Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am thinking about a teddy bear that is in my office, and I think about it because I remember going to a funeral when a mother placed a teddy bear and a red fire truck in the coffin of her young fallen hero, a member of the United States military that lost his life in Iraq. No, it is not the Iraq Caucus that is running this very poor and devastating agenda of this White House. Rather, I would like to say that I am proudly a member of the Iraq Caucus. And I thank Mr. McGovern, the Speaker of the House, Mr. Obey, and Mr. Murtha for understanding that our children are dying and that we must do something that faces the fact that our troops have won the victory. So I hope that we will debate H.R. 930 that says there has been a military success but this is a devastatingly wrong political mission that we are on. The President has to listen. This is 90 days plus 180 days, 9 months to redeploy. That's fair. We will fund our troops. That's fair. It is time now to bring our troops home because we love our children and we love America. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2237, the ``Iraq Redeployment Act.'' I rise in strong support of this legislation because I am listening, and responding to the will of the American people. Last November, Americans went to polls by the millions united in their resolve to vote for change. They voted for a new direction and a change in the Bush administration's disastrous policy in Iraq. The new Democratic majority heard them and responded by passing H.R. 1591, the Iraq Accountability Act. The President vetoed the bill, demanding instead a continuation of the ancient regime under which the Republican-led Congress gave him a blank check to mismanage the occupation and reconstruction of Iraq. Those days are over. No matter how many veto threats the President issues, this Congress is not going to give him a blank check to escalate and continue the war ad infinitum. It is long past time for change in Iraq. It is time for the people and government of Iraq to take primary responsibility for their own country. It is time for the President to recognize the reality on the ground in Iraq. The time when a surge in troops is useful and necessary is past. It is now time to redeploy our troops and launch a diplomatic surge for national and political reconciliation in Iraq. H.R. 2237 will help achieve this goal and that is why I support the measure. Mr. Speaker, there is no more important issue facing the Congress, the President, and the American people than the war in Iraq. It is a subject upon which no one is indifferent, least of all members of Congress. The Framers understood that while the military does the fighting, a nation goes to war. That is why the Framers lodged the power to declare war in the Congress, the branch of government closest to the people. They knew that the decision to go to war was too important to be left to the whim of a single person, no matter how wise or well-informed he or she might be. Four years ago, President Bush stood under a banner that proclaimed ``Mission Accomplished.'' If the mission was to further place our troops in harm's way at the hands of insurgents and sectarian violence, then it is mission accomplished. After spending more than $400 billion dollars sacrificing the lives of 3,381 of America's finest citizen- soldiers, what have we accomplished and where are we headed? I cannot support the President's waging of a war that has no clear direction, does not meet the benchmarks that the President set, and has no visible target. Four years after launching the invasion, conquest, and occupation of Iraq, the evidence is clear and irrefutable: the preemptive invasion of Iraq, while a spectacularly executed military operation, was a strategic blunder without parallel in the history of American foreign policy. This is what can happen when the Congress allows itself to be stampeded into authorizing a president to launch a preemptive war of choice. It is time to change our strategy in Iraq. It is time to engage the key stakeholders in the Middle East and make real strides towards securing a just and lasting peace in Iraq and for the Iraqi people. And most important, bring our troops home so they can be reunited with their families, friends, and neighbors. That is why, Mr. Speaker, in February of this year I introduced H.R. 930, the ``Military Success in Iraq and Diplomatic Surge for National and Political Reconciliation in Iraq Act of 2007.'' Title I of my legislation, the ``Military Success in Iraq Act of 2007'' (M-S-I-A) or ``Messiah,'' offers an honorable deliverance from Iraq. Let me explain. In October 2002, the Congress authorized the President to use military force against Iraq to achieve the following objectives: 1. To disarm Iraq of any weapons of mass destruction that could threaten the security of the United States and international peace in the Persian Gulf region; 2. To change the Iraqi regime so that Saddam Hussein and his Baathist party no longer posed a threat to the people of Iraq or its neighbors; 3. To bring to justice any members of al Qaeda known or found to be in Iraq bearing responsibility for the attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001; 4. To ensure that the regime of Saddam Hussein would not provide weapons of mass destruction to international terrorists, including al Qaeda; and 5. To enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. Every one of these objectives has long been accomplished. Iraq does not possess weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein has been deposed, captured, and dealt with by the Iraqi people. The American military has caught or killed virtually every member of al Qaeda in Iraq that was even remotely responsible for the 9/11 attack on our country. Last, all relevant U.N. resolutions relating to Iraq have been enforced. In other words, every objective for which the use of force in Iraq was authorized by the 2002 resolution has been achieved. Mr. Speaker, since the objectives which led Congress to pass the 2002 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) have been achieved, I believe the authorization to use that military force expires automatically. My legislation affirms this proposition. Additionally, I believe, and my legislation provides, that it is the Congress that is the ultimate arbiter as to whether the objectives set forth in a congressional AUMF have been achieved. Mr. Speaker, where a Congressional authorization to use military force has expired, the President must obtain a new authorization to continue the use force. My legislation requires the President to do that as well. Finally, my bill requires that if the Congress does not vote to reauthorize the use of force in Iraq within 90 days after determining that the objectives set forth in the 2002 AUMF have been achieved, all American armed forces in Iraq must be redeployed out of Iraq. Thus, under my legislation, an up-or-down vote must be held by the House and Senate to continue waging war in Iraq. I am not talking about ``cutting and running,'' or surrendering to terrorists. And I certainly am not talking about staying in Iraq forever or the foreseeable future. The Armed Forces won the war they were sent to fight. Their civilian leadership has not succeeded in winning the peace. That is why the United States should surge diplomatically and politically. Title II of H.R. 930, the ``Diplomatic Surge for Political and National Reconciliation in Iraq Act,'' implements 12 of the most important recommendations of the Iraq Study Group. Significantly, it creates a high-level Special Envoy for National and Political Reconciliation in Iraq (SENPRI). This Special Envoy would consist of individuals like former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Madeleine Albright, or James Baker who would undertake the peaceful reconciliation of the major stakeholders in a free and democratic Iraq, particularly the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds. All 6 of Iraq's neighbors--Iran, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait--have an interest in a stabilized Iraq because as the Iraq Study Group report makes clear, none of these countries wants to live with an Iraq that, after our redeployment, becomes a failed state or a humanitarian catastrophe that could become a haven for terrorists or hemorrhages millions more refugees who will stream into neighboring countries. Mr. Speaker, every day when I walk into my office I am reminded of the courageous young men and women who have given their lives in service to our Nation. Outside my office I have displayed a poster- board that displays the names and faces of those who made the ultimate sacrifice. The poster-board is nearly full. I do not want to start another board. That is why I rise in strong support of H.R. 2237. This legislation significantly reduces the U.S. military presence in Iraq over a 9 month period. The legislation does not abandon the Iraqi people. On the contrary, it recognizes the need to complete our mission by training Iraqi military forces and providing Special Forces to continue to pursue al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, and destroy terrorist networks working out of Iraq. The bill also provides the full array of non- military assistance for Iraq's economic and political reconstruction. This legislation recognizes and respects Iraqi sovereignty. This bill also respects the decision-making judgment of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and U.S. military commanders in the field in determining where forces leaving Iraq might next be deployed. Finally, this legislation provides balance between the security priorities of the United States and Iraq to complete key military missions, and the political imperative to reduce the presence of U.S. military forces inside Iraq. For all of these reasons, I strongly support H.R. 2237 and urge all members to do likewise.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the distinguished Chair for yielding and let me also thank the distinguished chairwoman and ranking member for their leadership on this very important issue of small business, and thank them for the series of bills that have come to the floor that are like building blocks in helping small businesses across America. I would like to thank the majority committee staff for working with my staff. I would like to thank Mr. Tsehai for working on I think an important issue. Let me quickly say that this amendment comes from experience of some of the frustration that small businesses will express coming to your office. The Federal Government is big, and the refuge for small businesses is the SBA. They look for incentives. They look for instruction. They look for guidance. And so my amendment simply says that when there is a dispute and there is a response by the FDA and an action is taken, any action with regard to any disagreement between the SBA and contract procurement agency, this resolve should be put on the Web site. This is an important part of educating small businesses about their action and gives them an empowerment. And I say that in the backdrop of so many businesses that were housed in Houston who fled New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Many businesses were there. They were looking to get restarted back in New Orleans. And the confusion of not being able to access what happened in their request or what happened in a dispute led me to believe that more information on the Web site of the SBA would be extremely helpful. So I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. It simply provides an opportunity for the Small Business Administration to post on their Web site any action taken and the result achieved with regards to any disagreement between the SBA and any contract procurement agency. I yield to the chairwoman of the full committee, Congresswoman Velazquez.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1873, the Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act. From the bodegas of the Bronx to your favorite family owned restaurant scattered across the plains of small town America, small businesses are the backbone of the American economy. These entities epitomize the spirit of the American dream, and they speak to everything that is wonderful about our society. Small businesses represent an opportunity for those individuals who dare to dream, who take a chance, and who wish to fulfill that entrepreneurial spirit that built this mighty Nation. I find it interesting that we are giving this bill consideration in the midst of a heated immigration debate, because one will find that a significant number of immigrants start small businesses as a means to realizing the American dream. They enrich the local community while bringing in much needed tax revenue, the same revenue that helped build New York City, Chicago, and Boston back at the turn of the 20th century. Turning our focus back to H.R. 1873, the Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act, I rise in strong support of this legislation as it ensures that the federal government maintains a strong commitment to small businesses, as they try to remain competitive in a growing global economy. This legislation increases the government-wide goal for participation by small-business concerns in all contracts awarded in a fiscal year to no less than 25 percent, from the current 23 percent. This legislation also increases the government-wide goal for procurement for small disadvantaged and women-owned businesses to 8 percent from 5 percent. The bill also requires each federal agency to submit to the SBA and Congress a detailed plan outlining how the agency plans to meet its small-business goals each fiscal year. As a body, we the members of this 110th Congress have a duty to protect the needs of the average American. By passing this legislation we ensure the owners of small businesses across the country that the 110th Congress eagerly performed their duties.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank both the chairwoman and the ranking member. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished chairman for his yielding to me and appreciate his leadership in the Speaker's chair this evening. Let me again express my appreciation to the chairwoman of the full Committee on Small Business and, as well, the ranking member for their assistance in this amendment and their staff and my staff as well. This amendment is one that reflects, again, that small businesses are small businesses, and they need our assistance. They also work with a number of agencies, and those agencies have contracting procurement offices. Those, of course, are challenges for many small businesses, one, to have a road map of how to get a procurement from a large, if you will, government agency. Many times, there may be disputes. This amendment simply says that any disagreement between the SBA and the contracting procurement agency, the appropriate House and Senate committees with jurisdiction over the matter should be informed. This includes the Committees on Small Business and Oversight and Government Reform. This, of course, is designed to ensure that both the SBA and the procuring agency are accountable and forthcoming to the committees which have jurisdiction over the procuring agency as it relates to small businesses and meeting SBA and congressionally mandated goals. Of course, this emphasizes the fact to make sure that we do have the widespread of small businesses, women-owned businesses, minority-owned businesses. My amendment is simple; my amendment is, I think, helpful; and my amendment is necessary and bipartisan. Small businesses are the backbone of our society, and they represent an American dream for numerous families and provide much-needed revenue to the local municipalities they live in. So I therefore ask that that amendment be accepted. I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for allowing me to explain my amendment to H.R. 1873, the ``Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act.'' My amendment has the full support of Chairwoman Velazquez and mandates that whenever there is a disagreement between the SBA and the contracting procurement agency, the appropriate House and Senate committees with jurisdiction over the matter are informed. This includes the Committees on Small Business and Oversight & Government Reform. This amendment is designed to ensure that both the SBA and the procuring agency are accountable and forthcoming to the committees which have jurisdiction over the procuring agency, (as it relates to small businesses and meeting SBA and congressionally mandated goals.) My amendment is simple. My amendment is important. My amendment is necessary. And my amendment is bi-partisan. Small businesses are the backbone of our society. They represent the American dream for numerous families, and provide much needed revenue to the local municipalities they serve. The very nature of small businesses tend to create a bond between customer and shop owner that can not be duplicated within the confines of our super-malls, or on the never ending maze we call the internet. Small business owners value the relationship they share with their customers, and tend to go above and beyond the normal call of duty to meet their clients' needs. Mr. Chairman, I would yield to the distinguished gentlelady from New York (Ms. Velazquez).

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Thank you very much. I thank the chairwoman and the ranking member. And, Mr. Chairman, it's always good when light comes into this place and we have consensus; and I'd ask my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for allowing me to explain my amendment to H.R. 1873, the ``Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act.'' My amendment, which enjoys full support from Chairwoman Velazquez, brings transparency, accountability and responsiveness to the process of procuring federal contracts. By mandating that the Small Business Administration (SBA) post on their Web site any action taken and the result achieved, with regards to any disagreement between the SBA and the contract procurement agency, individuals can be assured that their government is open and honest. The purpose of this amendment is to ensure transparency and accountability of the SBA to the small businesses it was designed to protect and assist. My amendment is straightforward. My amendment is vital. My amendment is essential. And my amendment is bipartisan. We may not realize the impact that small businesses have on our lives, but they represent the sole diner that is open on a late night trip, the catering service that turns a family gathering into a lifetime of memories, or the mechanic that will not allow your first car to die. In conclusion, we the members of the 110th Congress are sending the right message to the American people and small business owners that we are committed to eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished chairman. Let me just simply say to my good friend, nothing precludes the engaging by the Homeland Security Department of those who have a stakeholder's role. Remember, this is an assessment of critical infrastructure on the issue of security. The rules of the House designate the Homeland Security Committee as the committee that deals with the question of security. In addition, none of us work in a vacuum; and we would expect this center of excellence to engage those necessary parties. This amendment is opposed by the committee. This amendment will create another layer of bureaucracy. This amendment goes against the 9/ 11 Commission, which has asked us to be efficient and to be definitive on our questions of security issues. And what we are attempting to do is to allow the Homeland Security Department to do its job, which creates a center of excellence to focus on the security protection measures for critical infrastructure, a defined responsibility of the Homeland Security Department. And we simply expect that there will be a collaborative working on that such that no Department, Mr. Chairman and my colleagues, will be left out, including the very important Department of Transportation. And we would look forward to collaborating with them. And, in that regard, I rise to vigorously oppose the amendment and ask for a ``no'' vote.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for, again, his outstanding spirit of bipartisanship. I think the importance of Mr. Cardoza's amendment is that he agrees with the Homeland Security Committee and the message and the mission of yourself and Mr. Thompson and all of the Members that, in addition to just handing out equipment, you want to make sure there's a continuing of training, professional development, understanding of the system. And it really impacts firefighters, police, other emergency responders who cannot communicate during times of emergency. We know what happened in 9/11. Let me just finish by saying, one of the other elements of helping us work through this question of interoperability is, as your amendment suggests, focusing on local and regional interoperability communications efforts and, particularly, and I raise this point for a city like Houston, that simply says, let us use the dollars, let us directly use the dollars so that we can follow the pathway of Mr. Cardoza's amendment, which is to improve our interoperable communication efforts. Let us get the monies directly, as opposed to the layering that goes on through the State system. But, in any event, let me thank the gentleman for his amendment. The need for improved emergency communications is not new. Whether we are talking about the Oklahoma City bomb detonated by homegrown terrorist Timothy McVeigh, September 11, or Hurricanes Katrina and Rita--the same story emerged. Firefighters, police, and other emergency responders cannot communicate during times of emergency. Five and one-half years after the 9/11 attacks, and 1\1/2\ years after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the Department still does not have a dedicated interoperability grant program. Subsequently, states and localities are forced to rob Peter to pay Paul by using large chunks of homeland security grant funding--in some instances 80 percent--to purchase communications equipment instead of securing bridges, ports, buildings. The FY 2006 Budget Reconciliation Act created a $1 billion interoperability grant program to be administered by the Department of Commerce based on the proceeds from the sales of the 700 Mhz spectrum. While that is a good start, the 9/11 Commission has called on Congress to prioritize and improve interoperable emergency communication. Buying equipment is not enough! Congress must support State, local and regional interoperable communication plans that recognize all of the critical factors for a successful interoperability solution. Those factors are part of the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum. They are: governance, standard operating procedures, training and exercises, and usage, in addition to technology. We cannot just throw money at interoperability--we have to develop a strategic, national plan to improve interoperable communications. The Administration and DHS officials have testified that the cost of achieving interoperability will cost in the tens of billions to $100 billion. More than 90 percent of the public safety communication infrastructure in the United States is owned and operated at the local and state level. Therefore, we must have improved coordination, training, and planning across many jurisdictions to achieve interoperability. According to Project SAFECOM at DHS, interoperability directly impacts the first responder community which consists of over 61,000 public safety agencies including 960,000 Firefighters, 830,000 EMS personnel, and 710,000 Law Enforcement Officers. The Federal government must show leadership on this issue if it is going to tell state and local governments that they need to enhance and improve their emergency communications capability. Funding is only one-half the solution for the interoperability crisis. There must be leadership by all the key stakeholders to sit down and develop the plans necessary to create effective nationwide interoperable communication standards. This amendment provides support to the local governments and regions that are developing plans and systems that will better enable multi- jurisdictions to communicate during times of emergency. The Cardozo amendment will encourage jurisdictions to move toward a truly ``national'' emergency communications capability. This is an excellent amendment, and we rise to support it. I yield back to the distinguished gentleman.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman for a very thoughtful amendment. We have addressed this question in the Homeland Security Committee, but also in the subcommittee that I chair, and I think the important point is that when people are trying to clarify their name and they submit personal data, we should be responsible for protecting it. In light of what happened last week, and by the way, we will be having a briefing on that very issue dealing with the TSA's loss of the computer and all that data, this is a very instructive amendment. It would be great to think that we would never lose material, but we do, and also to protect those that have been subjected to a lot of scrutiny, some of them coming from different ethnic groups. This is very thoughtful, and I rise to support the amendment. Madam Chairman, this amendment should be supported as it seeks to require the Department of Homeland Security (the Department) to use funds to protect the security of personal information submitted electronically to the Department's website for the Department of Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program, otherwise known as DHS-TRIP, and any other Web site associated with that program. It would be great if we only had to theorize about the possible security, or lack thereof, of the information sent to the Department via redress websites. However, the past has shown that this problem is very real. In February of this year, the Department's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) learned that the website they were using to collect personal information to aid in traveler redress contained a link that was not secure. This insecure link caused hundreds of individuals to transmit information through cyberspace that was not encrypted and subject to being captured by identity thieves, at best, and terrorists, at worst. The Web site was established to provide a remedy for passengers that had been delayed at airports and therefore believed that they had been incorrectly identified as someone on an aviation watch list. What causes even greater concern is that for 4 months and 8 days TSA did not detect the problem through their own internal procedures. In fact, they became aware of the situation through an independent internet blog. The fact that the redress website lacked the necessary security measures to protect users' personal information is proof in the pudding that more needs to be done to protect personally identifiable information sent to TSA. The American public needs to know that the ``S'' in TSA stands for something. Individuals that may have already been wrongfully identified--which can cause airport delays for hours or even days--should not have to experience a second round of mistreatment by having their personal information, including their name, gender, date of birth, social security numbers and addresses vulnerable to being hacked. A few weeks after this discovery TSA launched the Department of Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program, otherwise known as DHS-TRIP. We have not yet determined whether the internal controls that should have been in place during the first mishap have been put in place with respect to DHS-TRIP. The recent revelation that a TSA hard drive containing the personal, payroll and bank information of over 100,000 former and current TSA employees was reported stolen, does nothing to alleviate our concerns. For these reasons, this amendment is a good idea, and should be supported.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Thompson, and the ranking member. They know that our byline is that we are a bipartisan committee. The reason is because entrusted to the Homeland Security Committee is the security of the Nation, security of a Nation that we love, security of a people that we cherish. Whenever we hear of a tragic truck accident in California, explosive truck accident, the viciousness of the shooting at Virginia Tech, and the bombing, or the threats of such, in the London train system, we begin to think of our security. No, maybe those are accidents, maybe those are not considered terrorist acts, Virginia Tech or the tragedy in California, but it causes America to begin to think about her own security. That is why H.R. 1684 is a strong reflection of the importance of security to this majority leadership. I am very proud that, in the early days of our legislation or our time as the majority, we passed the 9/11 bill, certainly working with a bipartisan leadership. We have moved to ensure that for the first time that we have a strong authorization bill on homeland security. We have not forgotten the employees, and I was glad to be able to offer a particular amendment that addressed the question of the morale and the leadership and the training of our employees. That is important, for if your employees are not fully functioning, the question of security is a question. And so I was delighted to be able to incorporate language regarding the CMOs qualifications, to ensure that the CMO possess a demonstrated ability and knowledge of treatment of illnesses caused by chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological agents. I am also glad to have developed an amendment which strips the Department of the authority to develop a personnel system different from the traditional GS schedule Federal model. In a number of critical ways the personnel system established by the Homeland Security has been a litany of failure. The question is, that if we don't order and put in order our homeland security function, then we cannot secure America. That is what 1684 does. And we will address the questions of security, of civil liberties, of protecting our highways, of being concerned about rail security, we will do it and continue to do it because we believe in America. H.R. 1684 gives us the perfect road map, the perfect hand print to secure this Nation. I ask support for the bill. Mr. Chairman, September 11, 2001, is a day that is indelibly etched in the psyche of every American and most of the world. Much like the unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, September 11, is a day that will live in infamy. And as much as Pearl Harbor changed the course of world history by precipitating the global struggle between totalitarian fascism and representative democracy, the transformative impact of September 11 in the course of American and human history is indelible. September 11 was not only the beginning of the Global War on Terror, but moreover, it was the day of innocence lost for a new generation of Americans. Just like my fellow Americans, I remember September 11 as vividly as if it was yesterday. In my mind's eye, I can still remember being mesmerized by the television as the two airliners crashed into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, and I remember the sense of terror we experienced when we realized that this was no accident, that we had been attacked, and that the world as we know it had changed forever. The moment in which the Twin Towers collapsed and the nearly 3,000 innocent Americans died haunts me until this day. At this moment, I decided that the protection of our homeland would be at the forefront of my legislative agenda. I knew that all of our collective efforts as Americans would all be in vain if we did not achieve our most important priority: the security of our nation. Accordingly, I became then and continue to this day to be an active and engaged Member of the Committee on Homeland Security, and Chairwoman of the Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee, who considers our national security paramount. Our nation's collective response to the tragedy of September 11 exemplified what has been true of the American people since the inception of our Republic--in times of crisis, we come together and always persevere. Despite the depths of our anguish on the preceding day, on September 12, the American people demonstrated their compassion and solidarity for one another as we began the process of response, recovery, and rebuilding. We transcended our differences and came together to honor the sacrifices and losses sustained by the countless victims of September 11. Let us honor their sacrifices by passing H.R. 1684, which bolsters the efficacy, accountability, and our oversight over the Department of Homeland Security. This bipartisan bill was reported out of the Homeland Security Committee by a unanimous vote and includes many significant provisions I ensured were incorporated either into the base bill or through amendments at the Full Committee Markup aimed at strengthening and streamlining management, organizational, personnel, and procurement issues at the Department to facilitate execution of its homeland security mission. H.R. 1684 authorizes $39.8 billion in appropriations for the activities of the Department of Homeland Security for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008--$2.1 billion over the requested amount of the President's FY 2008 budget. H.R. 1684 is an oversight and management bill that builds capacity, provides resources, and ensures accountability at what GAO still views as a high-risk endeavor--the transformation and integration of 22 entities into the Department of Homeland Security. H.R. 1684 establishes important offices such as the Directorate for Policy, the Office of Health Affairs, and the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications. Within the Office of Health Affairs, this bill creates a Chief Medical Officer, CMO, and I worked with Chairman Thompson to incorporate language regarding the CMO's qualifications to ensure that the CMO possess a demonstrated ability and knowledge of treatment of illnesses caused by chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological agents. Moreover, I introduced an amendment which passed during the Committee Markup of H.R. 1684 which strips the Department of the authority to develop a personnel system different from the traditional GS schedule Federal model. In a number of critical ways, the personnel system established by the Homeland Security has been a litany of failure. The flexibility we originally granted in the Homeland Security Act of 2002 has not worked. That is why I offered an amendment repealing the DHS human resources personnel system. The Department has abused the flexibility given by Congress. They have created a personnel system that eviscerates employee due process rights and puts in serious jeopardy the agency's ability to recruit and retain a workforce capable of accomplishing its critical missions. We initially believed that the flexibility given the Department would allow it to respond better in times of crisis. We know now that nothing could be further from the truth. The abysmal response to Hurricane Katrina taught us that lesson. Despite Court rulings, however, on March 7, 2007, DHS announced that it will put into effect portions of the personnel system not specifically enjoined by the Court. Just a few weeks earlier, DHS outlined plans to move slower on its controversial personnel overhaul, formerly known as MaxHR, but now called the Human Capital Operations Plan or HCOP. Implementing these plans would further undercut the fairness of the appeals process for DHS employees by eliminating the Merit Systems Protection Board's current authority to modify agency-imposed penalties. These regulations would also provide the Secretary sole discretion to identify offenses and impose employee penalties as well as appoint a panel to decide the employee appeals the Secretary's action. According to U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer, these regulations put the thumbs of the agencies down hard on the scales of justice in [the agencies'] favor. The Federal Appeals Court agreed with the District Court's basic conclusion regarding the lack of fairness of these planned changes in adverse action and appeal rights, but ruled that they were not yet ripe for a decision since no one has been subject to discipline under them. It is clear that another court case will be filed should DHS put these provisions into place and an employee is harmed by the new adverse actions and appeals procedures. Some insisted that employees would be happier and more efficient if they were managed more like the private sector. We know now that nothing could be further from the truth. The Department's morale ratings have consistently been at or near the bottom of all federal agencies. In February of this year, the Department of Homeland Security received the lowest scores of any Federal agency on a Federal survey for job satisfaction, leadership and workplace performance. Of the 36 agencies surveyed: DHS ranked 36th on job satisfaction, 35th on leadership and knowledge management, 36th on results-oriented performance culture, and 33rd on talent management. We know that the Department too often does not listen to their employees. In fact, the National Treasury Employees Union, NTEU, sent me a letter on behalf of the 15,000 employees of DHS' Bureau of Customs and Border Protection thanking me for introducing my amendment repealing DHS' failed human resource management system, MaxHR. Despite its incredibly low morale, the Department is not changing its plans to implement MaxHR. Instead the Department is merely changing the name of an unpopular and troubled system. MaxHR will become HCOP. With the abysmal morale and extensive recruitment and retention challenges at DHS, implementing these personnel changes now will only further undermine the agency's employees and mission. From the beginning of discussions over personnel regulations with DHS more than 4 years ago, it was clear that the only system that would work in this agency is one that is fair, credible and transparent. These regulations promulgated under the statute fail miserably to provide any of those critical elements. It is time to end this flawed personnel experiment. So it is time for Congress to once again step in. It is time to say to the dedicated workers of the Department of Homeland Security that they deserve to be treated with the same dignity and respect granted to other federal employees. Therefore, I thank my Homeland Security colleagues who supported my amendment repealing DHS' failed human resource management system because Homeland Security is too important to get it wrong again. I also worked with Chairman Thompson to incorporate into H.R. 1684 language authorizing the Citizen Corps and the Metropolitan Medical Response System programs to strengthen emergency response and recovery efforts. The Citizen Corps Program is a critical program within the Department of Homeland Security that engages the community to be involved in emergency preparedness through public education and outreach, training, and volunteer service. My language ensured that funding will enable local Citizen Corps Councils to more adequately provide education and training for populations located around critical infrastructure. These populations will have an opportunity to be better prepared to respond to natural disasters, acts of terrorism and other man-made disasters. In a bipartisan fashion, I also worked with my colleague from Texas, Representative McCaul, to draft an amendment regarding CBP officers and their policies. My amendment called for the GAO to study the Border Patrol's policies on pursuit and the use of lethal and non-lethal force. Our Border Patrol officers operate in some of the most dangerous regions in the country and are often required to use force and pursue suspects on a daily basis. An independent evaluation of these practices and policies is important so that the Border Patrol knows the parameters of its enforcement tactics and has the information necessary to assess whether it needs to adopt new policies. My amendment also requires GAO to examine the number of incidents where force was used and when it has led to penalties against our Border Patrol officers, so we have hard data that can guide any reassessments that may be necessary. Recognizing the problem first is essential to fixing the situation. This non-partisan report by GAO will be a major step in evaluating these vital Border Patrol policies. H.R. 1684 also requires the Department to conduct a Comprehensive Homeland Security Review, similar to the Quadrennial Defense Review conducted by the Department of Defense. In addition, the bill requires pay parity for Customs and Border Protection employees and other border personnel enhancements and addresses critical staffing needs by tapping into the pool of experienced Federal annuitants. In conclusion, I stand here remembering those who still suffer, whose hearts still ache over the loss of so many innocent and interrupted lives. My prayer is that for those who lost a father, a mother, a husband, a wife, a child, or a friend will in the days and years ahead take comfort in the certain knowledge that they have gone on to claim the greatest prize, a place in the Lord's loving arms. And down here on the ground, their memory will never die so long as any of the many of us who loved them lives. Mr. Chairman, the best way to honor the memory of those lost in the inferno of 9/11, is to do all we can to ensure that it never happens again. The best way to do that is to bolster the efficacy, accountability, and our oversight over the Department of Homeland Security, which we created in the aftermath of 9/11 to protect and preserve our Nation which we all hold so dear.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, and I am opposed to the amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. This amendment--while well-intented--unnecessarily creates a bureaucratic and burdensome process to what should be a simple study. Specifically, this amendment seeks to add the Secretary of Transportation to a study on incentives to secure critical infrastructure information from private stakeholders. Mr. Chairman, we all know what happens when we have too many cooks in the kitchen. Adding more layers to a project like this only assures that the project will not get done in a timely manner. The Secretary of Homeland Security is charged with working to identify and help, with other agencies, protect critical infrastructure. The Secretary of Homeland Security by himself is more than capable of working with CREATE to complete a study of incentives for infrastructure stake holders to share information with the government. For these reasons, I oppose this amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. And might I indicate, because I know Members are in their offices working and committees, and deliberations on the floor are instructive to the Members and their staff, make it very clear of the cooperative and collaborative relationship that the Homeland Security Committee has had with the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, along with many other committees. Let me reemphasize the very strong working relationship of the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee and the chairperson of the Transportation Committee. So this amendment is unnecessary. We have worked closely together on this bill and on many issues. I specifically remember the close relationship that we had in working on the rail security bill, where we are jointly responsible for securing the Nation's transportation system or rail transportation system. This amendment, though possibly well-intended, unnecessarily creates a bureaucratic and burdensome process to what should be a simple study. Let us be reminded of the 9/11 Commission. The 9/11 Commission wanted to emphasize the ending of bureaucratic red tape. That is why we have the Homeland Security Department and the Homeland Security Committee. Specifically, this amendment seeks to add the Secretary of Transportation to a study on incentives to secure critical infrastructure information for private stakeholders. Mr. Chairman, we all know what happens when we have too many cooks in the kitchen. We also know that we have a working relationship between our committees and between the Members of this Congress, and also a duty and responsibility to Homeland Security Committee to ensure the securing of this Nation through the securing and the responsibilities of the Homeland Security Department. Adding more layers to a project like this only assures that the project will not get done in a timely manner. The Secretary of Homeland Security is charged with working to identify and help with other agencies and protect critical infrastructure. That is a component of our committee and the subcommittee that was set up by the chairman of this committee and the subcommittee that I serve to ensure efficiency. The Secretary of Homeland Security by himself is more than capable of working to complete a study of incentives, infrastructure, stakeholders, to share information with the government. For these reasons, I oppose this amendment. And I would simply say to my colleagues, what did the 9/11 Commission dictate or ask us to do? Thoughtfully streamline the process of securing America and make sure that we are attentive, we are efficient, and we get the job done. Lives are at stake. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the gentleman for his ongoing leadership on this issue. Since he started in the United States Congress many years ago, he has led out on this issue. I want to simply refer my colleagues to the idea of imagining the horror of your child being missing, and imagine your child has been missing for so long that his case is declared inactive. Now think about where you would turn if you thought your missing child was in a foreign country. The only parents who do not fear that scenario are those who already live it. So this idea of using the Department of Homeland Security, which should be certainly interested in securing our children, is an important step and certainly an important responsibility for the Inspector General. I would suggest that when we think of security we think of children lost overseas or taken overseas. There is no better agency that could utilize its Inspector General facilities and resources to be able to help those families who are deeply suffering. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding to me. I don't imagine any of us could imagine the need for the resources of DHS checking passengers, checking passports, interacting with the international law enforcement, could not imagine a better use of our time than supporting the gentleman's amendment and allowing the Inspector General to participate in this very important project. I support this amendment. This amendment will allow the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security to conduct reviews of ``cold cases'' stored at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children when the children or the offenders are located outside of the U.S. This amendment would permit the Inspector General to provide assistance and develop recommendations for further investigation of these hard to solve cases. A missing child is the anguish of every parent and a concern to every caring adult. Imagine the horror of your child being missing. Imagine that the child has been missing for so long, that its case is declared ``inactive.'' Now think about where you would turn if you thought your missing child was in a foreign country. The only parents who would not fear this scenario are those who already live it. In the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, DHS assumed responsibility for border protection. Many people may not understand how border protection intersects with missing children. I can tell you that as our inspectors check passengers entering and leaving the United States, they have the opportunity to identify missing children and their abductors. Those employees of homeland security who are responsible for protecting our borders and assuring that terrorists do not enter this country also play a role in assuring that children who are leaving this country are in the company of a parent or legal guardian. But when efforts to intercept and detain a child abductor fail, more is lost than just one child. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) thousands of American children are illegally transported from the United States every year. Through this amendment, we will add one more weapon in our arsenal to safeguard America's children. By bringing to bear the investigative abilities and fresh insights of the Inspector General to these cases we can help resolve these cases that others have given up on. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chair, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, we are at a crossroads again. The legislation that we worked so meticulously on to ensure the funding of our troops just about a week ago saw the veto pen of the White House without consideration of the failed mission that Iraq has become. I did not say military operations because I believe that our soldiers are valiant, and they have achieved the success that we've asked them to achieve. That is why I went to the Rules Committee today to ask for the consideration that the resolution in the fall of 2002 should expire. In fact, it has expired, because we have shown there is no nexus or was no nexus between Saddam Hussein and terrorism. There were no weapons of mass destruction; and, of course, we know that Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. Unfortunately, our President has expanded the resolution, building on it, surging troops, and the great loss of life has harmed the United States. There's been no diplomacy, there's no reconstruction, and the government of Iraq is weak. I hope that when we debate this question tomorrow that we will recognize that the best solution is a diplomatic, a political and social solution that requires a reconstruction, if you will, of Iraq, the inclusion of the allies surrounding the region, the engagement with Syria and Jordan and Saudi Arabia, working with NATO. But, more importantly, it requires that we redeploy out of Iraq; and I hope we will consider at some point the idea of the resolution expiring. It is time to save lives, those of our soldiers, and to bring them home in dignity.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 105, supporting goals and ideals of a National Suffragist Day to promote awareness of the importance of the women suffragists who worked for the right of women to vote in the United States. Mr. Speaker, as a woman who has not only enjoyed the privileges and responsibilities of voting, but also of serving my country in elected office, I am extremely proud to co-sponsor this resolution honoring those women who fought for my right, and the right of all women, to participate in the process of governing. This bill recognizes the tireless work and innovative ideas of women in particular. Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Sojourner Truth, Carrie Chapman Catt, Maud Wood Park, Lucy Burns, and Alice Paul were visionaries in their own times, and remain inspirations to us today. These seven women each challenged a system of male dominance, and asserted the role of women in politics and governance. Many of their methods of civil disobedience and peaceful protesting were taken up by the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 60s, which expanded voting rights to even more of the population. July 19th will be the anniversary of the first women's rights convention, held in Seneca Falls, New York, in 1848. To celebrate their accomplishments and raise awareness of the importance of the suffragists who fought for and won the right of women to vote in the United States, this bill designates July 19th as National Suffragists Day. Mr. Speaker, any of these women would be amazed and proud to see an America where women are not only able to vote, but they are able to run for office. It is incredibly appropriate that this body, presided over by a woman for the first time in its history, should honor their work through a day set aside to raise awareness of their struggle. Mr. Speaker, I am especially pleased to support this resolution because it gives much deserved recognition to one of my heroes, Sojourner Truth, the great abolitionist and suffragist. In 1843, deciding her mission was to preach the word of God, Sojourner Truth--the name she gave herself as a traveling preacher who speaks the truth--left New York and traveled throughout New England, calling her own prayers meetings and attending those of others. She preached ``God's truth and plan for salvation.'' After months of travel, she arrived in Northampton, Massachusetts, and joined the Northampton Association for Education and Industry, where she met and worked with abolitionists such as William Lloyd Garrison, Frederick Douglass, and Olive Gilbert. As we know, during the 1850s, slavery became an especially issue in the United States. In 1850, Congress passed the Fugitive Slave Law, which allowed runaway slaves to be arrested and jailed without a jury trial, and in 1857, the Supreme Court ruled in the Dred Scott case that those enslaved had no rights as citizens and that the government could not outlaw slavery in the new territories. While traveling and speaking in states across the country, Sojourner Truth met many women abolitionists and noticed that although women could be part of the leadership in the abolitionist movement, they could neither vote nor hold public office. It was this realization that led Sojourner to become an outspoken supporter of women's rights. In 1851, she addressed the Women's Rights Convention in Akron, Ohio, delivering her famous speech ``Ain't I a Woman?'' The applause she received that day has been described as ``deafening.'' From that time on, she became known as a leading advocate for the rights of women. Indeed, she was one of the nineteenth century's most eloquent voices for the cause of anti-slavery and women's rights. It was to give proper recognition to her contributions to the struggle to abolish slavery and secure equal rights for women that I introduced H.R. 4510 which would direct the Joint Committee on the Library to accept the donation of a bust depicting Sojourner Truth and to display the bust in a suitable location in the Capitol. In February of this year, that legislation became law. I strongly support H. Con. Res. 105, and I urge my colleagues to join me in doing so.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 117, which commemorates the 400th anniversary of the settlement of Jamestown. On May 14, 1607, just over 100 English settlers landed on the banks of the James River, in what is today the state of Virginia. The first permanent English settlement in North America, Jamestown weathered extreme hardship, starvation, and warfare to become the foundation upon which our Nation was built. We can recognize many of our democratic ideals in institutions developed by the Jamestown settlement. It was in this colony, in 1619, that the House of Burgesses, the first locally elected legislative body in the New World, was convened in a Jamestown church. As a nation, we have come a long way since our early colonial days. We fought a war with each other to abolish slavery, which was introduced in Jamestown in the same year as the House of Burgesses. We gradually extended full citizenship and equal rights to African Americans. While the settlers that landed in 1607 were all male, we have in the past 400 years, incorporated women into all aspects of our Nation's political, economic, and social life. And while the early colonial settlements fought wars with their Native American neighbors, we have, in recent decades, made serious efforts toward making amends for injustices done to native tribes. This resolution serves to remind and educate Americans about the importance of our history. It highlights that the economic, political, religious, and social institutions developed during our colonial past continue to form the backbone of our society today. Significantly, this resolution also draws attention to the crucial role the native people played in the success of the Jamestown colony, and in the formation of our Nation. Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate the 400th anniversary of Jamestown, this legislation urges us to understand and engage with our history as Americans. I strongly support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, this is an appropriate resolution that comes before us. I know that in a couple of days many of us will be out on the West Lawn commemorating and celebrating the Nation's law enforcement officers from across the Nation. We welcome them to this Congress every year, and we do so humbly and with great appreciation. Let me acknowledge the work that many of us have done with our local law enforcement in the State of Texas. We have a multitude of law disciplines, from the constables office. I have the privilege of representing the first African American constable, Mae Walker, and representing Constable Victor Trevino, a Hispanic constable. We have deputy sheriffs. We have the sheriff's department. We have the Houston Police Department, the Department of Public Safety. In many instances we find great leaders who believe not only in crime fighting, but crime prevention. I rise today to focus in particular on the importance of law enforcement in working in the community. I salute the former mayor of the city of Houston, Lee Brown, former chief of police of the cities of Houston, New York, and Atlanta. I consider him the father of community- oriented policing that really speaks to the hearts and minds of the people. It lets the police officers, law enforcement officers, become knowledgeable about the community, and in particular they work to know the ``good guys'' and the ``bad guys.'' Neighbors become comfortable with law enforcement officers when they are engaged as people who are certainly concerned about the neighborhood and the community. They are eager to help them bust, if you will, the crime situation or bust the criminal or make sure that the situation is corrected. At the same time as we raise up and respect our law enforcement officers, let me applaud those who I speak to all the time as I travel to Washington. We have a very effective aviation police force. I get an opportunity as I go through the airport to listen to them and to thank them. Let us be concerned about the benefits for law enforcement officers. In particular, I know that my city, a very large city, has seen the decline of senior officers. For some reason or another, because our belts are being tightened, we don't have enough resources to provide them with the upward mobility, the professional development and the protection of their pensions and to recognize the sacrifice that they and their families are making. We as communities across the Nation should be concerned about making sure they have the right kind of benefits. On the Federal level, I am very glad that the House Judiciary Committee has just passed out a COPS bill reauthorization. I think that is a very, very important aspect of the work of this Congress. The COPS program worked. It provided police officers for rural communities and urban communities. I spoke to my police personnel there and they said, yes, it would help us greatly if the COPS program were reauthorized. So as we salute our peace officers across America, let us make sure that we are actually doing as we are saying, and that is providing them with the resources that they need. At the same time, let me also add the importance of training. There is the sensitivity that our police officers are able to get through experience, but training also helps them detect those with mental illness and have the best resources to address those suffering from mental illness so that those persons can be taken away from society before they do harm to themselves or someone else. This legislation is timely because we thank those who are serving today. We offer our deepest sympathy to the families of those who have lost their lives on the front lines of law enforcement in America over the last year, and we certainly acknowledge the continued sacrifice that law enforcement officers will make. The best point about what this says as we stand on the floor today saluting them is that we should promote and congratulate good law enforcement officers. We should not allow the bad incidents that occur, the mishaps that occur, and many of them have occurred, and I have stood up vigorously against them and I will stand up yesterday, today and tomorrow, when there is abuse. But we should not allow those kinds of situations to take away from the grandeur, the respect, the honesty, the integrity and the downright commitment that the law enforcement agencies of America, particularly those in our local communities, show every single day with the idea that as they leave in the morning and kiss their families good-bye, that they might sacrifice their lives so that we might be safe. We owe them a great debt of gratitude, and it is my pleasure to thank the distinguished gentleman from Illinois and thank the sponsor of this legislation for allowing me to pay tribute at this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 291, supporting the goals and ideals of Peace Officers Memorial Day. Peace officers, the sworn, public-sector officers entrusted with law enforcement authority and the power of arrest, risk their lives daily to protect our Nation. These individuals, who are responsible for safeguarding the rights and freedoms we enjoy as Americans, are true heroes. Peace Officers Memorial Day honors those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the safety and security of their communities and our Nation. Created by Public Law 87-726, signed by President Kennedy in 1962, this day gives us the opportunity to acknowledge and pay our respect to those who, through their courageous deeds, have fallen in the line of duty. Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, May 13, 2007, 382 names will be added to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial during the 19th Annual Candlelight Vigil. These 382 names include 145 officers who died in the 2006, plus 237 from earlier years who had previously been lost to history. Of these 382 names, 55 represent Texas law officers who lost their lives in the line of duty, nine of them in 2006. Mr. Speaker, one of the names of the fallen heroes to be added to the list is Officer Rodney J. Johnson of the Houston Police Department. Officer Johnson, a 12-year veteran of the Houston Police Department, was killed September 21, 2006, while taking a suspect in custody during a traffic stop. He leaves to honor his memory his beloved wife, Houston Police Department Officer Joslyn Johnson, and five teenage children; three daughters and two sons, ages 14 to 19. Officer Rodney Johnson was born in Houston and served in the U.S. Army as a military police officer until being honorably discharged in 1990. He then went to work as a corrections officer for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and then as a jail attendant. He graduated from the Houston police academy in 1994. As a member of the department's Southeast Gang Task Force, Officer Rodney Johnson earned two Lifesaving Awards and one Medal of Valor from the State of Texas. In January 1998, Officer Rodney Johnson rescued a physically challenged driver trapped in rising floodwaters in January 1998 and later that year he rescued mentally challenged people trapped inside of a burning house. Officer Rodney Johnson, who stood 6 feet 5 inches tall and weighed nearly 300 pounds, served on his union's board of directors. As Hans Marticiuc, the president of Officer Johnson's union stated, ``he was big and he was intimidating-looking, but he was as gentle as a baby bear.'' Mr. Speaker, the number of officers killed in the line of duty last year declined nearly 8 percent from 2005, when there were 157 officer deaths. The 2006 figure was the lowest annual total since 1999, when 143 officers were lost. Although the number of officers killed in the line of duty has declined in recent years, the fact that one officer is killed every 2\1/2\ days in our country is a sober reminder that protecting our communities and safeguarding our democracy come at a heavy price. Including this year's officers, there are now 17,917 names engraved on the Memorial, representing offices from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories, and Federal law enforcement and military police agencies. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important resolution, honoring the Federal, State, and local peace officers killed or disabled in the line of duty.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me take this opportunity, before I address the question our soldiers in Iraq, to thank Mr. Honda for convening this special order on the Asian Pacific community of this Nation and to thank him for his leadership of the Asian Pacific Caucus, of which I am a member and to acknowledge the Asian Pacific community in Houston, Texas, a thriving community so diverse and so respected. I am reminded of the unity that was exhibited as Katrina survivors who were Asian Pacific Islanders came into Houston. Both Mr. Honda and myself worked on the issue of language and representation and resources, and the Asian Pacific community in Houston was so united and so supportive so that these new visitors, these strangers in a different land, would feel welcome. Let me also acknowledge that I have the privilege of representing not only a very strong Vietnamese business community, but also the original Chinatown in Houston. So my hat goes off and salutes the outstanding leaders in that community, scientists, educators, businesspersons, public servants, and, as well, I thank them for the wonderful service that they give and the opportunity to work together with them. This is an outstanding tribute to be able to honor the Asian Pacific Islander community in the month of May. Let me also acknowledge that the Vietnamese community will have its first cultural event gala where it honors heroes and public servants from around the Nation. I would hope that as we look to the greatness of America, we will find it in our hearts to be able to address the question of the tragedy in Iraq. It is a tragedy that continues to grow. Every time you turn the corner, turn the news on or read a newspaper article, it is disintegrating and deteriorating. Today in the newspaper it says an Army general predicts a rise in casualties. So at the back of the surge the President says will have solved the conflict in Iraq, we will see, tragically in the words of Major General Rick Lynch, who is working with the 3rd Infantry Division, ``Casualties will climb as American troops dig into enemy territory as part of the stepped-up military operation ordered by President Bush in January.'' His sentence does not say how we will resolve the conflict. It doesn't say that it results in any positive end. It doesn't say that we will be victorious in that effort, it says that the lives of Americans will be lost. We, as Americans, believe that when we go to war, the Nation goes to war. Therefore, it is important to have a mission to have a conclusion to that mission. Compounded to that issue, we show that attacks killed eight U.S. troops. They kill them because they are being killed by IEDs. They kill them because there is no mission, there is no policy, there is no political policy. There is no end, there is no beginning. So I ask the President to sit down with this Congress and be able to resolve this by, one, leaving in the language that says, we will redeploy the troops by July, 2007, or, at the latest, October, 2007, have a rational policy for exiting from the conflict that is causing the mounting lives that are lost. In addition, lives are being lost in Afghanistan of a civilian population, lives of the civilian Iraqis are being lost, and there is no response from this administration. While there they are wining and dining, I would simply ask in addition to that responsibility, let us find a conclusion to the war in Iraq by reconciliation and compromise between the executive and, of course, the Congress. We cannot tolerate any more headlines like this, mothers and fathers, husbands and wives are asking why, when there is no end. The soldiers are our heroes. They have done their job. We have said this over and over. I commend to this body H.R. 930, my legislation, Military Success in Iraq and Diplomatic Surge for National and Political Reconciliation in Iraq Act of 2007. Declare a military victory, our soldiers have been victorious. Let them come home to yellow ribbons and celebrations and their families, have them prepared, stronger, increased, a stronger military, with the right kind of equipment. Let the generals logistically plan how they will redeploy, possibly to the Kuwait borders and to the other borders, but let them come home. We are not trying to dictate to the generals how to redeploy, what the logistics would be, but we are only saying that the policy is a failed policy, and our soldiers must come home. No more headlines, Army general predicts rise in U.S. casualties, no more headlines eight troops dead and continuing to die with no solution and no end. I ask my colleagues to review H.R. 930 and ask the President and this Congress to find a way that we can work together.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 264, which puts this House on record in support of the goals and ideals of ``National Correctional Officers and Employees Week'' and which honors the service of correctional officers and employees. Correctional facilities form a crucial component of our criminal justce system, and the proper functioning of these facilities is depndent upon the exemplary service performed by correctional peronnel. These men and women work daily in a complex, ever-changing, and often dangerous environment, protecting the rights of the public and safeguarding us, as a Nation, from criminal activity. Not only are these correctional officers and employees responsible for the custody of inmates, but they are also charged with the care of these individuals, and with maintaining their dignity as human beings. This is a profession that exerts immense physical and emotional demands on a daily basis, and requires constant courage and vigilance. Mr. Speaker, correctional work has become an increasingly sophisticated profession, and we as a nation should take pride in the caliber of those who work in this field. These men and women face overwhelming obstacles, and operate daily in a high-risk environment, yet they receive little recognition. This week, which we observe as National Correctional Officers and Employees Week, is our opportunity to honor all correctional officers and employees for their service to their communities and our Nation. I strongly support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.