Jim Gibbons

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2912 is sponsored by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas). This legislation would put the Osage Tribe on the same footing as every other sovereign, federally recognized tribe in the United States in terms of defining its own membership criteria and its form of government. The Committee on Resources ordered H.R. 2912 reported by unanimous consent, and the report was filed on May 19, 2004. The Osage Tribe is the only federally recognized tribe for which a specific act of Congress, which was passed nearly 100 years ago, mandates terms of membership in the tribe, as well as its form of government. Under the Osage Allotment Act of 1906, as interpreted by subsequent Federal court decisions, the only legal members of the Osage Tribe are the lineal descendents of those Osage persons living before July 1, 1907, who also possess what is called a ``headright share.'' A headright share, Mr. Speaker, is a share in the royalties from mineral development in the Osage reservation. This has had the unfortunate result of excluding people who have a high degree of Osage blood from membership in the tribe. Even though the Osage tribal leaders want to allow such disenfranchised people to become members, the 1906 act precludes them from altering their tribe's membership criteria. The reasons for how the 1906 act came about are complicated, and though Congress may have had its reasons for mandating membership rules for the Osage people, such reasons are no longer relevant today. Preventing the tribe from determining its membership and form of government is the exact opposite of promoting self-determination. The Committee on Resources held a hearing within the Osage reservation on March 15, 2004. We received testimony from several witnesses with a high degree of Osage blood who are part of the Osage community in Oklahoma and whom many of the tribal members want to welcome into the tribe. But because of the 1906 act, they are not eligible to be members of the tribe because they do not own a headright share in the Osage mineral estate. They are denied the basic benefit, as well as responsibilities, of tribal membership. Some are not eligible for certain services and benefits, such as Native American scholarships. They are prohibited by law from participating in certain rituals and ceremonial events, even though they may or might, in theory, have a higher degree of Osage blood than official members of the tribe. It is past time to consider letting the Osage Tribe decide how to govern itself as it sees fit, providing that no one loses any property or other vested legal rights in the process. H.R. 2912 includes language to ensure that no one's interest in headright shares is touched. Headrights are private property, and there is no intent to affect them under this bill. This bill received support from all the witnesses testifying at the hearing, including the representatives of the Osage Shareholders Association, which is comprised of individuals who have a vested interest in the mineral estate of the Osage reservation. Again, Congress is overdue in addressing this unusual problem, and I urge passage of H.R. 2912. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2912) to reaffirm the inherent sovereign rights of the Osage Tribe to determine its membership and form of government.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 265, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 265) to provide for an adjustment of the boundaries of Mount Rainier National Park, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 265, introduced by the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn) and amended by the Committee on Resources, would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to adjust the boundary of the Mount Rainier National Park by creating a new noncontiguous unit to the park. The new area would provide for improved camping opportunities near the northwest entrance of the park, while ensuring continued access for the Muckleshoot Tribe to nearby U.S. Forest Service lands. Today, the only road leading to the current popular campgrounds in the northwestern portion of the park continues to be flooded out by the Carbon River. I believe this bill represents a commonsense solution to this ongoing problem. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 265, as amended, is supported by both the majority and minority members of the committee, as well as the Muckleshoot Tribe and the National Park Service. I commend the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn) for her tireless efforts to work with all parties concerned to reach the consensus that is before us on the House floor today. That said, Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time and urge a favorable vote on this measure.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1233) to authorize assistance for the National Great Blacks in Wax Museum and Justice Learning Center, as amended.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 1233, the Senate bill under consideration.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Senate Bill 1233, introduced by Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland and amended by the Committee on the Judiciary, authorizes assistance for the National Great Blacks in Wax Museum and Justice Learning Center located in Baltimore, Maryland. Mr. Speaker, the Great Blacks in Wax Museum was founded in 1983 by Doctors Elmer and Joanne Martin, two Baltimore educators who used their personal savings to purchase wax figures which they displayed in schools, churches, shopping malls, and festivals in the mid-Atlantic region. The goal of the Martins was to test public reaction to the idea of a black history wax museum. So positive was the response over time that the museum has been heralded by the public and the media as a national treasure. As part of a proposed expansion of the museum, which is to occur over the next several years, S. 1233 would allow the museum to receive grants from the U.S. Department of Justice to establish programs relating to civil rights and juvenile justice. Mr. Speaker, S. 1233, as amended, is supported by the majority and minority of the Committee on Resources, and I submit for the Record letters from the Chairman of the Committee on Resources and the Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary regarding this bill. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, DC, March 25, 2004. Hon. Richard Pombo, Chairman, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Pombo: I am writing regarding S. 1233, the ``National Great Black Americans Commemoration Act of 2003'' which was referred primarily to the Committee on Resources and secondarily to the Committee on the Judiciary. The Committee on Resources reported the bill favorably on November 17, 2003. H. Rept. No. 108-372, Part I. The Committee on the Judiciary's secondary referral is currently scheduled to expire on April 2, 2004. The spending authorized by S. 1233 would come from funds appropriated to the Office of Justice Programs within the Department of Justice. For that reason, I had concerns about the bill as reported by your Committee. My staff has had discussions with staff for the sponsor of the companion House measure, Rep. Cummings, and we have reached a mutually agreeable compromise to resolve these concerns. A copy of the compromise language is attached. I understand that through staff discussions you have indicated your willingness to take the bill to the floor under suspension of the rules and use the attached compromise language as the manager's amendment when you do so. I also understand that you will use your best efforts to get the bill scheduled for floor consideration as soon as you are reasonably able to schedule it with the House leadership. Based on your willingness to follow this course, I am willing to waive further consideration of the bill in the Committee on the Judiciary so that the bill may proceed expeditiously to the floor. The Committee on the Judiciary takes this action with the understanding that the Committee's jurisdiction over the bill is in no way diminished or altered. I would appreciate your including this letter and your response in the Congressional Record during consideration of the legislation on the House floor. I appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Chairman.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to urge an ``aye'' vote on this very positive bill.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, from May 1 to 3, 2004 more than 1,200 students from across the United States will visit Washington, DC to take part in the national finals of We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution, the most extensive educational program in the country developed specifically to educate young people about the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Administered by the Center for Civic Education, the We the People program is funded by the U.S. Department of Education by Congress. I am proud to announce that the class from Incline High School in Incline Village will represent the State of Nevada in this prestigious national event. These outstanding students, through their knowledge of the U.S. Constitution, won their statewide competition and earned the chance to come to our Nation's capitol and compete at the national level. The 3-day We the People National Finals Competition is modeled after hearings in the U.S. Congress. The students are given an opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge before a panel of adult judges while they evaluate, take, and defend positions on relevant historical and contemporary issues. Their testimony is followed by questions designed to probe the students' depth of understanding and ability to apply their constitutional knowledge. Columnist David Broder once described this annual competition as ``the place to come to have your faith in the younger generation restored.'' Most recently, the We the People program was highlighted at two national conferences held in 2003: the White House Forum on American History, Civics, and Service, and the first annual Congressional Conference on Civic Education. Evaluations and independent studies have validated the effectiveness of the We the People program on students' civic knowledge and attitudes. This innovative civic education program continues to be one of the best antidotes to apathy and cynicism in our Nation. In addition, I would like to recognize the commitment and support received from all of Incline Village, community organizations and parents. Individually, coach Robert Heilig, peer tutors Ashley Hanna, Daniel St. John, and Jonathan B. Shoops, and teacher Milton Hyams have dedicated their time to work with the students in the program. Judy Simpson, the State Coordinator of the program, and Daniel Wong, the district Coordinator of the Program have also contributed countless hours into making these students better citizens. I would also like to recognize the participants of this program individually: Bradley Charles Allured, Jason Daniel Beavers, Nicholas J. Bohn, Jessica L. Corpuel, Joseph Driver, Alexander T. Heilig, McKenna Louise Hollingsworth, Joshua Michael Hub, Ansley Karen Kendziorski, Elisabeth Komito, Ashley Christine Nikke, Laura Rochelle Pillsbury, Robert William Rappaport, Catherine Lauren Serrano, Tira Wickland, and Beate Marie Wolter. These students should be commended for their hard work and tireless dedication. The class from Incline High School diligently conducted research and prepared for their participation in the national competition. I again commend these young ``constitutional experts'' on their work for and commitment to the We the People national finals. They represent the future leaders of our Nation. I wish these students the best of luck at the We the People national finals and applaud their achievement. We should all be proud that they are learning and advocating the fundamental ideals that identify us as a people and bind us together as a Nation.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today also to highlight some very troubling remarks by John Kerry, who is now seeking the Presidency of the United States, our Commander-in-Chief. In 1971, Kerry testified before a Senate committee that communism was not a real threat to the United States. He went so far as to say that the U.S. was ``reacting under Cold War precepts which are no longer applicable.'' Mr. Speaker, that was 1971. I think we can all agree the Cold War was very much applicable and continued to be for the next two decades. Now John Kerry has the gall to compare our efforts in Iraq to Vietnam. Mr. Speaker, as a veteran of Vietnam War, I take great offense to Mr. Kerry's statements, then and now. Our efforts in Iraq have liberated millions of civilians from a brutal dictator that has used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, and the United States is a safer place with President Bush as Commander-in- Chief.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Guardsman and Reservists Financial Relief Act of 2003. First let me commend all of our fine troops at home and abroad for their efforts in the war on terrorism. I want them to know that America supports their unyielding commitment in protecting our country from the constant threat of terror. The terrorists will never let up in their pursuit to create devastation and chaos all at the cost of innocent civilians, and their lives, of course. And we cannot afford to lose this war, and we must remain steadfast. Madam Speaker, there is no doubt that through this difficult and dangerous struggle, our National Guardsmen and military reservists have continued to serve our Nation with honor and distinction. The President and this Nation have called upon these brave men and women to help win this war, and they have answered. Guard and reservists oftentimes leave behind not only their friends and family, but their private sector jobs. In doing so they may face a drastic cut in pay, placing their families in financial hardship. While our reservists are fighting to protect the American way of life, facing daily threats from radical insurgents and terrorists abroad, here in Congress we must stand up and fight for those heroes here at home. Madam Speaker, this is why I am a strong advocate for this legislation. H.R. 1779 will help the families of these reservists and guardsmen pay their bills while they continue to serve this country. I ask Congress to do the right thing today, pass this important bill for the brave men and women who sacrificed so much for our safety and security so that we can win this war.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I respectfully request that the following document be entered into the Congressional Record. As you may know, many of my constituents and friends in the state of Nevada are of Romanian descent, and it is with those individuals in mind that I make this request. The Romanian-American Community greeted with joy the fall of communist dictatorships and the dissolution of the former Soviet Union. They also greeted with optimism the declaration of independence of the newly created Republic of Moldova . Their paramount hope was that the people of this republic, of whom the majority are ethnic Romanians, would develop along democratic lines and would become part of the enlarged European family. Their joy was short-lived. Russia soon launched a new geopolitical policy aimed at bringing back to its fold Moldova and other parts of the former Soviet Union. As of March 2004, Belarus is well under Moscow's control, Ukraine is barely capable of claiming its independence, and Moldova has virtually collapsed as a result of new Russian political pressure and economic strangulation. The communist government of Moldova has recently withdrawn the parliamentary immunity of the last members of the democratic opposition and is ready to imprison them. Due to these humanitarian, political, and geopolitical reasons, the Romanian communities of the United States have changed their views and have suggested a new policy toward Moldova . . . Here is their new stand as prepared by Dr. Nicholas Dima.) the united states, romania, and . . . moldova This essay represents the position of a large number of responsible and loyal American citizens of Romanian descent with regard to the current status of the Republic of Moldova. Heretofore, we present the facts. Since times immemorial, the current Republic of Moldova (better known as Bessarabia) has been populated by Romanians. During medieval times, this land was the eastern half of the Principality of Moldova, one of the three principalities that made up modern Romania. Tsarist Russia occupied it for the first time in 1812 and used it to further expand into southeast Europe. Russian interference in the Danube and the Black Sea navigation caused the West to side with Turkey during the Crimean War of 1856. At the end of the war, Russia was forced to retreat from the Danube and southern Bessarabia. Nevertheless, the tsars occupied the whole province again following the new war of 1877. Then, after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, the province voted to reunite once and for all with Romania. Unfortunately, the new Soviet Union did not accept the union and somewhat puzzling for us, the United States did not ratify the union of Bessarabia with Romania either. Between WWI and WWII Moscow promoted a policy of territorial expansion and global communism. In this part of Europe, Moscow pursued the goal of re-annexing Bessarabia and further intruding in the Balkans. This policy was implemented after Nazi Germany and communist Soviet Union signed the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact to divide Eastern Europe. The Soviet republic of Moldova was thus set up in 1940 after the Red Army invaded the province. Actually, in anticipation of the annexation, as early as 1924 Moscow had set up an autonomous Moldavian republic on the left bank of the Dnestr in the Ukraine. Its sole purpose was to prepare the future annexation. When the occupation of the province was accomplished in June 1940, Moscow disbanded the autonomous republic and returned to Ukraine part of it together with the northern and southern parts of Bessarabia. The old name that recalled the Romanian origin of the province was banned from the Soviet vocabulary. To further complicate the issue, Moscow incorporated into the new Moldavian SSR a slice of land on the left bank of Dnestr with the city of Tiraspol as its center. Ever since, this highly Russified industrial area has remained a cauldron of communism and expansionism. The ethnic Romanian majority of the occupied territory was never asked if they wanted to be part of the USSR. Neither were the other ethnic groups asked if they wanted to be annexed or arbitrarily divided between the newly created republic and the Ukraine. Furthermore, well-informed international circles as well as local survivors have revealed that during and after WWII up to a million inhabitants of Soviet Moldova, mostly Romanians, were arrested, deported or killed by the Soviet authorities. At the same time, Moscow sent hundreds of thousands of Russians to replace the local Romanians and to secure the allegiance of the new republic. Yet, to this day two thirds of the population of this land is still ethnic Romanian although they have been forced to call themselves Moldavan. Perestroika of the 1980's brought new hopes of freedom to the peoples of the USSR, and by the early 1990's every Soviet republic including Moldova had declared its independence. However, to prevent Moldova's reunification with Romania, the Russians from Tiraspol declared the independence of their region and named it the Dnestr Moldavian republic. Soon after, a war between Moldovan authorities and this territorial entity erupted with disastrous consequences. Ever since the Trans Dnestr region has remained a communist stronghold and a hub of arms trafficking, smuggling, and other illegal activities. It should be stressed that most of the Tiraspol leaders are Russian citizens who were planted there by Moscow in the 1980's. It should also be underlined that most of them are involved in illicit activities and many have been banned from traveling in West Europe. After the dismemberment of the Soviet Union, Russia continued to keep military units and huge quantities of equipment and ammunitions in the Trans Dnestr region. As recently as December 7, 2003, for example, ``The Washington Post'' wrote that this enclave has been led by mafia-style leaders and has remained, an extremely dangerous place for black marketing in weapons. According to The Washington Post'', ``this area has 50,000 tons of shells, mines and rockets, enough to fill 2,500 boxcars''. The same paper also points out that the Trans Dnestr region has a sizeable quantity of dirty bomb warheads and possibly other weapons of mass destruction ready to be sold to whoever has the cash to acquire them. Nonetheless, the new Russian authorities under President Putin continue to back this separatist region and its leaders. It is obvious that Moscow has not relinquished its expansionist aspirations toward the Balkans and the Black Sea. Actually, several Russian political leaders have stated openly that Moldova, as well as Georgia in the Caucasian region, are areas of traditional Russian interests and that they should be kept under Moscow's control. While the population of the Russian Federation is ailing and suffers grave misfortunes, Moscow is wasting its resources pursuing 19th century geopolitics. Ever since the overthrow of Ceausescu's dictatorship in l989, the Romanians looked to the West for guidance and to the East hoping to reunite Bessarabia with the country. Romania, however, has been economically ruined and politically disoriented and does not have the means to resolve by itself this old geopolitical wound. At the same time, the Romanians expected some Western support to redress the situation, but they did not get any. No wonder some Romanians question whether there is a new agreement signed at Malta, similar to the Yalta accords, that leaves the eastern part of Moldova in a new Russian sphere? At the beginning of the new millennium the European Union is looking toward unifying the old continent. Concomitantly, NATO and the United States are integrating new friends and allies in Eastern Europe. The Balkans, however, is still a dangerous place and is very close to the Middle East and south Asia. Romania has an important geopolitical and geo- strategic location and the Romanians are overwhelmingly pro- Western and pro-American. They have already welcomed American troops and military bases on their soil. Yet, they are questioning the soundness of the official U.S. policy with regard to Moldova. Indeed, loyal American citizens of Romanian origin are surprised to see that the U.S. is still taking for granted this new state entity that has no merits, no adequate means of survival, and no raison d'etre. While the world has condemned the Ribbentr-Molotov Pact, Washington continues to accept its legacy. For the time being and given the drive to join NATO and the European Union, the Romanian officials are not willing to challenge the U.S. stand, but the time will come when the issue will be raised again, and the people are waiting. The United States should be proactive rather than reactive and be prepared to deal with this matter in a manner that would not offend the Romanians and would not hurt American interests. The decade of the 1990's was extremely difficult for the Republic of Moldova. From an economic standpoint, Russia strangled the small republic. From a politic point of view, Moscow spent huge amounts of money to keep it in its sphere. From an ethnic point of view, the local Russians did everything to prevent the Romanian majority from cultivating their culture and pursuing their roots. At the same time, the democratic opposition of Moldova was almost annihilated and by 2000 the Communist Party was brought back to power. Once again in charge, the communists launched a policy of gradual return to the old system. The process of privatization began to be reversed, the free media began to be harassed, and the new authorities started to persecute the pro-Western democratic opposition It is worth noting that during the 1990's Moscow approached Romania alluding to the possibility of allowing the reunification of Moldova with Romania. But Moscow warned the government in Bucharest to avoid membership in the NATO and not to trust the Americans because they would betray Romania. Given their historic experience, few Romanians paid any attention. The country opted clearly and firmly for Euro- Atlantic integration. While joining NATO and siding with the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, Romania has also tried to promote good relations with Russia. This policy has not pleased Moscow. It appears that the disintegration of Moldova has been one of the Kremlin's responses to the enlargement of NATO. Thus, acting in collusion with the leaders of Tiraspol and in agreement with the new communist government in Chisinau, Moscow endorsed the idea of reorganizing Moldova as a federation. Allegedly, the purpose is to solve the Trans Dnestr conflict and to secure the territorial integrity of the republic. Consequently, the plan of federalization is being advanced in spite of violating the provisions of the very constitution of the state. Accordingly, the new federal organs are supposed to be in place by early 2005. Strangely, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) chaired in 2003 by an American ambassador, concurred initially with this dubious project. The project only advances the geopolitical goals of expansionist circles in Moscow and the murky interests of the leaders in Tiraspol. Moscow has not only tolerated those leaders, it is actually helping them to hold the area as a Russian bridgehead against the West. A December 4, 2003 editorial of ``The Washington Post'' reveals that the United States has understood the true nature of Russia's policies in Moldova and Georgia. And for the first time an American administration has taken a firm stand. The editorial emphasizes that Moscow has never fully accepted the independence of Moldova, ``a desperately poor country that for more than a decade has lived with a separatist splinter, Trans-Dnestr, that is controlled by an ethnic Russian criminal mafia backed by Russian troops and arms.'' What Mr. Putin wants, the editorial continues, is ``to make Moldova a neutral state, to disband its armed forces, and to give Moscow a veto over its government.'' The editorial adds: ``the American administration is taking steps to thwart Moscow's neo-imperialism.'' The situation is somewhat similar in Georgia. The United States is firmly against the disintegration of the two republics. Nevertheless, while the Caucasian Republic of Georgia needs every form of support to strengthen its independence, we strongly believe that the only sound resolution for Moldova is to return it to Romania. In summary: The Republic of Moldova is a Romanian land transformed arbitrarily by Moscow into an artificial independent entity. It has never been a separate state throughout its entire history and its very existence is an open invitation to geopolitical instability. It only promotes Russia's expansionism, even to the detriment of democracy and the welfare of the very Russian people. It is by design directed against the stability of Europe and it represents an insult to the Romanian nation. And, last but not least, in the future, its continuous existence will mar the good relations between the United States and Romania, thus hurting America's interests. We, responsible and loyal American citizens of Romanian descent, are aware of the risky consequences of modifying borders. We are aware of America's limitations and of Russia's reluctance. But we also believe in America, we believe injustice, and we believe in redress. With good will, wisdom, and an open mind, the problem could be properly addressed. Thus, we recommend that the United States start considering the reunification of this land with Romania where it belongs. Such an approach would avoid further complications and undesirable consequences. To this end we are ready to lend our full and unconditional support. Nicholas Dima, PhD Retired professor JF Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School, Fort Bragg,

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to explain how I would have voted on November 22, 2003, during Roll Call votes #670 and #671 in the first session of the 108th. The first vote was to table the motion to reconsider on H.R. 1, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act and the second vote was on a motion to suspend the rules and pass S. 877, the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003. I respectfully request that it be entered into the Congressional Record that if present, I would have voted yes on both these roll call votes.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall Vote Nos. 76, 77, and 78, I was unavoidably detained in the Senate. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer a personal explanation of the reason I missed rollcall vote No. 62, On Ordering the Previous Question for H. Res. 557. At the time the vote was called, I was seated at a House Armed Services Committee hearing and had just completed a question to which one of the witnesses was offering a long response. I respectfully request that it be entered into the Congressional Record that if present, I would have voted: Rollcall vote No. 62, on Ordering the Previous Question--``yea.''

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 557, and I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, our military and coalition forces, as well as our intelligence community, are all working tirelessly to protect this Nation 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. A year ago, the United States led a military coalition to disarm Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein's regime committed horrible atrocities; and Saddam was a threat, a grave and increasing threat to his country, his region, and to the world. Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, marked the 16th anniversary of Saddam's use of chemical weapons on the Kurdish citizens of Iraq. Sixteen years ago, Mr. Speaker, as a result of this atrocity, 5,000 Kurdish Iraqis died. Saddam was indeed a terrorist in his own nation. Thanks to our efforts, Saddam Hussein will never commit such atrocities again. There is no doubt, Mr. Speaker, we are all safer without this tyrant in power. Our decision to go to war in Iraq was based on our intelligence about Saddam's threat to world security. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence, I know the substantial investment now being made in our intelligence community to meet the demands of the global war on terrorism. Our intelligence community is aggressively rebuilding its capabilities that withered during the mid-1990s. Our clandestine service dropped by 25 percent, and nearly one-third of our overseas offices were closed. Our overall intelligence reporting fell by almost 50 percent during that period of time. Language skills were slow to develop, limiting our ability to infiltrate rogue organizations or intercept messages encrypted in tribal dialect and regional tongues. We effectively lost our ability to see and hear in many of the world's most dangerous places. Our intelligence community provided the best information and analysis on Iraq that it could, given the reduced collection, language shortfalls, and Iraq's active denial and deception programs. Every one from David Kay to the Director of Central Intelligence, George Tenet, has stated that analysts did not and would not change their judgment to meet policy objectives. Some argue that judgments in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's Continuing Programs of Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs were flawed. They point to the report's statement that ``Iraq has chemical and biological weapons.'' However, this is only the first six words of the second sentence in the declassified portion of the report. The rest of the sentence reads, ``as well as missiles with range in excess of U.N. restrictions and, if left unchecked, Iraq probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade.'' Critics also fail to mention judgments made by Dr. Kay and the Iraqi Survey Group regarding their findings in Iraq: ``We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction programs in defiance of U.N. resolutions and restrictions.'' Quote: ``Although we assess that Saddam does not yet have nuclear weapons or sufficient material to make any, he remains intent on acquiring them.'' Yes, chemical or biological weapons stockpiling have not been found, but secret laboratories have. And, yes, Iraq appears not to have reconstructed its nuclear program, but the Iraq survey group uncovered documents that revealed Saddam's intent to make nuclear weapons. Intelligence analysts seldom, if ever, are 100 percent perfect. This is the nature of the business. Intelligence officers collect the dots and analysts attempt to connect them. Given the reduced resources and inadequate insight into Iraq, I say the picture we drew from a limited amount of dots was pretty good. And we were right to take action. Every day intelligence officers make tough judgment calls and dangerous operations are conducted. We must support them. We must support our troops in the ongoing efforts to protect our Nation. I support House Resolution 557 and strongly urge its adoption.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer a personal explanation of the reason for my absence on March 10 and 11, 2004. Last week, former Governor of Nevada Mike O'Callaghan passed away and I had to leave Washington this Wednesday afternoon, March 10, to attend funeral services for Governor O'Callaghan. I respectfully request that it be entered into the Congressional Record that if present, I would have voted: Rollcall vote No. 48, on agreeing to the Scott (VA) amendment-- ``no''; Rollcall vote No. 49, on agreeing to the Watt amendment--``no''; Rollcall vote No. 50, on agreeing to the Andrews amendment--``no''; Rollcall vote No. 51, on agreeing to the Ackerman amendment--``no''; Rollcall vote No. 52, on agreeing to the Jackson-Lee amendment-- ``no''; Rollcall vote No. 53, on agreeing to the Watt amendment--``no''; Rollcall vote No. 54, on agreeing to the Resolution, H.R. 339-- ``yes''; Rollcall vote No. 55, on passage of H.R. 3717--``yes''; Rollcall vote No. 56, on passage of H. Con. Res. 15--``yes''; and Rollcall vote No. 57, on passage of H. Res. 540--``yes.''

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my friend and colleague from Connecticut for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for H. J. Res. 84, which I introduced to commemorate former President Ronald Reagan's 93rd birthday. It is a pleasure to join my colleagues here today, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) in honoring the birthday and life of an extraordinary man, historic leader and an American icon. As we look back on the life and Presidency of Ronald Reagan, it is always a challenge to pinpoint a single greatest achievement from his many great achievements. His life has been filled with extraordinary adventures and monumental accomplishments. Ronald Wilson Reagan was born on February 6, 1911, in Tampico, Illinois, the ``Land of Lincoln.'' President Reagan's lifelong career of service to fellow Americans began at a young age when he served as a lifeguard in Dixon, Illinois. Later, as a fledgling radio sports announcer, Reagan traveled from his home in the Midwest to Southern California, where he embarked upon an acting career in Hollywood. He would soon rise to serve his fellow actors as president of the Screen Actors Guild. Reagan's leadership style and keen knack for engaging the public through his dynamic speaking skills and endearing nature provided him the additional opportunity to enter public service. He would serve as Governor of California for two terms before being elected President of the United States twice. During his 8 years in the White House, President Reagan worked to fulfill his pledge to restore ``the great confident roar of American progress, growth and optimism.'' President Reagan's commitment to inspiring the American people and strengthening our Nation's leadership role in the world are part of our Nation's proud heritage and history. Of course, when it comes to recognizing a distinguished leader such as Ronald Reagan, it is difficult to find words to adequately express how deeply his legacy still affects each and every one of us still today. During his 8 years as President, Ronald Reagan successfully stimulated economic growth, curbed inflation, increased employment, and strengthened national defense. President Reagan was instrumental in uniting a divided Berlin, as well as a divided world, by bringing about an end to the Cold War. Reagan's speech calling on Mr. Gorbachev to ``Tear Down This Wall'' is a piece of American, indeed, world history, that will forever elicit a special sense of pride among the American people and all freedom-loving people across this world. Throughout his tenure in the office of President, Mr. Reagan maintained a unique grace and uncanny wit. These endearing qualities enabled him to easily communicate with American citizens, foreign dignitaries and public figures, meriting him the historic title as the ``Great Communicator.'' Railroad Ronald Reagan's renowned wit, firm dedication to American principles and tireless belief in our ``shining city on the hill'' secured Reagan's enduring legacy. President Reagan will forever be remembered for his eternal optimism and faith in the ability of the American people. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to express what an honor it has been for me to take the lead in sponsoring this resolution. I would like to extend my appreciation to my colleagues, over 100 of them, who have cosponsored this measure to recognize one of the greatest leaders this Nation has ever known. Happy birthday, President Reagan. As always, the thoughts and heartfelt sentiments of this Congress are with you.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer a personal explanation of the reason for my absence on November 17, 2003 during rollcall Votes #620, 621, 622, and 623. When these votes were called, I was detained in Nevada's Second Congressional District while tending to certain duties in the State of Nevada. If present, I would have voted: ``aye'' on rollcall Vote #620, S.J. Res. 22; ``aye'' on rollcall Vote #621, S.J. Res. 18; ``aye'' on rollcall Vote #299, H. Con. Res. 299; and ``aye'' on rollcall Vote #623, A Motion on Hour of Meeting.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 425, a Resolution to recognize and honor the brave men and women who responded to the horrendous wildfires that plagued Southern California last month. While we all recognize that hundreds of first responders from the State of California bravely risked their lives to fight these wildfires, many Americans are less aware that hundreds of Nevada's first responders were also enlisted in this fight. In fact, during the course of this deadly natural disaster, the State of Nevada deployed over 450 brave Americans to Southern California to join their neighbors in the effort to quell this deadly natural disaster. These Nevadans included dozens of firefighters, paramedics, and highly-skilled mechanics. Northern Nevada-based crews from the United States Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management along with engine crews from the Nevada Division of Forestry, Reno, Sparks, Storey County, Elko County and the North Lake Tahoe Fire Protection District were dispatched on October 27 to fight the Southern California fires. Additionally, four Ely firefighters, a member of Lovelock, Nevada's private fire department and a rescue truck formed a strike team with Walker Lake Paiute Tribe firefighters and firemen to join the united efforts across Nevada's Western border. Finally, two strike teams composed of firefighters from Las Vegas, Clark County, Henderson, Pahrump, the Nevada Test Site and the Naval Air Station at Fallon drove in to offer support to a base camp in Santee. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this important resolution. The brave first responders from all over the Western States, and Nevada, have earned this honor and I am pleased to recognize their selfless efforts today.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, in honor of our former friend and colleague, a World War II veteran, the veterans' great friend across this country, the late Bob Stump, I rise in strong support of this legislation, S. 1156, the Department of Veterans Affairs Long-Term Care and Personnel Authorities Enhancement Act of 2003. I want to add my voice in support of those who have already spoken in support of this legislation. This bill goes a long way in providing our Nation's veterans with the medical care that they have earned and deserve. The long-term health care that this bill provides communities across the country, including southern Nevada, is desperately needed. Southern Nevada, as you have already heard, has one of the highest, fastest-growing veterans populations in the country; and their needs have far outstrip the current care capacity of the current VA facilities in the area. Fulfilling the current and future health care needs of our veterans must remain a high priority. I applaud the commitment of our colleagues in the House, especially the Nevada delegation, in meeting the needs of Nevada's veterans. I also applaud the work of my colleagues in the other Chamber on this bill. I urge my colleagues in the House to support S. 1156. The assistance it provides to Nevada's veterans and veterans across this country is long overdue.