Pete Hoekstra

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to my colleague from California (Mr. Issa), a member of the Intelligence Committee

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Further parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Does this resolution include any provisions expressing support for the members of the United States intelligence community serving inside of Iraq?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. At this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I believe that Congress should continue to encourage an open and robust debate about its Iraq policy. I found former Speaker Newt Gingrich's recent testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the situation in Iraq of particular interest. I would like to share it with my colleagues. [From Gingrich Communications, Jan. 23, 2007] The Cost of Defeat in Iraq and the Cost of Victory in Iraq Testimony to Senate Foreign Relations Committee (By Newt Gingrich) Chairman Biden, Ranking Member Lugar, and members of the committee: Thank you for allowing me to testify. This is an extraordinarily important series of hearings on a topic of enormous national importance. The United States finds itself in a global struggle with the forces of Islamic fascism and their dictatorial allies. From a fanatic American near Chicago who attempted to buy hand grenades to launch a personal Jihad in a Christmas mall, to 18 Canadians arrested for terrorist plots, to the Scotland Yard disruption of a plot in Britain to destroy ten civilian airliners in one day that if successful would have shattered worldwide confidence in commercial aviation and potentially thrown the world into a deep economic contraction. We are confronted again and again with a worldwide effort to undermine and defeat the system of law and order which has created more prosperity and more freedom for more people than any previous system. The threats seem to come in four different forms: First, from individuals who are often self recruited and randomly inspired through the internet, television and charismatic social and religious friendships. Second, from organized non state systems of terror of which Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and Hamas are the most famous. Additional groups have sprung up and provide continuity, training, and support for terrorism. Third, from dictatorships in the Middle East most notably Iran and Syria who have been consistently singled out by the State Department (including in 2006) as the largest funders of state supported terrorism in the world. These dictatorships are investing in more advanced conventional weapons and in chemical and nuclear weapons. Fourth, from a strange assortment of anti-American dictatorships including North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba. This coalition of the enemies of freedom has growing power around the world. Its leaders are increasingly bold in their explicit hostility to the United States. To take just two recent examples: Ahmadinejad of Iran has said ``[t]o those who doubt, to those who ask is it possible, or those who do not believe, I say accomplishment of a world without America and Israel is both possible and feasible.'' He has also said that Israel should be ``wiped off the map.'' Chavez of Venezuela, just last week in a joint appearance with the Iranian leader in Latin America, announced a multi billion dollar fund to help countries willing to fight to end ``American imperialism.'' Both of these statements were on television and are not subject to misinterpretation. Similarly there are many web pages and other public statements in which various terrorists have described in great detail their commitment to killing millions of Americans. I described these publicly delivered threats in a speech on the fifth anniversary of 9/11 which I gave at the American Enterprise Institute. The text of this speech is attached as an appendix to this testimony. These threats might be ignored if it were not for the consistent efforts to acquire nuclear and biological weapons by these enemies of freedom I first wrote about the extraordinary increase in the threat to our civilization from nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists in Window of Opportunity in 1984. Attached to this testimony is a copy of the relevant pages from this book. It is not accurate to suggest today that people were not aware of terrorism or were not warning about the threat to America's very survival prior to 9/11. Many sophisticated observers and professional military and intelligence officers have been issuing these warnings for two decades. What has been amazing to watch has been the absolute inability of our system of government to analyze the problem and react effectively. It is this collapse of capacity for effectiveness which is at the heart of our current dilemma. The United States is now in a decaying mess in Afghanistan and an obviously unacceptable mess in Iraq. While this language may seem harsh to defenders of the current policy, it is sadly an accurate statement of where we are. Efforts to think through and solve the problems of Afghanistan and Iraq have to be undertaken in a context of looking at a wider range of challenges to American leadership around the world and potentially to our very survival as a country. These larger challenges are described in my attached presentation entitled ``The Real World and The Real War''. With these caveats I want to focus on the challenge of Iraq. Two Very Hard Paths Forward in Iraq America is faced with two very hard paths forward in Iraq. We can accept defeat and try to rebuild our position in the region while accommodating the painful possibility that these enemies of freedom in Iraq--evil men, vicious murderers, and sadistic inflictors of atrocities will have defeated both the millions of Iraqis who voted for legal self government and the American people and their government. Alternatively we can insist on defeating the enemies of America and the enemies of the Iraqi people and can develop the strategies and the implementation mechanisms necessary to force victory despite the incompetence of the Iraqi government, the unreliability of Iraqi leaders, and the interference of Syria and Iran on behalf of our enemies. Both these paths are hard. Both involve great risk. Both have unknowable difficulties and will produce surprise events. Both will be complicated. Yet either is preferable to continuing to accept an ineffective American implementation system while relying on the hope that the Iraqi system can be made to work in the next six months. The Inherent Confusion in the Current Strategy There are three fundamental weaknesses in the current strategy. First, the strategy relies on the Iraqis somehow magically improving their performance in a very short time period. Yet the argument for staying in Iraq is that it is a vital AMERICAN interest. If we are seeking victory in Iraq because it is vital to America then we need a strategy which will win even if our Iraqi allies are inadequate. We did not rely on the Free French to defeat Nazi Germany. We did not rely on the South Koreans to stop North Korea and China during the Korean War. When it mattered to American vital interests we accepted all the help we could get but we made sure we had enough strength to win on our own if need be. President Bush has asserted that Iraq is a vital American interest. In January 2007 alone he has said the following things: But if we do not succeed in Iraq, we will leave behind a Middle East which will endanger America in the future. [F]ailure in one part of the world could lead to disaster here at home. It's important for our citizens to understand that as tempting as it might be, to understand the consequences of leaving before the job is done, radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength. They would be emboldened. It would make it easier to recruit for their cause. They would be in a position to do that which they have said they want to do, which is to topple moderate governments, to spread their radical vision across an important region of the world. If we were to leave before the job is done, if we were to fail in Iraq, Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Our enemies would have safe havens from which to launch attacks. People would look back at this moment in history and say, what happened to them in America? How come they couldn't see the threats to a future generation? The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions. Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people. On September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities. For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq. Iraq is a central component of defeating the extremists who want to establish safe haven in the Middle East, extremists who would use their safe haven from which to attack the United States, extremists and radicals who have stated that they want to topple moderate governments in order to be able to achieve assets necessary to effect their dream of spreading their totalitarian ideology as far and wide as possible. This is really the calling of our time, that is, to defeat these extremists and radicals, and Iraq is a component part, an important part of laying the foundation for peace. The inherent contradiction in the administration strategy is simple. If Iraq matters as much as the President says it does (and here I agree with the President on the supreme importance of victory) then the United States must not design and rely on a strategy which relies on the Iraqis to win. On the other hand if the war is so unimportant that the fate of Iraq can be allowed to rest with the efforts of a new, weak, untested and inexperienced government then why are we risking American lives. Both propositions cannot be true. I accept the President's analysis of the importance of winning in Iraq and therefore I am compelled to propose that his recently announced strategy is inadequate. The second weakness is that the current strategy debate once again focuses too much on the military and too little on everything that has not been working. The one instrument that has been reasonably competent is the combat element of American military power. That is a very narrow definition and should not be expanded to include the non-combat elements of the Department of Defense which also have a lot of difficulties in performing adequately. The great failures in the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns have been in non-combat power. Intelligence, diplomacy, economic aid, information operations, support from the civilian elements of national power. These have been the great centers of failure in America's recent conflicts. They are a major reason we have done so badly in Iraq. The gap between the President's recent proposals and the required rethinking and transforming of our non-combat instruments of power is simply breathtaking. No military leader I have talked with believes military force is adequate to win in Iraq. Every one of them insists that the civilian instruments of power are more important than the combat elements. They all assert that they can hold the line for a while with force but that holding the line will ultimately fail if we are not using that time to achieve progress in nonmilitary areas. This failure of the non-combat bureaucracies cannot be solved in Iraq. The heart of the problem is in Washington and that brings us to the third weakness in the current strategy. The third weakness in the current strategy is its inability to impose war-time decision-making and accountability in Washington. The interagency process is hopelessly broken. This is not a new phenomenon. I first wrote about it in 1984 in Window of Opportunity when I asserted: [W]e must decide what sort of executive-branch planning and implementation system are desirable. At a minimum, we will need closer relationships between the intelligence agencies, the diplomatic agencies, the economic agencies, the military agencies, the news media and the political structure. There has to be a synergism in which our assessment of what is happening relates to our policies as they are developed and implemented. Both analyses and implementation must be related to the new media and political system because all basic policies must have public support if they are to succeed. Finally, once the professionals have mastered their professions and have begun to work in systems that are effective and coordinated, those professionals must teach both the news media and the elected politicians. No free society can for long accept the level of ignorance about war, history, and the nature of power which has become the norm for our news media and our elected politicians. An ignorant society is on its way to becoming an extinct society. In 1991 my concern for replacing the broken interagency system with an integrated system of effective coordination was heightened when General Max Thurmond who had planned and led the liberation of Panama told me unequivocally that the interagency process was broken. In 1995 that process was reinforced when General Hartzog described the failures of the interagency in trying to deal with Haiti. As early as 2002 it was clear that the interagency had broken down in Afghanistan and I gave a very strong speech in May 2003 at the American Enterprise Institute criticizing the process. By the summer of 2003 it was clear the interagency was failing in Iraq and by September and October 2003 we were getting consistent reports from the field of the gap between the capability of the combat forces and the failure of the civilian systems. No senior officer in the Defense Department doubts that the current interagency cannot work at the speed of modern war. They will not engage in a fight with the National Security Council or the State Department or the various civilian agencies which fail to do their job. But in private they will assert over and over again that the interagency system is hopelessly broken. It was very disappointing to have the President focus so much on 21,500 more military personnel and so little on the reforms needed in all the other elements of the executive branch. The proposals for winning in Iraq outlined below follow from this analysis. Key Steps to Victory in Iraq 1. Place General Petraeus in charge of the Iraq campaign and establish that the Ambassador is operating in support of the military commander. 2. Since General Petraeus will now have responsibility for victory in Iraq all elements of achieving victory are within his purview and he should report daily to the White House on anything significant which is not working or is needed 3. Create a deputy chief of staff to the President and appoint a retired four star general or admiral to manage Iraq implementation for the Commander in Chief on a daily basis. 4. Establish that the second briefing (after the daily intelligence brief) the President will get every day is from his deputy chief of staff for Iraq implementation. 5. Establish a War Cabinet which will meet once a week to review metrics of implementation and resolve failures and enforce decisions. The President should chair the War Cabinet personally and his deputy chief of staff for Iraq implementation should prepare the agenda for the weekly review and meeting. 6. Establish three plans: one for achieving victory with the help of the Iraqi government, one for achieving victory with the passive acquiescence of the Iraqi government, one for achieving victory even if the current Iraqi government is unhappy. The third plan may involve very significant shifts in troops and resources away from Baghdad and a process of allowing the Iraqi central government to fend for itself if it refuses to cooperate. 7. Communicate clearly to Syria and Iran that the United States is determined to win in Iraq and that any further interference (such as the recent reports of sophisticated Iranian explosives being sent to Iraq to target Americans) will lead to direct and aggressive countermeasures. 8. Pour as many intelligence assets into the fight as needed to develop an overwhelming advantage in intelligence preparation of the battlefield. 9. Develop a commander's capacity to spend money on local activities sufficient to enable every local American commander to have substantial leverage in dealing with local communities. 10. Establish a jobs corps or civil conservation corps of sufficient scale to bring unemployment for males under 30 below 10 percent (see the attached oped by Mayor Giuliani and myself on this topic). 11. Expand dramatically the integration of American purchasing power in buying from Iraqi firms pioneered by Assistant Secretary Paul Brinkley to maximize the rate of recovery of the Iraqi economy. 12. Expand the American Army and Marine Corps as much as needed to sustain the fights in Iraq and Afghanistan while also being prepared for other contingencies and maintaining a sustainable rhythm for the families and the force. 13. Demand a war budget for recapitalization of the military to continue modernization while defeating our enemies. The current national security budget is lower as a percentage of the economy than at any time from Pearl Harbor through the end of the Cold War. It is less than half the level Truman sustained before the Korean War. 14. The State Department is too small, too undercapitalized and too untrained for the demands of the 21st century. There should be a 50 percent increase in the State Department budget and a profound rethinking of the culture and systems of the State Department so it can be an operationally effective system. 15. The Agency for International Development is hopelessly unsuited to the new requirements of economic assistance and development and should be rethought from the ground up. The Marshall Plan and Point Four were as important as NATO in containing the Soviet Empire. We do not have that capability today. 16. The President should issue executive orders where possible to reform the implementation system so it works with the speed and effectiveness required by the 21st century. 17. Where legislation is needed the President should collaborate with Congress in honestly reviewing the systems that are failing and developing new metrics, new structures and new strategies. 18. Under our Constitution it is impossible to have this scale of rethinking and reform without deep support from the legislative branch. Without Republican Senator Arthur Vandenburg, Democratic President Harry Truman could never have developed the containment policies that saved freedom and ultimately defeated the Soviet Empire. The President should ask the bipartisan leaders of Congress to cooperate in establishing a joint Legislative-Executive working group on winning the war and should openly brief the legislative branch on the problems which are weakening the American system abroad. Only by educating and informing the Congress can we achieve the level of mutual understanding and mutual commitment that this long hard task will require. Thank you for this opportunity to share these proposals.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Army Specialist Brandon L. Stout, who died on January 22, 2007 in Baghdad, Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Specialist Stout, who was 23 years old, died when an improvised explosive device detonated near his military vehicle. He was assigned to the 46th Military Police Company, 210th Military Police Battalion, Army National Guard, Kingsford, Michigan. Brandon was raised in Kent City, Michigan. He met his future wife Audrey while attending Great Lakes Christian College from August, 2002 to May, 2003. They married in May of 2005. Brandon's faith was an important part of his life, and he hoped to pursue a vocation in ministry. He felt called to serve his country and joined the Army National Guard in June 2003. In 2005 he was deployed to Louisiana for nearly two months as part of the Hurricane Katrina response. Brandon trained at Fort Dix, New Jersey beginning in July 2006 and was deployed to Baghdad on October 1, 2006. He earned his promotion to Specialist in December of 2006. Brandon was looking forward to a scheduled two-week leave with his wife, family and friends. Brandon is survived by his wife; his mother and step-father, Tracy and Jeff Anderson; his father and step-mother, Bill and Tammy Stout; and his brother, Adam. His extended family includes Andrew, Elizabeth, Stephanie and Christine Anderson; Stephanie Stout and Callie McGee; Gary and Laurie Hinken; Dusty and Lisa VanderMeer; and Marianne and Lindsey Hinken. Specialist Stout's family and friends consider him a role model and a hero. He was dedicated to serving his country, was steadfast in his faith and deeply loved his wife and family. I extend my prayers and condolences to his family and friends and hope that they find peace and comfort during this difficult time.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak in opposition of H.R. 5. Today we are considering the College Student Relief Act of 2007. Democrats have claimed that this legislation will provide relief to students going to college. However, what they have done is propose a classic bait and switch. This bill will not improve access to higher education for low- and middle-income Americans nor will it provide relief for students in college today. This relief, when fully phased in, will benefit college graduates for only 6 months. H.R. 5 reduces interest rates for only undergraduate subsidized loans over 5 years from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent. By the time the interest rate is cut in half, the 3.4 percent interest rate is only in effect for half a year. The student loan interest rate goes back to 6.8 percent permanently starting January 1, 2012. In other words, it snaps back just 6 months after it is fully phased in at a cost of $7 billion. The reality of the situation is that the Democrats could not follow through on their campaign promise to cut interest rates in half because they couldn't pay for it. So first they narrowed the field down to one subset of student loans. Then, they phased the rate cut in. Then, they ended it after 5 years. What is left is this ``bait and switch'' benefit that will expire in a mere 6 months after it is fully phased in. Democrats have talked about improving access to higher education for lower- and middle-income Americans. H.R. 5 does not provide relief to college students seeking to pay their tuition. It does not do anything to get more students into college. This bill provides a back-end benefit to college graduates instead of a front-end benefit for those trying to get in the door of a university. The bill will not help a single graduate student saddled with a heavy financial burden. H.R. 5 is a boon to the Direct Loan Program. The Direct Loan Program's market share has fallen to 22 percent because schools have chosen FFEL. Cutting FFEL lenders is the only way to increase the competitive position of direct lending, a program that is withering on the vine through the voluntary attrition of colleges. CBO estimates that cutting interest rates will cost taxpayers more than $7 billion. In order to off-set the cost, the proposal before us will cut government payments to loan providers. While reducing lender payments, I'm concerned that rate reductions, fee waivers, loan forgiveness and other benefits will be taken away from students seeking higher education loans. Lowering interest rates for borrowers could result in schools increasing tuition. If that is the result, borrowers won't get any relief at all. The real issue is college cost, not student loan interest rates! During the 109th Congress, we enacted policies that reduced student loan fees by allowing students to consolidate with lenders that best met their needs. Origination fees were reduced and loan limits were also increased, allowing more students to gain access to much-needed financial aid. Supporting H.R. 5 will not help students achieve higher education affordability.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

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

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to thank my colleague from Virginia for bringing forward this resolution today. I think it is a wonderful opportunity to educate the colleague from Virginia on the talents that we have in the State of Michigan, especially in western Michigan. I am excited to see how well versed he has become about the Grand Valley State University football team. As he indicated, we rise today to congratulate the student athletes on the Grand Valley State University Lakers 2006 football team. On December 16, 2006, the Lakers football team won the NCAA Division II football national championship by defeating the Northwest Missouri State University Bearcats 17-14. The Grand Valley State University football program has now won championships in 2002, 2003, 2005 and 2006. The victory capped another storybook season for Coach Chuck Martin. He has coached his team to a 23-3 record, including a 10-1 post-season record after assuming coaching responsibility after a successful stint as the Lakers' defensive coordinator. The Grand Valley State University seniors finished their 4-year run with the Lakers with a 52-4 record, making them the all-time winningest senior class in all of NCAA history. Grand Valley student athletes have displayed great strength, ability and resolve during the 2006 season. They have made the great State of Michigan proud once again. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all Members to support the passage of H. Res. 62. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the full roster of this national championship team and their coaching staff. 2006 Roster [Alphabetical] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No. Name Ht/Wt Pos Yr Exp Hometown (last school). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4............................. Anthony Adams.... 6-2/234 LB.............. JR.............. 2L.............. Troy, MI (Troy). 58............................ Sam Allen........ 6-5/285 OL.............. SO.............. 1L.............. Lansing, MI (Sexton). 35............................ Matt Bakker...... 6-1/190 RB.............. FR.............. FR.............. Middleville, MI (South Christian). 43............................ Lyle Banks....... 5-11/170 DB.............. FR.............. RS.............. Detroit, MI (Cass Tech). 61............................ Brandon Barnes... 6-2/315 OL.............. JR.............. 2L.............. Detroit, MI (Pershing). 82............................ Ryan Bass........ 6-2/181 WR.............. FR.............. RS.............. Portage, MI (Northern). 9............................. Matt Beaty....... 6-0/232 LB.............. JR.............. 2L.............. Detroit, MI (Cass Tech). 99............................ Nate Beebe....... 6-2/235 DL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Allendale, MI. 21............................ P.J. Beuke....... 6-0/215 LB.............. FR.............. RS.............. Hinsdale, IL. 36............................ Chad Biggar...... 6-2/220 LB.............. FR.............. FR.............. Traverse City, MI (St. Francis). 6............................. Scott Blasko..... 6-4/265 TE.............. SO.............. 1L.............. Lansing, MI (St. Joseph). 88............................ Cameron Bradfield 6-4/256 TE.............. FR.............. RS.............. Grand Rapids, MI (Creston). 29............................ Bill Brechin..... 5-10/180 DB.............. JR.............. 1L.............. Addison, IL. 64............................ Drew Burton...... 6-1/310 OL.............. SR.............. 2L.............. Moscow, ID (Moscow). 76............................ Troy Buter....... 6-8/270 OL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Zeeland, MI (West). 5............................. Samad Cain....... 6-2/200 DB.............. SO.............. 1L.............. Detroit, MI (Minnesota). 87............................ Robert Carlisle.. 6-1/184 WR.............. SO.............. 1L.............. Detroit, MI (Lutheran East). 24............................ Brandon Carr..... 6-1/206 DB.............. JR.............. 2L.............. Flint, MI (Carman-Ainsworth). 25............................ Tony Carr........ 6-0/190 DB.............. SR.............. 1L.............. Flint, MI (Western Michigan). 83............................ Tony Carreri..... 6-3/235 TE.............. FR.............. FR.............. Clinton Township, MI (L'Anse Cruse). 20............................ Kirk Carruth..... /235 LB.............. JR.............. 2L.............. Saginaw, MI (Saginaw). 90............................ Todd Carter...... 6-1/190 K............... SO.............. 1L.............. Flint, MI (Carman-Ainsworth). 3............................. Mark Catlin...... 5-10/180 WR.............. SR.............. 3L.............. Lowell, MI (Lowell). Carlos Clark..... 6-0/160 WR.............. FR.............. FR.............. Belleville, MI. 37............................ Aaron Conti...... 5-8/175 DB.............. FR.............. RS.............. Bloomfield Hills, MI (Detroit Jesuit). 52............................ Greg Copeland.... 6-3/250 OL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Inkster, MI. 95............................ Mendalson 6-4/225 DL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Carsbad, CA. Covington. 84............................ Anthony Crump.... 6-4/228 WR.............. FR.............. RS.............. Muskegon, MI. 59............................ Joe Davis........ 6-1/250 OL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Jenison, MI. 32............................ Corey Edwards.... 6-0/183 WR.............. SO.............. 1L.............. Grand Rapids, MI (Ottawa Hills). 93............................ Jeremy Ehinger... 6-3/285 DL.............. JR.............. TR.............. Torranc, CA (L.A. Harbor College). 51............................ Billy Eisenhardt. 6-3/270 OC.............. SO.............. 1L.............. Macomb, MI (Dakota). 56............................ Ian Evans........ 6-3/235 TE.............. FR.............. FR.............. Clearwater, FL (Countryside). Eric Ewing....... 6-1/200 LB.............. FR.............. FR.............. Jackson, MI (Lumen Christi). 31............................ Gary Fant........ 5-11/190 DB.............. FR.............. RS.............. Lansing, MI (Eastern). 94............................ Chris Favors..... 6-2/270 DL.............. JR.............. TR.............. Laplace, LA (Citrus J.C.). 16............................ Cullen Finnerty.. 6-2/210 QB.............. SR.............. 3L.............. Brighton, MI (Brighton). 34............................ Matt Flutur...... 5-11/215 RB.............. FR.............. RS.............. Ludington, MI (Mason County Central). 79............................ Dan Foster....... 6-5/250 OL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Grand Haven, MI. 80............................ Eric Fowler...... 6-3/198 WR.............. SR.............. 3L.............. New Haven, MI (New Haven). 7............................. Preston Garris... 5-9/190 WR.............. JR.............. 2L.............. Muskegon, MI (Mona Shores). 92............................ Ryan Gaydosh..... 6-3/259 DL.............. JR.............. 2L.............. Medina, OH (Medina). 66............................ Alex Gilde....... 6-0/265 DL.............. FR.............. FR.............. McBain, MI. 17............................ Brennen Glass.... 6-4/220 QB.............. FR.............. FR.............. Springfield, OH. 70............................ John Godush...... 6-3/315 OL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Stevensville, MI (Lakeshore). 23............................ Maurice Gore..... 5-9/190 RB.............. FR.............. RS.............. Lansing, MI (Sexton). 97............................ Mike Graham...... 6-2/244 TE.............. JR.............. TR.............. Owosso, MI (Grand Rapids C.C.). D.D. Hardy....... 6-0/170 WR.............. FR.............. FR.............. New Haven, MI. 75............................ James Hardy...... 6-5/250 OL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Buffalo Grove, IL (Stevenson). 57............................ Brett Harris..... 6-5/240 DE.............. FR.............. RS.............. New Haven, MI. 55............................ Jacob Henige..... 6-2/295 OL.............. JR.............. 2L.............. Chesaning, MI (Chesaning). 71............................ Brett Hines...... 6-4/290 OL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Cincinnati, OH (Moeller). 54............................ Drew Hinkle...... 6-3/240 DL.............. FR.............. RS.............. Dearborn, MI (Divine Child). 65............................ Tyler Holtz...... 6-3/294 OL.............. FR.............. RS.............. Holt, MI. Nick Hopkins..... 5-11/170 K/P............. FR.............. FR.............. Byron Center, MI. 67............................ Brad Hull........ 6-4/240 DL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Centreville, OH. 13............................ Brad Iciek....... 6-1/180 QB.............. FR.............. RS.............. Grandville, MI. 42............................ Jay Jandasek..... 5-11/190 K............... FR.............. FR.............. Brighton, MI. 69............................ Nate John........ 6-4/300 OL.............. JR.............. TR.............. Bolingbrook, IL (College of DuPage). Blake Johncock... 6-1/205 LB.............. JR.............. SQ.............. Battle Creek, MI (Central). 47............................ Derrick Jones.... 6-5/278 DL.............. SR.............. 1L.............. Barstow, CA (Victory Valley College). 53............................ Sam Jones........ 6-0/250 DL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Kentwood, MI (East Kentwood). 28............................ Zach Jones....... 6-1/195 DB.............. SR.............. 2L.............. Glendale, CA. Lamar Keith...... 6-3/230 DL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Inkster, MI. 86............................ Mike Koster...... 6-3/206 WR.............. FR.............. RS.............. Lowell, MI. 8............................. Buster Larkins... 5-11/190 DB.............. SR.............. TR.............. Indianapolis, IN (University of Indiana). Mike Leiffers.... 6-1/245 DL.............. FR.............. FR.............. Allendale, MI. 2............................. Astin Martin..... 5-9/187 RB.............. SR.............. 1L.............. Grand Rapids, MI (Toledo). 81............................ John Mathews..... 6-2/235 TE.............. SO.............. 1L.............. Essexville, MI (Garber). 77............................ Nick McDonald.... 6-4/275 OL.............. FR.............. RS.............. Sterling Heights, MI (Henry Ford

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Madam Speaker, the conduct of oversight of our Nation's intelligence community is one of the most sensitive and complex duties that we have as a Congress. Our committee and other committees took a very close look at recommendations from the 9/11 Commission. We implemented many of them. Some of them we did not implement. We recognized the need to coordinate the strategies of the authorizing committee and the Appropriations Committee. We recognized the need for additional oversight. As a matter of fact, in the last Congress we created subcommittees specifically focused on oversight and increased the number of committee staff that were dedicated to the work of oversight. We also recognized the importance of coordinating between authorizers and appropriators. In the last Congress, the appropriations bill closely mirrored the authorization bill that this House passed. We worked hand-in-glove because we recognized the importance of putting that together and recognized the importance of what the 9/11 Commission recommended. This resolution today goes in exactly the wrong direction. The objective of the 9/11 Commission that was identified was to give the authorizing committee greater, if not sole, influence and control over appropriations, authorizations, and oversight. This resolution creates an additional committee between the authorizers and the appropriators that will add confusion. One of the things that we hear so often from the homeland security folks, from the intelligence folks, is we report to all of these different committees on the Hill, and there is a lack of clarity. It is exactly what is going to happen now. We are adding more confusion to the process, rather than adding and keeping clarity in this process. If you go back to when the committee was first established under the Church committee, there was one issue that was very important: there had to be clarity as to what committee was going to conduct oversight.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor former President and U.S. Congressman Gerald R. Ford. Gerald Ford, who is often referred to as ``Michigan's Greatest Son,'' worked hard wherever his life led him and based his decisions upon what he felt was the right thing to do. A star football player with my alma mater, the University of Michigan, he turned down offers to play in the National Football League to study law at Yale. He then volunteered to serve his country in the Navy during World War II before returning to Michigan to put his law degree to work. He later defeated an incumbent for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in his own party's primary, which from my own experience is an incredibly difficult endeavor. His colleagues later elected him to the highest leadership position among Republicans in the House. Gerald Ford admittedly did not seek the greatness of the U.S. presidency, but destiny determined that he would become the right man in the right place at the right time. President Ford allowed the country to move forward by pardoning Richard Nixon, although it likely contributed to him failing to win the 1976 election. He helped to unite a divided nation, even when he knew that it would likely result in a great personal cost. He made the decision because he knew that if he did not, our country would spend the months and years looking back and not ahead. For him it was simply the right thing to do. He conducted himself with integrity and character throughout every step of his distinguished career. He set a very high standard for those of us in West Michigan who would follow him to Washington. The legacy he leaves to join his Creator will impact not only the officeholders who follow in his footsteps, but generations of Americans to come.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the bill just adopted.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. Mr. Speaker, we are a Nation at war. All we need to do is take a look at what the leaders of radical Islam are saying. Bin Laden has said that if by the grace of God he would be able to have access to nuclear weapons, he would use them. All you need to do is take a look at what radical Islam is doing. Just five short weeks ago, they once again had a plan to attack America in a horrific way, multiple planes crashing into the Atlantic Ocean at the same time. This is a global war. The attack that had its home in the U.K. is directed out of Pakistan. It is targeted at America. There are operatives throughout the Middle East, north Africa, Europe, the Netherlands, Canada, Australia. It is a global and dangerous enemy. It is a decentralized, entrepreneurial organization that is very, very dangerous. We are on the offense. We are taking the fight to the radical Islamists wherever they may be. This bill is about making sure that the men and women in our intelligence community have the tools to fight this kind of an enemy. It is time to update FISA. It is time to give the men and women in the intelligence community the tools for them to fulfill the job that we have asked them to do, which is to protect America, to keep us safe. Vote for this bill. Vote for a modernization.

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

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her comments. The arguments this evening on the other side have been along the lines of FISA does work. The President acted alone and in secret. FISA is the only tool that is necessary. But we know that that is not true. It does not work. The President did not act in secret, and FISA's insufficient. It is September 11, 2001, shortly after the attacks. The President calls in his National Security Advisor, calls in folks from the intelligence community, and says, how do we get a better handle on who is attacking us? What other tools do we need to put in place to make sure that we can fight and win this war on terrorism? They developed their ideas. They identified the strategies and the new tactics that they need to fight this war against terrorism effectively. October 25, 2001, the President convenes and meets with congressional leaders and outlines this program to them and with them, or the executive branch does, and the group in there recognizes that against this enemy FISA does not work and that collaboratively, working with the executive branch and Congress, we need to implement new tools to keep America safe. The terrorist surveillance program that has been used for the last 4 years is not only the President's terrorist surveillance program, it is the terrorist surveillance program of the President, Minority Leader Pelosi, Ranking Member Harman, former Majority Leader Daschle, all who had the opportunity regularly to review this program, to see how it worked, why it needed to be done in the way that it was being done, and the benefits that America was receiving from the program and the impact it was having in keeping America safe and enabling us to move forward. It is because these individuals, working with the President, recognize that FISA was insufficient that they agreed to move forward with the terrorist surveillance program for almost 4 years, until this very valuable tool was leaked by the New York Times. We are a country that is less safe because of that. It is why we are now having this debate, because now al Qaeda and radical Islamists know more about our tools and fighting them than what they did before. It is time to update this law, to pass this bill to make sure that we can continue providing our intelligence community with tools they need. Build on the work of the President, of Minority Leader Pelosi, Ranking Member Harman, Majority Leader Daschle, all who agreed that FISA did not work and that the President and the executive branch needed the authorities and the capabilities that are now outlined in its many ways and are brought under more congressional oversight under the Wilson bill, and allow for more congressional oversight in a defined way through the Wilson bill. This is the way we need to go, the direction we need to take because we are a Nation at war, under threat, and this is the appropriate updating of an old law that the White House but also congressional leaders in a bipartisan way agreed did not work. Vote against the motion to recommit. Vote for final passage.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, Mr. Dent.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to one of the newer members of the committee, Mr. Issa from California.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to a gentleman from the committee, Mr. Tiahrt.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson).

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 6 minutes. Mr. Speaker, there shouldn't be a controversy about the fact that there are threats to our national security today and that they continue to be more diverse and more complex than ever before. The Intelligence Committee has worked throughout this Congress to identify and better understand these threats and what steps are necessary to provide the best possible capabilities to our intelligence community, the men and women of our intelligence community, to keep America safe. The committee recently issued a detailed report on the threats posed by al Qaeda, a hostile regime in Iran. I encourage all members to review them. But you don't need to read the reports to understand the scope, the urgency, and the viciousness of the threats that we face today. The threats are relentless. They are omnipresent. In the last 2 months alone, a treasonous American appeared in a video prepared by al Qaeda terrorists who have sworn to destroy America and said, ``Either repent of your misguided ways and enter into the light of truth, or keep your poison to yourself and suffer the consequences in this world and the next.'' Jihadists called for the Pope to be ``hunted down and killed,'' merely for reading from a medieval text. A 66-year-old Italian nun was ruthlessly shot four times in the back and killed while trying to train nurses in Somalia. Our British allies discovered a horrific and brutal plot, close to fruition, to blow up multiple passenger airliners flying between the United States and the United Kingdom. That likely would have been a more devastating terrorist attack than 9/11. The British Home Secretary has said that they are following at least 20 additional plots. Press reports have indicated the possibility that the Stalinist regime in North Korea is accelerating its plans to test nuclear weapons, and the rogue president of Iran has reiterated his rights to nuclear technology. If anyone in the House believes that these threats are not real or they are not serious, I would welcome any information and discussion to the contrary. But even if a small portion of these threats have the possibility of coming to fruition, it should not be a serious matter of debate that our country needs to rapidly and effectively bring every intelligence tool to bear to find our enemies, detect and understand their intentions, and thwart their hostile and terrorist acts against our country and our people. The opponents of this bill say it is ``not necessary.'' I suppose the bill is ``not necessary'' if you do not believe that the threats we face are very real, and very serious. But I believe in the face of such intense and relentless threats this House would be derelict in its duty not to pass this bill that gives us the necessary intelligence tools to defend ourselves. This bill is intended to modernize one of our primary weapons against terrorists and hostile foreign powers, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. FISA was passed in 1978. There are some who say it has been updated since, the law has become dangerously obsolete and hopeless as a tool against terrorism. We cannot fight a 21st-century intelligence war against sophisticated terrorist and state enemies with laws designed around the 1970s, around the former Soviet Union and around the bureaucracy associated with the former Soviet Union. This bill will update the law to allow more flexible and agile intelligence collection against modern communication technologies and streamline the process. We must focus our resources on finding and detecting terrorists, not on having to fill out repetitive, inch-think paperwork to justify what should be an obviously appropriate need to listen to two foreign terrorists communicating in a foreign country. The outdated law doesn't serve our intelligence interests. It doesn't serve our civil liberties interests. It serves only lawyers and bureaucracy. This bill will focus the resources of the FISA process where they belong: on effective intelligence collection and protecting civil liberties where Americans have a reasonable expectation of privacy. There is no ambiguity. This law continues to protect the average American going about their daily business, but does provide for needed surveillance against specifically identified terrorist organizations and spies. This bill would also provide clear authority for our Nation to act in times of armed attack, terrorist attack, or imminent threat. It will also substantially increase congressional oversight not only of FISA but of all intelligence activities to address important concerns about the separation of powers that have been expressed in this Congress. I appreciate the strong, close support on this matter by Chairman Sensenbrenner and the Committee on the Judiciary. I would also like to recognize the hard work and the leadership of the distinguished Chair of the Intelligence Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence, Heather Wilson, who took on the assignment to address the difficult and complicated issues in this bill. This has not been an easy task. She has worked diligently to address a number of complex, substantive issues and a range of interests within the House. Mr. Speaker, I believe that this bill is not only necessary but vital to protect our Nation and the American people. The Nation demands that the Congress pass laws to protect our national security. This is what this bill does. I urge all Members to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson), the chairwoman of the Tactical and Technical Subcommittee.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Robert Potter, President of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Union Local 951, upon his retirement. A graduate of Calvin College in Grand Rapids, MI, Robert Potter won election nine times as President of UFCW 951. Since 1980, he grew the organization from an unaffiliated union of 6,000 members into one of the largest local unions in Michigan and the largest UFCW local in the United States. Today, UFCW 951 represents more than 35,000 members in an exemplary fashion: with innovative programs, a diverse and dedicated staff and professional management systems. Robert Potter proved over the course of his career to be a skilled and pragmatic negotiator, facilitating several labor agreements that have preserved thousands of employee salaries and ensured the sustained prosperity of numerous businesses. In the early 1980s, he structured contracts with Kroger in West Michigan that allowed the grocer to remain profitable through today. The same contract model still guides other area employers. He also negotiated complex contracts covering all Michigan operations of Meijer, Inc. for 10 bargaining cycles without a single strike. Robert Potter graciously shared his talents beyond his UFCW service by holding several officer positions within organized labor, including Vice President of both the Michigan State AFL-CIO and the Metro Detroit AFL-CIO. He also won election and re-election as an officer of the Michigan Economic Alliance of Business and Labor, serving from 1990 to the present. Robert Potter's accomplishments and leadership will not soon be forgotten, and his years of dedicated service and expertise will continue to shape the UFCW long after his retirement. As Chairman of the Committee for the Future of the UFCW, he helped to guide the group that will undoubtedly play a significant role in ensuring the UFCW's future success. Mr. Speaker, please let it be known that on this 27th day of September in 2006, the U.S. House of Representatives acknowledges the contributions and achievements of Robert Potter.