Dennis Kucinich

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Just a few days before his dismissal, General McChrystal wrote what has been described as a devastating report on his mission. He pointed out that he faced a resilient and growing insurgency with too few troops, and he expected no progress in the coming months. Why are we continuing to send our troops into a mission impossible? Why are we committing our troops to a situation which is certainly bound to bring about more casualties, both of our troops and innocent civilians? General Petraeus is promising an escalation of the war which will put more American lives on the line and more innocent civilians killed. Do we support our troops? If we do, and if we really paid attention to what's going on in Afghanistan, if we really supported our troops, we'd bring them home. And that's exactly what the Barbara Lee amendment is designed to do, and that's why we should support it. As related by William Polk in his recent article in ``Counterpunch''--Just a few days before his dismissal, General McChrystal wrote what has been described as a ``devastating report on his mission.'' He pointed out that he faced a ``resilient and growing insurgency'' with too few troops and he expected no progress in the coming months. Why are we continuing to send our troops into a mission impossible? Why are we committing our troops to a situation which is certainly bound to bring about more casualties, both of our troops and innocent civilians? General Petraeus is promising an escalation of the war which will put more American lives on the line and more innocent civilians killed. Do we support our troops? If we do, and if we really paid attention to what's going on in Afghanistan, if we really supported our troops we would bring them home. That's exactly what the Barbara Lee Amendment is designed to do, and that's why we should support it. What Now? Afghanistan Sitrep (By William R. Polk) On June 24, the International Herald Tribune published an editorial from its parent, The New York Times, entitled ``Obama's Decision.'' Both the attribution--printing in the two newspapers which ensures that the editorial will reach both directly and through subsidiary reprinting almost every ``decision maker'' in the world--and the date--just before the appointment of David Petraeus to succeed Stanley McChrystal--are significant. They could have suggested a momentary lull in which basic questions on the Afghan war might have been reconsidered. That did not happen. The President made clear his belief that the strategy of the war was sound and his commitment to continue it even if the general responsible for it had to be changed. The editorial sounded a different note arising from the events surrounding the fall of General McChrystal: Mr. Obama, said The Times, ``must order all of his top advisers to stop their sniping and maneuvering'' and come up with a coherent political and military plan for driving back the Taliban and building a minimally effective Afghan government.'' In short, Mr. Obama must get his team together and evolve a plan. Unfortunately, the task he faces is not that simple. First, consider the ``team.'' It has two major components, the military officers whom McChrystal gathered in Kabul. As they made clear in the Rolling Stone interview, they think of themselves as ``Team America'' and hold in contempt everyone else. Those who don't fully subscribe to their approach to the war are unpatriotic, stupid or cowardly. Those officers are not alone. Agreeing with them is apparently now a large part of the professional military establishment. They are the junior officers whom David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal have selected, promoted and with whom they take their stand. The other ``component'' is not a group but many groups with different agendas and constituencies. The most crucial for my purposes here are the advisers to the President; they were dismissed out of hand as ``the wimps in the White House.'' Most, but not all, were civilians. Other senior military officers, now retired, who are not part of ``Team America'' and its adherents were also disparaged. Famously, General Jim Jones, the director of the National Security Council staff, was called a ``clown.'' These were the comments that forced Mr. Obama's hand and were what the press latched upon to explain the events. But many missed the point that McChrystal had just a few days before his dismissal written a devastating report on his mission. Confidential copies of it were obtained by the London newspaper, The Independent on Sunday, which published it today, but of course the President had seen it earlier. Essentially, its message boiled down to failure. McChrystal pointed out that he faced a ``resilient and growing insurgency,'' with too few troops and expected no progress in the coming six months. Despite expenditures of at least $7 billion a month, his politico-military strategy wasn't working. Within weeks of the ``victory'' over the Taliban in the agricultural district of Marja, the Taliban were back and the box full of government he had announced proved to be nearly empty. As the expression went in the days of the Vietnam war, whatever happened during the day, the guerrillas ``owned the night.'' As he described it, Marja was the ``bleeding ulcer'' of the American campaign. Behind McChrystal's words, the figures were even more devastating: Marja, despite the descriptions in the press is not a town, much less a city; it is a hundred or so square miles of farm land with dispersed hamlets in which about 35,000 people live and work. Into that small and lightly populated area, McChrystal poured some 15,000 troops, and they failed to secure it. To appreciate what those figures mean, consider them in context of Petraeus's counterinsurgency theory, on which McChrystal was basing his strategy. As he had explained it, Marja should be taken, secured and held. Then an administration--McChrystal's ``government in a box''--should be imposed upon it. Despite all the hoopla about the brilliant new strategy, it was hardly new. In fact it was a replay of the strategy the French General Lyautey called the tache d'huile (the oil spot) and applied in Indochina over a century ago. We also tried it in Vietnam, renaming it the ``ink spot.'' The hope was that the ``spot,'' once fixed on the Marja, would smudge into adjoining areas and so eventually spread across the country. Clear and simple, but unfortunately, like so much in counterinsurgency theory, it never seemed to work. Petraeus's counterinsurgency theory also illuminated how to create the ``spot.'' What was required was a commitment of forces in proportion to native population size. Various numbers have been put forth but a common number is about one soldier for each 50 inhabitants. Marja was the area chosen for the ``spot.'' The people living there, after all, were farmers, wedded to the land, and so should be more tractable than the wild warriors along the tribal frontier. Moreover, it was the place where the first significant American aid program, the Helmand Valley Authority, had been undertaken in the late 1950s. So, if an area were to be favorable to Americans, it ought to be Marja. But, to take no chances, General McChrystal decided to employ overwhelming force. So, what is particularly stunning about the failure in Marja is that the force applied was not the counterinsurgency model of 1 soldier for each 50 inhabitants but nearly 1 soldier for each 2 inhabitants. If these numbers were projected to the planned offensive in the much larger city of Kandahar, which has a population of nearly 500,000, they become impossibly large. Such an attack would require at least four times as many U.S. and NATO as in Marja. That is virtually the entire fighting force and what little control over Marja and most other areas, perhaps even the capital, Kabul, that now exists would have to be given up or else large numbers of additional American troops would have to be engaged. Moreover, in response to such an attack, it would be possible for the insurgents also to redeploy so the numbers would again increase. The more fundamental question, which needs to be addressed, is why didn't this relatively massive introduction of troops with awesome and overwhelming fire power succeed. Just a few days before he was fired, as I have mentioned, General McChrystal posed, but could not answer, that question. I hope President Obama is also pondering it. For those who read history, the answer is evident. But, as I have quoted in my book Understanding Iraq, the great German philosopher, Georg Willhelm Friedrich Hegel, despaired that ``Peoples and governments never have learned anything from history or acted on principles deduced from it'' and, therefore, as the American philosopher George Santayana warned us, not having learned from history, we are doomed to repeat it. Indeed, it seems that each generation of Americans has to start all over again to find the answers. Who among our leaders and certainly among college students now really remembers Vietnam? So, consider these simple facts: The first fact, whether we like it or not, is that nearly everyone in the world has a deep aversion to foreigners on his land. As far as we know, this feeling goes back to the very beginning of our species because we are territorial animals. Dedication to the protection of homeland permeates history. And the sentiment has never died out. Today we call it nationalism. Nationalism in various guises is the most powerful political idea of our times. Protecting land, culture, religion and people from foreigners is the central issue in insurgency. The former head of the Pakistani intelligence service, who has had unparallelled experience with the Taliban over many years, advised us that we should open our eyes to seeing the Afghan insurgents as they see themselves: ``They are freedom fighters fighting for their country and fighting for their faith.'' We agreed when they were fighting the Russians; now, when many of the same people are fighting us, we see them only as terrorists. That label does not help us understand why they are fighting. Instead of asking why they are fighting, counterinsurgents think they can overcome aversion to foreign invaders by ``renting'' the natives. In Marja, we not only put in a large military contingent but, as Rajiv Chandrasekaran reported this month in The Washington Post, we offered to employ virtually the entire adult population, some 10,000 people. Unquestionably such efforts do persuade some of the people for some of the time. But not all or permanently. In Marja, only 1,200 people signed up for the jobs we offered. Why so few? After all, the Afghans, as I wrote in an earlier article, have suffered through virtually continuous war for thirty years. Many are wounded or sick, with some even on the brink of starvation. More than one in three subsists on the equivalent of less than 45 cents a day, almost one in two lives below the poverty line and more than one in two preschool children is stunted because of malnutrition. They are the lucky ones; one in five dies before the age of 5. Obviously, the Afghans need help, so we think they should welcome our efforts to aid them. But Marja shows that they do not. Nation-wide, independent observers have found that attitude is common: most do not want us there, even giving them aid. And even those who do are fairly easily dissuaded by the insurgents. Threats or attacks by the insurgents have brought them into our gunsights. In Afghanistan, as in Vietnam, we have tried to so weaken the insurgents that they cannot effectively block our programs. Our ``body counts'' in Vietnam showed that we killed off the entire Viet Minh several times over and today we are told that the ranks of the Taliban have been severely depleted. But, because the motivation that energized the first group of insurgents is widely shared, and is usually intensified by foreign military action, which by its nature is regarded by many of the natives as unjustified and brutal, new insurgents as well as supporters of the temporarily evicted insurgents will emerge from among the inhabitants of the oil/ink spot. Outsiders may have come in, but, according to U.S. military intelligence about three in four insurgents fight within five miles of their homes. They were ``home'' and taking up arms within a month in Marja. Indeed, the campaign may have been, to use that cumbersome locution of governmentese, ``counter-productive.'' According to the former British counter-terrorism chief and current head of the U.N. monitoring mission, Richard Barnett, as cited in The Guardian/The Observer last week, ``Attempts by British and American forces to expand their control over Afghan territory over the past 12 months have been counter- productive and led to a worsening security situation.'' The second fact is that those insurgents who don't get killed are the ones who have learned three simple ways to defeat the counterinsurgents. The first of these ways to defeat counterinsurgents is to use appropriate tactics--never stand and fight. Insurgents can see that their enemies outgun, and usually far out- number, them so they should hit and run--lay mines, ambush patrols, disrupt logistics but never get caught. Drawing on a Kenyan fable, this has been termed ``the war of the flea and the lion.'' The flea bites and jumps away. The powerful lion swats, occasionally hits, but eventually tires and moves away. Lions don't defeat fleas. The second way insurgents can defeat the counterinsurgent is a form of jujitsu--using his strength against him. His strength is his superiority in weapons. So the insurgent seeks to incite him to use them. Inevitably, caught in the middle, the people--who are after all the ``spoil'' in insurgency warfare--get hurt. And when they get hurt, they naturally come to hate those who fire the weapons. In Vietnam, insurgents would sometimes enter a ``neutral'' village, shoot at an American airplane and then steal away. The attacked airplane would call in troops or gunships. The villagers would suffer and would be confirmed in their hatred of the Americans. It was brutal but very effective. Counterinsurgents think they can avoid this problem by withholding as much as possible of their lethal power. But doing so is very difficult. Their soldiers also get hurt and angry. And they come to hate the locals--wogs, gooks, rag heads, untermenschen--who appear to them dirty, slovenly, corrupt and cowardly. No one can be trusted when even children act as spies or carry bombs. Soldiers make bad neighbors to civilians in the best of circumstances and insurgency is not one of those circumstances. As I have pointed out in my book, The Birth of America, it was the presence of even superbly disciplined British troops in Boston that touched off the American Revolution. The third way insurgents can defeat invaders is by destroying their local puppets. Ruling another country is, of course, expensive and difficult so foreigners have almost always and everywhere enrolled willing natives to help. In the American Revolution we called those people ``the Loyalists.'' In Vietnam, they were the government of the South. In Afghanistan they are the ``Kabul government.'' So the insurgents regard collaborators--``Quislings'' as we called them in the Second World War--as their prime target. In America, the colonists threatened, tarred and feathered, lashed, imprisoned, hanged or drove away tens of thousands of the Loyalists. In Vietnam, French police records show that in the 1950s, the Viet Minh virtually wiped out the administration of the southern government, murdering policemen, postmen, judges and other civil servants as well as teachers and doctors. And today in Afghanistan, as Rod Nordland reported in The New York Times on June 10, ``The Taliban have been stepping up a campaign of assassinations in recent months against officials and anyone else associated with local government in an attempt to undermine counterinsurgency operations in the south.'' One Afghan told Nordland, ``I know many people who are afraid to take jobs with the government or the aid community now. It's a very effective and very efficient campaign; the armed opposition are using this tool because it works.'' Even from a nationalist perspective, this is very rough justice. But many Afghans appear to believe it is both ``justice'' and Afghan justice. To validate their actions, the insurgents must themselves supply what the foreigners and their local supporters offer. We have full records of how insurgents did this in Yugoslavia and Greece during the Second World War. The records are not so open for Afghanistan as yet. But, we know from a study by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) that the Taliban has set up a ``widespread paramilitary shadow government . . . in a majority of Afghanistan's 34 provinces.'' One of the things these shadow governments do is administer the law. For years, I have read reports contrasting what happens in a government court and a Taliban court. In the government court, cases languish for months or years while bribes are collected. A U.N. study found earlier this year that officials shake down their fellow citizens for an amount that is nearly a quarter of the country's gross domestic product. In a Taliban court, there is no bribery and no delay: Islamic law as defined by Afghan custom is immediate. From our point of view, this too is very rough justice, if justice at all, but in insurgencies, people appear willing to put aside the niceties of peaceful life. In our Revolution we did too.

Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise in support of the Obey amendment, amendment No. 2 to H.R. 4899, Supplemental Appropriations for FY 2010. However, I do so with significant reservation because of the $9 billion in nuclear loan guarantees that have been inserted into this bill of otherwise badly needed funding. The nuclear power industry has already received $51 billion in loan guarantee authority. The guarantees leave the taxpayer on the hook for energy policy so fiscally irresponsible, it has attracted bipartisan opposition. Indeed, private investment in new plants is nearly impossible to come by because the investment is so unattractive. The Congressional Budget Office characterized the risk of default on such projects as ``well above 50 percent.'' Even plants under construction are being abandoned. If private firms won't invest, should we be putting taxpayers on the hook? Energy from wind and solar makes more financial sense and creates many more jobs when compared with nuclear power sans massive subsidies. But the loan guarantees for clean energy sources, which were added to make the nuclear loan giveaways easier to swallow, are not an industry priority. They need more direct subsidies to get started with the urgency required to address global warming. This amendment also contains otherwise valuable funding for teacher's jobs, Pell grants, and Gulf Coast oil spill clean-up. I voted for this amendment because of the dire needs in these areas and others. But slipping in $9 billion in nuclear loan guarantees when we struggle to find money to extend unemployment compensation and create new green jobs is not acceptable. The Economics of Nuclear Reactors: Renaissance or Relapse? (By Mark Cooper, Senior Fellow for Economic Analysis, Institute for Energy and the Environment, Vermont Law School--June 2009)

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Albert and Vera Sgro as they celebrate their platinum wedding anniversary on June 29, 2010. Seventy years of marriage is a truly remarkable accomplishment; in this time they have raised two sons, been grandparents to four children and now have four great-grandchildren. Except for eight years on a farm in Medina, Mr. and Mrs. Sgro have always lived in Cleveland. Mr. Sgro's parents emigrated from Italy and Mrs. Sgro's ancestors hail from Bohemia. They attended Cleveland schools, met at a dance, and have been inseparable ever since. They continue to be the hearts and souls of their family and remain active in the lives of their children, David and his wife Louise, Jerry and his wife Heather; their grandchildren, David, Shelly, Max and Anthony; and their great-grandchildren, Brittney, Jeremy, Alex and Nicholas. Mr. and Mrs. Sgro live life with great energy, enthusiasm and joy. They are kind, generous, outgoing and have a great sense of humor. Like any couple of seventy years they also share many interests: gardening, traveling and reading to name a few. Every year, Mr. and Mrs. Sgro grow enough fresh vegetables and flowers for themselves, their children, friends and neighbors. Mrs. Sgro is an excellent cook and baker; she is well known locally for her pies--especially her rhubarb pie, which she makes with rhubarb straight from their garden. Madam Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honoring, recognizing and celebrating Albert and Vera Sgro as they reach their platinum wedding anniversary. Their ongoing love for each other, and for their family and friends, acts as a beacon of hope. I wish Mr. and Mrs. Sgro continuing health, happiness and peace.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the Consul General from the Republic of Slovenia, Mr. Jure Zmauc, and his wife, Mrs. Janja Zmauc, on the occasion of Slovenian Statehood Day celebrated annually on June 25th. In 2009, Mr. Jure Zmauc, Mrs. Janja Zmauc, daughter Nika and son Aljaz moved from Slovenia to Cleveland. Mr. Zmauc served there for four years as a foreign diplomat representing the largest Slovenian population in the world outside of Slovenia. Mr. Zmauc's responsibilities in the United States include developing educational, business and tourism ties for Slovenia and supporting Americans of Slovenian heritage throughout Northeast Ohio. The twenty-fifth of June is Slovenian Statehood Day, an annual celebration of Slovenia's independence and the sovereignty it gained in 1991. It is a commemoration of the struggles and triumphs of the people of Slovenia. It also serves as an opportunity for residents of Northeast Ohio to celebrate the customs, traditions and contributions of Slovenian Americans to our community. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in recognition and welcome of Consul General Janja Zmauc and his family. Their representation of Slovenia in our community connects our communities and our nations--from the shores of Lake Erie to the Adriatic Sea.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. In a little more than a year, the United States flew $12 billion in cash to Iraq, much of it in hundred dollar bills, shrinkwrapped, loaded onto pallets. Vanity Fair reported in 2004 that at least $9 billion of the cash had gone missing, unaccounted for. Nine billion. Today, we learned that suitcases of $3 billion in cash have openly moved through the Kabul airport. One U.S. official quoted by the Wall Street Journal said, ``A lot of this looks like our tax dollars being stolen.'' Three billion dollars. Consider this step as the American people sweat out extension of unemployment benefits. Last week, the BBC reported that the U.S. military has been giving tens of millions of dollars to Afghan security firms who are funneling the money to warlords. Add to that a corrupt Afghan government, underwritten by the lives of our troops. And now reports indicate that Congress is preparing to attach $10 billion in State education funding to a $33 billion spending bill to keep the war going. Back home millions of Americans are out of work, losing their homes, losing their savings, their pensions, their retirement security. We're losing our Nation to lies about the necessity of war. Bring our troops home. End the war. Secure our economy.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield myself 1 minute. I would let my friend from California know that there is no First Amendment right to drill for oil and gas in the Outer Continental Shelf. There is no constitutional right that anyone has to a government contract. This provision relates to the Outer Continental Shelf leases, and not all oil and gas leases, because these leases in the Outer Continental Shelf are inherently more dangerous, more risky. It's especially true as we have seen with deepwater drilling. It's true of all drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf. These spills are impossible to clean up. We are still living with the effects of the Valdez catastrophe. We will be living with the effects of the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe for generations. We are not just talking about mopping up the shores and spreading toxic dispersants and then everyone goes home happy. This oil is going to be in the water column, on the sea floor for a very long time, ramifications for our delicate ecosystem, forcing a lot of persistent toxic compounds like metals into our food supply. These oil companies could conceivably intervene in our political process, using money that they are getting from leases with the Federal Government to place our environment at further risk.

Mr. KUCINICH. I ask the Chair how much time is remaining.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to the DISCLOSE Act.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, the underlying bill would extend an existing ban on campaign contributions by government contractors to also include independent expenditures and electioneering communications by contractors. My amendment would clarify that this provision applies to companies with leases with the Federal Government allowing them to drill for oil and gas in the Outer Continental Shelf. If we ever needed a stark reminder of one of the many problems that arise from our addiction to oil, we have it now, as many as a half-million gallons of oil is erupting from an underwater volcano of oil into one of the most fragile ecosystems on Earth every single day from the Deepwater Horizon drilling site alone. This disaster was preventable. We had a warning of the consequences of our dependence on oil in the 1970s; we ignored it. We could have built upon the increased awareness to continue on a path of weaning ourselves off oil, but we squandered it. There can be no doubt that the oil industry has strategically and brilliantly used its powerful influence to maintain or even worsen the addiction. They are not entirely to blame, though. Blame does rest with Congress for being addicted to oil company contributions. We have to begin to break the addiction and do it now. According to opensecrets.org, the oil and gas industry has given close to a quarter-of-a-billion dollars to candidates and parties since the 1990 election cycle. In the 2008 cycle alone, the oil and gas industry donated $36 million. In the 2010 cycle, they are on track to exceed that with $13 million donated so far. The mere perception of undue influence by the companies whose products are so profoundly destructive to our water, air, and health is toxic to our democracy. Mr. Chairman, I am urging a ``yes'' vote for the Kucinich amendment that relates to the Outer Continental Shelf leaseholder status. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield myself the balance of my time. To my good friend from California, the Buckley v. Valeo decision equated money with free speech. The oil and gas industry, over a period of 20 years, has contributed close to a quarter of a billion dollars to the political process. There is no question of the influence they have had. There is no question of the incestuous relationship between the oil industry and the regulators which led us to this deepwater drilling catastrophe. What this legislation aims at doing is curbing the influence of these oil companies on our political process so they can't get a lease, use the revenue from that lease, put it back in the political process, and ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching. We can't let the oil companies do that anymore. We have to protect our government here; we have to protect the Constitution of the United States, and we can't give them the ability to usurp the Constitution, trying to do it in the name of free speech. I would like to conclude by saying this: The language that is in this amendment is the same language as that for TARP recipients, so there is nothing special about the language. It's the same one for TARP recipients, saying that someone that gets Federal money, they shouldn't be able to use their position to go back to the government and get people elected who are going to give them more money.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to my good friend.

Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the gentleman. Reclaiming my time, the oil companies, let us stipulate, are not eleemosynary or charitable organizations. They make huge profits at the expense of the taxpayers. And they are making even more profit because the fact of the matter is we now have to monetize the cost of all the pollution that's coming out of the gulf. No matter what BP pays, we will be paying for generations to come. Support the Kucinich amendment.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the conference report on H.R. 2194, the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010. Despite the inclusion of provisions in this legislation that would improve internet access and target violators of human rights, the bill will inflict severe economic hardship on the Iranian people and have no impact on the Iranian government. I oppose nuclear proliferation for military purposes for all countries and believe that sanctions have proven to be a failed policy. The stated purpose of this legislation is to persuade the Iranian government to halt their nuclear program. Broad sanctions can only serve to further isolate Iran from the international community and cause them to be increasingly secretive. The sanctions play directly into the hands of the Iranian government and directly undermine the efforts of the Iranian people who have courageously challenged their government--often at the cost of their lives. The United States was unable to come to a resolution with Iran over its nuclear program, partly due to the fact that during negotiations, Iran was threatened with sanctions regardless of negotiations. At the core of the failure of negotiations was mistrust. Turkey and Brazil accomplished something the United States was unable to do in their diplomatic negotiations with Iran over a nuclear fuel swap--broker a deal based on trust. Unfortunately, the Administration missed the opportunity to capitalize on this significant breakthrough in negotiations. It is my hope that it will not take the impending suffering of the Iranian people at the hands of U.S.-imposed sanctions to wake us up to the need to significantly change our diplomatic engagement with Iran.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the veteran and auxiliary members of Strongsville Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) Post 3345, as they celebrate the Post's 75th anniversary and dedicate a Veterans Memorial on June 19, 2010. Strongsville VFW Post 3345 was chartered on June 22, 1935 with only three members in attendance. Today, it is one of the largest VFW posts in the state with nearly 1,200 members. Strongsville VFW Post 3345 has a legacy of community outreach and volunteer service throughout the western communities of Greater Cleveland. The members of Post 3345 have reached out to veterans and the families of military personnel, providing support and assistance wherever possible. Post 3345 provides numerous college scholarships and sponsors an annual Teacher of the Year Award. Members also volunteer thousands of hours annually for charity and at local Veterans Administration hospitals. Members of VFW Post 3345 raised funds to construct a Veterans Memorial to publicly honor and commemorate the lives of all American soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of our nation. Madam Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honoring the members of Strongsville VFW Post 3345 and all veterans for their contributions to community and country.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the 51st Annual Dinner of the Cleveland Chapter NAACP. The Cleveland Chapter and all NAACP Chapters were a driving force behind our nation's civil rights movement. Founded in 1912, the Cleveland Chapter continues to serve as a source of support and strength on behalf of the rights and freedoms of minorities. While the Cleveland Chapter began as a small group, they quickly grew to 1,600 members by 1922. The population of African Americans in Northeast Ohio increased during the 1920s and 1930s, allowing political leadership to organize and emerge. In 1923, supported by the Cleveland Chapter of the NAACP, Thomas W. Fleming was elected the first-ever African American to Cleveland City Council. A few years later, three more African Americans were elected to serve on the Cleveland City Council. In 1927, Harry E. Davis was elected to serve on the Cleveland Civil Service Commission and Mary Martin Brown was elected as a member of the Cleveland City School Board. They too were the first African Americans to hold these positions. During its first few decades, the Cleveland Chapter of the NAACP fought fiercely against racism. Chapter leaders and members rallied and organized for fair housing, educational and job opportunities, and an end to segregation. The Cleveland Chapter of the NAACP filed lawsuits against theaters, restaurants and other establishments that discriminated against African Americans. Chapter members also worked diligently behind the scenes to persuade white business owners to stop discriminatory practices. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of the members and leaders, past and present, of the Cleveland Chapter of the NAACP as they gather to celebrate their 51st Annual Dinner. Since their formation in 1912, members have risked their lives and their livelihoods to fight for equality and tear down the walls of racism. In their quest for freedom they paved the way for a society where equal opportunity and justice exist for many as never before and where someday, will exist for all.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of George and Clara Zaborowski, as they celebrate sixty-five years of marriage and devotion to one another. On this special day, they also celebrate their family and many friends throughout the community. George Zaborowski grew up on Cleveland's eastside and worked at White Motor Company for nearly forty years. Clara Sokolowski grew up in the Tremont neighborhood in the apartment above her parents' restaurant, the Sokolowski's University Inn. Established in 1923, the Sokolowski's University Inn remains one of Cleveland's most beloved culinary landmarks. Mr. Zaborowski joined the Marines and served his nation during World War II. George and Clara, both of Polish heritage and fluent in Polish, met in 1941. On June 23, 1945, they wed at St. John Cantius Church in Cleveland, Ohio. Together, they lovingly raised their children--Thomas and Christine. Their shared love for each other has extended through each new generation. Their family continues to be the center of their lives, as they are close to their grandchildren, Lisa, Maureen, Kim and Jessica, as well as their great-grandchildren, Joshua, Craig, Kyle, Malcom, Cassy, Alex, Spencer and Henry. To this day, Mr. and Mrs. Zaborowski continue to honor Polish traditions and customs, especially during the holiday season. They have instilled within their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren a sense of their family heritage. Madam Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of Mr. and Mrs. Zaborowski, as they celebrate sixty-five years of marriage. I wish Mr. and Mrs. Zaborowski an abundance of health, happiness and peace in all of their future endeavors.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the contribution of the Cleveland Chapter of the Order of the Knights of Rizal and to honor Dr. Jose Protacio Rizal on the occasion of the 149th anniversary of his birth. A hero of the Filipino Independence movement in the 1800s, Dr. Rizal continues to inspire. His heroic and poignant writings and efforts focused on freedom from oppression and liberty for all. He inspired and energized people beyond his native Philippines. A young and idealistic doctor, Dr. Rizal wrote of freedom and independence from Spain. His writings soon struck a chord and he went on to found the Filipino independence movement, Luga Filipina, in Manila in 1892. By 1898, an armed struggle for independence had begun, and government officials accused Dr. Rizal of leading the charge. On the evening of December 30, 1896, Dr. Rizal was executed by firing squad in what is now known in Manila as Rizal Park. The night before his scheduled execution, he wrote the poem `Mi Ultimo Adios,' a heart- rending and poignant expression of his love for country and people of the Philippines. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring and celebrating the life of Dr. Jose Protacio Rizal, and in recognition of the members of the Order of the Knights of Rizal, Cleveland Chapter. Dr. Jose Rizal's story is the embodiment of the innate human quest for freedom, justice and liberty.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Karl Ertle, whose dedication has helped improve the education and opportunities for hundreds of young women and men throughout southeast Cleveland, Ohio, and beyond. Mr. Ertle has been the President and Principal of Cleveland Central Catholic High School, an urban high school located in the Slavic Village neighborhood, since 2004. He has turned the school around, managing a $13 million capital improvement program and overseeing an increase in enrolment of more than forty percent. Mr. Ertle grew up in the Cleveland area. He studied at St. Ignatius High School and then later began his teaching career there. He earned a bachelor's degree in English from Borromeo College and a master's degree in religious studies from John Carroll University. Between 1983 and 2004 he performed a number of different roles at St. Ignatius, including theology teacher, director of admissions, assistant principal for student services, and vice president of the Mission of St. Ignatius. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of Karl Ertle on the occasion of his retirement. He has continuously and unstintingly served the young people of Cleveland, displaying integrity, kindness, and an unwavering commitment to bettering the lives of countless students. I wish Mr. Ertle, his wife Carol, and his children: Tim, Katie, Mary, Annie, Danny and Joe, health, peace and happiness.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. What if the BP gusher in the gulf is unstoppable? This is a challenging question which is making its way through various blogs. What if millions of barrels of oil continue to flow uncontrolled from the hole in the seabed? We should be preparing now for a worst- case scenario. We should be mobilizing our Nation now, developing new, comprehensive plans for sustainable, alternative energy, for environmental protection, for public health, for preservation of species, for security, for rebuilding our economy and repairing commerce. We should be challenging our fellow citizens and ourselves to take part in charting a new course for our Nation, towards creating an America which has unlimited energy because it has unlimited vision, unclouded by greed or partisan advantage.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Housing Advocates, Inc., (HAI) which has fought for fair housing rights and equal housing opportunities for more than three decades. Established in 1975, HAI is comprised of passionate attorneys, experienced in litigating civil rights cases, and dedicated support staff who work to ensure that fair housing laws and affordable and quality housing principles are followed. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of Housing Advocates, Inc., whose advocacy on behalf of equal housing rights has helped the people of Northeast Ohio. The staff of Housing Advocates, Inc. safeguards civil rights and serve as protector and champion on behalf of housing rights for minorities, the disabled and the poor.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognize 25 years of amazing work by the staff and supporters of Community Challenge. In giving specific mention to one of Community Challenge's biggest long-time supporters, David LaRue--I not only honor him, but also all those others who have given of themselves to create a better future for our children. Community Challenge, a branch of Recovery Resources that focuses on keeping our children healthy, happy and free from the devastation of drug and alcohol abuse, has strengthened and empowered the lives of countless youth and families throughout our west side communities. As with many great initiatives, its origins are humble. In 1985 a small group of Rocky River residents acted when they became concerned about alcohol and drug abuse by local children and teens; they formed the Rocky River Community Challenge, which worked on education and prevention. As the organization expanded, `Rocky River' was dropped from its name but its mission has remained the same--to improve education and prevent abuse. Today, I also honor David LaRue for the tireless support he has given Community Challenge. Mr. LaRue's dedication to the mission and programs of Community Challenge is evidenced by the significant sponsorship funding from the company of which he is Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Forest City Enterprises. In 1992 Mr. LaRue personally led the effort to start Community Challenge's Basketball Challenge Cup, an annual event bringing together teens and families for an evening of fun and competition in an alcohol-free environment. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of the 25 years of tireless effort by all the staff and supporters of Community Challenge and of David LaRue whose leadership, sponsorship, and support of Community Challenge's programs and events has made a real difference in the lives of so many.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Stanley and Betty Sheinbaum as they celebrate their 90th birthdays. The Sheinbaums have been partners in life since 1964, with a shared devotion to each other, to their families, and to causes of peace and justice. Their support and work on behalf of humanitarian and progressive causes continues to strengthen the democratic foundation of our nation and the world. Mr. Sheinbaum grew up in a poor, working class neighborhood in New York City. His family was hit hard by the Depression; their financial struggles during his formative years left an indelible imprint on him-- clarifying his sense of justice, and strengthening his compassion and empathy for others, especially for the poor. After high school, he worked at various jobs until he joined the service, where he served during WWII. After the war, he re-enrolled in high school courses to elevate his grades and he was eventually accepted at Oklahoma A&M, where he did well enough to transfer to Stanford University. He graduated from Stanford with a degree in Economics with high honors, subsequently moving to Paris as a Fulbright scholar. In the early 1960's, Mr. Sheinbaum's previous support of U.S. military involvement in South Vietnam began to fade. He became an active member and leader at the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions--an organization that attracted the nation's intellectual elites. Mr. Sheinbaum quickly impressed members with his strong intellect and superior debating skills. He soon met and fell in love with activist Betty Warner, daughter of Warner Bros. co-founder, Harry Warner. Born in 1920, Ms. Warner was a like-minded political activist who shared her future husband's social and political inclinations. She was born in Hollywood and grew up in the glory days of the movie industry. The daughter of a movie mogul, she lived a life adorned with pop artists and movie stars. Her family came to the United States in the early 1900s seeking democracy, freedom, justice and economic security. Although her father became famous, he began as a cobbler and a salesman. He instilled within her a strong sense of hard work, equality and justice. She became involved in community and grassroots politics and organized to fight McCarthyism. Stanley Sheinbaum and Betty Warner were married in 1964. The Sheinbaums' sense of philanthropy and service to others has been a shared vision since their marriage. In addition to her activism, Betty Sheinbaum is a passionate artist. She is a successful sculptor, painter, artist and gallery owner. She uses her lifetime of experiences in her beautiful work and incorporates the imagery she has discovered on her travels throughout the world. She has studied with Howard Warshaw, Keith Finch, Jan Stussy, Mark Strickland and George Small. In addition to donating to worthy causes over four decades, the Sheinbaums have continued to donate their valuable time. Among his countless accomplishments, Mr. Sheinbaum has served as head of the ACLU Foundation of Southern California and as President of the Los Angeles Police Commission during the difficult years between 1991 and 1993. While serving as a Regent of the University of California, he fought for divestment from South Africa. For the last 10 years, he has been the publisher of New Perspectives Quarterly. Both Betty and Stanley continue to serve on the Advisory Board for the Liberty Hill Foundation, an organization which invests in changemakers and equips them with the skills and relationships they need to build power and advance social justice. As well as being active in their own communities, the Sheinbaums have used their resources and their influence to effect global change. In 1988, Mr. Sheinbaum led a delegation of American Jews to the Middle East where he befriended Yassar Arafat. Thanks in part to the efforts of the Sheinbaums, Arafat renounced terror and finally recognized Israel's right to exist. Respected for his ability to negotiate with world leaders, Mr. Clinton would later ask Mr. Sheinbaum to serve as a back-channel envoy to Syria and help influence the course of nations. The passion, dedication and commitment of the Sheinbaums have made a difference in the lives of many. Their historic careers are surpassed only by their love for each other. Madam Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of Stanley and Betty Sheinbaum on the occasion of their 90th birthdays, as we extend to them both the thanks of a grateful nation for all they have done together to make our world a better place. They are truly great Americans.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and remember a brother and a sister who left this world far too soon. Erin and Andrew Ehrbar were both tragically taken away from us at the tender ages of 16 and 13, respectively. I stand with those in our community grieving for them and for their families. Erin and Andrew both loved sports, music, and spending time with friends and family. They were extraordinary children who lived their lives with great energy, laughter, joy, kind hearts and a spirit of generosity. Today, we remember them, in the House and in the nation. As we grieve, we also celebrate the joy and happiness that Erin and Andrew brought to their friends and family. Erin, a junior at Highland High School, played on the girl's varsity soccer team; Andrew, a seventh grader at Highland Middle School, played baseball, basketball, and sang in the school choir. Madam Speaker and colleagues, I ask you to join me in honor and remembrance of Erin K. Ehrbar and Andrew J. Ehrbar, whose young lives were framed by the unwavering love of their family and friends. In addition to honoring the memory of their late father, James, we offer condolences to their mother, Laura; to their big sister, Melissa and their little brother, Sean; to their stepfather, Chris DePiero; their grandparents, Thomas and Barbara Donovan; James and Marilyn Ehrbar; Jerry and Roberta DePiero; and the many others who loved them. The legacies of Erin and Andrew will continue on in the lives of others, through organ and eye donation, and their gentle spirits will forever hold a sacred place in the hearts of those who loved them.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and remembrance of Lenore C. ``Lori'' Wendell, whose life was filled with family, friends and service on behalf of our community. Mrs. Wendell was the cherished wife of the late Richard. Together, they lovingly raised their daughters, Jennifer and Heather. She was a devoted mother and enjoyed a close relationship with her grandchildren, Jamie, Patrick, Anthony, Quinn and Allan. Mrs. Wendell's giving and kind nature reflected throughout her life. She was active in local politics and was a community leader. She consistently volunteered her time and talents on behalf of numerous causes. Whether to assist with a local fundraiser or to help a family in need, Mrs. Wendell was always there to help. She was also a longtime member of the American Legion Post 738 in Fairview Park, where she led numerous meetings and prepared countless dinners for a variety of Legion events. In local politics, she worked diligently, volunteering many hours on behalf of candidates whom she supported. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of Lenore C. ``Lori'' Wendell, who lived her life with unwavering love for family and friends and great joy for life. I offer my condolences to all who loved her including her brother, John and her dear friend, Cliff. Mrs. Wendell touched the lives of many throughout our community, and she will be remembered always.