Jeff Fortenberry

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday morning, under the beautiful prairie sky, U.S. Army Specialist Blaine Edward Redding was laid to rest in an old and serene Plattsmouth, Nebraska, cemetery. Specialist Redding was a 22-year-old newlywed, married just 10 weeks to Nikki before a roadside bomb took his life in Afghanistan on June 7. He died along with four other soldiers, two of whom were his close friends. Blaine Redding followed a family tradition of service to our Nation, in the footsteps of his father and grandfather. Heeding the call to duty was also important to Blaine's younger brother, Private Logan Redding, who was also serving in Afghanistan in the 101st Airborne, just 15 miles away. Upon learning of his brother's death, Private Redding dutifully escorted Blaine's flag-dragged coffin back to Dover Air Force Base to meet their parents, Teresa and Pete, as well as Nikki. Mr. Speaker, at the funeral, dozens of Patriot Guard Riders; children with their mothers, hands over their hearts; saluting veterans; local officials; and hundreds of citizens lined the streets reverently bearing American flags to honor Specialist Redding's sacrifice. A hand- painted sign read, ``Thank you, Blaine.'' Also in attendance were Sally Allen and Monica Alexander, two mothers from nearby towns whose sons were killed during their service in Iraq. They came just to show their support. By the many heartwarming accounts I heard from his loved ones on Tuesday, he was a beloved son, friend, and husband. He cared deeply about his family and his country. He had served before in Iraq, and volunteered for another tour of duty in Afghanistan. Mr. Speaker, my heart is heavy with the loss of Specialist Redding. I am deeply humbled by his service and his sacrifice, and I wish God's blessings upon him and his family during this difficult time.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, June 22, 2010, I was absent and thus I missed rollcall votes Nos. 376-378. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on all three votes.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, the national debt just surpassed $13 trillion. Since 2000, the national debt and government spending have doubled, and in simple terms, every American citizen now owes $42,000 toward this debt. To govern is to choose, Mr. Speaker, and choices must be made within our budget to resolve this dire situation. Yes, the choices before us are hard, and restoring economic strength will be very difficult. But tightening the belt, making hard choices and relieving the massive debt burden that will otherwise be left to our children and grandchildren, this is the charge of Congress. This is our duty. This is what the American people deserve Government spending and overreach are eroding economic confidence, yet there is neither a political will or a mechanism in Washington right now for addressing this spiraling debt and deficit/right now there isn't even a budget, and this is unconscionable and unsustainable. Our constituents deserve a Nation with its fiscal house in order, and this starts with a responsible budget plan.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Madam Speaker, on Monday, June 14, 2010, I was absent and thus I missed rollcall votes Nos. 355-357. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on all three votes.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, May 4, 2010, I was unavoidably detained and thus I missed rollcall votes Nos. 243-245. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on all three votes.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. I thank the gentleman for the time. Madam Speaker, as we all know, this Sunday, millions of Americans will celebrate the 102nd Mother's Day. The dedication, the grace, and the love of our mothers are written on all of our hearts and the history of our Nation, and I think it can be rightly said that the great character of America is due to the collective visionary might of the American mother. President Abraham Lincoln elucidated this very well: ``All I am or hope to be, I owe to my angel mother. I remember my mother's prayers and they have always followed me. They have clung to me all my life.'' Across time, traditions, and cultures, mothers have long been recognized and uplifted for their irreplaceable contributions to the family and to society. But it wasn't until a woman, as we heard earlier, from Grafton, West Virginia, named Ana M. Jarvis, held an observance in her mother's honor at St. Andrews Methodist Church, that the modern American Mother's Day first began. The quest for the official recognition of Mother's Day, however, began in my own home State of Nebraska. Ms. Jarvis and the Young Men's Christian Association urged the junior Senator from Nebraska, Elmer Burkett, to bring the celebration before Congress for a vote in 1908. It didn't pass then--it took until 1914--but they got it done. Congress eventually declared that ``the service rendered the United States by the American mother is the greatest source of the country's strength and inspiration.'' Since that time, our society has undergone vast transformations, but it is a testament to the enduring role of the family as the true foundation of America that Mother's Day still stands strong, even amid the nuances of modernity. Mothers have sustained and strengthened our Nation through every generation, and their compassionate leadership in the family and in their communities has remained a constant even through turbulent times. Each day, mothers are called to carry on the essential challenge of nurturing and fortifying our world, of building a better future for their--for our--children. The strength of the Nation ultimately is determined by the strength of our families and communities--and mothers shape that strength through their unique and integral role. Madam Speaker, in times when we have become mired in bitter policy disputes, I believe it is refreshing to come together as a body now to honor the women who have literally given us the breath to stand on this floor, to defend our convictions, and maybe, to try to effect some good in this world. We join with millions of Americans echoing the father of our country, George Washington, who said, ``All I am, I owe to my mother. I attribute all my success in life to the moral, intellectual, and physical education I received from her.'' Madam Speaker, I appreciate the time, and I urge my colleagues to support this timeless resolution.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Father Dan, I am glad to see that you have been able to join us, and I thank the gentleman for the time. Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to rise today to pay tribute to our Chaplain, Father Dan Coughlin, whom we honor today in his 10th year of service as House Chaplain and as its 59th Chaplain. On this occasion, I also wish to express my personal deep appreciation for Father Coughlin's steadfast support and wise counsel. Public service in its essence demands much from those called to responsibility for the future of our Nation. It presents many weighty challenges that call upon Members of Congress to live out the transcendent principles that mark the immutable character of our great republic. Father Dan works tirelessly to focus our attention on the values that actually do unite us at a time when so many forces seek to divide us. He challenges us to animate our drive for truth with compassion and to fortify our quest for compassion with truth. Members and staff have come to rely upon his insight, his openness, his unique ability to lead people of all faith traditions to thought-provoking introspection, based upon a lifetime dedicated to understanding the profound motivations of the human heart. Called upon so often to help us and our families shoulder the burdens of state at discordant times in our history and particularly given the challenging time in the history of our world now, Father Coughlin exemplifies what it means to be a selfless servant and a true peacemaker. We are indeed fortunate for the grace of his presence among us, and it is an honor and privilege to acknowledge his 10 years of service to this institution. Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by reading an excerpt of the prayer that Father Coughlin delivered on September 12, 2001, which I do believe remains as relevant today as it was then. ``Send forth Your Holy Spirit, Lord, upon all Members of Congress, the President, and all government leaders across this Nation. Free them of fear, any prejudice whatsoever, remove all doubt and confusion from their minds. With clear insight which comes from You and You alone, reveal all that is unholy and renew the desire of Your people to live lives of deepening faith, unbounding commitment, and lasting freedom here where liberty has made her home. ``We place our trust in You now and forever. Amen.'' Thank you, Father Coughlin, for your outstanding service.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Madam Speaker, on Friday, March 19, and Saturday, March 20. 2010, I was absent due to family obligations and thus I missed rollcall votes Nos. 136 through 154. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on Nos. 137, 138, 139, 141, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, and 154 and ``nay'' on Nos. 136, 140, 142, and 153.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, let's just imagine for a moment that this health care bill before us today failed. Let's just imagine that we all awoke tomorrow and could say to one another now we have a chance to get health care reform right, health care reform that is fair to everyone, reduces costs and truly improves outcomes, instead of just shifting costs to more unsustainable government spending and eroding health care liberties. Mr. Speaker, the debate has become very passionate, and I fear that we sometimes lose sight of the fact that our actions have consequences and can even affect little children. The other day a 9-year-old boy approached me and he said, Congressman, I have a question. He said, if the government gets so bad, which country should we move to? And I put my hand on his shoulder and I looked at him and I said, America is still a good country, we just have to make it better. Mr. Speaker, I am not here to help manage the decline of America. None of us are. We can do better. We must do better.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, there's a motto inscribed on Nebraska's State Capitol. It says, ``The Salvation of the State is Watchfulness in the Citizen.'' Mr. Speaker, Nebraskans and all Americans are watching this health care debate. Frankly, I think they're growing tired--tired of the backroom dealing, tired of the abuse of the legislative process, and tired of the unwillingness of this body to craft the right policy for our country. Overall, Nebraskans, and I assume most Americans, want a good health care bill, one that truly strengthens health care outcomes for everyone and reduces cost while we protect vulnerable persons. Instead, with Washington-style elitism, efforts are continuing behind closed doors on a measure that is filled with special deals that will substantially shift costs, erode health care liberties, and add to increased and unsustainable government spending. Mr. Speaker, our constituents are watching to see if the health care legislation is fair--fair to seniors, fair to families, fair to small businesses, fair to the hardworking citizens across this country. Mr. Speaker, I believe we can do better.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Madam Speaker, we are hearing about the problems with this health care bill, from its failure to address the real cost drivers, as well as its subversion of the democratic process. But here's another problem. The Speaker of the House, on Monday, asserted that the bill before us is ``about health care, health insurance reform. It's not about abortion.'' Now for the reality. The bill before us would permit the Federal Government to provide subsidies to insurance plans that cover abortion, oversee State plans that cover elective abortions, and allow Federal officials to mandate that private plans cover abortions. It is replete with abortion. The American people have spoken, and they do not want their taxpayer dollars entangled in the provision of abortion. Abortion is not health care, and no American should be forced to pay for it. We should be supporting those in vulnerable circumstances. Abortion is so often the result of abandonment. Women deserve better. But true health care reform must be life-affirming. I will not support this bill.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for her leadership on Foreign Affairs and for the time. Madam Speaker, the situation in Afghanistan is complex, and it has been difficult. And it has serious ramifications for regional and global stability. Congress understood this in the aftermath of September 11 and authorized the use of force in Afghanistan. The situation is no less serious today. We would all like to see our troops come home as quickly as possible, leaving Afghanistan a stronger and better place. And we all deeply care about our troops, particularly those who are now wounded, who have fought so valiantly. But, Madam Speaker, decisions regarding the disposition of our forces in Afghanistan should be made in concert with our commanders in the field who take seriously their responsibility for our troops and the success of that mission. I have confidence that General McChrystal, after a thorough and painstaking calculus, has provided a clear plan to increase stability in Afghanistan and allow our troops to withdraw as quickly and as responsibly as possible. Moreover, now is not the time to leave fledgling civil society programs more vulnerable to intimidation and attack. So, Madam Speaker, I respectfully submit that we cannot afford to risk compromising the future of that region at this most difficult time, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. I thank Mr. Smith from New Jersey for the recognition and for his passionate understanding and belief of this most fundamental aspect of human rights and the need for justice in our world today around this essential issue, the protection of our most vulnerable. Thank you, sir, for your leadership. Mr. Speaker, I would like to add that tomorrow thousands of people from across the Nation will gather just steps away from this very Capitol along the National Mall. They will be huddled against the cold, but nonetheless they have come out to speak out against the 37 years of human rights abuses and affronts to our fundamental rights and liberties. We especially welcome the youth who will come out tomorrow who will take time away from their studies to stand at the feet of our Nation's seat of power and give voice to the voiceless. They faithfully make the trip to D.C. each year to regret the anniversary of the Supreme Court's passage of Roe v. Wade legalizing abortion in this country. Tomorrow these thousands, young and old, will lift their voices in one resounding cry for one fundamental cause of justice, the idea that women deserve better than abortion; the idea that life gives hope and that we are big enough and we should be loving enough as a Nation to care for the lives of every mother and the child nestled within her. This idea is essential to the well-being of our entire country. A truly good society must stand for the protection of all persons' rights, above all the right to live. To stand for goodness and justice, we must protect all life, particularly that which is most vulnerable. Wherever it takes place, abortion is so often a decision that is brought on by either physical or emotional abandonment. We must not accept a culture that says if you have been abandoned, your only option is to abandon the life within you as well. We cannot let this hopelessness breed hopelessness, nor despair breed more despair. However, many of our leaders here in Washington, Mr. Speaker, send a much different, less-affirming message to those most in need of encouragement and assistance. Last year, Secretary of State Clinton appeared before the House Foreign Affairs Committee and confirmed that it is this administration's goal of including abortion as an integral element of reproductive health care provided by the United States. President Obama has rescinded the Mexico City Policy, making millions of dollars available to foreign entities that promote and perform abortion. We now export abortion and project, in turn, our own woundedness in this country upon others. The National Institute of Health has created the largest Federal incentive to date to destroy human embryos for research, distracting scientific attention away from adult stem cell research, research that is achieving real results and does not cause ethical divides. Secretary of Health and Human Services Sebelius may soon rescind a regulation protecting from discrimination our health care providers who choose not to participate in the act of abortion. All four of these, and other actions taken by the administration, are a direct and pernicious assault on the sanctity of human life. And today, when twice as many black children in this country are eliminated through abortion than are born, we also hear repugnant assaults on the dignity of minority populations from our leaders. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg last year commented in the New York Times, and this is a direct quote, ``Frankly, I had thought at the time Roe was decided there was concern about population growth, and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion,'' close quote. Mr. Speaker, let's reflect on that for a moment. Quote, ``populations that we don't want too many of,'' from a Supreme Court Justice. These statements deserve the strongest public rebuke. Abortion is not health care, no matter how much some leaders in Congress would like it to be. Abortion hurts women. Abortion is decimating urban America. And this cannot stand. But together, we can stand for life. We can win this fight for good. And Mr. Speaker, those who share this deep concern for the sanctity of life, I would say they are the new abolitionists. They are the inheritors of the great American tradition of seeking justice and uplifting the most vulnerable. On the eve of the 37th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, countless Americans have awoken to this reality. And the civic engagement of thousands who will gather here tomorrow, and the millions more who remain at home, will hopefully hasten the day when the Nation fully recognizes the unborn as persons worthy of protection under the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, the vast majority of Americans oppose-- do not want--their government funding abortion. I want to thank Mr. Stupak and Mr. Pitts for this amendment to prohibit Federal funding for abortion in the guise of health care reform. Women deserve better. Last week, we heard a lot of talk about compromise. Well, Mr. Speaker, neither a child in an early phase of life nor an elderly person clinging to each breath in the waning days of this life should ever be subject to a compromise. I hope that, if House has learned anything from this debate, it is this: that we must first do no harm. It is not ours to decide who lives or who dies.

Mr. FORTENBERRY. I thank the gentleman for the insight. Mr. Speaker, our health care system must be strengthened. No one disputes the diagnosis. We need to improve health care outcomes for all Americans and reduce costs, especially for small businesses and families, while we protect vulnerable persons. But this bill is a massive, risky restructuring of our health care system. Why could there not be agreement on reasonable reforms such as portability of insurance, buying insurance across State lines, and creating new insurance association models for farmers and families, providing affordable options just like corporations have? I agree we should promote a health care culture that focuses on wellness and prevention, removes lifetime caps, and expands high-risk pools to help those with preexisting conditions. However, I fear that this 2,000-page bill at $1.3 trillion will fail to reduce costs, would simply shift the costs to more government-run health care and reduce health care liberties. Mr. Speaker, what is at issue now is winning and power, not effective, reasonable reforms. We've missed an opportunity. I cannot support this bill.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and thank her for her leadership and assistance in this important resolution as well. Mr. Speaker, this week holds special significance for our Nation, especially for the courageous U.S. diplomats and military personnel who were captured when militant student activists stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran 30 years ago on November 4, 1979. Their 444-day hostage ordeal in Iran is forever etched in our Nation's memory. You cannot understand what is happening in the Middle East today without reference to this event. I introduced this resolution to remind us of the hostages' triumph in adversity, of the difficult lessons our policymakers learned during that grueling episode, to commemorate their service to our Nation and to honor those brave soldiers who were killed and wounded in a valiant rescue attempt. Our diplomats took a difficult assignment at a difficult time in the Middle East. Their courageous witness to the principles that we hold dear, just civil order and recourse to the orderly address of grievances, stands as a reminder of what is at stake now in the ancient land of Iran, a choice for peace and cooperation or a choice for repression, fear, and isolation. The quest for national prominence and prestige to which Iran understandably subscribes, absent the enduring values we have been fortunate to see enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is an empty quest. In his oft cited work, ``Democracy in America,'' Alexis de Tocqueville in essence concluded that America is great because America is good. We must constantly remind ourselves that the ongoing challenge to our Nation or any nation lies in the quest for what is good. This is the measure of greatness in a civilized world. Greatness not to dominate, but to liberate. Greatness, not to rule and coerce, but to govern wisely and with the consent of the people who seek to determine their own destiny within the framework of the just rule of law. This is the challenge before Iran today. To be a force for good in a region challenged to rise above long-standing grievances and injustices, to be a force for good in a world threatened by greed, terror and tyranny, or not. When President Ronald Reagan welcomed the former hostages to the White House on January 27, 1981, he stated, ``We hear it said that we live in an era of limit to our powers. Well, let it also be understood, there are limits to our patience.'' It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that by honoring these brave men and women, we may inspire people throughout the world to work tirelessly for the freedom and justice they deserve and settle for nothing less. It is also my fervent hope that in recognition of this 30th anniversary, the people of the United States and Iran may embark on a new relationship that fully reflects the noblest aspirations for life and liberty.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. I thank my colleague Mr. Smith from New Jersey, whom I learned a great deal from primarily about being passionate for those who are least among us, for being passionate in the belief that women deserve better than abortion. So I thank you for your leadership, sir. I would like to point out what is becoming increasingly clear, Madam Speaker, that the health care plan under consideration would authorize Federal funding for elective abortion, even though the majority of Americans do not want their government funding that procedure. Several amendments, as has been discussed, introduced in the committees of jurisdiction to make sure abortion funding was explicitly excluded from the bill all failed. Now it is reported that there is a so-called abortion funding compromise that I fear is put in place to draw the support of pro-life House Members who otherwise, in good conscience, would not vote for this particular bill. This move should not mislead the American people. However clearly, cleverly worded the proposal might be, this plan would authorize a government-run option to fund elective abortion and subsidize private plans that cover elected abortion. This language creates a smokescreen by appearing to offer a restriction on the use of Federal funds for abortion while leaving in place the key legal authority which says, ``Nothing in the act'' should be interpreted to ``prevent the public health insurance option from providing for coverage of elective abortion.'' The abortion language requires the public option to hire contractors to ensure that money paid into the government option could potentially be used to pay for elective abortions. For example, Medicare contracts with private business to handle claims, but no one in their right mind would say that Medicare payments are private payments. They're government payments. So this new compromise language is a hoax. So, Madam Speaker, I don't believe my colleagues should be misled. I also believe that we should have the opportunity for more dialogue, debate, and consideration of potential amendments that could actually strengthen the opportunity for good health care reform in this country. I would personally like to offer an amendment that broadens a long-held American tradition that we call freedom of conscience. I would like to simply read a part of the amendment that I will potentially offer. It says, The Federal Government and any State or local government or health care entity that receives Federal health assistance shall not subject a health care entity to discrimination on the basis that the entity does not perform, participate in, or cover specific surgical or medical procedures or services or prescribe specific pharmaceuticals in violation of the moral or ethical or religious beliefs of such entities. This amendment goes on and actually protects the freedom of conscience of those who are actually in the health insurance coverage business by saying that the Federal Government, any State or local government that receives Federal health assistance shall not prevent the development, marketing, or offering of health insurance coverage or a health benefit plan which does not cover specific surgical or medical procedures or services or specific pharmaceuticals to which the issuer of the coverage or sponsor of the plan has an objection of conscience that is clearly articulated in its corporate or organizational policy. So, Madam Speaker, here is the issue. We should be allowed to amend this bill. We should be trying to work together to strengthen health care for all Americans by improving health care outcomes, reducing costs, and protecting our most vulnerable. The most vulnerable include people who find themselves in very difficult circumstances, those who call upon us--maybe not verbally because they're inside the womb, but those who are the least among us that need our protection and help. So, with that, I yield back to my colleague Chris Smith.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, we need to strengthen health care. We need to improve health care outcomes for all Americans, and we need to reduce costs, especially for families and small businesses, while protecting vulnerable persons. The question is how. The current bill is very risky. It is nearly 2,000 pages and will cost $1.3 trillion. It shifts the cost of what we have been doing to more government-run health care without reducing the cost drivers that have gotten us into the very circumstances we find ourselves in. It reduces the funding for important Medicare programs. It increases burdens on small businesses. It passes on costs to States, and it will reduce health care liberties for millions of Americans, including forced payment for abortion services. The solutions: We should shift our health care culture to the focus of prevention and wellness. We should allow for commonsense reforms like the portability of insurance, the buying of insurance across State lines, the creating of new insurance risk pool models for small businesses and families, of appropriately addressing preexisting conditions, and of expanding opportunities for health savings accounts. No one disputes the diagnosis. Our health care system must be strengthened. Let's get it right, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, sixty years ago, the United States, joined by Great Britain, Australia, and South Africa embarked on a historic operation to sustain and defend the vulnerable, entrapped people of Berlin, Germany. The Berlin Airlift was a colossal strategic mission that inspired strength and fortitude in those held captive by then Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin's blockade of the Western-held sectors of Berlin. Today, this Congress honors those responsible for this noble feat. The Veterans of the Berlin Airlift struck the first major blow in the new Cold War, forcing Stalin on May 12, 1949, to lift the blockade that impoverished Germany's capitol, thwarting the fall of the Iron Curtain over the Western strongholds. These airmen embodied the highest virtues of American air defense, fusing tactical brilliance and innovation with goodness and heart in one of the greatest humanitarian efforts of all time. In providing food, coal, and medical supplies to the besieged citizens of West Berlin, our veterans of the ``Greatest Generation'' led a seminal goodwill offensive that alleviated the suffering inflicted by a communist regime that threatened not only the peace and prosperity of Berlin, but the peace and prosperity of the world. As Col. Gail Halvorsen and his colleagues carpeted the streets of Berlin with chocolates and candy during Operation Little Vittles, they drew the hearts and minds of Berlin's children to notions of goodness and liberty, and away from the pervasive communist propaganda that sought to turn them against the West. As we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Berlin Airlift, let us remember the veterans who exemplified our highest ideals of brilliance and innovation in air defense, and whose integrity and dedication to liberty have inspired so many vulnerable people throughout the world. Their example renews our faith in the power of freedom and goodness to prevail over tyranny. As memories of World War II and the Berlin Blockade fade with the passing years, I believe it is even more important to commemorate the spirit of kindness that led our veterans to bring hope and joy to the weary and beleaguered citizens of Berlin. May we honor their legacy and follow their example. I am grateful for this opportunity to commemorate this noble endeavor and to honor the memory of those who are surely with us in spirit, those who gave the last full measure of devotion to a cause greater than themselves, a cause that changed the course of history for the better.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, Congress is currently engaged in a very important debate on health care. It's complex, and Americans deserve an informed and transparent debate. Yet while this discussion continues, there is a country roughly 7,000 miles from here where nearly 35,000 American lives are on the line every day, and Congress has yet, given the changing circumstances there, to fully engage in a focused discussion with our military leaders on a comprehensive strategy for Afghanistan. Since I was elected in 2004 and like so many of our colleagues, I have attended the funerals for fallen Nebraska soldiers. I've stood next to widows, whose young children were not of age, to comprehend the magnitude of the family loss. And yet when the time came, I did make the difficult decision to support sending more troops to Iraq in what was called a ``surge.'' It was the right call. I have continually met with those who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I recently met with those who are preparing to redeploy. Their dedication to service and their commitment to our country continues to inspire me and the families they leave behind. The solemn responsibility for their lives continues to weigh very heavily upon us all. Mr. Speaker, Afghanistan is facing complex security and governance challenges, and the situation demands engagement by this legislative body now. Although the administration developed a strategy for Afghanistan in March of this year, there is still a lack of clarity, some seeming uncertainty and certainly a hesitation to fully engage Congress in order to move forward in a decisive manner. Many Afghan people have braved threats of brutal violence in order to vote. Our troops are courageously fulfilling their duties, and there is concern that their resources are stretched to the limit. None of us wants our soldiers at risk nor the opportunity for stability in Afghanistan to slip away. The administration's top field general and the national security adviser are reflecting differently on the security situation in Afghanistan. General Jones stated on October 4, ``I don't foresee the return of the Taliban, and I want to be very clear that Afghanistan is not in danger, imminent danger, of falling.'' Yet our senior military commander, General Stanley McChrystal, assessed that ``the situation in Afghanistan is serious; neither success nor failure can be taken for granted. Although considerable effort and sacrifice have resulted in some progress, many indicators suggest the overall situation is deteriorating.'' We in Congress need to know, which is it? While we are responsible for funding and equipping the troops, the administration needs to define the next way forward, and this House needs to challenge the decision paralysis that threatens our mission in Afghanistan with each passing day. Until recently, the war in Afghanistan was the other war, the forgotten war, said by some to be the right war. Mr. Speaker, as much as anyone, I would like to wait and to make sure that all is in order, but Afghanistan is slipping. According to General McChrystal, ``Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near term (next 12 months)--while African's security capacity matures--risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible.'' In his initial assessment of the security situation, General McChrystal requested up to 40,000 additional combat troops. This is going to be a very tough call for all of us. Clearly, General McChrystal's judgment is based on keen insight about what it will take to prevail. The American people deserve to know the unvarnished truth about the situation in Afghanistan and the fundamental purpose for our being there. Military families deserve to know the truth about the challenges facing their loved ones. Americans need to know that the administration is committed to a plan for success that minimizes our casualties, stabilizes the country, and brings the main contingent of our troops home quickly. Let me venture to say that this is not just an American problem. The situation in Afghanistan and, for that matter, in Pakistan poses an international security threat, one that demands a shared response from the members of the international community. Pakistan has exhibited a stronger will of late to engage in the ungoverned tribal regions bordering Afghanistan. Yet we have witnessed a curious range of responses by other governments. Some who see the urgency join us, others sit back hoping that we will save the day, and yet others exploit international tensions for economic and geopolitical gains. While it may be difficult to engender the will to send combat troops, our partner nations must help provide resources to stabilize Afghanistan. Just as General Petraeus returned from Iraq to testify about the impact of the surge, I believe it would be helpful for President Obama to instruct General McChrystal to forthrightly articulate before this House his views, concerns and professional judgment. Eight soldiers, Mr. Speaker, were killed yesterday. We need to develop adequately informed conclusions about the resources needed, Afghan capabilities, and international will.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, Terry recently wrote me, ``Congressman, I can buy a car in Iowa, beer in Kansas, a fishing license in South Dakota, land in Colorado, but health insurance? No place but Nebraska.'' Mr. Speaker, in these difficult times people are hurting. Families, and especially seniors, need more affordable options, from what they put on their table to what they put in their medicine cabinets. My constituent, Terry, pointed out a commonsense reform--purchasing health insurance across State lines. There are other reforms, such as appropriately addressing preexisting conditions, promoting a culture of health and wellness to drive down costs, creating new insurance risk pool models for small businesses and families, strengthening community health centers, and expanding opportunities for health savings accounts. These changes could mark a truly bipartisan policy effort that increases competition among health insurance companies and benefits all Americans.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican leadership standards on Member requests, I am submitting the following information regarding the earmarks I received as part of the FY10 Agriculture Appropriations Conference Report: Requesting Member: Congressman Jeff Fortenberry Bill Number: H.R. 2997, FY10 Agriculture Appropriations Conference Report Account: Agricultural Research Services--Buildings and Facilities Project Name: Systems Biology Research Facility, Lincoln, Nebraska Amount: $3,760,000 Name and Address of Requesting Entity: University of Nebraska-- Lincoln, located at 202 Agricultural Hall, Lincoln, Nebraska 68583. Description: This funding will be used toward construction of a University of Nebraska--Lincoln, UNL/Agricultural Research Service, ARS, Research Facility. This facility would provide critically needed space for UNL and ARS research addressing two areas of national concern: renewable energy and water resource conservation and management. Agriculture is expected to provide almost 40 percent of the nation's liquid fuels within 30 years. This will further intensify demands on our soil and water resources. UNL and ARS scientists have been collaborating at UNL since the 1930s. Very strong collaborative programs continue today, including the ARS program at UNL that has been developing improved switchgrass varieties for 30 years and is the leading program in the world on the use of switchgrass for cellulosic ethanol. These scientists are scattered across the UNL campus and the proposed building will enable them to share collaborative, cutting-edge research space that will move this important research forward more rapidly. This project would advance major research focused on essential national efforts.

Mr. FORTENBERRY

Mr. FORTENBERRY. There's another option out there that we should actually have a creative policy discussion about in a bipartisan way which the good doctor just mentioned as well, high-risk pools is another option you have to insure or have the government basically subsidizing a market that does not exist for people who are priced out of because of preexisting conditions or other affordability problems, normal market rates through their business, through their individual policy. You could look at the expansion of those opportunities. We have a fairly good one in Nebraska. It's argued that it's a bit expensive for folks, but that's another way that the government, again, could use public dollars to ensure that people are adequately covered and pay normal rates or provide a reinsurance mechanism, and then as the doctor was saying, you will have gone a long way toward resolving the real difficult problems that exist for about 10 million Americans in providing affordable, good coverage. You'd probably have a bipartisan winner on your hands. If I could add one more point, there are certain other options, maybe this is a little more controversial, but I think it's worth exploring, in terms of basic public health expansions like community health centers, where you actually help persons who are in more vulnerable situations avoid ending up in the emergency room for primary care treatment. A combination of this, a focus on health and wellness incentives, new insurance risk pools for affordable innovative options and protecting those who are, because of preexisting conditions or other problems, priced out of those markets with perhaps other types of high-risk pool entities combined with other public health initiatives like that, you would have answered the question I posed initially: How do we improve the health of all America, reduce costs, particularly for families and small businesses, and protect vulnerable persons? We could all applaud and have a big bipartisan agreement and have accomplished, I think, what the people have sent us here to do.

Mr. FORTENBERRY. This is well stated, doctor, that the injustice of a person who has wrongly had their insurance rescinded has to be addressed by this body, another clear point of bipartisan agreement. Persons who have preexisting conditions through no fault of their own and are caught in a cycle of not being able to find insurance for the type of problem that they're dealing with is another point of real unfairness that I think you could find appropriate solutions for in a bipartisan way and fix. It leads to my second point that we really ought to focus on creative new risk pools for insurance affordability and innovation as well as increased access for people out there. I got a letter from Affiliated Foods in Norfolk, Nebraska, the other day. They are a cooperative. Now in Texas, Missouri and Nebraska we are used to the concept of cooperatives. That's where we leverage our buying power to get agriculture inputs a lot less expensively and sell our grain a lot of times. This is a cooperative grocer who basically uses their group buying power to provide the products for mom-and-pop grocery stores throughout rural Nebraska and other States. They used to be able to buy their insurance through that cooperative, but because of the change of the law a few years ago, they can no longer do so. So it leaves the small business entrepreneur out in the rural community who is struggling to make it, to have to go out on the very expensive individual or small business market instead of using the group buying power. Now this is a legitimate business. It is a group of people who have bought into a business plan and have ownership in it. They are stakeholders. They're going to be appropriately capitalized. There's no reason that they shouldn't be allowed to use that entity as a creative form of association to leverage group buying power to provide more affordable insurance for themselves.

Mr. FORTENBERRY. You've made a very good point that there is an unequal tax treatment based upon your defined status in the Tax Code. And if you're an individual left out there on your own versus a multistate corporation, you have a different incentive, basically, based on the Tax Code structure. I agree with you, it's unfair.