Tom Davis

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce H.R. 718, the National Guard Empowerment Act of 2007. The National Guard needs a voice to ensure that its people get the same training, equipment and benefits as their active-duty counterparts. It needs a voice to speak for the needs of governors and the guardsmen who defend and protect us from natural disasters and acts of terror. Asking the Department of Defense to approve one four-star General for the National Guard and allow this Guard General a seat at the Joint Chiefs of Staff is not overly reaching or a threat to national security. It's simply a matter of providing a seat at the table to an organization that has earned it. When it comes to the Guard, Cold War thinking still prevails at the Pentagon. So a bipartisan and bicameral group of Members of Congress stand united behind this bill. This year, we have added three important provisions to: allow Guard officers to advance to the highest ranks of leadership; force better accountability in service procurement for the National Guard; and, define and improve the fractured planning and operational relationships between the Department of Defense, the National Guard Bureau, U.S. Northern Command and our Governors. After 9/11, the President issued an Executive Order making the security of the homeland the No.1 priority of the Department of Defense. But the Department's attempts to empower the Guard have so far been date have been hollow, with no clear standards, no firm requirements and only minimal funding. The Department of Defense seems to be in denial about the essential role the National Guard plays in times of need. The Pentagon needs to show more concern for the force that protects Americans first, arrives first, acts first and stays longest. Today, the Government Accountability Office released a study sponsored by the Oversight and Government Reform Committee entitled: ``Actions Needed to Identify National Guard Domestic Equipment Requirements and Readiness.'' This study points out that the Department of Defense has yet to take decisive action to improve the National Guard's domestic capabilities and clearly points out why this basic Guard empowerment bill is absolutely necessary. If you want to know why the Guard deserves a seat at the table, take a look at what the Air Force has budgeted this year for First Air Force, which is made up of the nation's top Air National Guard wings. These are the fighters who protect the skies over America. Their command budget and manpower is being cut almost in half. And it should come as no surprise that these Air Guard wings are not on the Air Force list to get F-22s or F-35s. Last year's BRAC decimated Air National Guard units that provided critical airlift capability during Hurricane Katrina, moving people, water and supplies through catastrophic damage. Without that capability, we may be in a worse position today in terms of emergency supply movement than we were when the storm struck. Or consider the readiness of the Army's chemical and biological response units, most of which rest in the Reserve Component units. GAO soon will release a study sponsored by the Oversight and Government Reform Committee that will show the Army has not seen fit to enhance these units for homeland defense. As a result, Americans remain vulnerable to the chemical-biological attack many fear likely if not inevitable. A year and a half after Hurricane Katrina, the findings and basic recommendations in the Select Committee Report on Hurricane Katrina have not been adequately addressed. Moreover, the National Guard continues to perform valiantly in the Global War on Terrorism. The National Guard provides almost half the manpower, support and transportation our military uses overseas, yet it has just 35 percent of the equipment it needs. The time has come to fix this. Since 9/11, every single person in this country has benefited from the exemplary service provided by the men and women of the Guard. I urge the new leadership in this Congress, as they examine defense policies and budgets, to keep in mind the needs of the these brave men and women, who for too long have been treated as second-class citizens by our military. This country cannot afford a broken state/federal response to homeland emergencies. Madam Speaker, those National Guardsmen responsible for our homeland defense and military assistance to civilian authorities deserve the resources, planning and training they need. These reforms are long overdue, and the National Guard Empowerment Act of 2007 represents an essential step in the right direction.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Dale City Bengals, who on December 9, 2006, won the American Youth Football Pee Wee ``AA'' Division National Championship. After a stellar regular season the Bengals advanced through local and regional qualifiers to gain a berth in the national tournament in Tampa, FL. Over a period of 5 days, the Bengals played against the best football teams in the Nation and emerged victorious with the ``Taft'' National Championship Trophy. The tournament started with a seeding game, where the Bengals drew a match up against the Brooklyn Chiefs. The Bengals got off to a rocky start as they were routed 27-6. Their four coaches, Jim Spellman, Joviaire Yarbo, Joel Avent, and Moses Webb, knew it was time to refocus. Through an extra practice and a new attitude they were able to do just that. In their next game against the Westchester Raiders the Bengals came out with a chip on their shoulder, and they were forced to invoke the mercy rule on the way to a 48-13 victory. In the meantime, Brooklyn had won their semi-final game as well, setting the stage for an epic rematch. Prior to the final game, Assistant Coach Yarbo brought the team together and during an inspired speech told the players, ``it doesn't matter how you get there--it matters what you do when you get there.'' Drawing on these words and a power ground game, the Dale City Bengals persevered to create a 13-6 lead late in the game. With the Chiefs driving on what would prove to be their final possession, middle line backer Jacob Spellman intercepted an errant pass that sealed the outcome of the game, earning him MVP honors. In a truly inspirational story, the Dale City Bengals represent all that is great about youth sports. Drawing on the support of their parents, coaches and community, the Bengals' team performance shows that anything is possible when people come together to achieve a common goal. I honor the efforts of every player: Daniel Amendolaro, Jaylen Avent, Juan Bennett, Shakeem Copeland, GeJuane Dalrymple, Xavier Dashiell II, Typer Donnelly, Easton Hawk, Khalil Jackson, Jamil Jackson, Kinte Johnson, T.J. Middleton, Kamel Montgomery, Tariq Qawiyy, Darnell Rife, Michaiah Smith, Jacob Spellman, Joseph Walker II, Moses Webb, Jr., and Ji Wright. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to honor the Bengals on their championship and to wish them all the best in their future endeavors.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to House Resolution 78. This is an uncomfortable decision for me since for many years I have tried to convince the Republican-controlled Rules Committee to grant my friend, the Representative from the District of Columbia, a vote in the Committee of the Whole. In the beginning I did so because the right to vote in the Committee of the Whole, which has little meaning in practice, carried important symbolic meaning to people who had no representation at all. Over the past 4 years, I have embarked on a journey to give D.C. a real vote in the House of Representatives. Working with Congresswoman Norton and numerous legal scholars and many colleagues on my side from across the ideological spectrum, we have crafted a bill that was politically neutral, gave real rights to the District of Columbia, and solved Utah's special problem created in the last census to boot. The Speaker of the House has been a cosponsor of my legislation. The majority whip says he expects the bill to be brought up quickly this session. It is clear that if our bill, the D.C. FAIR Act, were brought to the floor today, it would pass with solid support from both parties. Today's resolution muddies the waters. It fails to recognize the fundamental difference between the District of Columbia and the territories. It ignores the carefully constructed bipartisan compromise we reached in the D.C. FAIR Act. It amounts, as The Washington Post opined today, to little more than ``dithering.'' I hope this vote, which grants illusory voting rights to Delegates, is designed to expose the strong support that exists for full D.C. voting rights. But pardon me if I appear cynical. To the cynic in me, this resolution smacks of obfuscation. What the majority is doing today threatens to delay action on the real injustice that has plagued the District for more than two centuries. I am looking for assurances that this is not the case. Admittedly, we could have avoided this awkward grouping of governmental apples and oranges if the Republican leadership had brought the bill to the floor at the end of last year. The bill was ready. It is ready now, too. It is time for the new majority to not just talk the talk. What is proposed today in H. Res. 78 is not a politically neutral solution. It adds four Democrat votes and one Republican. Traditionally, when we have added votes in the House, we have done so in a politically neutral manner. Worse, this resolution mixes the interests of the District of Columbia, the Federal district, the capital of the free world, whose residents pay Federal income taxes, with those of the territories. This mushy thinking is what has led to nearly 200 years of no representation for District residents. H. Res. 78 distracts attention and saps energy from the movement we have created behind D.C. voting rights. It is confusing and allows Members to check a box that in reality is not being checked. Still it is tempting to support this, if only to get more Members of Congress acclimated to voting to expand representation for District residents. But this is a sham, and I am not going to be part of it. I can't condone grandstanding and symbolism when real reform is so easily within our grasp.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Chief Michael P. Neuhard upon his retirement as Fire Chief and Fairfax County Fire Marshal for the Fairfax County Fire and Rescue Department. Over the past 30 years Chief Michael Neuhard has worked tirelessly to promote efforts that ensure the safety and well-being of the citizens of Fairfax County. During his career he has moved through the ranks of the department serving in such positions as assistant chief of administrative services, deputy chief of special operations, hazardous materials response team coordinator and head of hazardous materials services in the fire prevention division. As Fire Chief and Fairfax County Fire Marshal, Chief Neuhard oversees a staff of 1,678 personnel, 300 operational fire and EMS volunteers, and 36 fire stations. In this role he plans, coordinates, and directs the overall operation of the Fire and Rescue Department, which includes fire suppression, hazardous material abatement, emergency medical services, fire prevention, technical rescue, as well as administrative and support services. Through service on numerous department, county, regional, state and national boards, Chief Neuhard has demonstrated his dedication to safety in his community. He is chair of his department's Strategic Planning Leadership Team, a member of the Fairfax County Domestic Violence Prevention Policy Coordinating Council, chair of the National Technology Transfer Center--Emergency Response Advisory Committee, as well as chairman of the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments Fire Chiefs Committee. Additionally, he has served on the Secure Commonwealth Panel since his appointment in 2002 by then-Governor Mark Warner. Madam Speaker, in closing, I would like to commend and congratulate Chief Michael P. Neuhard on all of his accomplishments. His efforts have boosted the overall safety and preparedness of the citizens of Fairfax County and the region. I call upon my colleagues to join me in applauding Chief Neuhard for his past accomplishments and in wishing him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my disappointment with the majority's efforts today to attempt to restore the public trust in government. The Nation's Capital has been hammered by corruption-related political scandals in recent years, and it is imperative that we take action to respond to these scandals. But H.R 476, the Congressional Pension Accountability Act, is little more than a trophy that the majority can hold up to claim they restored public trust in the Nation's Capital. In a nutshell, the legislation gives Members of Congress who are convicted of a public corruption related crime an additional slap on the wrist by preventing them from counting their time served as a Member of Congress toward their federal retirement. This stands in stark contrast to much stronger, bipartisan legislation that the Committee on Government Reform marked up last February to crack down on public officials convicted of betraying the public trust. The Federal Pension Forfeiture Act of 2006, approved by unanimous consent by the Committee last year, would have denied federal retirement benefits to any Member, congressional employee or political appointee in the Executive Branch convicted of a crime related to public corruption punishable by more than one year imprisonment for an act committed while the individual was employed by the federal government. Unlike H.R. 476, last year's proposal would have permanently denied a pension from an official convicted of a corruption-related crime rather than simply limiting time that counted toward the official's retirement. Additionally and most importantly, last year's proposal covered not only Members of Congress but also political appointees in the Executive Branch. After all, federal officials in both branches of government equally share the blame for the fact that the public no longer trusts public officials. It's unclear to me why the majority would want to only address half of the issue when we have an opportunity to address the issue in its entirety. Unfortunately this is the first opportunity I have had to raise this concern since the legislation was taken straight to the floor rather than receiving the benefit of committee consideration. Regardless of process, I fear that this legislation will do little if anything to restore any of the public's trust in the federal government. Therefore, it is with regret that I will vote in favor of this legislation, and I do so only because no other option has been presented to the House.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Tom Temin for over 17 years of service providing the Federal technology community with unbiased, accurate, and timely information. Through Mr. Temin's role as executive vice president and editor in chief of Government Computer News, Washington Technology, Defense Systems, Government Leader and other technology publications, he has brought valuable insight and creative journalism to the Federal IT arena. Under Tom's guidance Government Computer News has become a premier IT magazine providing objective and comprehensive rankings of the usefulness and overall value of technology as it reaches the market. Leaders in the executive branch, both Houses of Congress and the broader technology community have come to consider the editorials he has written for Government Computer News as shrewd and perceptive analysis of the implications of IT trends. The newspaper's fair and unyielding pursuit of issues showing the flaws and faults in the Federal technology sector has prompted numerous reforms that continue to conserve funds and improve performance for the American taxpayers. Madam Speaker, in closing, I would like to commend and congratulate Mr. Tom Temin on all of his accomplishments. His tireless efforts have deeply impacted the public discussion of IT issues in the Federal Government, truly meriting recognition. I call upon my colleagues to join me in applauding Tom for his past accomplishments and in wishing him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor E. David Foreman, Jr., who is retiring after a life of dedicated service in both the private advocacy sector and to the Republican Party. David has had a long history of service to both the Republican Party of Virginia and the Republican National Committee. This record is well documented and has come full circle from his initial role as chairman of the Fairfax County Republican Party from 1970 to 1976 through his most recent role as the party's senior consultant. During his political career, David also served on numerous exploratory, steering, advisory and finance committees for countless Republican candidates for local, State, and national office. Most notably, David was chairman of Americans for Bush in 1990 as well as chairman of the Credentials Committee at the 1996 Republican National Convention. It was easy for ``those in the know'' to recognize that Mr. Foreman was a true player in local and national politics. David has been featured in the Who's Who in American Politics, Who's Who in Washington, Who's Who in Virginia Politics, as well as Who's Who in Politics in the South and Southwest. David's love for politics complimented his knack for policy. This was demonstrated through his extensive work as a congressional and administration lobbyist for numerous American corporations. Through his role as founder and president of Foreman & Associates, David was able to effectively represent his clients in their interactions with State, local, and Federal officials as well as all Federal agencies. While compiling this impressive legacy of private and political service, David was a loving and dedicated husband to his wife Rosemary Foreman, and father to his two children, Sheryl Olecheck and E. David Foreman III. Madam Speaker, in closing, I ask my colleagues to join me in applauding E. David Foreman, Jr., and congratulating him on his deserved retirement after a distinguished career of service.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3. We are all aware of the potential embryonic stem cells hold for mankind. It could very well be that these cells prove to be the Rosetta stone of medical research--allowing us to break the code on some of the worst afflictions: Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, juvenile diabetes. We must acknowledge, however, that there is much we don't know about embryonic stem cells, and we are mistaken if we believe great cures are right around the corner. But we will never know either the true potential--or the dangers of stem cell related treatments if our scientists are overly constrained. I understand the concerns of those who question the ethics of embryonic stem cell research, and agree that we must not throw caution to the wind at the hint of miraculous cures. Indeed, left unconstrained, this type of research could lead to dangerous outcomes. That is a key reason why I support the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. It provides essential ethical guidelines to which federally funded researchers must adhere. It would be far preferable to have the Federal Government setting standards in this field rather than a hodge-podge of states and private entities. In fact, I believe that the National Institute of Health's rigorous ethical guidelines would prove to be more protective of human life than individual states or private entities. Remember, embryonic stem cell research is not illegal, and individual states have already moved forward on their own. It is crucial that the Federal Government lead the way. I supported President Bush when he announced his plan to allow federally funded research on 60 pre-existing stem cell lines. But we now know that only 21 stem cell lines are available for research. These 21 have significant shortcomings that make them of dubious value. Federally funded U.S. researchers are at a technological disadvantage as they lack access to newer stem cell lines. This is causing concern that some of the top stem cell biologists will move into non-federally funded research, or even move overseas. We should not allow this to happen. There are a great many difficult questions that attend this debate. However, I can not look in the eyes of a couple whose child is suffering from a debilitating disease and tell them that I am doing everything possible to stop their child's suffering without supporting this legislation. I believe expanded Federal funding of embryonic research is the right course to take--a view shared by increasing numbers in both parties. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007. I believe this bill is an important step in making the United States a leader in all facets of the stem cell issue--both scientifically and ethically.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, today I am re-introducing with my colleague Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton the District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act. This legislation has now been considered through several Congresses. It is no longer a novel idea. Nevertheless, the need for this legislation is stronger than ever and I call on the Congress to pass it without delay. We can't credibly struggle to make other parts of the world safe for democracy if we continue to deny it to residents of our Nation's Capital. This bill pairs two injustices in such a way as to create a politically neutral solution for both. The first injustice--that the citizens of the District of Columbia have no direct representation in the House of the United States Congress--has existed since Congress took away representation in 1800. The second injustice--the failure to count all of the residents of Utah in the last Census--is more recent. Historically, it takes just this kind of marriage to create a viable solution. We had a great deal of success in moving this bipartisan legislation last Congress. In our committee, a strong majority of both parties voted to pass this legislation. Over the last 3 years, it has been gratifying to watch members of my own party consider the problem and accept this solution. We now have the support of conservatives, moderates, and liberals. Unfortunately, we were unable to get the bill to the floor in the rush that ensued last December. Ironically, it was a rush to pass legislation that created this problem in 1800. In the lame duck session following the election of Thomas Jefferson of Virginia as president and the Whigs to the majority in 1800, Federalists rushed to pass legislation to set up some structure for the District of Columbia. Congress was silent on District voting rights in spite of having granted voting rights to District residents 10 years earlier in the Residence Act that created a Federal district. Now, over 200 years later, Congress has before it a principled and workable compromise solution. This bill does two simple things. It treats the District of Columbia as a congressional district for the purposes of representation in the House of Representatives, and permanently increases Congress to 437 members. After 3 years of research, it is clear that Congress does have the authority to grant the District a seat in the House of Representatives. This House, which we refer to as the ``People's House,'' represents the people of the several states. Some scholars have tried to parse the phrase to mean that state residents only are represented. But when this phrase was drafted there was no Federal District. The ``People of the Several States'' means all Americans. Congress has recognized this by allowing Americans living overseas to vote in House elections despite the fact they are no longer residents of any state. Overseas Americans are allowed to vote in their last state of residence even if they never intend to return to that state. There always seems to be some reason to keep from doing a good thing. In our personal lives we all put off the easy act of common graciousness because we're busy or because we're tired or because someone treated us unfairly. This makes sense at the time, but in the end we are all poorer for missing the opportunity. The same is true with this legislation. Maybe you don't like the permanent increase in the size of Congress. Maybe you want to protect ``states rights'' in redistricting. Maybe you wish this addressed the Senate as well. Maybe you just don't know for sure what the Sixth Congress intended when they created this problem. I would ask every member of this body to look up for a minute and look at the people we live with here in the District. Is there anything really gained by refusing them direct representation in the Federal Government? I say no. It is time to make a change in the way this District is governed. It is time to tell the 550,000 District citizens that we recognize their inalienable right to participate in the decisions that affect their lives every day. Let's not--once again--miss the chance to do the good thing. Justice should no longer have to wait.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2, and in support of the Republican motion to recommit. Americans deserve a decent minimum wage, but we cannot simply ignore the fact that somebody has to pay for it. In many cases, small businesses are the ones who must bear these costs. The Democratic bill we consider today gives absolutely no consideration to small businesses at all. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, providing two-thirds of new job creation. They cannot, however, simply create money out of thin air. A small business might have been struggling to pay health care premiums for its workers. With this resolution, they may well now be unable to do so. My Democratic colleagues frequently voice their strong support for small businesses. I don't understand why they cannot then acknowledge that this could be a burden and offer some help in the form of tax incentives. My vote for this motion to recommit and against the underlying bill is intended to send a message to the other body that a minimum wage increase is only half of the equation. I am confident the other body will work in more of a spirit of compromise and recognize the concerns I mention here today. Indeed, I look forward to considering legislation that does contain common sense provisions that will protect our small businesses' competitiveness. I urge my colleagues to vote for the motion to recommit to and if necessary against final passage.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2, and in support of the Republican motion to recommit. Americans deserve a decent minimum wage, but we cannot simply ignore the fact that somebody has to pay for it. In many cases, small businesses are the ones who must bear these costs. The Democratic bill we consider today gives absolutely no consideration to small businesses at all. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, providing two thirds of new job creation. They cannot, however, simply create money out of thin air. A small business might have been struggling to pay health care premiums for its workers. With this resolution, they may well now be unable to do so. My Democratic colleagues frequently voice their strong support for small businesses. I don't understand why they cannot then acknowledge that this could be a burden and offer some help in the form of tax incentives. My vote for this motion to recommit and against the underlying bill is intended to send a message to the other body that a minimum wage increase is only half of the equation. I am confident the other body will work in more of a spirit of compromise and recognize the concerns I mention here today. Indeed, I look forward to considering legislation that does contain common sense provisions that will protect our small businesses' competitiveness. I urge my colleagues to vote for the motion to recommit to and if necessary against final passage.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, though he served as President for only 2\1/2\ years, Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr., leaves a legacy of leadership and service that will endure for years to come. As the 38th President of the United States, he is remembered as a man whose integrity and decency would be the salve needed to heal a deeply divided country during one of the most politically turbulent periods in our Nation's history. He is also remembered as a loving and loyal husband, family man, and friend. Born on July 14, 1913, in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Gerald Ford graduated from the University of Michigan and excelled in both academics and athletics. He was voted the most valuable player on the football team his senior year at Michigan, which led to offers to play for the Chicago Bears and the Green Bay Packers. Despite these offers, Ford decided that law would be a better career choice. He attended Yale University Law School, graduating in the top 25 percent of his class while working as a football and a boxing coach. It was at Yale that he would receive his first taste of national politics, volunteering on Wendell Willkie's 1940 Presidential campaign. His rise in Michigan politics was put on hold when he joined the United States Navy in 1942 to serve in the Second World War. He served valiantly on the aircraft carrier USS Monterrey until 1946, attaining the rank of lieutenant commander. 1948 was a banner year for Ford as it was the year he was elected to the House of Representatives, with over 60 percent of the vote, the lowest margin he was ever to receive. It was also the year he would marry Elizabeth ``Betty'' Bloomer, who would become one of his most ardent campaigners and mother to their four children. Ford served in the House for distinction and honor for 25 years, where his contributions earned him a reputation as a Congressman's Congressman. Even though his highest aspiration was to be Speaker of the House, he never got the chance. He did, however, hold the highest Republican post in a Democratically controlled Congress by being elected the minority leader in 1965. He held that post until 1973 when he was appointed by President Nixon to replace Spiro Agnew as Vice President of the United States of America amid allegations of corruption. After Nixon's resignation on August 9, 1974, Gerald Ford became the 38th President of the United States and has the distinction of being the only person to serve as but never be elected by the populace to either the Presidency or the Vice Presidency. As President, he followed a steady, sensible course to cope with the Nation's economic problems. He is credited with halting double-digit inflation and lowering unemployment. He also worked to solidify President Nixon's accomplishments in China and ended U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. Under his leadership, the United States signed the final act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, commonly known as the Helsinki agreement, which ratified post-World War II European borders and supported human rights, and is now regarded as having helped bring down the Soviet Union. Maybe most importantly, his wisdom, courage and integrity restored the faith of the American people in the executive branch of government. His time in office is remembered for restoring trust and openness to the Presidency. His courageous and difficult decision to pardon President Nixon may have cost him the election. However, it is now regarded as being in the best interest of the Nation, allowing it to move forward and recover from a tumultuous time. After leaving the Presidency, Ford became an international ambassador of American goodwill, a noted scholar and lecturer, and a strong supporter of the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan. And together with his wife, Betty, he was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal in 1999 in recognition of their dedicated public service and outstanding humanitarian contributions to the people of the United States. Also in 1999 Ford received the Medal of Freedom, the Nation's highest civilian award, for his role in guiding the United States through the turbulent times of Watergate, the resignation of President Nixon and the end of the Vietnam War, and for restoring integrity and public trust to the Presidency. Gerald R. Ford, the President and the man, embodied many fine characteristics that we as Americans value: honor, integrity, decency, hard work and kindness. For this, I ask my colleagues to join in honoring his legacy by supporting this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the author of this resolution, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers at this time.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of Sydney Tally for her tireless commitment to better the lives of active duty servicemembers, retirees, veterans, and above all their families through a distinguished career with the National Military Family Association. Widely known and beloved in military circles, this Air Force daughter and Navy spouse trained as a nurse and pursued her specialty in public health nursing before becoming a full time mother and volunteer after the birth of her first child. Among many service endeavors, she freely devoted her time serving as teaching assistant, Brownie and Girl Scout leader, Red Cross pediatric nurse, and president of four naval officers' wives clubs. In 1983, she joined the NMFA government relations staff and served as vice president of the department from 1987 to 1990 before rising to the position of first paid professional staff member and director. She also sat on the NMFA's board of governors until her recent passing. Mrs. Tally used her leverage through this organization to benefit military families everywhere. Her focus on the military family drove her in creating the Military Coalition. Women, infants, and children found nourishment after her advocacy secured legislation for an overseas nutrition program targeted specifically for military families. Mrs. Tally received numerous awards and recognitions for her altruistic work, including the Military Coalition's Award of Merit, a Certificate of Appreciation from the Defense Commissary Agency, 1993 Defense Transition Services Award from the University of Central Florida, and recognition of her outstanding citizenship by the Military Chaplains Association. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank Mrs. Tally for her life's work and continuing legacy that brought forth significant awareness of the needs of military families. I call upon my colleagues to join me in recognizing her accomplishments, and in sharing our condolences with her family and friends.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6407) to reform the postal laws of the United States, as amended.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6407, the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. This is the first major overhaul of the Postal Service since 1970. The House passed its version of postal reform in July of 2005 by a vote of 410-20. The Senate passed its version in February by unanimous consent. This bill is the product of months of negotiations between the House and the Senate and the administration. It is also the culmination of more than a decade of hard work and study, not to mention a great deal of bipartisan negotiation and cooperation. Mr. Speaker, this bill is the product of months of negotiations between the House, the Senate and the administration. It is also the culmination of more than a decade of hard work and study, not to mention a great deal of bipartisan negotiation and cooperation. The landmark legislation solves the structural, legal and financial constraints that have brought the postal service to the brink of utter breakdown. The postal service is the center of a $900 billion industry, employing 9 million workers nationwide. Each year, the U.S.P.S. processes and delivers over 200 million pieces of mail to more than 130 million households and businesses in the United States, but the last major overhaul of the statutes governing the postal service occurred in 1970 before the Internet and e-mails and faxes, before letters became snail mail, before the deregulation of the airline industry, before competitors like FedEx even existed. Today, this critical component of our Nation's economy is being challenged by a variety of factors, including increasing volume, insufficient revenue, mounting debts and new technologies such as the Internet advertising, electronic bill payments, e-mails and faxes. As a result, the GAO has included the postal service on its high-risk series since 2001. This compromise will reverse the death spiral at the postal service and bring the postal service into the 21st century. I want to take this opportunity to thank Congressman John McHugh of New York who recognized the need for comprehensive postal reform legislation when he became chairman of this subcommittee at the beginning of the 104th Congress and has championed reform tirelessly. I also want to thank Henry Waxman and Danny Davis for their dedication to this subject and their willingness to cooperate in a bipartisan manner. I want to thank the principal sponsors in the Senate, Susan Collins of Maine and Tom Carper of Delaware. Without their leadership and dedication, this compromise would not have been possible. Finally, I want to thank the many members of our staff who have worked on this important issue: Jack Callender, Ellen Brown, and Mason Alinger of my committee staff; also Robert Taub of Congressman McHugh's staff who has dedicated years of his life to this cause; and also Phil Barnett, Denise Wilson, and Naomi Seiler of Congressman Waxman's staff; Jill Hunter-Williams of Congressman Danny Davis' staff; and Ann Fisher of Senator Collins' and John Kilvington of Senator Carper's staff. I also want to thank all those individuals in the administration that have actively and tirelessly participated in the negotiations to help us reach this point today, especially Michael Bopp, Jeff Sharpe and Chris Frech. Mr. Speaker, all the stakeholders in this legislation, postal employees, financial services companies, major marketers, have been rigorous in urging Congress and the administration to complete this bill. No one thinks it is perfect. This is the nature of compromise, but everyone, especially all Americans who use stamps, will be significantly better off with this legislation than they would be without this long overdue package of reforms. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh).

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I would reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, let me just say again, this legislation mandates transparency in the Service's finances, costs, and operations, creates a modern system of rate regulation, establishes fair competition rules, and a powerful new regulator to oversee operations. It addresses the Postal Service's universal service operation in the scope of the mail monopoly; it institutes improvements to the collective bargaining process; it also puts a reasonable rate cap on it for the mailers, the first-class mailers and across the board for Americans who use the postal system. I urge my colleagues to adopt it and support this. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee for agreeing to work with me on H.R. 6407 and I ask that our letters of exchange be inserted into the Record. December 8, 2006. Hon. William M. Thomas, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your December 8, letter regarding the Committee on Ways and Means jurisdictional interest in H.R. 6407, the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, and your willingness to forego consideration of H.R. 6407 by your committee. I agree that the Committee on Ways and Means has a valid jurisdictional interest in H.R. 6407 and that the committee's jurisdiction will not be adversely affected by your decision to forego consideration at this time. In addition, I will support your request for the appointment of outside conferees from the Committee on Ways and Means to a House-Senate Conference committee on this or similar legislation should such a conference be convened. As you have requested, I will include a copy of your letter and this response in the Congressional Record during consideration of H.R. 6407 on the House floor. Thank you for your assistance as I work towards the enactment of H.R. 6407. Sincerely, Tom Davis, Chairman.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 4050) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 103 East Thompson Street in Thomaston, Georgia, as the ``Sergeant First Class Robert Lee `Bobby' Hollar, Jr., Post Office Building''.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.