Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, in a continuing effort to combat the adverse effects that illegal immigration is having on the United States, I have introduced a concurrent resolution that expresses the sense of the Congress that the President should immediately and unequivocally call for the enforcement of existing immigration laws in order

to reduce the threat of a terrorist attack and to reduce the massive influx of illegal aliens into the United States.

I will summarize the text of that resolution without the whereas clauses.

A primary duty of the Federal Government is to secure the homeland and ensure the safety of the United States citizens and its lawful residents.

As a result of the attacks on this country on September 11, 2001, perpetrated by al Qaeda terrorists in the United States, the United States is engaged in a global war on terrorism.

Four years after those attacks, there is still a failure to secure the borders of the United States against illegal entry.

The failure to enforce immigration laws in the interior means that illegal aliens face little or no risk of apprehension or removal once they are in this country.

The Government of Mexico actively encourages illegal immigration into the United States by, among other things, publishing how-to books and urging State and local entities to accept the metricula consular as valid identification.

Granting amnesty to illegal aliens, or even proposing legislation or efforts for amnesty for illegal aliens, serves only to generate more illegal immigration.

If illegal aliens can enter and remain in the United States with impunity, so, too, can terrorists enter and remain while they plan, rehearse, and carry out their attacks.

The failure to control and to prevent illegal immigration into the United States increases the likelihood that terrorists will succeed in launching catastrophic or harmful attacks on United States soil.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that we should resolve four things.

First, that the President and the Secretary of Homeland Security should immediately use every tool available to them to secure the borders against illegal entry.

Second, the President should announce publicly that he will oppose any proposal to grant legal status or amnesty to illegal aliens and that he and the Secretary of Homeland Security will use every tool available to stop illegal immigration into the United States and to announce efforts for the removal of illegal aliens from the United States.

Third, the President and the Secretary of Homeland Security should seek the assistance of State and local law enforcement personnel in enforcing immigration laws, whether through formal agreements to cooperate or through the elimination of sanctuary policies.

Fourth, the President and the Secretary of State should warn Mexico that any further action it takes to encourage illegal immigration to the United States will be viewed as interference with our domestic laws, in violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by reemphasizing how important it is for the position of this body and this government to say ``no'' to illegal immigration, to say ``no'' to amnesty. When amnesty occurs or is expected to occur, the floodgates are wider and more open for illegal aliens and those who might harm this country. Our future will be much safer and more secure if we will secure our borders and stop illegal immigration and give a resounding ``no'' to any amnesty policy.

I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), and I want to thank him for his steadfast diligence on this issue. I want to thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) who spoke previously, the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter), and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Davis) for being here tonight during this hour to address what I think is one of the most important issues to come before the 109th Congress.

Before we began this special order on CAFTA, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham) told about Admiral Stockdale and his heroics during the Vietnam War. That brought to mind what Admiral Stockdale and Mr. Ross Perot were saying in 1992.

Though the two major party candidates, Bush and Clinton, were supporters of NAFTA, they said that NAFTA would create a giant sucking sound of the jobs going out of this country. And I will have to say on that issue, time has certainly proven Ross Perot and Jim Stockdale correct. And I only have to tell about the situation in the county adjacent to my home county.

Martinsville and Henry County had more manufacturing jobs on a per capita basis than any jurisdiction in the Commonwealth of Virginia. That was known as the sweatshirt capital of the world. Tultex sweatshirts were all over this country and all over the world. Pluma was another textile manufacture. Sara Lee was there. Those jobs

and those companies are all gone. Tultex went out of business. Pluma went out of business.

I will never forget the Chamber of Commerce there in Martinsville, in Henry County in the early 1990s when my predecessor was there and the questions came about NAFTA. Would the jobs still remain in the United States of America? And the speakers there and the proponent of NAFTA said, oh, yes, only a few low-end manufacturing jobs will be going to Mexico.

And Sara Lee had in the thousands, manufacturing jobs in Martinsville and Henry County. Those jobs went away pretty fast, and they went south. There are a few distribution jobs left there with Sara Lee. Our unemployment went over 20 percent for a time, fell down to 16 percent not too long ago; and, thankfully, it is slightly above 10 percent now. At least it is heading in the right direction.

So to those who say that CAFTA, which as the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter) so correctly pointed out is simply a NAFTA cousin, is going to bring us a lot of manufacturing jobs and prosperity, I say beware. Do not forget those who gave the warnings about NAFTA. When NAFTA was passed, they were saying we will be bringing more into this country. And the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) have shown us how the trade deficit with Mexico has soared. If we adopt CAFTA, that trade deficit with Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic will be heading in the same direction with NAFTA.

Now, I heard proponents of CAFTA say, we have got to get in the economic barrel with those in Central America and Mexico so we can counteract China; let us pass CAFTA so we can counteract the huge trade deficit that we have with China. And I can remember those who spoke around this country on behalf of Permanent Normal Trade Relations and Most Favored Nation trade status with China, saying how great that was going to be for the United States and jobs in this country. The trade deficit with China is way over $100 billion and rocking on towards $150 billion.

I say the answer to the trade deficit with China is not CAFTA; the answer is let us renegotiate. Let us take a look at PNTR and reevaluate that. Let us attack the problem where it is, not create another situation like NAFTA that could result in even a greater deficit with those countries.

I have heard, pass CAFTA because it will help stem the flow of illegal immigration from Central America. Well, let me say this. Take a look at NAFTA. Illegal immigration was a problem in the early 1990s, but it is a monstrous problem now. NAFTA has not solved the constant flow of illegals across the Mexican border into the United States.

So do not be sold off on an argument about passing CAFTA and that will reduce the flow from Central America.

I submit that the greater interaction between the entities in South America and the United States will result in more illegal immigration, not less; and all we have to do is look at the NAFTA model.

Lastly, I want to make a few comments about globalization of our world economy. I believe in trade, but I think trade has to be done with hard-nosed negotiation on the part of the United States with individual countries and with regions of the world. And it has to be focused on trade. You have to focus on individual items. It is nuts and bolts work.

When we have an agreement like CAFTA, when there is an agreement like NAFTA, when there is an agreement like PNTR with China that has a whole lot in it besides trade, I say be wary. Some of the richest people in this world are in this country, and some of them are supporters of CAFTA. They were supporters of NAFTA and PNTR with China. They say if we have a one-world globalized economy how great it is going to be for the United States.

Let me say one thing. We are not gaining in manufacturing in this country. China is the big gainer of manufacturing in the world. It is not this country. Other countries are rapidly catching up. We are the premier country in the world now. We are able to protect our citizens. We are able to give a land of opportunity to so many, the richest people in the world, the Warren Buffets and the Bill Gateses of the world. I salute them for their work and their business acumen. They have done well. That is the American Dream: work hard and this is the land of opportunity.

Well, let me tell my colleagues what can happen. If we go down this globalized route, which, as the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter) said, is a rush to the bottom, if the United States is not the premier country in the world, we will see a lot of persons in this world go from a Bill Gates or Warren Buffet status to the poor house mighty quick if China or Russia or the Arab nations in the Middle East take over the number one position in the world.

I am thankful the United States is number one. I want us to be always number one. But these trade agreements do not enhance that status. They hurt us. And I ask that when CAFTA comes up that my colleagues vote for America and vote ``no'' on CAFTA.

Mr. Chairman, first, I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Knollenberg) for providing $550 million more for Amtrak than was originally submitted in the budget. And I want to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Lewis) for getting us to this point of finishing the appropriations bills before July 4.

Lastly, I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for their work on this amendment in an effort to preserve the long-distance Amtrak routes. In my district, the long-distance route is the Southern Crescent Route that goes from New York and stops in Charlottesville, Lynchburg and Danville, and I hope it will be the pleasure of this body to preserve the Crescent Route, the Cardinal Route and many other long-distances routes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to read a poem by Molly Brown. Molly is a 13-year-old who suffers from cerebral palsy, and she is the daughter of a college professor at Sweet Briar and his wife. She read this poem at an Adaptive Ski event for injured soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan that was held at Wintergreen in Nelson County in my district.

Commander William L. Shade of Nelson County American Legion Post 17 sent me this poem, and I want to share it with the United States House of Representatives.

The poem is entitled ``Metamorphosis.''

For every soldier who lost something in Iraq:

What do I say to those

Who have looked time's end in the eye

And faced it, heads raised,

With their own eyes open

Not afraid to fear?

What comfort can I offer those

Who lost the life they knew,

And must begin again

With eyes that see

A world transformed?

How do I greet the boy

Who donned an Army jacket

And stepped on a bus,

Ending his childhood

Before his time?

I speak slowly,

Knowing this is all I can say;

I hope that on the mountain,

As you take your first fall

And powder, cool as moonlight, hits your cheek

That you can regain

If only for a moment

All that you have lost

And see before yourselves

A future uninhibited and bright.

By Molly Brown.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would permit military personnel to secure America's borders. It authorizes, but does not require the Secretary of Defense to utilize members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Reserves under certain circumstances and subject to certain conditions to assist the Department of Homeland Security upon the request of the Department of Homeland Security in the performance of its border functions.

This amendment has passed in the two previous Congresses, and prior to my offering this amendment in the past two Congresses, it was offered by other Members and it has passed the House, but has not survived conference. I hope this year it will pass the House and then survive a conference.

I want to emphasize, this is an authorization measure so that the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense would not be subject to posse comitatus charges if they utilize this in a nonemergency situation.

This simply makes it clear that if the Secretary of Homeland Security requests of the Secretary of Defense the utilization of forces to assist the border patrol in combating illegal drugs, combating illegal immigration or to reduce the threat of terrorism, that authority exists and it would not require the declaring of a national emergency by the executive branch.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. Chairman, how much time remains on each side?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).

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

Just to comment briefly, this amendment does not require forces on the border, it simply authorizes the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense to utilize them if necessary to supplement the border control, and they have to be trained.

This amendment is a message-sender to tell the world we are serious about

illegal immigration, drug trafficking and the threat of terrorism coming across the border.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).

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

I would point out to the gentleman from California, I did vote for his motion to recommit to increase funding to add more border patrol officers. This is simply an authorization measure to allow the United States, if the Department of Homeland Security and if the Department of Defense thought necessary, to utilize forces to supplement the border control.

There are troops on the border today, but they are not U.S. troops, they are Mexican troops. We should certainly allow, not mandate, just give the permission for our troops to be there and not have them violate posse comitatus.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter).

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

I would like to say that I think the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) was right on target when she said allowing troops on the border under current law in the United States would violate posse comitatus. I am not sure that it would, but if they were requested tomorrow by the Secretary of Homeland Security and went there, I assure you there would be lawsuits and national media saying we were violating posse comitatus. Pass this amendment and we will not have that obstruction to protecting the security of the United States of America.

I want to salute the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) for his conducting of this debate, a great debate. I also want to thank him for his service which was truly outstanding, as the gentleman from California said.

I would like to close by urging you to vote for the security of the United States and simply give to the Department of Homeland Security with the concurrence of the Department of Defense the authorization to use troops without running afoul of posse comitatus.

Madam Chairman, illegal immigration costs this Nation $68 billion per year. That is not million; that is billion. This study changes the focus of the Department of Homeland Security. The Department of Homeland Security needs to be focusing on keeping those illegally in the country out. Citizen groups such as the Minutemen who performed a tremendous neighborhood watch function on our southern borders need to be commended and not slapped by an amendment like this.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Hulshof), the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox), and all those who have worked so hard to get rid of this onerous burden on a number of American citizens. The Federal death tax is a job killer.

I represent the Fifth District of Virginia. We have a number of counties and jurisdictions that focus on manufacturing. Many of our smaller manufacturers have had to sell out to larger manufacturers; and as a result, we have double-digit unemployment in a number of jurisdictions that used to be the home to small manufacturers. A factor in their selling out was the Federal death tax because they would not have the cash to pay when death knocked on the door. If we pass this bill, we will help the job situation in those types of jurisdictions in the United States.

I hear the other side say that this is a bonanza and a budget breaker because we will not be getting the revenue from the Federal death tax. Let me tell the Members under the current law the really rich in this country trust and foundation themselves out of the Federal estate tax. I believe that Mr. Gates, the owner of Microsoft, is a proponent of keeping the Federal death tax. He has got a father that is in charge of his foundation. But many small farmers and average business persons are not able to have the cash to set up the trusts and the foundations that will get themselves out of the Federal estate tax. And I predict that if we pass this bill, the incentive to set up those trusts and foundations that avoid taxes will not be there and in the long run the Treasury of the United States will benefit because we will still get the capital gains tax when the assets are sold.

Mr. Speaker, I offer my strong support of passing H. Res. 80, which honors the Virginia Fire Chiefs Association on reaching their 75th anniversary and commends them for annually hosting the Mid- Atlantic Expo and Symposium, and honors all Fire Chiefs Associations across the United States of America for their hard work on behalf of the all citizens in this country. The Virginia Fire Chiefs Association serves as an outstanding model for the importance that fire chiefs associations serve in our country, while confronted with new challenges facing fire services in ensuring the safety of our citizens and in protecting our homeland. I congratulate the Virginia Fire Chiefs Association on reaching its 75th Anniversary. I hope that all will vote for H. Res. 80, the Virginia Fire Chiefs Resolution, and hope the U.S. House of Representatives will support this resolution and pass it today.

Mr. Chairman, I salute the gentleman from Arizona for having the courage to address this issue.

Totalization with Mexico will harm the Social Security Trust Fund. It will be a major drain on this fund. They talk about 20 countries that we have a totalization agreement with. None of them have 5 million illegal workers in the country like Mexico does.

We are better off to stop this snake here and now, cut off its head. Some say wait, let it get bigger. Let it bite us again. I say no. Cut off its head today by stopping the funding.

If we grant an amnesty, and there are plenty of amnesty bills floating around, those illegals will be legal, and we will have a huge drain on the Social Security fund.

I want to stand with the seniors in this country. I want to protect Social

Security for United States citizens, and I want to preserve it for future generations, not drain it by allowing Mexico and illegals to get in it and suck a big truckload of money out of it.

Stand up for Social Security and vote yes with the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).

Mr. Chairman, I too want to salute our Chair, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards). I agree with them. I do not agree with CBO as other speakers have so indicated. I agree with OMB, I agree with the President, and I agree with our subcommittee on this issue of caps. I cannot understand how CBO scores it as it does.

Let me mention briefly the impact in Virginia. An additional 39 units are planned for privatization in fiscal year 2006 and 2007. This includes 22 projects in 16 different States. In Virginia at Langley Air Force Base, we are talking about 1,400 units. I can tell you the quality of life of those at Langley would be significantly enhanced if this could go forward.

One gentleman on the other side said we have got to find a way to make it happen. I believe the best thing to do is vote for this bill, send it forward. This is just part of the process through which Military Construction will go before it is finally adopted by both the House and the Senate and signed by the President.

So I would urge a ``yes'' vote, go forward with the process, and I think positive things will happen throughout that process.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that H.R. 3819, the Lewis and Clark National Historic Park Designation Act of 2004, passed the House earlier today.

From Jamestown to the Cumberland Gap, Virginia has been a land of pioneers. Virginians have explored the New World and established America, and two of her most adventurous sons are Meriwether Lewis and William Clark.

While the western trail of the Lewis and Clark Expedition is well- recognized, less known is the route taken in the preparation phase and return phase of the expedition. I thank my colleagues for joining me in support of H.R. 3819 and in recognition of the Eastern Legacy of the Lewis and Clark Expedition during this bicentennial commemoration.

On January 18, 1803, President Thomas Jefferson sent a confidential letter to Congress requesting an appropriation of $2,500 to fund an expedition of exploration to the Pacific Ocean by route of the Missouri and Columbia Rivers with the hope of discovering a continuous water passage to the Pacific for the purpose of commerce. It was from Monticello that Jefferson conceived this idea, and he chose Captain Meriwether Lewis to lead the exploration. Thus began what would become the Lewis and Clark Expedition.

On March 15, 1803, Meriwether Lewis left the President's House in Washington, D.C. and began preparations for his adventures toward the Pacific. He stopped at the arsenal in Harper's Ferry with an authorizing letter from the Secretary of War and purchased items. He proceeded to Philadelphia, where he studied a wide range of scientific topics. Lewis returned to Washington when he wrote to Captain William Clark to enlist his aid and to share command of the expedition.

In Pittsburgh, Lewis had a keelboat constructed and recruited boatmen to man the vessel that would enable him and Clark to make the long journey. Preparations for the expedition, beginning at Monticello and ending in Wood River, Illinois and the return phase beginning in St. Louis and ending in Washington, D.C., included visiting sites in ten States in the East. These States include Virginia, Maryland,

Delaware, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, Indiana and Illinois, as well as the District of Columbia.

Currently, no sites visited in these States are recognized as Lewis and Clark National Historic Landmarks nor are they locations along the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail. I am pleased that Title II of H.R. 3819 implements a study that begins the process towards obtaining recognition for these sites east of the Mississippi.

On January 18, Jefferson's Monticello hosted the commencement of the National Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Commemoration that will continue through 2006. This was the first signature event of the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial, and hopefully, once the study has been completed, the National Park Service will designate Monticello and other parts of the Eastern Legacy as official Lewis and Clark trail sites.

I believe that it is appropriate to include the route followed by Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, whether independently or together, in the preparation and return phases of the expedition. The Eastern Legacy should rightfully be included in the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail. H.R. 3819 is a positive step towards properly recognizing and honoring the Eastern Legacy of the Lewis and Clark Expedition.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) for yielding to me.

I want to thank the gentleman for his tireless efforts on bringing immigration reform to this Congress and before the American people. He has traveled across this Nation. He has gone to the border between Mexico and the United States. He has also been to the Canadian border. He brought back the tax returns and have weighed them of those who I believe were here illegally, trying to get money from the American Treasury and who, no doubt in my mind, many of which have been successful.

The gentleman saw how they were going to utilize the Earned Income Tax Credit on papers that the gentleman gathered in alleged trash near the Mexican border. The gentleman has done the research on items like the papers by the mayor of the District of Columbia. The gentleman has talked to the Border Patrol agents. The gentleman has done countless other things on behalf of bringing true immigration reform to this country, and I want to thank the gentleman.

We heard speakers before the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) talk about the deficit, and I want to see the deficit reduced. I would like to see it eliminated. It is great to identify a problem, but you also need to address the problem.

Reduce illegal immigration and reduce the deficit. Illegals come into this country and soak up not thousands, not millions, but billions of healthcare dollars that taxpayers of this country are paying for. If we stopped illegal immigration, we would have those billions of dollars to apply to the deficit.

We can look at social services and social programs. Again, we are not talking about hundreds, thousands or millions; we are talking about billions of dollars.

If we want to reduce the deficit, reduce illegal immigration. Stop it, and stop that money going to them from these social programs.

Another area of concern are illegals getting Social Security. I have heard some say, ``Oh, we passed a law to stop that.''

Yes, we passed a law saying if you are illegally in this country, you cannot draw Social Security benefits. But if you go back to Mexico, or you go back to whatever other country you came from to this country illegally, you can start dipping into the Social Security System and getting money out of it.

If we were to get that totalization agreement with Mexico, which I surely hope we do not, the totalization agreement would override the statute that says illegals cannot get Social Security benefits. If that were followed by an amnesty of any type, form, shape or regularization or whatever euphemistic phrase you want to call amnesty, you are going to hear a sucking sound out of the Social Security fund that would turn all seniors whose heads are not gray gray, I would predict, because the drain on the Social Security fund would be significant and heavy. Again, it is not hundreds, it is not thousands, it is not millions; it is billions of dollars.

So, if you want to reduce the deficit, let us stop illegal immigration and put a big dent in the deficit.

Pretty soon we are going to get the September 11 Commission report. It is going to talk an intelligence czar, and I am anxious to see what they have to say about that. But I bet it will not mention too much about the fact that 19 of those terrorists who flew the airplanes into the buildings of this country and killed thousands of citizens in New York, Pennsylvania and across the river in Arlington, were in this country illegally. They had overstayed their visas, for the most part, illegal aliens.

They committed suicide by flying those planes into the World Trade Center and into the Pentagon. They were in this country illegally, and if they were not here illegally, they could not have done the acts. If we stopped illegal immigration, then there would have been 19 fewer persons in this country to do those acts that they did. I hope, but I do not expect, the 9/11 Commission to address this facet of making America more secure.

I remember the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) bringing to a meeting of the Immigration Reform Caucus, and I recollect it was held in the courtyard outside of the Longworth Building, the father of one of the September 11 victims. As I recall, the statements made by that individual, he said, ``If I had to pick out a key factor in what caused September 11, it was a huge sea of illegal immigration, whereby 19 illegals could float around in that sea undetected.''

What he wanted was to see a reduction in illegal immigration. I hope the 9/11 Commission will address this fact. I want to see America be made more secure, and one way to make America more secure is to reduce illegal immigration, just as one way to reduce the deficit is to reduce illegal immigration.

So I would like to close by doing as I started and to thank the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) for taking the time to come to the floor of this House on a repeated basis and point out the many problems and the many pitfalls of illegal immigration. I hope that the voting standard in this country will always be that you have to be a United States citizen to participate in our electoral process.

Mr. Chairman, I rise on behalf of thousands upon thousands of small farmers and small quota holders across the southeastern United States, primarily, and urge opposition to this devastating amendment.

Mr. Chairman, although it is questionable that the Flake amendment would have any impact on the payment of proceeds from the Federal Treasury, which receives billions of dollars annually from federal tobacco taxes, I still oppose this amendment because the proponents of the amendment regularly slam tobacco country and do not understand the tobacco buyout provisions in FSC/ETI, which will largely aid thousands of small quota holders and tobacco producers in the southeastern United States. I believe that the proponents have let their hatred of tobacco cloud their thinking in proposing this amendment. I still hope that the FSC/ETI legislation, which included tobacco reform legislation, will go forward in the Senate and that the measure will be passed and signed into law by the President so that many quota holders and growers can gracefully exit the current tobacco program and so that those who wish to continue growing tobacco can have an opportunity to compete with foreign tobacco.

Mr. Speaker, first I want to thank the gentleman from California for allowing me a couple of minutes during this period of tribute. The death of President Reagan reminded Americans and many around the world of the achievements of his 8 years in office. A significant part of his legacy is that he helped the United States to feel good about itself again and the tax cuts that he advocated in the early 1980s stimulated the economic boom that lasted until the end of the century.

History may well show that President Reagan's greatest accomplishment was reestablishing our military strength and bringing about the collapse of the Soviet Union, which had been the principal adversary of the free world in the Cold War that had raged since the close of World War II. The strengthened military was the one that waged Desert Storm successfully and laid the foundation for the United States military that is leading the war on terrorism. President Reagan rekindled the American spirit and patriotic fervor in this country. We shall never forget the grace and style with which President and Mrs. Reagan represented America. Our country will always remember Ronald Reagan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the lacrosse program at the University of Virginia. The Virginia Cavaliers' women's lacrosse team recently won the 2004 national championship, following the 2003 national championship of the men's lacrosse team. Both programs are outstanding and their championships stand as a testament to the skill and hard work of the University of Virginia's athletes, coaches, trainers, and staff.

I know that the University of Virginia is honored by both its men and women's lacrosse teams. I am proud to say that the 2004 women's lacrosse championship belongs to the University of VA from the Fifth District of Virginia.