Roy Blunt

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend from Maryland, the majority leader, to tell us what the plans are for next week.

Mr. BLUNT. I appreciate your efforts to do that. She was an example of public service and personal courage.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. I appreciate the sentiment. If I am not in error, I hope we don't just waste the 2 weeks, and instead begin the discussions that we need to get to a bill that puts the health care of kids who don't have access to insurance first. On one more appropriations topic, two comments made this week by Chairman Obey, and I was interested in more information from the gentleman. One was that we won't do any supplemental funding for our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq this year, and I believe he may have said ``and potentially not next year,'' and then the other was the question raised by him of having an income tax surcharge placed on people who pay the income tax to the tune of about $150 billion. I believe you and others have said that surcharge will not be coming to the floor, and I wonder if you can verify that. And also any information you have about the likelihood of how we sustain our troops in the field between now and the end of the year. I yield to my friend.

Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman and I yield back my time.

Mr. BLUNT. I appreciate that. And I also appreciate the sentiment that the process works better if we agree on a process rather than being told about a process. On MILCON for several years now, whether it was health care to retirees, starting a formula that ended the post-Civil War concurrent receipt problem, we have come together and passed good legislation, as I think we did this year, and this is a bill that had virtual unanimity. I am not sure that anybody voted against this bill. I would hope to get it done. I would hope to get all of our work done, and get it done in a way that we talk to each other, that gets a product on the President's desk that he can sign that we are all able to work together on and get done. I would also like to see that happen on the Child Health Insurance Program bill. We believe that there is room for us in that discussion, and hope to be able to get there. I would tell my good friend as the whip on this side, I believe whether it would have been yesterday or Monday or 2 weeks from yesterday, we will sustain that veto, but we want to do that in a way that either now or later gets us in that discussion so that we continue this important program so that it works best for kids who don't have access to health care.

Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that information. That is incredibly helpful, as is the notice on the Fridays this month. With that kind of notice, our Members have the kind of time they need and, I know, appreciate on both sides of the aisle to take advantage of that time. Like you, I hope we can find a way to be done by November 16, but I am very appreciative of knowing the schedule for the next two weeks in November if we aren't done. In the process of getting done, I asked last week when you couldn't be on the floor, and I will just ask again, is there any anticipation with four Senate appropriation bills completed, and in fact the Senate having named conferees on those four bills, is there any anticipation we can go to conference on one or all of those bills in the near future? I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. BLUNT. I am sure that will be well received. While we are on that topic, I wonder if my good friend has any sense of the anticipated November schedule, if we are working in November.

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend from Maryland, the majority leader, for the purpose of inquiring about the schedule for next week.

Mr. BLUNT. I yield.

Mr. BLUNT. That would be helpful, and I appreciate the information on that. On the Military Quality of Life bill, I think we have had that the second longest, the Homeland bill, and then the Military Quality of Life has been here about a month, and that bill has contained substantial increases for veterans and for military personnel and their families for a long time. This year I think those increases amount to $18.5 million a day, and I just advance the thought that the sooner we can get that bill finalized, a bill that all Republicans in the House voted for, a bill that all Democrats in the House voted for, they can begin to benefit from those new changes and new benefits. All four of the bills are important, but that bill, I think, particularly is a bill that has an easy path to a moment when veterans and people currently in the military would benefit from the changes in that bill. So whether it is Homeland or Military Quality of Life or the other two bills sent over, I would be eager to see us move forward on those, but particularly on the Military Quality of Life bill.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, like others, I am disappointed we are not going forward today to sustain the President's veto, an outcome that I think no matter how much time anybody has in the time-out chair will be the result. If we were moving forward today and sustaining the veto, then we could get together and try to have a bill that does what I think all of us want to do. Madam Speaker, all of us don't want to do everything, but all of us do want to do some things. We all want a program that meets the needs of poor kids first. That is why when we put this in place in 1997, we said, look, kids, whose families are at the poverty level or below, they have access to Medicaid. But what about people who are kids whose parents are working, and working in jobs where they don't likely have access to insurance? Let's prioritize those kids. Madam Speaker, as a minimum, whatever we do as we move forward, let's have a standard that the States have to meet, the administration proposed 95 percent, Mr. Barton proposed 90 percent, but some percentage of kids whose families are in those jobs that may not have access to insurance. Before we go on and just simply talk about insuring kids, this should be a program that is focused on poor kids, not a program that is on more kids. Madam Speaker, some of our friends say, well, if a program that would give health care to poor kids is a good thing, a program that would give health care to all kids or more kids must be a great thing. It is just simply not accurate. Things that destroy the private insurance market, things that don't meet the needs of the program before you move on to do more are not the kinds of things we ought to be focused on. We need to be sure that we are covering people who are uninsured, not people who are insured, and then moving from insurance to government- paid health care, Washington-based health care. There are going to be situations, I guarantee, if we start insuring all the kids in America, or all the kids that this bill says that we are going to insure, where moms are going to wind up in houses that have both a mom and dad as the only person not insured. Madam Speaker, think with me for just a minute. Dad has a job; insurance comes with dad's job. The government comes in and says we are going to insure the kids. Who gets left out then? It's mom. Our mom has a job, and while she is struggling with the job, she has to figure out how to insure herself and the kids, because insurance didn't come with the job. Then the government decides to insure the kids, and mom says, well, maybe I don't need insurance anymore. Some of our friends will say, well, that is why we are insuring adults. This should not be a program about insuring adults. One of the reasons this program hasn't worked as well as it should have is too many States move to insuring adults before they would insure poor kids. Madam Speaker, let's get on with this debate. I regret the fact that we are not able to start tomorrow because we went ahead and did today what is going to happen in two weeks. But let's get on with this debate. Let's be sure we provide a stable funding source for a program for poor kids and we put poor kids first in a program that is supposed to be about helping kids whose families are working, but working in jobs that aren't likely to have insurance.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. I thank the sponsor of the bill for not only allowing me to cosponsor it with him, but for allowing me today to assist and recognize the 12 individuals whose lives were lost in this terrible attack on our embassies. And let me do that now. First of all, Prabhi Kavaler, Arlene Kirk, Dr. Louise Martin, Michelle O'Connor, Master Sergeant Sherry Lynn Olds from the Air Force, and Tom Shah.

Mr. BLUNT. I thank Mr. Poe for the good work he has done on this legislation and the recognition today to be allowed to speak for a few minutes. On August 7 of 1998, al Qaeda launched a devastating and meticulously coordinated attack on American people residing in foreign countries, but on American soil because they were at our embassies. On that day, 12 Americans and 200 Kenyans were killed at the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, and another 11 lives were taken at Dar es Salaam, the former capital of Tanzania. Though other indications existed, these bombings represented the clearest signs to date that Osama bin Laden had declared war on our country and its people. It was a declaration that fell largely on deaf ears, as my good friend, Mr. Jackson, just pointed out and has been acknowledged by our government. Had we been paying closer attention to that declaration, it's possible that we could have been more prepared for the terrible attacks that day and those attacks that came just 3 years later. The legislation before us today speaks to an issue I've been working on since 2002 when, at the time, I introduced and the House passed the Embassy Victims Compensation Act. At that time, my good friend Maxine Waters was my cosponsor and an active advocate in dealing with this issue, and the House as a whole stepped forward and dealt with this issue, now 5 years ago. It was our first effort at that time to recognize the profound sacrifices made by those Americans that have been mentioned here today, and just as important, that their families made and continue to make. Today, we take a step toward completing the work this House started 5 years ago. The families of those who lost so much at the hands of al Qaeda deserve this bill, and I'm proud to have been involved in it. I would also like to especially thank Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr., who has helped make this bill happen this year. He took up the mantle of the hard work that needed to be done; he was tireless in insisting that our Nation deal with this issue and deal with it now. Along with Jesse Jackson, I would like to recognize the incredible and patient work of Edith Bartley, who lost her father and her brother in the Nairobi attack. For almost a decade now, she has worked to point out the sacrifices made by our State Department personnel, as well as some of the shortcomings of that agency's treatment of her family and others both before and after the attacks. Obviously, nothing we do today can replace those who were lost nearly a decade ago, but I'm hopeful that this effort, if nothing else, will demonstrate that we have not forgotten those who died in this horrific attack. And we will never forget the enduring lessons that we've learned from it.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Well, before we go to one other topic, I'd just say that for bills where we could have started, particularly for military families, the quality of life issues there and for veterans, I think it's a shame that we're not starting those on Tuesday, when they could have started. The other thing that just happened, the President just sent the Peru Free Trade Agreement to the House. The Ways and Means Committee held its markup on the Peru Free Trade Agreement this week, and I've read, at least, that there's an intention, before we go to that trade agreement, to go to a trade adjustment bill that has not yet been written. That trade adjustment bill, when it has passed in the past, has passed with trade promotion authority. With no new trade promotion authority, there's less reason than there might have otherwise been for new trade adjustment authority. And more importantly, it seems, we might run the risk here of slowing the Peru agreement, the clock of which just started, if we wait for a bill that's not yet been written. And I guess my two questions would be, do we plan to do trade adjustment assistance with TPA? And does the gentlelady have any sense of why it's necessary to do that before we do a trade agreement that we've already held the markup on and the President just sent down? And I'd yield.

Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentlelady. Mr. Speaker, I'd just say that, one, as we have started that clock, I think it's very important that we keep on schedule, particularly since this will be really the first bill that the majority has done under the TPA standards, and we want to work closely with the majority on that. And I'd also point out that it's obvious we have not done everything we could have done for military families and veterans, or we'd have a bill that goes into effect next Tuesday instead of some time later this year. Mr. Speaker, I yield back.

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the representative of the majority leader, the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), for the purpose of inquiring about next week's schedule.

Mr. BLUNT. If I could reclaim my time here, I'd just point out that the Senate actually has requested not only a conference, but named conferees on all four of those bills. And I'd yield to you for anything you want to say about that. I mean, they're ready to go to conference, and I'm just asking why we're not so we can get some of this work done. And I'd yield.

Mr. BLUNT. I thank you for that information. It does look like to me that the schedule for next week is incredibly light for 3 days of work. Last week, when Mr. Hoyer and I were talking about the problems of bringing the SCHIP bill to the floor without a conference, without any real opportunity for those of us on this side to see the bill, he said last week one of the reasons for that was the Senate was not able to go to conference. And I'm hoping on the four bills that the Senate has already passed, and we could go to conference on, that we see some action on those bills. I think, particularly, the bill where the new benefits for military families and veterans that could be available as early as next Tuesday, October 1, aren't going to be available because we're not naming conferees. And I wonder if my friend has any sense of when we might be able to have one of those bills, or any appropriation bill, on the House floor now that the fiscal year is essentially, this is the last legislative working day in the fiscal year. Four bills have been ready, one of them, the military quality of life and veterans bill, for some time now, with no apparent interest in going to conference and getting that bill done. And I know we notified the majority before that I'd be asking that question, and so I'm wondering if you have any sense of when any or all of those bills might actually be scheduled, particularly looking at the incredibly light workweek scheduled for next week. And I yield to my friend.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Marvin L. VanGilder of Carthage, Missouri on receiving the Outstanding Missouri Citizen Award. Marvin was born on September 24, 1926 in Lamar, Missouri--in Barton County. He attended Drury College in Springfield where he was involved with the area's first campus radio station. During college, Marvin was a student pastor of two rural churches and became a licensed minister in 1946. After teaching English, history, and music for numerous years in Southwest Missouri, Marvin was hired as a disc jockey and sportscaster for radio station KDMO in Carthage. Marvin advanced to news director at KDMO and then took a job with The Carthage Press where he worked as the assistant managing editor and co-publisher. Marvin served his community as a member, and then President, of the Carthage Board of Education. He was also on the boards of the Sunshine Children's Home, the Carthage Crisis Center, the Eastern Jasper County Red Cross, the Carthage United Way, the Carthage Lions Club and the Eastern Jasper County Mental Health Association. Marvin has authored books on everything from poetry to the history of Barton County, Missouri. On those subjects and many more, he served as a guest lecturer at numerous schools and museums. He received the George Washington Medal of Freedoms Foundation at Valley Forge Award in 1971, the Drury College Distinguished Alumni award and was the first citizen of Carthage to receive the Carthage Chamber of Commerce Citizen of the Year award. Marvin was married on October 15, 1950 to E. Irene Smith VanGilder and they have four daughters Paula, Linda, Leesa and Carla, one son Chris, nine grandchildren and one great-grandchild. I am proud to congratulate Marvin VanGilder on his years of service as a leader in our community, and across our State.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a group of law enforcement officers whose quick thinking and courageous intervention saved lives and ended a tragic shooting spree earlier this summer in southwest Missouri. It was a shooting that left three people dead and several others wounded at the First Congregational Church in Neosho, Mo., and it happened on August 12th of this year. The events of that day startled the Nation, shocked the tight-knit town of Neosho, and devastated the small Micronesian community in the area from which the victims of these senseless and depraved acts of violence came. The shootings occurred during the early afternoon church services near downtown Neosho, with the first call for help coming at 1:54 p.m. Within minutes, officers from the Neosho Police Department, the Newton County Sheriff's Office and the Missouri Highway Patrol were on the scene and organizing a plan to put this nightmare to an end. Officers arriving first were told a lone gunman had burst into the church and begun firing, severely injuring several people and possibly wounding a good deal more. The conditions of the victims were unknown. Several members of the congregation fled the church and the gunman ordered that other children take leave. But as many as 30 worshipers remained held at gunpoint at the moment the officers arrived. Neosho Police Chief David McCracken, who was in charge at the scene, issued a command decision that would bring a quick and positive end to situation. Within minutes, McCracken had organized an impromptu team of experienced officers from three different agencies schooled in special weapons and tactics. After hearing another gunshot from inside the church, the seven-man team entered the sanctuary through a side door into the building. Inside they found a 52-year-old man armed with two handguns--one of them pointed at the head of a female hostage. In a corner of the church, the gunman had gathered around 30 members of the congregation, and positioned them around him. Nearby lay three people mortally wounded, including two pastors and a deacon of the church, and five others clinging to life. As they entered the church, the gunman ordered the officers to leave. They told him to put down his weapon. And, perhaps recognizing his choice was either to comply with the demand or face a penalty similar to the one he imposed on his victims, he did just that. In those tense moments, officers made it clear they intended to use deadly force to end the standoff. The confrontation with officers lasted less than 10 minutes. Eiken Elam Saimon gave up his handguns and was taken into custody. He has been charged with multiple offenses, including three counts of capital murder. Found inside the church were Micronesian-American pastor, Kernel Rehobson, 43; his uncle, Intenson Rehobson, 44; and Kuhpes Jesse Ikosia, 53. Newton County Sheriff Ken Copeland said the quick action of the SWAT team saved lives, and I don't have any doubt that he's right. He believes, as I do, that many other residents and civic leaders in Newton County would have been lost without the team's rapid response and decisive decision-making. Let me add special praise to Neosho Police Chief McCracken, who--as I mentioned--was the commanding officer on the scene. With shots still being heard inside the church, Chief McCracken acted without hesitation to lead the SWAT team in and bring to an end the armed threat, preventing the loss of additional life. Though the events leading up to this tragedy will forever be the object of speculation and mystery, one thing we can be sure of is that having skilled officers and decisive leadership were essential to bringing a quick end to it. These men willfully put themselves in the line of fire to rescue their friends and neighbors. The team led by Chief McCracken consisted of Neosho Police Officer Cameron Kruse and Cpl. Donn Hall, Newton County Sheriff's Chief Deputy Chris Jennings, Sgt. David Trimble and Deputy Dale Brashers and Trooper ``Corky'' Burr of the Missouri State Highway Patrol. These are men of extraordinary valor, but several of their colleagues in the department are also worthy of mention as well. On March 16th of this year, Neosho City Police Sergeant Dan Cook tried to execute, what appeared at the time, a routine traffic stop. Unfortunately, the driver had a handgun ready and opened fire as Cook approached the car. Although Cook was hit in the arm, he returned to his vehicle and chased the assailant down for several miles. During the chase, one of his colleagues--Officer Michael Sharp--was wounded in the face. Another Missouri State Trooper, G. H. Hendrix, traded gunfire with the wanted man. Because of their determined pursuit, the man was later apprehended without further incident, arrested and booked on eight separate felony charges. Each day our peace officers face these dangers and each day they confront the people who would do harm to law-abiding citizens. Each of these men is a dedicated public servant who knows how to do his job, and was not afraid to use his training and expertise to end the awful tragedies with which they were presented. Facing a deranged gunman who has already shown the capacity to kill-- and the willingness to kill some more--is a situation that requires cool heads and professional training. Not a single one of these law enforcement officers would call himself a hero. But here today, I will suggest that's exactly what they are. To the praise already bestowed on them by the Governor, the state legislature, the Neosho City Council and county officials, I add a ``well done and thank you'' for your dedication to your profession and for putting your lives on the line in defense of your community.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. BLUNT. Reclaiming my time on that, Mr. Speaker, I would just say that I'm sure when my good friend was frustrated that conferences weren't always scheduled in in a way that was timely that the alternative that would have been presented would not have been, well, the way to solve this was just not to have conferences. And the two bills, the Senate and House bill, were different from each other by tens of billions of dollars; so there is plenty of debatable space between a known Senate bill and a known House bill that apparently we will have no opportunity to issue an alternative on. I believe there was not an instance, and I don't know when I was unsuccessful, but I always argued in that rare case when this happened that the minority should have an opportunity. In fact, I very well remember having a significant disagreement with our chairman of the Ways and Means Committee in the last Congress on insisting that the minority be given that opportunity. And on something this big, I really think the process is at great fault here. But we'll have time to talk about this next week. On appropriations will we have a continuing resolution on the floor next week or at what point?

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend from Maryland, the majority leader, to update us on the schedule for next week.

Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that information. On the State Child Health Insurance Program, what bill would we be considering at that point?

Mr. BLUNT. Are we scheduled to work on the 12th or not?