John McHugh

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, for all the aspects of natural beauty that grace the North Country, few equal the splendor of the St. Lawrence River. From the wide expanse of its Gulf to the grandeur of the Thousand Islands, the St. Lawrence River is truly a wonder to behold. For those of us who call this special region home, the St. Lawrence has long been a vital source of commercial and recreational activity. From its waters and its fragile environs, many thousands earn their living and renew their lives. Simply put, our welfare in very tangible and vital ways is inextricably linked and dependent upon the vitality of the St. Lawrence. It is, therefore, both understandable and logical that many who know this river best have viewed with great skepticism recent initiatives that seek to measure the potential impact of conducting a massive construction and dredging project designed to significantly expand the existing shipping locks and channel depths to accommodate Seaway access to a larger class of freight vessels. Their concern has focused on the unavoidable scope of such an undertaking and the disruptive effects that would result upon a delicately balanced ecosystem that even today is severely stressed by existing Seaway traffic. As someone who has been granted the honor of representing the entire New York State span of the St. Lawrence, I have spent much time in recent months considering the views of both those who doubt and those who embrace the proposed project. Clearly, the Seaway serves a vital purpose both to this region and to others throughout the Great Lakes that utilize the shipping it accommodates. Just as evident is the need to reformulate this vital system's operations to ensure its highest utilization into the future. Indeed, the observation that the proposal in question is no more than a study designed to identify the existence and scope of any resulting problem is not without merit. In the final analysis, however, my foremost responsibility is to assume those positions that represent the greater interests of those I represent. In my opinion, no matter what merits any study may offer, the inescapable fact remains that the perils of such a project, if initiated, would far outweigh any benefits that may result to our region. The viability of our vital tourism industry, the generation of economically stimulating hydropower, and the untold enjoyment that the St. Lawrence provides derives less from the shipping that the river supports that the delicate environment it nurtures. As past studies have invariably found, the effects of a project of the magnitude in question would unavoidably and unilaterally upset the delicate ecological balance of the St. Lawrence River and all that prospers from it. Given the great importance of this issue to our region, I feel compelled to declare my opposition to the proposed study and the requested funding to advance it. I fully recognize the likely reality that my views may be shared by few in the House of Representatives. While the area I represent affords me the distinction of being the only Member from New York to have the St. Lawrence River shores within their district, it also means that many others hail from areas that stand to realize greater benefits any expansion of the existing systems might afford. The fact that both the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee and full House Appropriations Committee have provided $2 million to advance this study attest to the support this initiative has gained thus far. Nevertheless, I have no intention of abandoning the higher interests of my district because the odds may be long. I have begun the preparation of an amendment that will seek to remove the $2 million in study funding currently contained in the FY03 House Appropriations bill should this legislation be advanced. I will submit that amendment to the Rules Committee requesting that it be approved for consideration if and when the full bill is brought to the House Floor for a vote. In this way, I hope to convey to other Members the peril that such an initiative holds and, hopefully, gain the support of those who recognize the need to stand on the side of preserving a resource that is so critically important to so many.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 393, I inadvertently voted ``aye.'' I would like the Record to show that I meant to vote ``no.''

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage the distinguished Speaker of the House in a colloquy regarding subsection (c). Mr. Speaker, clearly this subsection of Mr. Shays' amendment adds an additional requirement on the President over and above what currently appears in section 7103 of title 5 before this or any other President would be enabled to exempt an agency or subdivision from the provisions of the Federal Labor Management Relations Act, a very important right, very important protection. However, and added to the original Morella amendment as the Shays amendment proposed, this could create a methodology by which a President might circumvent the limitations on that section 7103 authority that the original Morella amendment, and I commend the gentlewoman, that would have put in place under the Department. Accordingly, I believe that subsection (c) authority should, if it ever becomes law, be limited. I believe that it should be crafted in a fashion that each time that the President should invoke authority under subsection (c) of the pending amendment, that the exclusion would only be effective for a period of no more than 24 months. Further, I believe that written notification of substantial adverse impact must be conveyed to both Houses of Congress no less than 30 days prior to the invoking of that subsection (c). Thereafter, upon any subsequent finding of substantial adverse impact on homeland security, the President could only again, upon written determination, convey to both Houses of Congress no less than 30 days prior to the expiration of that original term of exclusion, extend such a waiver for additional periods not to exceed 24 months each, with written determination and congressional notification for each exclusion as previously described. And lastly, Mr. Speaker, upon such time as the war is won, conditions even out and waivers are no longer extended, each bargain unit previously recognized should be reinstated with all of its rights as they existed the day before the original waiver. And I would ask would the distinguished Speaker agree with me that we should provide for congressional notification allowing us to consider those issues, make those determinations, not as under current law, but for a determined period, and when the war on terrorism is leveled out or is over and won, the workers and their union organizations should fully return to their previous status and relationship?

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the Speaker for his assurance and I commend him, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), and all the people who have worked so hard on this for their leadership.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Virginia, a very distinguished member of the Committee on Armed Services, yielding time to me. I particularly want to pay my compliments to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham) for advancing this very important initiative. Mr. Speaker, for the last 2 years now, it has been my honor to serve as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Personnel of the Committee on Armed Services. Our main responsibility on that body is to ensure that we do all that we can to provide for those brave men and women who serve this Nation so valiantly and with no hesitation as members of our armed services. We take that responsibility very, very seriously. This bill was originally under our jurisdiction; but thanks to the gentleman from Iowa's very hard work, we were pleased to waive jurisdiction to do everything we could on that committee, the committee that has primary responsibility for our armed services, so that it could move as expeditiously as possible to the House floor for its consideration here today. I certainly join with those who have spoken here previously in underscoring what I believe, as well, is the importance of this initiative and the very important significance that stands behind it. I think it is difficult for any of us as Americans to look back on September 11 and to discern much that is positive, but certainly one of the more positive attributes of that has been the reaffirmation in the minds of, I have to believe, every American of the heroes that have served in this Nation's military and who continue to serve today. And no matter which branch of the service they may choose to contribute to, no matter what era they may have served in, as we have learned and been reminded of so very importantly since September 11, these are truly men and women who deserve our respect and who earn our honor in such extraordinary ways. But amongst all those heroes in our military are those who distinguish themselves to an even higher degree. As we have heard the illustrious history of the Medal of Honor, it is one that I think is reward in itself. Clearly the medal that is presented to those and has been presented to those 3,439 individuals in our Nation's history deserves an even added amount of respect. But for all of the symbolism, for all of the appreciation that lies behind the medal, I think that there is more we can and should do. Certainly the designation of this flag as an official token, as an official representation in addition to the medal, would be, in my judgment, a very, very fitting action. I understand the House rules and I will not acknowledge that Sergeant Bill Kendall is in the gallery here today, but I certainly want to extend our appreciation collectively on behalf of the House, if I may be so presumptuous, for taking up this initiative and for the designing of what I certainly look upon as a very, very fitting tribute, one that can add to the honor that we feel toward these very, very special individuals. And as the gentleman from Iowa suggested, I think so correctly, one that can carry forward with their family members, with their descendants, to be displayed in those ways that can signify how a loved one, a family member, someone they knew, contributed above and beyond the call of duty. It is really a rare opportunity in this House, Mr. Speaker, that we have the chance to do something that on the surface may seem relatively simple, but I think beneath it all carries such great significance. Both as a member of the Committee on Armed Services but more importantly as an American, I think this is a very, very special initiative and like the speakers before, I certainly urge all of our colleagues to join in supporting it and giving it the unanimous approval on the upcoming vote that it deserves. Mr. Speaker, I thank again the gentleman from Iowa for taking this initiative and for working so hard to make this moment a reality.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, May marks National Military Appreciation Month, and I can think of no appropriate way to recognize it than to rise in strong support of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. I especially commend for my colleagues' consideration and support the military personnel provisions of the bill that address continuing realities and challenges by making improvements in the end strength, compensation, personnel and health care systems of the Department of Defense. Let me highlight three of those most important areas. First, while fully supporting the efforts of the Secretary of Defense to reduce operational and mission requirements, this bill reflects the view that the war on terrorism will be a long-term effort and that some growth in military manpower is prudent at this time. Therefore, the bill represents the bipartisan views of all of us, including the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), who was a leader on this, and recommends an increase in active duty end strength of nearly 1 percent, or 12,650, above fiscal year 2002 levels. That is the largest single year growth in active end strength since 1985 and 1986. To support the added strength, the bill provides an additional $550 million as well as increasing National Guard and Reserve component full-time manning by some 2,400 personnel. Secondly, the bill provides a military pay raise, as proposed by the President, of 4.1 percent across-the-board for all personnel, one-half of 1 percent more than the average pay increase for private sector employees. In addition, it recommends targeted raises of 6.5 percent to critical mid-grade and senior noncommissioned officers and mid-grade officers, as well as housing rates that will reduce the out-of-pocket housing expenses from the current level of 11.3 percent to 7.5 percent in fiscal year 2003. Finally, as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) said moments ago, the third major provision I want to highlight would ensure that by 2007 all retirees rated by the Veterans Administration with 60 percent disabled or above will receive both their full military retired pay and their full VA disability pay. This initiative, known widely as concurrent receipts, represents the culmination of a multi-year, bipartisan effort to restore justice in veterans' compensation using the $5.8 billion provided by the House budget resolution for fiscal year 2003. In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me thank the ranking member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder), for his leadership, for his very active involvement, as well as all members of both sides of the aisle of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel who have a good deal to be proud of in this fine mark and in this great bill. Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to join us in support of this very fine measure.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate joint resolution (S.J. Res. 32) congratulating the United States Military Academy at West Point on its bicentennial anniversary, and commending its outstanding contributions to the Nation.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on S.J. Res. 32.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), the gentleman I mentioned earlier, a graduate of West Point and someone who, to this day, returns on a regular basis and instructs in the classrooms and helps to mold those leaders that all of us have been speaking about and are in such deep admiration of. Also, of course as I mentioned, the gentleman is the primary driving force behind having this resolution before us today. (Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have a final word of praise for all those Members who are here today, and to the gentleman from Illinois for his special effort in urging our fellow Members to join us in commemorating this very worthy resolution on this 200th anniversary. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, S.J. Res. 32 celebrates the bicentennial anniversary of one of our Nation's most valued institutions, the United States Military Academy at West Point. I should say, Mr. Speaker, this is a particularly proud moment for me personally. As an 8-year member of the Board of Visitors at that illustrious institution and as a 10-year member of the Committee on Armed Services, I have come to know firsthand the amazing contributions and the invaluable role that West Point has played, both in our Nation's history and in our Nation's present. The Military Academy has performed its primary objective of educating military officers with unparalleled excellence throughout its history. To understand the value of West Point, one only has to look back on the long line of great men that have led our forces in war who were the products of this tremendous institution. Perhaps the most important achievement of West Point is the ``long gray line,'' the many graduates beneath the great names of history who have formed the foundation of the officer corps that is the bulwark of the United States Army in peacetime, as well as war. Throughout its history, the Military Academy has molded the best and the brightest of our youth into leaders with skills, character and commitment to not just defend America, but to make it a better place throughout their lives. In my experience, the contributions and achievements of the graduates of the Military Academy extend well beyond their lives as military officers. Academy graduates have historically made and continue to make contributions to local government, business, and academia across the Nation. Through their leadership talents and commitment to service, they have been successful in making their bedrock values, duty, honor, country, part of every community they touch. The effectiveness of their influence is most evident in Washington, D.C., here at the seat of government. I would venture to say there is not a single government agency here in Washington that does not directly benefit from the presence of a West Point graduate. It has been my experience that West Point graduates are more often focused on the challenges of a job and society's need for that job to be done than they are on the personal financial rewards and recognitions that any employment slot may offer. They do not shy away from the difficulties and the sacrifices we are required to work with within government, but rather they embrace the challenges and seek the reward of knowing they have made a difference in that important mission. Mr. Speaker, our Nation has benefited in many ways from these remarkable citizens. While we treasure the graduates, we must also honor the institution that gave these wonderful Americans the opportunity to learn and grow. Mr. Speaker, I would particularly like to extend a word of thanks to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) for his leadership and for his hard work in helping to bring this resolution to the floor. We are all deeply in his debt. So, Mr. Speaker, S.J. Res. 32 correctly congratulates the United States Military Academy on its 200th anniversary as a leadership institution that upholds and promotes the highest virtues of American society. I would like to also add my personal thanks to the men and women, past and present, who have made it a bastion of learning in which students may witness and assimilate the individual qualities that we have come to hold dear and view as authentically American; and specifically I speak of the professors, the faculty, the staff, and, of course, the administrative staff, who have really led this institution and have helped form it and in the process helped to form so many great young American men and women to fill an invaluable role, both in our military and our society in general. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, let me first commend my fellow Board of Visitors member, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher), for both her work on this resolution and for her very eloquent statement in support. I think she very effectively outlined the specific contributions of this great institution. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly); not just from New York but a very special part of New York who, beyond being also a member of the Board of Visitors, has the honor of representing in her congressional district this fine institution.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I rise today to pay tribute to a great and honorable man from northern New York--Mr. John ``Jack'' Shea. Let me begin my remarks by stating how deeply saddened I was to learn of the passing of John Shea--a consummate gentleman, a proven leader, and a North Country hero to all of us. Jack, as he was known to anyone who met him, was looking forward to seeing his grandson, Jim Shea, Jr., compete in next month's Winter Games in Salt Lake City. Sadly, that opportunity has been taken away from him and his family at the hands of a senseless, and regrettably, preventable act. This country as well as northern New York, has lost a great statesman and a good friend. Like so many others who have met him through the years I considered Jack Shea a personal friend, and I was privileged to have known him. Each time we met I went away feeling not only better of myself, but of the world around me. Jack had the ability to convey warmth and goodwill that is sadly found in too few people today. His spirit, his generosity toward others, and his general outlook on family and life will always be remembered. Throughout his life Jack Shea was a tremendous ambassador for the Olympic movement, and he worked tirelessly in successfully bringing back the Winter Olympics to his hometown, Lake Placid. The place where he experienced some of this greatest triumphs, and sadly the place where it tragically came to an end this past Tuesday. He embodied everything the Olympics stand for--goodwill, national pride, and the love for competition. But, perhaps one of his greatest attributes was his high sense of moral integrity. After winning two gold medals in the 1932 Winter Games Jack would have been the odds-on favorite to repeat his conquests in the next Olympics. However, in deference to the local Jewish community, Jack boycotted the games being held in Nazi Germany. It was exactly this type of unselfish behavior that made Jack Shea the great man that he was. While there are no words that can take away the pain his family and friends are experiencing, I would like to offer them my sincerest condolences. I hope that his family is comforted by the knowledge that he was admired, respected, and appreciated by all of us who knew him. I know I speak for all of us in saying, we will miss him.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, at a time when Americans are waging a war on terrorism, we have before us the strongest national defense authorization conference report in recent memory. I rise in support of the Conference Report on S. 1438, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, and urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' when it comes up later for a vote. The strength of this conference report comes from many provisions, but especially from those benefiting military personnel and their families. For example, the conference report: Provides $6.9 billion more for the military personnel accounts than in fiscal year 2001. That's the biggest one-year increase in military personnel accounts since 1985. Authorizes the largest military pay raise since 1982--a 5 percent across-the-board increase for officers and a 6 percent across the board for all enlisted personnel, combined with targeted increases--ranging from 6.3 percent to more than 10 percent--for noncommissioned officers and mid-grade commissioned officers. Increases the defense health operations accounts by $6 billion over fiscal year 2001 levels, reflecting a commitment by DOD and Congress to fully fund health care. In addition the conference report: Reduces out-of-pocket housing costs from 15 percent in fiscal year 2001 to 11.3 percent in fiscal year 2002, thereby keeping faith with the plan to eliminate housing out-of-pockets by fiscal year 2005. Improves the ability of military absentee voters to more effectively and easily exercise their right to vote. Reduces the costs that service members and their families incur while moving between assignments. Right now, DOD only reimburses them for 62 percent of their costs. When implemented over the next couple of years, the provisions of S. 1438 will reduce that out-of-pocket cost to approximately 10 cents for every dollar expended. There are many more important measures contained in H.R. 2586. For all these reasons I urge all Members to support the conference report on S. 1438, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 257) expressing the sense of the Congress that the men and women of the United States Postal Service have done an outstanding job of delivering the mail during this time of national emergency, as amended.

Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, before I yield back the balance of my time, let me just say that the old saying, you do not know what you have got until it is gone is perhaps somewhat applicable here. Fortunately, the Postal Service is not gone. It is still with us. And that too is a tribute to these hard-working men and women who do so much for us in such an efficient and yet such a quiet way. I do think it is unfortunate that the tragedies that we have spoken about here today, the loss of life, those who are still struggling to regain their health had to occur to make us once again appreciate the great job that the employees of the Postal Service do for each and every American in their efforts to deliver the mail. This resolution is, as I said earlier, a most-fitting recognition of that and, again, my praise and appreciation, particularly to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for his leadership in that regard; but it seems to me that if we do not take the next step in expressing our concern into real ways that ensure to the greatest extent possible that these 800,000-plus employees are never again asked to make the kinds of sacrifices they have made in the past weeks, we will still have failed; and I know the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), and so many others are anxious to work together to ensure that that does not happen. Madam Speaker, with a final sense of appreciation to those great employees and a final sense and word of consolation to the families of the two fallen postal workers, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, I have the privilege of yielding 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), someone who, certainly by experience and dedication, is a senior member of the Committee on Government Reform, and someone who has deservedly earned a reputation as a fierce defender of government employees in all branches, in all agencies; and certainly the Postal Service is among them.

Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, H. Con. Res. 257, as introduced by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), expresses the sense of Congress that the men and women of the United States Postal Service have done an outstanding job delivering the mail during this time of national emergency. I am very, very pleased, as I know the gentleman from Illinois is, that 47 of our colleagues here in the House have cosponsored this resolution, signifying a broad base of support and recognition of the great sacrifices and contributions that these people make, certainly in recent weeks but, in point of fact, each and every day. We are amending this bill this afternoon, Madam Speaker, with a clarifying change in order to recognize all aspects of the postal system such as collection, processing, sorting, as well as delivery. Let me begin by complimenting again the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis). I deeply appreciate his leadership, his understanding of the very appropriate nature of moving forward with this resolution at this time. Let me note as well that it is not just appropriate, but I think it is also very fitting, that the House consider this resolution honoring the dedicated people of the Postal Service in this, the same week as we have celebrated and observed our national holiday on Veterans' Day. As they have literally for centuries, postal employees today are putting their lives on the line each and every day for those of us in America. It is their commitment to this job that is ensuring our Nation can continue to communicate through these difficult times by way of the mail. We as a House grieve for the Postal Service, which lost 2 of its own dedicated, devoted employees to inhaled anthrax, resulting from the bioterrorism attacks of recent days. Postal workers Thomas Morris and Joseph Curseen truly died in the line of duty, and I know we all join in expressing our most heartfelt sympathy and deepest words of appreciation to their families and to their loved ones in this time of great loss for them. From the days of Ben Franklin to the high speeds of the information highway, the Postal Service has touched the lives of each of us, whether at home or at work, nearly every day of the week. Postal employees maintain an important presence in our busiest urban centers as well as our most tranquil rural communities. They are the friendly faces that deliver that special birthday card, the newest magazine or, quite often, the credit card bill. Yet, many of us, Madam Speaker, fail to realize how important postal workers are in our daily lives, in our daily experiences, until someone or something interferes with that centuries' old system. Despite the terrorist attacks, the mail handlers, clerks, carriers, supervisors, and postmasters have delivered more than 20 billion pieces of mail since the terrorist attacks of September 11. A recent postal and delivery industry report found that an $871 billion global business of mailing service providers has been built around the mail. Ninety percent of that money is earned in the United States or by U.S.-based organizations. This industry, taken collectively, has almost 9 million employees. Based on these statistics, the total mailing sector is roughly 8 percent of America's gross national product. Just in my State of New York alone, the annual mailing industry impact totals some $64.7 billion. Yet, in spite of this enormous impact and of the continuing outstanding service to our Nation provided by postal employees, we would be negligent if we did not recognize that the Postal Service is facing a worsening financial position, threatening its very viability. Even before September 11, the Comptroller General had placed the Postal Service on its high-risk list due to its financial and operational problems. The Postal Service is facing a $1.8 billion deficit now, on top of the $1.35 billion estimated deficit it ran in the fiscal year that just ended. Revenues were below projections by $627 million in the last 2 months alone. Mail volumes are down by levels not seen since the Great Depression. I know, Madam Speaker, that the Postal Service and its administration is resolute in meeting its challenges, as its employees that we have gathered here to honor and commemorate demonstrate to us each and every day. However, in my opinion, Madam Speaker, without modernizing our Nation's 31-year-old postal laws, the men and women of the Postal Service will have far too few tools to confront a growing challenge. The Postal Service is already requesting billions of dollars in Congress to deal with the crisis; but absent legislative change, the agency will likely have to return for ever-increasing taxpayer assistance. As President Vincent Sombrotto of the National Association of Letter Carriers recently stated, ``If this whole institution collapses, that is as great a threat to the individuals who work in the Postal Service as contracting this anthrax. Their future is at stake.'' That is why at this moment when we honor and recognize the Nation's postal employees, I am very pleased to note the work that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis); the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), the chairman of the full committee; the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member, and others, including myself, have undertaken to try to produce a substantive draft bill to reform the Postal Service. I know the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) shares my commitment to the men and women of the Postal Service, that we in the Congress must do everything necessary to ensure their safety and well-being as they carry out their duties and responsibilities, particularly in this time of national emergency. Madam Speaker, I look forward to working with the gentleman from Illinois and many others to help enact postal reform. It seems to me the Postal Service, its 800,000 dedicated employees, and the 281 million Americans who depend on universal service at affordable rates, are depending on us. Fortunately, as has existed from its founding days, the Postal Service has at its core men and women who each day make the mail work and move it to our homes, to our businesses in ways that far too often we take for granted. So, Madam Speaker, I certainly urge all of our colleagues to support this resolution with amendments to honor the men and women of the Postal Service who, as I have said, do such an incredible job in making sure that the mail arrives on time to its addresses across this great Nation. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the concurrent resolution now being considered.

Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), who serves in this House as chairman of the Committee on Veterans Affairs; but in the context of this particular resolution, he has the honor of representing Trenton, New Jersey, which is home to the postal facility at Trenton, the processing and delivering center; and he has known firsthand the challenges that the threat of the current situation facing postal employees has wrought. I want to commend the gentleman for what I know has been his personal attention, his personal visits to that facility in this time of great need, to be as supportive as he possibly could. It is the kind of dedication that he brings to all facets of his service.

Mr. McHUGH. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I was called away from Washington on the evening of October 11th to attend to an ill family member. Due to my absence that evening and on Friday, October 12, I missed votes on the floor of the House of Representatives, including the vote on H.R. 2975, the Provide Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (PATRIOT) Act. Had I been present, I would have voted in support of the legislation and its worthy objective of providing law enforcement officials with additional tools to detect, apprehend, and prosecute terrorists. The horrific events of September 11th have demonstrated that more needs to be done to protect Americans from terrorism. At the same time, my colleagues and I are quite cognizant of our responsibilities in safeguarding the fundamental constitutional rights of the American people. The PATRIOT Act recognizes these concerns and strikes a balance between security enhancements and tools for law enforcement and civil liberties.