Scott Garrett

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I wish to simply begin by associating myself with the comments that the gentleman made earlier, along with those of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) with regard to the war in Iraq and specifically our brave men and women who are fighting our cause over there. Specifically at this time, I just want to bring to the attention of this House and this body and also to Americans at home one particular soldier, Army Specialist Kyle Griffin, a man, a hero, who made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of this Nation. Some men will be remembered for heroic acts, others for the type of persons they were. Kyle Griffin will be remembered and treasured for both of these. In a world that has become a place of hostilities and violence, of terror and fear, the brave men and women like Kyle Griffin are selflessly and tirelessly building and ensuring peace and liberty throughout the globe. Back on May 30, 2003, one of our own was taken from us. Kyle was a young man that everyone of his Emerson community in New Jersey was proud of; and he will be surely missed by his mother, his father, his sister, and his brother. As an Army Specialist, Kyle was a dedicated soldier and a true patriot. Since the tragic day of September 11, our country has been at war, it has been a war on terror. Kyle was one of the many heroic Americans who heard the call to defend this Nation and did so by donning our country's uniform. Kyle made the ultimate sacrifice to preserve and defend the freedom and liberty that every American loves and cherishes. We must all vow now to never forget the price that has been paid in all of our names. Army Specialist Griffin will always be remembered as a true hero and an American who forever we can be proud of. I pray that God may bless his family.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as we pay our respects to one of the greatest leaders that this Nation has ever known, a man who will forever be held as a model for what is great about America. As we take this time to mourn the loss of one of our Nation's greatest leaders, we should also celebrate his heroic and historic life that he lived. Ronald Reagan exemplified the best qualities that you would ever want in a leader. He was compassionate, he was caring, he was visionary, and he was strong. He took our Nation from a crisis in confidence to a country the entire world would view as a standard bearer of justice and liberty. Americans, they put their trust in Ronald Reagan and, in turn, Ronald Reagan put his trust in each one of us. He had faith in the American individual, in one's ability to care for one's self. Ronald Reagan knew that we could do more for ourselves than any oversized bureaucratic burdensome Federal Government could ever do. Ronald Reagan believed that doing more for ourselves was really the best way that we could regain that long missing self-confidence in our American pride again. So today, in the wake of the President's death, we must continue to learn from his teachings. And we must long remember after today the contributions that Ronald Reagan made to this Nation both for this Nation, and his actions, and their meanings. So may the legacy of Ronald Reagan live on as long as we are all proud to raise up the Stars and Stripes and call ourselves the United States of America.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, each year, Memorial Day gives us the opportunity to honor the brave men and women who have so selflessly stood in harm's way to protect the fundamental freedoms of our great nation. Our soldiers have made so many sacrifices from the Revolutionary War, to the World Wars, to the modern day engagement in Iraq. All of our military personnel deserve our utmost respect, gratitude and care. The great sacrifices that they have made must not be forgotten. Army Spc. Kyle A. Griffin of Emerson, New Jersey, is one such brave soldier whose sacrifice we must recognize. He laid down his very own life for liberty fighting in Iraq this past year, while defending the very freedoms and rights Americans enjoy today. He did not die in vain, but with a very noble mission in mind--to protect our nation and our citizens against those who wish to see us fail. We must always remember the valiant efforts of Spc. Griffin and continue to pay tribute to all soldiers who have paid the ultimate price. In 1868 Major General John A. Logan established a ``Decoration Day'' on May 30 as a day of remembrance for the dead of the Civil War. General Logan ordered his posts to decorate the local cemeteries ``with the choicest flowers of springtime'' to honor the thousands killed during those four terrible years. General Logan's original Decoration Day proclamation called us to honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice, ``We should guard their graves with sacred vigilance . . . Let no neglect, no ravages of time, testify to the present or to the coming generations that we have forgotten as a people the cost of a free and undivided republic.'' However, the remembrance and dedication General Logan meant to preserve through Decoration Day, seems to have gotten lost over the many years. A recent Gallup poll found that just 28% of Americans are able to explain why we celebrate our modern day version of Decoration Day--Memorial Day. We may sometimes take for granted the many liberties we enjoy in America, but they have all been earned through the sacrifice paid by so many of the members of our armed forces. Many soldiers have died for our liberty and prosperity. They acted with patriotism and commitment to their country. We owe them a huge debt of gratitude. I urge you to take this charge to heart and honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country by stopping what you are doing at 3:00 p.m. on Memorial Day to participate in the National Moment of Remembrance. Consider what the world might look like if not for the service of generations of Americans in uniform. Take a moment to remember those who gave their lives, so that you may have freedom. But, don't just stop there. Take time throughout the rest of the year to reach out to the members of our armed services who are fighting freedom's newest enemies. While we take this day to honor those who have given so much for our freedom in the past, our thoughts should also be drawn on a daily basis to the brave men and women of our armed services who are fighting for the cause of freedom and democracy around the globe today. Tell them that the citizens of our state and nation are grateful for their service, and thank them and their families for the daily sacrifices that allow them to serve. We must always remember our fallen soldiers, our veterans and our military currently serving as we celebrate Memorial Day. They deserve the highest praise of all.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution as we honor both the past and current members of the armed services, and also their families, as we encourage every member of the American public to wear the red poppy on Memorial Day. To many people, especially the Nation's thousands of combat veterans on this day, history that goes back all the way to the Civil War, it is an important reminder of all those who died in service to their Nation, the brave, the proud, the strong who gave their lives so that so many of us today can have the freedoms that we have. And it is proper that we honor this today in light of all those men and women who find themselves in harm's way as we speak, risking their lives over in the Middle East. And it is proper also that this House does all that we can do as we continue to work on this side to provide services for our veterans, services of better health care, enhanced housing access, job opportunities, and benefits for their loved ones at home. So I encourage all Members and the constituency back in the district in the great State of New Jersey to wear a poppy on this day, and also to honor those men and women by going to the cemeteries, visiting memorials, and also by participating in the National Moment of Remembrance at 3 p.m. to pause and think on the true meaning of this day.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise now to speak on a double standard. Yesterday, the world learned of a young brave man from Philadelphia named Nick Berg. Nick Berg was a 26-year-old man who was in Iraq looking for work with the reconstruction and helping to lend a hand to the people in that country. But a gruesome video, posted on a radical fundamentalist site, shows this young man, Nick Berg, bound in an orange jumpsuit with five hooded al Qaeda operatives standing behind him. One of those operatives read a prepared statement, pulled a large knife from his pocket, proceeded to push his head to the ground, and then with five strokes of the knife, decapitated Nick Berg and then held the head up to the camera. I tell you, Mr. Speaker, my thoughts and my prayers go to Nick Berg's family and friends. I honestly cannot imagine what the family is going through right now and how they must feel, but this act by al Qaeda is a reminder of the evil we face in this world, and it should reinforce this country's determination to win this war against terror. Yet another concern in the tragic death of Nick Berg is the lack of any forceful response and condemnation from the European nations or the Arab community over this incident. The worldwide broadcast of the photos of Iraqi prisoners has brought forth outrage by Americans and Iraqis alike, but not surprisingly, the anti-Americans who are already on the radio exploiting that incident as an opportunity to condemn America and Americans, further promoting this double standard of which I speak. Yes, a small number of American soldiers committed crimes against Iraqi prisoners. Those soldiers should be and will be tried and punished accordingly. However, while explaining our anger over these crimes and our will to punish these people rightfully when found appropriately guilty, calling for the resignation of a Secretary or even appearing over-apologetic for actions at the prison, I think it is a mistake and plays into the hands of the double standard. The anti-American left, in this country and elsewhere, forever remembers every single American misdeed while forgetting every anti- American and every anti-human atrocity that the terrorists have taken against those who oppose any one of their causes. Mr. Speaker, what of the media outlets? They detail the outrage of Iraqis based on the images of a few soldiers' crimes against prisoners. They are the same media outlets that showed no remorse, no outrage whatsoever a few years ago, for the thousands of lives that Saddam Hussein killed using his mass graves, nor when the Iraqi crowds in Fallujah burned and mutilated four American contractors and then hung their corpses from a bridge, there was no outrage or remorse. A while back in an article, Eason Jordan from CNN, he admitted that his network had deliberately covered up and ignored Saddam Hussein's atrocities and they did that just so they could stay on TV. This policy of caution by CNN is not reflected in their current coverage of the charges against American soldiers. Although the actions against the Iraqi prisoners are unacceptable, they are not part of the standard procedure here in the United States or in the military treatment of our prisoners. Although al Qaeda states that their actions against Nick Berg are in retaliation for the crimes taken against these prisoners, their actions by al Qaeda in reality are typical of al Qaeda and all their affiliates. Their previous acts of violence against Americans serve as a testament to that fact, such as the attacks of September 11 and the slaying of a Wall Street Journal reporter, Daniel Pearl. Mr. Speaker, make no mistake, the slaying of Nick Berg was about a war against the West in general, and America in particular, and we should firmly stand on our commitment to our American morals and values and denounce anti-American acts. However, while we publicly uncover crimes committed by some members of our military against Iraqi prisoners, we should not play into this double standard set by various media outlets, the European community and the Arab community, and the American left where America is condemned and the brutality, terror, and the cold-blooded acts of murder of innocent people by terrorists is left unreported and without condemnation. As these recent actions show, the terrorists are not bound by any moral conscience. America must maintain its strength and its resolve to win this war on terror.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a man who's selfless and tireless dedication has been a tremendous service to the community where he lives. Bruno Bettega has dedicated fifty years of his life as a volunteer firefighter for the Northvale Volunteer Fire Department in Northvale, NJ. Even more amazingly, at age 92, Bruno still plays an active role in the department and is their oldest active member. During Mr. Bettega's half-century of service he has participated in numerous supportive roles. Bruno is also a member of the Northvale Fire Department Exempt Fireman's Association. Volunteer fire departments perform a sometimes thankless, but absolutely imperative service to the communities they protect. The lives of our family and friends are in their hands and they do a truly commendable job keeping each and everyone of us safe. Bruno Bettega should be regarded as nothing less than a hero to his community. I urge all my colleagues to join with me in celebrating his achievements and thanking him for all that he has done.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remind my colleagues that our constituents at home continue to struggle with the loss of jobs to both cheap foreign labor; where employers pay just a fraction of what is paid here, and also provide no paid benefits of any sort. They are losing jobs here at home to illegal immigration. Illegal immigration has risen to a staggering rate. Nearly 1/2 million illegal aliens enter this country every year. These law- breakers, are taking the jobs that are held by and needed by our citizens. They also drain the much needed and limited social services that would normally go to American citizens, who either themselves, or their families came to this country legally. No nation can consider itself a sovereign nation if it cannot define where its borders begin and where they end. And it certainly cannot consider itself sovereign if it cannot determine who is and is not allowed entry into that nation. Without such control, a nation loses its ability to protect the rights and liberties of its people. Our founding fathers were no less certain in this respect, when Governor Morris stated at the constitutional convention: ``every Society, from a great Nation down to a Club, had the right of declaring conditions on which new members should be admitted.'' Congress should be no less adamant. American citizens are struggling for work. They should not be the victims of a system that turns its back to illegal immigration.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I just wish to address the two concerns that have been raised by those who are critical of this amendment. Those issues are time and money. They raise the suggestion that all we need now is more time and more money. I simply remind them of the fact that this committee has had, quite honestly, literally months, over a year, to work on it. I would ask for a show of hands. Who would ever expect we would get a better bill out of committee on this? I do not think time will solve the issue. The other portion is money. Those on the other side also object, all we need is more money. I would remind them of the fact, if we could get more money, where will that money come from? All those people who are donor States please raise your hand, because it will be coming from us, the donor States. Time and money is not the solution.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, the real issue here is who pays and who is hurt? Americans at home are looking for fiscal responsibility from this House. Whether they are taxpayers, workers, whether they are people that are relying on essential services from this government, they are looking for this House to provide them with some degree of fiscal responsibility. As I said just last night, we come into this budget process knowing that we are in dire financial straits with a $521 billion budget deficit, which simply means, as I said before, we are spending out $521 billion more than we are taking in. And how does this Blue Dog budget address that? Well, they certainly do not address it by trying to rein in spending because look at the spending side of the equation. They are actually saying that even though they are in a hole, they want to stop digging. They are not stopping digging at all. They are still digging. They are spending more. They are spending upwards of $2 billion more in the 2005 budget. So where is it on the other side that they want to get to the balanced budget that they speak of? They do it by raising taxes to the tune of $10 billion in the 2005 budget alone. Back in my State of New Jersey, $10 billion when I was in State government, that would pay for almost half of our entire State budget for the year. They go even further. They want to raise taxes by almost $200 billion over the life of this budget. So it comes back to the question again, who pays, who is hurt? We have already heard that 90 percent of small business pay taxes at the individual tax rate and that more than 80 percent of an increase in taxes for the top tax rate would be borne by small businesses. What does that mean? That means that the tax increases that they are talking about in the Blue Dog budget will impact upon Main Street USA, on small businesses, on small manufacturers, on farmers. Those same manufacturers that we debate in this House over and over again that are already having a hard time competing overseas with manufacturing and production are now going to have, under the Blue Dog budget, to see their taxes go up. So who pays? Small businesses, mom and pops, farmers. And, finally, who is hurt by this budget? Besides those people, who is hurt by this budget are all those people who work for small businesses, mom and pops, farmers. The workers out there in America, lost jobs, the family. Who pays? Small businesses. Who is hurt? The workers of America and families.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I rise to join in the discussion on a matter of grave concern I think to every American taxpayer, every American worker, every American that relies on a Federal program that is essential to them, to every American that relies on the Federal Government for our safety and security, and that is the issue of fiscal responsibility by our Federal Government, an issue that is really long overdue as we look back. And I stand here and I commend the efforts of the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Nussle) for the work he has done on this committee to bring us a budget that is now responsible. Right now we are spending $521 billion in deficit spending. That, very simply put, means we are spending every year $521 billion more than we are taking in on the other side. I may be relatively new to Washington, being a freshman as I am, but I can tell the Members back in my State of New Jersey, there is not one business that could operate that way. There is not a State government that could operate that way. As a matter of fact, most States have to have a balanced budget at the end of the year. And yet when I come here to the House, it seems that Members on the other side of the aisle just barely take notice to the problem. And I say that because I serve on the committee, and it was just a week ago when we were in that committee discussing these very same issues and amendment after amendment after amendment was proposed by the other side of the aisle. A total of $28 billion was proposed in additional spending. I do not know whether those amendments, when they were doing that, whether they were simply playing politics at the time or whether they simply do not care about all this excessive deficit spending. Either way it is not a good example for this House to be setting for the American public. At the end of the day, what all that means is that we are adding to the fiscal drag on the American family budget. We are already looking at some $20,000 per household, $20,000 that the average household would say that they would love to be able to spend as they see fit, whether it is on their kids' education, on their kids' health care, or other such priorities as they deem fit instead of Congress deciding how they are going to be spending their money. We are stuck under their proposal of spending additional funds even though in the past we have been spending more in Washington at a rate greater than inflation. Opponents on the other side of the aisle agree, I would assume, that deficits are caused by spending more than we are taking in. But they will argue that it is not because we are spending too much money; it is because we are taking in too little revenues. So their answer to the problem, as it has been all day and repeatedly during the committee as well, is that we do not cut spending, we increase taxes. Mr. Chairman, I strongly disagree. I believe that the American public is already taxed far too much. We are just learning now that there is a correlation between cutting taxes and job growth and an expansion of the economy. Now would be the absolute wrong time to go in the opposite direction and raise taxes. When more people are working because we have cut taxes over this past year in the budget this committee put out last year, when more people are working, when there is more job creation, when consumer confidence is increased, when there is more consumer spending, there is more economic growth. That relates and that causes more revenue to come in. And that also causes people to be less dependent on the Federal Government, which means on the other side of the ledger, we can spend less, all those good things. But however we look at the issue of making the economy grow, I think that one thing we can agree on is we are in the midst right now of a war on terrorism. We have potential daily threats on every side of us. We have deficit spending in the past years that we have to reconcile. Now is not the time, as the other side of the aisle suggests, that we should be raising taxes. Now is the time that we should move forward with a fiscally responsible budget, as has been proposed by our chairman, to put this House back in order.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. It cuts that deficit in half, which goes in the correct direction. That is to say what we talked about, the area of trying to get to a balanced budget some day, we have to do it by reining in spending, and this goes to doing that not by raising taxes.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss and join the discussion on a matter that I think should be of grave concern to every American taxpayer, every American worker, every American that relies on an essential Federal program that they look to on a daily basis and any American that basically looks to our Federal Government to provide for our safety and security, and that is, I join with my colleagues in discussing this issue of fiscal responsibility on the Federal level. It is one that you and I agree is long overdue, as Washington begins to put its house in order, and that we need to do it obviously in the sense that if we want to continue to provide those essential services back to our districts, those services that people have a right to under the Constitution and look to the Federal Government for, we have to put those processes in place. So, Madam Speaker, I appreciate the chance to join with my good friend from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), and thank him for all the work he has done on this issue in the past, basically, this evening to bring to the American public's attention the issue of fiscal responsibility and process to the system. Madam Speaker, it has been discussed already here and in the past that we are looking at a $521 billion budget deficit right now, meaning we are sending out $521 billion more than we are taking in at the end of the day. I stand up here as a freshman, and $521 billion is an awful lot of money to me. I come from the good State of New Jersey, where when I go back and talk to businesses there, they obviously would never be able to operate their business on a basis like we do in Washington. Even in our State government, where I had the honor of serving for the last 12 years, we did not have the opportunity to operate in the manner that Congress has over the years. We had to do the fiscally responsible thing, and that is to end up at the end of the year with a balanced budget. I have the privilege and honor of being on the Committee on the Budget, and we just went through 2 days of hearing, and this past week we passed through the budget that we will soon be considering in this House. We discussed the issue of fiscal responsibility during the course of that markup. But I think it is interesting to know that during the debate and during that time we got that bill out of committee, the Members on the other side of the aisle, still understanding where we stand with regard to the budget deficits, still proposed spending and sending out $28 billion more than we see in the budget that will be coming before us. I do not know whether those tactic were simply playing politics or whether the other side of the aisle honestly does not care about spending more than we are taking in, but I think it sets a bad example either way.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Exactly. Each and every one of those amendments came up, and Members on the other side of the aisle made their best case as to why we should be spending more money than we are taking in. Fortunately, members on this side of the aisle said it would not be fiscally responsible to do those programs and at the end of the day not have money available to provide the essentials.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Exactly. That is an important point we need to get to as well. At the end of the day, we want to grow the economy. One of the points that I think I have learned here and in State government, when you cut taxes, you return those dollars from Washington back to the family budget. Families have the ability to spend more; consumer confidence goes up. They spend more locally, businesses are able to expand, jobs are created; and at the end of the day, not only do you expand the economy, but by putting more people back to work and expanding the economy, you reduce the amount of the reliance on the Federal Government, and so you reduce the amount of money that we have to spend. So eventually you will be able to reduce taxes even further.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Actually we are doing a level funding plan. If a program had this much money this year, we are going to keep it level going into the future.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. That is absolutely not a cut. A cut is when you are spending this much this year, and next year you go down to here. That is a cut. If we keep it level, I do not know how anyone can call that a cut.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, when in power, Saddam Hussein posed a grave and great danger to the Iraqi people, the region's stability, and the worldwide community. He ruled by oppression, deception, and fear; and the President's decision to go to war with Iraq was the right one, and the world is safer and better off without Saddam Hussein in power. For 12 years, Saddam Hussein used tactics of denial, distortion, and delay to prevent the world from enforcing the 1991 cease-fire agreement that ended the Persian Gulf War and numerous other U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding complete disarmament. It proves Saddam Hussein's stance against a peaceful resolve in the region. Now, while some skeptics continue to suggest that military action in Iraq was wrong, their answer never is that Iraqis or the world would be better off left with him in power. Mr. Speaker, I stand here today in support of the President and his decisions, for I know his one overriding responsibility is to protect and defend the American people, and our President is working to do just that.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring both attention and admiration to a program that truly has had lifesaving results. The Community Blood Services, located in Paramus, NJ, within my fifth Congressional District, has working partnerships with many hospitals in the New York metropolitan area to supply cord blood. This cord blood is used in the treatment of leukemia, breast cancer, lymphoma, Hodgkin's Disease, Aplastic Anemia, various other cancers, blood diseases, hereditary/genetic conditions and immune system disorders. The Elie Katz Umbilical Cord Blood Program at Community Blood Services recently and generously announced it will donate one of its umbilical cord units to St. Joseph's Regional Medical Center in Paterson, NJ, to assist an uninsured patient in need of a lifesaving transplant. The patient is suffering from Burkitt's Lymphoma, a non-Hodgkin's disease which is rare in most of the world, but is the most common childhood cancer in Central Africa. The Elie Katz Umbilical Cord Blood Program was inaugurated in 1997. Since then, it has accepted more than 1600 donated cord blood units. To date, 24 of those units have been used for transplants in children throughout the world. The unit being donated to St. Joseph's will be the twenty-fifth. Stem cells obtained from placentas and umbilical cords, have been proven to successfully aid in the treatment of many life-threatening diseases. Researchers have found that umbilical cords especially are a rich source of stem cells. This discovery could make the use of embryonic stem cells unnecessary. The cells are easily attainable and can be expanded in vitro, maintained in culture, and induced to differentiate into neural cells. They are a potential source of multipotent stem cells that may serve many therapeutic and biotechnological roles. In order to identify possible genetic diseases or past illnesses that could jeopardize the patient, when collecting donated cord blood there is a wide-ranging parental history considered. Once the parents agree to the donation, a technician working closely with the delivery team collects the residual blood from the umbilical cord after it has been detached from the baby, ensuring no risk to the mother or child. The cord blood unit is then transferred to the processing laboratory at Community Blood Services, where the red blood cells are removed and the remaining stem cells are frozen in liquid nitrogen for long-term storage. Let me close by portraying just how proud I am that such a worthwhile organization is located within my community. It is an honor for me today to bring attention to Community Blood Services on the floor of the House. We thank you for everything that you do.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in full support of H.R. 1997, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. I commend those who have come before me in previous years for their work, and I commend the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania for her work now in bringing this issue to the floor. Violence against a woman who is pregnant with an unborn child is a hideous and tragic act that must be punished accordingly. To my left here is a photograph, this is the first time I have seen this photograph recently, of Tracy Marciniak and her little baby. I would challenge anyone who knows the story, that she was beaten, she survived the beating but her little baby did not. I would challenge anyone from the other side of the aisle who would look at this photograph and say that this is a fetus in her arms. No, I would say this is her baby in her arms. And when a baby, born or unborn, is taken away from her mother, the offender must be punished. This is commonsense legislation. Once it is passed, it will work to deter violence against women and their unborn children as well. As has been stated by other people already, one of the leading causes of violence and death to women in many States is in fact homicide of pregnant women. I would urge all Members of good faith on both sides of the aisle to do what is right for society, right for women, and right for the innocent victims in this Nation and vote in favor of this legislation.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, since 1948 the State of Israel has constantly been under attack from inside and outside her borders, from neighbors on all sides. Innocent Israeli citizens, including women and children and seniors, have become terrorist targets. Israeli shops, streets, and schools have become the battleground. There are always threats in the country and always a cause for alarm. Today, the threat to Israel's security has never been greater. On the eve of the U.N.'s hearing this week on the West Bank barrier, a Palestinian suicide bomber blew apart a Jerusalem bus, killing himself and eight passengers. This strike, which injured 60 others, was in protest of the security barrier constructed by Israel to foil terrorist attacks such as this. This terrible and painful bombing in Jerusalem has brought new urgency to the claim of Israeli leaders that a security fence is desperately needed in order to prevent terrorists from entering from the West Bank and proves that Israel is under a new wave of violence, one that the Palestinian leadership is unable and unwilling to stop. For this reason, I support Israel's construction of a security fence and will support that additional miles be built should Israel so decide to continue this self-defense option. The security fence is a proven way to impede terror, which in turn will help advance the peace process. It is situated to protect the lives of Israelis. The separation barrier has proven itself by preventing 50 percent of the attempted terrorist attacks against Israel, and the fence around Gaza has prevented all Palestinian suicide bombers from entering the country. There are Palestinians who are working now to disrupt this pursuit towards peace. Monday, the Palestinians presented their case to the United Nations International Court of Justice, the ICJ, standing against the Israeli separation barrier in the West Bank, while Israel appealed to world opinion and moral common sense to ignore the proceedings that are unfair. Israel only began the construction of this fence after 3 years of near daily terrorist attacks that killed 919 Israelis and left thousands more wounded for life. Now more than 40 nations, including the United States, the European Union, and Australia, have joined Israel in protesting the court's consideration of this matter because it falls outside the court's traditional mandate to serve as a mediator between a willing state and, more importantly, because it undermines Israel's, and for that matter any nation's, right to self-defense. The Palestinians and their supporters have now manipulated the U.N. General Assembly to request the ICJ to issue a legal advisory on the security of the fence. Though it is not legally binding, this advisory opinion could prompt anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N. later this year and will reinforce efforts to isolate Israel internationally. Manipulation of the ICJ is only the latest attempt in many attempts by Israeli detractors to use every arm of the U.N. to delegitimize Israel. The U.N. has been a source of anti-Israeli activity, passing more resolutions against Israel than any other subject matter, over 400 since 1964. In contrast, that body has never investigated the Palestinian terror campaign against Israel, nor has it investigated the abuse, torture, and other human rights violations by nondemocratic states in the Arab world. The U.N. is the same body that voted against removing Saddam Hussein and ending his evil regime over his own people. The international community and Arab states in the region must come together now and strongly discourage further Palestinian terrorism. Nations around the world must support Israel in their right to defend their land and their people. Israel has every right and must have every right and ability to protect their people and their country. Those who say otherwise, that Israel's self-defense is an impediment to progress, they miss the point entirely. The destruction of Palestinian terrorism is not an impediment to progress; rather, it is the definition of progress. Where the violence stops, the peace process can move forward. And until it does, Israel's efforts to build a security fence on their own borders are a necessary and justified response to the perils that this nation faces. As Israel is a free and democratic, peace-loving nation and our only real ally in a region filled with unrest and American hatred, our Nation must do everything we can to support Israel and not stand in the way of the Israeli leaders doing what they feel is necessary to protect their citizens and their homeland.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a distinguished citizen from the Fifth Congressional District from New Jersey, which I represent. Mr. John Redden has been named Pascack Valley's Citizen of the Year. John is deserving of such acclamation for his many contributions to his community. He serves on the board of the Pascack Community Services. He has owned a Westwood-based business for over 20 years. And John, who has a wife and three children, has generously given of his time and money to donate to many community organizations. He has used his passion of sports to encourage athletic involvement in the community for having coached both basketball and baseball. I might add that John is a worthwhile recipient of this award not only for the many contributions but in the way that he undertakes them. He supports his community silently, asking no credit whatsoever for his charity to his community. He supports his hometown organizations simply because he loves his neighbors and the community means so much to him. I commend John for his dedication to his community, and I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating him on receiving this prestigious award.

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker Taiwan and the United States have a long and fruitful relationship. Taiwan's democracy is modeled after ours and its economic prosperity depends much on the mutual trade between Taiwan and the United States. Taiwan's leaders were mostly educated in the United States and Taiwan has nearly 30,000 students studying in America colleges and their tourists' number one overseas destination is the United States. So despite the lack of formal diplomatic relations, Taiwan is a close ally of our government. It has supported our global war against terrorism and has pledged humanitarian-assistance to postwar Iraq. On the other hand, we have the Taiwan Relations Act, a law of the land which is designed to provide Taiwan with adequate weapons to protect itself against invasion from China. The U.S. policy on Taiwan- China relations is to maintain the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. Taiwan's planned March 20 referendum, contrary to what Chinese leaders have said about it, is designed to maintain the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. It is not to provoke Chinese leaders. It merely asks Taiwan voters whether their government should buy more anti-missile weapons if China refuses to withdraw its 496 missiles targeted at Taiwan and whether their government should open up talks with China about other issues. I feel the 23 million people of Taiwan have a right to hold such a referendum. We mustn't allow China to intimidate Taiwan with talks of overtaking Taiwan by force and other verbal threats.

Mr. GARRETT

Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of a recently fallen soldier, Chief Warrant Officer Aaron Weaver. Aaron was a member of the Army's 82nd Airborne Division and was stationed in Iraq. A little over two weeks ago, Aaron got on board a Black Hawk medevac helicopter to go to Baghdad for a routine medical check up. Aaron had recently undergone a serious bout with cancer and critical surgery. In fact, he could have remained in the states while the doctors continued to monitor his progress. Instead, Aaron volunteered for Iraq and requested and received the medical waiver necessary to deploy. He wanted to join his younger brother, Ryan and his comrades. He heard the call of duty and he answered it. His brother, Ryan, was also stationed in Iraq. Ryan and Aaron had plans to meet when Aaron was to arrive in Baghdad, but that moment never happened. The medevac that Aaron was traveling in was shot down by enemy fire and all nine soldiers, including Aaron, were killed. He is survived by his wife, Nancy, and his one year old daughter, Savannah. Aaron, already a decorated war hero who fought in the streets of Mogadishu in 1993 to rescue his friends after their Black Hawk had been shot down, set the highest example of someone who is willing to risk their own life to save others. His dedication to his country and fellow soldiers represents his tremendous sense of loyalty and selflessness. Aaron Weaver is a true American hero. Aaron will never be forgotten by his family, friends or the country he fought for.