Vito Fossella

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, today we pay tribute to the men who made up the greatest fighting force ever assembled. Their cause was just, and they carried the banner of freedom against the most fearsome and vicious enemy the world has ever seen. All the while, the courage of these American heroes never failed. They were soldiers, sailors, marines--others served with great distinction in the Air Force, the Coast Guard and the Merchant Marine. We owe them all a great debt. Over 400,000 Americans died during the conflict. Today, roughly 4,300,000 veterans are still with us. To understand the importance of what these men did, one must realize the magnitude of what they were up against. In the space of a few years, a great evil had swept across much of the world. It was the hand of several governments--all dictatorships--who had formed a bloodthirsty pact to swallow their neighbors whole. The aggressors struck quickly and with ferocity impossible to resist. Many strong nations fell under their control. The occupation was focused, deadly and vicious, and executed millions of the conquered peoples. One of the aggressor states in particular had developed an ideology so disturbed it led them to murder millions more of their own citizens, including many loyal ones. So perverse were the nature and scope of the deeds committed by Germany that, decades later, the mere name of its ruling political party is a curse word for the most vile--the Nazi party. Meanwhile, Japan captured the Chinese city of Nanking in December, 1937, and the four months that followed have become known as the Rape of Nanking. It is estimated that the occupiers executed between 250,000 and 300,000 of the city's inhabitants, merely the most outrageous of a series of atrocities committed in the Pacific Theater. Who could stand against these savage marauders? Who could stop them, as they savaged their way across the continents? The answer came on December 7th, 1941. Japan attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, killing 2,409 Americans. The devastating attack, which nearly crippled the battlefleet and destroyed equipment and facilities, shocked the nation. Americans, still groggy from the Great Depression, were jolted awake by the empires expanding across the oceans both to our east and west, and by the grim realization that it was going to take America to do something about it. We were fortunate to have strong leaders: President Franklin Roosevelt knew that a full-scale mobilization was needed, and that it was going to take the entire country pitching in to properly prepare our military for war. Army Chief of Staff George Marshall revamped the military and crafted overall strategy. One who was watching the American reaction and knew what it meant was British Prime Minister Winston Churchill: ``To have the United States at our side was to me the greatest joy. Now at this very moment I knew the United States was in the war, up to the neck and in to the death. So we had won after all! . . . Hitler's fate was sealed. Mussolini's fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to powder.'' Thousands upon thousands of Americans answered the call to arms, flooding into enlistment centers. They knew the danger; news reports out of Europe and Asia made the mounting death tolls clear. Japan's assault on Pearl Harbor was of a piece with its strategy to dominate the Pacific, capturing nearly every outpost of significance. As they became entrenched, dislodging them would only be more difficult and cost even more lives. American courage and commitment would prove superior to the great evil it confronted. Our sailors, marines and soldiers battled every step of the way, first at the Battle of Midway on June 6th, 1942, and then through the long slog of the Guadalcanal campaign (August 1942- February 1943). Meanwhile, the American fighting men joined the European front, and our allies from Britain, Poland and many other nations. First in North Africa the German armies were confronted under Operation Torch in November 1942, which culminated in the defeat of Germany's greatest general, Erwin Rommel, by early 1943. The war then moved to Sicily, then Italy--at each step our men giving better than they got. The Battle of Monte Cassino during the first half of 1944 led to the liberation of Rome. The greatest single act of courage came on D-Day, the largest one-day offensive in history, on June 6th, 1944. Over 10,000 allies were killed that day in breaching Fortress Europe, and another 200,000 would die over the next two months during the Battle of Normandy. American fighting men, in concert with men from Britain and many other nations, stormed the beaches of northern France. They charged through a hail of machine-gun fire to gain the foothold they would use to liberate all of Europe. The last major German offensive was the Battle of the Bulge, December 1944-January 1945, trying one last time to keep the war outside of Germany. American supply lines had been stretched since D-Day, and the 101st Airborne Division found themselves surrounded at Bastogne. A hundred miles from their nearest fellow units, the situation was grim, and the German commander demanded they surrender. The American attitude, here and throughout the war, was summed up by the response: ``Nuts.'' While many persevered in the belief that liberty would prevail, educated opinion was cynical. Many believed that the captured lands could never be freed, even assuming that the aggressors could be forced into a stalemate. What force could possibly stop them? It was up to the American GIs to dispel the doubts and charge into the fire. Every step of the way they knew that many of them would never be coming home again. But they knew the importance of their task--as Dwight Eisenhower said: ``History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.'' Our fighting men were neither. Today, at long last, we unveil the monument to those who saved civilization in World War II. We thank them for their sacrifice and pray that no struggle so titantic ever again need take place.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for bringing H.R. 2771 to the floor. I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gillmor) for passing this bill to ensure the continued protection of our Nation's largest and most pure source of drinking water. The overwhelming bipartisan nature of this effort was seen at the subcommittee hearing when New York Members of Congress from both parties, representatives from upstate and New York City, as well as the State Department of Environmental Commissioner Crotty all testified in support of the bill. I would like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel) for their help in spearheading this effort through. The unanimous vote passing this bill out of the full committee is yet another testament to this bipartisan initiative and backed by every single member of the New York delegation. H.R. 2771 reauthorizes the New York City Watershed Protection Program, as I mentioned, made possible through the landmark New York City Watershed Agreement. The accord resulted from the efforts of Governor George Pataki and his vision to bring together environmental groups, New York City officials, upstate communities and the United States Department of Environmental Protection in 1997. It allowed for the continued and long-term protection of New York City's drinking water, while safeguarding the economic viability and environmental quality of Upstate communities in the watershed region. The agreement also saves, and this is important, State and Federal taxpayers $8 billion that would be necessary to build water filtration systems in its absence. With a relatively small amount of Federal funding, New York City and State have been able to implement an unprecedented water monitoring and surveillance program for the 1,900 square miles of the region. This is the Nation's largest source of unfiltered drinking water, providing pristine water to 9 million residents in both New York City and its Upstate communities. Congress recognized the need to fund the New York City Watershed Protection Program in 1996 with the Safe Drinking Water Act amendments. Since then, the Watershed Agreement has made unprecedented advances towards enhancing water quality in both New York and the country. The $15 million in Federal funds authorized annually provides the seed money for groundbreaking programs and studies. These efforts are used as a nationwide model to improve drinking water for all Americans. Building on this small base of Federal funding, the City and State of New York have shown a strong commitment towards implementation of the Watershed Agreement. To date, both have spent $1.6 billion on watershed programs. Unfortunately, authorization of Federal funding of the agreement expired on September 30 of last year, leaving its future in jeopardy. H.R. 2771 solves this problem. By reauthorizing the program through 2010, enhancing the protection of New York City's water supply will continue, along with the development of watershed protection models benefiting, again, all Americans. Today, Congress will act to protect New York City's drinking water. Protect the watershed agreement's breakthrough innovations, protect Upstate farmers and communities and pass H.R. 2771.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and pay tribute to a remarkable citizen from my district, Sister Rosemary Ward. Sister Rosemary was recently presented with the Patrick Daly Memorial Award for her dedication to the care and education of children on Staten Island. For almost 55 years, she has been an exceptionally devoted teacher and principal in schools within my district. As do the truly great educators, she possesses a deep understanding and compassion for children. In combining this gift with her own values and ideals, she has created a holistic philosophy for education that has made her an invaluable asset to the community as teacher and principal. Her achievements are widely known and well sung by the innumerable citizens she's left a lasting impression upon. It is with pleasure and honor that I'd like to congratulate Sister Rosemary for this distinguished award, and on behalf of the citizens of Staten Island offer my most sincere gratitude for the extraordinary contributions she's made to the community.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deepest condolences and sympathy to the victims of the tragic terrorist attacks in Istanbul, Turkey yesterday. Following the attacks last weekend on two synagogues in Istanbul, yesterday's attacks are further evidence of the war on terrorism our country and our allies are facing. I am pleased the House passed H. Res. 453 today expressing condolences to the families of the individuals murdered and to those injured in the terrorist attacks. We must continue to stand in solidarity with Turkey in the fight against terrorism. In addition, on behalf of my New York Delegation and all my colleagues, I would like to express my profound regret to the more than 40 employees at HSBC who were injured. As of today, many of those employees are still in critical condition, while it has cost others their own lives. Often referred to as the ``World's Local Bank'', HSBC employs people in over 80 countries, including 50,000 in the United States, with over 400 offices in my home state of New York and in Staten Island. While the headquarters was attacked as a symbol of global commerce, I take my hat off to the HSBC employees in Turkey for re-opening their office today and for their leadership in committing to stay in Turkey and not backing down in the face of terrorism. Again, I extend my deepest sympathies to the entire HSBC family on the tragic loss of their colleagues.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 645 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for the clarification and his leadership in developing this important piece of legislation.

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I want to engage in a colloquy with the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce regarding section 1211 of the conference report, which adds a new section to the Federal Power Act, entitled, ``Electric Reliability Standards.'' Section 1211 provides for the establishment of mandatory reliability rules for transmitting electricity. The blackout of August 14 of this year clearly demonstrates the need for such rules. Following the blackouts of 1965 and 1977, New York implemented its own reliability standards for New York City. Any disruption in electricity in New York City can have devastating effects, as we saw, not just on the daily lives of city residents, but for the economy of the entire Nation. It is my understanding of the new section 215, subsection (i)(3) of the Federal Power Act is not meant to prohibit State or regional entities from adopting more stringent reliability standards, such as those in effect for New York City, as long as such action does not result in lesser reliability outside the State or region than that provided by the Electric Reliability Organization reliability standards. Is that correct?

Mr. FOSSELLA. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I am not recorded on rollcall numbers 602 and 603. I was unavoidably detained and was not present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall numbers 602 and 603.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I am not recorded on rollcalls Nos. 476 and 477. I was unavoidably detained and was not present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcalls Nos. 476 and 477.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Chairman, I ask the body, what do Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, and other nations have in common, other than being oppressive, dictatorial regimes? Well, what they have in common is that at one time or another, they have served as Chair of commissions or organizations within the United Nations. So what my amendment does, based on legislation introduced earlier this year, is it essentially blocks funding to organizations, commissions, or other bodies headed by nations on a terrorist watch list. Specifically, it would block U.S. taxpayer dollars from being disbursed to the United Nations if the money is used for committees headed by nations that have repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. Now, by way of example, I think a vivid example, I should say, is essentially what happened earlier this year with the Commission on Human Rights, or the Conference on Disarmament. These very commissions are dominated by nations opposed to the very concepts by which those commissions are named. Last month's outrage was Cuba. The dictatorship's brutal crackdown included the execution of three men for trying to escape Cuba and imprisoned dozens of others for daring to speak out. They have a vital role on the Commission on Human Rights. The U.N. said nothing about the crackdown, but Cuba was then elected to another term to serve on the panel. Ironically, the chairman, or the Chair country of that Commission on Human Rights, is Libya. At the beginning of the year, Iraq was going to head the Conference on Disarmament. Iraq did not take over, but remained on the commission, the Commission on Disarmament. Iran chaired the conference instead. Also on the Disarmament Committee is North Korea. I just think that this is symptomatic of a lot of carelessness at the United Nations. There are many who think that the United Nations can play a pivotal and vital role in securing the world's peace. But from time to time, the only language it seems they understand is the power of the purse. So all this amendment does is if one of these nations, and I think everybody in good conscience can look at these nations and say they represent not only what the brutal regimes are all about, but really are inconsistent with fundamental universal values, I would suggest that the money is withheld. Very simply put, I think it is common sense. After all, the U.S. provides almost 22 percent of the U.N. budget, which currently stands at about $222 million; and what we are suggesting is that if one of these nations on the State Department list of terrorist nations is heading one of these commissions, the money is withheld. With that, I urge adoption of this amendment.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 368 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voter ``yea.''

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I am not recorded on rollcall numbers 315, 316 and 317. I was unavoidably detained and was not present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted yes on rollcall numbers 315, 316 and 317. I ask unanimous consent that this statement be printed in the appropriate part of the Congressional Record.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, in spite of the wonderful exchange, I rise in support of the amendment, and I have great respect for the Members here on both sides and what they go through in this process. It is a difficult one to question and constantly evaluating and balancing priorities. My number one priority, as far as I am concerned, is to protect the American people. I think everybody in this Chamber supports that proposition. The question is how you would do that the best way? We could do it in a lot of different ways. We can root out the terrorists overseas as our great brave men and women are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan and around the globe. That is one way. We have great local police departments and Federal law enforcement officials, intelligence officials who try to root out evil before it pops its head, and we can allocate funding to the places that need it the most. And I know there may be a fundamental difference as to where that money should go, and that is okay. But if the Members asked me how I stand up here and proclaim that not just New York City but those areas that we have defined as high-threat areas should get a disproportionate amount of this money, Exhibit A is September 11. Exhibit A demonstrates that the terrorists sought out places like New York City. Why? Because it is the capital of finance, the capital of the world in some people's minds, and, indeed, as we hope and pray they are not, but, indeed, they are out there trying to do the same thing right now. So if the Members ask me why we are here to try to shift the money to what we think is a priority, I think I would say I do not ever want to see something like September 11 happen again. And with all due respect to the towns and villages around the country that wrestle with this problem every day, I think it is common sense to suggest that some areas could be more targeted than others. I do not think there is an American who would not say every town is equal in that respect. So I would hope, and I take the chairman at his word because I have immense respect for him, for the people who he has around him, to work with us to ensure that not just New York City, but those urban areas full of American citizens get that funding they need. It has been brought up before what Secretary Ridge says. I am not going to rehash it. I will submit it for the Record. New York City, counterterrorism, intelligence and public safety, $200 million; training for first responders, police, fire, $99 million; security enhancement for facilities, $187 million; emergency preparation response equipment, $189 million; communications and information technology, $223 million. Total loan, $900 million. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), who offered this, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), and I know the gentleman from New York (Mr. Sweeney) has worked hard. He mentioned the Brooklyn Bridge. Go to any bridge in New York City, any tunnel, 24 hours a day, people scanning cars, checking cars, checking trucks. Why? So that anybody coming into the city can feel more free and secure. That is what this debate is about. And I am hopeful that the good chairman once again, and I believe him, will follow through and use all existing systems to ensure that these cities and urban areas get what they deserve and get what they need. Tom Ridge. Well first of all, I share both the Governor's and the Mayor's concern to reduce distributing those dollars. According to the old formula, I don't believe we would be at maximum security with the dollars that are being expended at the federal level. We are going to work to get that number as high as possible. Having been a member of Congress for twelve years, that's the beginning of the process. The House has had a number in mind. They've passed that and we'll be working with the Senate. There's still a long way to go, but I would like to see the number risen, significantly higher than the $500 million. Reporter. Mr. Secretary, have you given the Governor and the Mayor a specific limit, a specific amount of money? Tom Ridge. No, I think we are all in agreement that it would have been a nice place to start with the 750. If we can get the Congress to restore that quarter of a billion dollars, that would be a great place to start. To finish there, that would be at least preserving the status quo. As for the supplemental, we got about $700 million and I think at least preserving what we are able to distribute before. At the end of the day ladies and gentlemen, if you take a look at the population, the density of the population, the equivocal infrastructure and the threat, there is one city that no matter how you move those factors around and weigh those factors it ends up at the top of the list and its New York City. I think every state should be given a certain amount of money and they build up a capacity to protect the infrastructure, and the capacity to respond, and the capacity to prevent a terrorist attack. But at the end of the day, I do believe there are some communities and regions that need more money because of the multitude of factors, not just population.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I am not recorded on rollcall Nos. 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263 and 264. I was unavoidably detained and was not present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes,'' on rollcall Nos. 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263 and 264.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, earlier this week New York City suffered a blow with the untimely death of Mike Handy. He leaves behind his wife, Edna Wells-Handy, and four daughters. He was 55. Mike served as Director of Veterans Affairs for New York City, a position he held under Mayors Ed Koch, David Dinkins, Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg. Professionally he had earned a great deal of respect, but it was his personal dealings with veterans, colleagues and friends that had earned him so much love. He will be very much missed. A veteran of Vietnam, he served as a ``Quick Reaction Team'' leader (with a rank of E-5) and was a .50 Caliber Machine Gun Instructor at Phu Cat. He was active in veterans affairs for nearly 30 years, acquiring more than 50 honors and awards from city, State and Federal levels. He was a member of the American Legion, the Catholic War Veterans, the Navy League, an honorary member of the New York Society of Military & Naval Officers, and a member of the Veteran Corps of Artillery. Mike led New York City's fight to save the Times Square Recruiting Station and then chaired a City/Army Corps of Engineers Task Force to facilitate its renovation. In 1991, he was appointed to the Operation Welcome Home Commission, which organized what was at the time the largest Ticker Tape Parade in the city's history. In 1995, he was the Mayor's representative for the ``Nation's Parade'' NYC tribute to the 50th anniversary of World War II. He was the Mayor's representative for seven of thirteen ``Fleet Week'' celebrations in New York City. Without fanfare, Mike helped thousands of veterans. He did this not for credit but to help his comrades-in-arms who were in need. His is a loss not only for New York, but for the Nation as well. He will be missed.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take this opportunity to mention an exemplary Staten Islander, Mr. Gustavus Evansen. He embodies the hard work and determination that characterizes the American Dream. In 1923, at the age of 17, Gus Evansen emigrated to the United States, along with the rest of his family. They joined his father, Jorgen, who had traveled here to lay the foundations of a stable life for the family in 1917. He automatically began to work alongside his father at the Electric Launch Company, or Elco, in Bayonne, New Jersey, practicing the same shipbuilding trade his father had practiced in their homeland of Denmark. He and his father worked out of their own garage on nights and weekends to make ends meet during the Depression. Mr. Evansen was promoted to foreman of the hull-building department in 1939, and continued to work for the next 6 years on the 399 PT-boats that Elco made for our government's use in the Second World War. After the war, as the Elco Company scrambled for work while the government contracts waned, Mr. Evansen lost his job when Elco closed down for good in 1949. He wasted no time in beginning a new career with the U.S. Coast Guard. At the age of 70, after 25 years building workboats on Governor's Island, and after rising from the rank of third-class boatbuilder to assistant foreman, Gus Evansen finally retired. In 1930, he had married his childhood sweetheart, Bergit Knutsen who, with her family, had also emigrated from Denmark. They were together for 71 years until her death. Gus is currently 96 years old, and is enjoying his hard-earned retirement in Staten Island, New York. He has two daughters, five grandchildren, and six great grandchildren. Mr. Evansen has led the life of a model citizen, has worked hard to make a life for his family, and is the true embodiment of the American Dream. Mr. Evansen, thank you for being a model citizen, and a proud Staten Islander.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Madam Speaker, I want to take a minute to discuss an issue that is very important to many men and women in my district and to the men and women working in the telecommunications industry. The FCC is preparing for a release of their Triennial Review of the UNE-P and I want to weigh in with my colleagues as to the fundamentals of how the UNE-P pricing model works, or as I see it, doesn't work. Suppose you, an entrepreneur, go in to manufacture candy bars and you invest significant capital to create this wonderful factory and generate candy bars. You operate for 30 years, during which you must buy new equipment, and maintain that equipment. The bottom line of your costs is say, $.75. You determine to sell them in the retail market for $1. Then you discover that there is a regulatory body empowered by the Congress that regulates candy bars and one of their missions is to promote competition. One day, these regulators come to you and they say, ``You know what? We think since you're the largest candy bar manufacturer, you should have a competitor. And we have someone that we want to be your competitor.'' Then the regulators tell you one way in which they've determined to promote competition is for you to allow this competitor to sell your product from your machinery and buildings at $0.75 or in some cases less than $0.75, so they in turn can resell it in the market for a profit to them, and a loss to your company. All the money you just spent to build a building which stores the machinery you use to make your product, package your product, distribute you're product, and maintain all of this, is used to provide a product to your competitor for the same price or less of a price that is costs you, only they don't have any risk. I pose the question to the regulators and my colleagues. What would you do as CEO of this candy bar company, what do you feel is the right thing to do? I see it to be wrong and think the regulators should take steps to mitigate this wrong or change it while they still have a chance.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, this week, my district in Staten Island is honored to host the Vietnam Wall Experience. I would like to take this opportunity to talk about the heroism of the fathers, sons, sisters and daughters that gave their lives during that conflict. These men and women traveled around the world to serve their country. They joined the military for different reasons and with different backgrounds, but were united in purpose to serve the cause of freedom. Matthew Bono, at 25, was six years older than the average draftee. He became a father-figure to his fellow soldiers, as beloved there as he was throughout his home neighborhood. He did not survive Khe Sanh. Vincent James Caravello enlisted just before his 18th birthday, right out of high school. He was killed in Thua Thien five months after he arrived in Vietnam. The Grunt Padre, Father Vincent Capodanno, died trying to rescue men while under fire. He was known for his devotion to ``his'' Marines and put himself in harm's way for them again and again. Other men were never fully accounted for after they disappeared. Lt. Kevin O'Brien served as a spotter in a U.S. Army Bird Dog 01-G craft. He is believed to have crashed over Khe Sanh in South Vietnam during bad weather on January 9, 1969. Air Force Major Gerald Crosson, Jr., was declared missing on May 16, 1968 after his plane did not return from a night reconnaissance mission. America lost fifty-eight thousand in Vietnam, including 84 from Staten Island. And then there are the wounded, POW-MIA and other veterans, all of whom deserve our deepest thanks. Today on Staten Island, nearly twelve thousand Vietnam veterans still make their homes. There is no truly adequate way to put into words our appreciation for those who made the ultimate sacrifice. I believe it was wise to have the memorial be simply a wall, bearing the names for us to remember. However, that does not relieve us of the responsibility to find a way to express to our children and theirs why it is that we have such love for the ones who gave their lives. They knew the danger when they went in, and ultimately they were fighting for us. America is stronger today because of the example they set. We must teach our children to study what these men did and why it was a noble cause. We are grateful to the Vietnam Wall Experience for helping make that job a little easier.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 181, I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, as the President of the United States has indicated, the war against terror is far from over. The battle may be won but it is far from over. Therefore, I think it is important that the United Nations step up to the plate and reflect reality and serve in the positive role that it can. That is why I think H.R. 800 is a needed step toward reform at the United Nations. It reduces U.S. funding for United Nations commissions like the Commission on Human Rights which have been hijacked by terrorist nations. The latest outrage is Cuba. The dictatorship is in the midst of a brutal crackdown, having executed three men for trying to escape Cuba and imprisoned dozens of others for daring to speak out. The U.N. said nothing about the crackdown but elected Cuba to another term on the human rights panel. The current chair of that panel is Libya, that beacon of human rights. At the beginning of the year, Iraq was going to head the Conference on Disarmament. Iraq did not take over but remained on the commission. Iran chairs that conference. North Korea and Cuba also sit on the Disarmament Committee. This is all symptomatic of a culture of carelessness at the U.N. It would not be as grave if not for the fact that the United States pays 22 percent of the United Nations' operating budget. Diplomacy and dialogue are important, but sometimes dollars are the only thing that makes sense.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I am not recorded on rollcall Nos. 146, 147, and 148. I was unavoidably detained and was not present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall Nos. 146, 147, and 148.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, It is my great pleasure to take a moment to speak about the Blue Star Banner and the Gold Star. As we continue to battle the enemy of freedom, each day many Americans bid farewell to a loved one that is a member of our Armed Forces, not knowing where they will go or when they will return, these families only have symbols of their loved ones. These brave men and women who proudly wear our military's uniforms leave behind equally brave friends and relations who look for some way to remain connected to their loved ones abroad. Those on the homefront are eager to show their support for our troops, their hope for a safe return, and their pride in the actions and bravery of their loved ones. The Blue an Gold Star Banner emphasizes the special and difficult role of the family left behind in time of war. Recognizing this desire to show support and pride for our family members who are off to battle, Army Captain Robert L. Queissner designed the Blue Star Banner in 1917, initially in support of his two sons who were serving on the front lines in World War I. The popularity of this banner spread quickly among those whose family members were also fighting in the War, and continued through many years and many battles to be displayed by families nationwide who anxiously awaited their loved ones' return. The families of those who did not make it back home displayed a Gold Star over the Blue Star Banner, to symbolize the honor with which their loved ones perished in the name of freedom. This practice continues today, as a way for families to show their pride in the valiant actions of their loved ones in service to our country, who have made the ultimate sacrifice on our behalf. I therefore encourage the families of all American servicemembers to display the Blue Star Banner and, as necessary, the Gold Star, in show of unconditional support for and pride in our nation's Armed Forces.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, today we are gathered to recognize the Greek in their 182nd year of independence. It was the ancient Greeks who coined the ideas of freedom and justice that we founded our country on. And March 25th celebrates the freedom that Greeks enjoy since their war of independence. In 1821, Greeks forcefully rose up against the oppressive Ottoman Empire, which had occupied Greece for nearly 400 years, embarking on the ultimately successful war of independence. This war was to the same likes that the United States engaged in nearly half a century earlier during the American Revolution. Fighting side by side through two World Wars, Greece and the United States remain committed allies in maintaining and strengthening freedom throughout the World. My district of Staten Island and Brooklyn celebrates the Greek heritage as an important part of our community, providing diversity and culture to our schools and neighborhoods. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I want to congratulate the Greek people for 182 years of independence and thank them for their contributions to American life.