Tom Latham

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. I want to express my appreciation to the chairman for his patience. This has been a difficult process. As he mentioned, we start and stop, start and stop and back and forth; but it has been a real pleasure for me in my first year on this subcommittee to work with the chairman. And while we don't always agree on everything, we always have a very, very open dialogue. And I appreciate that very much. Again, Madam Speaker, this really is very simple. With all the money that we are spending in this bill that we are pulling together a bunch of extraneous bills that have nothing to do with Transportation and HUD, the idea that we should just limit the conference to this bill, there are other avenues for doing the other bills. And certainly when you are spending this much money, there is no doubt that people should have a chance, at least 72 hours, to look at this bill in advance of passage. I would ask for a ``yes'' vote. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. LATHAM. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this is a very basic motion to instruct on what could be a very complicated bill. This motion simply instructs the conferees to restrain from adding any extraneous materials--like other appropriation bills and any other issues outside the provisions included in either the House- or Senate-passed Transportation HUD bill, or THUD bill. This motion also provides any conference report will be available for no less than 72 hours before the conference report will be brought up for final passage in the House. Madam Speaker, the THUD bill, like every appropriations bill this year, was slammed through the House in July under an unprecedented closed and restrictive rule, all in the name of completing these bills in ``regular order.'' The Senate, even with all of its scheduling issues, managed to pass a regular THUD bill in an open process with amendments--and I might add by September 17. This THUD bill should have been considered and passed by early October at the latest. Instead, here we are now in December. According to the plan as presented to me, Chairman Obey is planning on lumping five other bills with the THUD bill to create an omnibus. Three of those bills--Financial Services, Foreign Operations, and the Labor H bills--weren't even considered on the Senate floor. Two of the other bills--the Military Construction-VA and the Commerce, Justice, Science bills--have passed both the House and the Senate, and there is no reason these bills shouldn't have their own free-standing conferences. In fact, the Commerce, Justice, Science bill was supposed to go to conference on November 17, but that conference got yanked due to some cold feet on the part of the majority at the prospect of having their Members have to vote on Guantanamo Bay policy. By voting for this motion to instruct, you are voting for regular order process on these bills. We should be able to vote on veterans issues separate from the D.C. issues, the foreign aid issues, and all of the other issues we don't want stacked together. There are other things like railroad issues, immigration issues. They should all be done separately. Further, this motion to instruct provides that the House will make available the full text of the conference report to the conferees at least 72 hours prior to consideration. There are billions of dollars at stake and a lot of policy to digest. It's our responsibility that we, as elected Representatives representing our districts, know what we're voting on. Further, I believe this motion is not inconsistent with Speaker Pelosi's policy. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the simple motion to instruct. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, everyone agrees that health care costs too much in this country, but we can fix the problem without a trillion- dollar government takeover of health care. The bill before us now takes us in the wrong direction. It slashes Medicare and pins small businesses with job-killing taxes and mandates, at a time when our economy is struggling and unemployment is over 10 percent. More federal controls on the content of insurance policies have nothing to do with covering the uninsured and will increase costs for most families rather than decrease them. If you have coverage through an employer, your premiums will go up. If you have an individual policy, you will have to switch to a federal exchange plan in 2013 or face a fine or, possibly, jail time for not having federally qualifying coverage that you may not be able to afford. Younger people in particular could see their premiums increase by more than 70 percent. Instead of taking the approach we are taking today, we should implement common-sense reforms that focus on covering the uninsured and lowering health care costs. We must ensure those with pre-existing conditions get quality coverage. We can lower costs by requiring insurance companies to compete nationwide, and we can clamp down on frivolous malpractice lawsuits. Most of the uninsured work for small businesses that cannot afford health insurance for their employees, and we should allow small businesses to pool together for lower premiums. Such reforms have bipartisan support and could be enacted immediately to provide relief for millions of Americans struggling with health insurance costs. On another note, this bill contains no guarantee that Iowa's Medicare reimbursement rates--which are among the lowest in the country--will see any sort of increase. At the same time, this bill specifically increases Medicare payments in 14 counties in California, the home state of Rep. Henry Waxman, one of this bill's main authors. This may be viewed as reform by some, but it is certainly uneven reform for those counties in our districts that do not benefit from such increases. Throughout the summer and early fall, more than 12,400 residents of Iowa's 4th Congressional District responded to my health care survey. A majority were unsatisfied with the state of health care in America, and rightly so. More than 70 percent of respondents ranked cost as the most pressing concern regarding health care in the United States, followed by access at 14.6 percent and quality at 8.4 percent. However, 86 percent described the quality of their personal health care as either ``excellent'' or ``good'' and they do not want to be forced to give up coverage they are satisfied with. Some 65 percent said the government should play ``no role'' or a ``minor role'' in determining health insurance options for Americans. My constituents support common sense solutions. Approximately 64 percent support doing away with exclusions for preexisting conditions, 75 percent thought people should be allowed to purchase health insurance across state lines, and 69 percent support small business health plans. To sum it all up, this bill is clearly not what is advertised by its supporters and it is not what my constituents want. We need to go back to the drawing board and produce a bill with common-sense solutions that the vast majority of Americans support.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, last evening, I did a telephone town hall meeting, and I talked to thousands of my constituents. We had a poll. We asked the question: Do you support the health care reform bill that was just introduced by Speaker Nancy Pelosi? The results were overwhelming: 76 percent of the people responded ``no.'' The reason is that what people are concerned about are the costs in health care today, and the people at home understand the fact that this is only going to raise their costs. The government-run plan, the takeover plan of our health insurance, actually is going to cost more than what private insurance costs today. This isn't what was advertised. This isn't what people want. They don't want the government coming in, taking over their health insurance, changing their policies for them without their permission, cutting benefits to people on Medicare--people who need those benefits desperately. They're going to take those benefits away. This is not what the people wanted, and we're going to vote this bill down.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Sarah Rose Frana from Ridgeway, Iowa for her commitment and enthusiasm as a foreign language student at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa. Sarah has been selected for a United States Department of State Critical Language Scholarship to study the Arabic language in Amman, Jordan. This Department of State program is an important component of the federal government's coordinated effort to expand the number of Americans learning foreign languages. I consider it a great honor to represent Sarah Rose Frana in the United States Congress, and I know that my colleagues join me in congratulating her on earning this special scholarship. I wish Sarah great success in the program, her travel and in her future endeavors.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Kathryn Wolt from Ames, Iowa for her commitment and enthusiasm as a foreign language student at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. Kathryn has been selected for a United States Department of State Critical Language Scholarship to study the Russian language in Astrakhan, Russia. This Department of State program is an important component of the federal government's coordinated effort to expand the number of Americans learning foreign languages. I consider it a great honor to represent Kathryn Wolt in the United States Congress, and I know that my colleagues join me in congratulating her on earning this special scholarship. I wish Kathryn great success in the program, her travel and in her future endeavors.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the House Republican standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information. Bill Number: H.R. 3183--Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. Project Name: Winnebago River, Mason City, Ia. Amount Provided: Not Stipulated Account: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers--Section 205 Recipient: Rock Island Illinois Corps Office/Mason City, Iowa Recipient's Street Address: Clock Tower Bldg., Rodman Ave, Rock Island, IL 61201 Description: Continuation of authorized activities. This project is related to mitigating recurring flood problems in Iowa, and provides for continuation of flood control strategies being undertaken by the Corps.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, as millions go without health insurance and costs skyrocket, I strongly believe we need commonsense reforms so that all American families can have access to affordable health coverage. But the plan should not be financed by raiding the Medicare program and shifting costs onto the backs of our seniors. Seniors are being asked to shoulder the burden while getting virtually none of the benefits. H.R. 3200 cuts Medicare by a total of $500 billion over the next 10 years. This includes cuts to hospitals, nursing homes, life-saving imaging services, and home health care services. The bill cuts payments to Medicare Advantage plans by $172 billion, which, according to the CBO, will force more than 3 million seniors out of plans that could no longer operate. More than 61,000 Iowa seniors and nearly 20 percent of Medicare beneficiaries nationwide are enrolled in that type of plan, which lowers premium costs by rolling health and drug coverage into one plan and negotiating with the health care providers.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentleman. I don't know how you can say you have 99 percent when the amendment is eliminated. The fact of the matter is that we are going to be spending millions of dollars whether you are large producers or small producers to figure out who qualifies under this. That's one of the major problems here is that nobody knows for sure who it is and who it isn't. You are going to have to spend as a large producer, small producer, whatever, a whole bunch of money to figure out whether or not you actually qualify. The fact of the matter is, any of these costs are going to be passed down to the consumers. Now, I know, maybe another 30, 40 bucks a week out of a grocery bill isn't much for folks around here. But I tell you what, there are folks hurting at home, and that's a lot of money. The idea that somehow this isn't going to affect the price of food, that it isn't going to affect the cost of agriculture; and to do nothing, just have no improvement as far as the environment, no improvement as far as waste management, as far as air emissions, it will do nothing except add cost to the end consumer. I'm sorry, but my producers out there know what this is going to cost them, each and every one of them, because they're going to have to go through a whole process to figure out what they can do and cannot do; it's going to add cost, and we're going to end up with the families today paying the bill at the grocery store because of onerous regulations exactly like this.

Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentleman from Idaho, and I thank the Speaker for the recognition. Mr. Speaker, the Senate included a one-sentence provision in the 2008 omnibus spending bill requiring the EPA to develop and publish a rule that mandates the reporting of greenhouse gas emissions for all sectors of the U.S. economy. That one sentence reads, ``Of the funds provided in the Environmental Programs and Management Account, not less than $3,500,000 shall be provided for activities to develop and publish a draft rule not later than 9 months after the date of enactment of this act, and a final rule not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this act, to require mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas emissions above appropriate thresholds in all sectors of the economy of the United States.'' Mr. Speaker, this one sentence, incidentally, I will say--and I will say again later--never had a hearing. It was snuck in in this bill. That one sentence resulted in 1,302 pages, 42 volumes of regulations, and I hold here the 1,300 pages. The preamble of this regulation is 500 pages long. This is what this is, another 500 pages. So we've got 1,800 pages, and the Regulatory Impact Analysis of more than 200 pages. Mr. Speaker, here is another 200 pages. So, in total, this one sentence that was snuck in this bill has resulted in over 2,000 pages of new regulations for our country at a time that we're in a recession and people are hurting out there. This is the cost of more government. The proposed rule generated about 17,000 comments. According to the EPA, this rule will cost employers $115 million for the first year, and estimates about $70 million each year after that just to comply with the new 2,000 pages here. Mr. Speaker, as a former small business owner and farmer, I would suggest these numbers are exceedingly low. And there is no estimate as to how much has already been spent by businesses trying to figure out whether or not they fall under the regulation, and if they do, how they're going to follow these new rules. Congress tucked this sentence into an appropriations bill, again, without holding a single hearing. Let me reemphasize, not a single hearing goes into these 2,000 pages of regulations that are now being put on top of our economy. Consequently, the language provided no limitation or guidelines for the EPA and gave the agency unlimited authority to draft the new rule. The EPA did its job; 1,300 pages in regulations are a testament to the Congress using the Appropriations Committee to shortcut the authorizing committee process. The language we are debating today impacts the livestock industry. Within these 1,300 pages, the regulation requires a reporting of greenhouse gases from animal agriculture, which, on the surface, seems harmless enough. However, I want to stress that this regulation has a cost and, more importantly, it will do nothing to improve the environmental health of rural America. It doesn't make manure lagoons smell any better. It doesn't protect water wells or native species. It doesn't do one thing to improve the standard of living in rural Iowa or any part of this country. It has, however, improved the standard of living of people in metropolitan Washington, D.C., because this one sentence has kept a bunch of bureaucrats at EPA busy for the last year and a half. Farmers work very hard day to day to try to preserve their environment, from learning how to keep their topsoil from washing away, to improving the quality of our water, to eliminating odor and turning waste products into energy. The health of the environment is critically important to the success of a farming operation. American farmers have done a great job in finding ways to protect the environment without sacrificing their families' farms' incomes; but at a time when our Nation's farmers are facing some of the most difficult economic times in the last decade, we are introducing a new and costly Federal mandate. This regulation will generate additional input costs for an industry that can ill afford it. Dairy has lost about $12 billion in milk receipts from 2008-2009, about a 33 percent loss; pork, a loss of about $2 billion, or 10 percent in receipts for hogs, and the industry is expected to lose another $800 million this year; cattle, a loss of about $5 billion, or 10 percent of its receipts; and poultry producers are going bankrupt. If you're in livestock today, you are losing money. The EPA estimates the cost of reporting will be $900 per facility. However, one instrument used to measure methane can cost about $15,000, and it requires trained personnel to maintain, which adds further costs. So these farmers are going to have to hire an expert to sit there and monitor the machines. To me, that adds up to a little more than $900 per facility. To add further costs to production is simply foolish and irresponsible on the part of this Congress. This language should never have been added to a spending bill. That's why we have an authorizing committee and why Members representing agriculture are concerned about this climate change legislation. You think about it. One sentence tucked into an appropriations bill generated 1,300 pages of regulations, 500 pages of preamble and 200 pages of regulatory impact analysis, and it regulates all sectors of the economy, agriculture just being a small slice. We have cap-and-trade bills that have thousands of pages of legislative language alone that Members of Congress want signed into law. This Congress intends to give the EPA a huge increase in spending this year, and I guess they're going to need it. Why? Because the EPA is going to have to hire a heck of a lot of new people to write those regulations, and regulations with equations like these have real costs to our economy. Let me just show you what this regulation looks like. This is true. This is why farmers love Washington--when you have a paragraph that puts one of the formulas in these regulations that farmers have to comply with. Let me just read. It says, ``For all manure management system components listed in 98.360(b), except digesters, estimate the annual CH4 emissions and sum for all the components to obtain total emissions from the manure management system for all animal types using equation JJ-1.'' Well, this is equation JJ-1. You figure it out. We're going to have to have a bunch of mathematicians on the farm along with the EPA, apparently. The regulation, as written, is onerous. The cost and scope is in serious question, and agriculture cannot afford another Federal mandate on this economy. Manure management is a serious issue. I know. I grew up and I live in Iowa, but this rule does nothing--and I emphasize again nothing--to improve the way farmers manage their manure. Ladies and gentlemen, we stand up here every day, and we talk about the economic problems outside the beltway and about how much we want to work to provide assistance. When will it dawn on us that here in Washington we are part of that problem? Washington mandates costs on a daily basis, whether on farmers who feed us or on our constituents in low-income areas who have to pay more of their hard-earned dollars each month to cover the costs of our well-intentioned handiwork. We need to think about the impacts--$200 here, $1,000 here, $200 million over there. Pretty soon, our employers are struggling to keep up with the government-generated cost-of-living increases. I ask my colleagues to please support this motion to instruct. It is absolutely critical, not only in agriculture but for our constituents back home.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina for the time. I have to rise today in strong opposition to this rule, and unfortunately and reluctantly in opposition to the conference report itself. The main reason, this rule is simply outrageous. We've had a long debate for years around here about air-dropping items in conference. What happens is that you have a bill that comes out of the House that does not have a provision in it, a bill that comes out of the Senate that does not have the provision in it, and then policies and new laws are dropped in in conference with no debate, no discussion, nothing passed off the floor of either body but just come from afar, air-dropped at conference time. In this bill, there are at least five new programs that were air- dropped in conference costing $150 million. That's in this bill. And it certainly is way beyond the scope of the Rules Committee to approve this. Maybe there was some debate in the Rules Committee sometime that they agreed to it, but certainly there is no other Member that knows what these provisions are for. Again, to spend $150 million, five new mandatory programs in this bill that no one has debated in either body is simply outrageous. Mr. Speaker, I also today have to oppose the conference report reluctantly. There are things in this conference report that I support, such as the research for agriculture, child nutrition, aid to farmers, all of these things. However, this is not, in my opinion, a responsible bill. Today we are going to vote on an agriculture appropriations package that exceeds $121 billion. It contains huge increases in spending over last year's levels. Mandatory appropriations in this bill total $97.8 billion. That is $10 billion more than last year. And nearly two-thirds of this increase is for domestic nutrition programs. They may be very, very worthwhile and needed. That's a $6.2 billion increase, 9 percent over last year's level. However, neither the House nor the Senate Appropriations Committee ever held a hearing on these items, where you're spending an additional $6.2 billion, with the proper agency to actually discuss the need whether or not this spending is justified. Farm commodity programs receive a $2.8 billion increase. That's 25 percent over last year. And again Congress, the committee had no hearings to justify that kind of kind of an increase.

Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentlelady. Federal crop insurance that I very much support receives about $900 million more than last year. That's a 14 percent increase, and yet never a hearing, no one from the agency that oversees crop insurance came to justify that kind of an increase. Discretionary appropriations in the bill total $23.3 billion, that's $2.7 billion more than fiscal year 2009, a 13 percent increase. This is $325 million more than the President requested, and $404 million more than was passed in the House bill. The largest discretionary increases are for nutritional assistance, including a $421 million increase for that. That's 6 over percent over last year. But did Congress have a hearing on it? No. The agreement contains a $590 million increase for foreign food assistance. That is a 39 percent increase. Again, neither the House nor the Senate held any hearings to discuss such an enormous spending increase. This spending bill was written with virtually no congressional oversight. It also almost seems that the motto of the Appropriations Committee today should be ``Spending Your Tax Dollars With No Questions Asked.'' The American taxpayers deserve a heck of a lot better than this. Accountability matters for both the administration and this Congress. And at the very least, the Congress should be asking the tough questions about these budget requests, these spending increases, and we deserve to get answers about how these huge government programs are administered. To date, we haven't had hearings. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule because of the air- dropped items and the spending increases and support accountability and responsibility in this Congress. Unfortunately, I ask them to vote against the conference report.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for yielding me this time for an opportunity to remember a great American, a great Iowan, Dr. Norman Borlaug, and I am very pleased that the whole Iowa delegation has come together and written a letter to the Iowa State legislature and the Governor to ask that a statue of Dr. Borlaug be placed, representing Iowa, right here in our Capitol. I appreciate the cooperation of everyone. Dr. Borlaug devoted his life to a historic campaign to save the lives of the world's neediest people using agricultural science for the feeding of those individuals. His innovative leadership in plant breeding and agricultural production gave birth to the Green Revolution, and he was credited with saving over a billion--that's with a ``B''--a billion lives from starvation and the generations onward. It will be several billion as time goes on. I think it's interesting that even in his final days at the age of 95, Dr. Borlaug pressed on with his mission to work for the good of all mankind. His accomplishments and his memory will live on continuing to improve the lives of countless people around the world for generations to come. It was a great honor for me personally to call Dr. Borlaug a friend. I admired him for his vision and all of his accomplishments, but his modesty was every bit as extraordinary. He once described his work as ``a temporary success in man's war against hunger and deprivation.'' Dr. Norman Borlaug proved that one person can save a billion lives with a powerful vision and a pair of hardworking hands. He will very, very much be missed. I think a very fitting thing that happened here with Congress was to give Dr. Borlaug the Congressional Gold Medal. I was very proud to have worked together with my colleagues from Iowa to make that achievement. And I think the remembering of his last words is so fitting for the life of achievement that he had and how he believed in basic science and having it actually relate to production agriculture. He was visiting with another scientist that he had taught on his deathbed. The scientist was telling about a new technology he had. Norman Borlaug, if I may try to quote what he said, he said, ``Get it to the farmers. Get it to the people who can actually make use of this technology to feed more people to make it actually utilized in agriculture today for the feeding to stamp out this horrible thing we call starvation around the world.'' Once again, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for this chance and this opportunity to recognize once again a great American, Dr. Norman Borlaug.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, here we are on the Floor of the House again, with less than a week to go before the end of the fiscal year, and the majority is not prepared to send a single, finalized appropriation bill to the President for signature. Where is the change that was promised? In addition to the legislative bill before us today, we have four significant funding bills that have passed both the House and Senate, and are ready to go to conference or whatever we call conferences these days: Agriculture, Energy and Water, Homeland Security and Transportation/HUD. These are bills that contain important funding for all of our districts, including monies for new and important initiatives that might help the economy. Over the course of this FY-2010 funding cycle, the majority has run a process that has prevented spending bills from being perfected through the amendment process, primarily to avoid tough votes. That stunted process has allowed the funding bills to be rammed through the House. Yet, with closed Rules, an 80-seat majority in the House and a 20-seat majority in the other Body, the congressional leadership still cannot manage to move the appropriation bills. As my children used to say, ``what's wrong with this picture?'' Ladies and gentlemen, I suggest that what is wrong with this picture is a continuation of what has been going on for the last several months and it is not about the last administration. Right now, we are: sitting on a 9.6% unemployment rate; struggling with CBO deficit projection numbers that are off the charts for the next several years; suffering the fiscal effects of a gross misallocation of Stimulus bill funds that mostly went to expanding 73 existing government programs and adding 30 new ones for select constituencies; and procrastinating over a healthcare situation about which all agree something must be done, but which the majority refuses to consult the minority or produce a product. And today, the majority is determined to perpetuate this craziness with a ``cooked'' appropriation process to temporarily fund the government because the House and Senate cannot get their respective acts together. No wonder, we heard noisy demonstrations at town hall meetings and in Washington. Folks, the noise from outside the Washington Beltway is not just a response to the healthcare fiasco though that is certainly a part of it. The noise is part of a steadily growing response to what people rightly perceive to be those running the government in Washington not paying attention to their concerns and fears about spending and the paths we are taking. This continuing resolution exercise today is just one more example that the majority intends to keep ignoring those concerns.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Jack Read of Stanhope, Iowa, on his dedication to the community of Stanhope as a mayor of the town and as a member of the Stanhope Volunteer Fire Department for over fifty years. The community of Stanhope is celebrating this incredible man, but I feel that we in the House of Representatives should praise the contributions of volunteer firefighters in Iowa and recognize Mr. Read for his years of dedication to the town of Stanhope. His years in public service, and his commitment to the safety of the citizens of Stanhope provide an incredible example of the importance of active citizen involvement in America. I commend Jack for her many years of loyalty and service to Iowa and to our country. It is an immense honor to represent Jack in Congress, and I know he will continue to serve as a role model of valuable public service to all of Iowa.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Ed Haman of Stanhope, Iowa, on his dedication to the community of Stanhope and his retirement as Fire Chief at the Stanhope Volunteer Fire Department after forty-one years of service. The community of Stanhope is celebrating the retirement of this extraordinary man, but I feel it is imperative that we as a Congress celebrate Ed as an example of incredible and valuable citizenship. His service to his community, Iowa, and our nation represents an ideal that should be an inspiration for all Americans. I commend Ed Haman for his many years of loyalty and service to Iowa and to our country. It is an immense honor to represent Ed in Congress, and I wish him and his family in Stanhope, Iowa, a long, happy and healthy retirement.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Dr. Dean Harms of Ames, Iowa as the Ames Tribune's 2009 Unsung Hero. The Unsung Hero award honors people who quietly but generously give their time and talents to help others. In 2003, as president of the Rotary Club in Ames, Dr. Harms began searching for ways to serve people. During his search he found that his friend, Doug Perry, who served with him in the U.S. Air Force, had started a mission in El Porvenir, Honduras. Doug welcomed Dr. Harms aboard and he has since been volunteering his time off and on in Honduras for six years. Dr. Harms mostly conducts eye surgeries but does other procedures as well. When Doug passed away, Dr. Harms took it upon himself to continue the mission along with his friends Chuck and Carolyn Jons, who nominated him for this award. With the help of his friends and the community, Dr. Harms also successfully spearheaded the construction of a high school library in El Porvenir and established reading and literacy programs for local citizens. Dr. Harms' eagerness to utilize his talents to improve the lives of others serves as a wonderful example of human compassion. I consider it an honor to represent Dr. Dean Harms in the United States Congress, and I know my colleagues join me in commending Dr. Harms on his well- deserved award. I wish him all the best in his continued voluntary service and future endeavors.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize and congratulate Steve Ringlee, a resident of Ames, Iowa, for being honored as the Ames Tribune's 2009 Citizen of the Year. For more than a decade, Steve has shown his compassion by sharing breakfast at McDonalds with the city's homeless and dispossessed. His once a week breakfasts are filled with talk and prayer as a way to reach out to those in need. He is motivated by his strong Christian faith and follows the golden rule of loving your neighbor as yourself. Steve moved to Ames in 1990 and has served as the president of the Ames Community School Board and vice chair of the Ames Education Foundation. Not only does Steve hold weekly prayer breakfasts, he helps men at the local shelter locate jobs and permanent housing. He helps with automobile repairs and directing men to Skunk River Cycles who assist shelter men with bicycle repairs. I know my colleagues in the United States Congress join me in congratulating Steve Ringlee for receiving the Citizen of the Year Award. I thank Steve for his willingness to volunteer his time and uplift so many people in need within his community. I consider it a great honor to represent Steve in Congress and I wish him the best in his future service to those in need.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Cheryl Haman of Stanhope, Iowa, on her dedication to the community of Stanhope as a librarian since 1976. The community of Stanhope is celebrating this amazing woman, but I feel that we in Washington should praise the contributions of librarians in America and recognize Mrs. Haman for her years of dedication to the town of Stanhope. Her service to the community, Iowa, and our nation represents an ideal that should be an inspiration for all Americans. I commend Cheryl for her many years of loyalty and service to Iowa and to our country. It is an immense honor to represent Cheryl in Congress, and I know she will serve as a role model of valuable citizenship to Stanhope and all of Iowa.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Lucile Goodhue on the celebration of her 100th birthday on August 26, 2009. Lucile was born on what is now a 150-year old farm near Hartford, Iowa in 1909. She became a farm wife when she married her husband Wilbur. Lucile enjoyed traveling with Wilbur and collecting antiques. She has been blessed with numerous children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. Lucile's secrets to a long life are to keep active, take power naps and remain positive. She always followed these directives with a great sense of humor. Lucile currently lives at the Good Same Care Center in Indianola, Iowa. There have been many changes that have occurred during the past one hundred years. Since Lucile's birth we have revolutionized air travel and walked on the moon. We have invented the television and the Internet. We have fought in wars overseas, seen the rise and fall of Soviet communism and the birth of new democracies. Lucile has lived through eighteen United States Presidents and twenty-two Governors of Iowa. In her lifetime the population of the United States has more than tripled. I congratulate Lucile Goodhue for reaching this milestone of a birthday. I am extremely honored to represent Lucile in the United States Congress and I wish her happiness and health in her future years.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the American Legion Auxiliary Unit 278 of Osage, Iowa. The Unit facilitated the Veterans Inspiring Patriotism program as a part of the Joe Foss Institute, and I am honored to submit into the Congressional Record the following commentary from the program in Osage. ``Osage American Legion Post 278 Presents program at Sacred Heart School: Betty McCarthy of Osage American Legion Auxiliary Unit 278 was the facilitator of the Joe Foss Institute's program `Veterans Inspiring Patriotism' for Sacred Heart students grades K-6th. Joe Foss achieved international fame as America's top Marine fighter pilot in World War II with a record of more than 60 missions in the South Pacific and shooting down 26 Japanese Zeroes. His bravery in combat earned him the Congressional Medal of Honor. Joe's many lifetime achievements are told in his autobiography `A Proud American.' In 2001, he founded the Joe Foss Institute as a non-profit organization with its mission of promoting Patriotism, Public Service, Integrity and an Appreciation for America's Freedoms. The `Veterans Inspiring Patriotism' is designed for school children from grades K-12. Through this program, American Flags for the classroom and replicas of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights are made available at no cost to be presented along with the program. An age appropriate video was part of the presentation which helped the students understand the freedoms established by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Following the video, John Ross, member of Osage Legion Post 278, told of his service in the military and what it means to be a patriot. This was followed by questions from the students. The presentation ended with John Ross presenting American Flags as well as the laminated copies of the Constitution and Bill of Rights to 5 students, each of whom were wearing the uniforms of the 5 branches of the service. These uniforms were worn by veterans of World War II, Korea and Desert Storm. McCarthy told of the final tribute, the military rites at the graveside of a veteran, the presentation of the American Flag under which they served and then TAPS was played by a 6th grade student. The program ended with the singing of God Bless America! Osage American Legion Post 278 and Sacred Heart School are indebted to the Joe Foss Institute for making this program possible.''

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Kelsey Dennis, a student at Ames Middle School in Ames, Iowa, on being selected as a winner of the Library of Congress's 2009 Letters About Literature Competition. The Letters About Literature Competition is a reading and writing program sponsored by the Library's Center for the Book in partnership with Target Stores and in cooperation with affiliate state Centers for the Book located across the country. Kelsey's letter was one of approximately 55,000 entries nationwide selected from students in grades four through twelve. Her letter was written to Jerry Spinelli, the author of Stargirl. I consider it a great honor to represent Kelsey Dennis and her family in the United States Congress, and I know that my colleagues join me in congratulating her. I wish Kelsey continued success in her future education and career.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor Ryan Novak, a native of rural Decorah, Iowa and current University of Iowa student. Ryan is riding his bicycle across the United States this summer to raise money for people with disabilities. Ryan is participating in the Journey of Hope, a 64-day, 4000-mile bicycle ride from San Francisco, California to Washington, DC to benefit Push America. Push America was founded in 1977 through Pi Kappa Phi as a way for undergraduate fraternity brothers to experience leadership development through serving people with disabilities. During this bicycle ride, Ryan is not only raising money but educating people about the needs of those with disabilities. He is also stopping at local organizations and a variety of community events to meet people with disabilities and to tell his story and promote the cause. I know that my colleagues in the United States Congress join me in commending Ryan Novak for his leadership and commitment to serving people with disabilities. I consider it an honor to represent Ryan in Congress, and I wish him the best in his future endeavors.