Yvette Clarke

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. And women's rights.

Ms. CLARKE. Together, we will.

Ms. CLARKE. That's right.

Ms. CLARKE. A fraction of the cost, my colleague; a fraction of the cost of what we are spending every day to build democracies overseas. He is not willing to invest in strengthening our democracy here at home. It is fundamental. It just almost seems like a bad dream. Another thing that the President has said, the SCHIP proposal would move millions of American children who now have private health insurance into government-run health care. What planet is he on, Doctor? The main impact of this bill would be extending coverage to low-income children who would otherwise be uninsured.

Ms. CLARKE. When we look at our families and communities, they are called upon to do so much all the time. But these are very special times we are in. It calls for us to multitask. It calls for us to go above the call of duty to address real life-and-death issues. SCHIP is a life-and-death issue. It is here, it is now, it is our neighbors. It is our coworkers' children. It is the folks who attend religious services with us. It is their children. We need to call our representatives, e-mail our representatives. We need to make sure that the Speaker's office, the whip's office, the majority leader's office, we need to make sure that we make our voices heard, jam the phone lines.

Ms. CLARKE. No, he didn't.

Ms. CLARKE. Their pastors, their imams, and their rabbis. We need to make sure that our children are protected, and we have an opportunity to do so. We should not miss this opportunity. We don't know when it will come our way again. Just think about the lives in between, the children's lives in between that will be adversely impacted if we are unable to override the President's veto. We don't have any time to waste. The imperative is there. And I think there isn't a parent, an aunt, an uncle or grandparent who doesn't understand what it is to stay up late at night when their child is ill and to feel helpless. Compound that with the fact that you can't even go to a doctor until, as your President says, they are sick enough to be wheeled into an emergency room. There has got to be a better way, my colleagues.

Ms. CLARKE. We are already moving in a new direction. Under the leadership of our Speaker Nancy Pelosi, this Congress has risen to a new level of stridency and of focus with regard to the issues that are impacting every district across this Nation. So we have to be very clear. We may not see the tangible results right this second, but they are all lined up and we have already seen a number of really extraordinary pieces of legislation passed here in the House. We have even seen the College Cost Reduction Act signed into law. We should not overlook those things, and understand that none of that came easy for us. We had to put ourselves on the line. We had to stand up and be counted. We will do that again with SCHIP. This is just another bump in the road, but I believe without struggle there is no progress. We need to make sure that the American people, the parents, the grandparents, tune in and let their voices be known.

Ms. CLARKE. Let me start by thanking you, Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota, for leading the class of 2006 on the floor as we really get to the substance of a real disappointment to the American people today, which was the veto of our SCHIP legislation, the bipartisan SCHIP legislation, and just to say that when we provide for the least of these in our society, we are building a stronger Nation. When we recognize that no one is disposable in our society, we have an obligation to reach out and to provide for those who can't provide for themselves. If we take care of a child today who's low income, that child becomes a productive part of our society. They will be taking care of us as we grow older, and it's a cycle and it's a circle, and when we understand that, then we know how important this vote is coming up. And we want to urge our colleagues across party lines, hold the line on SCHIP, hold the line on SCHIP. Our low-income children, our children in our communities, our families who are just struggling to make ends meet need us to be there for them to override this veto. I want to thank my colleagues for having me in the class of 2006 and speaking out today and turn it over to my colleague, Dr. Kagen of Wisconsin.

Ms. CLARKE. What I think most Americans find most mind-boggling is just the mindset that our President has been in in terms of his whole rationale for the veto. He at one point said the SCHIP plan is an incremental step toward the goal of government-run health care for every American. I am saying to myself, first of all, there is a bit of hypocrisy here, because we have the Commander-in-Chief, who I believe gets a Federal health care plan himself, saying that we are moving towards government-run health care, when he knows in fact that government doctors and government health plans do not deliver the services of SCHIP. It is private doctors, private health care that do, under private insurance. So, there is this false justification he came up with. He at one point even talked about, well, the SCHIP bill, the proposal would result in taking a program meant to help poor children and turning it into one that covers children in households with incomes up to $83,000 a year. I am saying to myself, this bill does not expand eligibility for SCHIP. The focus of the bill is on expanding health care coverage for low-income children who have no health insurance. So there have been these false statements in justification of a decision that he made, which I really believe was in retribution, quite frankly. When we get to that level of angst, I guess, in our decisionmaking, it is time to sort of pack it up. I think right now it is important that, as a legislative body, we take control and consciousness of the moves that we have to make on behalf of the American people, because, obviously, our Commander-in- Chief has decided to submerge himself into a bipartisan fight with himself. We have said here that we agree as Democrats and Republicans that this is important, and he is off on a whole other planet.

Ms. CLARKE. First, let me just thank you as a member of the class of 2006 to be here with my colleagues this evening to really address what is a moral imperative. Taking care of our young, taking care of our elderly, being in a position to actually have our future secured by making sure that our children are healthy and well-focused, well- nourished and ready to compete in this Nation is a critical part of what makes America America. So to hear that this morning, before the President's coffee got cold, he had vetoed the SCHIP legislation, bipartisan legislation that we delivered to him on their behalf, was really disheartening. I think that it is imperative that Americans really press upon this body that we make sure that we override this veto. $3.50 a day. That is what it would cost us to cover the children who are currently uninsured, to provide them with preventive care so that they are able to reach their God-given potential, so that they don't have to sit up in the classroom with headaches and stomachaches and other ailments, perhaps communicable diseases that could cause an outbreak. Meningitis was one of the major issues in many of our schoolhouses last year. We have a President that sort of stood in the way of that. He has just made it unequivocally clear that this is not a policy that he will pursue. I think it is our obligation as representatives of the people to pursue this and make sure that we get it right on their behalf. Hubert Humphrey was absolutely right. It is a moral imperative, very much so. I hope that every American feels that this evening when they look at their children this evening, when they look at their grandchildren this evening, they will count their blessings that they are able to sit with their child today and their child is not in need of a doctor's care. For those who are in need of a doctor's care, that they will pray for a mother like Deamonte's mother who went around trying to find coverage for her child, who tried to get a doctor to see her son though she did not have insurance and who was turned away. As a result, her son met his demise. My colleague, the doctor is in the House.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 817, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 818, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 819, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 820, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 821, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 822, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 823, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 824, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 825, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 826, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 827, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 828, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 829, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 830, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 831, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 832, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 833, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 834, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 835, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 836, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 837, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 838, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 839, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 840, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 841, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 842, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 843, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 844, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 845, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 846, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I want to start by thanking the gentlelady from New York for her relentless efforts on behalf of the victims, heroes and heroines of the World Trade Center attack and aftermath. I am joining my colleagues on the floor in pursuit of justice for the second-generation victims of the wicked attack of our Nation in New York City on September 11 and to demand basic health care support and services for those whose physical well-being was adversely and irreparably impacted by the horrific attack on the World Trade Center. As was stated by the gentlelady from New York, I was elected to the New York City Council the year our dear city was attacked. I became Chair of the Committee on Fire and Criminal Justice Services, as well as a member of the Health Committee where we examined year after year what the impact of the aftermath, the work that our first responders, the residents of the area were feeling as a result of having been misguided, misled by our own Federal Government through the leadership, or lack of leadership some would say, of the administration through the Environmental Protection Agency which said to New Yorkers that the air we were breathing was okay and that we would be fine, only to find out that today many are diseased. I also watched as a very close friend, a very best friend and companion of mine, rushed out on September 11 to the pile, a member of Local 79, who heard the call. And as I speak with him each and every day, I am reminded that he is one of the lucky ones. But every now and then when he coughs, I wonder could this be the advent of a serious health crisis that was precipitated by his heroism on that day. I cannot fathom why on the advent of the 6th anniversary of this most tragic event in our history this administration has not seen fit to do right by its most courageous citizenry. This is a problem that not only affects many thousands of people throughout the New York region, but also countless thousands throughout the country who bravely came to New York City and helped my hometown in our time of need. Immediately following the attack and imminent collapse of the World Trade Center, first responders, construction workers and volunteers from across every economic sector and walk of life converged upon what we know as Ground Zero to perform search and rescue missions. From the outset, these heroic individuals went in without a second thought about their own personal well-being. They just wanted to save anyone who might have been buried alive and/or to help recover the bodies of those who had perished, heroes and heroines, without whose efforts New York City and our Nation never could have recovered as quickly as it did. Later, many of these same workers went through the lengthy process of cleaning up the demolished site. At the time, the EPA declared the air to be safe to breathe, a statement we now know to have been false. Because of their efforts in helping our country to recover, these men and women ingested vast amounts of toxic dust and harmful chemicals. The result is a plague of debilitating and deadly diseases, some of which are rarely seen in nature. Only now, 6 years later, are many of these diseases and complications showing themselves. In fact, many of the people who spent time near the site may not show any problems until several years further down the line. Even the best experts have no clue just how many of these individuals will actually fall ill of long-term complications from the exposure. Of course we cannot change the past so there is nothing anyone can do about exposure that already took place. All we can do now is make sure that these victims receive the medical treatment they deserve. Bureaucratic red tape and legal challenges have left these second generation victims overwhelmed by deteriorating health as well as a lack of meaningful financial support from a grateful Nation. Many are going bankrupt under the weight of escalating health costs and the loss of income to their homes and families. And what about the families? Furthermore, there has been no assistance offered to the many nonresponders who worked on the scene and the area residents who breathed the tainted air that entered their homes. These people are also victims of the attacks, and require support for health problems that are only now manifesting. This is why I am compelled to add my name and wholehearted support behind the Maloney-Nadler-Fossella 9/11 Health Compensation Act. This comprehensive bill establishes programs to monitor and treat everyone exposed to the dangerous toxins found at Ground Zero. Whether you are a police officer or firefighter, construction worker, area resident, government employee or anyone else who spent significant time at the scene, you are entitled to treatment for any disease that doctors find is linked to your work immediately after the attacks. Some of my colleagues from outside the New York region may wonder why they should support such a bill. They say it does nothing for their own States or districts, so why bother voting for it. I feel the reasons could not be clearer. The diseases being developed by victims of Ground Zero are horrid. Already well over 100 deaths have been partially attributed to toxins from the site. Not long ago, a 34- year-old detective collapsed and died while playing with his young daughter due to complications from exposure. There are victims requiring double lung transplants because of damage caused from dust and chemicals. Others develop rare cancers These people are heroes to the Nation. They went in and helped resuscitate not just a city but an entire country that had been shocked, frozen, traumatized and unsure of how to react. It should be a matter of national honor to help these victims who have rushed in where we all rushed out. I wholeheartedly support the Maloney-Nadler-Fossella bill as a cosponsor, and I look forward to joining my colleagues and the AFL-CIO this weekend at the World Trade Center site as we rally in support of fulfilling victims' long-term health care needs. I thank the gentlewoman from New York for her extraordinary leadership with regards to this matter, and I look forward to pursuing what is right and what is just on behalf of our fellow New Yorkers, fellow Americans and their families.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 824, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 825, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 826, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 827, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 828, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 829, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 830, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 831, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 832, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 833, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 834, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 835, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 836, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 837, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 838, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 839, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 840, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 841, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 842, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 843, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 844, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 845, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 846, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 817, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 818, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 819, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 820, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 821, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 822, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 823, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 791, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 792, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 793, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 794, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 795, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 796, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 797, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 798, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 799, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 800, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 801, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 802, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 803, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 804, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 805, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 806, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 807, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 808, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 809, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 810, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 811, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 812, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 813, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 814, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 815, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 816, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 779, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 780, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 781, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 782, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 783, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 784, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 785, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 786, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 787, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 788, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 789, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 790, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, On rollcall No. 763, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 764, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 765, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 766, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 767, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 768, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 769, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 770, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 771, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 772, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 773, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 774, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 775, I would have voted ``present.'' On rollcall No. 776, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 777, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 778, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 758, I was unavoidably absent; had I been present, I would have voted ``aye''; On rollcall No. 759, I would have voted ``aye''; On rollcall No. 760, I would have voted ``aye''; On rollcall No. 761, I would have voted ``aye''; On rollcall No. 762, I would have voted ``aye.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 748, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 749, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 750, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 751, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 752, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 753, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 754, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 755, I would have voted ``nay''; on rollcall No. 756, I would have voted ``yea''; on rollcall No. 757, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 734, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 735, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 736, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 737, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 738, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 739, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 740, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 741, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 742, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 743, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 744, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 745, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 746, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 747, I would have voted ``aye.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 716, I was unavoidably absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 717, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 718, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 719, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 720, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 721, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 722, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 723, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 724, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 725, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 726, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 727, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 728, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 729, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 730, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 731, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 732, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 733, I would have voted ``aye.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, On rollcall No. 691, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 692, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 693, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 694, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 695, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 696, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 697, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 698, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 699, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 700, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 701, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 702, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 703, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 704, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 705, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 706, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 707, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 708, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 709, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 710, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 711 I was taking a leave of abence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 712, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 713 I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall No. 714, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall No. 715, I was taking a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 687, I was on a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea''. On rollcall No. 688, I was on a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea''. On rollcall No. 689, I was on a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea''. On rollcall No. 690, I was on a leave of absence. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea''.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, early in the morning on Saturday, July 7, I awoke to an unusual sound; it was the sound of a police helicopter circling over the community in which I reside. Typically, when you hear a police helicopter you know that something has gone wrong in the community. They are usually searching for a suspect in a crime. Today, I stand before this body and before you, Mr. Speaker, with a heavy heart. The reason behind that circling was the injuring, critical injuring of an officer, a police officer. And it is with a heavy heart that I stand before you today to honor the life and contribution of a fallen hero, a great American patriot, New York Police Officer Russel Timoshenko. Last weekend, he was tragically shot in the face and the neck and succumbed to those fatal gunshots this weekend. Officer Timoshenko was born in Belarus and immigrated to the United States in the early 1990s, when he was only 7 years old. Upon his graduation from Tottenville High School in Staten Island, New York, Russel attended City College and majored in economics while playing on the lacrosse team. I understand, like myself, he loved to dance. Prior to completing his studies, he decided to become a New York City police officer. During his short career on the force, Officer Timoshenko made 15 arrests. And although Officer Timoshenko had only been on the force for 1\1/2\ years, his commitment to protect and serve the least and the greatest in our community embodied the true sentiment of a public servant, and he was highly regarded among his colleagues. Officer Timoshenko and his partner, Officer Herman Yan, were both shot during a routine traffic stop in Brooklyn in the early morning of Saturday, July 7. Officer Yan survived because of his bulletproof vest, and I pray for his continued speedy recovery. Unfortunately, Officer Timoshenko was shot in the head, and the two bullets that struck him cut across his spinal cord just beneath his brain. Officer Timoshenko did not survive his wounds. Officer Timoshenko's untimely death was a direct result of the proliferation of illegal guns in my community. His life was taken in service to our city and in pursuit of his oath to protect and serve. And, in so doing, there are three less illegal handguns on the streets of New York. I stand with the New York City Police Chief, Commissioner Kelly, Mayor Bloomberg, and Governor Spitzer in the fight against illegal gun trafficking into our city, and also in aggressively working to make our neighborhoods safe to live, work, and play. To the parents and family of Officer Timoshenko, please accept our thanks for sharing him with us. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to share the life of such a fine human being. And on behalf of New York's 11th Congressional District, I offer my sincerest condolences, and pray that God will grant the family comfort and peace at this time.