Ray LaHood

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi for his very articulate statement. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall). (Mr. UDALL of New Mexico asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson). (Mr. HOBSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) who represents one of the largest military installations in our State.

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to my friend from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie). (Mr. ABERCROMBIE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I believe I have the right to close. I have no other speakers, and if these gentlemen are ready, when they finish, I will close.

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself whatever time I have remaining. Mr. Chairman, let me just pick up on a couple of the people that have spoken. I want to pick up on a point that Mr. DeLay made. He has an Air Guard unit returning to Ellington Air Force Base to a slap in the face, to essentially being told, you have done great work, thanks for what you did in Iraq; oh, by the way, we are closing your base. Now, what kind of a message is that? That was my point earlier on in my opening statement. We owe it to the people. I ask Members to consider this: To the people who are doing the hard work in Iraq, the people that did the hard work in Afghanistan, this is not the way to say to them, job well done. It is not the way to say to them, you did a great job in standing up for democracy in Afghanistan and doing the hard work in Iraq. And, oh, by the way, there is no base to come back to, because your unit is being eliminated. Is that the message we want to send to the people who do the hard work, to the 130,000, 140,000 people now serving in Iraq, the citizen soldiers that have left their jobs and their families and left their communities? I do not think so. The point that Mr. Taylor made, why not give Congress the responsibility, the Armed Services Committee the responsibility; why lay it off on somebody else? We should not be doing that. This is our responsibility. That is why we are elected, to make these decisions. The report is flawed. You can say all you want about the great work that was done. I know people that serve on the base closing commission, and I know they spend a lot of time, but this work is flawed. This is a flawed report. This is our opportunity in the House to speak up and speak out. The Defense Department has had their say. The President had his say. The BRAC Commission had their say. Now it is the House's turn to say to the hard-working citizen soldiers, we appreciate your work, we are going to stand with you, we are going to allow these bases to remain open, we are going to vote for the resolution that says that this BRAC should not stand, that these recommendations should not stand. That is what the House should be saying today. I hope the majority of Members will do that. I mentioned earlier, there is a law on the books, passed by Congress, that says that you cannot close air and Guard bases unless you get the authority from the Governors. We even had a report from one of the people that was working for BRAC that this law has standing. The BRAC ignored this. The Defense Department has ignored us on this. We should not be doing this. This is the wrong message. This is the wrong idea to send to our country, to send to the people who are doing the work and continue to do the work. As I said earlier, I have supported the President and this administration and the Secretary of Defense, who is a friend of mine from Illinois, in everything they have wanted to do in Afghanistan and Iraq. I know a lot of Members have. The majority of the membership of this House has. Now we ought to say to them, we do not agree with your recommendations. We do not agree that we should be realigning bases, turning people away, turning out bases and shutting down bases where the good work has been done. So based on that argument, based on the flawed BRAC report, based on a law that is on the books, a Federal law that says you cannot close these air and Guard bases without the authority of the Governor, I ask Members to speak up today, to be a voice for the people, to be a voice for the military, to be a voice that says, this BRAC is not right, and I urge Members to vote for the resolution. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, let me just speak for a minute or two. I thought there were going to be some other Members that wanted to speak in favor of the resolution; but until they arrive, let me just talk for a minute or two about some of the costs. The BRAC Commission estimated that $35 billion would be saved over a 20-year period, but the $35 billion figure includes assumed cost savings due to military personnel actions. Both the BRAC Commission and the GAO believe the military personnel savings should be excluded from the overall savings figure. Once those personnel savings are removed, the overall savings fall to approximately $15 billion over 20 years. There is a one-time up-front cost of $21 billion to implement the BRAC round, and the DOD claimed that the savings from military personnel are not savings at all. These costs do not disappear; they simply shift from one base to another, and those folks are still in the military, and we still have to pay for them. For some Air Force recommendations, the military personnel cost savings represents 90 percent of the total savings. And in the case of the Air National Guard end strength, it remained mostly the same. Obviously, no savings come from simply moving positions around the country. If we keep the same number of personnel, DOD spending levels will not actually be reduced. The BRAC Commission concludes that DOD savings estimates were vastly overstated and overestimated. And there is also a quote from the commission on page 330 of their report: ``In fact, the commission is concerned that there is a likelihood that the 2005 BRAC round could produce only marginal net savings over the 20-year period.'' Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I am here this noontime to introduce a resolution of disapproval regarding the base closing commission which I believe is a flawed document. I believe it is flawed because I think the base closing commission ignored some very, very significant information. But most importantly I think the base closing commission and those at the Defense Department who helped them make these recommendations ignore the fact that we are at war and has ignored the fact that the 130,000 men and women that are in Iraq fighting the good fight, winning the freedom and hope and opportunity for the people there, many of them come from bases around the country, they are citizen-soldiers, they are volunteers, they are people who have been well-trained and well-equipped and are doing a great job but they are people who come from bases, some of which have been recommended for closure by the base closing commission. I think that does fly in the face of what we believe is the idea of having a strong military, the idea of having a citizen-soldier, the idea of not having a draft because we have these bases that provide the kind of capability when these men and women are called upon to do the hard work as they did in Afghanistan. We see now in Afghanistan millions of people have gone to the polls and voted and they do have democracy there. The same will be true of Iraq very soon, thanks to the citizen-soldiers. This report is flawed because it does not take into account a Federal law on the books that says that bases cannot be closed without the Governor of the State authorizing the closure of that base. The base closing commission ignored that law. They bypassed that law. I believe there now is in some courts in this country opinions that say that these bases should not be closed unless the Governor of that State agrees to that. But the base closing commission ignored that. I think it is also important to note that through all of the deliberations and hearings and visits that took place, part of what was ignored is the impact that these bases have in certain parts of the country. They are very, very important, to the economies of local communities, to what they do for local communities, and this will be a terrible blow to many communities around the country. But I think the military aspect is probably the most important aspect that we really need to look at. I am here today introducing this resolution of disapproval hoping that my colleagues as they have a chance to consider the recommendations that have now been forwarded from the President to the Congress, we now have a period of time to consider these, I hope Members will look at these recommendations, consider the terrible, terrible deficiency that are included in these recommendations and consider the impact that these recommendations will have on our military. Now is not the time to be closing bases around the country. Now is not the time to be eliminating men and women who have done the hard work that they have been asked to do, who have done the good work that they have been asked to do. This is the wrong time. The timing is wrong. We now as a Congress have the opportunity, I think, to have our say. We have the opportunity to say, those of us that have stood with the President, that have stood with the military, that have made the votes to provide the money to make sure that our military have the kind of capability they have to win the peace and to win democracy in Afghanistan, to win the peace and to bring about democracy in Iraq are saying that this is not the time to be closing bases, Guard and Reserve bases and other bases around the country and emasculating the military. This is the wrong time. I hope that our Members will look carefully at these recommendations and become a cosponsor of the resolution of disapproval that I have introduced today. I think when Members look at these recommendations they will see that they are flawed, they will see that this is not the right time, and I believe that when given the opportunity to really study these recommendations, Members will decide that this resolution of disapproval is the right thing to do and to send them back to the commission. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to cosponsor my resolution and to look at these recommendations and come to the same conclusion that I have come to.

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend hearty congratulations to the Saint Francis Medical Center College of Nursing in Peoria, IL, as they celebrate 100 years of providing quality nursing education. This outstanding program was organized in 1905 as the Saint Francis Hospital School of Nursing by The Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis. Only 10 years later, the school was approved for a diploma nursing program by the State of Illinois. As testament to their academic rigor and overall success, the School of Nursing has been accredited by the National League of Nursing for 55 years. Additionally, in 1985, the School of Nursing established the baccalaureate in nursing degree program and became the Saint Francis Medical Center College of Nursing. More recently, in 2001, the College of Nursing began offering a master of nursing degree as confirmation of their adherence to the highest standards of academic and clinical instruction. The achievements of the College of Nursing are numerous and great, as evidenced by their attainment of the highest level of accreditation by the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association and National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission, as well as the significant impact of more than 4,300 graduates on patients throughout the United States and the world. I wish the Saint Francis Medical Center College of Nursing all the best with their centennial celebration and thank them for their dedication to developing caring professionals through the finest nursing education.

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say this is a good bill. It is a bill that every Member should support. It is a bill that takes care of all the things that get done around here. Every day there is a Record printed of every word that is spoken in the House. Every day there are Clerks that show up here that help the Members. Every day there are people here that take care of the security of the Capitol. Every day there are people here to make sure that we can come and do our work and this bill takes care of all of that. That is why it is a bill that is absolutely critical to every Member of this institution. It is a bill that I think highlights some of the important things that have gone on and will go on around here in terms of opportunities to enhance the facilities, one of the most beautiful, magnificent buildings in the world, and the one across the street, the Library of Congress, is also accounted for, and the staff that work there and provide the kind of resources, the people that do the research that help us write the bills around here and all of that staff. There is also in this bill the opportunity not only to enhance a visitors center, which may not be perfect but one that is sorely needed, but there are also provisions in this bill to account for what happens if some sort of national calamity would fall upon the United States Capitol, the idea of continuity and how we should succeed ourselves around here. I think that is an important part of it. I hope during our deliberations next year we can consider some sort of governance board for the visitors center to account for maybe a little bit more opportunity to look at how it should be run and how it should be operated. But this is a good bill. This is the bill that says to all of the people that make this institution work, we are grateful to you. This is the bill that says to all the people who help us get our jobs done, we thank you for what you do. And this is a bill that deserves the support of every Member of the Chamber. I encourage all Members to vote ``aye'' on the legislative branch bill so that we can continue to keep the operations of the United States Capitol, the House of Representatives, the United States Senate, and all the workings of this great institution going.

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LaHOOD. I wonder if the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) would, since I gave him a friendly reminder, would be willing to vote for the bill now as a result from the fact now that you could now expound on this for another 5 minutes?

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say this. We did have a very spirited debate on this issue of continuity. We really did. I do not know if there were 5 or 6 or 7 hours, but the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird) had his chance to present his bill and have a vote on it. And, frankly, not very many Members voted for it. And we did have a good debate about it, but I think ultimately the Speaker decided that we have to get on with this issue and this was the place to put it. It may not be the best place, but it is in this bill because I think the Speaker felt an obligation that we have to deal with this issue at some point. It may not be perfect, but we did have a very good debate about it, and I think that is why it is included in the bill. I thank the chairman for allowing me to explain that.

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the managers on the part of the House have until midnight tonight to file conference reports to accompany H.R. 2361 and H.R. 2985.

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman very much for his leadership and certainly on the minority side, I thank them for their leadership over there to all the staff. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill and certainly against the Flake amendment. But the important part of this bill, I think, for the country is we are going to fix the potholes in the river. That is what I call the locks and dams. They have not been touched for over 50 years. They need to be replaced. They need to be repaired. These are the pot holes; and if we have potholes in our roads, we fix them up. The potholes on the rivers are the locks and dams. This bill provides the authorization that will allow the Committee on Appropriations to come up with the money to implement the plan that has been long overdue and long coming with the Corps of Engineers' $3.2 billion over 15 years that will help those who use the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers to continue to have it be the navigable waterway that is so important for the transportation of the food and fiber that is used and produced all along those two waterways. I encourage all to support the bill and to vote against the Flake amendment.

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I would like to read a letter that I received from the National Association of Letter Carriers, Abraham Lincoln Branch No. 80, Springfield, Illinois: ``Dear Congressman LaHood: The Letter Carriers of Springfield are requesting that the Northeast Annex, 1927 Sangamon Avenue, Springfield, Illinois, be renamed the J.M. Dietrich Northeast Annex. ``James Michael `Mike' Dietrich died unexpectedly September, 2003, just over 1 month short of his retirement. Mike was a lifelong employee of the United States Postal Service. He served in the U.S. Army from 1968 through 1970. After an honorable discharge from the Army, he was hired as a letter carrier. ``In May, 1983, he was promoted to supervisor, Delivery and Collections. He was charged with the supervision of approximately 50 letter carriers and collectors. It was his responsibility to see that those in his section were properly trained and successfully functioned as city carriers. In 1989 he was promoted to supervisor, Customer Service. He managed the daily operations of a group of carriers numbering about 100. He also handled scheduling of day-to-day assignments as well as annual and incremental leave for the entire group of Springfield city carriers and collectors. During his service, he received several safety and leadership awards, and in 2002, became the OSHA recordkeeper. ``Mike was not only a great supervisor but he was a fantastic human being. You would be hard pressed to find a U.S. Postal Service employee in Springfield, Illinois, who would have a bad word to say about Mike. He was a man of never-ending patience. He was someone we could all go to with a question and know we would come away with a reasonable and correct answer. And if one of us had a problem, he was our sounding board and mentor, one who can never be replaced. ``Mike and his wife, Carol, raised a beautiful family of six girls for whom they worked hard to provide college educations. They are all now productive adults, some beginning families of their own. I know his career was important to him, but I also know that he considered his family to be his greatest accomplishment. ``Not a day goes by that Mike's name is not uttered by someone on the workroom floor. We all feel it is only fitting that we work in the J.M. Dietrich Northeast Annex. ``Thank you for the consideration'' of renaming the annex. ``Pat Kruger, letter carrier, Springfield, Illinois.'' Mr. Speaker, I read this letter because it is the opportunity for me to thank the letter carriers that work with Mike, to thank them for recognizing all of his accomplishments and thank them for bringing to my attention the opportunity to name the facility that they all work in and that he worked in and that he accomplished so much with. And, too, a word about the letter carriers. We have the greatest mail delivery system in the world, anywhere in the world, right here in our country. And it is thanks to the people like Mike and all the people who work in Springfield and all the people who work in the postal service that letters get delivered on time 6 days a week in a professional manner, and I know all Americans appreciate that. And I am grateful to the letter carriers of Abraham Lincoln Branch No. 80 for bringing this to my attention and the ability of this committee to bring this to the floor as a bill that will become law and to have this facility named in Mike's honor.

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I have noticed at least one occasion when a Member announced he was opposed to a measure when he sought to offer a motion to recommit but then voted ``yes'' on passage of the bill. Mr. Speaker, is that regular order?

Mr. LaHOOD

Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?