Robin Hayes

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I was with President Bush at Ft. Bragg on Tuesday, June 28th. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner: ``nay'' on roll No. 326, ``nay'' on roll No. 327, this vote was a procedural motion to provide the Congressional pay raise which I am against, ``yea'' on roll No. 328, ``nay'' on roll No. 329, ``yea'' on roll No. 330, ``nay'' on roll No. 331, ``yea'' on roll No. 332, ``yea'' on roll No. 333, ``yea'' on roll No. 334, and ``nay'' on roll No. 335.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit the following article in regard to the Obey amendment alleging that the Bush Administration and Congress are deliberately mislead on a variety of issues. [From the Weekly Standard, Jun. 30, 2005] A CNN Anchor Gets Iraq and al Qaeda Wrong. But Will the Network Issue a Correction? (By Stephen F. Hayes) ``There is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was connected in any way to al Qaeda.'' So declared CNN Anchor Carol Costello in an interview yesterday with Representative Robin Hayes (no relation) from North Carolina. Hayes politely challenged her claim. ``Ma'am, I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. There's evidence everywhere. We get access to it. Unfortunately, others don't.'' CNN played the exchange throughout the day. At one point, anchor Daryn Kagan even seemed to correct Rep. Hayes after replaying the clip. ``And according to the record, the 9/11 Commission in its final report found no connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.'' The CNN claims are wrong. Not a matter of nuance. Not a matter of interpretation. Just plain incorrect. They are so mistaken, in fact, that viewers should demand an on-air correction. But such claims are, sadly, representative of the broad media misunderstanding of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. Richard Cohen, columnist for the Washington Post, regularly chides the Bush administration for presenting what he calls fabricated or ``fictive'' links between Iraq and al Qaeda. The editor of the Los Angeles Times scolded the Bush administration for perpetuating the ``myth'' of such links. ``Sixty Minutes'' anchor Lesley Stahl put it bluntly: ``There was no connection.'' Conveniently, such analyses ignore statements like this one from Thomas Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission. ``There was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.'' Hard to believe reporters just missed it--he made the comments at the press conference held to release the commission's final report. And that report detailed several ``friendly contacts'' between Iraq and al Qaeda, and concluded only that there was no proof of Iraqi involvement in al Qaeda terrorist attacks against American interests. Details, details. There have been several recent developments. One month ago, Jordan's King Abdullah explained to the Arabic-language newspaper al Hayat that his government had tried before the Iraq war to extradite Abu Musab al Zarqawi from Iraq. ``We had information that he entered Iraq from a neighboring country, where he lived and what he was doing. We informed the Iraqi authorities about all this detailed information we had, but they didn't respond.'' He added: ``Since Zarqawi entered Iraq before the fall of the former regime we have been trying to have him deported back to Jordan for trial, but our efforts were in vain.'' One week later, former Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi told the same newspaper that the new Iraqi government is in possession of documents showing that Ayman al Zawahiri, bin Laden's top deputy, and Zarqawi both entered Iraq in September 1999. (If the documents are authentic, they suggest that Zarqawi may have plotted the Jordanian Millennium attacks from Iraq.) Beyond what people are saying about the Iraq-al Qaeda connection, there is the evidence. In 1992 the Iraqi Intelligence services compiled a list of its assets. On page 14 of the document, marked ``Top Secret'' and dated March 28, 1992, is the name of Osama bin Laden, who is reported to have a ``good relationship'' with the Iraqi intelligence section in Syria. The Defense Intelligence Agency has possession of the document and has assessed that it is accurate. In 1993, Saddam Hussein and bin Laden reached an ``understanding'' that Islamic radicals would refrain from attacking the Iraqi regime in exchange for unspecified assistance, including weapons development. This understanding, which was included in the Clinton administration's indictment of bin Laden in the spring of 1998, has been corroborated by numerous Iraqis and al Qaeda terrorists now in U.S. custody. In 1994, Faruq Hijazi, then deputy director of Iraqi Intelligence, met face- to-face with bin Laden. Bin Laden requested anti-ship limpet mines and training camps in Iraq. Hijazi has detailed the meeting in a custodial interview with U.S. interrogators. In 1995, according to internal Iraqi intelligence documents first reported by the New York Times on June 25, 2004, a ``former director of operations for Iraqi Intelligence Directorate 4 met with Mr. bin Laden on Feb. 19.'' When bin Laden left Sudan in 1996, the document states, Iraqi intelligence sough ``other channels through which to handle the relationship, in light of his current location.'' That same year, Hussein agreed to a request from bin Laden to broadcast anti-Saudi propaganda on Iraqi state television. In 1997, al Qaeda sent an emissary with the nom de guerre Abdullah al Iraqi to Iraq for training on weapons of mass destruction. Colin Powell cited this evidence in his presentation at the UN on February 5, 2003. The Senate Intelligence Committee has concluded that Powell's presentation on Iraq and terrorism was ``reasonable.'' In 1998, according to documents unearthed in Iraq's Intelligence headquarters in April 2003, al Qaeda sent a ``trusted confidante'' of bin Laden to Baghdad for 16 days of meetings beginning March 5. Iraqi intelligence paid for his stay in Room 414 of the Mansur al Melia hotel and expressed hope that the envoy would serve as the liaison between Iraqi intelligence and bin Laden. The DIA has assessed those documents as authentic. In 1999, a CIA Counterterrorism Center analysis reported on April 13 that four intelligence reports indicate Saddam Hussein has given bin Laden a standing offer of safe haven in Iraq. The CTC report is included in the Senate Intelligence Committee's review on prewar intelligence. In 2000, Saudi Arabia went on kingdom-wide alert after learning that Iraq had agreed to help al Qaeda attack U.S. and British interests on the peninsula. In 2001, satellite images show large numbers of al Qaeda terrorists displaced after the war in Afghanistan relocating to camps in northern Iraq financed, in part, by the Hussein regime. In 2002, a report from the National Security Agency in October reveals that Iraq agreed to provide safe haven, financing and weapons to al Qaeda members relocating in northern Iraq. In 2003, on February 14, the Philippine government ousted Hisham Hussein, the second secretary of the Iraqi embassy in Manila, for his involvement in al Qaeda- related terrorist activities. Andrea Domingo, head of Immigration for the Philippine government, told reporters that ``studying the movements and activities'' of Iraqi intelligence assets in the country, including radical Islamists, revealed an ``established network'' of terrorists headed by Hussein. Can CNN stand by its claim that ``there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was connected in any way to al Qaeda?''

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution. This legislation is going to send a much needed strong signal to China. We do not support government-sponsored acquisitions of American corporations that clearly threaten our national security. I am extremely concerned at CNOOC's proposal to buy Unocal, one of our Nation's leading independent natural gas and crude oil exploration companies. The Chinese Government owns over 70 percent of the China National Offshore Oil Corporation. This is frightening. China is the second largest consumer of energy in the world behind the U.S. China's only desire to purchase this energy company is to meet the demands of their ever-growing population and economy. We cannot let this purchase move forward. What type of precedent would it set? What would the Chinese take next? They have already taken the textile industry jobs, thousands of jobs from other business, whether it is currency manipulation, the intellectual property rights or even government subsidies. China does not play by the rules. Why in the world would we expect them to do so now? Folks, this is a no-brainer. It is time for America to take a stand and say no. We have suffered too much. We cannot allow the Chinese to lock into one of our most precious resources and leave our Nation vulnerable. Support the resolution. I commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo). Stop this move now.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take the time of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time. And just having returned from Fort Bragg, the epicenter of the universe, home of the 82nd Airborne, I want to relate to you and others the speech that the President made tonight. And let me begin by saying that our heartfelt thanks and appreciation go out to the men and women in uniform everywhere tonight: Iraq, Afghanistan or wherever they may be. The President outlined very clearly tonight that this is a war against terror and terrorists that we are winning, that we must win, and that we will win. His resolve, as well as his appreciation for the troops, was most apparent. Mr. Speaker, interestingly, I received a message early this morning from a good friend, 82nd trooper in Iraq, in which he said, we are winning. We will win. We must win. But he also cautioned us, the American people, that this is a difficult fight and we must be patient. His closing words were, a time line is a terrible idea and we must not rush to failure. Patience, honoring the sacrifice and the men and women who have given their lives so that Iraq could be a free and sovereign Nation is vitally important. As we look at the upcoming drafting of their Constitution, starting on August 15, followed by ratification October 15 and then elections held by and for Iraqis on December 15, it is very clear that what we are doing is the right thing. As I shared the night with Senator Dole, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McIntyre), Senator Burr, and those wonderful troopers of the 82nd Airborne Division, it was just so clear to me how vitally important this mission is. The Western way of life and freedom itself is at stake in this war against bloodthirsty, ruthless, ideologically incredibly wicked killers. That is the stake. We are winning. We can win. The timetable is clear. We owe it to the members and to the families with whom President Bush spent several hours tonight consoling, praying, and, yes, shedding tears with them for the sacrifices they made so you and I and all Americans and others around the world can be free. So, Mr. Speaker, my sincere love, gratitude, and appreciation to the men and women in uniform who serve us now who have given their lives to the families that support them, the heartfelt thanks of a Congress, a grateful Nation, and freedom-loving men and women around the world. God bless these men and women.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the amendment offered by Mr. Rehberg and Ms. Hooley, I applaud Chairman Bonilla for including a provision in the agriculture appropriations bill that would limit USDA's funding for implementing the mandatory country-of-origin labeling law for meat and meat products. The country-of-origin labeling laws as currently written clearly requires more Congressional attention before going into effect by September 30, 2006. As a member of the Agriculture Committee and as Chairman of the Livestock and Horticulture Subcommittee, I have held hearings to discuss how mandatory country-of-origin labeling will affect the entire livestock industry. I have personally heard the numerous concerns of producers, processors, suppliers, and retailers in trying to implement this onerous program. These hearings raised many questions, and the livestock witnesses specifically pointed out the tremendous potential for increased costs and unintended consequences. All of the witnesses, regardless of being for or against country-of-origin labeling, unanimously stated that this is not a food safety issue but a marketing issue. Saying labeling is needed because of recent cases of BSE, for example, is bogus--especially since this particular disease does not occur in the muscle cuts we consume! I have also heard concerns from many of my constituents in North Carolina about this issue. I can tell you that not one of them has said this law will bring them additional revenue or market advantages. They all express their deep concern that this law will instead cause significant burdens and headaches in order to be in compliance with the law. Having participated in the hearings and listening to the worries of my constituents, I firmly believe a voluntary approach is a better solution. I am pleased to cosponsor the Meat Promotion Act introduced by Agriculture Committee Chairman Goodlatte which requires the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a voluntary program for labeling meat and meat products. I believe this legislation better fits the true intent of country-of-origin labeling--to maximize producer benefits and avoid the costs and regulatory intrusions that a government-mandated program would entail. Unfortunately, a ``Fire, Ready, Aim'' approach led to the creation of the current mandatory country-of-origin labeling law. This issue clearly needs further attention and delaying the implementation of the law for meat and meat products is a step in the right direction. I would like to reiterate that the provision included in the agriculture appropriations bill only affects meat and meat products. I urge my colleagues to support the appropriations bill and reject the Rehberg-Hooley amendment.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise today in support of the rule to provide consideration for the National Defense Authorization bill. This legislation focuses on force protection and personnel benefits for the soldiers and airmen in my district at Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base. The ability to adequately execute the mission for which they are called and care for their families are the two issues that are second to none. I believe this legislation makes significant progress in these areas and will enable our men and women in uniform to continue to successfully win the war on terrorism. My trip to Iraq just a few weeks ago, the third I have made, did nothing but reinforce my pride and confidence in our Nation's warfighters. These brave men and women serve with honor and distinction as they liberate a nation. Troops from the Eighth District of North Carolina have been at the tip of the spear that ended the dark reign of Saddam Hussein and continue to lead the way in post-conflict resolution in Iraq and Afghanistan. This legislation, first and foremost, takes care of our most vital asset of our military: our people. It provides every serviceman with an across-the-board 3.1 percent pay raise and increases the force structure of the Army and the Marine Corps. It boosts the maximum amount of hardship-duty pay and increases the amounts paid for active duty and Reserve enlistments and reenlistments. I am particularly happy that we are expanding the capacity of the military health care system to provide health care to service members and their families by requiring the reimbursement for services of mental health counselors without a referral from a primary care manager. Additionally, I would like to mention the direct effects this legislation will have for the men and women at Fort Bragg. There is over $200 million for infrastructure and housing improvement, including $11.4 million more than was in the President's request for the Third Brigade Combat Team barracks complex. I worked hard to secure this funding because it will help improve the living conditions for our soldiers and support the Army's transformation to modularity. Additionally, I am happy to support the funding for a new junior high school at Fort Bragg. The National Defense Act also addresses another critical issue, that of fortifying the defense industrial base, ensuring that the Department of Defense purchases textiles that are made in America. My top two priorities are national security and economic security. There is seldom, if ever, a reason that these two goals should be considered mutually exclusive. I have vowed to always work and support and promote the U.S. manufacturing industry, but we must develop transparency within DOD to ensure that our troops are wearing uniforms made in America. I am hopeful that our colleagues in the other body will recognize the need to safeguard U.S. textile jobs and work with us through the conference process. Madam Speaker, it is a gross injustice and misfortune that it took the tragedy of 9/11 to focus the public eye on the need for a more robust defense budget, but I feel that the legislation in front of us today will help our troops accomplish their mission. We are establishing a clear and strong course of support for our troops. I encourage my colleagues to send a message loud and clear to our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coasties, that we will strongly support you and give you the resources necessary to perform the mission. Madam Speaker, I urge a vote in favor of the rule, as well as the national defense bill. The campaign began with shock and awe. At this point, it should be awe, admiration and appreciation for what these men and women are doing. Having been here for 7 years, the trend and support for our men and women in uniform has trended ever upward. That is where it should be. As we look at this bill today, the way we can best thank our troops, show our love and appreciation for them, is to pass this bill and continue the upward trend that shows that we not only talk about our troops, but we do things that will make their lives better and show our appreciation. I urge support for the rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, the State of North Carolina is a proud home to a great American racing tradition: NASCAR. This weekend Lowes Motor Speedway in Concord will host the NASCAR Nextel Cup All Star Race, and folks from all across the country and around the world will come to watch the world's best drivers race for the finish. My hometown of Concord is proud of its partnership with the racing industry and is home to many NASCAR drivers and teams. The Charlotte area has also joined together to attract the NASCAR Hall of Fame. We are excited about the possibility of this prestigious attraction calling North Carolina home. Today I would like to take a moment to commend NASCAR, a tremendous industry and job provider in North Carolina, for its efforts to give back to the community. With its growing popularity, the sport provides entertainment for families, support for charities, and a huge economic boost for our region. I am also especially grateful for NASCAR's support of Dell TechKnow, a technology program for our schools. It is making an impact for kids in education. Even more important is NASCAR's support of our incredible military. Tomorrow, May 20, I will join fans across the country celebrating NASCAR Day, which means support for numerous charities, our men and uniform, and jobs for Americans. NASCAR Day is an opportunity to bring fans, businesses, and community organizations across the Nation together for common cause while giving to NASCAR-related charities and making a difference in the lives of children. It supports charities such as Victory Junction Camp, Speediatrics, and Speedway Children's Charity, all meeting needs and providing support for children with chronic and life-threatening illnesses. Mr. Speaker, I commend NASCAR, and if we ever add an extra line to the ``Star Spangled Banner,'' it will be ``Gentlemen, start your engines.''

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to congratulate and praise an individual who has dedicated himself to improving North Carolina. Mike Eaves is a remarkable person in many ways, and I want to acknowledge him for his accomplishments and efforts towards promoting agriculture and rural development. Mike grew up in Epson, North Carolina located in Vance County. He is a proud graduate of both Louisburg College and Appalachian State University. Mike began his work in government when he accepted a job with the Farmers Home Administration. Mike soon moved on to the Farm Service Agency in 1984 where he served as Executive Director of the Richmond County Farm Service Agency. In 2002, due to his strong knowledge of the farm programs and the people, he became the District Director, overseeing 13 county offices as well as being a liaison between the State Office and the County Office. Most recently, Mike has been selected to be the Administrative Officer of North Carolina State FSA Office, effective April 3rd, 2005. Anyone knows that long-term success depends on future leadership. It will not surprise you to know that Mike has a strong record of leadership and achievements. He has received the Distinguished Service Award for Community Service from the North Carolina Association of County Office Employees. Mike has also received the Distinguished Service Award for Community Service for the Southeast Area and the National Distinguished Service Award for Community Service from the National Association of County Office Employees. Mike's determination to help build and create a better community and a better North Carolina is inspiring. I am very happy for Mike and his new position in the State Office, but I will tell you that Richmond County and the 8th District of North Carolina will miss his leadership. Although I know you will be watching over us from Raleigh and keeping a close eye on Richmond County, I can't tell you how much I have appreciated your steadfast dedication towards promoting and advancing agriculture and rural communities in North Carolina. Personally, I can't thank you enough for your friendship and the kindness you have shown me since I have been in office. Your assistance has been invaluable to me and my staff. Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell you how much I appreciate Mike Eaves' tireless dedication and his desire to increase the quality of life for Richmond County, the 8th District, and North Carolina as a whole. He has gone above and beyond the call of duty to help create and sustain a strong agriculture community, and as a citizen of North Carolina, I join many in sincerely thanking him. I would also like to acknowledge Mike's family that has been there backing him in his efforts and successes. Mike has a very loving family. Mike's wife, Susan, makes a mean lemon meringue pie. I am sure she is as proud as I am of his many accomplishments and his dedication to his profession.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young), and my colleagues on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for their continued hard work to bring H.R. 3 to the floor. This bipartisan legislation invests in America's roadways and transportation infrastructure, bringing jobs and investment to every corner of our country. This legislation is good news to the people of the Eighth Congressional District of North Carolina. My district includes the two urban centers of Charlotte and Fayetteville, as well as large rural areas. Obviously, these diverse segments of North Carolina require different approaches to meeting current and future transportation demands. In 2002, I worked to launch the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Process in the eighth district. As part of this process, the CEDS Committee commissioned and received a report outlining some of the region's economic strengths and weaknesses. The report was approved by the Economic Development Administration. One of the weaknesses cited was there were several areas of need regarding transportation infrastructure. Accelerating the construction of our transportation projects was particularly highlighted as one of the most likely places where improvements would translate into increased economic development and more jobs. Without easy access to areas of commerce and transport, potential for investment and increased economic development is hindered. The legislation before this House today contains funding for many of the established CEDS goals and will jump-start my district's directed efforts to revitalize and support the region's economy. Increasing the number of interstate miles, especially accelerating the construction of I-73/74, I-85 through Cabarrus County and increasing the multilane connections to interstate highways is vitally important. Upgrading many of the existing roads to multilane highways of the highest standards is another top priority. This will serve to not only increase the probability of companies investing in eighth district communities, but will also improve public safety through providing safer roads. In the Charlotte metropolitan area, a substantial population growth is severely taxing existing infrastructure. Through the widening of existing highways and increasing investment in alternative modes of transportation, we will work to decrease congestion, pollution levels, and urban sprawl. This will positively impact quality-of-life issues and economic opportunities for those who live in and around the city of Charlotte and all of our North Carolina and Southeastern region. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support this legislation today, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 3.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in thanks and tribute to our wonderful troops and a volunteer Army in Iraq who are making the world safer, and I quote my friend Gary Bauer about Senator Kerry: Moreover, wind surfing is not a policy; it is an excuse or inability to act. He sounds like Neville Chamberlain clinging to a scrap of paper after accepting the lies of a lunatic and declaring peace in our time, the terrorists had been there all along. But Winston Churchill understood there are times when war is the only option. One more U.N. resolution, one more scrap of paper from Saddam Hussein would not have made America safer. Our President understood that and he stood up for America.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for helping and supporting this legislation. I congratulate the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) for his city as well. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the people of Concord, North Carolina, and the other nine recipients of the 2004 All-America City Award. It has been my distinct honor to represent the people of Concord since I was first elected to represent the 8th Congressional District of North Carolina. This opportunity is especially dear to me because this is my hometown and where much of my family still resides. In fact, my family has called Concord home for decades, centuries now that I look at it; and we have had the privilege of watching this community grow. Concord personifies the term ``Southern hospitality'' and is home to some of the most engaging, welcoming and civically responsible citizens of the State of North Carolina. Through close relationships I have forged with citizens of Concord and the pride I have in this community, it is truly an honor today for me to highlight this great city. Because of Concord's hard work, the rest of America is getting to see the positive spirit of accomplishment that I have been fortunate to witness and experience my entire life. All-America City Award is a 55- year-old program that is sponsored by the National Civic League that recognizes excellence. The award is given annually to 10 communities that exemplify and display a positive spirit of grass-roots involvement and collaborative problem-solving in an effort to better the community. The cities selected to receive this award exhibit the American spirit of hard work and cooperation as they seek to identify and correct community-wide challenges. Concord is a community where citizens, businesses, volunteers, and government officials work together to address the issues that are vitally important to their citizens. Concord should take pride in the fact that they are in contention for recognition by this national organization for their hard work. Truly, Concord is a great example for other communities to emulate as other communities seek to meet the many challenges that face us all, communities large and small. To qualify for the award, Concord representatives submitted a detailed application highlighting the city's three most pressing challenges. They are medical needs of the uninsured and underinsured, eliminating substandard housing in the community, and extending the mentoring and civic responsibilities of the Boys and Girls Club of Concord. Programs such as Community Care Plan, Cabarrus Housing Partners, and the Boys and Girls Club of America have been designed and implemented to ensure the aforementioned areas are addressed. I am pleased to represent such a fine community where the citizens come together to solve problems at a local level rather than waiting on someone else to fix things. A wise man once said there are three types of people in the world: those who watch what happen, those who make things happen, and those who wonder what happened. Rest assured, the people of my hometown, Concord, North Carolina, are people who make good things happen. It is my honor and privilege to represent these good folks. I am proud that the National Civic League will recognize the city of Concord's success by awarding them the All-America City Award.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4620) to confirm the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture and the Commodity Credit Corporation to enter into memorandums of understanding with a State regarding the collection of approved State commodity assessments on behalf of the State from the proceeds of marketing assistance loans, as amended.

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt) for sponsoring H.R. 4620 and bringing this bill to the committee's attention. I also appreciate his extensive efforts in working to resolve this problem for producers in Washington State as well as producers nationwide. For years, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has collected State commodity checkoff assessments from marketing loans to fund research and promotion. In recent years, however, when producers within a State have voted to increase assessments on themselves, USDA has found that it lacks the statutory authority to recognize modified memorandums of understanding with the State. As amended in the Committee on Agriculture, H.R. 4620 provides USDA the authority to collect these assessments and allows USDA to recognize modified agreements with the States. Again, I appreciate the work of the gentleman from Washington on this issue, and I urge support of the bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may require to conclude by thanking my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) for his assistance today.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4569) to provide for the development of a national plan for the control and management of Sudden Oak Death, a tree disease caused by the fungus-like pathogen Phytophthora ramorum, and for other purposes.

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Since Sudden Oak Death syndrome was first detected in California in 1995, the disease has killed tens of thousands of oaks and tanoaks in 12 coastal California counties and affected shrubs and trees in small areas of Curry County, Oregon, and King County, Washington. In addition, isolated cases of the European mating type of SOD have been found in Washington, Oregon, and British Columbia. Sixty plant species are known to be hosts or associated hosts of the pathogen responsible. There are no chemical treatments currently available to eliminate the disease in nursery stock. Following confirmation of a discovery of the SOD pathogen in March at Monrovia Nurseries in Los Angeles County, California, USDA's APHIS plant protection and quarantine staff have been working with other Federal and State authorities to address the situation. APHIS mobilized its rapid response teams, and the California Department of Food and Agriculture placed hold orders on all shipments of host plant materials from confirmed positive facilities. Likewise, the Forest Service is coordinating with APHIS, spending $1.3 million this fiscal year to monitor areas near confirmed infestations to see if the pathogen is spreading from nurseries to forests. Despite the efforts of USDA and State agriculture departments, by the end of April, positive cases had been confirmed in nurseries from at least 10 States. As of September 29, 2004, the total number of confirmed positive locales from the trace forward, national and other survey finds was 160 in 21 States, including Alabama, three; Arkansas, one; Arizona, one; California, 53; Colorado, one; Florida, six; Georgia, 18; Louisiana, five; Maryland, two; North Carolina, nine; and so on. I am concerned about the potentially devastating impact of SOD on eastern hardwood forests and support all efforts at improving planning and coordination of our control and management programs. The legislation introduced by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Burns) and 19 other Members is an attempt to refocus efforts at controlling and managing outbreaks of SOD. In particular, the bill authorizes appropriations for development of a national strategy for sudden oak death syndrome. I would urge all Members to support the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Burns) who has been very active in this matter from the beginning.

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4620.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill just passed.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) for bringing this to the floor. This is, I say in all disappointment, an incredible insult to the men and women who wear the uniform. Why is it an insult? Because our men and women are the best, brightest, best trained, best equipped, most effective that the world has ever known. They are a tribute to the education process in this country and the ability of young people to stand up and serve their country. My dear friend, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), whom I admire and trust and respect, raised the point, and I think it needs to be expanded a bit. People have gone all over this country in the beds of pickup trucks anywhere someone would stick a microphone in their face, and the minority political operatives have used it as an opportunity not just to scare youngsters, but to scare moms and dads and grandparents about something that does not exist. Mr. Speaker, we can do better. Support the bipartisan effort to increase our ROTC on college and high school campuses. Let us honor the young men and women who are fighting for us today with a degree of skill, accuracy, and commitment that we have never seen. Mr. Speaker, today we bring to the floor a matter of great importance to our troops, and an issue about which there has been much misinformation. The legislation before us, H.R. 163, would essentially reinstate the draft, requiring all young persons, including women, to perform a period of military service. Those who are in favor of this legislation declare the draft is necessary for two reasons. They argue that recruiting and retention of our armed forces are falling at alarming rates and they asset that the military is disproportionately comprised of poorly-educated individuals. This is one of the greatest insults to our military I have ever heard. Today our armed forces are the most professional, best educated, most integrated and best trained in the world. All one needs to do is spend a few moments with our troops. Yesterday I was at Ft. Bragg in my district in NC. Talking with service members, is one of the most motivational things I ever experienced. These soldiers, often youngsters, are skilled, well-trained, articulate, intelligent, dedicated to their country, and model citizens. They endure hardships and sacrifice because they want to serve. Let me repeat: they want to serve. They are patriots who want to contribute to their country and serve their nation. They are proud of their service and we as a grateful nation should express nothing other than gratitude and praise for what they do. Our military today is not a repository for poor kids with little education and few opportunities in life. The U.S. military didn't get to be the most technically advanced fighting force in the world by relying on a collection of high school dropouts and underachievers. Simply stated, we have the finest and most professional military in the world. To suggest otherwise and argue that we need a draft to bring educated, skilled people into the military, is one of the most degrading insults to our troops that I have ever heard and furthermore is true not true. Secondly, I would like to point out that even though tours have been long, many sacrifices have been made and our troops have been called on for extraordinary missions, recruiting and retention is going well for all 5 services. Retention for the active component is over 100 percent and reserve retention rates are at 99 percent. The recent call for additional combat capability in Iraq and Afghanistan to conduct the global war on terror has fueled misconceptions that the United States will need to reinstate the draft to perform its military missions. There is only one reason that would justify conscription: if the military were unable to recruit enough volunteers to meet its personnel needs. This is not the case. Needed military personnel strength increases can be achieved through the existing recruitment and retention system. We should increase ROTC on high school and college campuses to highlight the high tech careers available through our military and further enhance our already successful recruitment efforts. No one in the Administration, at the Department of Defense, or at the Selective Service System has advocated for the reinstatement of the draft in any form. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us today is poor public policy, and pure politics and a disgrace to our troops. The all-volunteer force established the best and most professional military in the world. Our troops are disciplined, resilient and experienced, prosecuting the Global War on Terrorism and numerous other missions since 1973 with valor, bravery and honor. Continuing to uphold the high standards our military personnel embody everyday is only achieved through a voluntary force. I urge my colleagues to honor those who have individually decided to serve their country and vote against this election year legislation.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because my constituents are fearful that appointed judges will destroy the institution of marriage. I share their fear and speak with them today in strong support of H.J. Res. 106, the Marriage Protection Amendment, and I thank my friend the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Musgrave) for her outstanding leadership on this critical issue. Marriage has always been and will always be a covenant between one man and one woman. Marriage is a fundamental building block of society, and it is special. It has been from the beginning of time about procreation and the rearing of children. I wish that this fight here today was not necessary, and we did not ask for it, but because a handful of activist judges launched an all- out attack on the bedrock of Western civilization, the people of the eighth district of North Carolina, in a completely bipartisan way, have overwhelmingly asked me to stand here today and defend our Constitution and to protect marriage. Mr. Speaker, I believe in the Constitution. I have read it and studied it. We do not amend this lightly, but with activist judges writing law from the bench with their so-called interpretations, I can think of no better reason nor venue for the American people to be heard on whether the institution of marriage will stand or fall. Do not be fooled. Same-sex marriage and this debate is not about hospital visitation rights, joint bank accounts or inheritance rights. It is about marriage and children. Marriage between one man and one woman is associated with a broad array of positive outcomes. Americans have spoken clearly, and it is not about politics. It is about their desire to protect marriage from unelected judges who are appointed for life. I urge my colleagues to stand with nearly 2,000 of my constituents who have contacted my office over the past few months and protect the institution of marriage. Mr. Speaker, I represent folks from both sides of the aisle in the eighth district of North Carolina. They do not see it as an issue for one political party. They want to defend our institution of marriage. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time. I urge my colleagues to stand and protect marriage today.

Mr. HAYES

Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Kannapolis, North Carolina native Melissa Morrison. I want to congratulate Melissa for her Bronze medal in the 100 meter hurdles at the 2004 Athens Olympics. Melissa started running track in the seventh grade because a cousin, April Graham, made it look easy and fun. A few short years later Melissa was running track for A.L. Brown High School, and collecting four state titles in the process. She next attended Appalachian State University earning a Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology, and receiving All-American honors in both the 55 and 100 meter hurdles. Melissa's first Olympic experience was at the 2000 Sydney, Australia games. In Sydney, Melissa was the only American woman to win a medal in the 100 meter hurdles, winning bronze with a time of 12.76 seconds in the final. With her Athens repeat this year, Melissa became the only two-time American medalist in the 100 meter hurdles. In the last couple of years Melissa has fought through serious adversity, including nagging injuries and personal tragedy. However, through unyielding determination and support from her loved ones, she never gave up. In the race where Melissa captured her second Olympic medal, she exemplified her never quit attitude. Melissa collided with two hurdles but continued to fight on. In fact, she addressed these hardships and gave us insight to her strong character by saying, ``Mental strength got me through there and got me a bronze medal again this year.'' Mr. Speaker, while I have only touched on a fraction of her accomplishments, I proudly join her friends, family, and teammates in congratulating Melissa's outstanding athletic achievements. I wish Melissa continued success both on and off the track, and would also like to congratulate her on the forthcoming marriage to fiance Josephus Howard.