Walter Jones

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Tennessee and the gentleman from California. His remarks were absolutely excellent and to the point, a very fine public servant. I am only going to take a few minutes. I certainly want to thank the chairman and the ranking member of the committee in getting this legislation to the floor. Madam Speaker, as fate would have it, Floyd Lupton and my father were a team. I do not know anyone that knew anything about the congressional office that would not say the same thing because my daddy, as many of my colleagues remember, who served with him on the floor of the House, at one point in his career became chairman of the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, and it took a great deal of his time. Floyd always was there to take care of the needs of the people of the 1st Congressional District and to make sure that the office was running as smooth as a congressional office can. I think about the personal relationship that my family had with Floyd Lupton. We were like family, quite frankly. Floyd would drive my daddy home most of the weekends from Washington, D.C., to eastern North Carolina, and I would know that my father was coming home. My mother would call and say, ``Walter, your dad is going to be here pretty soon with Floyd; don't you want to come up here and have a bit of time with him and socialize?'' I did that so many times. Those days of being there with my father and Floyd, when they were driving back from Washington, in a house in a little town of Farmville, 5,000 people, were very special times for me and my family because we were a family. When Floyd came to Washington, Madam Speaker, he spent I do not know how many hours after the Congress had finished of staying out at 7:30, 8:30, 9:00 at night, calling constituents back home to say hello, trying to help someone who had a problem that they finally had answers and/or they could at least listen to that constituent to see if they could find answers. Floyd, as has been said by the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) never, not one time, did he seek anything for himself. His only concern were the people of the 1st District of North Carolina, and I think about how humble a man Floyd Lupton was, a man that always had time. He never would look past anybody when he was talking to them. He would look them straight in the eye. He would always take time when maybe he did not have the time, but no one ever realized that he had something else to do as he always had a way about himself so that people knew that he cared. Sadly, at his funeral, which I know that he is in heaven, there is no question in my mind about that, with his lovely wife Doris, but they asked me to speak at his funeral. It was an extremely emotional time for me, and I remember when one thing I did say that if anybody wanted to know the definition of public service, all they would have to know is Floyd Lupton because he exemplified exactly what a public servant is. I have just a couple of more comments and then I will yield back my time. Too many times when buildings, and whether it be a post office or a Federal building or State building, we always seem to think about someone who was elected to public life and, therefore, it is easier for that person who was elected to public life to be remembered, but in this case, I want to say again to the ranking member and to the Chamber that I am grateful that today we will hopefully pass legislation that will remember a public servant that never held public office. He could have probably if he had been a younger man, but he gave 26 years, as has been stated, to serving my father and to serving the people of the 1st District at the same time. This is so fitting, and I know I speak on behalf of thousands of people in eastern North Carolina who knew Floyd Lupton when I say thank you to the committee of jurisdiction for getting this legislation to the floor. I know also I speak for his family as well. They will be thrilled and excited that we got this legislation to the floor of the House, and hopefully it will pass this evening. Secondly, I want to say that this Congress, I have the greatest respect for this institution and the fact today that we will hopefully pass H.R. 2326 on behalf of a man who never asked anything but what can I do to help you. That is the legacy of Floyd Lupton.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas and the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) for bringing this joint resolution to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today because I believe that WTO membership has been a disaster for the U.S. worker. Since WTO, 1995, America's annual trade deficit grew from $96 billion to $617 billion. My home State of North Carolina has lost over 251,000 manufacturing jobs. The United States has lost over 2.9 million manufacturing jobs. Mr. Speaker, it was not too long ago that, I did not vote for it, but we gave trade promotion authority to the President of the United States. I was opposed to it when Mr. Clinton asked for it. I was opposed to it when Mr. Bush asked for it. And let me tell the Members what has happened since trade promotion authority, August of 2002. North Carolina has lost over 52,000 manufacturing jobs, and the United States has lost over 600,000 manufacturing jobs. Let me take just a moment to talk about how WTO membership strips American sovereignty. If the United States does not change its laws to suit WTO, then America's businesses and consumers face trade sanctions. Trade disputes are decided by international panels that are hand-picked by the WTO. The identities of panel members are kept secret, and deliberations are kept confidential. These WTO panels have ruled in favor of the United States less than one-third of the time. They have ruled in favor of the United States less than one-third of the time. WTO panel rulings go far beyond trade. In fact, the WTO panel recently found a Utah law prohibiting Internet gambling to be illegal. What will the WTO do next? Let me quote from Robert Stumberg, a trade law expert at Georgetown University, from Business Week, March 7, 2005. I quote: ``If Bush successfully engineers the introduction of private Social Security accounts, WTO rules would require the feds to let foreign money managers and insurers bid to manage them.'' How far do we have to go before we give up the sovereignty of this Nation? I do not know about you, Mr. Speaker, but I think letting the Chinese manage American Social Security accounts is a bad idea. Unfortunately, under WTO, there is little we can do to prevent it. We have already outsourced 1.5 million jobs since 1989 to the Chinese. We do not need to give control over to the Chinese of Social Security accounts in America. Mr. Speaker, before I close, I want to make a real quick point. On my right, this chart shows on July 31, 2003, in North Carolina we lost 6,450 jobs. It says, ``Five North Carolina plants close in the largest single job loss in the State's history.'' Just 3 weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, a plant in my district announced that 445 jobs would be going overseas. Mr. Speaker, I close by asking my colleagues that care about the American workers and care about the sovereignty of America to please join us in this effort.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 159, offered today by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman). Today as we continue to fight the global war on terrorism, it is entirely appropriate to honor the families of servicemembers who make sacrifices just as real, and no less difficult, as those who deploy to the war fighting zones. America may not realize it, but in the last 30 years, the military has gone from a predominantly single male establishment to one with a greater emphasis on family. In 1974, for example, 40 percent of enlisted members were married. Today, nearly 50 percent of the active and Reserve component enlisted members on active duty are married. Among officers, 68 percent of active duty officers and 73 percent of Reserve component officers are married. There is another story to be told by these statistics. America has become heavily reliant on its Reserve components, the National Guard, the Army and Marine Corps Reserves and the Reserves of the other services. So the burden and sacrifice of war is not confined to a small portion of America's military. The effort by military families is taking place in many of the small towns, cities, and counties that each of us represents. In my view, all military families have responded magnificently. So today I call upon my colleagues to support this resolution to honor military families, to thank them for what they have done, and to ask them for their continued support. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 159) recognizing the sacrifices being made by the families of members of the Armed Forces and supporting the designation of a week as National Military Families Week, as amended.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the concurrent resolution under consideration.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), who introduced this resolution.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Boren) and certainly the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), who introduced this resolution, and my good friend from South Carolina. I want to make just a few comments, and then I will close. This is such an important time in the history of our Nation. It is such an important thing that we are doing today in remembering the families. As the Members can see, in front of me is a photograph of a Marine who was getting ready to be deployed. This was a few years ago. In fact, this was before Iraq and Afghanistan. Major Trenchard was getting ready to be deployed to Bosnia, and I have had this photograph for probably 8 years. It is just the greatest shot I have ever seen. Standing on his big boots, we can see his little girl named Megan. This was taken by a newspaper in my State of North Carolina. He is a big man, as we can tell from the photograph, and he is holding in his hands his daughter Bridget. I believe this is what we are here today about. That is, to thank those who wear the uniform, thank the families who stand beside them. Many times, it is a husband when it is the wife in the military and the wife is overseas, but most of the time it is the wife who is at home and the husband oversees and the wife taking care of the children. I think about the district I represent, Camp Lejeune Marine Base, Cherry Point Marine Air Station, Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, and I want to share with my colleagues on the floor today that in the 11 years I have been in office, I do not have a military background but I have a real sincere appreciation for those who do wear the uniform and their families; and I want to share very briefly in the few minutes I have left some of my thoughts about being in Congress and what has happened that maybe impacted my life that I will never forget that really dealt with military families. One being that the third year I was in office I got a call from Mrs. Gloria Underwood in Goldsboro, North Carolina, whose husband, Colonel Paul Underwood, was shot down, a fighter pilot, Air Force, in Vietnam. And she called me. I did not know her, and she did not really know me except she knew I was elected to Congress. She said, ``We are going to have a service at Arlington. My husband is coming home 30 years after he was shot down and killed.'' I never will forget that day. It was in the fall. It was not too cold, but it was cool. My staff and I went over to the chapel at Arlington. It happened to be a Catholic service, and I just sat there looking at the children of Colonel Paul Underwood. He represented all who have ever fought in war that did not come home. Mrs. Underwood represented the families whose family member did not come home. When I looked at the children in that chapel and looked at Mrs. Underwood and thought for almost 30 years they did not have a husband, they did not have a father, I thought, what a price to pay. But thank God for those like Colonel Underwood who are willing to pay the price so that we can enjoy the freedom in this great Nation known as America. The other story I would like to share very quickly, and I am going to put another photograph up, if I may, this is a photograph of a child whose name is Tyler Jordan. Tyler's father was a gunny sergeant, actually at one time stationed at Camp Lejeune, and his name was Phillip Jordan. I saw this photograph in a newspaper, and I was so taken by the look on this young boy's face. He has got the folded flag under his arm, he has got a little flight jacket on, and he is holding the hand of a military person. You can tell that by the uniform. This reminded me of a Marine whose funeral I went to at Camp Lejeune. His name was Michael Bitz. Michael was 31 years old. He was killed at Fallujah. He left a wife, Janina, and four children, including twins that he never saw. The twins were born 2 months after he was deployed. At the funeral, she read the last letter she received from him, and I remember four points very quickly, and then I will make a couple more comments and close. He talked about how much he missed his family and how much he appreciated the photograph of the twins. He talked about the fact he was a religious man, that Jesus Christ was so important in his life. He made a third point in the letter. He said, ``I hope that He,'' meaning the Lord, ``will give me the strength to do what I am supposed to do for my country.'' Then the fourth point was he said to Janina, ``I don't know if I will see you on Earth or in heaven, but one day we will be back together.'' I share that because I think this ties right into this resolution introduced by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Boozman) and supported by both sides. Too many times, unless we have a loved one in the military, we forget the stress, the pressure, that is on the family. That is why I think this resolution is so, so vital today. Madam Speaker, one other point I want to make, and this was given to me earlier, there is an article in today's USA Today, June 8, and it talks about soldiers' divorce rates are up sharply. I wanted to read one thing very quickly: ``The trend is severest among officers. Last year, 3,325 army officers' marriages ended in divorce, up 78 percent from 2003, the year of the Iraq invasion, and more than 3\1/2\ times the number in 2000, before the Afghanistan operation. Army figures show for enlisted personnel, the 7,152 divorces last year were 28 percent more than in 2003, and up 53 percent from 2000.'' Madam Speaker, I share that as we begin to close this debate. It is important what we are doing today with this resolution. It is important that we as a Congress, as we always do in a bipartisan way, work for our military and their families. We shall never forget the cost of freedom, and I know that the people in America feel as passionately as I do, that we need to always remember that those who wear the uniform, whether it is peacetime or wartime, must be supported and their families, with the quality-of-life issues, must be maintained adequately.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is extremely kind, I thank him very much, and may God bless America.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, this past Friday I had the pleasure of attending an American Legion fund-raiser in Wilmington, North Carolina, where the guest of honor was Marine Second Lieutenant Illario Pantano. As you know, I have spoken at great length about Lt. Pantano and his dedication and service to the Marine Corps and to our Nation. Friday was a day of excitement and disappointment for me. I shared in the joy with his family as they celebrated the dismissal of the charges against him. But it was also a bittersweet celebration as Lt. Pantano announced his resignation from the Marine Corps. I know the future will bring much happiness for him and his beautiful family, but I was saddened to think that the Marines were losing such an outstanding officer because of such an unfortunate situation. Mr. Speaker, I was overcome with emotion as Lt. Pantano gave me his officer's sword after he announced his resignation. I cannot bring the sword on the floor of the House because of the rules, which I understand. It is an honor I unwillingly accepted but will always treasure. As I look at the sword, I cannot help but think that this whole matter could have been avoided by a more thorough investigation and appraisal of the charges before an Article 32 hearing was held. All along, I had confidence that the Marine Corps would ultimately come to the right conclusion and exonerate Lt. Pantano of all charges, and, thankfully, that has indeed happened. My only hope is that, in the future, if any other such allegations are to come forward about another member of our Armed Services, a more efficient and complete investigation will take place before this situation ever gets to the seriousness of an Article 32 hearing. Mr. Speaker, our men and women in uniform are our Nation's defenders and heroes. We are blessed to have so many young, brave Americans willing to risk their lives in the name of freedom. Lt. Pantano was an outstanding leader that I would be proud to call my son or son-in-law. I believe his resignation is a great loss for the Marine Corps and a great loss for America. Let us make sure that in the future we do not lose any more of our Nation's defenders the way we have lost Lieutenant Pantano. Mr. Speaker, I will close by asking God to bless our men and women in uniform, I will ask God to please bless the families of our men and women in uniform, and I will ask God to please bless America and the future of this great Nation.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I want to say to my side, my leader on the Committee on Armed Services who I have great respect for, this is not about our troops. This is about a policy, that I believed when I voted 2 years ago to commit the troops that I was making my decision on facts. Since that time, I have been very disappointed in what I have learned about the justification for going into Iraq. Afghanistan, absolutely. We should be there. We should probably have more troops. But we cannot have more troops when they are in Iraq. Mr. Chairman, with regard to this effort by the gentlewoman from California, we have never voted one time together, not one time in the 11 years I have been here. But, Mr. Chairman, I have beside me a picture of a young man whose name is Tyler Jordan. His daddy was a gunny sergeant killed two years ago, Phillip Jordan. He has under his arm the flag that was over the coffin. To my left are just a few faces of those who have died for this country. They died doing what they thought was right for America, and God bless them. But all this amendment does is just say that it is time for the Congress to meet its responsibility. The responsibility of Congress is to make decisions whether we should send our men and women to war or not send them to war. What we are saying here tonight is we think it is time for the Congress to begin, to start the debate and discussion of what the exit strategy is of this government, whether it be 2 years down the road, 3 years down the road, or 1 year. Mr. Chairman, what I am saying tonight is we have a responsibility. We should not be into some endless, endless war in Iraq, when we have so many other countries that we need to be watching much more carefully than Iraq. So I hope that this resolution passes and we can start meeting our responsibilities of discussing the policy for America.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I want to say to the gentlemen on the other side, I do not have two better friends than the two gentlemen handling the opposition to this, but this is not about anything except responding to the people of America who are concerned about what is happening at our borders. I support my good friend from Virginia because, as the gentleman says, this is an authorization bill. But I can say to Members today, the American people are fed up, tired about the fact we have between 8,000 and 10,000 illegal aliens coming across the border each and every week. People in this country feel we are not doing our job as elected officials in Washington, D.C. I have one of the best staffs in eastern North Carolina, in the State of North Carolina, of helping people who want to come to this country legally. We do everything we can to help them. But what the Goode amendment is proposing is absolutely a national security issue. It is no more or no less than national security. How in the world, when we have terrorists that are planting themselves down in Central and South America, and we have had this told to us on the Committee on Armed Services, we know this is happening; how can we not say to the American people that their security is of the utmost importance? I heard the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline), whom I have great respect for, talking about our troops being stressed. I would say to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline), we need to start bringing those troops back from Iraq, but that is not the debate here today. The debate here today is the fact that we need to do what the American people think we were sent here for, and that is to represent their interests. I was so disappointed when the President of the United States called the ``Minute Men'' in Arizona ``vigilantes.'' I would tell Members that in the Third Congressional District of North Carolina, where we have 60,000 retired military, those men that served on that border did not do anything but help those who came here illegally go back without any threat to them. Those men that stood on the borders of Arizona, they are, in the Third District of North Carolina, heroes. I say that to the President. I hope we will support the Goode amendment because we should care about the national security of America.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I first would like to say to the chairman and the ranking member, thank you very much for your work on this bill and for the opportunity to offer this amendment tonight. Mr. Chairman, I represent a coastal area of North Carolina, and many of my colleagues, both Republican and Democrat, do the same throughout the United States of America. What this amendment does is to, in my opinion, provide a small, meaningful increase to the Corps of Engineers' operation and maintenance budget of $20 million. It would be offset by taking $20 million from the administration at the Department of Energy. Mr. Chairman, our coastal areas are in deep trouble throughout America. Not just my district, but I can tell you that the waterways are so critical to the economic importance of these counties and States in North Carolina and throughout the United States of America that we need to remember that those people who make their living off the waterways are just like every other American, they are in need of every dollar they can make. My district says to me, Mr. Chairman, when we can find $6.5 billion, not from this bill now, I want to make that clear, but we have spent $6.5 billion in Iraq with the Corps of Engineers, and then my taxpayers say to me and to the gentleman from Indiana, why can we not get a little bit of help? So this is a modest amendment, Mr. Chairman. I understand the gentleman's opposition to it, but I can honestly tell you that the waterways of America are the economic engines for the coastal districts of America, and not just North Carolina. And, to me, to be able to take just $20 million and do a little bit of good is better than not having the $20 million. And I know the gentleman from Ohio and the gentleman from Indiana did try the best they could, knowing we are in a tight budget year. Mr. Chairman, I have heard from other Members who support this amendment, and let me say the amendment is also supported by the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association and the Congressional Waterways Caucus. We believe sincerely that this modest reduction within the Department of Energy will mean a whole lot to the people who pay the taxes. I do not know of anybody in Iraq that is paying taxes to help the American people, so I think it is time that the American people who pay the taxes get a little bit of help. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains?

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to say to the gentleman from Ohio that he has been very helpful, and I realize it is a tight money situation, but let me share with the gentlemen from Ohio, as well as Indiana, that last year I had the Marine Corps down in Camp Lejeune call me in my office and say, We need your help. We cannot train our Marines, who have been asked by this administration to go to Afghanistan and Iraq. If the Corps had not had a little bit of extra money to do some dredging that was absolutely necessary in New River Inlet, which is in Jacksonville, North Carolina, the home of Camp Lejeune, the Marines would not have been training. Again, I respect the gentlemen greatly on both sides, but I am going to, at the proper time, ask for a recorded vote on this. I will say that I feel that I owe this not just to my district, but to the States in the United States that have waterways and have the needs that we have in North Carolina. Because it is not just North Carolina; there are many other States. And, Mr. Chairman, I will just close by saying that I respect and appreciate the help I have received, and I hope next year will be a better budget year. But this year my State, as well as the other 49 States which have the harbors and inlets, are in desperate need and we need all the help we can get. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight, joining with many of my friends on the Democratic side, because I am opposed to CAFTA; and I would like to take just a few minutes to explain why I am opposed to CAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement; and I like to quote from a gentleman I have great respect for, particularly when it comes to protecting American jobs, Pat Buchanan. The title of his article is called ``CAFTA: Last Nail In The Coffin?'' And I will read a few paragraphs from the article. He says, ``As I write, the Department of Commerce has just released trade deficit numbers for February of 2005. Again, the monthly trade deficit set a record of $61 billion. In January-February 2005, the annual U.S. trade deficit was running $100 billion above the all-time record of $617 billion in 2004.'' Let me go read a little bit more from his article. ``Between 1993 and 2004, the United States trade deficit with Beijing, China, grew 700 percent to $162 billion. Since NAFTA which passed a few years ago, the U.S. trade surplus with Mexico has vanished and the annual trade deficit is now running above $50 billion that we owe Mexico. One-and-a- half million illegal aliens are caught each year crossing our borders and 500,000 make it in to take up residence and enjoy all the social programs generous but over-taxed Americans cannot afford to pay. ``The highest per capita income in Central America is $9,000 a year in Costa Rica, which is less than the U.S. minimum wage, but CAFTA will enable agribusiness and transnational companies to set up shop in Central America to dump into the United States and drive our last family farmers out of business and kill our last manufacturing jobs in textiles and apparel.'' Mr. Speaker, I also want to read just a paragraph from a letter I received recently that was not signed. It is a full page and a half. I will read one paragraph. I intend to come to the floor day after day after day to talk about this issue. He says, ``Dear Congressman Jones: It is my understanding that you share my deep concern that our country is losing its industrial base. We are losing the vital jobs that are so important to support our economy and ultimately preserve the excellent standard of living that prior generations passed on to us. My view is that leaders in government and business are doing an inadequate job of protecting America's industrial base.'' There is no question about that, Mr. Speaker. The gentleman that wrote this letter knows because he is a subcontractor. Mr. Speaker, I want to show in my great State of North Carolina, which I am very proud to be one of 13 representatives, that since NAFTA we have lost over 200,000 manufacturing jobs. The United States itself, since NAFTA, has lost 2.5 million manufacturing jobs. Mr. Speaker, this first chart shows you Pillowtex, which happens to be in the district of my dear friend, the gentleman from North Carolina's (Mr. Hayes), in July 31 of 2003. It says, ``Pillowtex Goes Bust, Erasing 6,450 Jobs.'' The subtitle says, ``5 North Carolina plants closing in largest single job loss in State's history.'' Mr. Speaker, we need to get serious about what is happening to the manufacturing jobs in America, and I am very disappointed that this administration does not seem to get it. I will also say that 2 weeks ago in my home county of Wilson County, which I share with the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield), it says, ``VF Jeanswear Closes Plant, Last 445 Jobs Gone By Next Summer.'' It further states in the article that operations performed in Wilson, which include fabric cutting and finishing garments, will be moved to Central America. Mr. Speaker, I hope that we in a bipartisan way can defeat CAFTA, and I will do everything I can to help my friends, Republican and Democrat, to defeat CAFTA because it is about time that we care about the American workers. Mr. Speaker, I ask God to please bless our men and women in uniform and their families.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to George Smith. Since 2001 the TREA Senior Citizens League (TSCL) has been under the strong leadership of Board of Trustees Chairman George A. Smith. With George Smith at the helm, TSCL has gained greater credibility and respectability in the Congress and in the country as a whole. TSCL has become a significant national player on Social Security issues such as the Notch, Cost of Living Adjustment based on a Consumer Price Index for the Elderly, Mexico Totalization, and a Lock Box of Trust Funds, and on other issues such as drug importation. This has largely occurred because Chairman Smith insisted that TSCL emphasize educating the public about senior issues. Like other TSCL Board of Trustees members he has served without pay. George A. Smith was born on October 28, 1930. He currently resides in San Antonio, Texas, with his wife Marie. Mr. Smith entered the U.S. Army in July 1948 and served an illustrious 21-year career. While on active military duty, Mr. Smith earned the Bronze Star, the Army Commendation Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster and a multitude of miscellaneous awards and commendations. Mr. Smith is a TREA (The Retired Enlisted Association) Past National President. As a TREA leader, he initiated and finalized the purchase of the first TREA National Headquarters. He has served as Chairman of the Past President's Advisory Council, Chairman of the TREA Memorial Foundation, Chairman of TREA Finance Committee, Chairman of TREA 5-Year Planning Committee, President of TREA Chapter 3, and Chairman of TREA Convention Committee. George Smith has an Associate Degree in Business Management from Metro State College in Denver, Colorado, and is retired from the Colorado Department of Employment where he served as the Job Service Director. He also worked in the area of direct sales for Telecommunications, and was an owner of his own precision welding business. He served as President of the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 3482, and as President of a local homeowners association. George Smith learned from his experiences in the military and private sector that a strong foundation has to be constructed brick by brick using motivational management and a team concept. At TSCL Chairman Smith used his management expertise to revitalize the organization. He developed an expanded legislative agenda of activities in Congress. His visionary leadership helped move TSCL forward to the status of a well-known and respected organization by most Members of Congress. During his tenure as Chairman, TSCL has become a significant national player on several senior issues. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am especially grateful for George Smith's service in the military. His advocacy for senior issues and for retired enlisted military will be missed when he steps down as TSCL Chairman later this year. Thank you George for your remarkable contributions and distinguished sacrifices for our country. You did make a difference. God bless you.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, my intent tonight was to come to the floor and talk about my opposition to CAFTA, which I think is a bad policy for the future of America. But tonight I am glad to come to the floor after 4 weeks of coming and talking about Lieutenant Ilario Pantano, a Marine who was charged with murder for actions he took as a Marine officer in Iraq over a year ago. I have been on the floor for 4 weeks saying this man should never have been charged. He did his job as a Marine officer. But because of circumstances of a sergeant who did not like the gentleman, he filed charges 2\1/2\ months later. I am pleased to say this past Friday I was notified by the attorney for Lieutenant Pantano that the hearing officer, Major Wynn at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, in my district, has decided that he will recommend these charges be dropped: two charges of premeditated murder that should never have happened. But Major Wynn will now send his recommendations to General Huck who is in Iraq, and it is my hope and prayer that General Huck will agree with the hearing officer and drop these charges. Mr. Speaker, what has been said about this is Lieutenant Pantano loves America. He had been a soldier during Desert Storm, came back, went back to his home State of New York, went to college and graduated in 3 years. He went into the stock market selling energy stocks making six figures. But shortly after September 11, he felt a passion because he had his brother and sister killed in the Twin Towers by terrorism, so he went back into the Marine Corps and was made an officer. Shortly after the shooting in Iraq, he was actually recommended for promotion by the officer in charge, that he was competent and a real leader and the type of person that they needed to promote in the Marine Corps. But 2\1/2\ months later, a sergeant who was demoted by Lieutenant Pantano weeks before is the one who made the charges 2\1/2\ months later. But the good news tonight is that the hearing officer has made a recommendation that the charges of murder be dropped against Lieutenant Pantano. Mr. Speaker, last Friday I had the pleasure to speak with Mary Pantano who stood by her son for months, and I had the pleasure to talk with her. I was convinced, even before I met her son, who is a wonderful man, I would love to have as a son or son-in-law, and she convinced me her son could not have done anything more than what he should have done as a Marine officer. So tonight, as I begin to close, I thank God Almighty that he has helped the Pantano family, both the mother; wife, Jill; and the two cute boys who are his sons; and also Lieutenant Pantano. Mr. Speaker, I close tonight by asking God, I think about our men and women in uniform in Iraq and Afghanistan, how difficult it must be for them to do their job. But yet they are there and they are willing to do their job, and they are proud to be American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. Mr. Speaker, tonight I close by asking God to please bless our men and women in uniform, bless their families, bless the job that they are doing for this world to bring peace. I ask God for the families that have lost loved ones, that they be remembered with our blessings and prayers. With that I ask three times, God please, God please, God please continue to bless America.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I have spoken at great lengths now about Second Lieutenant Ilario Pantano, a Marine who served our Nation bravely in both Gulf Wars and who now stands accused of murder for defending himself and this country. Lt. Pantano's article 32 hearing ended 2 weeks ago, and now the investigating officer in the case, Major Mark Winn, is set to make his recommendation on the case to the Second Marine Division Commander, General Richard Huck, by Friday. I stand here today to represent the thousands of people who have joined in my hope and prayers that, on Friday, Major Winn will recommend that all charges be dropped against Lt. Pantano. Based on the facts of the case, the man who brought forth the allegations, Sergeant Coburn, is someone who did not see the shooting and who waited 2\1/2\ months to report the incident. I am convinced that this lieutenant should and will be exonerated of all charges. I know that, during the hearing, both his Marine and civilian attorneys did an excellent job of proving the innocence of Lt. Pantano, and I have the utmost confidence in the system that the truth will prevail. Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly believe that Lt. Pantano was doing his job when he found himself in an unfortunate situation where he needed to defend himself and his platoon members against the enemy. Having met and interacted with Lt. Pantano and his family over the past few months, I have had the opportunity to get to know them well. I am certain that the man I have come to know is not a murderer. He is a dedicated Marine who loves his Corps, his country and his family. Mr. Speaker, I put in a resolution, House Resolution 167, to support Lt. Pantano as he faces trial. I continue to urge my colleagues in the House to take some time to read my resolution and look into this situation for themselves. Lt. Pantano's mother also has a website that I encourage people to visit. The address is www.defendthedefenders.org. I would like to repeat that, www.defendthedefenders.org. Mr. Speaker, I close once again by asking that we do not send the wrong message to our men and women in uniform and cause them to second guess their decisions. I fear that instilling doubt into the minds of our Nation's defenders places their lives and the security of our Nation in jeopardy. Mr. Speaker, I close by asking God to please bless Lt. Pantano and his family, and hopefully, on Friday, this decision will be to exonerate this wonderful lieutenant who loves his country. I also ask God to please bless our men and women in uniform and their families. I close by asking God to please bless America.