Marty Meehan

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a brave Marine from my District, Corporal Matthew Boisvert of Tyngsboro, Massachusetts, for his patriotic service to our country. Matthew has twice been deployed to Iraq, where he performed courageously as a squad leader in Um-Qasar and the volatile town of Fallujah. On August 17, tragedy struck when a roadside bomb tore through the humvee Matthew was patrolling in, leaving him critically wounded. But despite his injuries, Matthew's spirits have remained high and his faith strong. The first words out of his mouth to his mother were not those of anger or sadness, but rather concern for the well-being of his fellow Marines back in Iraq. Matthew knew the risks of war when he enlisted in the Marine Corps the summer after high school. But he was willing to make the sacrifice necessary to defend his country and protect our democratic ideals. At the young age of 18, he left his friends and family behind to endure the harsh realities of a war-torn land. Our Nation, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, are humbled and grateful for his sacrifice. Tonight, I plan to visit Matthew at Bethesda Naval Hospital to thank him for his honorable service. I am certain that all of our colleagues will join me in expressing our heartfelt gratitude for his courage and wishing him well as he begins to recover from his injuries. I will renew my commitment to him, and to all of our troops stationed overseas, to ensure that they have the equipment and the support they need to perform their duties. These brave Soldiers, Marines, and Airmen are on the front lines defending our national security. We owe it to them to provide the protection they deserve. And when these heroes return home, we must afford them the support, the respect, and the honor they have earned.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the so-called Marriage Protection Act, which has nothing to do with protecting marriage. This bill is nothing more than the latest Republican attempt to divide Americans and distract us from issues that people care about. It is about singling out one group of Americans for unequal justice under law. Constitutionally, this bill is a non-starter. The Constitution established an independent judiciary to protect every citizen's rights and to check the power of Congress and the executive. Courts exist to protect the rights of all Americans, even those who are often disenfranchised and marginalized. Unable to amend the Constitution to their liking, the Republican majority is now waging an unprecedented assault on the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers in our government. If Congress strips the courts of jurisdiction over the Defense of Marriage Act, there is no telling what other issues will be subject to court stripping. All of us in Congress took an oath to defend the Constitution. This bill is an attack on our most basic constitutional principles--and just as important, a mean-spirited attack on our country's values of fairness, tolerance, and equality. Earlier this week, the Speaker asserted that Congress doesn't have time this year to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission--urgent measures to protect our security. So why are we here today using our time to divide people for political reasons? Let's reject this cynical political ploy and move on to the real business of the American people.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act. I would like to thank Representative Nita Lowey for her leadership on this issue, and I would also like to thank Abby Giarrosso of Methuen, Massachusetts for bringing this important bill to my attention. Abby and her family request a meeting with my office because Abby wanted to share her experience as a child with celiac disease and to get legislation passed making it easier for her to eat safely. She shared letters that she had received from food companies in response to her requests for lists of products she could eat. The response letters were telling. Some gave her examples of gluten-free foods and others said that it was just too hard for them to break down their ingredients. After Abby came in to my office, I immediately cosponsored the bill, and commissioned a certificate for Abby making her an honorary Legislative Assistant for her work to pass this bill into law. Abby's story is so touching and compelling. At a birthday party she recently attended, they served pizza and cake and all of the children were given an assortment of goodies as party favors. She has a hard time in situations like that because while the other kids can eat the food, she has to just watch. Her parents do a fantastic job working around the problem. At the party they had her bring her own gluten-free pizza. It seemed reasonable to me that if manufacturers are going to sell products that have serious adverse health effects for a large number of consumers, the least they can do is disclose those ingredients. The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act will make it easier for people with food allergies to more easily identify a product's ingredients. By requiring food labels to list what, if any, of the eight major food allergens are contained in a product, the bill will protect people with food allergies from the risk of dangerous and even life-threatening reactions. The bill will also help the estimated three million Americans who suffer from celiac disease, an autoimmune disease that's triggered by the consumption of gluten. The legislation instructs the Department of Health and Human Services to define what constitutes ``gluten-free'' food and how the term should be used on food labels. For those who suffer from celiac disease, like Abby Giarrosso, accurate and easy to read food ingredient labels are critical to their health and well- being. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 30th anniversary of Turkey's illegal and immoral invasion of Cyprus. On July 25, 1974, Turkish troops stormed the shores of Cyprus, killing 6,000 Cypriots and forcing more than 200,000 to flee from their homes. Within weeks of a ceasefire and the commencement of negotiations toward a settlement, Turkey defied a United Nations Security Council resolution and launched a second, more aggressive attack. The assault captured more than one third of the island and marked the beginning of three decades of illegal occupation by Turkish troops. Today, the Green Line that divides Cyprus symbolizes the wounds of a war-torn people. Hundreds of thousands of Greek-Cypriots remain refugees in their own country, denied basic property entitlements and the right of return. The Turkish Cypriot government continues to deprive them of their basic human rights and the freedom to worship freely. Churches have been desecrated, archaeological sites plundered, and towns vacated. Since the Turkish invasion, the Cypriot government has vigorously pursued efforts to reunify the island through an equitable and viable settlement. While the Turkish Cypriot government under the leadership of Rauf Denktash has repeatedly stonewalled negotiations, the commitment of Greek-Cypriots to a unified Cyprus has been unwavering. I am disappointed that recent efforts to renew settlement talks have been stalled once more by Mr. Denktash's intransigence. The Annan plan, which was originally drafted by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan in November of 2002, underwent five major revisions to accommodate the demands of Mr. Denktash before a vote could be taken. In the end, the proposal sacrificed too many of the Greek Cypriots' needs in return for Mr. Denktash's acquiescence. The plan would have authorized the indefinite occupation of Turkish troops and settlers in northern Cyprus, imposed tough restrictions on the right of displaced Greek-Cypriots to return to their homes, and failed to adequately compensate displaced Greek-Cypriots for the loss of their property. Greek-Cypriots wisely mobilized to vote it down. I represent a large and active Greek-American community, and I have been proud to support U.S. participation in negotiations over Cyprus and the fight for freedom and human rights for all Cypriots. As we remember the anniversary of this tragic invasion, we must renew our commitment to achieving a fair and comprehensive settlement. I urge both sides to once again come back to the negotiating table. A settlement to the Cyprus problem is critical--not only to ensuring the basic rights of Greek and Turkish Cypriots alike--but to promoting stability in the Eastern Mediterranean and United States national security interests as well.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the brave men and women in our armed forces who are serving courageously in Iraq, Afghanistan, and throughout the world. Our Nation owes these brave troops a debt of gratitude for the sacrifices they have endured to make this world a safer place. I particularly want to salute our reservists, who have transformed from a supporting role to become a critical part of the backbone of our military. More than 40% of our troops now deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan draw from the Reserve Component. Many of them have served multiple tours, been called up with less than five days' notice, and had their deployments extended well beyond the promised ``12 months boots on the ground.'' Now the Defense Department has announced that it will activate 5,600 members of the Individual Ready Reserve, a pool of former soldiers that have completed their active or reserve duty but still have time left on their contracts. And the next troop rotation for Iraq and Afghanistan will only increase the burden on the Reserve Component, who will soon make up 43% of our deployed troops beginning in February of 2005. Tonight, I would like to highlight the harrowing story of the 94th Military Police Company, the longest activated reserve unit to date. Roughly one-third of the 94th's members live in Massachusetts, and I have had the opportunity to speak with many of their family members in recent months. The 94th Military Police Company first deployed to Iraq in April of 2003 after fulfilling a mission in Bosnia. The unit has seen its deployment extended twice--first by six months, then by four more. On Easter weekend of this year, members of the 94th loaded onto a bus in Kuwait to finally come home. Just as they were about to depart, they were turned back by their commanders and told they would have to serve another 120 days because there simply wasn't enough trained MPs to replace them. Now, just a few weeks before they are expected to return home for good, they have been sent out on another convoy mission. While we are indebted to their service, the story of the 94th MP Company shows that this country can't continue to place the burden of war squarely on the back of our Reserve Component. If we ask these men and women to put themselves in harm's way in Iraq for extended periods of time, we must ensure that they are given the same fair treatment as their active duty counterparts. If we do not, we will face a serious recruitment and retention crisis. What we need is a committed strategy to restructure our weary and overstretched Army. First and foremost, we must expand the active duty endstrength of our military. I applaud my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee on both sides of the aisle for recognizing this need. We have authorized an increase of 30,000 soldiers and 9,000 marines over three years as part of this year's defense authorization bill. I am disappointed that the Pentagon has chosen to overstretch our current forces instead of expanding our pool of manpower. Second, I am concerned that the occupational specialties most in demand--such as military police, intelligence analysts and engineers-- are highly concentrated in the Reserve Component. Instead of calling up the Individual Ready Reserve, we need to ensure that we have an adequate pool of specialists within the active-duty force. This requires an aggressive recruitment and training program backed by incentives to attract people with the right skills. Third, we need to lay out a transparent, equitable rotation schedule for our reservists that allows members and their families to predict when they will be activated. This administration has treated Guard and Reserve families with arrogance and a lack of respect. They have notified members of the Army Reserves and National Guard just days before deploying them to Iraq, broken promises that they would only serve for twelve months boots on the ground, and issued sweeping stop- loss orders to prevent members from retiring when they have fulfilled their service. The Administration's policies aren't pro-family or pro-military. Our troops and their families deserve better. If we don't treat our Reserve Component with the respect they deserve, our military's readiness will suffer. That has consequences for all of us. As our troops say, ``Mission first, people always.'' Our reservists are fighting on the front lines of the battlefield to protect our security, freedom, and democracy. We need to stand up for them and provide them with the respect they deserve.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Flake-Van Hollen amendment to prevent taxpayer funds from being used to give a sweetheart deal to Big Tobacco. The $10 billion dollar buyout that was included in the FSC bill is paid for out of the pockets of taxpayers. It makes tobacco a legislative chit to be cashed in for an unrelated corporate tax bill rather than dealing with tobacco as it should be: as a public health issue. If we don't act on this today, cigarette manufacturers could take the entire $10 billion windfall as profit, or use part of it to lower prices, addicting more children and killing more Americans. It is no surprise that the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids and other public health groups consider the no-strings-attached bailout a complete disaster. They join us in support of this amendment. Senator Kennedy, Henry Waxman and I have sponsored a bill that would require the FDA to regulate tobacco. Our bill will save lives and curb youth smoking. Yet, the buyout would have the opposite effect by increasing tobacco use at the expense of taxpayers. The tobacco industry is already spending $30.7 million per day to market and advertise its products, much of it aimed at kids. Should we really be in the business of providing Big Tobacco with an even cheaper product? We need to pass this amendment to the Agriculture Appropriations bill, reject taxpayer-funded giveaways to Big Tobacco, and pass a strong FDA-Grower buyout bill that isn't funded by taxpayers.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a fallen hero, Petty Officer 1st Class Brian J. Ouellette of Maynard, Massachusetts. He gave his life in service to our country, and we will forever be grateful. Brian was a U.S. Navy SEAL deployed as part of Operation Enduring Freedom and serving with the elite Navy Special Warfare Group Two based out of Little Creek, Virginia. He died tragically on May 29th along with three of his comrades when their Humvee hit a landmine in the Zabul province of Afghanistan. Petty Officer 1st Class Ouellette grew up in Waltham, Massachusetts and graduated from Waltham High School in 1985. His parents, Jack and Peg, now reside in the town of Maynard in my congressional district. A fourteen-year veteran of the Navy, Brian joined the service in 1990 and became a member of the elite SEAL team in 1991. Friends remember him as a great teammate and tough opponent on the football field and a fierce competitor in Kempo-style karate. Brian's parents are proud, not just for the supreme sacrifice he made on behalf of his country, but for the honor he brought to them as a Navy SEAL and loving son. Despite his tough exterior, Brian's family describes him as compassionate and nurturing brother of seven siblings and uncle to nine nieces and nephews. Brian's family deeply impacted his life, and he left an indelible imprint on them. Petty Officer 1st Class Ouellette was a brave sailor who gave his life to restore freedom and democracy in the war-torn country of Afghanistan and support the global war on terrorism. It is lives like his, taken too soon, that remind us of the true price of freedom. I have requested an American flag be flown over the United States Capitol in memory of Brian to honor his brave service to our country. This flag will be delivered to his family. Brian died fighting for the country he loved, alongside the fellow sailors he respected and with the family he adored forever in his heart. Our Nation is humbled and grateful for his sacrifice. Mr. Speaker, we should all take a moment to recognize Petty Officer 1st Class Brian Ouellette of the United States Navy SEALS for his ultimate service to our Nation.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, this amendment provides an additional $30 million for the Department of Energy's Global Threat Reduction Initiative to secure, remove, and dispose of nuclear and radiological materials around the world. In February, President Bush stated in a speech at the National Defense University that the greatest risk to the United States and the world is the possibility of a nuclear or radiological attack. And I could not agree more. And in today's world, the most urgent nuclear threat might not be from hostile states, it may be from a non-state terrorist group. The technology to produce a nuclear bomb is easier to obtain than we might like to believe. Earlier this year, a Pakistani scientist named A.Q. Khan confessed to operating a global black market for nuclear technology. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed El Baradei called it a ``veritable nuclear Wal-Mart.'' The design for a simple nuclear weapon is not beyond the reach of many terrorist groups. The best way, perhaps the only way, to prevent terrorists from obtaining nuclear weapons is to make sure they do not get the ingredients to make one. Alarmingly, fissile material is in abundant supply around the world today. Some 20 tons of highly enriched uranium exist at 345 civilian facilities in 58 countries, enough to make 1,000 nuclear weapons. Many of these are academic or industrial facilities that have no more security than a night watchman or a chain link fence. The threat is real. The CIA determined in 2002 that weapons grade or weapons-usable materials have been stolen from Russia. According to the IAEA, there have been 18 confirmed thefts involving plutonium or enriched uranium in the former Soviet Union. Highly enriched uranium is a dangerous tool in the hands of terrorist groups seeking to develop nuclear weapons. And we must do everything in our power to deter this threat. The Energy Department already has several programs aimed at securing nuclear and radiological materials around the world, but they are seriously underfunded. I was encouraged to hear that Secretary of Energy Spence Abraham unveiled a new global threat reduction initiative last month which will consolidate and accelerate the four existing programs. This program has been endorsed by political leaders and nonproliferation experts across the political spectrum. In a recent speech, former Senator Sam Nunn calls it a significant global effort. If we are serious about preventing nuclear terrorism we must cooperatively and effectively with international partners to secure quickly or remove the most at risk dangerous material first, wherever it may be. We are in a race between cooperation and catastrophe. However, if the Global Threat Reduction Initiative is to succeed, we have to fund it. Nonproliferation experts at Harvard University and the nuclear threat initiative headed by Sam Nunn argue that we need an additional $30 million in fiscal 2005 to remove highly enriched uranium from 2 dozen vulnerable sites through the Russian Research Reactor Fuel Return program. This is one of the four existing programs that have been under the consolidation under the Global Threat Reduction Initiative. Some of my colleagues may argue that we should not be appropriating funds for this new initiative before the Energy Department has submitted a budget request. But I do not think al-Qaeda is waiting for the next fiscal year to seek nuclear materials. And we should not wait to act either. Moreover, programs like the Russian Research Reactor Fuel Return program have a proven track record developed over many years. In 2001, the United States, Serbia, Russia, the IAEA and the Nuclear Threat Initiative worked together to remove 48 kilograms of potentially vulnerable unirradiated HEU from a research facility in Serbia. This was enough material for two and a half nuclear bombs. And in December of 2003, the United States, Russia, Bulgaria, and the IAEA collaborated to air lift 16.9 kilograms of HEU from a shut-down research reactor to Bulgaria to a secure facility in Russia. The urgency is clear, we need to be quicker and bolder in securing these dangerous nuclear and radiological materials. This amendment would boost funding for the global threat reduction initiative by rolling over $30 million in unobligated balances from the National Nuclear Science Agencies Weapons Activities Account. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance my time.

Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), my friend and co-author of this amendment.

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just to close, I really think this is an important issue to the national security of the country, and the reason why we bring the amendment forward is nonproliferation experts at Harvard University and the Nuclear Threat Initiative headed by Sam Nunn have clearly stated that we need an additional $30 million in fiscal year 2005 to remove highly enriched uranium from two dozen vulnerable research reactor sites throughout the Russian reactor fuel program. That is why we offered the amendment. This is an amendment that would take up obligated balances from the National Security Agency's weapons activities account. So I want to be clear. These are unexpended funds from fiscal year 2004, and shifting these funds will not come at any cost to the NNSA's weapons program or the American taxpayers. Instead, they will help safeguard us against dangerous nuclear and radiological weapons materials, that if they get in the hands of terrorists, as we know they could, could be used to kill thousands or tens of thousands of Americans. I believe, as the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) believes, that this amendment is vital to our national security and to our winning the war on terrorism. Therefore, I urge that my colleagues' support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, a bipartisan group of legislators has been fighting to get tobacco regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA regulates products from Tylenol to bottled water to macaroni and cheese; yet it does not have the authority to regulate tobacco, the only product that will kill you if used specifically as directed. This year we stand on the verge of a historic compromise to get tobacco regulated by the FDA, but the shameless $10 billion tobacco buyout in this bill threatens the progress that we have made. This sweetheart deal gives billions to Big Tobacco from the pockets of taxpayers with no strings attached. It requires nothing to improve public health in return. This buyout kills our hope for FDA regulation by taking it off the negotiating table. I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule and against this bill. It is inexcusable and indefensible that this product, macaroni and cheese, is regulated by the FDA; but this product, one of the only products that will kill you if used specifically as directed, we cannot get FDA regulation.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, this week, America is united in mourning for President Ronald Reagan. President Reagan will be remembered as a great optimist who helped convince America to believe in itself again. He believed that the Cold War would end and the Berlin Wall would fall during his lifetime. And he was right. His words inspired people living behind the Iron Curtain to believe that freedom was attainable. Ronald Reagan was a loyal Republican but an American first. With his profound personal decency and disarming sense of humor, he rose above the kind of bitter partisanship that infects American politics today. Personal attacks were below him. He was a patriot and a man of integrity--and he never questioned the patriotism or integrity of others. Our politics were polarized then as they are now. But President Reagan knew how to compromise and get things done for the American people. The Speaker of the House during the first six years of his presidency was Tip O'Neill of Massachusetts. Speaker O'Neill was a staunch Democrat with a very different vision for government, and a great leader in his own right. Working across party lines, President Reagan and Speaker O'Neill passed reforms to preserve and strengthen Social Security. They enacted sweeping tax reform to close tax loopholes and lower marginal rates. As we mourn and honor President Reagan, this Congress should pledge to follow in his example. Hold firm in your beliefs, but respect those who differ. Compete vigorously at election time, but then go to work for the American people. Stand united in times of sorrow and adversity. Ronald Reagan's final accomplishment will endure as one of his most important--bringing attention to the tragedy of Alzheimer's with his eloquent letter to the American people. One of the best ways to honor him is to rededicate our efforts to find a cure for this terrible disease. I join my colleagues in honoring the memory of President Ronald Reagan.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, as we consider H.R. 4060, the Health, Safety, and Security of Peace Corps Volunteers Act of 2004, I want to bring to my colleagues' attention the tragic disappearance of a Peace Corps Volunteer from my Congressional District, Walter Poirier of Lowell, Massachusetts. Walter Poirier served as a tourism advocate in the Zongo Valley of Bolivia from August of 2000 until May of 2001 when he was officially declared missing by the U.S. Embassy. He has never been seen since. Following Walter's disappearance, I requested a GAO investigation of this case, which concluded that the Peace Corps failed to adequately supervise Walter and eventually lost track of him. The GAO also found that the Peace Corps provided ``uneven'' implementation of its own safety and security procedures that could pose a risk for its volunteers. I am now writing a letter to Peace Corps Director Gaddi Vasquez urging him to appoint an official to focus solely on the investigation of Walter's disappearance. Unfortunately, the case of Walter Poirier is not unique. The GAO reports that the incident rate for major physical assaults nearly doubled from an average of 9 per 1,000 volunteer years from 1991-93 to an average of 17 per 1,000 volunteer years in 1998-2000. Despite concerns from Congress and the public that the Peace Corps has not provided the necessary safety and security for its participants, the organization continues to send volunteers alone to remote and isolated areas and fails to provide adequate housing, supervision, or jobs to keep volunteers busy. I remain very concerned about the ability of the Peace Corps to implement its own safety and security policies in the face of rising violence. I applaud the House International Relations Committee for holding hearings on the safety and security of Peace Corps volunteers and swiftly reporting out the Health, Safety, and Security of Peace Corps Volunteers Act. I also thank the committee for inviting Walter Poirier's father to testify and share his personal story about the tragic loss of his son. I have urged the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to follow suit. This legislation takes a number of critical steps to enhance safety and security procedures within the Peace Corps, including creating an ombudsman to receive complaints, questions and concerns from current or former volunteers regarding safety and security. The bill also establishes an Office of Safety and Security of the Peace Corps responsible for all safety and security activities at the agency and requires the Peace Corps to report to Congress on the effects of limits imposed on the duration of Peace Corps assignments and a study on medical screening procedures used by the agency. For decades, Peace Corps volunteers have played a critical role in promoting stability and prosperity in developing countries. Today they are asked to play an even more important role in correcting the misperceptions that many have of America. It's a troubling fact that anti-Americanism is on the rise in many parts of the world. That makes the mission of the Peace Corps more important than ever. But it also makes the task of protecting volunteers more urgent than ever. While the passage of this legislation is by no means a solution to all of the Peace Corps' security problems, it is certainly a positive step forward. If the Peace Corps wants to fulfill its goal of doubling the size of its agency over the next five years--a goal we all share-- it must provide its volunteers the safety and security they need. I therefore strongly support the passage of this bill.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay special tribute to Raymond Francis Rourke who passed away on Monday, May 24 at the age of 86. Ray was a loving father and husband, an outstanding public servant, and friend and mentor to many including myself. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the Congressional Record the Lowell Sun's Editorial from May 26: Ray Rourke. 1917-2004 If Lowell could build a pantheon to its all-time great civic leaders, a statue of Ray Rourke would stand on a pedestal alongside those of Paul Tsongas, Telemachus ``Mike'' DeMoulas and others. Rourke, who died Monday at the age of 84, was a Mill City icon and a throwback to an era of Irish gentlemen who succeeded in combining a valued family life with an equally strong commitment to public service. In his essence, Rourke was a good listener and a specially good adviser. He never told people how to think; instead he kindly counseled them as to the importance of what they should be thinking about. It was a philosophy that won him hundreds, if not thousands, of lifelong friends. Of all his many accomplishments, Rourke considered his greatest legacy to Lowell and the state of Massachusetts to be his seven children. ``I added to the economy seven times,'' he would proudly say at Mr. Al's Barbershop on Middlesex Street. Rourke will go down in political annals for his long and distinguished public service as a city councilor, mayor, state representative and state Deputy Secretary of Transportation in both the Dukakis and King administrations. Yet if we could write a fitting epithet for his statue, in our pantheon of Lowell greats, it would read: ``Ray Rourke [1917-2004], one of those humble yet great working-class men from Lowell's `Flats' neighborhood who decided to do something good for the community and succeeded.'' Ray is survived by his wife, Rita; his two daughters, Maureen A. Cohen and Nancy L. Vieira; his three sons, Raymond R., Richard P., and John P.; and his sixteen grandchildren and fifteen great-grandchildren.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of a true hero, Marine Lance Corporal Andrew Zabierek, who gave his life in service to our country. Lance Corporal Zabierek died tragically on May 21, 2004, while serving on duty with the 2nd Marine Division, 2nd Marine Battalion, Third Platoon near Baghdad. At the funeral service for Lance Corporal Zabierek on May 29 at Saint John's Church in Chelmsford, Massachusetts, Mark Zabierek delivered an eloquent tribute to his brother that touched me and others who were present. He described the lifelong dedication that Andrew gave to his beloved family and friends and the supreme sacrifice he made in service to his country. Mark Zabierek's touching eulogy to Andrew should be of interest to all of us here. I will read an excerpt and ask that the statement be included in the Record in its entirety: ``In an age where many people's idea of patriotism and civic responsibility are diminished by a sense of materialism, I was touched that my brother put his life on hold to join a service that most certainly would have brought him to the thick of the fighting overseas. He abandoned any other professional and personal designs to embrace a culture of service to his country and to our flag which now, tragically, drapes his coffin.'' Mr. Speaker, I think we all should take a moment to recognize Lance Corporal Zabierek. Andrew died fighting for the country he loved, alongside his comrades he respected. Our Nation is humbled and grateful for his sacrifice. Mr. Speaker, the full eulogy given by Andrew Zabierek's brother Mark is as follows: Eulogy for Lance Corporal Andrew Zabierek, USMC (By Mark J. Zabierek) I've always looked up to my bother, Andrew. From when we were young he was my role model, my hero, my friend. I wanted to be just like him, do everything he did. He had a rare sense of honesty and empathy that I could only try to emulate. Even in later years, if we fought, as brother's do, there was nothing said between us that could erode my love for him. I truly admired who he was as a person and the depth of his consideration for others. In the wake of September 11th, as he pondered joining the military, my family sometimes didn't understand why a college graduate so gifted as my brother would want to enlist for a nominal wage and risk losing what would have been such a full life. Simply, my brother was special. He wanted to be a part of something bigger than himself. He wanted to serve and honor and protect the things that he held dear in life. His sense of justice didn't enable him to accept that others would go to war for him to fight and die in his stead. I was indescribably proud of Andrew when he decided to serve in the Marine Corps. He had a brilliant intellect and talents too abundant to mention that he left to serve a higher calling. In an age where many people's idea of patriotism and civic responsibility are diminished by a sense of materialism, I was touched that my brother put his life on hold to join a service that would most certainly bring him to the thick of the fighting overseas. He abandoned any other professional and personal designs to embrace a culture of service, service to his country and to the flag which now, tragically, drapes his coffin. For Andrew and me, all our lives our flag was a symbol of hope, freedom, and purity. Now this flag also will remind our family profoundly of the loss of Andrew and the sorrow that comes from realizing the cost of the ideals he and I grew up cherishing. Sadly, our family will forever feel the burden of the sacrifice that enables our flag to fly. Andrew's desire to serve, as I've said, came from a sincere longing to better the lives of the people around him, but even he couldn't have imagined just how many lives he has touched. The support, kindness, and sympathy of family, friends, this congregation and this community would have shocked my brother who was humbly unaware of the extent of the loving spirit of the people among him now. My family and I can never truly express our thanks, nor repay your altruism. Andrew is deeply mourned in his death, but was incredibly loved in his life. We come from a large family, all who cherish the memory of Andrew. He embodied the best qualities of my parents and grandparents who loved him perfectly and completely. He had my mother's tenderness and faith and my father's honesty and humor. He had an impeccable sense of right and wrong and a heart filled with immeasurable compassion. He never met cruelty with hatred, never met sorrow without sympathy, and we know he met death with courage and dignity. That was our Andrew, my brother. He was kind, noble, and he was loved. We know that love will lift him up to a better place at God's right hand, and his spirit and grace will be part of us for all our lives, never to be forgotten.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for his service on this committee. I also recognize the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) for his service and the way that he conducted the hearings on this mark in a very bipartisan way, affording an opportunity for all Members to speak out. In fact, my recollection is the chairman even came down on the shortened of a vote which I have not seen in quite some time. I am sure the gentleman will fix that in the other body. I thank the gentleman for his service. As a ranking member of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Unconventional Threats, I believe the product before us today is, on the whole, a solid proposal. This committee pledged to make this year the Year of the Soldier, and I think we made great strides in achieving that goal. We have a well-deserved pay raise for our troops. I am pleased that this legislation authorizes critical force protection resources, including $329 million for up-armoring Humvees, $358 million for add-on armor kits, and $421 million for interceptor body armor. This fulfills all of the shortfalls, including on the Army's unfunded requirements list, which I am disappointed that the administration failed to request. The committee has also included language that I put forward requiring the Department of Defense to report to Congress on the lessons learned from its failure to expeditiously field protective equipment to our troops in Iraq. And we have expressed a sense of Congress urging the Department to release all appropriated funds to armor thin-skinned Humvees as soon as possible. We are a Nation at war, and we cannot shortchange our troops by leaving them defenseless in the theater. I am proud that this committee has stepped forward and authorized important resources to support our ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, despite the administration's failure to include much of this funding in its annual budget. But I also strongly support efforts to authorize $67 billion to take us through the end of fiscal year 2005 instead of the end of this calendar year. Additionally, I am pleased that my colleagues recognized the need to address the gaping holes in the oversight of civilian contractors hired by the Department of Defense in the face of human rights abuses in Abu Ghraib prison. Our committee approved an amendment offered by the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie) to require the Department to report to Congress on the activities of contractors in Iraq. We also included my proposal on directing the Department to issue guidance for training contractors in the Geneva Conventions and international laws of war. Finally, the bill makes important quality-of-life improvements for our troops and for our veterans. I applaud the committee for finally ending the survivors benefit penalty. I am also encouraged that the bill addresses many of the inequities in benefits for our Reserve component, from eliminating the $5,000 cap on reenlistment bonuses, to removing restrictions on Reservists from accessing tuition assistance, as included in an amendment which I offered. With respect to the terrorism subcommittee's mark, several of the provisions in this portion of the bill deserve praise. First, I am pleased we included a number of recommendations to streamline and accelerate the development and acquisition of technologies to combat terrorism. Additional resources are provided in a number of areas, including chemical and biological research and important detection initiatives. The committee also honored a request by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) and me to improve the manner in which we develop and acquire medical countermeasures against biological warfare agents. Finally, I cannot say I support every provision in this authorization bill. I remain concerned about cuts to DARPA and several information technology programs, as well as the committee's failure to include several important nonproliferation provisions which I believe are key to winning the global war on terrorism. I hope that we can at least have an honest debate on these issues another day. With that said, legislating is the art of compromise, and I believe the product before us will boost our troops and our war- fighting capabilities. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting its final approval.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember a young woman, Kaitlin Kazanjian, whose life was tragically ended on November 5, 2003, at the age of 16. Kaitlin Ashley Kazanjian, a resident of Palm Beach Gardens, FL, with close ties to a prominent Greater Lowell family in my district, died as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident. Kaitlin Kazanjian was riding in the passenger seat of a classmate's automobile when control of the vehicle was lost and it crashed. Kaitlin was born in Palm Beach Gardens, on April 22, 1987. Her parents, John and Joanne Natsios Kazanjian were proud of their daughter, not just for the cheerful girl she was, but also for the happiness she brought to them, as well as everyone who knew her. in addition to her parents, she is survived by a sister, Kristin Kazanjian, and a brother, John S. Kazanjian, both of Palm Beach Gardens. For decades the Kazanjian family name has been synonymous with that of a hard-working family that has dedicated itself to the betterment of the Lowell, Massachusetts community. The intersection of Dutton and Fletcher Streets in Lowell, Massachusetts has long been identified with one of the Kazanjian family businesses. It was at this intersection, on December 20, 2003 that many members of the Kazanjian family and friends gathered to remember this beautiful girl and a horrible, tragic loss. Kaitlin Kazanjian was taken from us too soon. Her sudden loss has devastated her family and friends. Despite this terrible tragedy, a wonderful outpouring of support has helped Kaitlin's loved ones cope and continue on with their lives. On Friday, May 14, 2004, and each year following, the Kazanjian Family and friends will continue to honor the memory of Kaitlin with the establishment of the Kaitlin A. Kazanjian Charitable Foundation, which will benefit local charity organizations. But the true tribute to Kaitlin will lie in the hearts of family and friends and the unflinching commitment to honor her life and preserve her legacy and memory.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mary McGrory. Mary McGrory was known for her strong opinions, which were liberal without equivocation or apology. But when I think of Mary, I will always remember her as a newspaper reporter, who gathered facts the old-fashioned way: by watching events and taking notes, staking out meetings of congressional leadership to be the first to get an interview, and relentlessly working the phones. When she received a press club award in 1998, Mary said, ``I should confess that I always felt a little sorry for people who didn't work for newspapers.'' We shared a deep love of both politics and print journalism, and I think her commitment to reporting is what set her work apart from her peers. At a time when commentators often try to substitute spin and second-hand analysis for the hard work of original reporting, Mary stood out for offering fresh insight backed up by her own interviews and observations. Over the course of more than 50 years in Washington, Mary covered every major story in American politics, from McCarthyism to the Kennedy era to Vietnam to Watergate to the September 11 attacks. And because she formed opinions based on her own reporting, Mary didn't have to try to tell anyone what to think to be effective--she let us inside her mind to see just how she worked through the events. The result was far more powerful than what passes for ``analysis'' among the talking heads and pundits who now dominate political journalism. An early example was her work covering the Army-McCarthy hearings for the Washington Star in 1954, when she found the telling details to describe the investigation led by Senator Joseph McCarthy. ``For eight days,'' she wrote, ``the Army secretary has been having his honesty questioned, his motives impugned and his patriotism challenged. He has been bullied, baited and patronized. He has been treated like a stubborn and not very bright child. Throughout his ordeal, moreover, he has been subjected to the rather jostling familiarity of Senator McCarthy, who calls him `Bob.' '' Mary was a star attraction at my annual legislative seminar, where she entertained and educated my constituents with a lifetime of stories about Washington and the political figures that have shaped the nation. She spoke at the event in 1998, 1999 and 2001. But even though Mary knew the leading figures on Capitol Hill--and watched generations of congressional leaders come and go--she was always more interested in writing about the underdog, the long shot, or the worthy cause that seemed to have no chance of success. ``If you want to abolish land mines, if you want to reform campaign spending'' or ``if you want to save children from abuse, or stupid laws, or thickheaded judges, you have my telephone number,'' she once said. ``All the places of little hope, that's my constituency.'' I am proud to have been part of her constituency, and when I look at the picture on my desk of her with my son, Bobby, I will remember her deep sense of compassion. As Bobby gets older, I will show him that picture and tell him about what made Mary one of the greats of her profession--her remarkable commitment to everything that makes newspaper reporting a noble calling.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for a just, lasting, and comprehensive settlement on Cyprus that protects the rights of Turkish and Greek Cypriots alike. As the people of Cyprus head to the polls on April 24th to vote on the settlement plan put forth by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, I am concerned that numerous provisions in the proposal fail to uphold the fundamental rights of the Greek Cypriot community. Since Turkey's invasion and illegal occupation of northern Cyprus in 1974, the government of Cyprus has vigorously pursued efforts to reunify the island through an equitable and viable settlement. While the Turkish Cypriot government under the leadership of Rauf Denktash has repeatedly stonewalled negotiations, the commitment of Greek- Cypriots to a unified Cyprus has been unwavering. The Annan plan, which was originally drafted by the Secretary General in November of 2002, has undergone five major revisions to accommodate the demands of Mr. Denktash. I'm concerned that the proposal sacrifices too many of the Greek Cypriots' needs in return for Mr. Denktash's acquiescence. The Annan plan would authorize Turkish troops to remain in Cyprus indefinitely, threatening the security and stability of the island. While the number of troops would gradually decrease to 650 over a period of 14 years, their continuing presence and intervention rights would prevent Cyprus from achieving full sovereignty. I am also concerned that the Annan plan would continue to allow Turkish settlers to illegally occupy northern Cyprus. Numerous U.N. Security Council resolutions have called for the withdrawal of all Turkish settlers from Cyprus, yet the Annan plan would permit 45,000 settlers to receive automatic citizenship rights within the United Cyprus Republic and additional settlers to remain on the island as permanent residents. Moreover, the Annan plan imposes tough restrictions on the right of displaced Greek-Cypriots to return to their homes. The agreement would prohibit Greek-Cypriots from accounting for more than eighteen percent of the population of the Turkish Cypriot Constituent State for the first nineteen years, or until Turkey accedes to the European Union, even though it is their native soil. These Greek-Cypriots would not have the right to vote for representatives in the federal Senate, further denying fundamental rights to many citizens. Finally, the Annan plan fails to adequately compensate displaced Greek-Cypriots for the loss of their property. According to the plan, 90 percent of the compensation from the federal State would be paid for by Greek-Cypriots, meaning that Greek-Cypriot taxpayers are forced to pay for the loss of their own property. The Annan plan is a positive starting point on the path toward a negotiated settlement, but it is not an ending point. In order for a solution to the Cyprus problem to succeed, the rights of both parties must be equally guaranteed.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 89th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, in which 1.5 million Armenian men, women, and children were brutally massacred by the Ottoman Turk regime. The Armenian Genocide was one of the darkest tragedies in human history, one that must never be forgotten. On April 24, 1915, nearly three hundred Armenian intellectuals and political leaders were rounded up, deported and executed under the orders of the Ottoman Turk Regime, marking the beginning of the first genocide of the 20th century. Later that day, 5,000 more Armenians were slaughtered in their homes and on the streets. For 5 years, the brutal regime carried out the systematic destruction of the Armenian people through forced labor, concentration camps, and death marches, until millions were dead or exiled. As we look back on the bloodshed and atrocities committed against the Armenian people, we must recognize the event for the genocide that it was. As Henry Morgenthau, Sr., the former Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire stated, ``I am confident that the whole history of the human race contains no such horrible episode as this. The great massacres and persecutions of the past seem almost insignificant when compared to the sufferings of the Armenian race in 1915.'' To deny this truth is to tarnish the memories of the millions of Armenians who lost their lives to ethnic cleansing. As a member of the Congressional Armenian Caucus, I have joined my colleagues in sending a letter to President Bush urging him to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide during his April 24th commemoration address. By drawing attention to the legacy of this genocide, we can strengthen our resolve to prevent future human tragedies of this kind. I am proud to represent a large and vibrant Armenian community in the Fifth Congressional District of Massachusetts. Every year, survivors and their descendants make public and vivid the hidden details of the Armenian Genocide as they participate in commemoration ceremonies across the Merrimack Valley. In my hometown of Lowell, the Armenian- American Veterans Honor Guard will lead a procession to City Hall for a flag raising ceremony in recognition of the 89th anniversary of the genocide. The commemoration offers participants an opportunity to remind the world of the tragedy that befell Armenians of the Ottoman Empire. I am honored to add my voice to those of my colleagues today in commemorating the Armenian Genocide. We will never forget the truth.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to express my concern that the administration has misled Congress and the American public on the most pressing issues we are facing here at home and abroad. It is time that the administration was truthful to the American public about the cost of the war in Iraq. Last week President Bush said in his address to the Nation that the administration is constantly reviewing the needs of our troops and will provide whatever additional resources are needed. Yet this is the same administration that sent our troops to war without adequate body armor, antijamming devices or armored Humvees. Our troops in the theater did not even have enough body armor and protective SAPI plates until January of 2004. As of today less than 50 percent of the 12,800 armored Humvees that we need in Iraq and Afghanistan are equipped with reinforced doors and windows. This is in part because the $87 billion supplemental for the Iraq war that Congress passed last November included only $239 million to up-armor Humvees, far short of what is needed. I supported a substitute version proposed by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) that would have provided $3 billion to reinforce Humvees and other unarmored vehicles used by our forces. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership refused to allow the House a vote to consider the Obey proposal. Is it not ironic that anyone who did not vote for this $87 billion package, they say, you are against anything for the troops, when it truth they orchestrated the vote so those of us who want to provide more funding for the troops to provide them with the up-armored Humvees were not allowed a vote. Clearly the funding for upgrades to the Humvees and other force protection initiatives have been inadequate. On March 18, 2004, the Defense Department formally requested Congress to shift $190 million previously allocated to other uses to cover the cost of armoring Humvees for fiscal year 2004. According to the defense expert Michael O'Hanlon at the Brookings Institution, simply maintaining current troops levels beyond June could add nearly $4 billion in unfunded costs through the end of this year. Yet President Bush's $521 billion defense budget for fiscal year 2005 includes no money, no money for military operations in Iraq or Afghanistan. In fact, there are $12 billion worth of unfunded requirements for the military, including nearly $2 billion of important force protection initiatives. And the administration says it will wait until next year to request a new supplemental, which could amount to over $50 billion. The question is, why did not they not include this in their regular fiscal 2005 defense budget? I think the American people deserve answers. The American people also deserve answers about urgent health problems here at home, health care and the rising costs of prescription drugs. The American people deserve to know the truth about the new Medicare prescription bill law. I have been having town meetings throughout my district with seniors, and they are outraged at the new Medicare law because it falls far short of what they expected, of what they need, and what they deserve. The new law does nothing to reduce the cost of drugs, and it actually raises costs for seniors with less than $5,000 a year in prescriptions. It jeopardizes existing health benefits for retirees. The new Medicare prescription drug law was a huge victory for the pharmaceutical industry because it fails to require the government to negotiate drug prices on behalf of seniors, and it continues to make reimportation illegal. Seniors are still prohibited from ordering prescription drugs from Canada at a fraction of the cost for those same drugs here in the United States. In the last 9 months, Springfield, Massachusetts, has already saved $2 million by buying prescription drugs from Canada for their city's employees and retirees. So instead of working to improve the Medicare prescription drug bill, we recently learned that the administration has chosen to hide the truth that the Medicare law would cost $139 billion more than the Congressional Budget Office's prediction. We need to work together to pass a prescription drug law that will allow Medicare to negotiate lower drug costs on behalf of America's seniors, that will allow Americans to pay lower costs for drugs in Canada. I have to tell my colleagues, whether I am talking to seniors who are Republicans, seniors who are Democrats, or seniors who are Independents, they do not get it. They understand that if you do not buy prescription drugs for all the 40 million recipients of Medicare, then it is probably not going to be a good deal for seniors; and they want this bill changed.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, this bill was rammed through the Committee on Armed Services 2 weeks ago without a single hearing. Without a single hearing. I guess it should not be a surprise because it seems that time and time again the leadership has forced votes on the floor without holding committee hearings. We did not have a committee hearing on the bill with the Medicare prescription drug language that came before this Congress, so I guess it should not be a surprise that we did not have a hearing on this particular piece of legislation. This bill is designed to force universities to violate their own policies against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and will undermine pending lawsuits that challenge the so-called Solomon amendment. We all strongly support efforts of the United States military to recruit on our Nation's campuses, especially in a time of war. But the gentleman from Alabama would agree at the time that we debated this in committee, only one educational institution in the country was brought before us that denies access to military recruiters and that school received no Federal funding to begin with. Furthermore, every campus on which the Department of Defense elects to have ROTC currently has an ROTC presence. This is because universities are already forced to compromise their nondiscrimination policies in order to receive most of the Federal funding they compete to obtain under the Solomon amendment. So why are we introducing a bill that would broadly expand the prohibition on Federal funding to schools that do not allow access to military recruiters when only one institution, at least at the time that we dealt with this bill that was available, that prohibited this? I have serious concerns about restricting additional funding such as grants for homeland security, intelligence programs to universities, particularly when the authority to define ``equal access'' lies solely in the hands of the Secretary of Defense. This bill is a drastic solution to a problem that I do not think even exists. In fact, there is no crisis in military recruiting on student campuses or anywhere else in the country. The Defense Department has reported to our committee that they are exceeding all of its recruitment and retention goals in each of the active duty services since 2001 and is actively downsizing certain specialties requiring advanced degrees. In 2003, the Army surpassed its recruiting objectives for new contracts by 9.1 percent and new recruits by 0.4 percent, while the quality of new recruits have increased dramatically. So if we are going to pass such a drastic piece of legislation, it seems to me we should at least have a hearing, have an opportunity to debate. I thought the gentleman from Hawaii said it best in committee. It is like trying to deal with a little problem of a fly with a sledgehammer. It does not make any sense. We should send this bill back into the committee and have a hearing on it and discuss these issues so that we know what the consequences of the language in this bill are.

Mr. MEEHAN

Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 183rd anniversary of Greek Independence Day. On March 25, 1821, the people of Greece rose up against the oppressive rule of the Ottoman Turks. For 8 years, the Greeks struggled for freedom and democratic self-governance until their independence was secured in 1829. The success of this struggle--after almost 400 years of Turkish domination--demonstrates the remarkable ability of human beings to overcome enormous obstacles in the path to freedom. The United States and Greece share a deep commitment to democracy and rule of law. American political thought was influenced just as much by Greek philosophy as the Greek revolution of 1821 was inspired by the American fight for freedom in 1776. In fact, Greek intellectuals used the U.S. Constitution as the basis for the constitution they drafted in the 1820s. The common struggles of our countries have forged a bond that spans the generations. The friendship between the United States and Greece is based on a common heritage and shared values. Greece has stood by the United States as a steadfast ally during World War II, the Korean War, the Cold War, the Persian Gulf War, and now, the war on terrorism. The citizens of Greece are preparing to host the 2004 Olympic Games, an honor that holds particular historical significance. Beginning in 776 B.C., the Olympic Games were held in the valley of Olympia in Greece every four years for almost 1200 years. The modern Olympic Games were created by Baron Pierre de Coubertin and inspired by the ancient games. First staged in 1896 in Athens, the games attracted about 245 athletes to participate in 43 events. At the Sydney 2000 Games, more than 10,000 athletes took part in 300 events. The Olympic Movement has survived wars, boycotts and terrorism to become a symbol of the ability of the people of all nations to come together in peace and friendship. And in 2004, the games return to their birthplace. The Greek Government has made tremendous progress in recent months to improve the security infrastructure for the upcoming games and wish them the best as they prepare for the challenge of hosting the world's premiere athletic event. I represent a large and active Greek-American community, and I have been proud to support U.S. participation in negotiations over Cyprus, the fight for freedom and human rights for all Cypriots, the inclusion of Greece in the Visa Waiver Pilot Program, and the presentation of the Congressional Gold Medal to His All Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew. I congratulate the people of Greece on the anniversary of their independence, and I look forward to working together with Greek- Americans and the Greek Government on issues of mutual interest in the years ahead.