Carolyn McCarthy

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, last week's tragic events in London reminded us that terrorists can strike anywhere, at any time. We must prepare to prevent any kind of scenario that will allow attacks. Terrorists have proven to be innovative in their methods to kill innocent people. We must work to shut down as many avenues of terror as possible or at least make it more difficult for them to carry out their acts. But since 9/11, the U.S. has dedicated 90 percent of its domestic preparedness resources to preventing an attack involving commercial air travel. While safe air travel is important, we do not pay attention to other possible scenarios, and it is irresponsible of us to do that. It is time for all of us to be proactive instead of reactive in our homeland security strategy. One area of homeland security that needs to be reviewed is our pre-9/ 11 gun laws. Mr. Speaker, we are at war, and our gun laws currently allow our enemies to arm themselves in our country. At least 44 times in a 4-month period, people whom the FBI suspected of being members of terrorist groups tried to buy guns. In all but nine instances, the purchases were allowed to go through. Affiliation with a terrorist group does not appear on any Federal background check that would disqualify someone from buying a gun. There certainly have been many more instances of suspected members of terrorist groups trying to buy guns since then, but since the Justice Department destroys background check records after only 24 hours, we will never know. So not only are we allowing suspected terrorists to arm themselves, we are destroying the records indicating how many guns they actually own. We are destroying critical intelligence in this war on terror. The question my constituents ask me is, why are these people allowed to buy guns in the first place? It defies common sense. We saw what these terrorists are capable of doing just armed with only a box cutter purchased at a hardware store. Then why do we make it so easy for them to be able to buy guns at stores and at gun shows? The very same people we spend 90 percent of our homeland security funds on to prevent boarding planes can walk into any gun store and purchase an Uzi, AK-47 or a 50 caliber rifle that can shoot down an airplane, whether it is taking off or landing. This is absolutely ridiculous. Let me set the record straight: I am not trying to take away the right from anyone of being able to buy a gun. These are law-abiding citizens. They have a right to buy a gun. But we do need commonsense gun safety regulations to protect law-abiding gun owners while making it tougher for criminals and certainly terrorists to be able to obtain a gun. That is why I introduced the No Fly, No Buy bill. Right now, if you are on a terrorist watch list and you cannot board a plane, you are allowed to go into any gun store or go to a gun show and be able to buy a gun. That is ludicrous. What my bill would do, if you are on a terrorist no fly list, you would not be able to also buy a gun. I understand that mistakes can be made, and on those mistakes, the list that I have chosen that the FBI has, if you are innocent, you will be able to come off that list. We have to start having a different dialogue on gun violence in this country. But certainly what we learned from London last week, and we do not know if we have terrorists in this country or not, they always wait until we are least suspecting them, we need to do what we can to make sure guns do not get into the wrong hands. This is not going to take away anyone's right to own a gun, to go hunting, to protect their families. But we can do a better job, especially working in the times that we are working in today.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, since 1935, Social Security has helped millions of our American families. It has helped them enjoy a secure retirement, and it has never been a day late or a dollar short. Now, the Members of this body and the administration are pushing a plan that will cut benefits for nearly every American under 35. The administration has said in the past that Social Security is a bunch of IOUs. Now we are hearing that we have a surplus, and we are going to take that surplus and finance private accounts. Where is the common sense in this? Social Security needs a solid source of funding, not a plan that drains trillions of dollars away from our American families that need it. We must commit to improving, not dismantling, the Social Security programs. We can and we must do better. And let no one forget that Social Security covers people with disabilities and those women and men who have become widows and widowers.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. 379. Sergeant Michael G. Owen 380. Lance Corporal Brian K. Schramm 381. Captain Christopher B. Johnson 382. Chief Warrant Officer William I. Brennan 383. Specialist Andrew C. Ehrlich 384. Sergeant Douglas E. Bascom 385. Lance Corporal Jonathan E. Gadsden 386. Sergeant Dennis J. Boles 387. Lance Corporal Richard Patrick Slocum 388. Corporal Brian Oliveira 389. Staff Sergeant Jerome Lemon 390. Private First Class Stephen P. Downing II 391. Specialist Segun Frederick Akintade 392. Sergeant First Class Michael Battles, Sr. 393. Sergeant Maurice Keith Fortune 394. Private First Class John Lukac 395. Sergeant Kelley L. Courtney 396. Private First Class Andrew G. Riedel 397. Lance Corporal John T. Byrd II 398. Corporal Christopher J. Lapka 399. Lance Corporal Travis A. Fox 400. Lance Corporal Michael P. Scarborough 401. Lance Corporal Jeremy D. Bow 402. First Lieutenant Matthew D. Lynch 403. Sergeant Charles Joseph Webb 404. Specialist Cody L. Wentz 405. Corporal Jeremiah A. Baro 406. Lance Corporal Jared P. Hubbard 407. Sergeant Carlos M. Camacho-Rivera 408. Private Justin R. Yoemans 409. Specialist Brian K. Baker 410. Lance Corporal Sean M. Langley 411. Specialist Quoc Binh Tran 412. Lance Corporal Thomas J. Zapp 413. Corporal Robert P. Warns II 414. Specialist Don Allen Clary 415. Staff Sergeant Clinton Lee Wisdom 416. Staff Sergeant David G. Ries 417. Lance Corporal Branden P. Ramey 418. Lance Corporal Shane K. O'Donnell 419. Corporal Nathaniel T. Hammond 420. Specialist Bryan L. Freeman 421. Corporal Joshua D. Palmer 422. Lance Corporal Jeffrey Lam 423. Lance Corporal Abraham Simpson 424. Sergeant David M. Caruso 425. Sergeant John Byron Trotter 426. Staff Sergeant Todd R. Cornell 427. Staff Sergeant Russell L. Slay 428. Lance Corporal Nathan R. Wood 429. Lance Corporal Nicholas D. Larson 430. Corporal William C. James 431. Lance Corporal Juan E. Segura 432. Sergeant Lonny D. Wells 433. Command Sergeant Major Steven W. Faulkenburg 434. Specialist Travis A. Babbitt 435. Master Sergeant Steven E. Auchman 436. Major Horst Gerhard ``Gary'' Moore 437. Lance Corporal Wesley J. Canning 438. Private First Class Dennis J. Miller, Jr. 439. Staff Sergeant Michael C. Ottolini 440. Corporal Romulo J. Jimenez II 441. Lance Corporal Aaron C. Pickering 442. Staff Sergeant Gene Ramirez 443. Lance Corporal Erick J. Hodges 444. First Lieutenant Dan T. Malcom, Jr. 445. Petty Officer Third Class Julian Woods 446. Lance Corporal Kyle W. Burns 447. Second Lieutenant James P. ``JP'' Blecksmith 448. Staff Sergeant Theodore S. ``Sam'' Holder II 449. Corporal Theodore A. Bowling 450. Specialist Thomas K. Doerflinger 451. Staff Sergeant Sean P. Huey 452. Corporal Peter J. Giannopoulos 453. Lance Corporal Justin D. Reppuhn 454. Lance Corporal Nicholas H. Anderson 455. Sergeant James C. ``J.C.'' Matteson 456. Lance Corporal Brian A. Medina 457. Lance Corporal David M. Branning 458. Sergeant Jonathan B. Shields 459. First Lieutenant Edward D. Iwan 460. Corporal Brian P. Prening 461. Corporal Nathan R. Anderson 462. Sergeant Morgan W. Strader

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, many here in this Chamber, each and every one of us came to Congress to try and make a difference, and each one of us are trying to make that difference. I came to Congress to try and reduce gun violence in this Nation. And many people have heard me talk about this for close to 8\1/2\ years now. What I want to talk about tonight are three pieces of legislation that I have and why I feel they are so important, especially in the climate that we have. We are post-9/11 now, and I think what we need to do is start looking at our gun laws that are here today and how we can make this country safer, certainly being part of our homeland security. One of the bills that I think is probably extremely important is the NICS Improvement Act. Unfortunately, I had a tragedy back in my district going back 3 years ago, where a person came into one of our local churches and ended up shooting the priest and a parishioner. On further investigation, we found out that New York State actually had a record where he should not have been able to buy a gun. But being that they did not give that information to the NICS system, and we all know that a computer is only as good as the system that has the information in it. Now, with that we did legislation, it actually passed here in the House by a voice vote, and I think it is important that we get that going again and get that improved. And another reason why, many of us are experiencing high volumes of gangs in our community. And it was only a few months ago that some gangs that were caught by our local police, who did a great job, traced the guns that these young people had, and they were bought legally in Alabama. And I say that, legally. But, again, if they had tried to buy them in New York, they would have been in the system. They were in the system and basically they would not have been able to buy the gun if the NICS system had the correct information in it. Right now, 25 States have entered less than 60 percent of the convictions of why some people should not be able to buy guns. Thirteen States do not list domestic violence convictions and restraining orders. And unfortunately, that was one of the things with Mr. Troy, who did the shooting in the parish church. His mother actually had a restraining order on him. Thirty-three States do not share mental health records. Now, I know there is an argument there that we are picking on people with mental health problems. That is not it. We are saying that people that come under adjudication under the system are denied the right to buy a gun. The privacy issue is kept in place. Mainly, if you are denied on a gun, all it does is come up rejected; it does not say for what area that you were rejected. And I think it is important that we get this bill up on the system. This way we will be able to certainly prevent people that should not be able to buy guns, by law under the 1968 Gun Control Act, which is only enforcing the law that is already on the books. We had terrific bipartisan support in the 107th Congress, and I think it is something that we should be doing to move around. The gun show loophole. I know we had our battles here on the gun show loophole, but even information again for post, 9/11, the FBI has found that over 40 ``terrorists'' on the terrorist watch list have gone into gun shows and been able to buy AK-47s and other guns. Now, it is common sense that those that go buy a gun, and 13 States have already passed legislation, it has not stopped anyone from buying a gun. It has not closed down any gun shows, because I know that many of our friends in the Midwest, this is a family weekend. They go out and spend a day there and that is fine. I do not have a problem with that. But I think the majority of people agree with me, if you are going to buy a gun, you need to go through a background check. I think that is the basic law that we could do. The other thing that really perturbs me, and by the way this actually goes into my third bill, no fly, no buy list. Right now we have a list, a terrorist list, and they are not allowed to get onto a plane. And yet they can go into any gun store, they can go to any gun show and are able to buy a gun. I do not think that makes too much common sense. We should be stopping these people from being able to buy their guns. Think about what happened here in D.C. a few years ago. One person, two people with a gun, certainly kept D.C. and the surrounding area petrified, and millions of dollars was lost. Imagine these terrorists. You know, people, I think, are starting to become, feel too safe. We know that terrorists will strike when no one is paying attention. And as long as we pay attention to detail, we can stop these terrorists from doing bodily harm. No fly, no buy. I understand that when you look at foreign countries, sometimes people are prosecuted. That would not be the same here in this country. We know that there are political reasons why they might be thrown in jail. We have a way of being able to adjudicate that. And also, the list that I chose for this bill is on a list where people can actually go to it and get off the list. And I think that is important because we certainly do not want to deny anyone. The three bills that I have introduced are not going to stop anyone from being able to buy a gun. Their second amendment rights are protected. I made a promise when I came to Congress that I would reduce gun violence in this country. But I also am not here to try and take away the right of anyone to own a gun. That is a personal decision for many of us. Some of us do not like guns. I used to do skeet shooting. It was not my sport. That is certainly up to me. Yet, I know there are many people around this Nation that like to go hunting. And we have always said, going back since 1994, they will be able to go hunting. We are not trying to take away the right to own the gun. But we must enforce the laws that are on the books and make this a safer country.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, Specialist Nathan W. Nakis. 1. Specialist Christopher J. Holland 2. Sergeant Glenn R. Allison 3. Private First Class Charles E. Bush Jr. 4. Private First Class Stuart W. Moore 5. First Lieutenant Edward M. Saltz 6. Major Christopher J. Splinter 7. Captain Christopher F. Soelzer 8. Sergeant Benjamin W. Biskie 9. Command Sergeant Major Eric F. Cooke 10. Sergeant Michael E. Yashinski 11. Staff Sergeant Thomas W. Christensen 12. Staff Sergeant Stephen C. Hattamer 13. Specialist Charles G. Haight 14. Specialist Michael G. Mihalakis 15. Staff Sergeant Michael J. Sutter 16. Captain Ernesto M. Blanco 17. Private Rey D. Cuervo 18. Sergeant Curt E. Jordan Jr. 19. Specialist Justin W. Pollard 20. Sergeant Dennis A. Corral 21. Specialist Solomon C. ``Kelly'' Bangayan 22. Captain Eric Thomas Paliwoda 23. Specialist Marc S. Seiden 24. Captain Kimberly N. Hampton 25. Specialist Luke P. Frist 26. Private First Class Jesse D. Mizener 27. Chief Warrant Officer Ian D. Manuel 28. Sergeant Jeffrey C. Walker 29. Chief Warrant Officer Aaron A. Weaver 30. Staff Sergeant Craig Davis 31. Specialist Michael A. Diraimondo 32. Specialist Nathaniel H. Johnson 33. Chief Warrant Officer Philip A. Johnson Jr. 34. Sergeant First Class Gregory B. Hicks 35. Specialist Christopher A. Golby 36. Staff Sergeant Ricky L. Crockett 37. Sergeant Keicia M. Hines 38. Staff Sergeant Roland L. Castro 39. Sergeant Edmond Lee Randle Jr. 40. Specialist Larry E. Polley Jr. 41. Private First Class Cody J. Orr 42. Master Sergeant Kelly L. Hornbeck 43. Private First Class James D. Parker 44. Specialist Gabriel T. Palacios 45. Chief Warrant Officer Brian D. Hazelgrove 46. Chief Warrant Officer Michael T. Blaise 47. Specialist Jason K. Chappell 48. Private First Class Ervin Dervishi 49. Staff Sergeant Kenneth W. Hendrickson 50. Sergeant Randy S. Rosenberg 51. Sergeant Keith L. Smette 52. Specialist William R. Sturges Jr. 53. Staff Sergeant Christopher Bunda 54. Chief Warrant Officer Patrick D. Dorff 55. First Lieutenant Adam G. Mooney 56. Sergeant Travis A. Moothart 57. Sergeant Cory R. Mracek 58. Sergeant First Class James T. Hoffman 59. Second Lieutenant Luke S. James 60. Staff Sergeant Lester O. Kinney II 61. Captain Matthew J. August 62. Staff Sergeant Sean G. Landrus 63. Private First Class Luis A. Moreno 64. Private First Class Holly J. McGeogh 65. Sergeant Eliu A. Miersandoval 66. Corporal Juan C. Cabral Banuelos 67. Private First Class Armando Soriano 68. Second Lieutenant Seth J. Dvorin 69. Specialist Joshua L. Knowles 70. Staff Sergeant Richard P. Ramey 71. Sergeant Thomas D. Robbins 72. Sergeant Elijah Tai Wah Wong 73. Master Sergeant Jude C. Mariano 74. Private First Class William C. Ramirez 75. Sergeant Patrick S. Tainsh 76. Specialist Eric U. Ramirez 77. Private Bryan N. Spry 78. Specialist Christopher M. Taylor 79. Private First Class Nichole M. Frye 80. Specialist Michael M. Merila 81. Specialist Roger G. Ling 82. Second Lieutenant Jeffrey C. Graham 83. Sergeant First Class Henry A. Bacon

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, currently, when someone wants to buy a gun, they are subject to a background check, and once he or she is cleared, the records of that transaction are destroyed after 24 hours. But 24 hours is simply not enough time to ensure a gun is not sold to someone who should not be buying guns. Why? Because the National Instant Background Check System, or NICS, is not effective enough to warrant such a quick turnaround time on gun purchase records. NICS is a database to check potential firearm buyers for any criminal record or history of mental illness. Mr. Speaker, however, the NICS system is only as good as the information States provide. Twenty-five States have automated less than 60 percent of their felony convictions into the NICS system. In these States, many felons will not be listed on the NICS system and would be able to purchase guns with no questions asked. In 13 States, domestic violence restraining orders are not accessible through the NICS system. Common sense would dictate that you do not sell a gun to someone who has been recently served with a restraining order. Thirty-three States have not automated or do not share mental health records that would disqualify certain individuals from purchasing a gun under existing law. Also felony convictions in some States will not show up on another State's background check. I understand the political realities of this Congress when it comes to new gun laws. Many on both sides of the aisle see anything longer than a 24-hour period to hold records as a de facto gun registry. So we must take measures to fix the NICS system to make sure that our existing laws are enforced. I have introduced legislation with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the NICS Improvement Act of 2005, that will give States grants to update their NICS database. This is the same bill that passed the House by a voice vote in the 107th Congress. No one person was denied his or her second amendment rights because of this bill. Even the National Rifle Association approved the bill in 2002. It is the States' responsibility to make sure that NICS databases are in order. But if so many States are facing budget problems, many simply cannot afford to dedicate resources to updating their NICS system. Meanwhile, too many criminals are slipping through the cracks of our background check system. This is unacceptable, especially in the post- 9/11 era. Until we fix the NICS system, our law enforcement officers will continue to be within a tight deadline to determine whether or not background checks cover all of the bases. With my bill, we can ensure that the NICS system does its job at the point of purchase. Mr. Speaker, please bring the NICS Improvement Act up for a vote this summer. It is time that we close the legal loopholes that make it so easy for criminals to buy guns and so difficult for law enforcement agencies to keep us safe. Mr. Speaker, this is a bill that can work. This is a bill that has bipartisan support. This is a bill that can save lives, especially those of our police officers.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, earlier this month the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the law preventing convicted felons from purchasing guns does not apply to individuals convicted of felonies in foreign countries. In the case of Small v. United States, the ruling stated the law needs to explicitly state that foreign felons are also prohibited from buying firearms. This ruling has opened the doors for dangerous criminals to purchase guns in this country with no questions asked. But the loophole can easily be fixed. That is why I have introduced H.R. 1931, the Foreign Felons Gun Prohibition Act. My legislation will ensure our gun laws take crimes committed in other countries into consideration before allowing a firearm purchase to go forward. We cannot allow convicted drug dealers, murderers, rapists and even terrorists to purchase guns just because their crimes were committed in another country. Mr. Speaker, a convicted drug dealer from South America can purchase all of the guns and ammunition that he wants and can buy in this country legally. This loophole puts the lives of our police officers, ATF officers and innocent bystanders in danger. And as demonstrated in the recent GAO report, it is already too easy for individuals with terrorist ties to buy guns in this country. This loophole will allow someone actually convicted of assisting terrorists overseas to purchase weapons like an AK-47 or a 50 caliber sniper weapon that can shoot down a plane. I completely understand some felony convictions handed down by foreign courts have legitimacy questions. Convictions can be trumped up for political reasons by corrupt regimes. And nations involved in civil wars or other political disputes may have more than one illegitimate court administering justice. This legislation takes that into consideration. My bill allows individuals to challenge the legitimacy of foreign felony convictions in our courts. If the foreign felony is found to be out of bounds legally, the individual would be allowed to purchase that gun. This would do nothing to take away the right of someone to be able to own a gun. I want this bill to ensure that anyone charged with an illegitimate or a politically motivated foreign felony is not discriminated against. This may be inconvenient for some, but we must make sure that gun sales are limited to law-abiding citizens. Mr. Speaker, we are at war. We cannot allow our enemies in the war on terror to arm themselves within our borders just because of a loophole. This is a homeland security problem with a common-sense solution. Congress must work to close all of the loopholes in our pre-9/11 gun laws. It is too easy for person with ties to terrorism and criminal organizations to access guns in this Nation. Passing H.R. 1931 will help us win the war on terror and keep our streets safe from gangs and criminal. We should be working together to make this country as safe as possible, certainly for our police officers, our ATF agents and the innocent bystanders. We can do this, but we must learn to work together. We must change the rhetoric of the gun issue. We are working for gun safety, not taking away the right of someone to own a gun.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate certainly the Committee on Homeland Security. I mean it was very difficult, I am sure, for them to try to work everything out that needed to be in starting and looking at a new territory. I happen to think that it is a bill that certainly has been put together and hopefully it is going to be everything that we need to keep this land safe. With that being said, last night in the Committee on Rules, I tried to offer five different amendments. A lot of them had to do with gun safety. Mr. Chairman, as far as I am concerned, part of this legislation is incomplete when we talk about homeland security. It totally ignores threats posed by terrorists aiming themselves at our country. And according to a GAO report published earlier this year, they are finding exactly that. Why? Because of our pre-9/11 gun laws. Common sense would dictate if we do not trust one to board a plane, we should not trust them to buy a gun. And that is exactly what we are seeing. We are seeing that certain people are on the no fly list, they are not allowed to get on a plane; yet those same people, a lot of them who certainly have backgrounds as terrorists, can go into any store, they can go to a gun show anywhere to be able to buy a gun. That does not make sense to me. We are supposed to be protecting the American people. We are supposed to be protecting our law enforcement people and certainly our Federal employees. Anybody on a Federal terrorist watch list can buy assault weapons with the large capacity clips. We tried to have that addressed, especially the large capacity clips. We saw what all these people can do with only box cutters and boarding passes. What makes it so easy for them to buy guns? Why is Congress ignoring this serious homeland security threat that we are facing? Why do we allow our enemies on the war on terror to arm themselves within our borders and make it so easy for them? Almost all of the legislation that I have been proposing certainly would not stop one citizen from buying a gun. Until we address our pre- 9/11 gun laws, our Nation's homeland security will be at risk. As I said, we will certainly, hopefully before this Congress is over, be able to address these issues. Safety for the American people is paramount for all of us. Both sides agree on that, and I hope that we can have a new dialogue on how we talk about gun safety in this country, and part of it has to be homeland security.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for working with me on this section, section 922(x) which he just basically took out. I appreciate him working with us on that issue.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, last Saturday's New York Times revealed that since the expiration of the Federal ban on assault weapons there have been no real boom in sales of the weapons at American gun stores. Opponents of the ban seized the opportunity to say the ban was ineffective. However, I think these statistics prove that assault weapons have absolutely no practical purpose except to kill human beings. Many Members of the House have told me the assault weapons ban is an affront on our second amendment rights, but the public never saw the assault weapons ban as an infringement on their second amendment rights. Last September, a Dallas newspaper ran a poll indicating that 78 percent of Texas gun owners supported keeping the ban in place. And nobody takes their second amendment rights more seriously than Texas gun owners. So nobody should be surprised that the sales of these weapons are so low. However, some people are buying these weapons. They may intend to use these guns in crimes; and because of our pre-9/11 gun laws, these people could possibly be aligned with our enemies in the war on terror. It is time for this Congress to finally be proactive when it comes to gun safety and gun laws. We cannot wait for another Columbine before we address how easy it is for criminals and terrorists to legally purchase these hand-held weapons of mass destruction. We need commonsense gun laws that allow law-abiding citizens to purchase guns for sport and self-defense, but ensure that those criminals with felonies and terrorist backgrounds cannot arm themselves. We need a new stronger assault weapons ban. One of the things that I certainly will be working for is the large- capacity clips. There are many that will say, Well, it doesn't matter how many clips you have. But if you see what these clips can do, especially against our police officers, it is something that we should not allow, certainly in this country. The only ones that should be allowed to own them are our police officers and certainly our military. Resourceful criminals still found a way to obtain illegal weapons. However, the ban made these weapons more expensive. And because they became more expensive, we saw that gangs were not buying these guns. I think that is one of the reasons why it worked. Tomorrow we are going to be voting on an anti-gang bill. We see our police officers on the front line against these gangs all the time. During the 10 years that the ban was in place, crimes involving banned weapons dropped by 60 percent, so we do know that it was working. Nearly every police organization in this country supported the assault weapons ban and wants to make sure that we try and get it in place again. When the men and women on the front lines in the war on gangs and crime in this country say they want assault weapons banned, we should listen. This week we are celebrating or mourning those police officers that were killed in this last past year. Every year it seems that the numbers are growing. We should be doing more to protect our police officers that try to protect us on a daily basis. However, we need to improve on the shortfalls of the old ban, namely, magazines as I have mentioned that hold more than 10 rounds. Personally, I remember going back to 1993 when there was a shooting on the Long Island Railroad and my husband was one of those killed. The person that was doing the shooting had clips of 15 and more bullets. Every one of those bullets made its mark, killing a number of people and injuring many, my husband dying and my son certainly being injured. If we had a clip that was only 10, 15 people might not have been injured or killed. I think that is important. The only Americans who should be allowed to have these weapons are soldiers and police officers, as I have said. Using one of these weapons with these clips in your home would certainly take down an intruder, but the bullets are flying. Come on, let us use some common sense. They would be flying all over the place. You could be hitting your neighbor. Why do we need clips that are more than 10? As I said, our police officers should have them, but it will probably be when we see these gangs buying the large capacity clips, that is when we will have outrage here. Mr. Speaker, it is time to stop listening to the NRA's rhetoric and start listening to common sense. We should be working together. The whole idea is to make sure that people are safe. No legislation that anyone is trying to do that I am aware of is taking away the right of someone to own a gun. We certainly should make it harder for those criminals, those terrorists that are out there at gun shows buying guns, criminals and gangs buying guns illegally. We can do a better job. Mr. Speaker, I hope in the next several weeks that we will see legislation come down. I certainly will work on it.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Martyr and Heroes Remembrance Day. I join the people of Israel and those around the world to memorialize the 6 million Jews who were murdered by the Nazis during World War II. The world is still feeling the Holocaust's effects. In 1933, there were over 9 million European Jews. By 1945, nearly two of every three had been killed as part of the Nazis' Final Solution. European cities have never recovered the diversity and way of life they had prior to the war. The Jewish people killed were teachers, lawyers, doctors, musicians, parents, and children, and were killed only because they were Jewish and targeted for no other reason. We must also remember the others who were murdered. Gypsies, the handicapped, and Poles were also targeted for destruction or decimation for racial, ethnic, or national reasons. Millions more, including homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, Soviet prisoners of war, and political dissidents, also suffered grievous oppression and death under Nazi tyranny for no specific reason except they were different than their captors. As time moves forward, there are few Holocaust survivors still with us and it is important for them to share their stories and educate people about their experiences. Nearly 60 years have passed since the Holocaust but anti-Semitism still exists. However, I believe passing on the lessons learned from this horrible time from generation to generation will someday destroy the hateful attitudes and ignorance that resulted in the evil of the Holocaust. The Holocaust was not an accident. It was a planned attempted extermination. Individuals, organizations and governments made choices that not only legalized discrimination but also allowed prejudice, hatred, and ultimately, mass murder to occur. The human race must constantly be reminded of the Holocaust and how the world stood idly by for too long. We must remember these painful events in order to prevent another Holocaust from ever occurring again. We will never forget.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, for years people have been hearing me talk about gun violence in this country, and the debates over tougher gun laws have been defined as ``social issues.'' Gun violence has had tragic consequences for so many families, including my own. Gun violence presents a tremendous burden to our police departments, and I see it in my own district on Long Island where we are dealing with so many gangs. With the expiration of the assault weapons ban, many police departments will be outgunned by gangs and criminals. That is why basically we had the assault weapons ban put in place back in 1994. Gun violence also costs this society over $100 billion a year. Most of that $100 billion is paid with tax dollars. It is estimated each shooting costs our economy $1 million in health care, police work, and lost productivity. Mr. Speaker, the social costs of gun violence are ever increasing, but since September 11, the threat of gun violence has become an important homeland security issue as well. We are at war, and our lack of tough gun laws allows our enemies to arm themselves right here in our country. People can go to gun shows and be able to buy guns. They can go into different gun stores across this country with false ID and be able to buy guns. We know through the FBI that 44 times just since January the terrorists that have been on a no-fly list have been able to go and buy those guns. In all but nine instances, the purchases were allowed to go through. Affiliation with a terrorist group does not appear on any background checklist whatsoever. There certainly have been many more instances of suspected members of terrorist groups trying to buy guns since then. But since the Justice Department destroys background check records after only 24 hours, we will never know, unfortunately, until there is a tragedy. So not only are we allowing suspected terrorists to arm themselves, we are also destroying the records indicating how many guns they have bought and how many they own. We are destroying critical intelligence in the war on terror. The question my constituents ask me all the time or when I go around the country and speak is, ``Why are these people allowed to buy guns in the first place?'' It defies common sense. We saw what these terrorists are capable of, armed with only box cutters purchased at a hardware store; and starting last week, people are not even allowed to bring a cigarette lighter onto a plane. Then why do we make it so easy for our enemies to buy firearms and ammunition within our borders? Since 9/11 we have adopted a multitude of new laws in the wake of the war on terror, and I agree with those laws. No one is spared from the reach of these new laws. Some of these laws may be an inconvenience for some; but if it prevents one terrorist from boarding a plane, it is a good law. But our gun laws are dangerously out of step with the war on terror. The same people who cannot board a plane can walk into a gun store and purchase a hand-held weapon of mass destruction. By the way, that is assault weapons, also. This is ridiculous. Let me set the record straight. I am not out to take away the guns of any law-abiding citizen. We need commonsense gun safety regulations that protect law-abiding gun owners while making it tougher for terrorists and criminals to obtain these guns. That is why I have introduced the No Fly No Buy bill. This bill would deny those on the Transportation Security Administration's No Fly List from purchasing firearms in this country. Granted, the No Fly List includes some law-abiding citizens who are on the list in error. But it is the only Federal terrorist watch list that allows innocent people to get their names removed. Other Federal lists without practical application may be just as inaccurate, but afford no due process to those wrongly listed. My bill would ensure that those people incorrectly listed on the No Fly List would be able to get their names off the list as soon as possible; and then they would be able to complete their gun purchase, no questions asked. Again, an inconvenience for some, but necessary steps to ensure terrorists are not buying guns in our country. The Federal Government is charged with protecting us from terror. That is what 9/11 has taught us. I understand the second amendment concerns of law-abiding gun owners. These laws can coexist with responsible people's rights to hunt and protect their families. Responsible gun ownership is a right of all law-abiding Americans, but we must also have a responsibility to protect law-abiding Americans from acts of terror and crime. Mr. Speaker, we are seeing gangs across this Nation multiply, and we also know that they still have easy access to get guns. We can stop this crime wave that we see going through our country. We should be stopping this. We can save certainly an awful lot of money on medical costs. Our communities, all of a sudden, they are asking themselves, is it safe to go out at night. We have cut back on our police officers; we have let the assault weapons bill expire; we now cannot even have our police officers check to see if a criminal has bought a gun because in 24 hours the records are destroyed. We are not going in the right direction. We can make a difference. I hope people will support this bill.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I talked about no fly. In other words, terrorists in this country cannot get onto a plane, but they can certainly go into a gun store and be able to buy a gun. Today, I would like to talk about gun liability, which is going to be out on the floor in the next week or so. The leadership of Congress is constantly preaching about personal responsibility: Individuals should accept the consequences of their actions. I agree with that. Unfortunately, this culture of responsibility does not extend to the gun industry and negligent gun sellers. Both the Senate and the House have bills granting the gun industry unprecedented immunity from litigation and other legal actions, legal actions that many of us that have suffered from gun violence were able to take advantage of in the courts. Under this legislation, dealers and manufacturers of guns would receive immunity from any legal action. Sellers and makers of nearly every other consumer product must face the consequences of their negligence and their misjudgments. Manufacturers and sellers of toy guns are more liable for their products than the makers and sellers of assault weapons and handguns. The NRA has named this issue as their number one legislative priority this year. They said this will end frivolous lawsuits, but not a single suit against the gun industry has ever been deemed frivolous by a court of law. This legislation is not about protecting an honest gun dealer who illegally sells a gun to someone who later commits a crime. This legislation protects cases of gross negligence which has led to the deaths of unsuspecting victims. For example, I think the majority of us remember the incident here in the D.C. area. The owner of the Bull's Eye Shooter Supply Store in Washington State was sued because he could not account for 239 guns in his inventory. One of these guns was the Bushmaster used in the D.C. sniper cases. The D.C. sniper killers were allowed to get their hands on a gun because of this store's negligence, but this legislation would get Bull's Eye Shooter Supply off the hook from any legal action. By the way, the victims were able to sue Bull's Eye and win a court judgment. Fortunately, there was a lawsuit against Bull's Eye and Bushmaster, and part of the settlement was Bushmaster agreeing to work with its dealer to promote safer sales practices to prevent incidents of negligence. That is one of the tools of being allowed to sue, to make manufacturers, to make people responsible for their products. This legislation would have required the immediate dismissal of the lawsuit against Bull's Eye. The gun industry must be subject to the same laws that govern every other American business. Courthouse doors must remain open to those injured or who have lost loved ones because of the gun industry's negligence. This bill would allow gun dealers to knowingly sell large quantity of guns to a single customer intending to traffic the guns to criminals without any legal repercussions. Stripping away the threat of legal action would seriously jeopardize any opportunity to make guns safer. Without the threat of lawsuits, the gun industry will not have any incentives to incorporate gun locks, safety triggers and smart gun technology into their products. Had this law been in place 40 years ago, the auto industry certainly would not have made the cars we are driving any safer than what we are in today. Instead of giving the gun industry never-before levels of protection, I support giving the gun industry Federal research and development money. This money would be used to develop reasonable safety measures for their products. But Congress has not been responding to the threat of gun violence. Let me speak in a language the Congress leadership understands, dollars and cents. The secret that most people do not understand is the gun violence in this country is costing millions and billions of dollars. People do not understand that the Centers for Disease Control at one time was able to study the economical impact of gun violence in this country. By an act here in Congress we are not allowed to do that anymore, so that data does not come out. Years ago, independent studies have shown gun violence costs our health care system over $100 billion every single year, $100 billion. The $100 billion a year cost includes premiums paid for private health insurance and tax dollars used to pay for Medicaid, Medicaid in our States that are having such a hard time, Medicaid that is going to be cut here in the House and the Senate. These costs often are not reimbursed and cost the States vital health care money. Victims who survive suffer years of rehabilitation costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. My son was injured 11 years ago and is still going under physical therapy to be able to keep what he has. The average cost of each firearm fatality, including medical care, police services and lost productivity is almost $1 million a year. This Nation has to start looking at the gun violence. We can do this without the right of gun owners being taken away. Wake up, America.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, last month, the front pages of our Nation's newspapers contained chilling headlines: ``Terror Suspects Buying Firearms.'' At least 44 times in a 4-month period, people whom the FBI suspected of being members of terrorist groups tried to buy guns. In all but nine instances, the purchases were allowed to go through. A background check of the would-be buyer found no automatic disqualification such as being a felon, an illegal immigrant, or deemed mentally defective. There certainly have been many more instances of suspected members of terrorist groups trying to buy these guns, but since the Justice Department destroys background check records after only 24 hours, we will never know. So not only are we allowing suspected terrorists to arm themselves, we are destroying the records indicating how many guns they actually have bought. We are destroying critical intelligence in the war on terror, and suspected terrorists are exploiting our pre-9/11 gun laws. The question many of my constituents ask me is, ``Why are these people allowed to be able to buy guns in the first place?'' It defies common sense. We are at war. We saw what these terrorists are capable of armed with only box cutters purchased at a hardware store. Then why do we make it so easy for our enemies to buy firearms and ammunition within our own borders? Since 9/11, we have adopted a multitude of new laws in the wake of the war on terror. Just try to fly out of Reagan National Airport. No one is spared from the reach of these new laws. Senior citizens, children, and Members of the House have been subjected to routine inspection before boarding a commercial flight. It is an inconvenience perhaps for some, but if it prevents one terrorist from boarding a plane, it is a good law. But our gun laws are dangerously out of step with the war on terror. The same people who are prevented from boarding a flight can walk into a gun store and purchase a hand-held weapon of mass destruction. This is absolutely ridiculous. Let me set the record straight. I am not out to take away the right of any law-abiding citizen from being able to buy a gun. We need common-sense gun safety regulations that protect law-abiding gun owners, while making it tougher for criminals and terrorists to obtain guns. That is why I have introduced a bill that would deny those on the Transportation Security Administration's No Fly List from purchasing firearms. Why the No Fly List? Granted, the No Fly List includes some law- abiding citizens who are on the list in error. But it is the only Federal terrorist watch list with a procedure to get innocent people off the list, and the No Fly List is the only watch list to have public scrutiny. Other lists without practical application may be just as inaccurate but afford no due process to those wrongly listed. My bill will ensure that these people incorrectly listed on the No Fly will be able to get their names off the list as quickly as possible. They would then be able to complete their gun purchase, no questions asked. Again, an inconvenience for some but necessary steps to ensure terrorists are not buying guns in our country. The Federal Government charged with protecting us from terrorists should put at least as much effort into making sure terrorists and criminals are buying guns as what senior citizens and children might bring aboard a plane. We are at war, and the Federal Government has made it easier for our enemies to arm themselves. I have written Attorney General Gonzales and asked him to endorse my bill. And if he cannot endorse it, I want to know why. I understand the Second Amendment concerns of law-abiding citizens and gun owners. But these laws can coexist with responsible people's rights to hunt and protect their families. Responsible gun ownership is a right of all law-abiding Americans, but we also have to take the responsibility to protect law-abiding Americans from acts of terror and crime. Mr. Speaker, we have seen, unfortunately, many, many acts of crime and gun violence in the last few weeks. Each week for the next several weeks now, I am going to bring this subject up. I know a lot of the American people think Democrats have given up on this issue. I promise the American people, I will continue with this issue. I will fight for good gun safety laws to make this country safer.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman for agreeing to work with us on this issue of importance to New York.

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to join the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), in a colloquy on how certain provisions in this legislation might affect the governance of WIA funding in New York State. This legislation provides governors the authority to take a portion of funds provided through the authorizing statutes of mandatory partner programs to cover the infrastructure costs of one-stop centers. I am concerned that this may create a constitutional conflict between the Governor of New York and the Board of Regents. I offered an amendment to remedy this conflict in committee. The amendment I offered was language that is identical to language already included in S. 9. I would ask the chairman if he would commit to working with me and my New York colleagues in conference to resolve this issue.

Mrs. McCARTHY. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor that I rise today to pay tribute to a dear friend and devoted public servant, the Honorable Donald E. Belfi. Mr. Belfi is retiring as Nassau County Court Judge after 44 years of dedicated service to the court. A long and distinguished history of accomplishment and community leadership marks Judge Belfi's career. A graduate of Georgetown University and Fordham University School of Law, Mr. Belfi has committed himself to serving the public as a member of the legal profession. After several years of service as Assistant District Attorney in both New York and Nassau Counties, and 10 years of service as Nassau County District Court Judge, Mr. Belfi earned the post of Nassau County Court Judge. As County Court Judge for more than 20 years, Judge Belfi presided over hundreds of criminal trials, many of which were high profile cases. Among these is the Colin Ferguson Long Island Railroad Case, a matter I hold close to my heart. On a personal level, this was the first time I had ever been exposed to the court system. Judge Belfi held the dignity of his courtroom every day, making the trial bearable for me, my family and so many of the victims of the Long Island Railroad massacre. Judge Belfi's commitment to the community does not end inside the courtroom. Mr. Belfi has served as commissioner of Rockville Centre Little League, and as a member of several notable groups, including the Knights of Columbus, the Association for the Help of Retarded Children, and the St. Agnes Cathedral Parish Council. He also contributed over 20 years to Georgetown University as both an interviewer and a recruiter for the school. Widely recognized throughout the community, Judge Belfi's efforts and achievements have been rewarded with countless honors. Among these is the Fraternal Order of Court Officers Bench and Bar Award, the Criminal Courts Bar Association's Norman F. Lent Award, the Fordham Law Almuni Association Distinguished Alumnus Award, the DeStefano Industries Annual Award, and the Court Officer's Benevolent Association of Nassau County Fidelis Juris Award. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me today in congratulating Judge Belfi on his admirable career, and recognizing his numerous accomplishments. I cannot even begin to express my deep gratitude and appreciation for his service to the community. Together with his wife of 35 years, five children, and two grandchildren, I send him my sincerest wishes for happiness and fulfillment as he begins this next chapter of his life.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I announce the Archer Street School of Language Arts, Mathematics and Technology in the Freeport Union Free School District as School of the Month in New York's Fourth Congressional District for February 2005. The Archer Street School's Principal is Paula R. Lein, the Assistant Principal is Kevin Bishop, and the Superintendent of Schools in the Freeport Union Free School District is Dr. Eric Eversley. The Archer Street School is committed to teaching their young students the ins and outs of the ``real world''. They have developed their own community called ``Archerville'' in which students, in addition to their regular studies, run two-dozen mini-businesses including a post office, banking and recycling center, and even a historical society and museum. The Archer Street School affords their students all the opportunities needed to help them succeed in a world that is becoming increasingly more technological and keeping these kids in tuned with the demands of a fast paced world. Even with the Archer Street School's commitment to the arts, math and technology, the students and faculty are committed to a strong, productive relationship with the community of not only their hometown but with the world. On February 14th, the Archer Street School will participate in an Act of Kindness day in efforts to return to what they feel is a long-lost human value--simplistic kindness to others. In an effort to keep within the spirit of Act of Kindness Day, the students and faculty of this wonderful school community will present a check to me that will help aid the victims of the Tsunami tragedy. The money the students raise will be donated to the organization Save the Children, because they know that any amount will be a tremendous welcome. It is because of this generous and gigantic gesture that the Archer Street School is my choice for School of the Month. The Archer Street School of Language Arts, Mathematics, and Technology deserves all the accolades in the world and it is an immense honor for me to stand before all of you and talk about the students and faculty and admirable accomplishments. Once again, it is my esteemed pleasure to announce the Archer Street School as New York's 4th district School of the Month for February 2005.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend Winthrop University Hospital, which is located in my home town of Mineola, NY, for receiving this year's Distinguished Hospital Award for Clinical Excellence. Each year HealthGrades, an independent national healthcare quality ratings company, rates the quality of our Nation's hospitals and recognizes hospitals in the top tier for their performance. The Distinguished Hospital Award for Clinical Excellence is based on clinical outcomes and quality data collected by the Federal government through the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Winthrop University Hospital has received this award and has ranked among the top 5 percent of all acute-care hospitals in the country for overall clinical excellence two years in a row. Both Winthrop's cardiac and stroke treatment services were specifically recognized for providing outstanding care. In addition, Winthrop received a 5-star rating for their treatment of pneumonia, was rated ``Best in Area'' for their Pulmonary Services and ranked among the top five percent in the Nation for their Gastrointestinal Medical Services. As a nurse for over thirty years before being elected to Congress, I know the difference superior medical care makes for a patient in the treatment and recovery process. Having access to quality medical services can mean the difference between life and death. I am proud that such a high quality medical facility is located in my community, and I thank Winthrop and its talented staff for their dedication and commitment to providing patients and families with such outstanding care.

Mrs. McCARTHY

Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, because of illness, I was not present on the vote on agreeing to the objection on the Ohio electoral vote on January 6. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, on November 16, 2004, I missed rollcall vote No. 531. Rollcall vote 531 was on recognizing the 60th anniversary of the Battle of the Bulge during World War II. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 531.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Alfred ``Fred'' Hicks, from Westbury, New York. Mr. Hicks was the accomplished president of Hicks Nurseries Inc., as well as a devoted leader in his community and a loving father. Mr. Hicks passed away on October 1st due to complications from a rare blood disorder. He was 64 years old. Mr. Hicks demonstrated a lifelong interest in the gardening industry. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Horticulture and a Master of Business Administration degree in Marketing from Cornell University. In 1963, he took over running his family's establishment, Hicks Nurseries Inc., which was founded by his ancestors in 1853. As the fifth generation in his family to run the business, Mr. Hicks transformed the small family nursery into a leading operation using his quiet strength, skills, and dedication. Hicks Nurseries Inc. is now the oldest nursery and gardening center and the oldest family owned business on Long Island. A long and distinguished history of community and industry leadership and service follows Fred Hicks. He served as president of the American Nursery and Landscape Association (ANLA), and was inducted into the Association's Hall of Fame last year. He also served as president of Garden Centers of America, past president of the Long Island Nurserymen's Association and the Cornell Cooperative Extension of Nassau County, chairman of the Environmental Commission of the Village of Westbury, board member of HMO Vytra Health Care, and advisory board member of Old Westbury Gardens. A particular interest in health issues led him to serve as a medic in the United States Army in 1960, and later on the Board of Winthrop University Hospital. Mr. Hicks was named the hospital's Trustee of the Year on October 23rd. Mr. Hicks has also served his community with great dedication throughout his life. His parents, Edwin and Eloise Hicks, were instrumental in establishing the Westbury Friends School. Fred Hicks gave much of his time to building and organizing the school, and served on its Board of Managers. All of his children attended the school, and all of his grandchildren are presently students there as well. Mr. Hicks believed children learn best by doing, and applied this principle when working with students at the school. His generosity, caring, and desire for students to succeed together were truly inspiring. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in applauding the amazing dedication and numerous accomplishments of Alfred Hicks. Mr. Hicks was a role model in his community and has set a great example for all of us. He leaves behind his wife of 38 years, Marilyn, and a loving family. His three children, Karen Courts, Stephen Hicks, and Marianne Folk, have taken over running Hicks Nurseries Inc. His family, friends, co-workers, and the residents of Westbury community are sad to see him go. He is remembered warmly and will be missed dearly.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I missed rollcall vote No. 536 due to surgery. Rollcall vote 536 was on final passage of S. 2986, raising the federal debt limit. Had I been present I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote 536.

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, on November 18, 2004, I missed rollcall vote No. 535 due to surgery. Rollcall vote 535 was on the Stenholm motion to commit with instructions to S. 2986. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment providing that the provisions of the bill shall not apply after April 15, 2005. Had I been present I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall vote 535.