Phil Gingrey

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. GINGREY. I thank the gentleman. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, in regard to some of the minimum-wage arguments the gentleman from Wisconsin is making, I want to point out, and these are not my statistics, but these are accurate statistics, that one-third of minimum-wage workers are children of the head of a household. Over half, 52 percent, actually of minimum-wage workers are under 25 years old. Less than 1 percent of minimum-wage workers are in households with a total income of $20,000 or less. The big concern, of course, Madam Speaker, in regard to minimum wage, and I am certainly not suggesting that that issue might not be considered by this Congress in a more appropriate setting than this appropriations bill, indeed it might, and indeed we may need to raise that minimum wage somewhat, but we have to be very, very careful that in the process we don't destroy some of these jobs. The gentleman talked about a situation with his own mom, and there are plenty of people in those situations. But if we raise the minimum wage to too high a level, then they won't have any job at all to come home from. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Sweeney), a hardworking member of the Appropriations Committee. (Mr. SWEENEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Speaker, at this time, I want to yield as much time as he might consume to the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. I appreciate the gentleman from New Jersey yielding, and I thank him, Mr. Speaker, for bringing these statistics to the floor of the House this evening. Clearly, these numbers show that this economy is doing well under this Republican leadership and this Republican President. The blue chip report that the gentleman talked about on fiscal year 2007, and he mentioned those 50-something prestigious financial organizations, says that the economy will continue to do well the rest of this fiscal year and into 2007. Mr. Speaker, it is because of the policies of this administration and this Republican-led Congress. Those policies I am speaking of, of course, are that you grow the revenue when you cut taxes. This is not a novel idea that we just invented over the last 2 or 3 years. This happened under a Democratic President in 1960, John F. Kennedy. It happened again in the early eighties under President Reagan. You cut taxes; you grow the revenue. All of these statistics that the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) has pointed out in regard to low inflation, low unemployment, robust gross domestic product over something like 12 straight quarters now. Five million jobs since 2001. I know when I first got to the Congress in the 108th in 2003, all I heard, Mr. Speaker, from the other side was how many jobs had been lost since George W. Bush was first elected. They pounded on that. I have not heard too much from the other side recently, because clearly this economy is robust, these jobs are growing, and they will continue to grow. We have this arcane scoring system, Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, and I know everybody agrees, and this is really not in dispute, that when you cut taxes, they calculate a number of how much it is going to cost. I think with the Bush tax cuts, it was estimated that it was going to cost $1.3 trillion in reduced revenue; $1.3 trillion less coming into the Treasury because of a reduction of every marginal rate so that everybody in this country, every American taxpayer, would get a reduction in their Federal taxes and get a check in their pocket. To double the child tax credit, to eliminate the marriage penalty, to lower the capital gains and dividend rates to 15 percent for almost everybody and, indeed, for some as low as 5 percent, and to give our small business men and women, Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the mom-and-pops of this great country who probably create 65, 70 percent of all these jobs that we are talking about, to let them more rapidly depreciate their capital improvements so they can, with bricks and mortar, new machines, new equipment, whether it is in my profession, the health care industry, or any other, to put people back to work, so that more people, albeit at a lower rate, are paying taxes. What happens is instead of costing $1.3 trillion over 10 years, in about 2\1/2\ years our revenue increased, and I know the gentleman from New Jersey will confirm this and agree with me, by something like $250 billion, increased revenue, because of the boldness, the courage, and the good common sense to look at historical perspective and understand that when you cut taxes, you pull a country out of recession and you don't cause decreased revenue coming to the Treasury, you end up with more. This is a great opportunity that the gentleman brings to us tonight to make sure the American people and all our colleagues on both sides of the aisle understand. Every Member is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own facts. I commend the gentleman from New Jersey for bringing us the true facts this afternoon and this evening on this floor of the House.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding, and I do rise today in strong support of the rule and this underlying bill, and I encourage all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support them both. As a cosponsor of H.R. 89, the full repeal of the death tax, I was disappointed to see the inability of the Senate to obtain cloture on a full repeal of the death tax. I firmly believe that the death tax, the estate tax, is a double taxation and, philosophically, it is wrong. We have all heard the statements, I think Steve Forbes said this several years ago, that there should be no taxation without respiration. More recently, I have heard the comment that we shouldn't try to balance the budget by robbing the grave. And there are other comments: a death should not be a taxable event. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) just said that. I fully agree with every one of those statements. The gentleman from New York also said, well, you know, in this time of war, in this time of deficits, in this time of debt, we should be able to get this money. We are not, Mr. Speaker, always going to be in that situation. But if we continue to double tax any American, that is a forever situation and it is forever wrong. So, clearly, I was in favor of full repeal. However, I believe the bill before us today is a very strong compromise. It will protect many more families, small businesses, and family farms from this double taxation, or the so-called death tax. It is my understanding, Mr. Speaker, that it also, with a manager's amendment, is indexed for inflation. Those of us, the fiscally conservative Members of our side, felt very strongly about that, and I am pleased with that addition. I know many of my colleagues are as disappointed with the failure of the other body to pass a full repeal as I am; but as many of us say, we cannot let the perfect become the enemy of the good. So I think there is a lot of good in the bill that Chairman Thomas has brought to us today and that we are discussing at this moment. We have an opportunity to take a substantial and a permanent chunk out of the death tax with a bill that can pass the Senate. They assure us, and I believe, that there will be 60 votes for this bill. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, again I want to thank Chairman Thomas and the committee for their commitment and all of the hard work in bringing this bill before us today. Now is the time for us to pass some real tax relief and eliminate the most egregious form of double taxation.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and this underlying bill, and I want to first of all commend Representative Paul Ryan of the Ways and Means Committee for bringing up this legislation. The Legislative Line Item Veto Act of 2006 takes a very measured approach that enables the President to recommend budget savings, but preserves the Congress' power of the purse. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of speeches this morning from the other side, and it is amazing how they are railing against two very strong, fiscally sound bills that we are going to vote on later today, a limited line item veto for the President and the virtual elimination of the death tax. Mr. Speaker, it gives them a great opportunity to rail against this Republican majority and this President, but I hope the American people are watching closely when they vote, if they vote against the virtual elimination of the death tax and against giving this President the limited power of a line item veto. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4890 will serve as an additional tool in our arsenal to reduce spending. This bill gives the Congress another set of eyes to review spending, with Congress still having the final say. The gentleman from Massachusetts, one of the previous speakers, said that, well, you know, some Member might have a really great project, but some President takes political retribution. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that we Members on both sides of the aisle would recognize that, and with a simple majority would vote it down. Rather, what would happen is that some Member would have some earmark that is nothing but a bunch of junk, like another rainforest in Iowa or a buffalo museum somewhere. The President would recognize that; he would ask us to rescind it so that that money could buy yet one more up-armored Humvee to protect our soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. I know some of my colleagues would prefer an even stronger bill such as a line item veto constitutional amendment, while others fear that even the underlying bill cedes too much power to the President. Well, Mr. Speaker, this bill, I believe, balances these concerns, allowing for an additional avenue to reduce the deficit with the approval of the Congress. However, even with the passage of the underlying bill, we must also redouble our efforts to continue the progrowth policies enacted over the past 6 years, to reduce the tax burden, which in turn increases tax revenues through a strong economy and an increased number of citizens participating in the American dream. At the end of the day, the American people, through their ingenuity and productivity, will fix this deficit with economic growth. We just have to continue to trust them and reject these calls from the other side to raise taxes. So, Mr. Speaker, I ask for my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the impressive work our troops are doing to fight and win the global war on terror. Last week, we debated a resolution pledging our commitment to victory in Iraq. I was troubled by some of the rhetoric I heard coming from other side of the aisle. Many Democrats are still advocating a withdrawal policy, and that is a policy that is sure to fail. Mr. Speaker, we are making significant strides toward a secure Iraq and a more stable Middle East. At that critical moment, it would be a tremendous mistake for us to set a hard deadline for troop withdrawal. A deadline only serves to embolden the terrorists because they know they only have to hold out for a few more weeks or months, or 6 months. Instead, the House last week sent a resounding message to al Qaeda that we will withdraw when the Iraqi security forces are ready and able to defeat the terrorists and their brutal tactics. This, and not some arbitrary deadline, is our true measure of success. Mr. Speaker, once again, we have assured our troops that we will support them and will allow them to finish this critical mission.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule for fiscal year 2007 Department of Defense Appropriations Act and the underlying legislation. I would like to commend Chairmen Lewis and Young, as well as the ranking member and the staff of the Defense Committee and subcommittee for their tireless effort in support of our soldiers, our sailors, airmen, and marines who are bravely defending us at home and abroad. Mr. Speaker, this bill most importantly meets the immediate needs of our warfighters who are fighting and winning the global war on terror. It is a good bill that provides funding for many important programs which are our military's top priorities. Not the least of these, Mr. Speaker, is F-22 Raptor. I am particularly delighted for the work the Appropriations Committee has done to fund the F-22 program this year. The full funding of 20 planes will go a long way toward providing stability for the program and ensuring that America maintains air dominance for the foreseeable future. In light of emerging military threats globally, the F-22 will continue to increase in significance, as it is the world's most capable fighter. I therefore wholeheartedly agree with the Department of Defense that the F-22 should be fully funded on a multi-year contract basis, and that the procurement life of the program should be extended beyond fiscal year 2009. Further, Mr. Speaker, during this time of conflict as we fight the global war on terror, the United States must, without question, continue to modernize and strengthen our ability to support our men and women in harm's way. Maintaining our Nation's airlift capabilities is critical to this mission, and I would like to applaud the committee for their recognition of this in funding 9 C-130Js and the C-5 modernization. Today, the C-130J is the most modern military transport in service. Both United States and allied C-130Js are exceeding expectations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The KC-130Js have been deployed continuously to Iraq dating to February of 2005, and their unprecedented capability, reliability, and maintainability have been impressive. Over the past year of deployment, the C and the KC-130J mission capable rates have been between 89 and 93 percent, which is more than a 50 percent improvement over legacy aircraft. Similarly, the C-5 has also proven its ability to provide critical support. While the C-5 fleet has flown less than 25 percent of all cargo missions in operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, they delivered nearly 50 percent of all cargo to our troops on the ground. Clearly, the C-5 has demonstrated its effectiveness, and therefore further modernization of a C-5 fleet is imperative. The funds for C-5 AMP modernization will be used to make critical upgrades of the cockpits with modern avionics and flight instrumentation that meet both Air Force and congressional mandated standards. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, the funds allocated for the C-5 RERP program modernization will be used to replace old engines and systems with newer ones. These replacements represent significant improvements to the aircraft, making them even more reliable and easier to maintain. Again, Mr. Speaker, this bill does a remarkable job in addressing a wide scope of issues that are vitally important to our armed services. I would like to again thank the chairmen and ranking members of the respective committee and subcommittee for their hard work on this bill. I urge support of the rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of effective, fair, and secure immigration reform, not the amnesty plan passed by the Senate this month. The Senate plan allows millions of illegal immigrants to get a green card and a path to citizenship. Mr. Speaker, let me ask you, what does this say to all the law-abiding people patiently waiting to become American citizens? It says they should have sneaked into our country and ignored our immigration laws like everyone else. Mr. Speaker, there is a better way to achieve meaningful immigration reform, and I am committed to passing the right kind of bill. We need to secure our borders first; give businesses a fail-safe way to ensure the workers that they hire are legal; and above all, start enforcing the immigration laws already on the books. Until we can accomplish these goals, any so-called ``reform plan'' will be little more than a recipe for failure. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and all of my colleagues join me in standing firm and saying ``no'' to the Senate's amnesty plan.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in full support of H. Res. 861. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution, H. Res. 861, and to emphatically declare that we will prevail in the War on Terror across the globe, and in Iraq. We've already amassed a long list of accomplishments. Mr. Speaker, since being liberated from the oppressive Taliban regime, native Afghans have returned to their homeland in droves, many of whom are highly educated teachers, healthcare providers, and community leaders that were thrown out of the country by the Taliban. The Afghan economy continues to power ahead and previously unheard-of opportunities are opening up, particularly for Afghani women. Regrettably, these accomplishments don't seem to generate much enthusiasm with the mainstream media or our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. If you did nothing but listen to their negativity, you would not know that more than 3,600 schools in Iraq have been rehabilitated, or that 240 hospitals and 1,200 medical clinics have been reopened, nor that 13 power plants have been built, providing about 60 percent of Iraq's power generation, or that over 250,000 Iraqi security forces have been trained, equipped, and are fighting on the front line against the insurgency! Further, Mr. Speaker, without our policies and efforts in carrying out the War on Terror, Libya would not have given up their WMD programs, free elections would not have taken place in Afghanistan and Iraq, a national unity government would not be in place in Iraq, and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi would still be carrying out terrorist operations. Instead of heralding the unparalleled successes of our troops and our policies in prosecuting this war, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would have the American people believe we are losing. Perhaps Mr. Speaker, the hope of political gains has some of my colleagues seeking to exploit the few missteps we have incurred while ignoring a much greater number of victories. Mr. Speaker, we cannot give in to the anti-war rhetoric, which only serves to embolden our enemies while offering little hope and little vision. It is always easier to pull back the reigns and watch from the sidelines, but we in America choose to be active in determining the course of history. Make no mistake, we are in a tough fight for the future of peace, freedom, and democracy in the Middle East and around the globe, but winning should be our only option. As we debate this resolution today, let us not forget that nearly everyone of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle when presented with the same pre-war intelligence that President Bush had concluded with high confidence that Iraq was continuing its' WMD programs contrary to U.N. resolutions. For those who now want to claim the pre- war intelligence was in some way fabricated, both the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 and bipartisan Robb-Silberman Committee in 2005 did not find any evidence to support that claim. It is shameful that ``Monday Morning'' critics who hate Secretary Rumsfeld and President Bush are now resorting to false claims about pre-war intelligence Given that Sadaam Hussein had used weapons of mass destruction on neighboring countries in the past, along with his desire to bring us harm, Republicans and Democrats alike reached consensus that the potential for him to either harm us directly with these weapons, or indirectly by passing them on to terrorists, was too great a risk to take. The terrible human rights atrocities committed by Sadaam and his blatant disregard for repeated U.N. resolutions were further compelling grounds for our bi-partisan actions. Mr. Speaker, none of these facts have changed. What has changed is the resolve of many on the other side of the aisle who in the process of changing their footing on the war, have become more interested in playing politics than in defeating terrorism and defending freedom. When these Members of Congress who are advocating a defeatist strategy, sometimes referred to as ``cut and run'', were presented with the opportunity in November 2005 to vote on withdrawing our forces from Iraq immediately, only 3 of those behind these calls stood by their words. Mr. Speaker, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq made the following statements this past Friday: ``We believe we will soon reach a tipping point in our battle against the terrorists as Iraqi security services increase in size and capacity, taking more and more responsibility away from the multinational forces. With our allies, we will also persevere to make Iraq a prosperous democracy in the heart of the Middle East.'' Mr. Speaker, it is easy to see great hope and potential in the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people. However, ill conceived and short sighted strategies threaten any chance of Iraq becoming a bastion for democracy in the Middle East. I sincerely hope the defeatist rhetoric of the minority party will not dishearten the brave men and women who are defending and advancing freedom around the globe. Therefore Mr. Speaker, I urge all members to support this resolution. Let our brave men and women in uniform know that we will never break faith with them. Let the Iraqi people know that their patriots have not died in vain.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this rule, H. Res. 861. I firmly believe that the installation of democratic governments in Afghanistan and Iraq, coupled with the recent completion of Iraq's National Unity Government and ratification of a Constitution, the elimination of Abu Musab al Zarqawi, and the continued success of our reconstruction efforts in these countries are tremendous accomplishments in the global war on terror. We are at a point in Iraq where we can build on these successes. We can advance democracy and freedom and stand by the Iraqi people while honoring the commitment that we have made. Or we can withdraw, as many on the other side of appeasement are suggesting, leaving the progress we have made and the future of Iraq to chance. Just as in Europe and Japan following World War II, there is only one option, Mr. Speaker, and that is to stand by the Iraqis until their government, police, military can ensure the security of their own nation. Then, and only then, will be the appropriate time to disengage, leaving a strong ally and flourishing democracy as an example of a peaceful and free nation to others in the Middle East region. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, we simply cannot give in to the anti-war rhetoric which only serves to embolden our enemies, while offering little hope and little vision. Rather, we must continue to advance policies which make our Nation safer, which are responsible for the liberation of over 50 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has led Libya to abandon their weapons of mass destruction program, and it makes every new year worse than the previous one for the terrorists. In this fight for the future of peace, freedom and democracy in the Middle East and around the globe, winning should be our only option. This past Friday we heard Prime Minister Maliki of Iraq make the following statement: ``With our allies we will persevere to make Iraq a prosperous democracy in the heart of the Middle East.'' Mr. Speaker, it is easy to see great hope and potential in the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people. Unfortunately, the minority party offers no hope. All we hear are ill-conceived and shortsighted strategies which threaten any chance of Iraq becoming a bastion of democracy in the Middle East. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this rule and the resolution, which sends a clear and a positive message to the new Iraqi government and its citizens. But just as importantly, Mr. Speaker, it sends a clear message to those soldiers who have been injured or killed and their families that this Congress will never break faith with them.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in memory of C.J. Fouts, a businessman and community leader in the city of Smyrna, Georgia, in my district. Mr. Fouts passed away this week, leaving behind his wife, Betty, three children, eight grandchildren, four great-grandchildren, and a community full of grateful citizens. Mr. Fouts captured the essence of the American dream, Mr. Speaker. He came to Smyrna at age 18 from rural Georgia in search of work. He started his own business, a service station that later grew into a sales shop for cars, trucks and equipment. Mr. Fouts gave his time, energy and passion to the Smyrna business community. He has the distinction of possessing the longest active business license in the city of Smyrna, 54 years. Just a few weeks ago the city honored him with a plaque commemorating him as a founding member of the Downtown Development Authority. I am so thankful to have been in attendance. Mr. Speaker, our communities are blessed with men like C.J. Fouts. Their work ethic boosts our economy, and their determination allows our towns and our cities to flourish. Smyrna, indeed, and the State of Georgia, lost a great man this week, but his work and vision live on throughout the city. Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in honoring Mr. Fouts' memory.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding. I rise to strongly, strongly oppose the Oberstar-LoBiondo-Poe amendment, because just exactly as the chairman and others have spoken in opposition to this amendment, this would jeopardize the open skies agreement between the United States and the EU. The domestic airline industry in this country is struggling with fuel costs. This would literally be a knockout blow to them. In regard to the rulemaking, it assures still that 75 percent of stockholders must be Americans on a domestic airline, and two-thirds of the seats on the boards of directors must be United States citizens. I think we need to move forward with this rulemaking so that we can complete this open skies agreement with the EU. This is a benefit to our airline industry that we have an opportunity to open up the markets to more international flights, more flights of their carriers into our smaller non-hub cities. Mr. Chairman, this is a jobs bill. I strongly, strongly voice my opposition to this amendment. I ask my colleagues to vote against it.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank our brave servicemen and women for their exceptional work in fighting the global war on terror. I recently spent time in Iraq with the 48th Brigade Combat Unit of the Georgia Army National Guard. This unit was doing some incredible humanitarian work for the Iraqi people, building schools and managing health clinics. Of course, these aren't the stories that you read about on the front page of the New York Times, so I want to share one with you today. One evening during my trip, I was having dinner with a young sergeant named Keith Weathers. This sergeant would explain to me why his unit was doing so much to help the Iraqi people. Sergeant Weathers said it was because he and most Americans have hope and opportunity, and it was his mission to share the abundant opportunities our Nation enjoys with those struggling to achieve freedom in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, our soldiers are bringing hope and opportunity for the Iraqi people every day. The war on terror is not an easy fight, nor is it an expedient fight, but it is undoubtedly the right fight. I hope we all take Sergeant Weathers's words to heart and continue supporting our troops and their mission.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4894, the School Safety Acquiring Faculty Excellence Act, and I congratulate the leadership of my friend and colleague, Mr. Porter, and of course of Chairman Sensenbrenner, for bringing this important piece of legislation to the floor today. This bill allows all States to access national criminal databases to obtain criminal information when hiring teachers. The safety of our children in America's schools is a major priority not only to our Nation's educators, but to every parent and guardian; and that is why I stand in support of it today. We need to make every resource available to our schools to ensure that the qualifications and the background of the faculty they hire are unquestioned. This legislation streamlines the process and ensures that those who are hired to work with and educate our children are trustworthy, honest, and law abiding citizens. Mr. Speaker, this is a great opportunity for the House of Representatives to take a stand with our communities and our schools and give them the tools necessary to make certain that our children are safe.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. I thank my colleague from Georgia for yielding. I certainly, certainly appreciate, Mr. Speaker, the Official Truth Squad that the gentleman has led, and particularly tonight in regard to this subject. The gentleman spent 10 or 15 minutes actually going through a historical perspective, taking us, Mr. Speaker, all the way back to the 1960s, as he outlined the attacks that have occurred against this country, and made the point that this policy that we have had heretofore prior to our President's response to 9/11, on September 11, 2001, this so-called policy of containment that has proven itself to be a dismal failure because of these attacks, one right after another, as the gentleman pointed out, Khobar Towers, U.S.S. Cole, first attack on the World Trade Center, and finally leading up to the horrendous killing of over 3,000 people on September 11. We didn't start this fight, Mr. Speaker; and I think that is the gentleman's point. It was just astounding to me to hear someone from the other side earlier this evening imply that we started this battle, that we have got no business defending freedom and standing up for the rule of law. Edmund Burke once said that ``all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.'' And quite honestly, Mr. Speaker, over the last 40 years, as the gentleman from Georgia has pointed out, we basically did nothing. It was like turning the other cheek, or I dare you to do that again, or I double dog, even triple dog dare you to strike at us again, and on and on and on. And finally this President and this Congress had the courage to stand up and take it to the enemy. And I would point out that at that particular time, Mr. Speaker, this battle was not against any one individual but this was a long slog, that it was going to be tough, that the global war on terrorism would not end with just one battle. It is so interesting, as we hear from the other side, that finally the tracking down and the killing of Zarqawi was almost a nonevent. It doesn't matter. They are going to replace him with someone just as terrible and we won't even notice the difference. That would be like saying that Knute Rockne was going to be replaced at Notre Dame, or a Lou Gehrig was going to be replaced by the New York Yankees and nobody would know the difference. This guy was the worst of the worst. And I think that what we have done last week in killing Zarqawi is a tremendous accomplishment for our military, for the Iraqi people, for the intelligence that was brought to bear that led to the success and also, Mr. Speaker, in regard to the Iraqi Government finally, very carefully vetting individuals to place as ministers of defense, ministers of interior, and minister of their national security. These are huge items of success. I want to say to my colleagues on the other side that we will, as the gentleman from Georgia has pointed out, we will discuss this thoroughly, and every Member in this body will have an opportunity to have their say about what we are trying to do and whether we support continuing this battle or whether we decide that it is time that, as the gentleman from the State of Washington said earlier this evening, to bring our troops home. I think it is very simple. I hear the Members on the other side of the aisle saying, well, the American people are against this, the American people have turned against this. Well, if that is the case, when we have this simple resolution on Thursday or Friday morning, then they will have an opportunity then to vote the way they think the American people want. I, Mr. Speaker, refute that. I think the American people stand strong and understand that when you are in a contest, you don't say, we are going to play the game for 60 minutes, but if it happens to go into overtime then we are going to pull our team off the field because we don't want to go any further. This is what this is all about. And, again, I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia for leading the Official Truth Squad. As he said at the outset, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts, and these are the facts that Congressman Price has brought to us as he outlined what has happened over the last 40 years. It is time that we stood up. We are going to win this battle, and we want to make sure that every Member of this body has an opportunity to vote yea or nay. So I commend the gentleman from Georgia, and I yield back to him.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank Betty Brady for nearly 30 years of service to the Powder Springs, Georgia community, most recently as the city clerk. Betty's retiring from public service this year, and I know the whole city will miss her enthusiasm and her dedication. Betty has worked with the City of Powder Springs since 1977, and in 1992, she was appointed city clerk. Over the past 14 years, Betty has worn many hats, accomplishing administrative, organizational and public relations duties for the mayor and city council. As a native of Powder Springs, Betty brought a passion to her role as city clerk. Never one content to sit on the sidelines, Betty gave her time and energy to almost every aspect of city government. In retirement, Betty will have more time to spend with her husband Aubrey, her three sons and her seven grandchildren. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you join me and all my colleagues in thanking Betty Brady for her years of service to the Powder Springs, Georgia community.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding. WHINSEC is a Department of Defense institute that instructs current and future civilian, military and law enforcement leaders from Nations in the Western Hemisphere. It was created in 2001 to replace the School of the Americas. The School of the Americas, as a Cold War legacy program, was not meeting the needs and standards required to operate in the world's new security environment. Its goals, which were set by Congress, explicitly include strengthening democracy, instilling a respect for the rule of law, and honoring human rights. WHINSEC's curriculum, and I have been there, I am on the board of visitors, WHINSEC's curriculum includes instruction in leadership development, peace support, counterdrug operations, disaster preparedness and relief planning. As mandated by Congress, WHINSEC formulated and implemented a human rights training program that, Mr. Chairman, is among the best offered by military educational institutions in this hemisphere. All students and instructors, without exception, receive comprehensive human rights instruction and training. So I strongly disagree with this impression created by the School of the Americas/WHINSEC critics that somehow all or most of the WHINSEC graduates are brutal and murderous thugs. In fact, more than 61,000 officers, noncommissioned officers and soldiers have graduated from or attended courses at these U.S. Army schools. They have helped foster a spirit of cooperation and interoperability among militaries throughout Central and South Americas. The vast majority, Mr. Chairman, of graduates have contributed positively to the region's transition to democracy, while helping to avoid interstate conflict in the hemisphere. While credible accusations of human rights abuses have been leveled against some graduates, most have served their Nation with honor and distinction. In the interest of full disclosure, Mr. Chairman, I am a Catholic and I was educated by the Jesuits, and I understand the opposition that is coming from that direction of some abuses and torture, yes, that occurred 30 years ago, but this is a classic example, this amendment, of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It would be equivalent to saying that we should shut down Fort Benning because of the My Lai massacre, and Lieutenant Calley that occurred in the Vietnam War. It just does not make sense, and I am totally opposed to my good friend Mr. McGovern's amendment, and I respectfully ask my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate our United States military for eliminating a ruthless and brutal terrorist in Iraq. Late Wednesday night, it was announced that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, had been killed in an air raid. This is a tremendous victory in our war on terrorism and a tremendous day for the Iraqi people. In fact, the air strike resulted from tips given to Iraqi Security Forces by residents in Diyala. Mr. Speaker, al-Zarqawi was responsible for an untold number of bombings and kidnappings. He is even believed to have personally beheaded two American hostages. His death lets our enemies know we will not bow to their ruthless tactics. America, our allies and the Iraqi people are committed to the triumph of liberty over terrorism. Mr. Speaker, our military is doing an outstanding job protecting our Nation from those who wish us harm. I ask that you join me in thanking our servicemen and women for their selfless courage and congratulate them on their most recent victory, the elimination of the brutal terrorist leader, al-Zarqawi.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Upson-Lee Middle School in Thomaston, Georgia, on being recognized as a ``School to Watch'' by the National Forum to Accelerate Middle Grades Reform. This award recognizes Upson-Lee's academic excellence, especially the school's commitment to challenging every student's mind. Upson-Lee was one of only 82 schools nationwide to receive this honor. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Upson-Thomaston Superintendent Howard Hendley, Upson-Lee Principal Patsy Dean and all the Upson-Lee teachers, administrators and parents for the dedicated work on behalf of Georgia's children. As a former school board chairman, I know the importance of a good middle school education. Our children learn more when they are inspired by the leadership of teachers and principals, and Upson-Lee is doing a great job inspiring the youth of Thomaston. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to join me in congratulating Upson-Lee Middle School on this exciting recognition.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Chairman Deal of the Health Subcommittee of Energy and Commerce. I thank Representative Hinchey and Representative Capps and all Members who bring this resolution, 833, before us this evening. Those of us involved in health care, like Representative Capps, as a registered nurse, and myself, as a physician, and not only a physician, but also a specialist dealing with women's health issues, as an OB-GYN, understand the importance of recognizing that this is National Women's Health Week. It promotes awareness of diseases that specifically affect women and encourage them to take preventive measures to ensure good health. It is a time when we need to tell all the women in our lives, our mothers, our wives, our sisters, our daughters, our aunts, in my case, my children and grandchildren, and friends, how important it is to take time out for their health. It can be as simple as taking the stairs instead of an elevator, eating healthier or scheduling an appointment with a health care provider. Mr. Speaker, as an OB-GYN physician for nearly 30 years, I cannot stress enough how important a good relationship with your doctor is in maintaining your health. Women need to have conversations with their physicians regarding family history. They clearly need to understand the importance of screening tests and how to manage chronic diseases. I want all of America's women to take a moment to focus on promoting health and preventing disease and illness by taking very simple steps to improve their physical, mental, social and spiritual health. And I thank the chairman for allowing me to address this issue.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Speaker, I also rise today in support of the principled leadership of the Speaker of the House, Mr. Dennis Hastert. As we all know, Denny is a former high school wrestling coach, and he brings those same values of teamwork and fair play to his work here in Congress. It is often said that to be a good leader, one must first be a good listener, and Denny's door is always open to every Member. Under his leadership, this House has passed scores of legislation benefiting American families, children, seniors, taxpayers. We have achieved historic tax reform, a prescription drug benefit for our seniors and legislation to secure our border and prepare our military. Madam Speaker, last night's news report's attempt to cast a shadow on Mr. Hastert, despite the fact that the Justice Department has categorically refuted ABC News claims about the Speaker, this is a case of sensationalism over reporting and it should not continue. Madam Speaker, I know this Congress will continue to focus on passing good legislation for the American people and not resort to muckraking and partisan attacks. I know all my colleagues in this Chamber join me in thanking Speaker Hastert for his leadership.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Health Information Technology, one of the most important and immediate ways we can increase patient safety and help more Americans access quality health care. Health Information Technology, like electronic medical records and e- prescribing, can help doctors save money, time and, most importantly, save lives. But as I speak to practicing physicians across America, I am hearing the same thing time and time again, Mr. Speaker: I would love to invest in this new technology, but the costs are simply prohibitive. This is why I have introduced H.R. 4641, legislation to increase tax deductions for physicians who invest in Health Information Technology. If more physicians can afford Health IT, more Americans can benefit from these systems. Mr. Speaker, a recent RAND study reveals that a widely adopted Health IT system could save the United States more than $126 billion each and every year. We have a unique opportunity then to help doctors, patients and the American taxpayer in one fell swoop. It is absolutely crucial that we encourage the adoption of HIT, Health Information Technology. Congress must act, and we must act now. H.R. 4641 is the right approach to lower the cost barriers to Health IT for our physicians.