Thelma Drake

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Madam Speaker, this is day 30. That is 30 days so far our veterans have not had the use of the increased funding for their benefits and health care. That is $18.5 million a day not able to be used. And why? Because the Democratic leadership has decided to not complete this bill and send it to the President who has agreed to sign it. In June, this House passed this appropriation bill with a $6 billion increase in a bipartisan manner. We were proud of our work and grateful to our veterans. On September 6, the Senate completed their bill. This work is done. Our veterans are not pawns in a political game. They are heroes. America expects us to get the job done. America expects us to provide the best care to our veterans. Please join me in calling upon the Democratic leadership to put our veterans first and send this bill to the President now.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Madam Speaker, this is day 29. That is 29 days so far that our veterans have not had the use of the increased funding for their benefits and health care. That is $18.5 million dollars a day not able to be used. And why? Because the Democratic leadership has decided to not complete this bill and send it to the President who has agreed to sign it. In June this House passed this appropriation bill with a $6 billion increase in a bipartisan manner. We are proud of our work and grateful to our veterans. On September 6, the Senate completed their bill. This work is done. Our veterans are not pawns in a political game. They are heroes. America expects us to get the job done. America expects us to provide the best care to our veterans. Please join me in calling upon the Democratic leadership to put our veterans first and send this bill to the President now.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, this is day 25. That is 25 days, so far, that our veterans have not had the use of the increased funding for their benefits and health care. That is $18.5 million a day not able to be used. And why? Because the Democratic leadership has decided to not complete this bill and send it to the President, who has agreed to sign it. In June this House passed this appropriation bill with a $6 billion increase in a bipartisan manner. We were proud of our work and grateful to our veterans. On September 6, the Senate completed their bill. This work is done. Our veterans are not pawns in a political game. They are heroes. America expects us to get the job done. America expects us to provide the best care to our veterans. Please join me in calling upon the Democratic leadership to put our veterans first and send this bill to the President now.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Madam Speaker, on October 22, the President will posthumously award our Nation's top military honor to the first Navy SEAL since the Vietnam War. In June of 2005, Lieutenant Michael Murphy of Patchogue, New York, led a team of four SEALs on an intelligence-gathering mission in the mountains of Afghanistan when Taliban supporters revealed the team's position. A heavy firefight ensued, and the team, cut off from all reinforcements and outnumbered 50 to 1, fought valiantly to preserve each other's lives. Faced with certain death, Lieutenant Murphy deliberately exposed himself to enemy fire in order to gain a clear signal which would communicate with rescue forces. He risked his own life to save the lives of his men. Madam Speaker, as the proud representative of both Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek and Dam Neck Fleet Combat Training Center, my heart goes out to the family of the first Navy SEAL to earn the Congressional Medal of Honor in the global war on terror. Lieutenant Murphy was a true American hero and will live on as an inspiration for all who serve within the ranks of the most elite special operations forces in the world.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Concurrent Resolution 222, commending NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, on the celebration of their 90th anniversary, and out of respect to my friend and our colleague, Jo Ann Davis, who so ably represented NASA Langley and who introduced this, her last resolution, just 4 days before she passed away. Established in 1917 by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, NASA Langley Research Center is the oldest of NASA's 10 major field centers and the Nation's first civilian aeronautical research facility. Research there began with 15 employees. Today, NASA Langley boasts a workforce of over 3,600. And from the very beginning, NASA Langley has been on the cutting edge of research into all aspects of aeronautics, from fixed wing to rotor craft, from propeller engines to jet engines. In fact, whether subsonic, supersonic, or hypersonic, NASA Langley Research Center has always been on the forefront of mankind's consistent refusal to keep both feet on the ground. NASA Langley is uniquely suited to realize the current administration's bold new vision for space exploration. In 1958, as Project Mercury was commencing, NASA Langley served as the main office for the first U.S. manned space program. In the early 1960s, NASA Langley served as a training center for rendezvous and docking in space, which became known as Project Gemini. And later that decade, as Project Apollo was preparing to land the first man on the Moon, NASA Langley's facility served as the astronaut training ground for lunar orbit and landing. Under Director Lesa Roe's dedicated leadership, NASA Langley will continue to play a critical role as we prepare to return to the Moon and look beyond to Mars. NASA Langley is performing an integral part of Project Constellation. They have been given the responsibility to manage the Launch Abort System for the new follow-on for the space shuttle, the Crew Exploration Vehicle, or CEV. In addition, they are greatly assisting in the design and wind tunnel testing of the CEV and Crew Launch Vehicle. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago we commemorated the 40th anniversary of the launch of Sputnik and the beginning of the space race. It is fitting that today we commemorate NASA Langley Research Center, which has and will continue to play such an integral role in our Nation's constant pursuit of the next frontier. I urge my colleagues to support H. Con. Resolution 222.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor our colleague and my friend, Jo Ann Davis. I was honored to have served with her in both the Virginia General Assembly and now here in the U.S. Congress. Jo Ann and I had reverse roles. When Jo Ann ran for the House of Delegates, I was her mentor. I was glad to see her success at being elected there. And when I ran for the U.S. Congress in 2004, Jo Ann was my mentor. We were both Realtors and shared that common bond and that friendship. I was proud to support her in her historic elevation to the Congress. Jo Ann, as you have heard, was the first Republican woman to serve in this body. She was also the first woman from Virginia to be re-elected. We all know that Jo Ann was a woman of great faith, great strength, great courage, great honesty and great integrity. I don't believe that it was ever Jo Ann's intention to be a trailblazer. I think her successes in her life as a mother, a grandmother, a businesswoman, as a legislator are all the result of a path that she chose in her life, and that was the path that cared for other people first, put other people first, and that she stood very strong on the principles to protect those around her. That earned her the respect of the people of the First District, and it lead her on the path to the House of Delegates and then here. Jo Ann was a valued resource and a trusted confidant. Here in Congress, I was honored to work with her on issues facing the people of Hampton Roads and of Virginia. We served together on the House Armed Services Committee, and I have watched her very deep appreciation for the contributions of the shipbuilding industry, and she understood the important role that the Navy plays in our Nation, projecting strength and security around the world. Jo Ann also was a true leader and a hero in protecting our military and their families, and she always worked to ensure that their rights and interests were protected. It is fitting that the month of October is dedicated to raising breast cancer awareness. For even as Jo Ann battled her own illness, she saw her illness as an opportunity to help other women. When she was first diagnosed, she told me that she would be healed, and she was, from her first bout of cancer, and that she would use this as an opportunity for other women to see and to make sure that other women received the health care and didn't put things off. I know that today I join my colleagues in extending our deepest sympathies to her family, to her husband Chuck, to her staff, to her friends. I appreciate the opportunity to stand here and to honor my good friend. I know that we will all miss her greatly.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, I have joined several of our colleagues in a letter requesting that the Senate majority leader end the partisan wrangling and move forward with the veterans appropriations bill. Our veterans have always been willing to man the front lines in the defense of this Nation and deserve to be honored for their service. From 2001 through 2006, this House increased funding for our veterans from $48 billion to $70 billion. This year the House came together in a bipartisan manner to increase funding for our veterans by an additional $6 billion. This is why I am so disturbed to read in Roll Call that Democratic leaders have made ``a decision to delay sending the veterans bill to the President so they can use it as leverage to pass other spending bills.'' In my mind, veterans and especially those waiting for services at VA facilities or working to secure their VA benefits are not bargaining chips. They are heroes. And we should not allow partisanship to interfere with our commitment to protecting their best interests.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago, General Petraeus presented Congress with the progress report that we requested. Rather than encountering a fair dialogue on the situation in Iraq, he was confronted with an accusation of treason by one of the Nation's most prominent and well-funded liberal advocacy organizations. Last week the Senate took the appropriate course of action to officially, and in a bipartisan fashion, condemn this atrocious act on a distinguished war hero. I call on the Democrat leadership to follow the Senate's lead and allow for consideration of House Resolution 644. The men and women of our Armed Forces have committed themselves to the defense of this Nation. I ask my colleagues, who will come to their defense when their integrity and patriotism come under attack?

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Well, thank you to the gentleman from Pennsylvania inviting me to be here with you today. This is such a critical issue, and one that I truly appreciate your leadership in the time that I've served in the House of Representatives, that this has been your passion. It shows to America today, but it's something that is a critical need, for our country, for our economic and for our national security. And I really want to thank you for the explanation that you give to America. And I heard you talk just a few minutes ago about Cuba and China, and I think that's when America is going to demand of elected leaders, why are we blocking the deep sea drilling of natural gas off America when Cuba is going to be doing it and selling it to China, right off the coast of our Nation? And I really want America to watch that and to remember that you've been talking about that for all this time. One of the things that was painful for me that I learned in working with you on your bill this year is the story of Dow Chemical and how a company founded in Michigan in 1897 has lost 7,000 jobs since 2002. But they're now doing a $30 billion expansion, and 10,000 jobs that should be right here in America are going to countries like Saudi Arabia and Libya because of the price of natural gas. You can't pay that $14 you just showed us if you can pay 85 cents in Saudi Arabia. And that was a real driver in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Virginia has really made a name for herself nationally on the issue of energy because of a study that was introduced by Senator Frank Wagner to look at manufacturing in Virginia. And what that study showed right away was that an absolute problem was the cost of natural gas in Virginia, and that was causing us to lose our manufacturing base. And I don't think that we've put that together into our discussions about energy. But I certainly agree with you, there has to be a comprehensive approach to energy. I brought something today to show you that I'm very proud of, and I hope you can see it. This is the work of Old Dominion University in the Second District of Virginia in Norfolk, Virginia. And this is a sample of a biodiesel that's created from algae. They are working with our sewage treatment plants; they're using that algae. But think about it even in the terms of agriculture and the run-off that we don't want in our rivers and in our streams and in our bays, that those nutrients, those fertilizers could be used to spur the growth of algae to be used in a product like this. So there are so many exciting things there, and that's part of what we need to focus on in your bill, in the NEED Act, which does make designated revenue streams for alternative energies for those future technologies that we need as we move into the future. But we also have to think about the needs of today and the economy of today. And sometimes I wonder, people who fight your initiatives, if they understand the impact that it has on our economy. And I just have to question that they don't understand the problem that they're creating for us in America. But the other things, that you have fixed royalties that will go into environmental restoration projects, in addition to renewable energy, weatherization and energy assistance, gives us funding for that, and royalties back to our local governments and to our States. In Virginia we all know our number one issue right now is transportation and how we fund that. This would give us a designated stream that wouldn't put an additional burden on our taxpayers. And critically important to us in the Second District is that the legislation will target 5 percent, roughly $20 billion, of funds that would go towards the restoration of the great natural resource of our Chesapeake Bay. That fully funds the estimate we've had from our Chesapeake Bay Commission for what it would take to restore the bay. And what's interesting is that this is gas only. We need to make sure that we have that discussion. You mentioned Exxon Valdez. My numbers are that you're 13 times more likely to have a spill moving product in by tanker. But we're talking about natural gas. We're talking about nothing that would have an impact on our environment, but would have a huge impact on our economy and our national security. It also puts our States in control. So thank you for that, that States would make the decision of, during that first 100 miles, of whether to be in or out of this program. So I want to thank you for letting me join you. I want to thank you for your leadership. I want to thank you for continuing to be the voice that says this is a crisis in America. We can no longer continue to be dependent on foreign sources of energy. With the technologies that exist today, we need your legislation; and thank you for telling America about it.

Mrs. DRAKE. I am surprised. I think it is one of the top five issues in America, and that's energy, and I was very surprised by that.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank the gentleman from Tennessee for having this hour this evening where we can come and tell you what our observations are about Iraq. And also, I would like to thank his family for the service of his nephew. I know he is in our thoughts and prayers for his safe return. I would also like to thank really the hundreds of thousands of Americans who have loved ones who are serving. I would like to thank the very brave men and women who are serving around the world for us today. They truly understand the threat in the world, and they understand the consequences if we were to just pull out, and I think this is one of the most overwhelming things. When you do make a trip like ours this year, it was my third trip into Iraq, and this year was my first trip into Afghanistan, but when you arrive in these Nations, the most overwhelming feeling immediately is that every single one of the young men and women that you're looking at serving in the U.S. military have volunteered to serve our Nation, and that is an incredible feeling. The first thing that we did on our trip, it was very early August, we went into a neighborhood north of Baghdad. There was six of us on the trip, and we had the opportunity to meet with four Iraqi sheiks, two Sunni and two Shia. Now, like most Americans, I think I was of the impression that Sunni and Shia would never even speak to each other, much less work together to rid Iraq, their neighborhood, of the enemy. Well, they were in that room together and they sat Sunni, Shia, Sunni, Shia, as they talked to us about what they've done. And the reason for what they've done, of course, is the incredible amount of violence that is taking place in Iraq against Iraqi civilians, executions, torture, and it's brought those sheiks into a position to join together for their neighborhood, for their region and, as they told us, for Iraq, that they did what they did for Iraq. They joined with our military. They worked together for 2\1/2\ months, and when they were ready, combined with our military, these four sheiks and their citizens ridded that neighborhood of the enemy in only 4 days' time. They were so proud of themselves. They told us repeatedly how their children could go out and play. Our military told us that this was the most dangerous street in northern Baghdad, the most IED attacks of all of Baghdad. They told us that they can go out and walk to the store now because of what's taken place. What the incredible change that you're seeing in Iraq right now is that our military is helping local leaders to develop the capacity to govern at that very local level, the most important area, and to work on a regional level to bring that about. Now, those sheiks are a little bit disappointed in their national government. I asked them about the Sunni members who had walked out of the government. Their answer is my favorite quote of the entire trip, and the quote was, they won't be reelected. I thought that's quick that they learned that. They're extremely concerned about the involvement of Iran and Syria. Our military knows full well of the involvement of those two governments and weapons that are coming in and help that's being provided. They need services. Our military brought in the governor of Baghdad to look at their neighborhood and to see what could be done differently. They also were very clear that they want their government to succeed, and they were very clear in telling us that they need our help and they want our help. We also met with the Deputy Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister Barham Shala, who is a Kurd. The Iraqi Government, and we don't ever talk about this, is set up, when your prime minister is the Shia, your two deputies, one's a Kurd and one's a Sunni. Your president is a Kurd, so your vice presidents are Sunni and Shia so that you bring in all three together to be able to have the involvement of all three sects within the country. It's not just one person telling you what to do. Of course, the Deputy Prime Minister expressed a little bit of disappointment in how far the national government had come. There were meetings that were taking place even while we were there. He was very clear, and I thought this was very important, that he said their focus is to establish the institutions of government so that their government would continue, regardless of who was in power, and that no one would be able to just grab power and do something different in Iraq, but that they form a stable government just like here in the U.S. When we had a shift in January from Republican control to Democrat control, there was no change in the way our government functions. Our courts functioned, and actually, Admiral Fallon, in addressing the Senate just recently, made the same types of comments, how important it is that we set up a rule of law, that we protect human rights. So I was encouraged to hear him talking about that. He did stress that it was going to take time, and I asked him, because it's been very important here to us in America and our benchmarks, that there are pieces of legislation that we want the Iraqi Parliament to pass. And I asked him if it was true that he actually had the votes to pass that legislation. His answer surprised me. He said, Oh, yes. He said, I have 75 percent approval for the legislation. I reminded him that in America we pass major pieces of legislation with one vote. But he looked at me and said something critically important. He said, if I pass this legislation with 75 percent, it means I've cut out the Sunni from the government. They would feel they had no power and they would feel they had no voice. Now, just today in the Armed Services Committee, we received the GAO report on Iraq and the status of these 18 benchmarks. About six of the benchmarks deal with legislation that we'd like to see passed, and we failed on that, that that legislation has not passed, as we all know. But there was another benchmark that was stressed in it, that there be political involvement of minority parties and minority rights be protected. Now, we've passed on that benchmark, but I would say to the gentleman from Tennessee, to you, Mr. Speaker, that if we had passed that legislation against the wishes of an entire group of people, that we would have failed in meeting the benchmark that minority parties be included. He talked to us about Anbar and about how it's been stabilized. Our trip was due to go there, and we weren't able to because we were detained here in Washington for that extra day. But he talked to us as well about the $10 billion that's been appropriated by the Iraq Parliament for reconstruction efforts. That joins with the 60 countries that have joined with America in our reconstruction efforts there. There is $200 million that's been appropriated to use just in Anbar province, and those contracts are now being let because the security level there will allow those construction projects to go forward. I'd also like to add that we do have a policy in Iraq, and that's called Iraqis First. Whether you're an Iraqi company or you're an Iraqi civilian, that if you're able to be hired by us, that we want to hire Iraqi first. The Deputy Prime Minister was clear that they are a country in transition, and he did caution us that they would not meet their benchmarks by September 15, but I would really want us to focus on not did we meet 18 benchmarks but what are the goals and what are the objectives and how do we develop a fully functioning Iraqi Government and how do those benchmarks play into that, how do they make responsible decisions there like I think they just did in not forcing legislation that would have cut an entire section of their country out. I think that's critically important. We all support benchmarks, but we want those benchmarks to reflect achieving the goals that we've set, and we want to show where are those positive developments, and people are frustrated when they don't hear them, when American people don't hear of the progress that's being made or four sheiks coming together to stabilize their own region and asking that we not leave them and that we give them their help. We did meet with General Petraeus. We met with Ambassador Crocker. We will receive their report on Monday. I know you have others who are here to talk. I just wanted to close by talking about the last thing we did that day. We met with Iraqi security forces, and they were actually special ops. They were so impressive that I would have thought I was here in the U.S. watching special operation forces do a demonstration. Our military was very clear that they are very easy to train, and the good news that we haven't heard is that these Iraqi forces are able to train their new recruits that are coming in. I want you to know they were so proud of themselves. Think of the risk to those men who are serving in Iraqi security forces. In our country, we know our men and women are in harm's way. That's painful for us as Americans, to have our men and women in harm's way defending this Nation. But in Iraq right now, anyone who joins the Iraqi security forces is in harm's way simply for joining, not in the threat of battle but simply for joining. So I want to thank you for letting me tell you about them, tell you about what I saw on our trip to Iraq. It was critical for me to see Afghanistan for the first time because there's a lot of similarities in Afghanistan. We're doing the same thing. We are looking at the local level now. We understand that that's the way we need to win this fight, but the change that's come about is like you have seen in Iraq, where local leaders join with us. Remember, they have to make a choice. Are they with us and their national government or are they with the Taliban in Afghanistan or with the al Qaeda in Iraq. And they have to make the right choice, because if they make the wrong one, they're dead. And what's the message that we've sent to the world is that we're going to leave? How do you choose us if we're going to leave and you would be left there with an enemy? It's critical that we establish political, economic and security measures in Iraq so that this nation can function, can establish a government that will take them into the future and not just short term. I did ask one question, and your article made me think about it, in armed services not long ago. We had witnesses come and talk about the National Intelligence Estimate, and my question to them was what would be the impact on America if we were to leave, if we were to have done everything that we've done but if we were to leave before that government can govern itself, secure itself and develop itself economically? What would be our standing in the world? Would we be a paper tiger? What would our allies think of us? And would anyone ever trust us in the future? The answer to me was we haven't studied that issue. Well, I think not only do we need to study the issue. We need to make sure that Iraq has made such progress that I've seen in my three trips. We need to make sure that these people aren't the victims of the violence that will take place. The Deputy Prime Minister pointed that out to us. He told us the consequences that would happen if we were to leave. He told us that Iraq is the heart of the Middle East and that everyone is watching what we we're doing. So thank you for letting me join you tonight and thank you for the service of your nephew.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 805 I am reported as voting ``yes''--It was my intention to vote ``no.'' Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Kingston

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, I recognize that this is a contentious issue. I also recognize that some of us will never agree on the question of Iraq and whether our presence there is justified. However, I believe there is common ground, and I introduced a substitute amendment during the Armed Services Committee that highlights the common ground. My substitute amendment, which is modeled after Senator Lindsey Graham's alternative to what has come to be known as the Webb amendment, replaced the base text with a sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should strive to meet certain goals concerning dwell time between troop deployment. My amendment maintained the goals that are outlined in the underlying bill. My amendment represents an alternative that touches on the issues that all of us, Republicans and Democrats, agree on. We all agree that our troops need to rest between deployment. We all agree that a rested fighting force is an effective fighting force. We all agree, hopefully, that these goals should not be limited to troops deployed to Operation Iraqi Freedom, which the underlying bill unfortunately does. We all agree that this committee must continue, as it has done so effectively in the past, providing the resources to our troops that they need to do their jobs effectively and safely. I believe this bill creates an unrealistic expectation on the part of our families and our military members. The bill does not define threat to national security interests, and the Presidential waiver is simply paperwork with no minimum standard. I also believe this bill violates the separation of powers as defined in our Constitution. Unfortunately, the Democrat majority decided to consider this bill under a closed rule with no room for debate on alternatives. Mr. Speaker, there is common ground on this issue, but, unfortunately, it is not represented in this bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 3159.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the conference report on the ``Water Resources Development Act of 2007,'' and in particular Section 1001, which authorizes approximately $712 million for the Craney Island Eastward Expansion in Norfolk Harbor at a Federal cost share of 50 percent, or approximately $356 million. The Virginia Port Authority's Eastward Expansion is a project of national significance and is vital to the efficient movement of goods for our country. At the outset, I would like to acknowledge the contributions of those individuals whose strong commitment and tireless efforts made Section 1001 possible. First and foremost, I would like to recognize my distinguished leader of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Ranking Member John Mica for once again delivering on his promise to support the needs of his Committee members on issues of importance to them and their districts; also, Congressman Richard Baker, Ranking Republican on the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, for his leadership and legislative expertise without which WRDA would have once again gone unauthorized; and Senator John Warner, Craney Island's champion and the Commonwealth of Virginia's leader in the Senate; for his steadfast dedication to seeing this vision to fruition. Also, Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay special tribute to two other individuals, not Members of Congress, but without whom we would not be here today. As Governor of Virginia and then Senator, George Allen always supported the expansion of Craney Island, recognizing its impact not only on the Commonwealth but the Nation. Robert ``Bobby'' Bray, who retired this year after 29 years as Executive Director of the Virginia Port Authority, always saw the Craney Island Eastward Expansion not only as a major port development project but also as an opportunity to enhance the quality of life for all Americans. To these and countless others, on behalf of the 2nd District of Virginia, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and our Nation, I extend my sincere gratitude. The Eastward Expansion of Craney Island is truly a matter of national significance. When complete, this landmark project will provide capacity for additional material dredged to maintain navigability of the region's shipping channels in addition to providing land on which to build a much-needed fourth marine terminal in Hampton Roads. In 1997, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution that directed the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to conduct a study of Craney Island. The study has been completed and the Eastward Expansion of Craney Island was recommended as the best alternative. Initially, the project costs considered for Federal participation comprised only the design and construction of the dredged material placement site, known as the Eastward Expansion. At that time, the Federal cost share for the project was identified as approximately 4 percent, and the Virginia Port Authority share as approximately 96 percent. It is important to note that the cost of the marine terminal construction (approximately $1.6 billion) will be solely the responsibility of the Virginia Port Authority. Because the Corps had been constrained by policies that did not take into account the unique dual nature of the Craney Island Project, the initial plan formulation and cost share were determined based only on the Federal interest in the least cost for dredge material placement only part of the authorization to conduct the study. This method of determining the cost share did not take into account the substantial National transportation savings benefits associated with the port construction on the Eastward Expansion of Craney Island, which is the second part of the study authorization. This Craney Island Marine Terminal will provide national economic development benefits of nearly $6 billion in transportation savings. The Port of Virginia is a major international gateway to the Midwest. In fact, more than 55 percent of the cargo handled by the Port originates in or is destined for locations outside the Commonwealth. More than 3,000 companies outside Virginia use the Port because of the cost-effective and reliable movement of freight to and from the Port of Virginia. Container traffic in Hampton Roads is projected to triple by 2030 and will exceed the Port's capacity by 2011. Without the additional capacity created by a new marine terminal at Craney Island, cargo that would otherwise use the Port of Virginia will be rerouted to other ports, resulting in freight moving over longer distances at a higher cost. This increase will generate a total of $6 billion in additional transportation costs when applied to the amount of cargo that would be rerouted to other ports over a 50-year period. However, with a new marine terminal at Craney Island, this additional $6 billion cost is avoided and becomes an origin-to-destination cost savings to the Nation in terms of maintaining the efficient, low-cost transportation afforded through the Port of Virginia. The Eastward Expansion of Craney Island also meets National Defense needs. The ability of the United States to respond to military contingencies requires the availability of adequate U.S. commercial port facilities. The Port of Virginia is one of 14 port facilities designated by the Department of Defense as a strategic port through which military deployments are conducted. The Port of Virginia is expected to be able to make its facilities available to the military within 48 hours of written notification. When complete, the Craney Island project will provide additional capacity to meet military logistical needs and ensure the safe, secure, and smooth flow of military cargo through the Port of Virginia while minimizing commercial cargo disruptions. Mr. Speaker, the Virginia Port Authority has been working for many years in partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to develop a plan for the Eastward Expansion of Craney Island. By authorizing the Federal cost share at 50 percent, the WRDA Conference Report acknowledges the importance of expanding Craney Island to both Hampton Roads and to the entire Nation. I am grateful the Congress has supported this endeavor. And, I look forward to seeing the same support from the President.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, I come today to honor those who have sacrificed so much in the defense of the freedoms we Americans often take for granted. We are all appreciative of the heroic sacrifices made by our men and women in uniform. However, there was little recognition given to the military spouses who provide the backbone of our armed services. Recently, I introduced H.R. 3026, the Military Spouses Memorial Act of 2007, which provides the authority to establish in our Nation's Capitol a memorial commemorating the selfless sacrifice of military spouses from 1776 to the present day. This memorial will honor the husbands and wives that tend to the home front and lend our servicemembers the support they need as they serve in the defense of freedom. I encourage all my colleagues to lend their support to H.R. 3026 and ensure that the sacrifices of our military spouses are recognized.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Chairman, I introduced an amendment today that merely reinforces current Federal law and provides a penalty for jurisdictions that choose not to follow this law. My amendment would prohibit funds from being made available to States and localities that do not abide by section 642(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996. Simply put, Congress will not distribute funds to any jurisdiction that is a sanctuary city. Mr. Chairman, I yield time to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 25th anniversary of Operation Smile, a worldwide children's medical charity headquartered in Norfolk, Virginia, that repairs cleft lips and cleft palates for children and young adults in developing countries. Founded in 1982 by Dr. William Magee, Jr., a plastic surgeon, and his wife, Kathleen, a nurse and clinical social worker, Operation Smile has grown from humble beginnings into a worldwide children's medical charity whose network of medical volunteers are dedicated to helping improve the health and lives of children worldwide. Operation Smile has helped more than 100,000 children and young adults in 30 developing countries overcome their physical irregularities. The organization now operates one of the world's largest volunteer networks, utilizing more than 5,000 medical and nonmedical professionals around the world. I commend the Magees for their passion to improve the health and lives of children and young adults worldwide. Through Operation Smile, their efforts over the past 25 years have offered new life and new hope to those suffering from facial deformities.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the 25th Anniversary of Operation Smile, a worldwide children's medical charity that repairs cleft lips and cleft palates for children and young adults in developing countries. Operation Smile, which is headquartered in Norfolk, VA, was founded by Dr. William Magee, Jr., a plastic surgeon, and his wife, Kathleen, a nurse and clinical social worker. In 1982, the Magees traveled to the Philippines with a group of medical volunteers to repair children's cleft lips and cleft palates. While many children were treated, the inundated volunteers, lacking in resources and manpower, were forced to turn away the majority of those who sought help. The Magees were heartbroken to see such an overwhelming need. Yet, instead of being discouraged, the Magees were inspired by their experience. As they prepared to leave the Philippines the Magees made a promise to return to the Philippines to help more children and Operation Smile was born. The Magees returned to Norfolk and began to solicit the donations of surgical equipment and supplies, began grassroots fundraising, and assembled a volunteer team of doctors, nurses and technicians. Just as they promised, the Magees returned to the Philippines to treat even more patients. Since those humble beginnings in 1982, Operation Smile has grown into a worldwide children's medical charity whose network of medical volunteers are dedicated to helping improve the health and lives of children and young adults worldwide. Operation Smile has helped more than 100,000 children and young adults in 30 developing countries overcome their physical irregularities. The organization now operates one of the world's largest volunteer networks, utilizing more than 5,000 medical and non-medical professionals around the world. During their medical missions, credentialed medical professionals volunteer to repair facial deformities while building public and private partnerships that advocate for sustainable healthcare systems for children and families. Furthermore, Operation Smile trains and educates local medical professionals and leaves behind necessary equipment to lay the groundwork for long-term self-sufficiency. I commend the Magees for their passion to improve the health and lives of children and young adults worldwide. Through Operation Smile, their efforts over the past 25 years have offered new life and new hope to those suffering from facial deformities and their families. In recognition of Operation Smile's 25th Anniversary, I am truly honored to commend their noble work here on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. A March 2007 Los Angeles Times editorial posed the question: ``Do we really need a General Pelosi? Too many lives are at stake to allow Members of Congress to play the role of Eisenhower or Lincoln.'' How unfortunate that less than a month after the fifth and final brigade of this surge effort has arrived in Iraq we sit here once again prepared to put bad politics in front of sound policy and undercut that mission, putting the lives of our troops, our coalition partners, and millions of Iraqis at risk. Once again, the leadership of this institution wants to play general, so it chooses to circumvent the committee process to rush a hastily written piece of legislation to the House floor, one that has no chance of becoming law. And so the question that I and many Americans have is: Why? You can find the answer in today's Washington Times. According to this body's majority leader, we are here because ``if we don't do anything, these groups,'' meaning MoveOn and affiliates, ``will feel like we haven't done anything.'' So that's it. We are here to appease MoveOn.org. Where is the policy? Where is the plan? Are we to believe that this bill will bring an end to violence in Iraq? Are we to believe that our withdrawal will make our Nation or the world any safer? Thus, politics replaces policy. We are a Nation at war against Islamic terrorists who have no intention of giving up the fight. We must defend this Nation. We cannot afford to play politics. This legislation carries no plan for securing Iraq or the Middle East, only politics. Mr. Speaker, we have authorized our military to execute this surge and to report to us in September on its status. Why should we cut the rug out from under them now? Our troops will not give up on us; let's not give up on them. I urge rejection of this resolution.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. I rise today to speak about a true freedom fighter, a man whose sense of the rule of law and democracy has kept him in prison for the past 2 years. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak for my constituent from Virginia Beach, Dr. Yacob Haile-Mariam. In 2005, Ethiopia held their national parliamentary elections. Dr. Yacob Haile-Mariam, a citizen of Ethiopia, resigned his position as professor at Norfolk State University and was elected to the parliament as a member of the opposition party. Soon after the election, Dr. Haile-Mariam was arrested. Last week, the Ethiopian tribunal, adjudicating this matter hastily and without notice, terminated the proceedings and found him guilty of the charges against him. Dr. Haile-Mariam faces sentencing, including the possibility of the death sentence. Mr. Chairman, the conviction of Dr. Haile-Mariam and other members of the opposition party is adverse to the principles of democracy, freedom and human rights that the United States promotes across the globe. More importantly, the conviction of these individuals is contrary to the commitment Ethiopia has made in recent years to engage in a civil society and establish a democratic government which respects the rule of law, due process and international principles of human rights. The injustice of Dr. Haile-Mariam's imprisonment has been felt throughout Hampton Roads, most particularly by his loving and supportive family. I have been in contact with his brave wife, Tegist, and officials at the State Department since 2005 seeking a positive resolution to this unfortunate situation. While I do not believe decreasing funds from this particular account would expedite the release of Dr. Haile-Mariam, I could not stand by without speaking for a man whose voice has been taken from him.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Chairman, as has been widely reported, the Department of Veterans Affairs continues to face challenges in improving service delivery to veterans and reducing the existing backlog of benefit claims. While the VA made progress in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 reducing the size and age of its pending claims inventory, it has regrettably fallen behind in recent years. The VA's inventory of pending claims and their average time pending has increased significantly in the last 3 years and the Department is currently facing over 630,000 open benefit claims. The VA reduced the average age of its pending claims from 182 days at the end of fiscal year 2001 to 111 days at the end of fiscal year 2003. However, by the end of fiscal year 2006, average days pending had increased to 127 days and is currently reported to be 177 days. It should be noted that continued increases in the number and complexity of claims being filed have played a contributing role in the current backlog. In its fiscal year 2008 budget justification, the VA identified an increase in claims processing staff as essential to reducing the pending claims inventory and improving timeliness. However, the VA states that the budget request only provides resources to reduce the processing time to 145 days. Furthermore, even as increased funding is appropriated and staffing levels increase, the VA acknowledges that it still must take other actions to improve productivity. Representatives from the VA have stated that there is a newly implemented strategy to manage the pending inventory and improve response time by getting more out of current resources, increasing staffing, and improving information technology. Given the current claims crisis, I believe that we need to know more about this strategy. My amendment will require the VA to provide a report to Congress on the status of the number of pending disability benefit claims and the actions taken to reduce processing time for veterans' disability claims. As the House considers FY 2008 funding for the VA, I believe the Congress, the American people, and more importantly, our Nation's veterans are entitled to know how current and future resources will be implemented to address these concerns. This is the least we can do. I understand that this amendment will be subject to a point of order and I will therefore not offer it. However, the current claims backlog is an issue of importance for our Nation's veterans. It is my hope that this Congress will address this issue in the near future.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Speaker, it is in the best interests of our country to have a strong and secure border. At a time when it's more important than ever to know who is entering and who is leaving our country, we should not be tying up funding in more bureaucratic red tape. Our constituents are begging for something to be done, yet the language in the Homeland Security appropriations bill will cripple the ability of the border fence to be built in high-priority areas. I understand that process and procedure are important, but this Congress has already made its stand on the fence when, in a bipartisan fashion, it supported the Secure Fence Act back in October. In the words of Sheriff Pendegraff of North Carolina, if your bathtub is overflowing, would you get a mop and bucket, or would you turn off the spigot? Mr. Speaker, it's time to turn off the spigot, close our borders and build the fence.

Mrs. DRAKE

Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment reduces the Office of the Secretary of Management $10.4 million, and increases ICE salaries and the expense account by $9.1 million, restoring the funding that was in the President's budget to fund the 287(g) program. I chose this account because between 2007 and 2008 budgets, it has increased 60 percent, or a total increase of $89 million. The 287(g) program provides training, technology, and resources to local law enforcement officers to work with the Federal Government, with ICE, to identify illegal aliens who have broken our laws. This is a voluntary program available to both our State and local governments. Currently, it is implemented in 13 locations. One of the most prominent of these is Sheriff Pendergraf in North Carolina, who has detained and deported 1,900 illegal criminal aliens in the last year. America saw the very tragic accident that occurred in Virginia Beach that took the lives of two beautiful young women at the hands of an illegal alien drunk driver. And, Mr. Chairman, this individual had been arrested and detained on DUI offenses in the past and was released onto our streets. I believe that immigration is a Federal responsibility, but we need the help of local and State law enforcement officials. We need to identify the gaps and figure out how to bridge those gaps. The 287(g) program can also be used to better coordinate with our DMVs; none of us want fraudulent documents used and driver's licenses issued for our States, and can also be used with our Departments of Corrections, so that when an illegal alien has served time in our prisons and jails, they're deported immediately, and there's no additional expense to us. Contrary to the report language in this bill, by the end of June there will only be $1 million remaining in the 287(g) coffers. Due to the success of this program such as in Mecklenberg, North Carolina, and high-profile cases like in Virginia Beach, there is an increased awareness and an increased demand for this program. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, make our communities safer, and allow better coordination between local, State, and Federal governments.