Ric Keller

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a supporter and original cosponsor of the PATRIOT anti-terrorism bill. This is a powerful piece of crime-fighting legislation. It gives the FBI additional tools to go after terrorists. It creates criminal penalties for people who harbor terrorists. At the same time, it respects the civil liberties of our citizens. Some people say it is not identical to the bill that came out of the Committee on the Judiciary, on which I serve. It may not be identical, but it is a good bill. Let us not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. Recently, President Bush told us that we should take our family on a vacation to Disney World in Orlando, Florida. I have the happy privilege of representing Orlando. Since we have a tourism-based economy, my district has been uniquely hurt by the tragic acts of September 11. Specifically, because people have been afraid to fly, theme park workers, convention workers hotel workers, and cab drivers have lost their jobs. It is critical to the people in Orlando and across the country that we pass this anti-terrorism bill to give our citizens a sense of confidence and security that our skies and country are going to be safer. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a supporter and original co- sponsor of the PATRIOT anti-terrorism bill. Recently, President Bush told our Nation that our citizens should take their families on a vacation to Disney World in Orlando, Florida. I have the happy privilege of representing Orlando. Since we have a tourism-based economy, my district has been uniquely hurt by the tragic acts of September 11. Specifically, because so many people have been afraid to fly, theme park workers, convention workers, hotel workers, and cab drivers have lost their jobs. It is critical to the people of Orlando that we pass this anti- terrorism bill to give our citizens a sense of confidence and security that our skies and country are going to be safer. This anti-terrorism bill which passed the Committee on the Judiciary unanimously deserves our support. It is a powerful piece of crime-fighting legislation. It gives FBI additional tools to go after terrorists. It creates criminal penalties for people who harbor terrorists, and at the same time it respects the civil liberties of our citizens. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the PATRIOT anti-terrorism bill.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak in favor of the Pell grant increase in the Labor-HHS-Education appropriation bill. Started in 1972, the purpose of the Pell grant program is to financially assist students from low-income families who would not be able to attend college because of the financial burden it would place on the student and his family. For example, my mom was a single parent who raised three children on the modest salary of a secretary. We lived in a one-bedroom home growing up. I personally would not have been able to go to college if it was not for the Pell grant program. In fact, one in five college students today benefit from Pell grants. This year we will invest $10.5 billion in Pell grants, the largest investment in our country's history. College students will now be able to receive up to $4,000 a year, or $16,000 over a 4-year college career. This will fully cover the cost of tuition, fees and books at the University of Central Florida in Orlando. Now, all children, rich or poor, will have the opportunity to go to college. This investment will also help generate up to $85 billion a year in additional tax revenues because students earning a bachelor's degree make 75 percent more money on average than those with only a high school diploma. I want to personally commend and thank the chairman of the subcommittee, the chairman of the full committee, and the ranking member of the subcommittee for their historic leadership in providing this high-level Pell grant funding. They are truly friends to our millions of college students who depend on this aid to go to college. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Pell grants and ``yes'' on the Labor-HHS appropriation bill.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise today in support of the Miller-Miller amendment to reform the U.S. sugar program. Over the next 2 months, millions of Americans will go to their neighborhood grocery stores to do some food shopping. Very few, if any, of our citizens will realize that the sugar in the processed foods, cereal, and ice cream they buy is subject to a cost about double the world price, courtesy of the U.S. Congress and the sugar program. Some of these grocery shoppers may head over to the candy cane aisle, particularly as we get closer to the Christmas season. However, once again, very few will know that Bob's Candies of Albany, Georgia, the Nation's largest candy cane manufacturer, had to ship some of its manufacturing jobs out of the country, to Jamaica, so it could buy sugar that was 50 percent cheaper than in the United States. They do not know that the president of Bob's Candies, Mr. Greg McCormick, stated that reforming the U.S. sugar company would allow his company to keep those same jobs in America and allow the retail price of his candy canes to be lowered by 10 to 15 cents a package. As our citizens walk up to the cash register at this grocery store to pay their food bill, they will not realize the sugar program is costing American consumers nearly $2 billion a year in added food costs, according to the General Accounting Office. As they pull the dollars out of their wallet, they will not realize that last year our Federal Government had to spend 465 million taxpayer dollars from the U.S. treasury to buy surplus domestic sugar and keep the price artificially high. Well, while very few Americans may realize these facts, there are several well-respected watchdog groups who are aware of the problem. For example, Citizens Against Government Waste, Americans for Tax Reform, and the Heritage Foundation all oppose the sugar program. The sugar program has also caught the attention of well-respected environmental groups such as the National Audubon Society and the Everglades Trust. These groups know that sugar cane in the Everglades agricultural area has exploded from 50,000 acres in 1960 to nearly 500,000 acres today, thanks in part to the U.S. sugar program. If these facts are true, and they are, why do we have the sugar program? Are these sugar growers bad people? Absolutely not. They are hardworking Americans. They pay taxes. They create thousands of jobs. They are now applying fertilizer to their crops in a very environmentally friendly manner, and they are frustrated that foreign markets are closed to them. In light of these trade barriers erected by certain foreign countries, our domestic sugar growers feel they need this complicated system of price supports, import restrictions, and loan guarantees to continue in order to thrive. Well, I agree 100 percent that our country should do everything in its power when negotiating these trade agreements to open up foreign markets for our domestic sugar, citrus, and vegetable growers. These concerns should be addressed head-on at the negotiating table by the Bush administration. Until that happens, I believe that the Miller-Miller amendment strikes the appropriate balance between consumers and sugar growers because it mends, but does not end, the U.S. sugar program. Under this amendment, the price support is lowered one penny, from 18 cents to 17 cents per pound. This, coupled with other reforms, will save the Federal Government $500 million over the next 10 years, according to the CBO. Of that amount, the Miller-Miller amendment states that up to $300 million will be used to restore the Florida Everglades. For these reasons I ask my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Miller-Miller amendment.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the United States Little League champions from Apopka, Florida. While I may represent the people of Apopka in the U.S. Congress, the Apopka Little Leaguers represented our entire country with class and dignity. Led by Coaches Brewer and Tapley, these 11 young men put the little town of Apopka, Florida, front and center on the world stage. They entered the 16-team world series tournament as underdogs, but they fought their way to the top of the heap to become national champions. Their persistence and hard work will surely inspire thousands of future Little Leaguers. On behalf of myself, Senator Nelson, and the entire U.S. Congress, we say to the Apopka Little Leaguers, congratulations on a job well done, and we thank them for inspiring us all.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the bipartisan patients' bill of rights. This bill has three key components. First, it provides patient protections. For example, women in my district of Orlando can now go directly to their gynecologist, children can go directly to a pediatrician, and it provides for emergency room coverage. Second, this bill holds HMOs accountable in a court of law for their decisions. This is critical because it places decisions back in the hands of physicians and patients, not in the hands of HMO bureaucrats. Third, it protects employers from frivolous lawsuits by using a dedicated decision-maker model. In addition, it requires that patients first exhaust their independent appeals process before filing a lawsuit. The bill has caps at $1.5 million on pain-and-suffering damages as a way to hold down insurance premiums. Punitive damages are not available unless a decision-maker fails to follow the recommendation of the independent reviewer. If they do not follow that recommendation, they are subject to punitive damages at $1.5 million. It encourages HMOs to do the right thing and it protects patients. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this important, bipartisan patients' bill of rights.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to House Joint Resolution 50, which attempts to disapprove normal trade relations with China. It is clearly in our country's best interest to open up China's market of more than 1.2 billion potential customers. Our markets are already open to China. We need normalized trade relations to further open up their markets to us. And we are moving in the right direction. Twelve years ago, the images we saw from China were of students standing in front of tanks. Now the images we see on our TV screens are of students standing in front of Internet cafes and McDonalds. There are several Wal-Mart stores that have recently opened up in China. U.S. exports to China have increased by $4 billion over the last 5 years, with a 24 percent increase last year alone as a result of normal trade relations. Some folks who want to put an end to our trading relationship with China point out that they have a less than satisfactory record on human rights. I agree. But I also agree with President Bush that maintaining normal trade relations with China is our best hope for improving their record in terms of human rights. I think President Bush did a great job in securing the safe return of 24 brave servicemen and women from China after the surveillance plane incident. Looking forward, we can make a positive impact by engaging in constructive dialogue with China, exporting more Bibles to China, opening up their minds about democracy through the Internet, and other things. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of the rule and wish to talk specifically about one of the most impressive components of this piece of legislation we are going to be voting on in terms of the Justice appropriations. As a proud original cosponsor of the COPS program and the only member of the Subcommittee on Crime from Congress, I want to take this time to applaud the efforts of the chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), in reinstating the funding for the COPS program at $1 billion, which is $158 million more than the President requested. This is a critically important program to our law enforcement community and to the safety of our citizens. In my community of central Florida, for example, we have added more than 500 police officers since 1994. We have added 110,000 police officers across the country. Over two-thirds of our police departments have benefited from this program. What happened? We saw a dramatic downturn in crime. Every year since 1994, the crime rate has gone down. Recently, I held a roundtable in my community and invited all of the sheriffs and all the chiefs of police. Some were elected; some were appointed. Some were Republican; some were Democrat. Some headed up large police departments; some headed up small. They all had one common goal. Their number one criminal justice priority was to fully fund the COPS program because they saw it made a meaningful difference in the lives of citizens in Orlando. I want to applaud the leaders in funding this program and let them know this will continue to make a meaningful difference in people's lives because of their leadership.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise today in support of the rule as well as in strong support of the need for a paycheck protection provision to the campaign finance reform bill, and I will tell my colleagues why. Banning soft money to the parties does not take the money out of politics, it only takes the money out of the parties. For example, currently a union such as the AFL-CIO can give $1 million to the Democratic party. The Democratic party will then turn around and run attack ads against Republicans like me that say, ``Call Rick Keller and ask him why he is a bad guy.'' Well, if we ban the soft money to the party, we will still see the exact same TV attack ad on the air. The only difference will be the little disclaimer at the bottom of the screen which will now say, ``Paid for by AFL-CIO,'' as opposed to, ``Paid for by the Democratic party.'' Any attempts to ban these ads 60 days before an election is blatantly unconstitutional. That is why to be fair and balanced we must also couple the ban on soft money with a paycheck protection requirement that requires unions to get the written consent of their workers if they intend to use part of their union dues for political activities. This is critical because fully 40 percent of the union members nationwide are Republicans, yet nearly all of their $100 million per election year is spent by unions on behalf of liberal Democrats. This is blatantly unfair and one-sided. But I ask my colleagues not to take my word for it. Listen to what Thomas Jefferson, our third President and the author of the Declaration of Independence, had to say about this matter. In 1779, Thomas Jefferson wrote: ``To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.'' Yet the American worker is forced to do just that. Finally, President Bush has repeatedly said that paycheck protection is an important component to any campaign finance reform bill. We should give the President a fair and balanced campaign finance reform bill that he can sign into law. I support the rule.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 212, I am not recorded. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. I rise today in strong support of the Davis amendment. We need oil rigs off the Florida beaches about as much as we need crackhouses next to our churches. Florida is home to this Nation's finest beaches. We have a tourism- based economy. The last thing we need is oil drilling 17 miles off the shores of our Pensacola beaches in north Florida. I represented the world's number one vacation destination. I get to meet thousands of tourists every year. I have never yet heard a child to me say, ``I want to see Mickey Mouse, Shamu, and wouldn't it be great to see a couple oil rigs off the beaches?" Reasonable people surely can differ on this issue. It genuinely is a risk-versus-benefits analysis, but in the case of Florida, in light of our economy, the risks outweigh the benefits. To the extent we need more energy supply, and we do, let us start with places that actually want the oil drillings and not the Florida beaches.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the resolution introduced by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw), a fellow Floridian. Today we are recognizing the importance of children in the United States and supporting the goals and ideas of American Youth Day. America's Promise, the nonprofit organization created by Secretary of State Colin Powell, is dedicated to building and strengthening the character of children by fulfilling five promises. The first of those promises is to provide mentoring programs throughout this country, and it is that promise that I would like to direct my remarks to today. Specifically, I would like to talk about the educational and crime prevention benefits of mentoring. First, the educational benefits, and I will tell my colleagues why it is so important to me. I had the happy privilege of serving as the volunteer chairman of the board of the Orlando/Orange County Compact Program, which is the largest mentoring program in the State of Florida. I also had the privilege of serving as a mentor myself to two students at Boone High School. From these experiences, I learned firsthand how important mentoring is. In the State of Florida, we had a big problem. We had the worst graduation rate in the country, with only 53 percent of our students graduating from high school. We decided to do something about it by starting this Compact Mentoring Program, which matches up students at risk of dropping out of high school with business people, sort of like a Big Brother, Big Sister program. The results were dramatic. Over the last 10 years, 95 percent of the children in the Compact Mentoring Program have graduated from high school, The number one graduation rate in the country. Let me give an example, so we are not just dealing with statistics. A young man, 16 years old, African American, named Lenard, went to an inner-city school called Jones High School. He had been arrested for selling drugs, was making D's and F's, was skipping school, and said he was going to drop out. He said he would be in the Compact Mentoring Program on one condition; ``Just don't give me a white mentor.'' Well, to help Lenard reach out a little bit, we assigned him a white mentor, an AT&T executive named Paul Hurley. He worked with Lenard every week, developed a friendship and, to make a long story short, by his senior year, Lenard's grades went up, his attendance went up, and he went on to become Orange County Student of the Year for the Compact Program. In his senior year, Lenard won two tickets to the Orlando Magic basketball game. He called his mentor and said, ``Hey, I just won two front row tickets to the big game tonight.'' His mentor said, ``That's great. Why don't you invite your best friend.'' Lenard said, ``That's why I called you.'' Mentoring truly does make a difference one person at a time. That is why I joined with the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), or Coach Osborne, earlier this year in sponsoring the Mentoring for Success Act, which now will become law, as it passed in H.R. 1 over in the Senate as part of the President's education reform will. In summary, recognizing America's Youth Day and fulfilling the five promises will make a meaningful difference in the lives of young people, will prevent crime, will save us money, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this important resolution.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Armey school choice amendment. I will tell the Members why. As Members of Congress, we already have private school choice, that is, if our children are trapped in a failing public school, we have the resources to get them out. Why is it that the D.C. public schools are not good enough for the children of Al Gore and Bill Clinton, but somehow they are good enough for the low-income African American kids trapped in these failing schools? It defies common sense and logic. This is not a complex issue at all. The opponents of school choice say it will bankrupt the public schools. The supporters of school choice say no, it will cause public schools to improve. Who is right there? All I can tell the Members is that in Florida in 1998, we passed almost the identical law under Governor Jeb Bush. What happened as a result? We went from 78 F-rated schools to only four F-rated schools. One of the schools in my district, Orlo Vista, went from 30 percent of the kids passing the standardized test to 79 percent of the kids passing. Another school district, Dixon Elementary, went from 28 percent of the kids passing to 94 percent in 1 year. It improved public schools by competition. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Armey school choice amendment.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Brady amendment to add teacher liability protection to the President's No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. This is a commonsense reform that protects teachers from frivolous lawsuits when they take steps to maintain order and discipline in the classroom. For example, imagine a scenario where we have a disruptive student, and the teacher tells him to go to the principal's office. The student says, ``I am not going to do what you want. I am going to do whatever I want. You are not going to tell me what to do. I will sit here all day if I want.'' Under that scenario, the teacher would probably go get another teacher and have no choice but to physically remove the child from the classroom as he was being disruptive and take him to the principal's office. Under that scenario, those same teachers could then be subjected to a frivolous suit for unlimited compensatory and punitive damages. This is a problem that happens all too often. I think our teachers deserve better. Interviews with public school teachers reveal a common theme. It is always a small percentage of the students who cause virtually all of the problems. Two-thirds of our public school teachers say discipline is a serious problem in the schools. Eighty-eight percent of those same teachers say academic achievement would improve substantially if the troublemakers were removed. Teaching is a noble profession. We ask a lot of them. We pay them nothing. The least we can do is protect them from frivolous lawsuits. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Brady amendment.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise today in strong support of the Tiberi-Castle amendment. For many years, the most dreaded words school board members would hear is we are from Washington D.C. and we are here to help you. Why? Because they only get 7 cents on every educational dollar from Washington, D.C., yet over half of the red tape that they have to fill out because of us. They wanted dramatic red-tape relief and flexibility. Right now, the bill as is is pretty good. They can use up to 50 percent of their non-title I money any way they want, switching it around. But what we are saying in this particular amendment to 100 school districts is we are going to give you a chance to put your money where your mouth is. We are going to give complete flexibility to the first 100 districts who take us up on it, other than their title I money, to use it however they want, however they see fit in exchange for accountability. That means, if a particular school does not have a problem with teacher development or have a problem with drug prevention, but they do not have computers wired to the Internet, then they can switch the money they had from teacher development and wire the computers to the Internet. Similarly, if another school is completely wired to the Internet, but they do not have enough money to hire new teachers or teacher development, they can switch that money. Complete flexibility, giving them the opportunity to do what is best. No longer will we have a situation, we are here from Washington and we are here to help. This gives them flexibility. It provides local control. It is a positive step to improving our children's education. If a school district does not believe that this is in their best interest, then they certainly do not have to apply for it. I suspect that we will have 100 school districts promptly apply to this. I urge all my colleagues to vote yes on the Tiberi-Castle amendment.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today as an original cosponsor and strong supporter of the President's No Child Left Behind Act. Why do I support this meaningful education reform legislation? Because, for the first time, more children are going to be able to read in this country. Parents are going to get a report card as to how their children's school is performing, and children now trapped in a failing school will have a safety valve to get out. Mr. Chairman, we do these goals by three key measures. First, we will invest an additional $5 billion over the next 5 years in reading for children in grades K-2. This is critical since currently approximately 70 percent of our fourth graders in inner-city schools cannot read. We must address this issue head on. Second, we will require that States annually test our children in grades three through eight in reading and mathematics. It is critical to measure their performance on an annual basis to ensure that no child falls through the cracks. How many times have we turned on the television to see a college athlete explain he is not able to read, yet he was able to graduate from high school. He has fallen through the cracks, and by measuring the performance each year, we are going to put an end to this problem right here in this Congress. Third, there will be a safety valve for children trapped in failing schools. Specifically this bill provides for immediate public choice, as well as providing tutoring, including those provided by faith-based providers. I have heard two criticisms of this bill raised by some of my conservative colleagues, and as a conservative myself, I would like to address both of those criticisms head on. First, they say, ``The President's reforms have been left behind in this bill.'' Let us look at the facts. The President called for more money for reading, testing, and school choice. This bill provides for reading, testing, and immediate school choice that takes place even sooner than the President proposed. It is true that we did not have the votes for private school choice at the committee level. Mr. Chairman, I support private school vouchers. I argued for them at the committee level, and will support them as an amendment on the floor later today. But even if we do not have the votes for private school vouchers, it is important to realize that public school choice provides a nice safety valve for children trapped in these public schools. It gets them immediate relief, and I believe 90 percent of a loaf of bread is better than none at all. That is why the President himself supports this bill. Do not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. The second criticism is that the Federal Government should not be involved in testing. H.R. 1 explicitly prohibits federally sponsored national tests, prohibits federally controlled curricula criteria, as well as any mandatory national teacher test or certification. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 1.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as an original cosponsor and strong supporter of the No Child Left Behind Act. Mr. Speaker, I say to my colleagues, let me be crystal clear, this act does three things. First, we invest $5 billion in reading for children in grades K through 2. The reason is, 70 percent of the fourth graders in our inner city schools cannot read. We must address this issue head on. Second, we measure the performance of each child in grades 3 through 8. Why? We do not want to have a situation where a child falls through the cracks and goes to college where he cannot read. We want to measure that performance and fix it. Again, we are addressing that issue head on. Third, and for those children trapped in a failing school or unsafe schools, they will have a safety valve in the form of immediate public school choice. This is a good bill that will make a meaningful difference in the lives of young children. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote yes on H.R. 1 this week.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this budget. As someone who grew up in relatively humble circumstances, in a one- bedroom home in Orlando, Florida, I learned some important things about life at a young age. First, I learned that single mothers and working families desperately need tax relief. This budget provides that tax relief to the tune of $1.35 trillion. Second, I learned that a first-class education is a child's passport out of poverty. This budget represents the largest investment in education in the history of the United States, including a $1 billion increase in Pell grants and $5 billion for reading in grades kindergarten through third grade. I also learned that senior citizens depend on their Social Security checks and prescription drugs to live. This budget puts the Social Security surpluses in a lockbox and spends up to $300 billion for prescription drugs for seniors. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the budget. This is what we came here for.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter).

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley), the sponsor of this important House resolution.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 112, which extends the recognition of this body to the 4-H Youth Development Program on the occasion of its 100th anniversary of its creation next year. The 4-H is the original ``learning by doing,'' and like all great ideas in education, it originated at the local level as the product of local educators and concerned citizens who saw a way to improve agricultural education. 4-H participants pledged their heads to clear thinking, their hearts to greater loyalty, their hands to greater service and their health to better living for their clubs, their communities, their country, and their world, not a bad code by which to live. Even before Congress began supporting land-grant extension programs that took the agricultural advances of academia into working farms, 4-H understood the value of putting ideas into action. It is at the heart of this organization. From its roots in agricultural education, food preservation, and nature study, 4-H has spread to include training in a variety of areas, more than 110 areas, in fact. These areas include the arts, environmental education, communication, science and technology, and healthy life-style education. With new programs, 4-H has continued to help more and more young people learn skills to succeed later in life and become positive contributing leaders. Today, only 10 percent of participating youth live on farms. In fact, 30 percent are minorities. More than 6.5 million youth are members. Some of the well-known former 4-H members are Johnny Carson, Faith Hill, Reba McIntyre, and Dolly Parton. The leadership skills 4-H members develop, the practical knowledge they accumulate in the programs they study, the friendships they build, and the experiences they have in competition and problem-solving make them better people and make our country a better place. Earlier this year, my family and I had the happy privilege of visiting with several 4-H'ers at the Florida State Fair in Tampa and the Orange County Fair in Orlando, Florida. These young people had prepared several impressive agricultural exhibits, and they were also very knowledgeable about the cows and the pigs and other livestock they had raised. These 4-H members made quite a positive impression on my two young children. In a changing world, I am very glad that 4-H has been there for America's young people and has continued to grow with them. 4-H helps to prepare them for the challenges they continue to face and help America to continue to be the place where the ideas and beliefs that made it great are still taught and practiced. Congratulations 4-H on 100 years of success and service, and best wishes for 100 more. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Res. 112.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 112) recognizing the upcoming 100th anniversary of the 4-H Youth Development Program and commending such program for service to the youth of the world.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.