Dan Burton

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank my good friend from Florida for yielding. I would just like to say that South Korea has been one of our greatest allies ever since the Korean War. We worked together during the war, along with the United Nations, to stop the expansion of communism throughout that area. And ultimately, there was a resolution of the problem, although it's still kind of tenuous, when they divided Korea along the 38th parallel. I have been over there and I have seen what's happened in Korea since the Korean War, and I have to tell you that there has never been a clearer case of freedom and democracy as opposed to a totalitarian Communist government than in Korea. In Korea, North Korea is foundering. It's under a dictator. The Communist system has created famine and a huge loss of life. The tyranny there is unbelievable. And yet you just go south of the 38th parallel and you see a blossoming country, one that has done extremely well over the past 60 years because of freedom and democracy. I think that South Korea is one of the best allies that the United States has. And the one thing I would like to add to this little discussion today is the need for us to expand our trade relations with South Korea with a free trade agreement. That's been languishing for a long time. And I would just like to say to my colleagues that's one of the things that can enhance our relationship with South Korea, and we need to get that thing passed as quickly as possible. With that, I would just like to say one more time, South Korea is one of our best allies in that entire region and a perfect example of where freedom and democracy really works well.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, the majority leader today gave a speech, and he indicated that we have to raise taxes. He said the deficit was so big--due in large part to the spending on the Democrat side of the aisle--that the deficit was so big, we have to raise taxes. There's no other way. When Ronald Reagan took office back in 1980, he heard the same thing. Everybody said that the spending was out of control, that we had to do more with less, and we had to raise taxes. Ronald Reagan talked to a guy named Art Laffer, who is an economist. He said, The way to get the economy moving was to cut taxes, to give people more disposable income, to give businesses more money to invest, and the economy would right itself. And it did, and we had 20 years of prosperity. Now the Democrats, under the leadership of Mr. Hoyer, want to raise taxes, take money out of people's pockets, take money out of businesses, and say that's going to solve the problem. It will compound the problem and make the recession much, much worse. What we need to do right now is what Ronald Reagan did--cut taxes, give people more disposable income, and give businesses the ability to grow. That's how you create jobs.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, the President of the United States believes that government can do the job better than the private sector. He has proven he has believed that because he in effect is taking over the health industry and using the Federal Government to do it. He reached into the automobile industry and took control of a large part of that, and eventually he will probably try to take control of all of it. He has reached into the financial industry across this country and has scared the financial industry to death, some with fairly good results, but the fact of the matter is it's more government control. And now he wants to take over the energy industry. The long socialist arm of the President is reaching out and trying to take over every area of the private sector. He believes in total government control over the economy. And if you don't believe it, all you have to do is look at the record over the last year and a half. The thing that bothers me is the detrimental effect it's having on the American people. Unemployment is still close to 10 percent. We're now seeing a tragedy in the gulf, as the gentleman from Texas talked about. And instead of really solving that problem, what he's doing now is compounding it by saying no drilling down there for 6 months. And all these people, as Mr. Poe said, are going to lose their jobs if the ruling of the court today is reversed when it goes to a higher court. The thing that really is funny about this is we just sent $2 billion to Brazil so they could do offshore drilling. I guess we don't care much about the environment down there. And we're certainly going to have to buy oil from them because we're going to lose the oil that's going to be produced down in the gulf. We're going to be more dependent on Saudi Arabia, on Africa, on Venezuela, Mexico, and probably Brazil, because we want to clean up the environment by using windmills and solar panels and geothermal energy sources. We've got the energy here in the United States to solve these problems. We don't need to be sending Mr. Soros money in Brazil so he can make more money by doing offshore drilling with our taxpayers' money. We don't need to be sending those jobs down there. As Mr. Poe said, those jobs are going to go down there. They're going to go someplace else because they can't keep those rigs moving in the gulf if they're not producing. So those people who are entrepreneurs are going to take those rigs and they're going to move them someplace else. Along with them will go the jobs, and possibly the impact could be as many as 150,000 Americans will be out of work. This administration is on the wrong track. They have been on the wrong track since the Obama administration took office. The President believes in socialism. He really believes in it. And so he's trying to put the government in control of everything, and himself at the head of the government is going to be the person pulling the strings. The American people, I hope, are going to realize that, and I hope in the November elections they're going to say that we've got to change that and give us a House and a Senate that can stop his runaway socialistic agenda. The way to solve our economic problems is, as I said earlier tonight in a 1-minute, the way Ronald Reagan did it, listening to Mr. Laffer, and that is to cut taxes, to get the burden of government off the backs of the businessman and the individual citizen. And if you do that, you can unleash the power of the free enterprise system and make this economy grow, cut taxes, give people more disposable income, cut business taxes, give business more money to invest, and create an environment where people can buy more because they have more money to spend. Instead, at the end of this year the Democrats want to let all the tax cuts we put in place expire. That in effect is a tax increase. And then they're talking about additional taxes. Mr. Hoyer today gave a speech saying we have to increase taxes because the deficit is so large. They've made it so large--into the trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars. And now they're saying we have to raise taxes, take more blood out of the American taxpayer, to pay for their mistakes. That's only going to compound the problem, because if you take money out of their pocket, they won't have it to spend; and if they don't have it to spend they won't buy and there will be more unemployed. Whereas, if you do the opposite and give them more of their tax money to spend and reduce the taxes, they'll be able to buy more and the economy will flourish. Reagan knew it, Art Laffer knew it, and we had 20 years of economic expansion because of it. But these guys and the President want control of everything. The American people have to wake up, Mr. Speaker. They have to realize what's at stake. Not only the future that we face but the future our kids face and our posterity. They're going to have a worse form of life, a worse quality of life, if we don't reverse what we're doing right now.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, last night I watched the President on television, and I was really disappointed because, instead of really addressing the problem of the gulf spill, he was once again talking about a government move to take over part of our country. We have seen the government move to take over or control the auto industry, the financial industry. We have seen the government or the administration force through the health care bill which the vast majority of Americans don't want. And last night, instead of really focusing on dealing with the problem in the gulf that's going to cost maybe 150,000 jobs and make us more dependent on foreign oil, what the President did, he started talking about the cap-and-trade bill, which will raise taxes on energy production, and every family in America will suffer to the tune of about $3,000 or $4,000 a year. This is a time, Mr. President, if I were talking to him, I would say to deal with the problem in the gulf instead of talking about taking over more of the private sector and raising our taxes.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, my good friend Congressman Poe of Texas just a few minutes ago talked about the oil spill down in the Gulf and referred to the action or inaction of the administration in dealing with it. He quoted something from the L.A. Times that I thought was kind of interesting and a little humorous that my colleagues might like to hear again, and it quotes the LA Times as saying: ``Obama's speech: There's a pipe spewing a gazillion gobs of oil into the Gulf, so let's build more windmills.'' Now, I know that sounds a little humorous, Madam Speaker, but that sounded like what the President's speech was all about last night. There was no real solutions in dealing with the problem. Everybody's concerned about it. Everybody feels empathy and sympathy for the people in the Gulf, the thousands of people who have lost their jobs and who are out of work, the environmental problem that's been created. But what people want is they want a solution to the problem. It has now been 57 days, 57 days since this tragedy occurred. And what did the President do? He has suspended oil drilling in the Gulf for 6 months. Now, that's going to result in as many as 150,000 people losing their jobs, and for the oil people that work on those derricks out there in the Gulf, that's 150,000 jobs that it not only affects them, it affects almost six times that number of people who have ancillary jobs that work in the restaurants, that work on the beaches down there, all the things that are going on down in the Gulf. So you're looking at the potential of half a million to a million jobs being affected adversely because we haven't dealt with the problem. There have been other countries right after the spill took place that offered to send skimmers, ships over here to help skim up the oil on the surface of the ocean. We have had other countries that offered other help, and it's all been turned down. The Jones Act should have been suspended, but it was not suspended, and as a result, the oil crisis, the spill goes on and on and on. It is extremely important that we address the problem as quickly as possible. I'm not an engineer. I don't know what the answer is. But today we had a meeting with people who had talked to the BP oil company and had talked to other oil engineers, and there are things that are going on right now that they believe will address the problem, hopefully in the next 2 or 3 or 4 weeks or at least another month or month-and-a-half, but at least they're moving on the problem now with auxiliary wells being drilled down into the bottom of the Gulf to choke off the spill. All I'd like to say tonight, in addition to what's already been said, is that we have a tragedy down there that should not be compounded by what the problem has advocated, and that was he advocated last night that we come up with an energy bill, i.e., the cap-and-trade bill. And the cap-and-trade tax bill will tax all energy producers that emit CO2 emissions into the atmosphere. And if translated, that means that companies around this country will have to pay hundreds of thousands and maybe millions of dollars more for their utility bills which will be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices, and the average family is going to be affected to the tune of about $3,000 to $4,000 a year if cap-and-tax is passed. This is a time to deal with the crisis in the Gulf, not a time to start talking about the cap-and-tax bill which is going to cost jobs at a time when we need to create jobs. The unemployment rate in this country is at 10 percent or very close to it, and if you include the people who are unemployed and looking for work who are no longer counted, we're looking at 13, 14, 15 percent that are unemployed. So we need to address the economic problems, and we need to be dealing with that in a positive way and not going on with more taxes and more spending as the administration has talked about. What I'd love to see if I had my druthers right now, Madam Speaker, is somebody like Ronald Reagan who could come in and cut taxes and cut spending and stimulate economic growth like he did, and as a result, we had 20 years of economic growth. Right now what we're looking at is more unemployment, and now they're talking about, because of the way the Gulf is being handled, the possibility of more double-digit unemployment. This is something that we can't tolerate right now. We need to be positive, we need to move ahead, and the President is not moving in that direction. And a perfect commentary is what was in the Los Angeles Times, not a conservative newspaper. And you heard liberal commentators all across the country last night saying the President is not addressing the problem, and he is way late in the first place, and in the second place, and in the third place. So I would like to end by saying once again, I think the Los Angeles Times was right on the money when they said of Obama's speech, There's a pipe spewing a gazillion gallons of oil in the gulf, and what's he talking about? More taxes, more spending, and more windmills.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the 2010 recipients of the coveted Ellis Island Medal of Honor. Presented annually by the National Ethnic Coalition, NECO, the Ellis Island Medal of Honor pays tribute to our Nation's immigrant heritage, as well as individual achievement. The medals are awarded to U.S. citizens from various ethnic backgrounds who exemplify outstanding qualities in both their personal and professional lives, while continuing to preserve the richness of their particular heritage. Since NECO's founding in 1986, more then 2,000 American citizens have received Ellis Island Medals of Honor, including six American Presidents, several United States Senators, Congressmen, Nobel Laureates, outstanding athletes, artists, clergy, and military leaders. As we all know, citizens of the United States can trace their ancestry to many nations. The richness and diversity of American life makes us unique among the Nations of the world and is in many ways the key to why America is the most innovative country in the world. The Ellis Island Medals of Honor not only celebrate select individuals but also the pluralism and democracy that enabled our ancestors to celebrate their cultural identities while still embracing the American way of life. This medal is not about money, but about people who really seized the opportunities this great country has to offer and who used those opportunities to not only better their own lives but make a difference in the lives of those around them. By honoring these outstanding individuals, we honor all who share their origins and we acknowledge the contributions they and other groups have made to America. I commend NECO and its Board of Directors headed by my good friend, Nasser J. Kazeminy, for honoring these truly outstanding individuals for their tireless efforts to foster dialogue and build bridges between different ethnic groups, as well as promotes unity and a sense of common purpose in our Nation. Madam Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in recognizing the good works of NECO, and congratulating all of the 2010 recipients of the Ellis Island Medals of Honor. I also ask unanimous consent that the names of this year's recipients be placed into the Congressional Record following my statement. Ichak K. Adizes, PhD; Adrienne G. Alexanian; Richard F. Ambinder, MD; Cyrus Amir-Mokri; Anousheh Ansari; Rao S. Anumolu; Robert S. Atallah; Mohamed A. Atassi, MD, FACC; Kevork D. Atinizian; Nancy H. Bailey; Hon. Rosemary Barkett; Samira Kanaan Beckwith; Sarkis Bedevian; Jerold E. Beeve, MD; Dorothy Beeve, RN; Suraj P. Bhatia; Carole Black; George F. Brown; Richard R. Burey, Jr.; Michael Capasso; Dominic Chianese; Mr. Hank Hyunho Choi; Yen S. Chou; Lin-Chi Chu; Carl J. Clause; Eugene P. Conese, Sr.; John F. Conley; Thomas J. Cook; Edward Cruz; Paul R. Davies; Chief Raymond Diaz; Dr. Edward B. Diethrich; Andre C. Dimitriadis, PhD; Borko B. Djordjevic, MD; Thomas J. Donohue; David Du; David B. Falk; Lina Fang; Eric Friedberg; Col. Arnald D. Gabriel (Ret.); Rod G. Gilbert; Col. David G. Goulet; E. Bulkeley Griswold; Col. Gina M. Grosso; S. K. Gupta; Wolf Hengst; Gregory M. Hodge, PhD; Maj. Gen. Karl R. Horst; Hon. Jerry M. Hultin; Chief James Jephthah; Ted Johnson; James Keach; Alan Krutchkoff; Tak W. Kwan, MD; William K. Lee, MD; Robert J. Loggia; Wing K. Ma; Vahid Majidi; Fouad Malouf; James Malpeso, MD; MSgt. Chester L. Marcus, Jr.; Chief Denis McGowan; Shekhar Mitra, PhD; Moshen Moazami; Curtis E. Moll; Yasmin Motamedi; Jeremiah A. Mullins; Agneta E. Nilsson; RADM Joseph L. Nimmich; Sr. Irene M. O'Neill; Bedros S. Oruncakciel; Hemant Patel, MD; Francis J. Pearn; Richard R. Pergolis; Timothy A. Phillips; Michael J. Piazza; Hon. Rose Pierre-Louis; Kappana Ramanandan; Maj. Gen. Michael S. Repass; Hon. Edward Rollins; Stanley M. Rumbough, Jr.; William J. Ryan; Kenan E. Sahin, PhD; Joseph M. Saponaro; John F. Scarpa; Jane Seymour; Faryar Shirzad; John Shu, Esq.; Dr. Ruth J. Simmons; Prasad Srinivasan, MD; Bert R. Sugar; Hon. Eugene R. Sullivan (Ret.); Jordan P. Thomas; Annie S. Totah; Suzanne von Liebig, PhD; William D. Walsh; RADM Philip A. Whitacre (Ret.); Morrill Worcester; Mohammad Yahyavi; Vartkes Yeghiayan, Esq.; Matt H. Yildizlar; Chang Bin Yim.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank Mr. McKeon and Chairman Skelton for allowing our amendment to be a part of this en bloc amendment. Congresswoman Napolitano and I introduced this amendment, and we have, I think, 57 or 58 cosponsors. And I'd like to tell the Members why this is such an important amendment. Last summer, a 25-year-old Hoosier Army specialist on his second tour of duty in Iraq named Chancellor Keesling died by suicide in Baghdad. His mother and father went to Dover Air Force base, and they received their son. He got a full military honor burial and a 21-gun salute. The family received all kinds of letters of condolence from the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs and a three-star general, but they did not receive any kind of a comment or letter of condolence from the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief. And I think it's very important that this policy be changed. It's been the policy for a long time that if a person dies by suicide in the military, the Commander in Chief does not send a letter of condolence to the family. But the family's the one that's really suffering. And right now with members of the military serving one, two, and maybe even three tours of duty in Afghanistan or Iraq or around the world, there's tremendous pressure on them. Tremendous pressure. And a lot of them succumb to the pressures and commit suicide. Now this is not an isolated case. In 2008, there were 260 suicides, 140 in the Army; 41 in the Navy, 38 in the Air Force and 41 in the Marines. In 2009, it was 160 in the Army, 47 in the Navy, 34 in the Air Force and 42 in the Marines. And so far this year, 71 young men and women have committed suicide in the military. And I think it's only fitting and proper that the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States, who sends these young people into combat for extraordinarily long periods of time, ought to understand that the grieving families, like the Keeslings, deserve a letter from the Commander in Chief saying we understand the pressure that your son or daughter was under. We understand that they served their country well, and we want to express condolence to you for your loss and for the service they gave their country. After all, they voluntarily joined the service. They voluntarily served in combat and in combat areas. And because they couldn't handle the pressure, over months and months and sometimes years, they succumbed to that pressure. They should still receive condolence from the Commander in Chief. And I want to thank once again the ranking member and the chairman of the committee for supporting this, and I hope that the President, after this resolution is passed en bloc with the other amendments, will see fit to send letters of condolence to every young man and woman's family who died in the service of their country, whether they died in combat or by their own hand.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. One of the big disappointments that I have about this rule is that the identity of service personnel who are accused of mistreating or torturing an al Qaeda terrorist if they capture them is not going to be agreed to. We think that their identity ought to be kept secret until they're proven guilty if they're charged with something like that. We had three Navy SEALs that were accused of mistreating an al Qaeda terrorist because of what he said, because of what he got out of the al Qaeda training manual, and they were all found innocent, but their names were made public--all through the media they were made public-- and as a result, they're at risk, their families are at risk, and their future careers are at risk because they've been accused of something but not convicted of it. So I think the legislation that we proposed in this amendment should have been approved by the Rules Committee because it protects our service men and women from being exposed for something that they did not do. And I am very disappointed the Rules Committee did not choose to protect the identity of our service personnel who are accused wrongfully by al Qaeda terrorists of mistreatment.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, one of the biggest threats to peace in the Middle East and possibly the whole world is for the United States and our friends and allies around the world to stop Iran's nuclear development program. We have been working for months and months to come up with a very strong Iran sanctions bill. The bill has finally passed the House and Senate, and because of the differences, we are in a conference committee. We have a very strong bill, one that will put extreme pressure on Iran and possibly avert a war in the Middle East. But now we are hearing that the bill is going to be watered down. It is going to be made weaker. If it is made weaker, that means the pressure will not be put on Iran that should be, and they will continue with their nuclear development program and we could be in a war in the Middle East that will far exceed what we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan. I want to read to you from a report that was issued just last week. ``Iran has set up new equipment that will allow it to boost its efficiency at enriching uranium at higher levels. Iran's clandestine enrichment activities were discovered 8 years ago and have expanded since to encompass thousands of centrifuges churning out material enriched to 3.5 percent. But despite three sets of Security Council sanctions meant to enforce demands of a freeze, Tehran moved to a new level in February, when it set up a small program to produce material enriched to near 20 percent.'' And 20 percent can be used for a nuclear weapon. The story continued, ``But the move has increased concerns because it brings the Islamic Republic closer to the ability to produce warhead material. Uranium at 3.5 percent can be used to fuel reactors, which is Iran's avowed purpose for enrichment. If enriched to around 95 percent, however, it can be used in building a nuclear bomb. And at 20 percent, uranium can be turned into weapons-grade material much more quickly than from lower levels. ``The 20-percent uranium is being produced by `a cascade'--164 centrifuges hooked up in series. The diplomats said that Iranian technicians had in recent weeks assembled another 164-centrifuge cascade, and the throw of a switch appeared ready to activate it to support the machines already turning out small amounts of near 20- percent uranium.'' We don't know how long it is going to be before Iran has nuclear weapons, but we know it is not going to be too long. And every day we wait to put pressure on Iran is a day they are closer to developing nuclear technology that could start a war over there, obliterate our friends in Israel, and cause a major war that we will have to be involved with. We get about 40 percent of our energy from the Middle East. And if a war breaks out over there and in the Gulf States, the Persian Gulf could be blocked, and we would lose so much energy we wouldn't even be able to run the lights in this place. It is extremely important that we have a very strong Iran sanctions bill. I am on the conference committee, and I would say to my colleagues who are conferees, let's make it tough, as tough as possible, because the one thing we want to do is avert a major war with Iran in the Middle East. And I can tell you, I know Bibi Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, is not going to stand by and watch a weapon that could obliterate, destroy Israel, be produced right next door there in Iran. So it is important that the United States take the lead by coming up with a very strong bill that will put sanctions on Iran that they will realize will stop them economically if they don't stop their nuclear development program. This is probably going to be one of the last chances we will have to stop a nuclear program in Iran that will develop a nuclear weapon and possibly cause a major war and proliferation of nuclear weapons throughout the Middle East. This is a very important time not only for them, in the Middle East, Israel and our allies, but it is a big, important time for the United States and all of our allies in Europe. We can't let a terrorist state like Iran get a nuclear weapon, and that is why we need to pass a very strong Iran sanctions bill, and we need to do it right away.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the majority leader--the Democrat majority leader's comments about the accomplishments that have been made by this Congress. I would just like to say briefly this: the American people don't want to hear this hyperbole. They don't want to hear these long dissertations about what's being accomplished around here. What the American people want is to cut spending and to get this economy moving again and create jobs. And blowing money like the Democrats are doing and creating a debt that our kids will never be able to deal with is not the answer. And so I'd like the next time that they have this discussion back and forth for 45 minutes that they cut to the chase and say, We're going to do this to cut spending. We're going to do this to create jobs. And we're going to cut taxes like Ronald Reagan did to get this economy moving again, instead of all this other stuff that's going on.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that really concerns me about war is we lose so many fine young men and women in conflict, in the combat area. One of the finest young men in my district from Marion, Indiana, Captain Brandon Aaron Barrett, who was 27 years old, died Wednesday, May 5, while serving in Afghanistan. Brandon was born January 21, 1983, in Albuquerque, New Mexico. As a child, Brandon was friendly and energetic, making friends with everyone he came in contact with. He played sports, and he dreamed of serving in the United States military. He wanted to be a marine. After graduating from Marion High School in 2001, he went to the United States Naval Academy and he was very proud of that. He graduated from there in 2006. Upon graduation, Brandon was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. Brandon deployed twice to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, once from March to October of 2008 and then again in December of 2009. During Captain Barrett's distinguished career, he received multiple awards for his service. The awards that he received include the Navy and Marine Achievement Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Afghanistan Campaign Medal, and the NATO International Security Assistance Force Medal. He has also recently been posthumously promoted from first lieutenant to the rank of captain. His deep commitment to the United States Marine Corps and the men he led was insurmountable. Brandon ``Bull'' Barrett will be remembered in Marion, Indiana, as a gifted athlete, avid outdoorsman, and a natural born leader. Those who knew him best will remember him for not only the loyalty and perseverance that served him so well in the Marine Corps, but also his unwavering dedication to the friendships of his youth in Marion. Throughout his life, Brandon kept the city of Marion close to his heart, coming home on nearly every leave, and always greeting everyone he met with a smile. To the citizens of the State of Indiana, his fellow marines, and the countless others he touched, Brandon will forever be remembered as a hero. Our thoughts, prayers, and deepest condolences go out to his mother, Cindy; his father, Brett; his brother, Brock; and his sisters, Ashley and Taylor. Mr. Speaker, one of things that we never really think about is the impact it has on other people in the Corps or in the Army or Navy when they lose one of their beloved fighting buddies. His captain, his commanding officer said in an article, ``It's surreal.'' He said, ``I keep expecting him to walk around the corner, big smile on his face.'' They can't believe he is gone. He said that everyone who knew him knew he was a leader, an officer, and a great man, and he is sorely missed. I would like to say once again to his family, our condolences, our deepest condolences go out to you. Everyone in Indiana and throughout the country is very happy that he served this country with such great distinction. [From The Chronicle-Tribune, Marion, IN, May 12, 2010] Brandon Aaron Barrett Jan. 21, 1983-May 5, 2010 Brandon Aaron Barrett, 27, died on Wednesday, May 5, 2010, serving his country in Afghanistan. He has recently been posthumously promoted from the rank of first lieutenant to captain by the United States Marine Corps. Barrett was born Jan. 21, 1983 in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He spent his childhood befriending everyone he met, playing sports, and dreaming of becoming a soldier for the United States military. Brandon graduated from Marion High School in 2001, and he was proudly accepted into the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland. He graduated in 2006, joined the Marine Corps, and was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant on May 26, 2008. Barrett was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment; 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. He deployed to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom from March to October 2008 and again in December 2009. Barrett's awards include the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Afghanistan Campaign Medal and NATO International Security Assistance Force Medal. Brandon ``Bull'' Barrett was an outstanding athlete, an avid outdoorsman and a natural leader. He confronted every task with enthusiasm and accepted each responsibility with dignity. His passionate commitment to the Marine Corps and to his troops was insurmountable. Those who knew him will remember his loyalty and his dedication to friendship most of all. His eyes held no prejudice, and he greeted everyone with a smile. Brandon kept the city of Marion, Indiana closest to his heart, returning home on nearly every leave. To its citizens and to the countless numbers of lives that he touched, Brandon Barrett will forever be remembered as a hero. He is survived by his mother, Cindy Barrett; his father, Brett Barrett; his sisters, Ashley and Taylor Barrett; his brother, Brock Barrett; and his grandmother, Carmen Johnson. Additional survivors include several aunts, uncles and cousins. Visitation will be held on Friday, May 14, 2010 from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. in the Marion High School Bill Green Athletic Arena, 750 W. 26th Street, Marion, IN 46953. A funeral service will be held at 10 a.m. on Saturday, May 15, 2010, also at the MHS Bill Green Athletic Arena. A burial service will follow at Gardens of Memory, 11201 S. Marion Rd. 35, Marion, IN 46952. In lieu of flowers, donations can be made for those wishing to contribute to a memorial and scholarship fund in Brandon's name. Please send contributions to STAR Wealth Management, Capt. Brandon A. Barrett Memorial Fund, 3610 River Crossing Parkway--Suite 190, Indianapolis, IN 46240. Local arrangements are being handled by Needham-Storey- Wampner Funeral Service, North Chapel, 1341 N. Baldwin Avenue, Marion, IN. Barrett was killed in Afghanistan a week ago today, 60 days before he was scheduled to return home from his tour in combat. His sister, Ashley Barrett, said she and her family are looking forward to allowing her brother to be at peace by finally laying his body to rest. More details regarding his killing were reported this week by The Sunday Times, of London. ``That article was very upsetting to read,'' Ashley Barrett said. She said the information reported in the British newspaper was more than what the family received in the casualty report provided by the U.S. Marine Corps. According to the article, under the headline, ``Swift and bloody: the Taliban's revenge,'' a Taliban gunman shot Barrett while he was fortifying his post in the Helmand town of Marjah. Barrett and Lance Corporal Marcus Lounello, 21, did not have their flak jackets on because of the heat that day. The Times article said Barrett was shot in the chest as he stood between two armored vehicles and died before a medical team could reach him, and Lounello was also shot and suffered extreme internal injuries: Lounello is expected to recover. ``It's surreal'' Captain Tony Zinni, Barrett's commanding officer in the 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, told the Times on Saturday. ``I keep expecting him to walk around the corner, big smile on his face.'' Barett had been well known in Marjah, according to the article. He guarded a post that checked traffic coming in and out of the town that was once a Taliban stronghold. The city was taken over by the Marines and their Afghan allies in February. Zinni told the Times that it was generally a boring duty, but Barrett was good about it. According to the article, Barrett would visit the neighborhood elders in Marjah, and could even partially speak their language--Pashto. Zinni told the Times he thinks the lieutenant was targeted and it makes him angry. ``Everyone in the block knew him, knew he was the officer,'' the captain said of Barrett. Barrett was the first death in Marjah for the battalion's weapons company. Barrett's friend, Andrew Morrell of Marion, said the efforts Barrett made to know the elders in Marjah and learn their language was part of his character: ``The main reason why Jesus affected the lives of so many people in his ministry in Galilee is because he dwelt amongst the people. This is the exact same reason why Brandon made such an impact among friends, family, but even more, strangers,'' wrote Morrell, who, communicated by e-mail while in Israel.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, Mr. Poe of Texas comes down here quite frequently and talks about the problems along the border between the United States and Mexico. Yesterday I received an email that I would like to read to my colleagues. The subject is ``The Wild Southern Border.'' And it starts off, and it says, ``A lesson: Don't leave your weapons in the car, don't turn your back on strangers who are somewhere they don't belong, use your cell phone with your off hand, not your strong hand.'' And the reason they start off with that lesson is because of what is said in this email, and I would like to read it to you. ``As you know, one of the local ranchers was murdered in Douglas, Arizona, 2 weeks ago. I received three messages similar to the one below from different officers within the Rangers and law enforcement. Yesterday afternoon, I talked to another rancher near us who is a friend of ours and whose great grandfather started their ranch here in 1880. These are good people. He told me what really happened out at the Krentz ranch and what you won't read in the papers. The Border Patrol is afraid of starting a small war between civilians here and the drug cartels in Mexico. ``Bob Krentz was checking his water like he does every evening and came upon an illegal alien who was lying on the ground, telling him he was sick. Bob called the Border Patrol and asked for a medical helicopter to evacuate the gentleman. As he turned to go back to his ATV, he was shot in the side. The round came from down and angled up, so they know the shooter was on the ground. Bob's firearm was in the ATV, so he had no chance. Wounded, he called the Cochise County Sheriff and asked for help. Bleeding in the lungs, he called his brother, but the line was bad. So he called his wife, but again the line was bad. Several ranchers heard the radio call and drove to his location. Bob was dead by this time. The ranchers tracked the shooter 8 miles back towards Mexico and cornered him in a brushy draw. This was all at night. ``The sheriff and Border Patrol arrived and told him not to go down and engage the murderer. They went around to the back side, and if you can believe it, the assassin managed to get by a B.P. helicopter and a sheriff's posse and back into Mexico. So much for professional help when you need it.'' And I would like to say that I think the Border Patrol and the sheriffs do a great job with what they have down there. Nevertheless, this is what he says in his email. ``One week before the murder, Bob and his brother Phil, who I shoot with, hauled a huge quantity of drugs off the ranch that they found in trucks. One week before that, a rancher near Naco did the same thing. Two nights later, gangs broke into his ranch house and beat him and his wife and told them that if they ever touched any drugs they found, they would come back and kill them. ``The ranchers here deal with cut fences and haul drug deliveries off their ranches all the time. What ranchers think is that the drug cartels beat the one rancher and shot Bob because they wanted to send a message. Bob always gave food and water to illegals, and so they think they sent the assassin to pose as an illegal who was hungry and thirsty, knowing it would catch Bob off-guard. What is going on down here is not being reported. You need to tell the people how bad it is along the border. Texas is worse. Near El Paso, it's in a state of war; 5,000 people were killed in Ciudad Juarez last year, and it's over 2,000 so far this year. Gun sales down here are through the roof, and I get emails from people wanting firearms training. Something has to be done, but I don't hold out much hope. These gangs have groups in almost every city in the United States. Please read below. This is serious business. The Barrio Azteca and their subgangs are like Mexican corporations and organized extremely well. If this doesn't get dealt with down here, you guys''--meaning us up north--``will deal with it on your streets.'' And it's signed Bud. All I can say is that Mr. Poe and others have come down here day after day, week after week, month after month, talking about the horrible problems on the border, and this government, the Federal Government, is not doing anything about it. They're not approaching this as it should be approached. We need to send the National Guard down there. We need to continue with the border fencing and stop the illegal aliens from coming across, number one, and stop the drug traffic and the terrorists who are coming across. This is a war down there. We're fighting wars in other parts of the world. This is our border, and we need to address this problem.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Young and I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This is an amendment I think that everybody will embrace, at least I hope so, because it clarifies what was just discussed. I will read it to you real quickly. It says this amendment would retain the requirement that all ballots used for authorized plebiscites include the full content of the ballot printed in English as well as Spanish. It would also require the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission to inform voters in all authorized plebiscites that if Puerto Rico retains its current status or is admitted as a State that: (1) any official language requirements of the Federal Government shall apply to Puerto Rico to the same extent as throughout the United States; and (2) it is the sense of Congress that the teaching of English be promoted, not demanded or anything, but be promoted in Puerto Rico in order for English-language proficiency to be achieved. So we are talking about making sure that everybody who votes, everybody who is involved in any kind of an official thing like a plebiscite, that they will see it in both English and Spanish. We are also pushing to promote English more than it has been in the past. I think this is an amendment that everybody should agree with. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I don't know what that has to do with anything, but I yield to Mr. Pierluisi for 1 minute.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I will take my last 30 seconds to say that the gentleman from Georgia has a very strong accent, but I understand him. I would just like to say that this is a clarifying amendment to make sure that everybody who votes down there in a plebiscite or in an election has before them the ability to understand and cast the vote intelligently. I can't understand why anybody would be opposed to this. It makes common sense, and I hope everybody will support it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, this is so muddied up I don't know if anybody that's paying attention really understands what's going on. This is just a process, that's all it is. The people who are going to decide whether or not any territory becomes a State is this body and the Senate. What we are asking for is a recommendation from the people of Puerto Rico. They're dying for this country; more have died percentage-wise in conflicts than any State in the Union. Their Governor wants this plebiscite, their Representative wants this plebiscite, their state senate wants this plebiscite, and the state house of representatives want this plebiscite. They know what this bill is. They've come and they've testified before the Resources Committee. They know, and they represent the people of Puerto Rico. So these people coming down here from New York and everyplace else, they don't know; they don't know what they're talking about. Announcement by the Chair

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. The people who want to have this determination made are the people of Puerto Rico, and their elected representatives altogether say let's have this bill passed. And yet people from New York and from Washington--I mean, I don't know how close the State of Washington is to Puerto Rico, but it's about 4,000 miles, maybe 5,000, and New York is quite a ways away. Why don't we listen to what the elected representatives of Puerto Rico want. And it's Democrat and Republican. This is not a partisan issue. So my view is, let's let them have the plebiscite. Let's come up with a process that will work. We've tried this before, and it has been split up all over the place. This process will work. It will boil it down to what the people of Puerto Rico really want. I believe they want statehood, and we ought to let them determine that. If their representatives want it, if their Governor wants it, if everybody else wants it, and if they are sacrificing their lives for this country, then by gosh we ought to give them a chance to be a State.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I think the amendment speaks for itself. I think the amendment, Mr. Chairman, says very clearly that we want to make sure that everyone who casts a ballot in an election or on a plebiscite has before them the ability to understand what the ballot is about and be able to cast it intelligently. This is done in all kinds of States. As a matter of fact, many States have as many as 11 different languages, which is really out of control, on one ballot. To say you can't have two on this ballot in Puerto Rico so they can cast their ballot intelligently really doesn't make much sense. I am a very strong advocate for making sure that everyone in this country speaks English, and I understand what my colleague just said, but in this particular case we are talking about a plebiscite that is going to be advisory for the Congress of the United States. This is just to help this process along and to make sure that it is understood by everybody. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Let me just say that Mr. Poe of Texas, my good friend who just spoke, he added a little bit of levity, but it was very important. The point that he was making, in that we have the ability in this country to really deal with things like agriculture and insects that might come in and contaminate our crops, but we have a serious, serious problems on the 1,980-mile border between us and Mexico. The administration has cut some of the money from the whole project of putting fences and more broad Border Patrol agents on that border. And it's a war zone, as Mr. Poe has said. Mr. Poe is the leader in pointing out the problems with what's going on on the border between Texas and Mexico, as well as the border all the way between the United States and the whole country of Mexico. So I'd just like to say if I were talking to the President or anybody in his administration, listen to Mr. Poe and the guys who've been down there on the border. They know. The sheriffs and the police in Arizona and all of them know that this is a war zone. American lives are at risk. And we're not doing anything from the Federal level to deal with the problem. As Mr. Poe said in a letter that he wrote that I cosigned the other day, they need to send, if necessary, the National Guard down there to augment the Border Patrol agents, some of whom are at risk every single day, every single night. And so if I were talking to the administration on behalf of my good friend, Mr. Poe, and all of us that are concerned about the border and the illegals that are coming in by the thousands and now into the millions over the years, we really need to do something to protect that border. No more talking about it. Let's do it. Let's send the National Guard down there with the ability to do whatever is necessary when they're dealing with armed drug dealers or people coming across the border who may mean to do harm to American citizens. If we give them that right and we put the National Guard down there with the ability to defend themselves against these people that are coming across the border, we can sew that thing up and we can stop the illegal immigration. Then, once we secure the border, we can start talking about a real, viable immigration reform bill. But until we secure the border, we shouldn't be talking about that. That's the number one objective.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, what are the people in Arizona supposed to do? What are the people in Texas supposed to do? Or New Mexico? I hear this rhetoric on the floor here about how the law in Arizona is unconstitutional. I've looked at that. I don't think its unconstitutional. And I think they have an obligation to protect the people of Arizona from the drug terrorists that are coming across the border in droves. They're bringing drugs illegally into the United States. We've got illegal aliens coming across in droves in the Arizona area into the United States and the government of the United States is doing absolutely nothing. The border between us and Mexico is 1,980 miles long. We've talked about securing that border for a long time, and we have not done it. Those border States have to deal with this on a daily basis and the law enforcement agencies down there have a Herculean job to deal with. And so I would just like to say to my colleagues, I don't think it's racial profiling for them to stop people that they suspect of being here illegally who may be dealing in drug trafficking and who may be threatening the lives of people down there because the crime rate is going out of sight. Let's support the people of Arizona and the law enforcement people down there. They have a right to make sure that they're safe.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. And I want to tell her how much I appreciate her coming down and taking the time to give this Special Order. It took a lot of preparation to explain this to our colleagues and anybody that might be paying attention to this. There is no question in my mind that the 10th Amendment of the Constitution is being violated by the bill that we passed, and that's why we have 22 States that have joined in this suit. And I'm glad that they are doing that. As a matter of fact, on March 29, the Attorney General of Indiana, Greg Zoeller, expressed his intent of having Indiana join in filing the suit against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which is the Obama care we're talking about. And here is what he had to say, our Attorney General: He said, ``There are significant constitutional questions regarding the Federal Government's authority raised by the legislation passed. I believe it's necessary that these ultimately be brought before the United States Supreme Court, and as the Attorney General of Indiana, I will join in the most appropriate legal actions available to represent the significant interests of our State, the State of Indiana, in this matter.'' And he prepared a 55-page report on this that he gave to our legislators in Indiana regarding the Patient Protection and Affordability Act. And he believes, as the other attorneys general do, that this is unconstitutional. Now, my colleague just talked about the automobile business and how people have to have car insurance. Well, they don't have to drive a car. And if they don't drive a car, they don't have to have car insurance. This is the first time that I can remember in my life that the Federal Government is telling people they have to buy something. I have never heard of this and I have never read anything that would lead me to believe that the Federal Government has the authority to tell people that they have to buy something. Now, there have been times in the past when the Federal Government tried to take over the entire commerce of the United States. Back in the 1930s during the Roosevelt administration, they passed a law called the National Recovery Act, and the National Recovery Act gave the Federal Government control over the entire economy of the United States regarding commerce. And there was one case that came to mind that I read in a book called ``The Forgotten Man.'' I don't know if my colleagues read it or not. But it involved two itinerate people from the Middle East that came to the United States and they started selling chickens. Back in those days, they didn't have frozen chickens in the supermarket. So when people would come to them to buy chickens, they had them in crates, and they would let the people that came to buy the chickens reach in and pick the chickens they wanted. Well, the National Recovery Act, which was controlling the commerce of the United States, had individuals, like the IRS is going to have under this bill, that would come out and tell the people what they could and couldn't do. And the National Recovery Act representative came out and told these two gentlemen that they could not let the people pick the chickens that they wanted. I know this sounds crazy. They said because the people that came in and bought the chickens first would pick the fatter ones and they would get the benefit of being there first. And the fellows that owned this company said, Well, this is the way we've always done it. We let the people pick the chickens they want. So they didn't change. They continued to conduct their business that way, and they were indicted under the National Recovery Act and they were convicted, and the case went all the way to the United States Supreme Court. Justice Brandeis wrote the opinion, which was 9-0, against the National Recovery Act, which went out the window. Justice Brandeis sent a message back to the President saying, Don't send us any more legislation like this, because if you do, we'll find it unconstitutional as well. That was the first time that I know where the Federal Government starting taking over the entire area of the commerce of the United States. Even then, even then, I don't believe there was a time when they said somebody had to buy something, which would violate the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. Now the National Recovery Act was found unconstitutional, but the 10th Amendment, as far as I can remember, never said you have to buy something. And that is what this bill does and that is why the attorneys general from 22 States are saying, You don't have that power. As you said, Mr. Carter, very clearly, the power is not delegated to the United States by the Constitution. The power is not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States are reserved to the States respectively. And so what's happening here is the Federal Government is overstepping its bounds and violating the 10th Amendment and taking away from the States their right to regulate this industry or to deal with whether or not people should or should not have to buy these things. And the attorneys general are saying very clearly this is a State's right and we don't think the Federal Government has the right to do this under the commerce clause. So I would just like to add a couple of other things that go along with this, Mr. Carter, and that is the cost that it's going to be to the American people. The estimated deficit that is going to be created by this, as far as the health care bill is concerned, is about $385 billion or $395 billion over the next 10 years. But the fact of the matter is, it's going to cost a lot more than that. The estimated costs, according to CBO, based upon the information that was sent to them, was that it was going to cost about $850 billion or $860 billion over 10 years, and the amount that was going to be as far as the deficit was concerned was about $300-some billion. But the fact of the matter is they only have 6 years of coverages, but they have 10 years of taxes. So when you take 10 years of coverage and 10 years of taxes and you look at what it's going to cost the American people, it's going to run up over $2 trillion--money we don't have. And the deficit already is out of control. The budget we passed this year was $3.85 trillion--or last year. And this year they won't even send us a budget because they know it's going to be more than that. The shortfall in spending that increased the debt, our debt to our kids and grandkids, was $1.4 trillion last year. It's going to be $1.6 trillion or more this year, and it's going to get worse as the years go by over the next decade or two. And so in addition to violating the Constitution, as I believe this does, and in addition to having 22 States file suit against the Government of the United States because of this bill, this is going to cost an arm and a leg that we don't have. We don't have this money. And who's going to pay for it? Well, we borrowed money from China. We owe them about $800 billion. We borrowed $600 billion from Japan. If you add it all up, we are probably into the trillions and trillions of dollars that we owe the rest of the world. If they ever cash in on what we owe them, I don't know how we are going to pay for it. The fact of the matter is, right now, because of the cost of this legislation and the other programs and the deficits that are taking place right now, I really believe that the Federal Government is going to have to print a lot of money. And when they print money, they inflate the money supply and we have what is called inflation. What they try to do is try to figure out a way to stop that inflation by raising interest rates or increasing taxes. Now the administration is talking about a value-added tax like they have in Europe. And the value-added tax in Europe is running about 20 percent in many countries. And if you buy a car for $10,000, for instance, and you add the value-added tax to it, you're up to $12,000. Another 20 percent. The American people can't afford it. We can't afford the inflation, we can't afford the taxes, and what it will do to the economy and jobs is unbelievable, not to mention that it violates the Constitution of the United States. So if I were talking to the American people tonight, Mr. Carter--and we can't talk to the American people; we can only talk to each other and the Members of the Congress--I would say there's a lot more to this than just the violation of the Constitution. There's no question in my mind that there is that violation, but the cost to us and our kids and our posterity is going to be unbelievable. This country can't afford to spend the money the way we are doing it. We can't afford to raise taxes like they are talking about. We can't afford a value-added tax and we can't afford to see jobs slip away from America and go offshore to other countries. That is what I think this is leading to. This administration believes in a European-style socialistic approach to government, and we have to stop that. I want to pat the attorneys general on the back from those 22 States for leading the charge in dealing with this constitutional abuse of power, and I wish them the very best and I hope that every State in the Union, Mr. Carter, I hope every State in the Union will join in this fight because the Federal Government should not usurp the rights of the people of this country and the several States. And our Forefathers never planned for that. And that is why they gave the States the ultimate power instead of leaving it with the Federal Government. They said that those powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution are reserved for the States. And that is the way it ought to be. I want to thank you once again for taking this Special Order. You're one of my heroes.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Would the gentleman yield on that point real quickly? Our Governor, who I think is one of the best Governors in the country, Mitch Daniels, he said that passing this would put 500,000 people more on Medicaid in the State of Indiana. I just wanted to validate the point that you just made. This is going to be a tremendous burden on States all across this country because they are going to shift an awful lot of the burden that is on the Federal health care system to the States. In Indiana, we are going to be spending billions of dollars more over the long haul because they are going to put 500,000 people more on Medicaid. I don't know that that is the exception. I think every State in the Union is going to suffer like that. Those are costs we are not even talking about.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank my colleague from Texas for yielding. I just want to follow up on what my other colleague from Texas just said. He was quoting the attorney general of Texas, Mr. Greg Abbott, and there was one clause in his letter that I thought bears repeating. He said, ``If there are to be any limitations on the Federal Government, then `commerce' cannot be construed to cover every possible human activity under the sun--including mere human existence. The act of doing absolutely nothing does not constitute an act of `commerce' that Congress is authorized to regulate.'' And this parallels what we were talking about earlier with the National Recovery Act, because it was designed to cover everything back in the 1930s. We talked about a couple of examples. And this attorney general is quoting pretty much what Justice Brandeis was talking about when he wrote the opinion, the 9-0 opinion that destroyed the National Recovery Act, saying that the Federal Government didn't have the right to run everything. And I think that's exactly what your attorney general is talking about. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I rise today to share with my colleagues a recent speech by the President of the Republic of China, ROC, Taiwan, discussing his country's future. I have been a longtime supporter of Taiwan and hope that my colleagues and I will continue to improve relations not only between the United States and Taiwan but between Taiwan and the international community. All Americans should be proud that Taiwan and the United States have enjoyed a strong and durable relationship. Taiwan is one of our largest trading partners and the cultural exchanges between our two peoples are as vibrant as they have ever been. Taiwan has stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States to combat the scourge of global terrorism; and the people of Taiwan have always given generously in our greatest times of need with monetary contributions to the Twin Towers Fund, Pentagon Memorial Fund and through the offer of humanitarian assistance to victims of Hurricane Katrina. Taiwan and the United States are not merely allies; we are friends and partners in the truest sense of the words. Recently, President Ma Ying-jeou of the ROC, Taiwan, took part in a video conference with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies at Harvard University to discuss Taiwan's vision for the future. I ask unanimous consent to include a copy of President Ma Ying-jeou's speech into the Congressional Record. And I urge my colleagues to read the remarks because whatever the future holds of Taiwan, I believe that the people of Taiwan deserve to have a voice in shaping that future. The Quest for Modernity--Speech by Ma Ying-jeou, President, Republic of China at Fairbank Center, Harvard University--April 6, 2010 President Ma Ying-jeou took part this morning in a video conference with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies at Harvard University. The conference was moderated by Dr. William Kirby, Director of the Fairbank Center. Harvard University president Drew G. Faust opened the conference with a videotaped talk in which she welcomed President Ma to the video conference. After the moderator's opening remarks, President Ma followed with a speech entitled ``The Quest for Modernity.'' Thereafter, professors Steven M. Goldstein, David Der-Wei Wang, William P. Alford each posed a few questions to the president. This was followed by a Q&A session in which the president fielded questions from members of the audience. As the conference was drawing to a close, President Ma gave a short closing statement. Prof. Kirby, Prof. Goldstein, Prof. Alford, Prof. Wang, Prof. Su Chi, Ambassador Yuan, Director General Hung, Dear faculty members, students, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen: Good Evening! I. Nostalgia about Harvard It heartens me to be once again addressing the excellent faculty and student body of Harvard University. This moment brings back a rush of nostalgia because it was here I became a proud father for the first time before I even got my doctoral degree. It was also at Harvard when I was cloistered for long hours in the Law School Library, or debating with fellow classmates and professors, that I was able to broaden my understanding of the world, and hone my skills as a scholar, intellectual and eventually a leader. I also feel nostalgic on a deeper level. When I think of a long litany of historic events, figures, and institutions: John Hay's Open- Door Policy, Boxer Rebellion, American Indemnity Scholarships for China, with all its recipients, like Hu Shih and Chien Shih-Liang, Tsinghua University, Yenching University, May Fourth Movement, Flying Tigers, Pearl Harbor, John Leighton Stuart, 1949, Korean War, United States-Republic of China Mutual Defense Treaty, Fairbank Center, the Quemoy and Matsu Crisis, Cultural Revolution, Shanghai Communique, Taiwan Relations Act, mainland China's Reform and Open Policy, U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and so on, I cannot help but think of the far-reaching impact that America has had on China's, and later on Taiwan's, convoluted path to modernization. I cannot help but think my time at Harvard was not only a personal academic journey, but also a microcosm reflecting a people's long search for a modern nation. II. Wealth, Power and Democracy The late venerable Benjamin Schwartz, who as you know had been a prominent member of the Fairbank Center, described in the life of Yen Fu that the evolution of modern China has been a journey in search of wealth and power. Given the rise of mainland China's economic power and military strength over the last thirty years, it seems that it has achieved those goals to a considerable degree. However, I believe a society that is truly modernizing should not be limited to wealth and power but must also include the foundations for freedom and democracy. For it is only through the active participation and free choice of one's citizens that government truly serves the welfare of the people; only then can a government sustain, and a nation thrive. So I am proud to say that the Republic of China on Taiwan has in fact achieved all these three pillars. The ROC has since become a thriving nation with a robust economy, viable military and a truly open and vibrant democracy. With so much already achieved the roadmap of my administration is quite straightforward: namely to strengthen the foundation of these three pillars so as to safeguard the future of Taiwan's posterity, and to share with mainland China our values and way of life. III. Coming out of Recession My administration came into office two years ago in the midst of a global economic crisis, so it's not an exaggeration that we definitely ``hit the ground running.'' Since then we have worked relentlessly to revitalize Taiwan's economy. By taking measures such as guaranteeing 100% bank deposits, substantially lowering interest rate in seven instances, investing 16 billion US dollars in domestic infrastructure in 5 years, distributing 2.7 billion U.S. dollars worth of shopping vouchers, and providing emergency assistance for the underprivileged, my administration has successfully brought the economy out of the downturn after a year and a half. Now we expect to create about a quarter of a million jobs to bring the unemployment rate below 5% and GDP growth up to 4.72% this year. Job creation will remain our top priority, especially those in the green energy sector. With carbon reduction in mind, we are now ambitiously promoting innovation across all of Taiwan's most competitive sectors. These include the country's traditional strongholds such as IT, agriculture, and healthcare as well as other emerging industries like green energy, biotech, tourism and the cultural creative industries. However, the growing trend towards regional integration among economic powerhouses in East Asia, like Japan, mainland China, South Korea and the ASEAN countries, is threatening to marginalize Taiwan's heavily export-driven economy. As such, my administration has been seeking to institutionalize economic relations with mainland China and diversify our export markets and products so that Taiwan will not only avoid being cut off from the global economy but also enhance its international competitiveness. Therefore, we have been pushing hard for an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with the mainland that will serve as a critical structural platform for economic interaction between the two sides. On top of intellectual property rights protection and investment guarantee, the framework will include an early harvest package of goods and services to enjoy zero custom tariffs. The negotiations are already underway and expect to conclude in the next few months. We have also established government programs that will cushion potential shocks to industries and workers, especially small- and medium-sized enterprises. Although some assert that signing the ECFA with mainland China will compromise our sovereignty, this is definitely not the case. The top priority of my administration has always been the principle of ``putting Taiwan first for the benefit of the people.'' The truth of the matter, ECFA will spearhead Taiwan's return to the accelerated track for economic integration in Asia-Pacific and beyond. This without a doubt will strengthen Taiwan's capabilities to enhance its competitive edge in the global market and brighten its outlook for negotiating similar arrangements with other countries. IV. Cross-Strait Rapprochement and Flexible Diplomacy In the pursuit of power my administration is not merely seeking military strength but more importantly to build up our soft power. In fact, the heart of my foreign policy is to reestablish mutual trust with all our major international partners, especially the United States. In achieving this goal, my administration has worked incessantly to transform the Taiwan Straits from a major flashpoint into a conduit for regional peace and prosperity. Therefore, in order to resume constructive dialogue with the mainland after a hiatus of over a decade, we first announced in 2008 the policy of ``No Unification, No Independence, No Use of Force'' so as to maintain the status quo across the Taiwan Strait under the framework of the Republic of China's 1946 Constitution, This breakthrough was further advanced under the framework of the 92 Consensus of ``one China, respective interpretations'' that was reached by the two sides in November 1992. That is now deemed a feasible formula by government leaders across the Taiwan Strait as well as many in the wider world community. We have also adopted a policy of Flexible Diplomacy and pursued a diplomatic truce with the mainland, which has by and large ended the vicious cycle of diplomatic warfare between the two sides. This will assuredly foster responsible stakeholdership in both Taiwan as well as the mainland. At the same time, we are working equally hard to enhance Taiwan's meaningful participation in and contribution to the international community. This will be achieved through our strong initiative to develop Taiwan's green technology and healthcare industries in conjunction with our foreign aid policies. For example, under the Flagship Program for Green Energy Industry, we will be building up Taiwan's industrial base in green technology especially in Photo voltaic solar cells and LED. This will not only benefit our people and economy, but more importantly, Taiwan will be able to share its resources and expertise with our allies and friends. On my visit to our Pacific island allies last month, I was proud to survey firsthand the work that Taiwan has done for some of the countries in the area. For example, Taiwan has installed and provided solar energy technology to the Solomon Islands in hopes of improving the environment and livelihoods of their people. Taiwan has also set up an impressive medical mission in the Marshall Islands to treat the high prevalence of cataracts sufferers. In fact, our government will boost the overall effectiveness of our medical aid by initiating many more medical and public health missions that will target specific conditions and diseases common among the people of the Pacific island allies and friends. At the same time, after Taiwan effectively controlled the spread of the H1N1 Flu within our own borders, with a mortality rate of 2 deaths per million, which is only 1/3 of the average for OECD countries, I am proud to report that Taiwan will also be giving away locally manufactured vaccines worth 5 million US dollars to other countries in need. Taiwan's search and rescue teams were also one of the first on the scenes when Haiti was hit by a devastating earthquake earlier this year. In addition to donating $16 million worth in aid and funds, our government is also planning to set up medical and vocational training centers to train for hundreds of medical and skilled workers, and build 1,200 housing units. Also, as a sign of Taiwan's flourishing civil society, World Vision Taiwan has collected countless small donations from our people that will be sufficient to feed and save more than 8,000 homeless Haitian children and orphans. However, my administration realizes humanitarian relief is only a small part of the long and challenging road to full recovery. This is why we hope to continue the work we have started in integrating the advances we make in healthcare and green technology into our foreign aid framework, so that Taiwan can truly make a meaningful difference in the countries we help. V. The Universal Value of Freedom and Democracy However, coming back full circle, the search for a modern nation cannot merely lie upon the pillars of wealth and power. It is only under a true democracy that one's citizens can live without fear according to the law, and share in the burdens as well as benefits of good governance. Although Taiwan has made impressive sociopolitical progress over the last decades, it is still a young democracy. So, as firm champions for democracy, my administration will work to strengthen the democratic infrastructure of my country. Already we are taking tangible steps to enhance Taiwan's rule of law and protection of human rights in conformity with international standards. In the past year, we have ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), both administered by the United Nations. In converting these covenants into domestic law, they will certainly strengthen the human rights of our citizenry and further consolidate our rule of law. Furthermore, I came to power on the promise of combating corruption in elections and government, whereby we have already made meaningful progress. Without a doubt this goal will continue to be a cornerstone of my presidency, which I am determined to carry through in my capacity as the President of the country. I will assuredly not waver from the path in laying the foundations of a true democracy. In fact, next year in 2011 will be the Centennial Anniversary of the Republic of China. Against the background of thousands of years of Chinese history, the last century was in some ways merely a comma. But from a larger perspective, it was nothing short of an exclamation mark, as it has been 100 years of struggle; 100 years of experimentation and 100 years of education before a people learned that they too have the unequivocal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This nation-building process undoubtedly was achieved through the collective efforts of countless dedicated individuals who traversed between tradition and modernity that helped bridge the East to the West so many years ago. Inevitably, this made it possible for a people to aspire to the same democratic values as you cherish. From the chaos arising out of the turn of the 20th century, to the founding of the first republic in Asia in 1912 and its evolution forward in 1949 when the Republic of China Government moved to Taiwan, in 1987 when Taiwan lifted martial law, launched its democratic transformation, and subsequently allowed Taiwan residents to visit their relatives on the mainland, in 1996 when people on Taiwan directly elected its president for the first time, and in 2000 and 2008 when the presidential elections further consolidated Taiwan's democracy through two rotations of power between political parties, the passage of these 100 years has irrevocably transformed the foundations of a political culture. Distinguished faculty members and students, ladies and gentlemen, as the elected president of the Republic of China, I will continue to strive toward forging Taiwan into an exemplary democracy; one that will be a source of inspiration and emulation for generations to come. Thank you. Dear distinguished faculty, students and friends; it is my great pleasure to hold this teleconference with you. Your questions and comments are very good, and some are very tough to answer, but in thinking and answering these questions you force me to think deeper and strive harder on the challenges that confront the road ahead. Although today's conference is near an end, I am heartened by the thought that our friendship will continue to grow as there is still so much we need to do, together. The international system that the US forged out of the devastation of World War II 65 years ago has today become the enduring foundation of our global village. Being rule-based and sufficiently flexible, this system encourages positive- sum international cooperation rather than zero-sum inter- state conflict. Hence, it changed the underlying dynamics of the world order that made it possible for countries, big or small, to prosper together. As a matter of fact, my idea to seek rapprochement with the mainland find some similarities with the ideas espoused by the American leaders in having soft talks with the Soviet Union and to have detente. In other words, to replace confrontation with negotiations; to solve international disputes through peaceful means. It is this very system that has interlocked the world into a community of thriving interdependence, giving rise to the possibility where foes can turn into friends, where every country can be a winner and every contribution become part of a greater picture. This is also the system from which I draw my inspiration to lead my country, particularly in dealing with the mainland. In taking a responsible stake in the world, and in seeking rapprochement with the Chinese mainland, my administration has committed the Republic of China on Taiwan to becoming a dependable and valuable contributor to this international system. In my visit abroad last month, I kept saying to our friends or to the overseas Taiwanese and to members of my delegations, that what I tried to do as far as my country's foreign relations is concerned is to make Taiwan a respectable member of the international community. I want every Taiwanese when they walk in the streets of New York, of Paris, of Sydney, of Beijing that they are respected. People will say they are from Taiwan, and that Taiwan is a respectful country in the world. Some in my domestic audience may disagree with me, but I firmly believe that this is the right path for Taiwan to avoid being marginalized from the forward march of the rest of the world. However, we will not merely concentrate on our own interests but equally apply our resources in hopes of having a positive impact on the world community. In fact, under this system that the United States started over half a century ago, we, as a whole, ought to be able to right what has gone wrong; to unite as one humanity against the global crises that threatens all that we hold dear, whether climate change, the global economic downturn, the risk of pandemics, or the wars that endanger the peace of our world. In the end, we are the only ones that can overcome the challenges we face. And in such an important partnership, I am confident Taiwan will be there to live up to its responsibilities.