-year career in the Air Force, he carried his discipline and military training with him to Congress when he joined the Capitol Police in 1980, but

was also known for his big smile and warm demeanor.

John Gibson, who was stationed outside the office of then House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, was also a husband and father of three and an 18-year veteran of the Capitol Police. He was a die-hard fan of all of Boston's sports teams and often requested a copy of the Boston Globe from the whip's office to see how his teams had done. He had become extremely close to Representative DeLay's staff and in the end saved their lives through his selfless act of heroism. He was remembered for tirelessly accompanying the Congressman even when the day would stretch into night, until his job was done.

This bill is only a small tribute to those two exceptional men who gave their lives in defense of their country. We owe them a great debt, and in honoring their memory, we honor all those Capitol Police officers who routinely put themselves in harm's way to protect us each day.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Res. 1360.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 645, which expresses the gratitude and appreciation of the House of Representatives for the professionalism and dedication of the United States Capitol Police.

As long ago as 1801, when John Goldman, the Capitol's first watchman, was appointed, there have been brave men and women charged with risking their own lives to protect Members of Congress. With the passage of time, the threat to the Congress has evolved, and with it so too have the Capitol Police become a world-class law enforcement body.

Over the years the development of the Internet and various telecommunications devices that have proved revolutionary to all Americans have had the unintended consequence of providing new ways for criminals to communicate with each other in order to plan more elaborate attacks. As their attacks have become more sophisticated, the Capitol Police have had to adjust their protocols and skills to stay a step ahead of the perpetrators.

As discussed with the previous resolution, tomorrow is the 10th anniversary of a tragic accident that took the

lives of two heroes, Jacob Joseph Chestnut and John Gibson, who were killed in the line of duty when a deranged gunman stormed this very building. Their deaths are a stark reminder of the great peril that Capitol Police officers face each day. With the terrorist attacks of 9/ 11 came new threats and heightened awareness that there are those for whom destruction of the Capitol and its inhabitants would be cause for celebration.

This sobering reality is one that the Capitol Police must live with each day. Yet even with the burden they carry, the Capitol Police greet members, staff, and visitors alike with a welcome demeanor and reassuring presence. They are often the first face we see when we a arrive at the beginning of the day and the last person we say goodnight to as we leave. This resolution serves as a tribute to each of those men and women who bravely stand between us and those who would do us harm.

For these reasons I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 645.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart), the sponsor of the resolution.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman from western Michigan for yielding to me. And I certainly thank the gentlewoman from California for offering this amendment.

As we discussed on the floor just a few weeks ago, I managed to get a bill passed a couple of years ago to strengthen the aerospace industry workforce just in order to help NASA, because they were having so many retirements. Many joined their workforce in the 1960s to respond to the call from President John Fitzgerald Kennedy that we go to the Moon, and those individuals are all now retiring, and as a result we have a serious shortage of workers in the aerospace industry. But there are many other industries, including the intelligence departments of this government, that have a desperate need of those knowledgeable about aerospace and other science and mathematics areas.

As I suspect everyone in this House knows, I've worked very hard over the last 15 years trying to improve the math-science education of this Nation. It's beginning to pay dividends. Just at lunchtime today, we had a very large room full of young ladies, all of high school and college age, interested in getting into mathematics and science, so we are making progress on that. But we need much more progress if we are going to compete with China, with India, and with other nations in regard to a trained, intelligent workforce.

That's especially true, of course, in the intelligence field and in the NASA. We have some very skilled, very knowledgeable, very bright people working there, but also, we are going to be losing a number of them to retirement, in the last few years. We have to beef up that force. And so this amendment will emphasize the need that we have to encourage more individuals to go into science and mathematics at all levels, ranging from high school graduates up through Ph.Ds. And we definitely need to work at that as a Nation. I appreciate that the amendment will direct the national intelligence effort in this direction as well.

So thank you again to the sponsor of the amendment for offering this. It is a great help to our Nation, it's a great help to the intelligence service, and I'm pleased to be part of it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3032.

This has an interesting history and it attracted my attention as soon as Mr. Jones spoke to me about it because I had worried myself about what might happen to my campaign funds if something should happen to me. And as a matter of fact, as I was getting wills prepared, I had an attorney draw up a letter that I might sign so I could designate who would be the person to make a decision about my remaining campaign funds.

As you know, by law we are limited to certain dispositions of campaign funds, but the law does not specify how they must be disposed of and in what quantities. And when Mr. Jones approached me, I said, well, that's good because I solved it for myself, but we really should solve it for everyone.

The bill, I think, is an excellent bill, which simply provides that each Federal candidate would be allowed to designate an individual who, in the event of the death of the candidate, would be authorized to make arrangements for the disbursement of campaign funds. He speaks from personal experience in his family, where his father passed away and there was some difficulty deciding how the funds should be disposed of, but also, all of us could face that possibility.

Under current campaign laws, it is understood today that the treasurer can decide what to do with the money and hand it out willy- nilly, whichever way he or she wishes, without any consultation with the family. We think it's very important that the candidate, him or herself, specify very clearly precisely how they want their campaign funds disbursed.

Also, we have made an additional provision in this bill because it is very well possible that a candidate's position may change, or the person he has designated may have passed away, and therefore, a candidate may propose at any time or file with the FEC a statement at any time changing the designation that he or she as a candidate may have made earlier.

We have given a lot of flexibility in this bill. Individuals, candidates, or Members are not required to file such a statement if they don't wish to, but we're simply giving them the option of doing so and of changing it at any time they wish in the future.

At this point, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the author and sponsor of this bill, Representative Walter Jones, for as much time as he might consume.

Mr. Speaker, I simply want to commend Mr. Jones for writing this bill and submitting it. I'm very pleased that it has reached this point. I believe it is going to be very helpful to every Member of Congress, both in the House and the Senate, and I commend him for his work on this and I urge its passage.

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

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

I rise today to support H.R. 6296, which would amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to extend through 2013 the authority of the Federal Election Commission to impose civil monetary penalties on political committees that file reports late or not at all rather than going through the traditional enforcement process. This bill is necessary because that authority, which they currently have, expires at the end of this year.

This bill is not a glamorous one. It will not capture the attention of voters who look to Congress to lower the price at the pump, even though we would all like to do that. Nonetheless, it is an important program designed to protect our Nation's campaign process from being thwarted by insisting upon the utmost transparency if an individual chooses to seek public office.

The administrative fine program, which was established in 2000, permits the FEC to assess fines if a candidate is found to be in violation of mandatory Federal campaign finance reporting requirements. Since its inception, the administrative fine program has proven successful in its two objectives:

First, the program frees up commission resources for more complex and higher profile enforcement matters. This is especially important now that the commission has formed and its important work can continue in a bipartisan fashion. Second, it reduces the number of financial reports filed late or not at all, which furthers the goals of the commission as a whole.

As of March 2008, the FEC had collected over $2.1 million in civil penalties for over 1,600 cases processed under the program. The fines collected are turned over to the U.S. Treasury, ensuring that there is no monetary gain to the FEC for applying such penalties. By implementing such a structure, there can be no calls of falsely using the fine program as a way for the agency to line its own coffers, thereby increasing confidence in the FEC's enforcement actions.

Without this bill, as I mentioned earlier, this successful program is scheduled to end on December 31, 2008. I am pleased to be able to join with my colleague in the House Administration Committee, Chairman Brady, as a cosponsor of this bipartisan measure. I

urge my colleagues to join us in supporting H.R. 6296 so that we may continue to monitor the success of this important program for the next 5 years.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just will simply say it's a good bill. Let's support it. Let's vote for it.

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

I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding, and I especially thank him for organizing this discussion together.

My comments are going to be a bit different from some of the others because I'm going to talk about an event in my hometown this week which brought home to me how far we have strayed from our complete understanding of the Constitution of the United States.

Let me quote the first amendment, and this amendment is first because the 13 colonies decided this was the most important amendment. ``Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,'' et cetera.

The event I'm going to talk about that happened in my hometown received extensive coverage. A graduating student at a local public high school was asked to give a speech. This is a model student. He had done well, he was respected, and he was asked to talk about his life experiences. And in that talk, which he had to submit for approval ahead of time, he discussed his life experience, including his religious life. That was judged improper, and he was removed from that particular duty that day.

Now, I fail to understand how anyone reading the first amendment of the Constitution would think that the Supreme Court has ruled that a student discussing his life experiences could not mention his religious life. And yet that is how far we have come in this Nation in our misunderstanding of our origins and what it should be.

I come from a religious community. In fact, our community is sometimes called the ``City of Churches,'' Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Last week, we dedicated a Hindu temple; a few years ago, a Buddhist temple. And we also have a Muslim mosque, actually, fairly close to my home.

We meet the test of the first amendment. We do not prohibit the free exercise of religion and the founding of various religious establishments. But I have to say, with this particular high school, I would not be able to give a commencement speech there because I would not be able to give a commencement speech without speaking about my life experiences and what I thought the students were going to face, and what they would need to face their life experiences.

I find it fascinating in the Capitol, we start with prayer every day, we have a chaplain, we have a Prayer Breakfast once a week, we have Bible studies in the Capitol. No one raises a feather against this and says this is wrong, this is unconstitutional. And if it's permissible in the Capitol of the United States, why is it not permissible across the Nation? It should be. Everyone should be free to discuss their beliefs and their religion and

their faith in God. That's what the first amendment is all about.

And let's not get hung up about Supreme Court decisions, ACLU lawsuits, et cetera. Let's recognize the clear language of the first amendment and let's let our citizens have the freedom that the founders of this Nation intended in the area of religious belief and the government's role therein.

As has been stated, this is a labor of love for me for many years. But a few years ago I began noticing or realizing that we were approaching a major inflection point that we should be worried about.

As you heard from the principal author of this amendment, that it was in the 1960s that John Kennedy asked for us to go to the moon, proposed this advanced and wild notion, and that inspired a whole generation of Americans to become involved in aerospace.

Those individuals are now retiring. And because we hired so many in NASA at one time, they are all retiring at about the same time, which is going to leave us bereft of talent if we don't take action.

Because of this, 2 years I introduced a bill which was passed which established an interagency aerospace revitalization task force within the Federal Government. I would have liked to have it be more broad, but I couldn't persuade my colleagues to make that giant leap at that point.

But since then that task force which involves, I believe, 17 different Government agencies has worked together. The 2008 report of the Interagency Aerospace Revitalization Task Force was released earlier this year. I spoke at the release. And I was astounded at the number of people in the room. It was a local hotel. The room was overflowing with people concerned about aerospace employment and how we keep the aerospace effort going.

This amendment is intended to reinforce what we've talked about for the past 2 years, but it does something very important. As I mentioned, my bill simply addressed the interagency governmental work. But we also have to involve universities. We have to get students excited about aerospace again, and that's what this amendment will do. It will require that NASA reaches out beyond Government agencies, beyond its own boundaries and work with everyone possible to improve STEM education in America, get the young people of today excited about the opportunities in science, particularly in space.

So I thank the gentlewoman from California for initiating this amendment. I believe it's going to be very, very important to the future of NASA and for the future of our country, because if we don't get our kids back into math and science education, we are going to become a second-rate Nation.

Twenty years ago the nation of China and the nation of India both decided that their economic futures lay in developing highly skilled workers who understood mathematics and science. It worked, and they have gone ahead with leaps and bounds, while our students are still mired where they were 20 years ago.

At all levels, from kindergarten on up, we have it take note of that and we have to do a much better job of teaching our children mathematics and science, not just for the sake of NASA, although that's very important, but for the sake of our Nation if we wish to remain competitive with other countries.

I will reserve the balance of my time.

I will be pleased to yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding, and I especially thank him for bringing this issue to the floor.

I also thank my colleague from California, who works with me on the House Administration committee, for her very perceptive comments on this problem.

I would just like to add a little historical insight. I was asked by the new Speaker, Newt Gingrich, some years ago--in 1995 to be exact--to take charge of setting up the new computer system for the House of Representatives. It was a formidable task. And one issue I emphasized over and over was the need for adequate security.

We did the best we could at that time. And I was very proud for a number of years that although the White House got hacked, the Pentagon got hacked, the Senate got hacked, we did not get hacked. Those days are over. And every Member of this House of Representatives has to recognize that.

This is going to involve, first of all, the best possible technology fix. There's no question about it. But there's another aspect that was mentioned by my colleague from California, and that is training Members and staff on how to deal with this threat and this danger. That is not easy.

When I computerized the House, I had to educate my colleagues about computers. It was hopeless. I eventually taught computer classes myself to my colleagues to try to get them interested and to begin using computers. We are going to have to be that direct, that formidable and persistent in ensuring that our colleagues and all our employees understand the threat and that they learn how to deal with the threat and especially learn how to prevent incursions by the actions that they take with their computers and the way they handle their equipment.

This is a major issue. I will pledge, as my colleague from California does, that we will attempt our best to address this on the House Administration Committee, and we will certainly do everything possible to solve it. But it is going to require the vigilance of every employee of the House of Representatives and the Senate for that matter.

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

I rise today in support of H.R. 5893, which will reauthorize the Library of Congress's Sound Record and Film Preservation Program. It is an important bill, which will preserve the images and sounds of our Nation's history and make those pieces of the past more accessible to future generations.

The importance of this effort was illustrated just this weekend when Universal Studios in California had a mammoth fire in which some priceless films were lost, and all films, if they were recorded and in the Library of Congress, would not face this problem.

The National Film Preservation Board was formed in 1993 following a study that revealed that America's film heritage was at serious risk due to the degradation of acetate film stock at an alarming rate. Funding for preservation programs had fallen drastically since 1980, creating an urgent need for action. A national plan to protect our Nation's treasures on film was created in 1994 to address the growing need for preservation and to make films more available for education and public exhibition.

I must confess, Mr. Speaker, to some frustration that we have to come in and save the films that the film industry has not taken care of. Obviously they're making enough money when they pull down $300 million in one weekend for certain films. I would think they would have the wherewithal to preserve their own films. Nevertheless, since they have not, the Congress has had to step in to do it.

In 1999 Congress created the Sound Recording Preservation Program modeled on the successful National Film Preservation Program. This new program would protect historic pieces of audio recordings from deterioration. These audio recordings are extremely important and should be preserved as well. Through the creation of this program, the Sound Recording Preservation Board was instructed to produce a report on the current state of sound recording archiving, preservation and restoration activities, encompassing standards for digital preservation and for access to preserved recordings. The program also includes research on current laws governing sound preservation and how the Library and other institutions can make collections more available to researchers digitally.

This bill will continue the good work started by the Sound Recording and Film Preservation Program staff and their respective boards. Historians, scholars, and citizens will benefit from increased access to these important works, and the items themselves will be preserved for many more generations to come under these programs.

I fully support this bill and thank Chairman Brady for his efforts to bring this matter to the floor.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, so I will attempt to conclude here.

I just want to recognize the good work that the board has done, the importance of the preservation of both visual and audio recordings, as Mr. Davis has just said. And it may be that 100, 150 years from now, someone will resurrect Pavarotti, Dizzy Gillespie, Ella Fitzgerald, some of the great musicians of our time, and say look what we have lost in our culture, and we may see a rejuvenation of those.

So I strongly support this bill and urge its passage.

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