Rodney Frelinghuysen

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Greater Somerset County Chapter of the American Red Cross! On Thursday, November 15, 2007, this vibrant organization will mark its Ninetieth Anniversary. The American Red Cross, a humanitarian organization led by volunteers and guided by its Congressional Charter and the fundamental principles of the International Red Cross Movement, provides relief to victims of disasters and help people prevent, prepare for and respond to emergencies. Jean-Henry Dunant is credited as the original founder of the Red Cross. The International Committee of the Red Cross was formed on February 17, 1863. Operations were well underway overseas when the American Red Cross was first founded nearly twenty years later, on May 21, 1881 by Clara Barton. The Red Cross has a long history of providing aid in emergencies. Food, shelter, and medical assistance are offered to victims of fires, floods, and other catastrophes. In addition to disaster aid, the Red Cross sponsors blood drives; conducts CPR and first aid training; teaches swimming; provides AIDS education; and serves as a link between service men and women and their families during emergency situations. By an act of Congress on January 5, 1905, the American Red Cross was granted a charter designating it as a nationwide agency through which the American people voluntarily extend assistance to people in need. The national headquarters, located in Washington, DC, implements policies and procedures that govern Red Cross activities, provides administrative and technical supervision, and offers guidance to its national organization, composed of local chapters and geographical regions. The Greater Somerset County Chapter, American Red Cross evolved into its current configuration after undergoing numerous transformations and mergers. The Bound Brook Chapter was chartered in April 1917 and a few weeks later, the Somerville Area Chapter also came into being. In March 1958, Manville was incorporated into the Somerville Area Chapter, and in June 1964, the Somerville and Bound Brook chapters merged to form the Raritan Valley Chapter. In 1994, this chapter reached its current configuration when the Raritan Valley Chapter merged with the Somerset Hills Chapter to become the Greater Somerset County Chapter. The Greater Somerset County Chapter has historically relied on the utilization of a small staff, 428 volunteers that represent 98 percent of the chapter staffing and private authorized instructors to deliver high quality programs and services to the community. For 90 years, Somerset County has been provided continued access to 24/7 emergency and disaster services, Armed Forces Emergency Services (AFES), blood donation programs, preparedness education, health and safety training and medical transportation services. Madam Speaker, I am privileged to honor the Greater Somerset County Chapter of the American Red Cross. I urge you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the members of this valuable, dynamic organization for their ninety years of service! Again, I offer my praise and thanks to their dedicated trustees, administration, support staff, and volunteers who work tirelessly on behalf of those in need.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, this motion to instruct is straightforward. It instructs the House conferees to recede to the Senate on a provision in the Senate-passed bill that would prevent the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from using funds to initiate civil action against an organization which requires its employees to speak English at work. This provision was motivated by a lawsuit filed earlier this year against the Salvation Army. In that particular case, the EEOC sued the Salvation Army over its policy that its employees speak English. The lawsuit sought hundreds of thousands of dollars in monetary and punitive damages. What is more troubling is that when you look at the history of this issue, you will find a Federal court ruling almost 4 years ago that upheld the Salvation Army's policy that employees speak English at work. You will also find that the Salvation Army gave the two employees a year to learn English before it took action to terminate them. The EEOC has an important mission, one which we all support. The EEOC currently has a tremendous backlog of pending cases, approximately 46,000, a number that the Commission estimates will grow. At a time when the EEOC is struggling to fulfill its mission, cases like this lead one to questions about the Commission's ability to set priorities. By insisting on the Senate amendment, we are sending an important message to the EEOC that we expect them to prioritize their actions and work diligently to address the major discrimination issues facing the American workers. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the motion and reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the motion. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in support of the rule and this conference report. I want to commend Chairman Murtha and Ranking Member Young for the great work they do together each and every year on behalf of our young soldiers and their families, and the great staff that works in a nonpartisan manner for all of those soldiers and families. The challenge laid before our subcommittee every year, and this year is no exception, is to strike the appropriate balance between present and future needs. Clearly, we must provide the necessary funding to support our courageous young warfighters, troops in and out of the current fight, and their families and do it as soon as possible. In this regard, I'm pleased, as others have mentioned, that we fully fund a pay raise for our troops. We also provide an additional $2.5 billion for family support activities, more counselors, teachers, day care providers, better housing. This bill also contains significant increases in many Defense health accounts and provides funding to improve military mental health and post-traumatic stress syndrome programs. It includes new efforts on preventative medicine in the Department of Defense and extra medical research. It contains $1.9 billion to erase the shortfall in the military's TRICARE medical program. It fully funds flying hours and home training. But, Mr. Speaker, our committee has also applied its best judgment as to how we look to the future and how our Nation will confront adversaries in future conflicts. This bill provides, as others have said, nearly a billion new dollars to upgrade the equipment of our National Guard and Reserves for both military and home State civil operations. This bill fully funds the end strength increases for the Army and the Marines. It moves the F-22 Raptor program forward and retains important language that bars its foreign sale. The bill advances the Joint Strike Fighter program and directs production of a second engine. Mr. Chairman, if I'd written this bill, I might have written some sections differently. For example, I wonder if we've gotten it right with respect to the future combat systems, the Army's signature modernization program. That's the Army's future, and we need greater investments in that area. And lastly, Mr. Speaker, I join with many others in being very concerned that this conference report does not include a bridge fund to support our deployed warfighters. I understand that the House may bring a freestanding bridge fund to the floor next week. However, I believe it's a mistake to attempt to pass a downsized, stand-alone bridge fund wrapped in so much red tape and conditionality so as to force the President to veto. While this may serve some ends, it slows the process of getting needed support for those who are literally on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan. But all in all, this is an excellent package, worthy of our support. Again, I congratulate Chairman Murtha and Mr. Young for all they do each and every year, and I support the rule and I support the conference report.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this agreement and thank the gentleman for yielding. Foreign trade is vital to the United States economy and to my home State of New Jersey. Since 1945, the world's markets have become progressively more open thanks in large part to leadership exhibited by our own country. Our Nation's citizens have benefited. Ambassador Susan Schwab, our United States Trade Representative, indicates that U.S. annual incomes are $1 trillion higher because of these trade promotion agreements, which equates to $9,000 per year for the average American family. In just the last decade, such free trade agreements have helped raise our Nation's gross domestic product by nearly 40 percent and add more than 16 million jobs. Additionally, trade creates more and better jobs. Manufactured exports support over one in six manufacturing jobs, an estimated 5.2 million jobs in the United States. Agricultural exports are responsible for 926,000 jobs. Interestingly enough, U.S. jobs supported by exports pay American workers more, an estimated 13 to 18 percent above the national average. In my home State, international trade is a driving force in our economy. In 2006, merchandise exports from New Jersey were valued at $27 billion, which places us ninth among all 50 States and represents a $10 billion increase since 2002. Such increases benefit not just New Jersey's manufacturing sector, but also positively impact transportation, logistics and warehouse activity across our State. It is also worth noting that in 2006, New Jersey exported $53 million in goods to Peru. Indeed, a recent report presented to the New Jersey Commerce and Economic Growth Commission states, ``New Jersey has the greatest opportunity of any State to prosper in the new global age due to its location within the global and continental grid and its systems-wide resources.'' Beyond the economic benefits, trade builds important international partnerships that encourage security and prosperity abroad. This agreement, while relatively small in comparison to others, as well as other pending agreements with Colombia and Panama, present vital opportunities to expand our economic freedom, fight narco-terrorism, expand export opportunities, and build strategic alliances with key allies in the Americas. In addition, this agreement would eliminate tariffs for U.S. companies, expand trade in areas such as textiles and agriculture and give our own financial services companies more market access. Failure to execute this pact and others like it would not bode well for our ability to take advantage of vast global markets. Indeed, as others have said, over 95 percent of the world's consumers are outside the United States. But more importantly, limiting foreign trade counters America's long- held belief in free enterprise and open markets. We can compete as a nation in the global marketplace if we reject protectionism and continue to remove barriers to free and fair trade with countries around the world. If not, we will only have our own politics and shortsightedness to blame for the outcome. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this agreement.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. I rise in strong opposition to this rule and the underlying legislation. I stand before the House as a member of Mr. Holt's new House Special Intelligence Oversight Panel and as a lifelong resident of New Jersey, a State which is still feeling the heartrending damage of September 11, 2001. We will never forget what happened that day, and I work each and every day to prevent another such attack. I recognize that achieving the proper balance between our national security and our civil liberties is a real challenge, but we must also recognize that our war against violent international extremists is the first conflict of the information age. With our technical assets and expertise, the United States is far better at gathering information at this point in history than our enemies. This is an advantage we must exploit to better protect the American people from those who would do us harm. Then why are we on the floor debating a rule on legislation that essentially amounts to unilateral disarmament on our part? Last August, Congress enacted the Protect America Act, legislation that sought to modernize the old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, and closed dangerous loopholes that prevented our intelligence community from monitoring overseas communications between al Qaeda members and other terrorist groups plotting and planning their next attack on U.S. citizens and our interests at home and abroad. These were not conversations involving Americans. These were communications between foreign targets overseas. Director of National Intelligence McConnell asked Congress to ``make clear that court orders are not necessary to effectively collect foreign intelligence about foreign targets overseas.'' I repeat, ``foreign intelligence about foreign targets overseas.'' But this new proposed legislation would not only undo the progress made by the Protect America Act, but it would do further damage to our collection efforts. Since it was enacted in 1978, FISA never required our government to acquire court orders for foreign communications of persons reasonably believed to be outside the United States. This bill would require such a court order, thus gutting 30 years of foreign intelligence collection. Once again, Mr. Speaker, I understand that achieving the proper balance between our national security and our civil liberties is a challenging task. I believe the Protect America Act achieved this goal. The bill required a warrant to target a person in the United States but allowed U.S. intelligence agencies to listen to foreign persons in foreign countries. Why is this important? Because speed matters in a war on terrorism, where terrorists are using our communications networks, not theirs, in order to try to harm us. This is not about politics. It's about ensuring that we give our security personnel the tools they need to help protect our families from future terrorist attacks. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I fear the RESTORE Act will live up to its name. It will restore our intelligence community to the days when their hands were tied and they could not monitor the communications of al Qaeda members and other terrorists overseas without lengthy legalistic procedural delays. Terrorism is an international threat that requires (international) technology to solve. I urge my colleagues to restore our intelligence community's hard- earned technological advantage over al Qaeda and their murderous comrades. Protect America. I urge defeat of this rule and rejection of the underlying legislation.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Employment Horizons of Morris County, New Jersey, a vibrant organization I am proud to represent! On Thursday, October 18, 2007, Employment Horizons is celebrating its 50th anniversary. Founded in 1957, Employment Horizons is the premiere, not-for-profit agency providing comprehensive employment, training and job placement services to persons with disabilities in the greater Morris County area. Employment Horizons, formerly known as the Occupational Training Center of Morris County, was founded by a group of concerned parents who wanted to expand work and personal growth opportunities for their children with disabilities. During the 1950s and 60s, those with disabilities had very few options available to them and special education services were just evolving. Work centers, such as their packaging and assembly unit, were developed at that time to provide disabled adults with a place where they could earn money and maintain their self-respect. Over the years the agency has experienced rapid growth in the number of and breadth of services provided to meet the needs and choices of the individuals they serve, both on-site as well as in the community, as well as to meet the changing needs of the business community. As a social business enterprise, the agency seeks to provide high- quality, competitively priced, services to the business community through their commercial operations while, at the same time, furthering their mission to ``assist people with barriers to employment to achieve their individual vocational objectives and establish self-sufficiency in the community.'' Over the past 50 years, Employment Horizons has established relationships with hundreds of businesses and created training and employment opportunities for thousands of individuals who require special assistance to obtain employment. Madam Speaker, I am privileged to honor Employment Horizons. I urge you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the members of Employment Horizons for their fifty years of service! Again, I offer my praise and thanks to their dedicated trustees, administration, support staff, volunteers and active parents who work tirelessly on behalf of Employment Horizons' children.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Caldwell Public Library, serving the Borough of Caldwell, Essex County, NJ, a vibrant community that I am proud to represent! On October 12th, the good citizens of the borough will celebrate their library's 90th anniversary with a rededication and the dedication of the Gene and Kathryn Collerd Local History Resource Room. The Caldwell Public Library, an Andrew Carnegie Library dedicated in 1917, is situated on Bloomfield Avenue, diagonally across from President Grover Cleveland's Birthplace Memorial, a national historic site. On October 1, 1906, at a regular meeting of the Borough Council, a communication was received from the Caldwell Borough Improvement Association, requesting the Borough to assume the responsibility of operating and supporting a public library. The following year, 1907, Professor Hedden, Superintendent of Schools, requested the Caldwell Borough Council submit to the voters a referendum to establish a free public library under the State Library Act. The councilmen endorsed the necessary requirements, and at the November elections, the Act was passed by the voters. The State Library Commission accepted and approved the proposed charter. On June 8, 1908 a letter from the Carnegie Library Foundation offered a sum of $7,500 to construct a library. To meet the grant's specifications, the town was required to provide an appropriate lot, plus $750 or 10 percent of the grant annually to sustain the library. For the next 9 years, the library board was confronted with problems which hindered the construction of a new edifice. Acquiring a suitable location was the principal issue. West Caldwell resident Mr. George W. Canfield generously donated $2,000 toward the purchase of a site for the library. With this contribution, and donations from other interested persons, a total of $3,000 was raised to purchase a site. On October 12, 1917, the Caldwell Library was formally dedicated by Mayor Peck, who was also President of the Library Board of Trustees. Gene Collerd recorded much of the history of this area over the course of his life (1913-2004), and this Collerd Collection, to be housed in the Gene and Kathryn Collerd Local History Resource Room, will be an invaluable resource to not just the Caldwells, but beyond. Madam Speaker, I urge you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Caldwell Library on the celebration of its 90th anniversary!

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Connecticut for yielding and for his work and for my colleague Scott Garrett's work in keeping the issue of increased airline noise before the public. Throughout my tenure in the House, I have been an advocate for reducing aircraft noise over northern New Jersey. I have attended dozens of public hearings, had meetings with officials from the FAA and responded to literally thousands of my constituents who are angry about aircraft noise. This new plan, in fact, increases aircraft noise over northern New Jersey. I have been a strong proponent of the redesign for airspace over New York and New Jersey. The first such design was conducted by the FAA, and through the appropriations process, I think we got $60 million for it. But in the process, the FAA has not adequately addressed the issue of aircraft noise. While this amendment doesn't deal directly with that, I am hopeful that this committee and other Members of Congress will push the FAA to concentrate on the issue of aircraft noise, because as we are concentrating on airline safety, we need to remember that people have to live in the area.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution marking the sixth anniversary of this vicious attack on America. It was 6 years ago tomorrow when our Nation was irrevocably changed as the tragedy struck in the streets of Lower Manhattan, the fields of Pennsylvania, and at the Pentagon. Six years later, the pain and anger remain fresh. We still miss those lost on that day, and we are still grateful for the heroes who faced danger on that day. When the day was over and as we learned of the loss of nearly 3,000 Americans, including 700 New Jerseyans, just about 100 from my district in one small town, 20 or more were killed, 12 from the same church, we knew our Nation had been changed forever. But amidst the tragedy, we also saw the best of our Nation, neighbors and friends consoling one another, Americans from all walks of life standing united side by side waving the Stars and Stripes and lighting candles to honor those missing or lost. And while our Nation still faces challenges and still grapples with the aftermath of these attacks, we draw strength from the knowledge that the character and resolve of America is still strong 6 years later. Today, on the eve of the sixth anniversary of this tragedy as a Nation, we remember all those we lost. We embrace those who remain, the families of those victims, and we honor those who serve on our behalf in places like Afghanistan and Iraq and do it on a hellish environment on our behalf. And we honor our firefighters, our police officers and our emergency personnel. We bless them for their work. We will never forget September 11, 2001.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill and want to thank Chairman Murtha, Ranking member Young and their very able staff for their hard work. The challenge before our Subcommittee was this: strike the appropriate balance between present and the future needs for our military in a time of war. Clearly, we must provide the funding necessary to support our courageous young warfighters--troops in the current fight--and their families. In this regard, I am pleased that the bill: Fully funds a 3.5 percent pay raise for troops; Provides an additional $2.5 billion for family support activities-- more counselors, teachers, day care providers, better housing, etc; That the bill: Contains significant increases in many Defense Health accounts and provides funding to improve military mental health and PTSD programs; Includes new efforts on preventative medicine in DOD and enhancements to military medical research; The $1.9 billion shortfall in the military's TriCare program is erased in this bill; Contains new initiative to consolidate the DOD and VA medical record- keeping systems to assure that our soldiers' medical records do not fall through bureaucratic cracks. Further, the bill: Fully funds flying hours for our aviators and home training for all those who fight on our behalf; Includes an additional $142 million to I provide enhanced security at DOD bases here in the U.S. As the recent incident at Fort Dix demonstrates, our military bases are terrorist targets. But Mr. Chairman, this Committee also applied its best judgment as we look to the future and how this Nation will confront future opponents in future conflicts. The bill: Provides nearly a billion new dollars to upgrade the equipment of our National Guard and Reserves for both military and home state civil operations; Fully funds the ``end strength'' increases for the Army and the Marines; Moves the F-22 Raptor program forward and retains language that bars its foreign sale; Advances the Joint Strike Fighter program and directs production of a 2nd engine; Establishes a new Army Stryker Brigade and contains funding for five new ships for the Navy. Mr. Chairman, if I had written it this bill, I might have written sections differently. For example, one could argue with the total funding levels. And I wonder if we have ``gotten it right'' with respect to reductions to Future Combat Systems--the Army's signature modernization program. But all-in-all, this is a good package worthy of our support. I thank the Chairman. I thank the Ranking Member. And I thank the staff and urge support of the bill.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation--H.R. 3356. The Global War on Terrorism--the Long War--is the first conflict of the information age. With our technical assets and expertise, the United States is far better at gathering information than our enemies. This is an advantage we must exploit each and every hour of the day to better protect the American people from terrorists who are plotting against us at this very moment. We must never lose that technological edge! Last year, this House passed the Electronic Surveillance Act seeking to update the Foreign Intelligence Act (FISA) of 1978. That bill took into account 21st century technological developments which enable our intelligence agencies to spy on terrorists who may be planning the next attack. For example, the current FISA law (1978) covers only ``wire'' and ``radio'' communications. FISA is a pre-internet, pre-cell phone law. It's a living anachronism! A dinosaur. That reform bill never became law and since that time various developments have further eroded our intelligence capabilities. The wording of the outdated FISA law and a court ruling earlier this year prevents our counterintelligence people from listening in on terrorists overseas if that communication is somehow routed thru ``nodes'' in the United States. In our effort to ``connect-the-dots'' to prevent the next attack, this is a huge problem! The Director of National Intelligence has stated unequivocally that we continue to miss significant amounts of information that we should be collecting. Simply put--we should be fully protecting the American people, and we are not. The Democratic Leadership has known about these failures and has failed to act to correct them. Madam Speaker, it is critically important that this Congress immediately reform the FISA. Intelligence is our first line of defense against terrorists. Good intelligence can save American lives--our soldiers in the war zones and our fellow citizens here at home. During this summer of heightened threat warnings, there is no more important priority for this Congress today than to modernize FISA-- fully and completely. The lives of our constituents depend on it. Unfortunately, H.R. 3356 falls short in several specific areas and actually erects new burdens for our counterintelligence personnel as they work to keep Americans safe. It is opposed by the Director of National Intelligence. I, too, oppose this legislation.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. While I support the military goals of this legislation, all of us do, I rise in opposition to this rule and this bill. We all want to see the dwell times for our troops expanded to meet Department of Defense standards, but this legislation would place handcuffs on our military commanders as they work to stabilize Iraq. My colleagues, in many senses this is a political document, pure and simple. The dwell time requirements appear to be not so much efforts to improve the readiness of units and quality of life of servicemembers in our Armed Forces; rather, these requirements are designed to force a withdrawal and reduction of U.S. forces committed to Operation Iraqi Freedom. The proof: This bill slaps deployment prohibitions only on forces destined for Iraq, but would allow those very same forces, regardless of dwell time, to be committed to combat in Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world where they might be needed. Over the past few weeks, we have heard Members of the majority speak with varying levels of clarity about their plans to ``end the war'' or ``bring the troops home.'' Of course, we all desire to bring the troops home. One even proclaimed the ``war is lost.'' But that is not the message we are hearing from Iraq today. Both General Petraeus and General Odierno have stated that initial assessments of the new strategy are encouraging as the Iraqi Army is taking a much more prominent role in the fighting. In recent days, many of us have read the op-ed in the New York Times written by two self-described critics of the war effort. From John Burns, Baghdad bureau chief, New York Times: ``I think there's no doubt that those extra 30,000 American troops are making a difference. They are definitely making a difference in Baghdad.'' And from USA Today, ``Coalition forces have uncovered more insurgent weapons caches in the first 6 months of this year than the entire previous year.'' Mr. Speaker, we have seen an increase in security, a decrease in killing, fewer car bombs, lower levels of civilian casualties; all good things. And what is this House's response to this demonstrable progress? They would offer legislation that would hamstring and handcuff our military commanders, short-circuit the training of Iraqi soldiers, and endanger further security progress. Mr. Speaker, I have always said that I want our war fighters' deployments to be short and as safe as possible. I do want our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and anywhere in the world where they are in harm's way, soon. But this is not the way to do it. I rise in opposition to this, the rule, and to this type of thinking that endangers not only our soldiers but endangers the civilians that we are there to help.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I respectfully change the subject. Mr. Speaker, all Members should be aware that there's language in this bill that greatly expands existing U.S. policy on importing drugs from other countries by allowing the wholesale importation of medicines not just for personal use but now for commercial use. Implementation of this new language would legalize the practice of reimportation of even more undocumented prescription drugs of unknown origin into the United States. Mr. Speaker, existing Federal policies allow for importation of prescription drugs for personal use, but this new provision opens the floodgates to the unknown. This is a risk we should not take, not for prescription drugs nor for any products that might do harm to our loved ones.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation on an appropriations bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be made in order if changing existing law imposes additional duties.'' I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment, and I reserve a point of order. The FBI's use of National Security Letters is a very important issue. It should be addressed by authorizing committees. I would like to point out, which I know the sponsor knows, that it is his Judiciary Committee that is the authorizing committee, and I respect that, and I know he exercises a very powerful position on that committee. This amendment requires the Department of Justice to report on its use of National Security Letters before they can issue any new National Security Letters. As we all know, the Department of Justice Inspector General released a report on the FBI's abuse of the National Security Letters in March. I hope the Judiciary Committee has been asking the Department of Justice questions. I am sure they have. Perhaps they should even mark up a bill to reform the FBI's use of National Security Letters after they have further studied this issue if they feel the reforms made by the FBI are not sufficient to date. Despite past abuses of National Security Letters, we know that they are an important intelligence tool. We also know that al Qaeda has reestablished its central organization, training infrastructure, and lines of global communications, and that the National Intelligence Estimate has put the United States, in the words of that estimate, ``in a heightened threat environment status.'' Taking away this important intelligence tool, these National Security Letters, from the Department of Justice while they compile a report, given this heightened threat environment, is not prudent. The use of National Security Letters is a very important issue that should be considered carefully and not debated for a few minutes on an appropriations bill. I urge rejection of the amendment, and I insist on my point of order. Point of Order

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Yes, I do insist on my point of order, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. While I am opposed to the gentleman's amendment, I would like to yield him time because there have been a number of other speakers.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Reclaiming my time, and just for the record, the bill has approximately 1,100 earmarks, which is about one-fourth of what we had last year. We are, indeed, making some progress in reducing the number. In any case, Members come forward to defend their earmarks, which I think is entirely appropriate. There is far more transparency, far less in the way of earmarks. I think the process has been vastly improved. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.