Bruce Braley

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate Bruce Beyer, a remarkable constituent of mine from Davenport, Iowa, who was recently awarded the Army's Outstanding Individual with Disability Award. I'm proud that Bruce was one of 16 employees honored at the DOD Disability Awards ceremony in December for his contributions to the Army Sustainment Command at Rock Island Arsenal. Bruce has been in a wheelchair since a bicycle accident in 1982 left him a quadriplegic without the use of his arms. According to his boss, Bruce Angus, who nominated him, Bruce is an inspiration to everyone around him and exemplifies the tenet that the only true disability in life is a bad attitude. Bruce is active in raising awareness about people with disabilities by training managers through the arsenal's Windmill Program, by serving as a counselor in the Rock Island-Milan School District, and by conducting seminars in assistive technology and advocacy for disabled individuals. Bruce is a model of perseverance and a source of pride for the First District of Iowa, and I join his family, friends, colleagues and community in congratulating him on receiving this honor, and I'm thanking and commending him for his incredible contributions to the arsenal and the Quad Cities community.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the achievements of African Americans in celebration of Black History Month. I find it quite fitting to address the House on this particular date when, in 1869, John Menard, the first African American elected to Congress, presented his case for being unfairly denied his seat as a Representative for the Second Congressional District of Louisiana. His testimony made him the first African American to address Congress on the House floor. Now, almost 140 years later, we bear witness to the fruits of his labor by having 41 African American Members of the U.S. House and 1 African American Member of the United States Senate. That's why I'm so proud to represent the First District of Iowa where, in this great State, we have created a legacy of diversity and our own mark in history. Iowa was home to Lulu Johnson, the first African American woman to receive a Ph.D. It is also home to 12 of the Tuskegee Airmen. Iowa State University, my alma mater, educated George Washington Carver and also houses Jack Trice Stadium, the only division 1-A football stadium to be named in honor of an African American. Iowa State also educated the current highest ranking African American health policy adviser in the U.S. House of Representatives, Mr. Aranthan Jones. It's these types of accomplishments that inspire me to continue to work and stand up for people of all backgrounds fighting for justice and working toward equality.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, this week the President unveiled his final budget proposal, and like previous budgets, it fails to properly address the needs and concerns that are central to the everyday lives of our constituents. Perhaps most troubling is the fact that the Bush budget continues the President's legacy of fiscal irresponsibility and leaves behind a $407 billion deficit. The five largest deficits in American history have all occurred on the President's watch. When President Bush took office, the debt stood at $5.7 trillion, and it is projected to stand at $9.7 trillion by the time President Bush leaves office. This fiscal record ties the hands of the next generation, which faces growing obligations with increasingly limited resources. The Bush budget also hurts Americans struggling to make ends meet by cutting Medicare and Medicaid, and the low income home energy assistance program. This budget also hurts our long-term efforts to prepare Americans for better jobs in the global marketplace by slashing important education and literacy programs. Mr. Speaker, the American people do not want more of the same. This Democratic Congress will propose a budget alternative that takes America in a new direction.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. One of the things I would like to ask both of my friends to comment on is how the Bush administration has known about this problem dating clear back to 2003 when the CBS 60 Minutes story aired, and what has happened since that time and what the attitude of the administration is in trying to justify it, this veto. One of the things that we know is that a number of Members of Congress and a number of influential Members of Congress in both parties were outraged because of the fact that some of these POWs were constituents of theirs, and when the White House moved to intervene and make sure that these judgements could not be collected, took very strong action and took and used very strong language to try to convince the administration not to do this. One of those individuals is someone we all know who is the current majority leader of the Senate, Senator Harry Reid from Nevada. And when this story aired in November of 2003, Majority Leader Reid said, I hope George Bush, the President of the United States, doesn't know about this because if he knows about it, if he knows about it, it is a pox on his house, his White House. This is wrong. Well, that was in 2003. And now we are 5 years later. There can be no doubt that this President knew what he was doing when he issued this veto, and yet when his press secretary has been questioned as to why the administration felt the need to take away the rights of victims of torture to full and fair compensation, they say the same thing over and over again which is, no amount of money could compensate these victims for their terrible injuries. Well, when the judge who heard this case issued his decision awarding damages, he noted that, and yet that's not what this case is about. This case is about putting some measure of value on what these torture victims went through, what their families went through who were watching these shots on TV of their loved ones, who were hearing these tales of torture and fearing for the lives and safety of their loved ones. Why would our government, why would our President say that the value of the Iraqi people was greater than the value of these tortured Americans? That's what the fundamental question is we are here to talk about tonight. And I would yield to my friend from Minnesota.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Well, Madam Speaker, I think my friend from Minnesota has hit this one on the head, because one of the things you were talking about is the administration's interpretation of what our treaty obligations are under the Geneva Convention. And maybe it all boils down to this very simple question: When is torture torture? Because you brought up the fact that our own Government, our own Justice Department, seems to have a difficult time interpreting acts such as waterboarding, that I think every American who has seen the video illustrating what that is would conclude that it constitutes torture in violation of the third Geneva Convention. And yet it is hard for us as a people and as a government to try to say, we need to stand up to other countries who are torturing our POWs if we can't get it ourselves in terms of our obligations under the Geneva Convention. I think it gets to a much more fundamental question, which is, are we going to be the type of country that stands by our word when we enter in these international treaties? These treaties are designed not just to protect American prisoners of war but to make sure that the countries that we may be in conflict with have the same respect for human rights, human dignity and human decency for captured prisoners that we would expect our men and women in uniform to be subjected to. To give you some idea of how this plays out in the real world, I would remind my friend from Minnesota of what happened to Lieutenant Colonel Berryman, one of the people I identified as the POWs that brought this claim. This really gets to the heart of many of those constitutional protections I talked about earlier. Lieutenant Colonel Berryman was inspected after he was captured to determine whether he was circumcised and was questioned about his religion. When he answered he was a Baptist, his captors called him a lying Jew. A guard then hit his left leg below the knee that felt like a heavy club. Lieutenant Colonel Berryman immediately collapsed in excruciating pain because the blow had broken the fibula, one of the bones in his lower left leg. Another guard used a similar club to attack his right leg, and the two guards continued beating him as he rolled on the floor to protect his leg. As he continued to resist answering questions, which is exactly what my friend mentioned, Lieutenant Colonel Berryman was told that if he did not answer their questions, they would break his other legs. Two guards pinned him to the wall and one kicked him in the left leg causing him to collapse to the ground in pain. The others began kicking and beating him. And one guard used a steel-towed boot to kick a piece of flesh out of Lieutenant Colonel Berryman's leg exposing the bone. Then a lit cigarette was pressed several times against his forehead and then pressed against his nose and each ear and then was crushed out in an open wound on his neck. What American listening to that testimony would not be overwhelmed with rage and with a sense of passion and compassion for the person that was subjected to that? That's why, in my humble opinion, Madam Speaker, when we set policy on this floor about how we are going to stand up for the people who serve this country who may become prisoners of war or who may become hostages, it's important that we keep in mind that the rule of law will only be respected if we in this country stand up for it and say that the rule of law is what we are all about in the way we are going to take care of our citizens. And with that, I would like to yield to my colleague from the great State of New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) and ask what your reaction is to some of the things we've been talking about tonight. What do you think the good people of New Hampshire would think if they knew their President and their government had done what we have done to deny the opportunity to compensate these victims of torture?

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I think you have hit a very important point in talking about what this law was originally designed to accomplish. This law was not designed to open the floodgates for any potential claim arising from persons engaged in armed conflict around the world against the countries where that conflict occurred. In fact, this law that allowed these claims to be pursued in the first place set a very high bar before you could even begin to pursue them. Number one, there had to be a declaration by the State Department that the nation involved in torture was a state sponsor of terrorism, which, as you know, that is an incredibly harsh accusation to make in the world community. So in order for the State Department to reach that conclusion, they would have to be presented with overwhelming evidence that a country was engaged in the state sponsor of terrorism. And when the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq invaded Kuwait, that is when the State Department acted to declare, based upon what was happening and what was outraging people all over the world, that indeed that government was a state sponsor of terror at that time. So that was the first threshold that these hostages and POWs had to meet. The second was that they were tortured under the definitions of international law, which is much more egregious than simply being involved in a firefight and being wounded or having something that is expected to happen in the normal course of conflict, which is always an impossible arena to control. But we are talking about a deliberate decision to torture individual citizens in violation of all accepted principles of international law. And then after you pass those two hurdles, these victims of torture also had to prove that the acts that they were being tortured for would be the type of claims that they could pursue in the courts of law of this country. And the gentleman from Minnesota, Madam Speaker, made another excellent point, and that is this is consistent with the pattern of behavior we have seen from this administration for the past 7 years to take away the rights of individuals who have been harmed due to no fault of their own and to substitute the judgment of this body and State legislatures for what juries have been doing in this country since before it was formed. And what I like to remind my colleagues is there is something that we all take an oath to defend when we serve in this body. It is called the United States Constitution. And part of that Constitution is something we hold and cherish, which is the Bill of Rights. And it includes the freedom of speech that we all cherish every day on this floor. It includes the freedom of religion, the freedom to associate, the freedom of the press. It includes the right to bear arms. But it also includes the seventh amendment to the Constitution that guarantees that juries get to determine facts like what the issues are we are talking about here today, what is fair compensation for someone who has been subjected to torture. Madam Speaker, one of the things that I think is most disturbing about the issues we are talking about on the floor tonight is that the President and his spokesperson don't like to talk about what happened to these POWs. It is unpleasant, and it brings to mind in the hearts of all Americans, how could we let this happen to people serving this country who have put up with so much and been through so much and then get them to the point where they can hold their offenders accountable, and who comes in and pulls the rug out from under them? Not the Iraqi Government, but the President of the United States who directed his Attorney General to intervene in these claims and see that the assets were not available to satisfy them. Let's just take a moment, Madam Speaker, to talk about one of those victims that I mentioned earlier, Colonel Cliff Acree. Here is what he said in that 60 Minutes interview that I referred to earlier: They had broken my nose many times and I was just getting used, you just kind of get used to it. Colonel Acree was shot down the second day of the war. The interrogations always began the same way, and these are his words: They would have these six or eight people just beat you for 10, 15, 20 minutes. Just no questions asked. Bring you into the room and beat you with fists, feet, clubs, whatever. One of the other victims, Dale Storr, that I mentioned, who was serving in the National Guard at this time said: Hearing Cliff talk about it, we never really talk like this before in such detail. But it brings back memories. It is almost like I am back in my cell again. Another victim, Jeff Tice, who was captured after his F-16 was hit by a surface-to-air missile, and, Madam Speaker, he was tortured with a device called the ``talkman.'' And what they would do is they would wrap a wire around the ear of one of these prisoners, another wire underneath their chin, then wrap it around the other ear and hook it up to an electrical device. Then they would start to question him. And this is what Jeff Tice said: They would turn on the juice. And what it does is it creates a ball of lightning in your mind or in your head, drives all the muscles simultaneously together, and it drives your jaw and everything together, and of course I am chained to a chair. I can't move freely. So everything is jerking into a little ball, and your teeth are being forced together with such force, I am breaking pieces and parts off. Jeff Tice's jaw was dislocated so many times that he was lucky, as he said, that they were able to put it back into place. And now, I am going to yield to my colleague from Minnesota. After hearing some of these descriptions and having had the experience of having young students of yours that you taught in Minnesota join the Minnesota National Guard, which along with the 133rd of the Iowa National Guard has served the longest single deployment of any combat unit in the war in Iraq, what type of message does that send to those young men and women who you helped to train, you helped to educate, and who are going off to serve their country, knowing that if they get captured and held as a POW their Government is not going to be there for them?

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, I was sitting at home over the holiday recess spending time with my family when I became aware of the fact that the President had vetoed the Defense Authorization bill that we passed in this body shortly before we adjourned. And like most of my colleagues, I was surprised by that veto and I wanted to learn more about the basis, the reasoning behind the decision of the President to withhold pay increases to our men and women in uniform who are serving us in very heavily conflicted areas around the world, and why the President would veto a bill that would increase funding for Veterans' Administration health care benefits to our Nation's aging veterans and our most recent veterans who are in serious need of those medical services. And so I got a copy of the President's veto statement and I read it, and, quite frankly, I was shocked. I was shocked, Madam Speaker, because, as I saw the President's basis for the veto, I was taken back to a time several years ago when I was watching a 60 Minutes story about tortured U.S. prisoners of war from our first Gulf War. And when I learned that the basis for the President's veto was to keep U.S. POWs who had been brutally beaten and tortured by Saddam Hussein's thugs in the first Gulf War from receiving compensation for those injuries, I was ashamed for my country. To give you some idea of what we're talking about, these were the words that Mike Wallace uttered on 60 Minutes at the beginning of the program on November 20, 2003: During the first Gulf War against Iraq in 1991, a number of American soldiers who were captured and became prisoners of war were brutally, brutally tortured by the Iraqis. Eventually, though, the POWs came home, put the pieces of their lives back together, and largely remained out of the public eye. But today, a different battle is being fought by some of those American POWs all these years after they returned. It was back in 1991 that the POWs came home from Iraq to a hero's welcome and were greeted by the then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Collin Powell and then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. ``Your country is opening its arms to greet you,'' said Cheney. Many of the POWs had suffered wounds both physical and psychological. Some of them suffer to this day more than a decade after they were captured and appeared on Iraqi TV. And, Madam Speaker, to put a human face on these tortured American POWs, I am going to put up a photograph of Commander Jeffrey Zaun, who was a tortured Gulf War POW, who had a very visible presence on TV because of the attempt by Saddam Hussein's government to use him as an example and try to convince the American people to give up the cause that was the purpose for defending the invasion of Kuwait from the aggression of the Iraqi army. Commander Jeffrey Zaun was one of those POWs who was brutally tortured by the Iraqis and was part of a group of POWs who took action to try to hold the Iraqi Government accountable and to serve as a deterrent to other nations like Iraq who would dare to use American hostages and American POWs as a way of exacting their political agenda through torture and abuse in violation of international law, in violation of international treaties. So how did we get to this point? During the Gulf War against Iraq, these captured POWs that we've been talking about were subsequently tortured, beaten, starved, hooked up to electric shock devices, and subjected to other horrendous acts by Saddam Hussein's regime. At the time these acts occurred, the United States Department of State had classified Iraq as a state sponsor of terrorism. Madam Speaker, during the Gulf War, this very Congress that I stand in today had passed two resolutions by unanimous consent, stating the intention of the Congress to hold Iraq accountable for the torture of American POWs. Yet when these same brave American POWs returned home after the Gulf War ended, what did our current Vice President and then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney tell them? ``Your country is opening its arms to greet you.'' Well, where I come from in Iowa, opening your arms to take care of tortured and wounded people means doing a lot more than ignoring their needs. And yet that is exactly what happened to these unfortunate POWs. They have suffered long-term physical, emotional, and mental damages as a result of brutal state-sponsored torture. And in 1996 Congress, responding to their concerns, raised by these international law violations, passed an amendment to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act so that torture victims like the American POWs we are talking about could seek compensation for their injuries from terrorist countries including Iraq. On April 4 of 2002, 17 POWs and their families filed claims in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking compensation for damages related to their torture and abuse by the government of Iraq. These POWs included many decorated officers in this Nation's military, people like Colonel Clifford Acree, Lieutenant Colonel Craig Berryman, Sergeant Troy Dunlap, Colonel David Eberly, Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey D. Fox, Chief Warrant Officer Guy Hunter, Sergeant David Lockett, Lieutenant Colonel Michael Robert, Lieutenant Colonel Russell Sanborn, Major Joseph Small, Staff Sergeant Daniel Stamaris, Lieutenant Colonel Richard Dale Storr, Major Robert Sweet, Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey Tice, Lieutenant Colonel Robert Wetzel, and, of course, Commander Jeffrey Zaun. I am on the floor tonight with some of my colleagues in the freshmen class so that these names do not fade into history and the abuse that they were subjected to does not get lost in the politics of a Presidential veto. In 2003, after the Government of Iraq repeatedly refused to participate in arbitration on these damage claims and after hearing evidence about how these POWs had been repeatedly tortured, a judge awarded them damages and indicated that the purpose of deterring torture of POWs should be one of the highest priorities of our government. And, Madam Speaker, the reason why what we're talking about is so important is because the United States, like many countries, is a signatory to international treaties designed to protect the treatment of U.S. POWs and other prisoners of war and the most important treaty is the Third Geneva Convention that was entered into on August 12 of 1949. One of the most important provisions that came out of the Third Geneva Convention is Article 131, and the reason that I am so outraged by the President's veto, Madam Speaker, is because Article 131 prohibits the very conduct that the President engaged in in vetoing this legislation because the Geneva Convention Article 131 provides no country shall be allowed to absolve itself or any other country of any liability related to prohibited treatment of prisoners of war. And there is no doubt, there is no question, that the abuse of American POWs by Saddam Hussein's regime constituted the type of torture prohibited by the Third Geneva Convention. I am proud to welcome to this hour the president of our freshmen class, the majority makers, my good friend from the southern part of Minnesota who has been a terrific leader in our class, who has been a passionate spokesman on fighting for veterans, fighting for our men and women in uniform, and he brings a very personal perspective to that based on his longstanding service in the National Guard of this country. And without further ado, I am going to yield to my friend and colleague, Mr. Walz from Minnesota.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I thank my friend so much for those eloquent words. It's amazing how much we can learn from our former enemies, the words you shared. Why do you care so much for those you lost long ago? I am just going to close with two examples from my district. While I was home over the holiday recess, the remains were brought back from North Korea of an Iowan from Buchanan County who had been lost long before I was born, and to see the touching way that his family and his friends placed those remains in the frozen Iowa soil is a poignant reminder of exactly why this country cares and won't forget. The other example, which is an actual positive benefit from this defense authorization bill is that when I was a college student during the Iranian hostage crisis, one of the best-known hostages was a woman who grew up in my district in Bremer County, Kathryn Koob. For people like Kathryn Koob and other Iranian hostages, there will be an opportunity to get the compensation they deserve for what they went through that no American should have to put up with. But it's also a reflection of this administration's foreign policy that we allow those claims to be pursued against a state-sponsored terrorism act that occurred in Iran, but we have taken away the rights of U.S. prisoners of war to recover compensation from state-sponsored terror in Iraq. Maybe that makes sense to some people, but it just doesn't pass the smell test in Iowa. With that, I would like to thank all of my colleagues, and I would also like to recognize my friend and roommate from Colorado, who I wasn't aware was with us. Mr. Perlmutter, we would like to have you close us out for the remaining time with your thoughts on this topic.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I thank you for those insightful comments. As our class president has stated on many occasions, we are blessed in this freshman class with incredible people who have had incredible life experiences that they bring to this body. One of my friends and mentors on the issues that we are talking about here today is my friend from Pennsylvania who has more real-world knowledge about how these international treaties impact the role of our military around the world than anyone else that I personally know. I would like to recognize my colleague from Pennsylvania, Joe Sestak, and ask him this question: When we are trying to teach the brave men and women who serve this country about their role in combat and about their role as potential POWs, what type of message do we send them when we have a President who has taken the action that this President has that goes against everything we believe and about the role of the rule of law and its strong force in preventing other states or nations from terrorizing and torturing our citizens?

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I want to thank you for sharing that story. It is not in my district. It is in Congressman Latham's district. It's the largest geographic county in Iowa, and it borders on your district. And one of the things that's unique about the county seat of Kossuth County is that it was also a prisoner-of-war camp for German soldiers who were captured and transported to the United States during World War II. And to this day, the townspeople of Algona cherished the creche that was built by German POWs that they used every year during their Christmas celebration as a symbol of exactly what my friend is talking about which is this: It is nothing more simple than the Golden Rule that you treat other people the way you would like to be treated. And one of the things that has been missing from our foreign policy is an appreciation for the role that this country plays as the sole remaining superpower to set the standard, the gold standard, for how we live up to the responsibilities we willingly entered into as part of the a Nation and a community of nations that come together and enter into treaties for our mutual benefit. I look forward to hearing from another friend of ours in the freshman class who will be talking to us in a few minutes who has a deep and abiding appreciation for the importance of these concepts in the real practical reality of dealing with this in a global world full of problems that need the might and the force of the U.S. military to be a pacifying presence. I recognize my friend from New Hampshire, and I would like to ask her specifically, as someone who serves on the Armed Services Committee here on the House, and having heard through the past year the problems with our readiness standards for our men and women in uniform and the problems of torture that we have been talking about here tonight and what symbol we send to the rest of the world based upon our own conduct, what lessons have we learned as a country that you have become aware of during your service on the Armed Services Committee that have relevance to the topic we are talking about this evening.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, I rise today to salute the people of Maquoketa, Iowa, for their extraordinary sense of civic duty during the course of a severe fire that destroyed a sizable part of the city's historic downtown early Saturday morning. I also want to recognize the efforts of firefighters from Maquoketa and 27 surrounding communities to extinguish the blaze and keep it from consuming other downtown buildings. The fire was a blow to Maquoketa's historic downtown, completely destroying five buildings and causing severe damage to several businesses and homes. While the fire left behind physical and emotional scars, it also demonstrated what makes Iowa such a great place. Firefighters battled tirelessly through subzero temperatures and wind chills of 20 below zero to get the blaze under control. Meanwhile, hundreds of Maquoketa residents open their homes and businesses to provide warm shelter, hot food, and emotional support for the firefighters and residents impacted by the fire. Perhaps young Maquoketa resident Kalli Muhlhausen said it best: ``They have our hearts, and we have their backs.'' Iowans dismiss such an outpouring of generosity as simply ``the right thing to do,'' but the people of Maquoketa deserve a special thank you.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Concurrent Resolution 279, 110th Congress, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Like all of you, I spent time out of my district during the recess between the holidays and coming back this week. And I was shocked to visit Davenport, Iowa, the largest city in my district, and learn that Davenport leads the country per capita in the number of subprime mortgage foreclosures. And I know that all of you have constituents in your districts that are being impacted directly by the subprime crisis. And although our friend from Wisconsin certainly spent a lot of time talking about the Green Bay Packers, and I know that's heresy in the State of Minnesota, what I thought maybe we could do is share some of the personal stories we've heard from people who are directly impacted by these mortgage foreclosures by the need to convert their spending habits to credit rather than cash because they're being pinched in the middle, and put a human face on the problems we're talking about and why this economic stimulus package is so important. With that, I will yield back.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I have made this statement before, that my family wound up in Iowa because of one of the greatest Federal economic stimulus packages in history, something called the Homestead Act. One of my great great grandfathers, George Washington Braley, walked to Iowa from Northfield, Vermont, because of the Homestead Act. My other great great grandparents, John and Nancy, left Ireland during the potato famine and went there because of the Homestead Act. One of the first things they did was found a Presbyterian Church, which they named the Homestead Church because of the importance of that stimulus package in creating opportunity and hope for that generation of Americans. So my question to you, my friend, is as you look at your State now and the people that you have the privilege of representing here in Congress, what type of real world benefits are they going to receive from this stimulus package we are talking about to give hope and opportunity to the next generation of people from the Green Mountain State?

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Would the gentleman yield for a question about the great State of Vermont?

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the gentleman for yielding and also thank you for your outstanding leadership with this special time we get to share together here on the House floor. My district in northeast Iowa, the First District of Iowa, is in some ways very similar to yours, my friend, Mr. Walz's. It's the rust belt of Iowa. It's got a lot of agricultural, manufacturing history, and I think it's a microcosm of what you've been talking about. We have great manufacturers that I'm fortunate enough to have in my district, companies like John Deere that have been around for years and have stayed in the communities providing jobs and opportunity. But we've also had a tremendous impact on our economy in Iowa this year from our loss of our Maytag plant in Newton, one of those manufacturers that people know as a brand name that used to be on the game shows we used to watch as kids growing up. And then just recently, the Schaeffer Pen Company in Fort Madison closed after over 100 years of being one of those symbols of what American manufacturers can produce. Those aren't just losses of jobs to people in those communities. The ripple effect throughout those communities in terms of people who move out and leave a void of volunteers who work in community service organizations, who work as mentors to the next generation of leaders that are going to be responsible for leading this country in a great new direction, those are the disturbing trends we never hear about from the President when he's talking about the rosy state of the economy. And one of the things that brought all of us here to Congress is our sense that the middle class was increasingly being shut out of the American Dream, that the opportunity for our children and the next generation of children to follow them was being limited by economic policies that did not provide incentive for the middle-class entrepreneurs to make risks and create jobs and provide opportunities in their home communities. And what we want to do as a Congress is make sure that our fiscal policies are creating those types of opportunities in our own districts and throughout this country, because that's what's going to make us competitive in the 21st century. So what I'd like to do at this time is let my friend Mr. Yarmuth, who comes from the great State of Kentucky and has probably a different perspective on what he sees in his home district, share with us some of the things he observes that are directly related to the state of the economy that brings us here tonight.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Glenn Cannon on his retirement as general manager of Waverly Power and Light Company. At the end of the past year, Glenn retired after a 17 year career with Waverly Power and Light. Waverly Power and Light is a municipal electric utility that is owned by the city of Waverly, a town of 9,000 people in northeast Iowa. Over the past 17 years, Glenn served as the driving force behind the success of Waverly Power and Light. Glenn's efforts allowed the company to lead the way for wind energy development across the Midwest. In 1993, under Glenn's leadership, the company installed the first utility-scale wind turbine in Iowa. Today, Iowa has approximately 350 wind turbines and ranks third in the Nation for wind energy development. Iowa, and America, are following Glenn's lead. In 2001, Waverly Power and Light launched the Iowa Energy Tags Program becoming the first electric utility in the Nation to offer green tags, which verify that electricity was generated from a renewable energy source. In 2002, thanks to Glenn's leadership, Waverly Power and Light received the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Paul Rappaport Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Award. Glenn accepted the award on behalf of the company and the city of Waverly. Glenn has dedicated his life to the promotion and development of wind power and renewable energies. His work has proven that communities in Iowa and across the country can be powered by clean renewable energies. I am proud to be representing Glenn and the Waverly Power and Light Company in Congress. I am happy to hear that Glenn will be continuing his work to promote and develop renewable energies. He will be serving as a consultant for the promotion of wind power, energy efficiency and soy-bean transformer oils. I wish him the best in all his endeavors.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my serious concerns that inadequate oversight, deficient procedures, and ethical lapses at the Department of Interior's Minerals Management Service (MMS) are costing the Federal Government millions of dollars each year. The MMS is responsible for negotiating, implementing and overseeing all Federal leases for resources removed by private companies from public lands, and it is supposed to be a guardian of our Nation's precious public resources. Unfortunately, evidence suggests that the cozy relationships between MMS officials and oil and gas companies have allowed these companies to underreport the resources they remove from Federal lands and underpay the royalties they owe to the Federal Government. Evidence that MMS has failed to detect and pursue these violations by oil and gas companies is especially troubling as gas prices continue to rise, corporations make record profits, and average Americans are struggling to fill their gas tanks and make ends meet. Most hard-working, taxpaying Americans would be outraged to know that these companies are cheating the Government out of these royalties which are a critical source of revenue for the U.S. Treasury and which would allow us to invest in other priorities.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, today we will consider legislation that invests in the future of our Nation and puts us on the path to energy independence. The Energy Independence and Security Act is a significant legislative package that will strengthen our national security by reducing our dependence on foreign oil. The bill addresses skyrocketing gas prices with increased fuel economy standards that will save American families 700 to $1,000 a year at the pump. It also reduces oil consumption by 1.1 million gallons per day in 2020, one half of what we currently import from the Persian Gulf. And this legislation includes a historic commitment to American biofuels that will fuel our cars and trucks. This investment in hometown crops will create American jobs and protect the environment by reducing carbon emissions. Madam Speaker, the Energy Independence and Security Act will help our Nation invest in resources in the Midwest to improve our environment, instead of relying on Mideastern countries for pollution-heavy fossil fuels. I hope all my colleagues in the House and Senate will support this legislation and help reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate John Glenn Elementary School in Donahue, IA. This week, John Glenn Elementary received the 2007 No Child Left Behind Blue Ribbon School Award. John Glenn Elementary was one of only five schools in Iowa, and 1 of only 289 of 133,000 eligible schools in the country to receive this award. The Blue Ribbon School Award is given annually to a select number of schools that demonstrate dramatic gains in student achievement. Schools that have received the Blue Ribbon Award are seen as national models that other schools can learn from. John Glenn Elementary clearly fits this role and should be used as a model for other schools in Iowa and throughout the country. The students and faculty at John Glenn Elementary think of themselves as not just another elementary school, but a family. Every day, they actively work with each other and help each other to achieve the goals the school has set forth. John Glenn Elementary has also gained a reputation for being not only a great elementary school, but an active leader in the community. The school has an ongoing alliance with Big Brothers, Big Sisters and operates a volunteer grandparents program. It is clear that John Glenn Elementary has served not only the children that attend the school, but the community as well. Yesterday, I had the honor of meeting Principal C.J. Albertson and Cindy Irwin, a 5th Grade teacher at John Glenn Elementary. I applaud Principal Albertson, Ms. Irwin, and the entire faculty at John Glenn Elementary for their commitment to public education and the development of our children. All of their hard work and dedication has made John Glenn Elementary one of the best schools in the country. I'm proud to be representing John Glenn Elementary School in Congress and look forward to hearing of their continued success in North Scott County.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall vote No. 1060, had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall vote No. 1061, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall vote No. 1062, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall vote No. 1063, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall vote No. 1064, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall vote No. 1065, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall vote No. 1066, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall vote No. 1067, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3997, the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act. I am especially pleased that this bill includes a crucial provision from H.R. 3736, the Combat Pay Tax Flexibility Act, which I recently introduced to permanently allow members of the Armed Forces to treat combat pay as earned income in calculating their Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). Because income earned while serving in a combat zone is exempt from income taxes, many low-income military families recently faced the loss or reduction of their EITC, as deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan shifted their income to nontaxable combat pay. While Congress acted to fix this problem by providing troops the option of calculating combat pay for the EITC, without further Congressional action this tax credit will expire at the end of the year. I introduced the Combat Pay Tax Flexibility Act to ensure that this tax savings provision is always there for the military families that need it. Soldiers who serve in hostile places make a great sacrifice for our country, and the least we can do is help them make the most of the tax savings available to them. I would like to thank Chairman Rangel for working with me to incorporate the Combat Pay Tax Flexibility Act into the legislation before us today, and for moving this legislation swiftly. I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 3997 today to ensure that our troops have the financial resources they need throughout the cycle of deployment.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, due to a flight delay on my return trip from Iowa to Washington on November 5, 2007, I unavoidably missed rollcall votes Nos. 1034, 1035, and 1036. Had I been present, on rollcall vote No. 1034, I would have voted ``yea.'' As a co-sponsor of H.R. 513, the National Heroes Credit Protection Act, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote No. 1035. I am pleased that this important bill, which would protect the credit ratings of military servicemembers and alleviate financial stress for troops serving our country in Iraq and Afghanistan, passed the House unanimously. On rollcall vote No. 1036, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, the American people agree with the Democratic Congress: It is time to begin responsibly redeploying our troops from Iraq and investing much-needed funds here at home. Instead of beginning to spend less money in Iraq, the President is once again asking Congress to do more; a lot more. Just last week, President Bush increased his request for additional Iraq funding to a total of $189 billion next year, bringing the total cost for the war so far to over $800 billion. Yet, the President has never proposed any way to offset this massive spending; instead, sinking our Nation deeper into debt. This Democratic Congress and the American public have a different set of priorities. We believe in being fiscally responsible and implemented a pay-as-you-go system to stop piling debt on the backs of our Nation's children. That is why our children's health legislation, which helps 10 million children receive the health care coverage they deserve, is fully paid for. Madam Speaker, the President's fiscal priorities are irresponsible and misplaced. He should be reducing the amount we are spending in Iraq so that we can again invest in domestic priorities, like children's health care.