Steve Israel

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, my amendment restores funding for certain advanced energy research programs to last year's levels. That research is absolutely critical to reducing our dependence on foreign oil. The funding in this bill for research and university resource centers is $9,448,000 below last year's levels, and those are the very centers that are researching and developing hydrogen and hybrid and other advanced transportation technologies. Now, we all understand how vital that research and development is. The President of the United States on this floor during the State of the Union proclaimed that we must reduce our addiction to foreign oil. Anyone in their cars at a gas station today, as we are on the floor, paying over $3 a gallon for gas understands how important it is that we reduce that addiction to foreign oil. I am a member of the Armed Services Committee. Our military understands how critical that is. Last year, the Department of Defense spent $10 billion on basic energy costs. Of that, $4.7 billion was spent to buy one thing, fuel for Air Force planes. I was in Iraq last month and was on a wonderful Stryker combat vehicle. It gets about 10 miles to the gallon. It is dangerous, Mr. Chairman, when we have to borrow money from China to fund defense budgets to buy oil from unstable Persian Gulf countries to fuel our military to protect us from China and unstable Persian Gulf countries. We have all talked about having men on the Moon, research and development programs to end that dangerous dependence on foreign oil. We have talked about having new Apollo programs to research and develop new vehicles, not lunar landing modules that will put people on the Moon, but hydrogen and hybrid vehicles that will make it easier and safer and less expensive for people to drive on our roads here on Earth. And yet, this bill cuts $9.5 million from the very research centers that are engaged in deploying those vehicles. This is not a giant leap for mankind. This is not even one small step for mankind. It is a step backwards, and so my amendment does not go above last year's level. It does not take a giant leap that I think we need. All it does is it keeps us steady so we do not continue to lose ground to the very adversaries we have around the world who are willing to use oil as a weapon against us and use oil to blackmail us and compromise our capabilities. This amendment simply offsets salaries in the Treasury and Transportation accounts and restores $9,448,000 for basic research at the research and university research centers to continue our vital work, and I hope that the House will agree to it and support it.

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the accomplishments of Gary Melius. Over the past 10 years, Gary has dedicated himself to the continuation of Oheka Castle, which is treasured by the town of Huntington, Long Island, and all of New York State. As the second largest mansion in the United States, Oheka Castle stands as an architectural marvel and an historic structure that must be protected. Gary Melius knows this fact better than anyone. Prior to his leadership, the castle's previous occupant went bankrupt leaving this structure abandoned. It was at this grave juncture in 1996 that Gary came to the helm. With his diligent guidance, Oheka Castle has been restored to its original structural magnificence. Gary's service has insured that Oheka Castle will remain a treasure for our children and future generations on Long Island. For 10 years, Gary has devoted himself to the protection, preservation and public awareness of Oheka Castle. I applaud Gary Melius for his achievements and contributions to Oheka Castle and the town of Huntington.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. I thank my friend from California and particularly I want to thank him for his strong and wise leadership on national security issues. As the gentleman mentioned he and our colleague from Atlanta, Georgia, Mr. Scott, and I co-founded the Democratic Study Group on National Security Policy, which advocates for a long and smart military, which believes in policy that are robust and visionary when it comes to our national security. I have the great honor, not just being a Member of Congress, but serving on the House Armed Services Committee. And I was in Iraq just a month ago. It was my second visit as a member of the Armed Services Committee. And when I was there I had the sense that we were getting close to finding al-Zarqawi. He was still on the loose but we were getting closer, and I am glad that we finished the job. This is a guy who relished beheadings. This is someone who enjoyed car bombings. This is someone who killed Americans who killed, Sunnis, who killed Shi'ia, who killed Kurds. And so I believe it is an important day and it is good news that while we have many struggles ahead this one struggle no longer exists. But I think it is very important for us to focus on the future. While I was in Iraq I had the opportunity to meet with Prime Minister Maliki and President Talabani and General Casey and his troops. All of those people were involved and should take credit for what happened today. The questioning now faces what is next. The gentleman talked about our plan for Iraq. The fact that 2006 should be a year of transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, that we need a responsible redeployment of U.S. forces, that we need to promote Iraqi political compromise to unite the country, encourage our allies to play a constructive role, hold the Bush administration accountable. And there is one more thing that we must do that I know my colleagues and I agree completely on. And that is to make sure that our troops continue to have everything they need, because despite the fact that al-Zarqawi has been removed, there are going to be other al-Zarqawis in the world. There are going it be others who enjoy beheadings and car bombings. And for as long as long as they exist, we are going to need the capabilities of meeting and defeating them. That is why I was so distressed when my constituents woke up this morning to this front page in our Long Island newspaper, Newsday. The front page headline, ``Blood clot bandages, frontline shortage, some troops calling home to ask for life saving dressings.'' By the way, I would say to my friends from Georgia and California, this story is under a story about how Ann Coulter visited my district having just attacked 9/11 widows as being witches and harpies. After Ann Coulter attacked 9/11 widows, I have about a hundred of them in my district, comes to my district and attacks them. Under that story is this story about potential shortages of blood clot bandages. Let me share with my colleagues what this story says. ``Despite Army order that frontline medics get special clotting bandages, soldiers say they're still needed.'' It begins with this lead. ``Nine months after an Army order that all combat orders would get life saving clotting bandages to curb bleeding deaths, some troops in Iraq are still calling home, asking friends and families to supply them. Despite Army assurances that there are plenty of bandages to go around. Soldiers have written to say they have not found their way to all those on the front lines, and the manufacturer under contract with the Army acknowledged last week that early production problems may have spurred a shortage.'' Now, let me be clear on this. We have been working with the Army and we will continue to work closely with them. They are trying to get to the bottom of this and that is their obligation. I appreciate their responsiveness to this report. But we cannot afford continued reports like this three years after the invasion. It is unfair that Ms. Doreen Kenny, who lost her job, Jacob Fletcher, in Iraq, one of the first Long Islanders to be killed in action, has to have her photograph in this story with the quote, ``If I can prevent one knock at the door of a military family, I will do all I can to prevent them from living through the heartbreak I have had to live through.'' Why is she in this story? Because Doreen Kenny, who lost her boy, is mailing this critical medical equipment to our troops in Iraq. That is not what she should be having to do right now. So I know we will continue as Democrats to ensure that when we go to war we do not go with the Army we have, as Secretary Rumsfeld said, but with the supplies they need. That those of us who believe that we have to draw a line against totalitarianism understand that we have to make sure our supply lines are adequately equipped. That we cannot afford to send soldiers into hostility and then read reports that they are calling home asking for blood clotting bandages. I want to thank the gentleman for his leadership. We will continue to pursue this vitally important plan for Iraq, but I know that at the centerpiece of those plans is the understanding that we have to protect the protectors and defend the defenders, and that is what Democrats are doing in the United States Congress today.

Mr. ISRAEL. I spent some time this evening with the gentleman and with one of our best generals, and he was telling the story of visiting with a critically wounded soldier in a military hospital and walking out with that soldier's mother. And the mother said, General, my son is not sleeping at night. And the General said, well, of course he is not sleeping at night, look what he has been through. She said, no, General, he is not sleeping because he is up all night thinking about the fact that his unit is still in Iraq and he is worried about them. That is the sacrifice that we are talking about and the dedication and the professionalism, and we have an obligation to those men and women to protect them. If the gentleman would allow me to make a concluding point. This front page newspaper tells the story of contrast, and the same contrast is played out on the floor of the House frequently. You have got this front, top of the newspaper that says ``Ann the Ripper Brings Campaign Against 9/11 Widows to Long Island,'' and then you have the rest of the page devoted to the possibility of front-line shortages of critical medical equipment. These guys get less so that Ann Coulter, who writes a book calling 9/11 widows witches and harpies, who will make a lot of money off the proceeds of that book, can get a bigger tax cut. How is that fair in America today? How is that just? How does that do justice to these people? It doesn't. We can do better. The Democrats will do better. We understand the need to fight and to use hard power around the world to fight totalitarianism and to fight terrorism, but if you are going to take on the fight, you got to take it on with the right supplies. And that is what we are about.

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, there is a lot of talk by the administration about the global war on terror and America's fight on the global war on terror. 133,000 of our troops are fighting the global war on terror. They are the ones who have been made to engage in the sacrifice. They are the ones who have been uprooted from their families. These two gentlemen on the front page of my daily newspaper, they are fighting the global war on terror. The rest of us are watching it on television. America can do better than that. I refuse, and I know the gentleman from California and the gentleman from Georgia should refuse to be the first generation of Americans in history to say let everybody else do it, we will just sit back and relax. We will pass a permanent repeal of the death tax or the estate tax which may cost $300 billion, and then have the temerity to tell these people on the front page of Newsday, sorry, we cannot afford your supplies, we cannot afford to take care of you when you come home. I do not want to be the first generation of Americans to balance the budget on the backs of someone who is on his back in this photograph. We have an obligation if we are going to fight the Zarqawis of the world, something I believe we should do, to make sure that those who are doing the fighting are protected and make sacrifices at home that save their lives abroad.

Mr. ISRAEL. Well, I thank the gentleman for the question. You know, every Member of Congress prides themselves on the work we do with respect to veterans case work. I know in my district we have two people devoted exclusively to trying to work with veterans, get them their retroactive payment, get them their medals. We secured over $2 million in my district in back payments for our veterans, but those are Vietnam veterans. Some of these are World War II veterans, Korean veterans. This country is just now catching up to people who were in the military theater 40 years ago. Just catching up now to those people. Can you imagine what our situation is going to be where we now have a multitude, a new generation of veterans coming back with post-traumatic stress disorder and other very serious physical and psychological problems, and we have to say to them we are sorry, we know we sent you to the front, but now we have got to balance the budget on your backs because we have run out of money? Just cannot do it as a result of the fiscal policy of the past 6 years. When the gentleman and I were elected, we had a $5.6 trillion surplus. We could have paid for the war in Iraq and then paid for health care for every single soldier that went, so that they did not have to go without the potential of coagulant bandages. So when they came home, they came home to a country that would take care of them. Now, we have got an $8 trillion debt, and we have to make painful cuts. The other side has forced us to cut back on those services, forced veterans to dig deeper into their pockets.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the students from Half Hollow Hills High School East in Dix Hills, New York for their hard work in the ``We the People: the Citizen and the Constitution'' national finals. These outstanding young Americans placed fourth in this nationwide competition and I am honored to call them my constituents. The students, Jason Aronson, Matt Bauman, Jillian Bernstein, Eric Bierman, Emily Chen, Davina Etwarn, Leily Faridzadeh, Zach Goldberg, Chris Green, Arun Gupta, Jennifer Kim, Praneet Korrapati, Emily Kuznick, Tia Mansouri, Joshua Milber, Brooke Schachner, Stephen Schiraldi, Dana Schwartz, Dara Seidl, Fauzia Shaikh, Kunaal Sharma, Kavita Vani, Alyssa Weinberg and Joshua Wohl, led by their teacher Scott Edwards, demonstrated a remarkable understanding of the fundamental ideals and values of American constitutional government. Also worthy of special recognition is Eileen Gerrish, the state coordinator, and Charles Trupia, the district coordinator, who are among those responsible for implementing the ``We the People'' program in my district. Their success in the competition is also a testament to the excellent teachers at Half Hollow Hills East High School and elsewhere on Long Island. I offer my congratulations on their success and commend these students on their dedication to the study of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, and I rise to oppose this rule, and I must express my very deep concern with the underlying bill. Despite the very best efforts of many of my colleagues, this bill remains a broken promise on the most critical issues that we confront, specifically renewable energy. The gentleman from Indiana is absolutely correct, we need to do much more than we are doing in this bill on renewable energy. Let me tell you why this is so critical, Mr. Speaker. This year, the Department of Defense will spend $10 billion on its basic energy bill. Of that $10 billion, $4.7 billion will buy one thing: fuel for the Air Force planes. That $4.7 billion is about what we are going to spend for the National Cancer Institute. We need renewable energies, Mr. Speaker, not just for our environment, not just to bring gas prices down, but as a matter of national security. What could be more dysfunctional than having to borrow money from China in order to buy oil from our Persian Gulf adversaries in order to fuel airplanes to protect us from China and our Persian Gulf adversaries? On renewable energies, this bill, as it is currently drafted, falls short. Last July, we passed an energy bill, and many of us printed press releases patting ourselves on the back for this sweeping new investment in renewable energy. Those press releases promised $3.3 billion would be spent on renewable energies this year alone, $3.3 billion authorized for research, development, and deployment of renewable energy. But when it comes time to actually sign the check, the check doesn't say $3.3 billion, it says $1.3 billion. That is $2 billion short. This is like No Child Left Behind all over again. You promise to pay high, you actually pay low. In this case, it is not Leave No Child Behind; pit is Leave No Barrel of Oil Behind. Mr. Speaker, I understand that the argument can be made, and I respect the argument, that many renewable technologies did receive increases over last year. Many specific accounts for renewable energy, research and development did receive increases over last year's levels. But only in Washington can a $2 billion shortfall be called an increase. Try that logic with your utility company. When the bill comes, try saying I know I was going to pay $100, $150, but what I really meant to say was, I am giving you $15. No utility company would let you get away with it, and the Congress shouldn't allow that to be gotten away with. The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is the bottom line. And if we are truly serious about ending our dependence on foreign oil and strengthening our military, we would not be shortchanging this bill. I hope that the gentleman's efforts prevail. I hope that this Congress will have an opportunity to put our money where our mouths are when it comes to renewable energy, not just as an environmental issue, not just to get gas prices down, but to make sure our military has the capabilities to defeat our enemies around the world.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I don't think I need 1\1/2\ minutes to make my point. I think this is rather clear and rather simple. I was in Iraq about 3 weeks ago when a bipartisan delegation was sent to urge the leaders of the Iraq Government to show respect and tolerance for their different faiths and create a unity government. This rule explicitly rejects respect and tolerance for servicemembers of different faiths in our own military. I offered an amendment that sought common ground, that preserved in its entirety every single word that the majority had in with respect to allowing and ensuring the right of military chaplains to pray in accordance with the dictates of their conscience. Every word of the Republican language was in, and then I added this simple statement, ``and shall behave with sensitivity, respect, and tolerance towards servicemembers of all faiths.'' Who could be against sensitivity, respect and tolerance to servicemembers of all faiths? The Rules Committee majority, which wouldn't even allow us to debate my amendment, which wouldn't even allow us to vote on that amendment. Who could be against national security that depends on unit cohesion and allowing our local commanders to make fundamental personnel decisions and ensure good order and discipline? The Rules Committee majority, which wouldn't even allow us to debate that amendment or listen to those military guidelines. People talk a good game around here about family values. But when it comes time to vote on family values, they won't vote on family values in our military. They talk a good game about a strong military and security, but when the time comes, won't listen to our commanders.

Mr. ISRAEL. I thank the gentleman. I will remind my colleagues that every faith talks about the importance of respect and tolerance for one another. Unfortunately, this Congress has chosen to reject those values by not even allowing us to discuss them when it comes to our own military.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although we do not oppose it.

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, we have no additional speakers on our side. So I would close by again thanking the chairman and the gentleman for his leadership and agreeing with them that nobility is a bipartisan virtue. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the gentleman's amendment. The amendment would provide $1 million for the Peace Through Healthcare Initiative to provide humanitarian assistance for critically ill Iraqi children. Mr. Chairman, it is well known that nothing aids the international reputation of our country, and particularly our image in the developing world, as much as our humanitarian and our relief efforts. Following the aid we provided after the recent disasters of the tsunami in Indonesia and the earthquake in Pakistan, polls in both countries showed a significant increase in those who viewed America favorably. Yet humanitarian relief is more than just a tool of international politics. It is exactly who we are. Americans are the most generous people in the world. We give more to charity each year than any other nation. We are just and we do not hold a people guilty for the sins of their leadership. Mr. Chairman, health care in Iraq is in a perilous state, but time and time again American servicemembers in the field, warriors and medics, and American hospitals and doctors back home have gone out of their way to help those in need. I have read numerous cases of Iraqi children being medivaced out of the country in order to receive first class medical treatment for everything from cleft palate to congenital heart disease. Mr. Chairman, I know that the gentleman has heard these stories as well, and we both recall one case of the chief of police in the southern Iraqi province of Wasit. He worked hand-in-hand with our troops every day, putting his own life at risk. And then, one night, he turned to his American advisers and said, ``My son is dying of leukemia and the road to Baghdad is too unsafe for me to drive him to a good hospital.'' Within 24 hours, the child and his mother were helicoptered to Baghdad. The child was treated there by U.S. Army medics in the International Zone and airlifted to Jordan. In Jordan, very sadly, Mr. Chairman, the child passed away, but with tears in his eyes, the chief of police turned to his American friends only days later and said, ``I will never forget what you have done for me.'' That, Mr. Chairman, is what this amendment is about. It is about doing the right thing for innocent children. It is about making friends and building relationships with the people of Iraq and all for only $1 million. That is why, Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the gentleman's amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the memory of Alphalonia P. ``Peaches'' Gwyn of Winston Salem, North Carolina. We rely on a great number of people, in addition to the members of our staff, to do our jobs as members of Congress. The people we work with twice a week to help us get to and from our districts become part of the extended network of support that helps us fulfill our duties. One of those people was Peaches Gwyn. A dedicated employee of US Airways, Peaches always had a smile and a friendly voice at US Airways' Capitol Desk. Peaches was tireless, making sure that members of Congress were able to get back to their districts and serve their constituents. She handled herself with grace and aplomb on the phone with staff members under pressure to get their bosses on the first flight possible. I have heard of the help she offered through my schedulers over the years who were sorry to learn that she recently succumbed to cancer. Her coworkers told us that Peaches fought cancer every step of the way, never giving up. She wanted to keep busy and go back to work, but eventually lost her battle. My thoughts and prayers are with those at US Airways who loved her and learned from her. May the Gwyn and Perkins families be comforted by peaceful memories and may they find strength in Peaches' spirit which lives on through everyone she touched.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the accomplishment of Meredith Kiesel, a 7th grader from Northport, NY, who won first place in the World Hunger Essay Contest. Ms. Kiesel understands our country's need for a plan to eliminate hunger and food insecurity. Should Food Be a Basic Human Right? (By Meredith Kiesel) I think that food should be a basic human right. In our society we have human rights. Some of these rights include freedom of speech, education, the right to vote, to think freely, and to practice and believe in any religion. These rights make our country great and strong. Food is used to give us energy, and to keep us focused on what we are doing. When a person misses a meal they become very tired and hungry. Every person who has food can contribute to local food pantries and to food drives. If every person contributed, many people would have food. If a local grocery store donated extra food to a food drive or a shelter it would help people who cannot afford food. People who cannot get a job suffer because they do not have money to buy food. If food was a human right these people could get food to support themselves and their families. Many people who cannot afford food do not have enough energy to do ordinary things. Kids who do not have enough food in their bodies cannot study and learn and cannot do sports or activities that are in their school. They cannot do it because they do not have enough energy. Even with eight hours they will not have the energy without food. If food was a human right they could go out for sports teams or play in their local neighborhood parks and study and become successful. Food is very important for our bodies and minds. It helps us to think and do regular activities. Without proper nutrients our bodies cannot function properly. These are very important reasons as to why food is very important. The whole world should have food as a basic human right. It would help make the world a happier and healthier place to live.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I am disappointed that I must rise today in opposition to H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act. I am enormously concerned with our Nation's lack of border security and the dysfunctional nature of our current immigration system. Our Nation's immigration laws are disrespected both by those who cross our borders illegally and by the businesses that hire those illegal immigrants. Unfortunately, the legislation we are considering today does little to realistically solve these problems. I'm saddened to say that it is based not on policy, but on politics. I support important amendments to this bill that will help secure our borders and cut down on illegal immigration. For instance, I support the amendment offered by Representative Hunter of California requiring the construction of reinforced fencing, along with lights, cameras and sensors, along high priority areas of the U.S.-Mexican border. Additionally, I support the amendment offered by Representative Norwood of Georgia that authorizes and empowers local law enforcement officials to help enforce immigration laws. However, this legislation addresses only half the problem our Nation currently faces. Nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants currently live within our borders. That's 11 million people living in the shadows whom we know next to nothing about. This legislation criminalizes these 11 million people, pushing them further into the shadows, and does not consider the impact this will have on our legal system. For instance, this bill does not address the number of pro-bono, taxpayer funded attorneys these immigrants will need to fight their criminal charges in court nor does it address the hundreds of new prisons that would need to be built in order to house 11 million new criminal aliens. Ultimately, I support a comprehensive immigration policy that is good for families, national security and the economy. Comprehensive immigration legislation introduced by Senator John McCain of Arizona would substantially secure our Nation's borders. Beyond that, it would fine those immigrants already here illegally and punish employers that hire illegal immigrants. However, it would also give the 11 million undocumented immigrants in our country, along with others who are not yet in the U.S. but who hope to one day live and work here legally, a chance to earn legal status. After paying a fine, proving they have been employed in the United States and undergoing a background check, immigrants living here illegally prior to the enactment of the bill would be eligible to apply for a new, non-immigrant visa, and after six years given an option to apply for permanent residency. Additionally, an essential worker visa category, with market-based caps, would be established for new immigrants. These immigrants would be given the option to apply for permanent citizenship after four years. The McCain bill punishes illegal immigrants for breaking the law but also acknowledges that we cannot act as though we have solved our immigration problem by ignoring the 11 million illegal immigrants already living in our country. As my votes on the Hunter and Norwood amendments prove, I support strong enforcement of our immigration laws and measures to make our borders more secure. But I believe that the only way to fix our broken immigration system is to ensure that, beyond enforcement, we take a realistic approach and acknowledge the immigrants currently living within our borders and those that will likely wish to come in the future.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I did not become involved in the issue of TRIA because of my seat on the House Financial Services Committee. I became involved in it because my district is located approximately 50 miles from Ground Zero, because I represent over 100 families whose lives and livelihood were completely upended as a result of the attacks on our Nation on 9/11. Mr. Speaker, I am going to support this extension, but I join with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in supporting it with some measure of disappointment. Our committee, under bipartisan leadership, reported a strong, comprehensive TRIA extension that included group life and covered domestic terrorism, had a public-private commission to ensure long-term alternatives to TRIA. None of that was included in the final product that we are going to vote on today. I have two major concerns that I will share with my colleagues, Mr. Speaker. One is the public-private commission on long-term solutions. The 9/11 families very much wanted to participate in a commission that would develop new policies, new alternatives to TRIA. Not only was their voice left out of this bill, but the commission itself was left out of this bill. Instead, we are going to have a bureaucratic report produced by a Presidential working group. I am sure it will be a good-faith effort, but surely those families deserve to be heard. Surely those families have a tragic expertise in how lives can be destroyed and how livelihoods can be lost. And I am very disappointed that they have been excluded, that their voices have been silenced. And the second concern that I have, Mr. Speaker, is that group life was not included in this product despite the best efforts on both sides of the aisle. It seems to me common sense and certainly compassion that if we are going to insure bricks and steel and glass and mortar, then surely we should insure the lives of people who work inside the bricks and the steel and the glass and the mortar, that surely their lives are just as valuable as property. So it is with a measure of profound disappointment that group life was excluded from this final product. This is, in fact, an imperfect bill, and certainly it is drastically less perfect than the language that was reported on a bipartisan basis from the House Financial Services Committee. But we ought not let an imperfect bill stop an adequate bill. And so because this is a good start and because we do have an opportunity to still get this right, I will support this extension and urge all of our colleagues to continue to work together to pass something that makes the most sense for our Nation and its economy.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman for introducing this resolution. I actually share her view and understand her frustration when any government attempts to ban secular symbols like Santa Claus or Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer or Christmas lights. I do not believe that any community should ban those secular symbols as long as they do not choose one set of symbols over the other; as long as they are inclusive of all symbols. My difficulty with this resolution is that it excludes some symbols and includes only certain symbols. So I would ask the gentlewoman, in the spirit of diversity, and of the many faiths that we celebrate in this body and throughout America, I would ask her not to withdraw the resolution, but allow this resolution to attract a very significant number of votes, maybe a unanimous vote, simply by adding the words ``Kwanzaa,'' ``Ramadan,'' and ``Chanukah'' to her resolution. Do not exclude certain symbols. Be inclusive of all. The gentleman just stated prior to the gentleman from New York that he would support a resolution that includes the holidays of different faiths. So I would take the gentleman up on that offer. So, Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman and ask her if she would change this resolution, change this language, include Chanukah, include Kwanzaa, include Ramadan, include holidays of all faiths so that this resolution can reflect the best of America, which is a place of justice for all.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Oxley and Ranking Member Frank for their hard work in getting this important legislation to the floor. This is an example of the kind of bipartisan cooperation that we have in the Financial Services Committee. Mr. Speaker, just over a year and a half ago, the committee held its first hearing in the 108th Congress on the extension of terrorism risk insurance. At that time, I announced I would be working with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano) on a TRIA reauthorization bill, and at the same time, I said that, in my view, this was the most important issue facing our committee. It was then; it still is now. After 9/11, the businesses in my district and throughout the New York metropolitan area saw firsthand the result of a lack of availability of terrorism insurance. New development was held up. Existing businesses were left to choose between unmanageable risk and astronomical insurance premiums. Certain high profile industries and buildings faced both at once. The passage of TRIA changed that by stabilizing the insurance market and allowing all businesses an affordable option for terrorism coverage. Unfortunately, we are now staring at the sunset of that program, and although strides have been made, the private sector is not yet able to independently price and make available terrorism insurance. Passage of this bipartisan bill is a critical step toward ensuring the continued stability of our national economy, and of particular importance to me is the inclusion of group life. As I have said often in the past, if we are going to provide a Federal backstop for the insurance of buildings, for bricks and mortars and steel and glass, we should also provide for the people who are residing and working within those buildings. We have 2 weeks left in this session, and a great many differences between the two bills that need to be worked out. I am positive that we will come to an agreement that will enable us to keep this program available uninterrupted. Mr. Speaker, I would like to conclude by making one final point. An attack on this country is not an attack on a building. It is not an attack on the insurance industry. It is not an attack on a bunch of companies. It is an attack on our country, and the Federal Government has an obligation to help defend against the economic consequences of that attack, which is what TRIA's extension does.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1721, legislation to reauthorize the BEACH Act. I thank Mr. Bishop for his vital leadership on this important measure. I also want to thank Chairman Young, Mr. Duncan, and Ranking Member Oberstar for their efforts to bring the BEACH Act to the floor today. Mr. Speaker, America's beaches are our national treasures. They are an important part of our heritage. They are environmental assets and economic assets. We want to keep them that way, and that is exactly what this measure will do. This vital legislation provides State and local governments with grant money to monitor pathogen levels off their shores, and to notify the public when those pathogens levels are above acceptable levels. Pathogens, we all know, can cause illness when people are exposed to them through swimming or consuming fish from contaminated water. It is absolutely essential that we continue to fund these programs so that States and localities have the resources that they need to protect recreational users from dangerous levels of bacteria, viruses or parasites off their shores. When people go to the beach, including the 981 square miles of coastal waters in New York, it should be pleasant and it should be safe. That is why this bill is so vitally important. I urge my colleagues to support the reauthorization of the BEACH Act to ensure that we protect Americans from potentially toxic coastal water.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the distinguished members of the 9/11 Commission released a scathing report card on the lack of progress the administration has made in implementing their 41 recommendations for improving the security of our Nation. The grades handed down would disturb any parent. On nearly half of the recommendations, our government received a D, an F, or an incomplete grade for failing to take the steps necessary to ensure that we never face another tragedy like September 11. It is unacceptable that while people across the world can talk with each other effortlessly, now over 4 years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, our Nation's first responders are still, still without the interoperable radios they need to communicate in crisis. It is unacceptable that after we carefully screened passengers who fly on aircraft in this Nation, we seat them on planes loaded with cargo that is rarely ever screened. Mr. Speaker, these and other loopholes must be closed immediately. The administration has failed the American people on these loopholes. We must work together to bring up these dangerous grades.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in very strong support of the reauthorization of the Long Island Sound Restoration Act. I want to begin by thanking Chairman Young and Ranking Member Oberstar for their efforts to bring this legislation to the floor today. I want to in particular thank my cochair of the Long Island Sound Taskforce, Mr. Simmons, and Mr. Bishop for their leadership on this important legislation and their ongoing efforts to put politics aside and advance the cause of environmental and economic preservation of the Long Island Sound. This is, as the gentleman from Connecticut said, a classic example that there is no Republican or Democratic way to protect a body of water. This is something that we need to develop consensus on and this bill does just that. This bill is bipartisan, and it is bicoastal at the same time. I am hoping that when we come back next year we can continue that spirit of bipartisanship and advance the Long Island Sound stewardship program which Mr. Bishop, Mr. Simmons, and I have been working on; and I am confident that the same sense of consensus will prevail. As we have heard, Mr. Speaker, the Long Island Sound is one of America's great natural wonders. It sustains the diversity of birds, wildlife, marine organisms and serves as a recreational magnet and economic generator to the tens of millions of American who live within 50 miles of its shores. The Long Island Sound is an important part of America's heritage. Nathan Hale slipped across the Long Island Sound, arrived in Huntingtown. It played a critical part in the American Revolution. It is important to our economy. It is important to our national identity. It is important to our environment. For thousands of years, the sound has been a productive and a central resource for the human inhabitants occupying its shores. Three New York counties, 24 Connecticut towns border the sound. That puts pressure on this environmental asset in terms of surface run off from some of the most densely populated areas in the country. Over 100 sewage treatment plants discharge a combined one billion gallons of waste into the sound each day. Thankfully, in 2000 the Long Island Sound Restoration Act authorized the Federal Government to spend $40 million annually over 5 years to clean the sound. Now we need to continue that important effort. There is still a lot of work to be done. We have made some progress, but not enough. Nitrogen levels have decreased since 2000, but the sound continues to suffer from significant nitrogen pollution, and high nitrogen levels in the sound lead to decreased levels of dissolved oxygen in the water, a condition called hypoxia, which kills marine life and destroys the delicate ecosystem of the sound. This reauthorization gives us an opportunity to continue the important work of respecting and preserving the Long Island Sound, not only as a critical environmental asset for the United States of America but also as an important economic generator. Once again I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop), the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons), my cochair of the Long Island Sound; the ranking member and chairman for bringing us to this point today and urge support for this bill.

Mr. ISRAEL

Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the many accomplishments of Anita Boeri, whose lifetime of service to her family and country is cause for celebration and honor this Veterans' Day. Anita Boeri was born on July 6, 1912 to Louise and Rinaldo Boeri in the Italian enclave of East Harlem, NYC. After graduating from Erasmus Hall High School, Ms. Boeri attended Pratt Institute--the School of Home Economics in Brooklyn, NY--obtaining a degree as a dietician. She also completed courses at the School of Business in Brooklyn. After the outbreak of World War II, when the U.S. Marine Corps called for female volunteers, Anita Boeri applied and was accepted to the ``Free a Marine to Fight'' program as enlisted personnel on September 22, 1943. Her active duty began on November 30, 1943 with a trip to Camp LeJeune, New River, NC for basic training boot camp. In January of 1944, Ms. Boeri was a member of the first contingent of the Women's Reserve Battalion to arrive on Parris Island, South Carolina. After a week of orientation, she was assigned clerical duties in the office of the Commanding General. Anita Boeri was promoted to the rank of Sergeant and through her hard work and dedication, became a confidential clerk to Major General Clayton B. Vogel, Commanding General, Parris Island. Ms. Boeri was honorably discharged from the Marine Corps Women's Reserve on November 26, 1945. Following her career of service to her country, Anita Boeri spent the next 35 years of her life caring for her family. She cared for her ailing father and mother as well as her uncle who lived in the apartment above her. In 1998, Anita Boeri moved to Atria Senior Living in Huntington Station, NY. There she joined the community with enthusiasm, volunteering for various duties in the gift shop and keeping in touch with Atria residents who were hospitalized. Mr. Speaker, this weekend it will be my great honor to present Ms. Boeri with two medals to recognize her achievements--the World War II Victory Medal and the American Campaign Medal. As Veterans' Day approaches, all Americans can look to the achievements of Anita Boeri as a model of commitment and service.